Theory, regulation and practice in Swedish digital records appraisal
| Date | 11 March 2019 |
| Published date | 11 March 2019 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-09-2018-0027 |
| Pages | 86-102 |
| Author | Elisabeth Klett |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Information management & governance |
Theory, regulation and practice in
Swedish digital records appraisal
Elisabeth Klett
Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden
Abstract
Purpose –Digital recordsappraisal and aspects of archival values in theory, regularizationand practice are
explored. Thispaper aims to reflect upon the appraisal process, responsibility and normsfor value creation in
a digitalizedenvironment. The research question was how do appraisaltheory, normative rules and appraisal
practicemeet the aims of values in digital archives?
Design/methodology/approach –The study triangulated appraisal theory, normative values and
participants’views about archivalvalues in appraisal practice in a Swedish setting. Content analysis were
used to explore normativedocuments and interviews. Appraisal theories of the Swedish NilsNilsson and the
Canadian Terry Cook were interpreted. The result was related to theories on public values, the nature of
responsibilityand relations between the state andcitizens.
Findings –The results show influencesbetween theory, norms and practice. Changes in norms and practice
do not follow the development of digitalization. Responsibility is focused on tasks, which exposesrisks of
accountability control and knowledgeof appraisal grounds. The paper concludes that access requirements
and user needs may prompt change in appraisal processes. In the light of digitalization, “primary and
secondaryvalue”are merely a matter of use and usability in a time and space (continuum) perspective.
Research limitations/implications –This study is based in Swedenwhere extensive right of access to
public recordsand default preservation are norm.
Originality/value –The result shows how allocated responsibilities impinge on a re-active digital
appraisalprocess.
Keywords Digital archives, Archival norms, Archival responsibility, Records appraisal
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
The core of archival theory is about the creation, recreation and remediation of records and
archives and about records being usedin the course of these processes. For archival theory,
the connection to practice is important through its roots in principles and its history of
development, since the Manual of Muller, Feith and Fruin in 1898 (Muller et al., 1940;
Ridener, 2009). Appraisal aims to create enduring value in archives. Archival appraisal
embraces “theory, rationales, policies and procedures”for the selection of records of
enduring value from records captured in organizations (Craig, 2015). The formation of
archives is based on the principle of provenance (Nilsson, 1983), which means the creation
and capture of records within the scope of organizational business interests. In a digitally
transformed environment provenance becomes a conceptual context when organizations
share information systems which affects internal and original order and the scope of an
archive (Douglas,2017;Hurley, 2005a).
How to scope, what to include in archives and how to appraise records is a recurring
discussion connected to increased masses of records resulting from changes in technology
(Ridener, 2009). During the past 20 years of the twentieth century until the present, the
This research was supported by Stockholm City Archives.
RMJ
29,1/2
86
Received21 September 2018
Revised24 November 2018
Accepted12 December 2018
RecordsManagement Journal
Vol.29 No. 1/2, 2019
pp. 86-102
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0956-5698
DOI 10.1108/RMJ-09-2018-0027
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0956-5698.htm
development of information and communication technology (ICT) has raised a renewed
discussion on the role of archives and methods for records appraisal (Eastwood, 2017;
Foscarini, 2017;Kallberg, 2012;Klareld, 2015;Klareld and Gidlund, 2017). One problem
identified is residual paper thinking among archivists in the digitally transformed
environment, as if the prerequisitesfor control and authenticity, and for manifold access and
usability were still more or less the same (Cook, 1994;Klareld and Gidlund, 2017;
Runardotter et al.,2011,p.74).
The public sector as a wholeis struggling with digital transformation and e-government
policies of efficiency, transparency, productivity, availability and high quality service
(Persson and Goldkuhl, 2010). Thischallenges traditional conceptions of archives formation
based on paper thinking with its tangibleand stable format and appearance (Kallberg, 2013;
Klareld and Gidlund, 2017;Runardotteret al.,2011). A change in responsibility for archives
formation from archivists to IT professionals has followeddigital transformation (Kallberg,
2013). Communication problems between the two professions are noted as a consequence
(Klett, 2017;Runardotter, 2009). Digital transformation and changed responsibilities bring
the matter of archival valuesand the creation of value in archives to the fore.
Traditionally the aimsof records appraisal are to protect values and to define and delimit
the archive (Nilsson, 1983); thus, the concept of value is central. In theory the value of
records and archives is the fulfillment of needs substantiated through access (Klett, 2017;
Menne-Haritz, 2001).The task is to develop conscious and logical grounds for digital records
appraisal based on archivaltheory (Fredriksson, 2003,p.23).
Records and archival appraisal are based on theory, rationales, policies and procedures
(Craig, 2015). In this paper, these bases are interpreted as follows: theory identifies archival
value, rationales are based on societalnorms, regulations formalize norms, policies interpret
and explain the regulations and guides to procedures.Finally, appraisal parameters support
practice in effectuationof creating value in archives.Value in digital archives is the result of
digital records appraisal which is comprised of assessment of both access and need, and
across a spectrum of perspectives, such as time, business and society (McKemmish, 2005;
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2016, 15489). The appraisal process
results in an archive that contains records of both primary and secondary value
(Schellenberg, 2003/1956).Primary value refers to business needs. Secondary value refers to
any other use of records,by any user in the present or future time. In a digitally transformed
environment requirementsof access and needs may call for change in appraisal processes, of
parameters for assessment and of structure in archives (Cook, 2011;Fredriksson, 2003). In
practice, divided responsibilities for appraisal of primary and secondary values causes a
black box of lost and unknown records, where scoping appraisal for primary value is
decided by the creator and appraisal for secondaryvalue and retention plans is decided by
the archival authority. It also causes inconsistency in implementing rules of law, as various
public agencies can decide differently when scoping the archive, despite similar types of
records.
From this reasoning, three working agents can be identified as involved in records and
archives appraisal: theory, regulation and practice. Knowledge about how aims of archival
value are formulated and understood by the three working agents is a starting point for a
process of change and adaption of records appraisal processes and value parameters in
e-governance of the publicsector.
This paper combines archival theory and empiricism (Fredriksson, 2003) and uses the
Swedish example to empirically explore how the fulfillment of needs is interpreted by
appraisal theorists, expressedin normative statements concerning appraisal that govern the
public sector and again interpreted by professionals involved in records appraisal. The
Swedish
digital records
appraisal
87
To continue reading
Request your trial