Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Memory of the World, Documentary Heritage and Digital Technology: Critical Perspectives

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The UNESCO Memory of the World Programme

Part of the book series: Heritage Studies ((HEST))

  • 641 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter explores the potential that critically oriented perspectives hold for broadened insights about the heritage value of digital documents. Digital technology has significantly changed the way documents are conceptualized, created, accessed, transmitted and preserved, and digital documents are characterized by features that challenge established perspectives. Although any of these features may hold heritage significance, digital documentary heritage is poorly represented in the context of the UNESCO Memory of the World Programme (MoW), in particular on the International Memory of the World Register, which contains a selection of some of the most globally representative documents in any form, including the digital. Observing that libraries and archives, and their underlying disciplines, which have informed MoW, have been dominated by positivism, this chapter builds on the assumption that approaching documents too narrowly entails the risk of overlooking the manifold significance they could have. Consequently, I suggest that moving away from positivism and adopting critical perspectives might help us understand more comprehensively the manifold heritage significance of digital documents. For illustration, I am using the example of software, and I discuss how the adoption of critical perspectives enables broadened insights about the significance of software, not just as a component in a digital document but also as a document in its own right.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This is often a source of confusion, as scholars who study and research about MoW report.

  2. 2.

    This is an awareness-raising tool that features a selection of some of the most globally representative documents. See Russell in this volume.

  3. 3.

    Librarianship, Archival Sciences, Diplomatics, etc. are distinct disciplines, but in this chapter, the designation “Library and Archival Sciences” has been employed to refer to the scientific areas on whose expertise MoW has been drawing.

  4. 4.

    See also van der Werf in this volume.

  5. 5.

    Owens distinguishes seven layers: compound or complex object, rendered file, file in the file system, file as bitstream, sub-file information, bitstream through I/O and bitstream on a physical medium (2018, p. 33).

  6. 6.

    The Guidelines drafted for the implementation of the 2003 Charter (UNESCO 2003b) notes the same three levels but it adds a fourth one, namely, “bundles of essential elements that embody the message, purpose, or features for which the material was chosen for preservation” (National Library of Australia 2003, p. 35).

  7. 7.

    An electronic record is defined as “a record that is set aside and used in electronic form irrespective of the original form in which it may have been made or received” (Duranti and Thibodeau 2006, p. 15). The same applies also to digital documents.

  8. 8.

    Even in the case of email, its preservation requires taking apart its digital components, e.g. “the elements of the header, the message, the block signature, attachments, etc.”. See Duranti in this volume.

  9. 9.

    Emulation is a digital preservation method that involves re-creating the software and hardware environment in which a document was originally created.

  10. 10.

    This has now been changed in the revised Guidelines. See discussion below.

  11. 11.

    The international level does not reflect accurately the activities taking place at the regional level. See discussion below on the Australian PANDORA web archive.

  12. 12.

    See Edmondson “Reviewing” in this volume.

  13. 13.

    The peak body responsible for the overall implementation of MoW.

  14. 14.

    A subsidiary body responsible for the initial in-depth assessment of nominations.

  15. 15.

    This was a draft version of the Memory of the World Companion.

  16. 16.

    In the context of MoW, one item of documentary heritage can exist simultaneously on all Registers. See Russell in this volume.

  17. 17.

    The reference here is to the six individual criteria for defining world significance, namely: time; place; people; subject and theme; form and style; and social/spiritual/community significance. This has been changed in the revised Guidelines (2017) but I am discussing nominations evaluated based on the 2002 Guidelines.

  18. 18.

    See also van der Werf and van der Werf in this volume.

References

  • Berry, D. (Ed.). (2012). Understanding digital humanities. Houndmills/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookshare, G. J. (2007). Computer science: An overview (9th ed.). Pearson Education: Boston/San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckland, M. (1997). What is a ‘document’? Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(9), 804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cloonan, M. (2015). Preserving our heritage: Perspectives from antiquity to the digital age. London: Facet Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR). (2001). The evidence in hand: Report of the task force on the artifact on library collections. Washington, DC: CLIR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cramer, F. (2008). Language. In M. Fuller (Ed.), Software studies: A lexicon (pp. 168–174). Cambridge/London: The MIT Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Duranti, L., & Preston, R. (Eds.). (2008). International research on permanent authentic records in electronic systems (InterPARES) 2: Experiential, interactive and dynamic records. Padova: Associazione Nazionale Archivistica Italiana. http://www.interpares.org/ip2/display_file.cfm?doc=ip2_book_complete.pdf. Accessed 27 Jan 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duranti, L., & Thibodeau, K. (2006). The concept of record in interactive, experiential and dynamic environments: The view of InterPARES. Archival Science, 8(1), 13–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Lusenet, Y. (2007). Tending the garden or harvesting the fields. Digital preservation and the UNESCO Charter on the Preservation of the Digital Heritage. In M. V. Cloonan and R. Harvey (Eds.), Preserving cultural heritage, (Special issue). Library Trends 56(1), (pp. 164–182).

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson, R. (2002). Memory of the World: General Guidelines to Safeguard Documentary Heritage. (Doc. No: CII-95/WS-11rev). Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feather, J. (2004). Introduction: Principles and policies. In J. Feather (Ed.), Managing preservation for libraries and archives: Current practice and future developments (pp. 1–26). Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forsythe, D. E. (1996). New bottles, old wine: Hidden cultural assumptions in a computerized explanation system for migraine sufferers. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 10(4), 553–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frohmann, B. (2004). Documentation redux: Prolegomenon to (another) philosophy of information. Library Trends, 52(3), 387–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirschenbaum, M. G. (2004). Extreme inscription: towards a grammatology of the hard drive. TEXT Technology, 2004(2), 91–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kittler, F. (1995, October 18). There is no software. A. & M. Kroker (Eds.) C-Theoryhttp://www.ctheory.net/printer.aspx?id=74. Accessed 7 Dec 2018.

  • Knuth, D. E. (1984). Literate programming. The Computer Journal, 27(2), 97–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leckie, G. J., Given, L. M., & Buschman, J. E. (Eds.). (2010). Critical theory for library and information sciences: Exploring the social from across the disciplines. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, LLC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lund, N. W. (2009). Document theory. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 43(1), 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marino, M. (2014, November 9). Field report for critical code studies. Computational culture. http://computationalculture.net/field-report-for-critical-code-studies-2014%E2%80%A8/. Accessed 21 Jan 2019.

  • Mcpherson, T. (2012). Why are digital humanities so white? Or thinking the histories of race and computation. In M. K. Gold (Ed.), Debates in the digital humanities (pp. 139–160). Minneapolis/London: University of Minnesota Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Montfort, N., Baudoin, P., Bell, J., Bogost, I., Douglass, J., Marino, M. C., Mateas, M., Reas, C., Sample, M., & Vawter, N. (2013). 10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); GOTO 10. Cambridge/London: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MoW Guidelines Review Group. (2017). UNESCO Memory of the World Programme. General Guidelines, Approved Text December. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Library of Australia. (2003). Guidelines for the preservation of digital heritage. (Doc. No: CI-2003/WS/3). Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owen, J. M. (2007). Preserving the digital heritage: Roles and responsibilities for heritage repositories. In Y. de Lusenet & V. Wintermans (Eds.), Preserving the digital heritage: Principles and policies (pp. 45–49). Amsterdam: Netherlands National Commission for UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owens, T. (2018). The theory and craft of digital preservation, Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pilerot, O. (2011). On documentary practices, paper for LIS course, Swedish School of Library and Information Science, University of Boras. http://www.adm.hb.se/~opi/Pilerot_paper_on_documentary_practices.pdf. Accessed 20 Sept 2014.

  • Prodan, A. C. (2014). The digital “Memory of the World”: An exploration of documentary practices in the age of digital technology, (doctoral dissertation), Brandenburg University of Technology, Cottbus, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rèmond-Gouilloud, M. (2001). Evolving conceptions of the heritage. In J. Bindé (Ed.), Keys to the 21st century (pp. 147–151). Paris/New York/Oxford: UNESCO/Berghahn Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Software Heritage. (2018). Software heritage. https://www.softwareheritage.org/. Accessed 22 Jan 2019.

  • Thibodeau, K. (2002). Overview of technological approaches to digital preservation and challenges in coming years, Conference proceedings. The state of digital preservation: An international perspective. Washington, DC: CLIR.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (1998). Report of the First Meeting of the Bureau of the International Advisory Committee of the “Memory of the World” Programme, London, United Kingdom, 4–5 Sept 1998. Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2000). Report of the Second Meeting of the Bureau of the International Advisory Committee of the “Memory of the World” Programme, Manzanillo, Mexico, 26 Sept 2000. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2001). Final Report of the Fifth Meeting of the International Advisory Committee of the “Memory of the World” Programme, Cheongju City, Republic of Korea, 27–29 June 2001(Doc. No: CI-2001/CONF.504/CLD.1). Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2003a). Final Report on Sixth Meeting of the International Advisory Committee of the “Memory of the World” Programme, Gdansk, Poland, 28–30 Aug 2003. (Doc. No: CI/INF/2003). Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2003b). Charter on the Preservation of Digital Heritage, adopted by general conference on 15 Oct 2003. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2004). Nomination form “PANDORA, Australia’s Web Archive”: Nomination form Submitted by Australia to the International Memory of the World Register. (REF N° 2004–28). http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en//ev.php-URL_ID=18001&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html. Accessed 7 Nov 2012.

  • UNESCO. (2005). Report of the Third Meeting of the Register Sub-Committee of the International Advisory Committee of the “Memory of the World” Programme, Paris, 21 March 2005. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2009). Memory of the World Companion, A Work in Progress. Paper Discussed at the 9th Meeting of the International Advisory Committee of the Memory of the World Programme, Christ Church, Barbados, 29–31 July 2009, (draft).

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2011). Memory of the World Register Companion. UNESCO Memory of the World Programme. https://en.unesco.org/sites/default/files/memory_of_the_world_register_companion_en.pdf. Accessed 19 Jan 2019.

  • UNESCO. (2015). Recommendation Concerning the Preservation of, and Access to, Documentary Heritage Including in Digital Form, adopted by the General Conference, on 17 Nov 2015, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2017, April 3). Agreement on software preservation signed at UNESCO (Press release). https://en.unesco.org/news/agreement-software-preservation-signed-unesco. Accessed 22 Jan 2019.

  • UNESCO. (2018, November 16). Experts call for greater recognition of software source code as heritage for sustainable development (Press release). https://en.unesco.org/news/experts-call-greater-recognition-software-source-code-heritage-sustainable-development. Accessed 22 Jan 2019.

  • UNESCO. (n.d.). Nomination form “Worldwide: Free Software”: Nomination form submitted by Free Software Foundation Europe to the International Memory of the World Register. http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/files/7550/10443548740free_software.rtf/free+software.rtf. Accessed 29 Nov 2012.

  • Uricchio, W. (2007). Moving beyond the artifact: Lessons from participatory culture. In Y. de Lusenet & V. Wintermans (Eds.), Preserving the digital heritage: Principles and policies (pp. 15–25). Amsterdam: Netherlands National Commission for UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on the Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and Technology (COMEST). (2005). The precautionary principle. (SHS.2005/WS/21). Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Brandenburg Technical University Cottbus-Senftenberg, Cottbus, Germany

    Anca Claudia Prodan

Authors
  1. Anca Claudia Prodan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anca Claudia Prodan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Audiovisual Archiving Consultant Former Chair and Current Special Advisor, MOWCAP (Memory of the World Committee for Asia and the Pacific), Canberra, Australia

    Ray Edmondson PhD

  2. Professor of Modern German Literature and Comparative Literature, UNESCO Memory of the World Programme, Chair Sub-Committee on Education and Research, Paris, France

    Lothar Jordan

  3. Scientific Associate and Lecturer Chair Intercultural Studies, Brandenburg Technical University Cottbus-Senftenberg, Cottbus, Germany

    Anca Claudia Prodan PhD

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Prodan, A.C. (2020). Memory of the World, Documentary Heritage and Digital Technology: Critical Perspectives. In: Edmondson, R., Jordan, L., Prodan, A.C. (eds) The UNESCO Memory of the World Programme. Heritage Studies. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18441-4_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18441-4_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-18440-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-18441-4

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation