...
Evidence shows that the extent of e-journal preservation has not kept pace with the growth of electronic publication. Studies comparing the e-journal holdings of major research libraries with the titles currently preserved by major agencies have consistently found that only 20-25%, at most, of the titles with ISSN's currently collected – let alone published – have been preserved. In early 2011, the libraries of Cornell and Columbia conducted a study as part of the 2CUL collaboration, and found, for example, that LOCKSS and Portico combine to preserve only a relatively small percentage of these libraries' e-journal holdings, less than 15% of Cornell's e-journal titles as a whole.
In the fall of 2012, a study using The Keepers Registry comparing the e-journal holdings of Columbia, Cornell, and Duke with the e-journals preserved by seven different agencies, yielded similar results, showing that only 22-27% of the subset of titles with an assigned ISSN had any volumes archived. Moreover, the extent of volumes archived for any given title varied greatly and was often sparse.Wiki Markup \[1\]
\]Wiki Markup \[2\|
Beyond the diversity of content, individual libraries, despite their concern for preservation, often lack effective means for taking action. One of the revealing findings of the 2CUL e-journal preservation study was that many staff at Cornell and Columbia only had a superficial understanding of the relevant preservation strategies and their implications – and of the roles of libraries in advancing the e-journal preservation front. Selection and acquisition processes may not involve any direct interaction with the publisher; many titles are acquired as parts of large packages, with no comprehensive provision for preservation. One of the proactive strategies proposed is developing language for a model license addressing preservation and sharing it with the publishing and library communities to set a timeline for implementation (e.g., in five years, all ARL libraries will aim to use the same licensing language). Also identified as critical was mobilizing advocacy to engage the key stakeholders and providing incentives for community-wide benefits. It is important systematically to engage publishers to address the problem and make this process transparent and public.
...