Digital diplomatics and measurement of electronic public data qualities

Author:

Makhlouf Shabou Basma

Abstract

Purpose – This paper aims to present a recent study on the definition and measurement of quality dimensions of public electronic records and archives (QADEPs: Qualités des archives et documents électroniques publics). It develops an original model and a complete method with tools to define and measure electronic public data qualities within public institutions. It highlights also the relationship between diplomatics principles and the measurement of trustworthiness of electronic data in particular. This paper presents a general overview of the main results of this study, with also illustrative examples to demonstrate the feasibility of measuring the qualities of electronic archives in the context of public institutions. Design/methodology/approach – This research was conducted in two phases. The first one was the conceptual phase in which the quality dimensions were identified and defined with specific sets of indicators and variables. The second phase was the empirical phase which involved the testing of the model on real electronic documents belonging to several public institutions to validate its relevance and applicability. These tests were performed at the Archives of the State of Wallis and the Archives of the State of Geneva, thanks to different measurement tools designed especially for this stage of the research. Findings – The QADEPs model analyzes the qualities of electronic records in public institutions through three dimensions: trustworthiness, exploitability and representativeness. These dimensions were divided into eight sub-dimensions comprising 17 indicators for a total of 46 variables. These dimensions and their variables tried to cover the main aspects of quality standards for electronic data and public documents. The study demonstrates that nearly 60 per cent of the measured variables could be automated. Research limitations/implications – The QADEPs model was defined and tested in a Swiss context on a limited sample of electronic public data to validate, essentially, its feasibility. It would be useful to extend this approach and test it on a broader sample in different contexts abroad. Practical implications – The decisionmaking of records retention in organizations and public institutions in particular is difficult to establish and justify because it is based generally on subjective and non-defendable practices. The QADEPs model offers specific metrics with their related measuring tools to evaluate and identify what is valuable and what is eliminable within the whole set of institutional electronic information. The model should reinforce the information governance of those institutions and help them control the risks related to information management. Originality/value – The current practice of archival appraisal does not yet invest in a meticulous examination of the nature of documents that should be preserved permanently. The lack of studies on the definition and measurement of the qualities of electronic and public electronic records prevents verification as to whether archival materials are significant. This paper fills in some of the gaps.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Library and Information Sciences,Management Information Systems

Reference60 articles.

1. Duranti, L. (1998), Diplomatics: New Uses for an Old Science , Scarecrow, Lanham.

2. Fortin, M.-F. (2006), Fondements et étapes du processus de recherche (Foundations and Steps of the Research Process ), Chenelière Education, Montreal.

3. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (2001), Information and Documentation –Records Management – Part 1: General, ISO 15489-1:2001 , ISO, Geneva.

4. INTERPARES 2 (2013), “Terminology database”, INTERPARES Project, available at: www.interpares.org/ip2/ip2_terminology_db.cfm

5. Library and Archives Canada (2006), “Guidelines for records created under a public key infrastructure using encryption and digital signatures”, available at: www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/services/government-information-resources/disposition/records-appraisal-disposition-program/Pages/guidelines-records-public-key-infrastructure-encryption-digital-signatures.aspx

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3