Trusted Digital Repositories

Annotated Bibliography Created by Valerie Brown, Paula Jones, Nichole Manlove, Luis Rodriguez, & Matthew Wilcox

Ambacher, B. I. (2007). Government Archives and the Digital Repository Audit Checklist. Journal of Digital Information, 8(2).

Ambacher reviews the development and initial reviews of the draft of the Audit Checklist for digital repositories. He ultimately makes the case that government archives should take a leading role in the development of this checklist and its related criteria. Some have in fact taken on this role and been able to use their experience, status, and influence to encourage and guide the kinds of improvements that the Audit Checklist is intended to bring about. Written before the final TDR Checklist was introduced, this article provides a good deal of insight into how it was developed and what questions were raised as it was introduced.

Association of Research Libraries. (2009). The Research Library's Role in Digital Repository Services:Final Report of the ARL Digital Repository Issues Task Force. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries. Retrieved from [1].

The report, published by the Association of Research Libraries Digital Repository Issues Task Force functions as an evaluative tool in measuring trends and current activities among ARL member libraries. It is also used to measure leadership roles-especially within the community of research universities. According to the report research libraries will need to act quickly in order to ready themselves for changing roles surrounding the needs of library users, technology, library collections, and policy implementation and changes, thus fully engaging themselves in digital repository development. The reader may find themselves pleasantly surprised to discover sections covering the frame work involved, issues and choices surrounding content forms, larger digital environments, demand and sustainability. The report also discusses strategies for in-house development and collaborations with and across institutions, and vended services. Furthermore the reader will find a list of supplemental materials on analyzing the user, technological, collections and policy environments. An excellent source for research, it provides a full bibliographical list of references, an appendix, and response summaries of other organizations involved in digital curation practices.

Ayoung, Y., & Tibbo, H. (2011). Examination of Data Deposit Practices in Repositories with the OAIS Model. IASSIST Quarterly, 35(4), 6-13.

This paper looks at forms and guidelines needed for depositing data into selected repositories. The Open Archival Information System (OAIS) is a model for determining prerequisites for the deposit of data. The examination of the processes required for the deposit of data helps to ensure its future use.

Becker, C., Kulovits, H., Guttenbrunner, M., Strodl, S., Rauber, A., & Hofman, H. (2009). Systematic planning for digital preservation: evaluating potential strategies and building preservation plans. International Journal On Digital Libraries, 10(4), 133-157. Retrieved from [2].

Trustworthiness, according to the authors, is the most important aspect of a digital repository. In order to earn users’ trust, it is crucial to preserve the digital content in a usable manner or the information may be lost. This article outlines a firm and easy to document method for creating a preservation plan. The authors list things that could or should be in the preservation plan and ways to go about creating a preservation plan and making preservation decisions. The authors also explain how their method works in accordance with different preservation standards, including OAIS. This preservation planning method was developed using multiple case studies and is still being explored through continuing case studies. Though this article does a thorough job of explaining the steps for creating a preservation plan, their method seems to still be relatively vague in terms of actual actions required. However, it does do a good job of explaining why certain actions add to the trustworthiness of the digital repository.

Bennett, M. J. (2007). Digital repository implementation: A toolbox for streamlined success. OCLC Systems and Services, 23(3), 254-261.

C/W Mars, a large network of over 140 libraries, developed and implemented the Digital Treasures digital repository. This paper discusses the methods and tools used to create the Digital Treasures repository. The article may serve as a useful tool for repositories in the library environment by providing examples of planning, workflow, and implementation of a digitization project.

Christenson, H. (2011). HathiTrust: A Research Library at Web Scale. Library Resources & Technical Services, 55(2), 93-102.

Christenson provides an overview of the background and workings of a major trusted digital repository: HathiTrust. As part of a comprehensive look that ranges from values to collection management, the article addresses the issue of preservation by comparing its operations to related paradigms (e.g. CLOCKSS) and enumerating the standards with which it complies (e.g. METS). Along with introducing HathiTrust specifically, this article provides a detailed picture of the institutional effort and engagement with numerous policies and standards that can come together in a TDR.

Cohen, S., & Schmidle, D. (2007). Creating a multipurpose digital institutional repository. OCLC Systems and Services, 23(3), 287-296.

DigitalCommons@ILR, a repository at the Martin P. Catherwood Library at Cornell University, provides users with access to almost 2,000 digitized documents. This paper discusses the steps taken to create DigitalCommons@ILR; it observes its policies and procedures, and addresses issues such as staffing, and dealing with stakeholders.

Colati, J. B., & Colati, G. C. (2009). A place for safekeeping: Ensuring responsibility, trust, and goodness in the Alliance Digital Repository. Library & Archival Security, 22(2), 141-155. Retrieved from [3].

Here the authors, Colati & Colati, discuss ensuring trust in the Alliance Digital Repository (ADR). First highlighting the ADR's history, and purpose in developing a stable and secure repository by managing, storing, accessing, delivering, and preserving their digital items. This includes their development of the CARL system, Uncover, Prospector, and Goldrush. The authors further discuss the guiding principles of the Alliance digital Repository, steps in positioning themselves, establishing infrastructure and strategies for strengthening relationships, financial security, and the development and storage of digital material. This is of course is based on the premise of working within a consortium of experts, researchers and institutions. Using a well thought out and logical structure, this article provides insight into the trials of developing a sustainable digital archive.

Cothey, V. (2010). Digital curation at Gloucestershire Archives: From ingest to production by way of trusted storage. Journal of the Society of Archivists, 31(2), 207-228. Retrieved from [4].

This paper discusses the experiences of Gloucestershire Archives, an archive service for the Gloucestershire County Council. When the repository began implementing digital curation on a local level, they needed to do with no internal information technology budget or access. They were able to achieve the low cost aspect through the development of open source software. It also needed to be Most of the paper is focused on the usage of a tool called SCAT (SCAT is Curation and Trust), which is enabling traditional archivists to get involved in the more technological aspects of digital curation. Archivists can create archival information packages using SCAT, which can then be ingested and stored. Files are considered preserved on a day to day basis, rather than on a “forever” basis. Of particular interest is that the SCAT tool does not rely on any proprietary software to operate, helping to ensure its use for creating in the future. The author provides a great deal of detail in the steps archivists undertake to preserve digital objects. Includes illustrations and one appendix.

Dobratz, S., Schoger, A., & Strathmann, S. (2007). The nestor catalogue of criteria for trusted digital repository evaluation and certification. Journal of Digital Information, 8(2). Retrieved from [5].

This article describes the work that NESTOR has done towards establishing criteria for trusted digital repositories. At the time of this article, NESTOR has identified features important to digital archives and is working on developing a certification process for trusted digital archives. Part of this certification process will include assessments of the repository’s trustworthiness, documentation, transparency, adequacy and measure-ability. The authors point out that digital repositories are gauged by their ability to provide interpret-able digital materials over time and therefore, important components are the “integrity, authenticity, confidentiality and availability” of the digital materials stored within. The next step for e NESTOR project is to develop internationally used practices for planning and assessing digital repositories. This source was incredibly helpful to both understanding components of a trusted digital repository and the aims of the NESTOR project.

Downs, R. R., & Chen, R. S. (2010). Self-assessment of a long-term archive for Interdisciplinary Scientific Data as a trustworthy digital repository. JODI: Journal Of Digital Information, 11(1), 1-13.

This article focuses on the scientific community’s challenges to data preservation. As new technologies provide opportunities for creating and using more data appear, the authors point out that practices for storing and sharing data need to be developed as well. The NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC) is using the TRAC document to assess their viability as a trustworthy digital repository. The article points out that SEDAC meets the TRAC criteria for data management. The evaluation also led to the improvement of six areas of their repository. The authors stress the importance of long term data management for all scientific projects and they discuss the development by SEDAC of open source software that will be able to aide data submission and workflow so that everyone using it would be following TRAC criteria. This article demonstrates the importance of continually evaluating repositories and improving the data within.

Dryden, J. (2011). Measuring trust: standards for trusted digital repositories. Journal Of Archival Organization, 9(2), 127-130.

This article highlights the history of digital repository standards and practices. The author emphasizes the point that there are many standards and tests for trustworthy digital repositories but the community of information and data professionals needs to work to achieve one standard that can be adopted in any situation. The article also points out the different organizations that are currently trying to standardize digital repositories. This resource provides a very useful and concise history of standards.

Furlough, M. (2009). What we talk about when we talk about repositories. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 49(1), 18-32.

Furlough, who serves as co-director of Penn State’s Office of Digital Scholarly Publishing, has written a broad overview of what repositories are from a user’s perspective. This article is a good place to start for any library considering implementing a digital repository. The author touches upon available tools, digital life-cycles, user-friendly access and other things that should be discussed before deciding whether or not to go forward with creating a digital repository.

Gladney, H. M. (2009). Long-Term Preservation of Digital Records: Trustworthy Digital Objects. American Archivist, 72(2), 401-435.

Most content management technology provides near-term digital preservation to digital archives. Many archive repositories have striven for long-term preservation, without success. This paper discusses ways of making digital objects more trustworthy, such as software that deals with potential technical obsolescence, ensuring the trustworthiness of digital collections.

Gracy, K., & Kahn, M. (2012). Preservation in the Digital Age. Library Resources & Technical Services, 56(1), 25-43.

This article addresses the topic of trusted digital repositories within a larger review of the literature on preservation librarianship from 2009-2010, much of the purpose of which is to demonstrate a shift in preservation concern toward digital materials. It connects TDRs to the tools and projects associated with the same digital preservation goals such as DRAMBORA and Plato, and it provides a thorough bibliography on the subject.

Hank, C. (2006). Digital Curation and Trusted Repositories, Seeking Success: JCDL 2006 Workshop Report. D-Lib Magazine, 12(7/8), 1. Retrieved from [6]

Hank provides a snapshot of the key issues raised at a workshop on the evaluation of digital repository trustworthiness held during the 2006 Joint Conference on Digital Libraries. Many important voices in the field are represented, and some ideas presented here do become more fully realized in later years. Among them are presentations from members of the Research Libraries Group and the National Archives and Records Administration discussing, in part, developments around the draft release of the TRD Checklist, making this a potentially useful source for understanding the development of that standard.

Hockx-Yu, Helen (2006). Digital Preservation in the Context of Institutional Repositories. Program: electronic library and information systems (0033-0337), 40(3), p. 232.

Institutional repositories face many hurdles when it comes to ensuring digital preservation. The Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) funds projects that look at different models for digital preservation, primarily in the UK. Emphasis is placed on the JISC’s plans for digital repositories, and their value in academic settings.

Innocenti, P., & Vullo, G. (2009). Assessing the Preservation of Institutional Repositories with DRAMBORA: Case Studies from the University of Glasgow. Bollettino AIB, 49(2), 139-158.

The subject of the article is the application of the Digital Repository Audit Method based on Risk Assessment (DRAMBORA) to a pair of digital collection environments at the University of Glasgow. The authors maintain that DRAMBORA is a necessary addition to “top-down” TDR requirements because of its local approach, which begins by assessing specific institutional objectives and the risks inherent in those objectives. The DRAMBORA methods yielded a detailed evaluation from which a number of technical and policy-related issues were raised. The pair of case studies serves to illustrate the application of DRAMBORA for those unfamiliar with it, and the issues raised by the process are relevant in many other contexts as well.

Jantz, R., & Giarlo, M. (2006). Digital archiving and preservation: technologies and processes for a trusted repository. Journal of Archival Organization, 4(1/2), 193-213.

This article tries to answer the question of what libraries and archives, institutions that have already built up trust, need to do to become just as trusted with regard to digital information. The authors list examples of not only the decisions that must be made when considering digital preservation, but also the complexity surrounding those decisions. Process design, which the authors indicate is frequently ignored by institutions, is a strong focus, and stresses the importance of the digital object’s architecture. Various technologies that enhance trust are also discussed. Includes charts and illustrations. The authors note that a more in-depth article with the same title was published in 2005.

Jantz, R., & Giarlo, M. J. (2005). Digital Preservation: Architecture and Technology for Trusted Digital Repositories. Microform & Imaging Review, 34(3), 135-147.

This article discusses the ways in which trust in a digital repository can be achieved. The authors point out that “trust” is something that is hard to define and even harder to create and therefore more research into what makes a digital repository “trusted” must be done. The authors also discuss a variety of technologies that can be integrated into a system to help develop a trusted digital repository, including important emerging standards and useful open source software. Key aspects of the preservation process discussed are the transformation of digital materials and ways to maintain digital authenticity. The article as a whole raises interesting points that digital curators needs to keep in mind when creating digital data yet the authors avoid making any set standards for actually carrying out digital processes.

Johnston, W. (2012). Digital Preservation Initiatives in Ontario: Trusted Digital Repositories and Research Data Repositories. Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library & Information Practice & Research, 7(2), 1-8.

Johnston surveys three significant digital preservation projects taking place in Ontario. The first two, the Ontario Council of University Libraries’ Scholars Portal and Library and Archives Canada, are digital repositories at different junctures within the lengthy process of gaining trusted digital repository certification. The third is a research data repository at the University of Guelph focused on facilitating enhanced usage and preservation of data from the agri-environmental field of research. The article highlights ways in which differences in collections and missions affect an institution’s attitude toward TDR status and necessitate a variety of technical approaches to digital preservation challenges.

Kaczmarek, J., Hswe, P., & Eke, J. (2006). Using the “Audit Checklist of the Certification of a Trusted Digital Repository” as a Framework for Evaluating Repository Software Applications: A Progress Report. D-Lib Magazine, 12(12), 1.

The authors describe what was an ongoing project (itself part of the ECHO DEPository project) to use the 2005 RLG/NARA Audit Checklist for the Certification of a Trusted Digital Repository to evaluate the software applications used to manage digital collections. The initiative produced an annotated version of the Audit Checklist that can be used by institutions interested in how specific applications support the set of TDR criteria. They found, however, that in order to go beyond the framework they created and effectively score the applications, greater technical detail and the collaboration of software developers would be necessary.

Katre, D. (2012). Need of Legislation and Digital Preservation Policy Framework in Indian Context. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 32(4), 321-326.

Katre concludes that India, both at the national level and within organizations, needs to enact policies geared toward meeting the standards required for the certification of trusted digital repositories. He enumerates the characteristics associated with successful digital preservation programs, and uses these “building blocks” to compare India to other nations. He finds that while many technical capabilities are sufficient, there are major gaps in the areas of policy and legislation. The assessment and comparison of non-Indian institutions with regard to their approach to standards for digital repositories is valuable outside of the Indian context as well.

Lawson, D., & Spies, P. B. (2004). Developing a trusted digital repository: the OCLC experience. VINE: Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 34(1), 27-32. Retrieved from [7].

Collaboration between the OCLC and RLG has resulted in the development of the Trusted Digital Repositories: Attributes and Responsibilities report, which was designed to define the attributes of a trusted digital repository as well as the OCLC digital archive to store electronic resources derived from the web and elsewhere. In this article Lawson and Spies highlight certain details behind the mission, as well as the development history and production system of the initiative. Going into further detail, they describe the processes involved in establishing metadata record creation capabilities, harvesting and its functionality, ingestion and administration, dissemination, and of course future endeavors. At that time these included partnering with the Task Force on Digital Repository Certification and PREMIS (Preservation Metadata Implementation Strategies).

In this article Lawson and Spies fall short of incorporating extensive detail. Nevertheless the article appears to be a well-structured outline of the steps and developments involved in the initiative. This is a useful resource but further research and readings may be required in order to gain deeper insight into how and why certain standards are created for establishing trustworthy practices in long term digital preservation.

Lee, C., & Tibbo, H. (2007). Digital curation and trusted repositories: Steps toward success. Journal of Digital Information, 8(2). Retrieved from: [8].

This article was part of a special issue that focused on digital curation and trusted repositories. The majority of the work focuses on recapping a workshop held in June, 2006. Speakers participating are responsible for many of the current literature on the topic of trusted repositories. There really isn’t anything new in this article, but it does provide a good overview of the ideas currently under discussion.

McDonald, T., & Walters, T. (2010). Restoring trust relationships within the framework of collaborative digital preservation federations. Journal of Digital Information, 11(1) . Retrieved from: [9].

In this study the authors present findings from an audience poll conducted on May 5, 2009 at the 4th International Conference on Open Repositories. In referencing, SRAST, a fictional digital repository, the authors explore various methods in which repositiories can effectively recover from disasters (natural or otherwise) and critical data loss. Using trust models put forth by Holland, Lockett, Ring and Van de Ven, the authors explore cooperative inter-organizational relationships (IORs) in regards to negotiating and implementing trusted business activities in and amongst digital repositories.

McHugh, A. (2007). Trust Through Self Audit. Unpublished Manuscript, University of Glasgow. Retrieved from: [10].

McHugh provides an outline of the role DRAMBORA plays in assisting subject based and institutional repositories with establishing trust within their users. As a measure in doing so, DRAMBORA uses an analytical method similar to that in an external audit that insures both short term and long term benefits. According to the author this constitutes awareness of an institutions aim, mission, and objective. It helps to determine assessment parameters, verify the investment in and success of their resources. McHugh explains that the system is designed to assist auditors in assessing the infrastructure for planning continuous improvement. Furthermore DRAMBORA helps in creating and publishing documentation and risk assessments to assist with future audits, as well as identifying future shortcomings.

McHugh, A., & Ross, S. (2005). Audit and certification of digital repositories: Creating a mandate for the Digital Curation Centre (DCC). RLG DigiNews. Retrieved from:[11].

According to the authors, there are a bevy of trust-related issues surrounding digital repositories. In this article, McHugh and Ross discuss the importance of and development of trustworthiness. They go on to describe it as being fundamental to the value of digital repositories along with accommodation different file formats, hardware, software, materials and users. This is in addition to providing secure digital information, validity, accessibility and usability of digital resources. The article is useful because it also addresses auditing and certification in great detail including the importance of, ways to and how it helps to establish authenticity in an institutions practices, holdings and services. Readers concerned with trustworthiness of digital repositories will satisfyingly find themselves faced with a substantial amount of information highlighting the contributions of and examples surrounding Reed-Elsevier, RLG-NARA, and the Task Force on Archiving Digital Information, as well as the Digital Curation Centre (DCC). At the time this article was written, the DCC had made audit and certification a priority. McHugh and Ross indicated this helped to introduce the needs and processes involved in auditing, its validation, procedures, certification guidelines and consensus, among other things.

Moore, R. W. & Smith, M (2007). Automated validation of trusted digital repository assessment criteria. Journal of Digital Information 8(2). Retrieved from[12].

The authors identify a strong need for the automatic enforcement of data management policies. The subject is the collaboration between the San Diego Supercomputer Center and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. SDSC developed iRODS, “a rules-based system for automating data management and preservation operations”, and applied it to MIT’s DSpace digital archive, where policies were in place according to the Trusted Digital Repository Checklist. The article goes through the process of turning pieces of policy into machine enforceable elements, and in doing so, it articulates a potentially very important way of designing digital repositories.

Moore, R. W. & Smith, M. (2007). Digital archive policies and trusted digital repositories. International Journal of Digital Curation 1(2).

The authors describe the work of the PoLicy Enforcement in Data Grid Environments (PLEDGE) Project, the goal of which was to develop ways to enforce and verify adherence to standard digital content management policies. They discuss the gap that exists between policy and actual preservation environments, and they propose a rules engine as a way to build policy into the archival preservation system itself. When appropriate policies are mapped to rules engines, technical preservation metadata may be generated to document compliance with the Trusted Digital Repository Checklist. The article is a useful study of the current policies in use in digital archives and it looks forward to how these policies can be better realized.

National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) Online Computer Library Center (OCLC); Research Libraries Group (RLG). (2007, February). Trustworthy repositories audit & certification: Checklist & criteria (v. 1.0). Chicago: Center for Research Libraries (CRL). Retrieved from: [13].

This extensive report is designed to detailed insight into the steps and practices involved in establishing trust in digital repositories. Developed by a colloquium of digital preservation experts from the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), Center for Research Libraries (CRL), and the Online Computer Library center (OCLC). In 2003 RLG and NARA joined forced to form the RLG-NARA Task Force on Digital Repository Certification with the purpose of developing criteria to identify digital repositories in terms of reliably storing, moving and providing access to digital collections. This report includes a well written introduction focusing on establishing audit & certification criteria, what a trusted digital repository is, international efforts, future versions of the criteria. The report also includes sections on using the checklist, defining audit and certification criteria based on organization and technical infrastructure, and digital object management. This report is designed to give the user a substantial breakdown on the processes in auditing and certification and is a useful tool in providing thorough breakdowns, illustrations, a glossary, and other references for understandability and use, additional requirements, perspectives and strategies for preservation and planning. Overall, this text may serve as a wonderful guideline for institutions seeking an easy to follow, and logical guide.

Peters, D. (2003). Giving form to the future of preservation: a trusted digital repository. S.A. Archives Journal, 43,89-92.

Peters opens his article by describing the options that smaller institutions have for creating trusted digital repositories: outsourcing and consortia. He then discuses, in detail, two related consortia for digital repositories, CHAIN and DISA. The article outlines several aspects of the digital repository including the aspects related to the digital materials and aspects related to the sustainability of the project. The author states that no one set of procedures will work for the digital preservation needs of all but that with changing technologies strict methods are needed. The author does make valid points about the advantages of consortia and outsourcing for digital repositories but the article also remains very vague about what makes CHAIN and DISA trusted digital repositories.

Peters, T. A. (2002). Digital repositories: Individual, discipline-based, institutional, consortial, or national? Journal of Academic Librarianship, 28(6), 414-417.

This title of this article is a little misleading, as there is very little mention of individual, discipline-based or national repositories. While examples of institutional and consortial repositories are described, the bulk of the article is a discussion of pros and cons of consortial repositories alone. The author’s conclusion seems a bit unclear, however, and any discussion of trust was fleeting.

Price, D. M. & Smith, J. J. (2011). The trust continuum in the information age: a Canadian perspective. Archival Science, 11,(3-4), 253-276. Retrieved from: [14].

The authors use the “trust continuum” model for analyzing relationships between the creator, archivist and user in a trusted digital archive. Rather than looking at the trust aspect as a list of qualifications an archive must meet, the article examines the notions of trust in a digital repository in a sociological way. They look at the Library and Archives Canada (LAC) and examined key problems with the trust between the LAC and society. The authors also discussed areas that were helping to increase the trust level between different parties, including the design of the trusted digital repository. Key decision making areas that can affect trust for the LAC are how they define “relevant” material, worthy of preservation, and what consortia they are a part of. The article also highlights several histories of the trust relationship between society and government agencies. This article presents a unique lens with which to view the requirements for trusted digital repositories.

Prieto, Adolfo G. (2009). "From conceptual to perceptual reality: trust in digital repositories". Library Review (Glasgow) (0024-2535), 58 (8).

Developing and earning trust in an online environment can be difficult. Digital repositories utilize different types of technologies, and are available in many different settings. This paper focuses on known trusted repositories, and examines their methods for continued assurance of trust with their customers. Accepted practices and trusted technological standards are primary focuses.

Research Libraries Group (RLG); Online Computer Library Center (OCLC). (2002). Trusted digital repositories: attributes and responsibilities. Research Libraries Group & Online Computer Library Center, Report. Retrieved from: [15].

The RLG/OCLC Working Group on Digital Archive Attributes has created an extensive list of best practices for a variety of factors concerning digital repositories. Intended mainly for institutions charged with preserving cultural heritage, this report identifies many characteristics and responsibilities of a digital repository but stops short of discussing technical specifics without more research in that area. A list of recommendations is provided, as well as a glossary of terms and two appendices.

Ross, S., & McHugh, A. (2006). The role of evidence in establishing trust in repositories. D-Lib Magazine, 12(7/8), Retrieved from:[16].

This article highlights important steps in the process to become a certified digital repository. The authors pose that certification helps to establish the trust in the digital repository and therefore should follow certain guidelines. The article does not outline any specific steps in the certification process but rather summarizes different projects/pilots for certification that are in existence now. The article takes certain steps in the auditing process and explains the different evidence that would be required of the digital repository to prove it is trustworthy. With the exception of a list of useful documentation for the certification process, most explanations and recommendations are general rather than detailed.

Roy, B. K., Mukhopadhyay, P., & Biswas, S. (2012). An analytical study of institutional digital repositories in India. Library Philosophy and Practice, 1-13. Retrieved from: [17].

India has an emerging infrastructure in the fields of information dissemination and technical development. Despite these advancements, institutional repositories remain to fall short of developing best practices and standards policies that will assist in maintaining long-term preservation of digital scientific and technical materials including multimedia objects, papers, books, theses, learning objects , data sets, patents, references, and software. Amidst the grammatical errors (language barrier) in this report, the authors (Roy, Mukhopadhyay, and Biswas), effectively summarize the growth rate, purpose, dissemination and history behind the open access movement and the government initiatives that arose as a result. This includes the University Grants Commission (2005), which encouraged the creation of the Indian National Theses Database (INTED) as well as the submission of PhD Theses in electronic form.

The authors, thankfully, delve extensively into the number of, growth rate statistics, functions and current practices of institutional repositories by providing tables and charts. In presenting such analysis the study sheds light on certain practices that many institutions are failing to instigate, including cultivating customized interfaces, creating registration guidelines and policy issues, limiting the number of search options, and inefficient record tracking (in regards to numbers). Relatedly the authors logically combat these issues in suggesting further implementation of guidelines by increasing manpower, quality and quantity of contents, metadata standards, copyright barriers, and policy issues; subsequently suggesting that with proper the measures in place, IRs can maintain university as well as national level databases by expanding their collection, organization, and dissemination capabilities.

Schmidt, L. M. (2011). Preserving the H-Net Email Lists: A case study in trusted digital repository assessment. American Archivist, 74(1), 257-296.

This article examines the use of the TRAC checklist for trusted digital repositories on an email LISTSERV. The author goes into detail on the history of electronic mail and digital preservation techniques to give a background for the rest of the article. The author’s study looks at the LISTSERV for the H-Net group, which is an international group of scholars. The article then describes how the H-Net email list works and the metadata associated with it. The functions of the TRAC evaluation are then discussed in the context of the LISTSERV. After the first TRAC evaluation, there were several problems with trustworthiness of the email list. The author notes all of the problems discovered and discusses what they did to fix these problems. The second TRAC audit showed significant improvement. From this the author concludes that the TRAC checklist can be used to audit email lists as well as repositories. This article is very well detailed and provides a unique perspective on what constitutes a trusted digital repository.

Shoeb, Z. H., & Sobhan, M. A. (2010). Authentication and authorization: Security issues for institutional digital repositories. Library Philosophy and Practice. Retrieved from:[18].

The authors contend that access management is one of the most important issues facing digital repositories. Legitimate users must be allowed access to data, but without proper measure in place, the integrity of that data is not guaranteed. This paper is an overview of systems of access management and authentication that are currently used by digital content providers. Detailed information on how some of these methods operate is provided. Authentication refers to how users log in, commonly with a user name and password. User authorization deals with what permissions pertain to a particular user. Methods of keeping digital materials secure, such as watermarking or digital signatures are also covered. The conclusion is a little difficult to understand, but the authors do make clear that there are new challenges ahead as widespread sharing of digital data takes place, and the area of access management will require further research.

Shoeb, Z. (2009). Access Management for Digital Repository. DESIDOC Journal Of Library & Information Technology, 29(4), 21. Access management is a key criterion in determining trustworthiness in digital repositories. This study, conducted in Bangladesh, looks at the importance of the use of Open Source Software, and the role it plays in helping build repositories. User authentications and digital communications are topics of importance in helping to stabilize reliable access management.

Statsbiblioteket HATII. (2008, March 25). D3.2 repository planning checklist and guidance. Glasgow: HATII at the University of Glasgow. Retrieved from Digital Preservation Europe: Retrieved from:[19]

This document is the result of the collaboration between the Center for Research Libraries (CRL), The Digital Curation Center (DCC), Digital Preservation Europe (DPE), and the German Network of Expertise and is based on the Ten Core Principles of Trust Repository Design. These core principles include continuing maintenance of digital objects, organizational fitness, maintenance of legal rights and responsibilities, effective policy frameworks, ingestion of digital objects based on stated criteria, maintenance of metadata, fulfillment of dissemination requirements, a preservation plan, and adequate technical infrastructure. The report is specifically designed to address these principles and how they might be integrated into the design and planning of a reliable repository.

This well-structured report discusses the broadness of the word "repository" and how different repositories obtain trust. This is critical because not all repositories are created equal. That is, not all carry the same type or size of materials, nor do they have the same purpose, goals, mission, or requirements in mind. However they all want to be classified as trustworthy. The report poses logical questions for the reader/researcher to ponder, such as whether the institution is associated with a government, has or is a parent organization, or is self-defined. Other questions for consideration surround the commercial status, legal acquisition rights and methods, the operational status, the amount, type, sensitivity and complexity of data, as well as the people it manages. Last of all the report asks repositories to consider access rights, sources of metadata, interoperability, and storage and software strategies. These questions appear to be critical in determining the trustworthiness of a digital repository.

Steinhart, G. (2013). Partnerships Between Institutional Repositories, Domain Repositories and Publishers. Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 39(6), 19-22.

Digital research data requires long-term preservation, but there can be difficulties when providers do not take the time to ensure that their data has reliable documentation, or is not properly organized. Three speakers, one from the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR), one from the California Digital Library (CDL), and one from Columbia University Library, discuss challenges that can occur unless repositories and researchers form trustworthy partnerships. Solutions include forming these partnerships early, to make the curation process more personal.

Thibodeau, K. (2007). If you build it, will it fly? Criteria for success in a digital repository. Journal of Digital Information, 8(2). Retrieved from: [20].

This article discusses the different factors believed to be important to an evaluation of a digital repository. First, the different types of digital repositories (libraries, corporate repositories and government repositories) are discussed in relation to their different needs. The author than claims that service, orientation, coverage, collaboration and state are the areas that should be included in every evaluation of digital repositories. This means that evaluations should ask: who is the repository serving?, are user needs represented?, does the repository cover what the users need?, does the repository collaborate with anyone?, and what stage of development is the repository in? The author does a good job recommending general guidelines but does not explain the reasoning for these inclusions or how they would help the repository develop specific areas.

Vardigan, M., & Whiteman, C. (2007). ICPSR Meets OAIS: Applying the OAIS Reference Model to the Social Science Archive Context. Archival Science 7.1: 73-87.

The Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) is a repository for digital social science data. Their standard for the collection and preservation of these data is the OAIS model. This paper shows, by observing issues other archives face with preservation, how implementing the OAIS model might benefit these other social science data repositories.

Warner, S., Bekaert, J., Lagoze, C., Liu, X., Payette, S., & Warner, H. (2007). Pathways: Augmenting interoperability across scholarly repositories. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 7(1/2), 35-52. Retrieved from: [21].

The amount of complex digital objects showing up in repositories is quickly growing. Current means of discovering these objects across these repositories are not up to the task, according to the authors of this article. They first describe a variety of scenarios that could be achieved with a better system of interoperability. The paper then begins a detailed account of the Pathways project, a collaborative effort between Cornell University and the Los Alamos National Library. Pathways attempts to define a common data model and service interfaces between repositories, allowing for objects to be moved and re-used among various repositories. Results of experiments have been successful; however, they have also raised questions, such as the implications on validity if there are multiple copies of the same digital object across several repositories. The authors acknowledge that thus far, the repositories are mostly limited to document content. Future experiments will include other types of data and different repository systems. Several illustrations and charts are included.

Westell, M. (2006). Institutional repositories: proposed indicators of success. Library Hi Tech, 24(2), 211- 26.

The author, a librarian at the University of Calgary, developed an evaluation framework to measure the success of institutional repositories in Canada. The article lists and defines eight indicators to measure success rates. While the phrase trusted repository does not appear, the majority of the indicators pertain to trust, specifically “integration into institutional planning” (demonstrating commitment), “funding model” (sustainability), “relationship to digitization centers” (demonstrating commitment and staff expertise), “measurement” (citation analysis), and preservation. Ultimately, Westell’s research shows that the number of repositories in Canada is growing, though not as rapidly as expected. The indicators laid out, however, provide an excellent starting place for libraries to evaluate and/or implement trusted repositories.

Yakel, E., Faniel, I., Kriesberg, A., & Yoon, A. (2013). Trust in digital repositories. The International Journal of Digital Curation, 8(1), 143-156. Retrieved from: [22].

This article does a wonderful job discussing the focus on the empirical and theoretical research surrounding user trust in digital repositories. Upon initial review it appears as if the authors have placed a significant amount of effort in referencing additional authors, organizations and institutions whose thoughts and ideas have contributed to the creation of this article. One such example is the implementation of ISO TRAC standards that propagate user trust.

According to the article, trust in repositories is established through sharing knowledge and scholarship. The authors argue that trust is a psychological state that encompasses the intention to accept vulnerability due to the expectations of others behaviors or intentions. They further argue that the role of trust needs to be established amongst stake holders as well as users. The authors base their study on the results of the in-depth interviews of 66 data users from the fields of archeology and social science. They posed questions surrounding the conception of trust in repositories amongst data users and in doing so the authors concluded that certain communities directly associate a repositories actions with trust, especially in terms of transparency, colleagues, preservation, sustainability and the reputation of the institution. Their findings specifically reveal that while archaeologists are more concerned with an institutions guarantees of preservation and sustainability, social scientists are more concerned with the influence of their colleagues and the institution’s reputation. Overall the article constructs a thorough insight into different communities’ views on what trust in digital repositories means to them. The authors provide the reader with great detail on the methods and findings of their research. This is accompanied by various tables and charts.

Yoon, A. A. (2013). End users' trust in data repositories: Definition and influences on trust development. Archival Science, 1-18. Retrieved from:[23].

The author, a third-year doctoral student in the School of Library and Information Science at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, asserts that while much research has been done on the issue of establishing trust in repositories, little thought has been given to users’ perceptions of that trust. Using semi-structured interviews, the author asked 19 participants a variety of questions pertaining to data validity, integrity of repositories, designated communities (how other users’ opinions influenced the subjects’ perception of repositories), past experiences and processes used by the repositories. Among her conclusions, she found that a particular user’s level of trust is likely affected by their knowledge of what the functions of a repository are. This is an intriguing area of research that definitely requires more study.

Yuhong, C. (2012). Research on construction strategies of trusted digital repositories in university libraries. 2012 7th International Conference On System Of Systems Engineering (Sose), 419.

This report acts as a basic framework for the construction of trusted digital repositories (TDRs). It examines attributes of a TDR, such as designing operating systems under universally-accepted standards. The report continues by looking at a TDR’s responsibilities to observe the OAIS model, honor management commitments, provide a strong organizational structure, and sustain finances from its financial supporters.