RESEARCH ARTICLE
The Social Construction of Risk in Digital Preservation
Rebecca D. Frank PhD,
Corresponding Author
Rebecca D. Frank PhD
University of Michigan School of Information, 4322 North Quad, 105 S. State Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-1285
E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorRebecca D. Frank PhD,
Corresponding Author
Rebecca D. Frank PhD
University of Michigan School of Information, 4322 North Quad, 105 S. State Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-1285
E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Digital information is fragile, yet access to digital information over time is a critical underpinning of core values and functions in our society, from open government to research and scholarship. Digital preservation research has focused on identifying technical, economic, and organizational sources of risk and has relied on an assumption that individuals will behave in rational and predictable ways in response to the same information. This article asserts that viewing digital preservation as a process that takes place in complex social contexts is just as important as thinking about digital preservation in terms of technological or economic issues. This is particularly important for understanding how individuals involved in digital preservation construct their understanding of risk because social factors influence how people construct their understanding of, and behave in response to, risk information. The author proposes an eight-factor model for the social construction of risk, which includes: communication, complexity, expertise, organizations, political culture, trust, uncertainty, and vulnerability. The article demonstrates how these factors influence individuals as they construct their understanding of risk in the context of digital preservation and how this in turn affects digital preservation decisions.
References
- Arvai, J.L. (2007). Rethinking of risk communication: Lessons from the decision sciences. Tree Genetics & Genomes, 3(2), 173–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-006-0068-7
- Baker, M., Shah, M., Rosenthal, D.S.H., Roussopoulos, M., Maniatis, P., Giuli, T., & Bungale, P. (2006). A fresh look at the reliability of long-term digital storage. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGOPS/EuroSys European Conference on Computer Systems 2006 (pp. 221–234). New York: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1217935.1217957
10.1145/1217935.1217957 Google Scholar
- Barateiro, J., Antunes, G., & Borbinha, J. (2011). Long-term security of digital information: Assessment through risk management and enterprise architecture. In 2011 IEEE EUROCON - International Conference on Computer as a Tool (EUROCON) (pp. 1–4). https://doi.org/10.1109/EUROCON.2011.5929270
- Barateiro, J., Antunes, G., & Borbinha, J. (2012). Manage risks through the enterprise architecture. In 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS) (pp. 3297–3306). https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2012.419
- Barateiro, J., Antunes, G., Freitas, F., & Borbinha, J. (2010). Designing digital preservation solutions: A risk management-based approach. International Journal of Digital Curation, 5(1), 4–17. https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v5i1.140
10.2218/ijdc.v5i1.140 Google Scholar
- Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London, Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
- Beck, U. (1999). World Risk Society. Malden, MA: Polity Press.
- Becker, C., Antunes, G., Barateiro, J., Vieira, R., & Borbinha, J. (2011). Control objectives for DP: Digital preservation as an integrated part of IT governance. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 48(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.2011.14504801124
10.1002/meet.2011.14504801124 Google Scholar
- Becker, C., & Rauber, A. (2011). Decision criteria in digital preservation: What to measure and how. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(6), 1009–1028. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21527
- Berman, F. (2008). Got data?: A guide to data preservation in the information age. Communications of the ACM - Surviving the Data Deluge, 51(12), 50–56. https://doi.org/10.1145/1409360.1409376
- Bostrom, A. (2014). Progress in risk communication since the 1989 NRC report: Response to ‘four questions for risk communication’ by Roger Kasperson. Journal of Risk Research, 17(10), 1259–1264. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2014.923032
- Burgess, A. (2015). Social construction of risk. In H. Cho, T. Reimer, & K. McComas (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Risk Communication (pp. 56–68). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
10.4135/9781483387918.n9 Google Scholar
- CBC News. (2012). Federal Libraries, Archives Shutting Down [News]. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/federal-libraries-archives-shutting-down-1.1139085. [19 June 2016].
- Center for Research Libraries. (2010). CRL Certification Report on Portico Audit Findings. Retrieved from Center for Research Libraries website: https://www.crl.edu/sites/default/files/reports/CRL%20Report%20on%20Portico%20Audit%202010.pdf
- Center for Research Libraries. (2011). CRL Certification Report on the HathiTrust Digital Repository. Retrieved from Center for Research Libraries website: https://www.crl.edu/sites/default/files/reports/CRL%20HathiTrust%202011.pdf
- Center for Research Libraries. (2012). CRL Certification Report on Chronopolis Audit Findings. Retrieved from Center for Research Libraries website: https://www.crl.edu/sites/default/files/reports/Chron_Report_2012_final_0.pdf
- Center for Research Libraries. (2013). CRL Certification Report on Scholars Portal Audit Findings. Retrieved from Center for Research Libraries website: http://www.crl.edu/sites/default/files/attachments/pages/ScholarsPortal_Report_2013_f.pdf
- Center for Research Libraries. (2018). 2018 Updated Certification Report on CLOCKSS. Retrieved from Center for Research Libraries website: https://www.crl.edu/sites/default/files/reports/CLOCKSS_Report_2018_0.pdf
- Center for Research Libraries. (2015). CRL Certification Report on the Canadiana.org Digital Repository. Retrieved from Center for Research Libraries website: https://www.crl.edu/sites/default/files/reports/CANADIANA_AUDIT%20REPORT_2015.pdf
- Chung, I.J. (2011). Social amplification of risk in the Internet environment. Risk Analysis, 31(12), 1883–1896. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01623.x
- 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/01960070902904118
10.1080/01960070902904118 Google Scholar
- Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems. (2012). Space Data and Information Transfer Systems — Audit and Certification of Trustworthy Digital Repositories (Standard No. ISO 16363:2012 (CCSDS 652-R-1)). Washington, DC: Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems Retrieved from http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=56510
- Conway, P. (1996). Preservation in the Digital World. Washington, DC: Commission on Preservation and Access.
- Conway, P. (2010). Preservation in the age of Google: Digitization, digital preservation, and dilemmas. The Library Quarterly: Information, Community, Policy, 80(1), 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1086/648463
- Corritore, C.L., Kracher, B., & Wiedenbeck, S. (2003). On-line trust: Concepts, evolving themes, a model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58(6), 737–758. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00041-7
- Dake, K. (1991). Orienting dispositions in the perception of risk: An analysis of contemporary worldviews and cultural biases. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 22(1), 61–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022191221006
- Dake, K. (1992). Myths of nature: Culture and the social construction of risk. Journal of Social Issues, 48(4), 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1992.tb01943.x
- Dale, R., & Gore, E. (2010). Process models and the development of trustworthy digital repositories. Information Standards Quarterly, 22(2), 14. https://doi.org/10.3789/isqv22n2.2010.02
10.3789/isqv22n2.2010.02 Google Scholar
- Day, M. (2008). Toward distributed infrastructures for digital preservation: The roles of collaboration and trust. International Journal of Digital Curation, 3(1), 15–28. https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v3i1.39
10.2218/ijdc.v3i1.39 Google Scholar
- De Santis, L., Scannapieco, M., & Catarci, T. (2003). Trusting data quality in cooperative information systems. In R. Meersman, Z. Tari, & D.C. Schmidt (Eds.), On The Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2003: CoopIS, DOA, and ODBASE. OTM 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-39964-3_23
10.1007/978-3-540-39964-3_23 Google Scholar
- Dillo, I., & De Leeuw, L. (2018). CoreTrustSeal. Mitteilungen Der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen Und Bibliothekare, 71(1), 162–170. https://doi.org/10.31263/voebm.v71i1.1981
10.31263/voebm.v71i1.1981 Google Scholar
- Dobratz, S., & Schoger, A. (2007). Trustworthy digital long-term repositories: The nestor approach in the context of international developments. In L. Kovács, N. Fuhr, & C. Meghini (Eds.), Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries (pp. 210–222). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-540-74851-9_18.
10.1007/978-3-540-74851-9_18 Google Scholar
- Douglas, M., & Wildavsky, A. (1982). Risk and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
- Dryden, J. (2011). Measuring trust: Standards for trusted digital repositories. Journal of Archival Organization, 9(2), 127–130.
10.1080/15332748.2011.590744 Google Scholar
- Fischhoff, B. (1983). Acceptable Risk. Cambridge, MA, New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Flynn, J., Slovic, P., & Mertz, C.K. (1994). Gender, race, and perception of environmental health risks. Risk Analysis, 14(6), 1101–1108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00082.x
- Gardoni, P., & Murphy, C. (2013). A scale of risk. Risk Analysis, 34, 1208–1227. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12150
- Harmsen, H. (2008). Data Seal of Approval - assessment and review of the quality of operations for research data repositories (pp. 220–223). Presented at the iPRES 2008: The Fifth International Conference on Preservation of Digital Objects, London: The British Library. Retrieved from http://www.bl.uk/ipres2008/presentations_day2/34_Harmsen.pdf
- Hart, P.E., & Liu, Z. (2003). Trust in the preservation of digital information. Communications of the ACM, 46(6), 93–97. https://doi.org/10.1145/777313.777319
- Hilgartner, S. (1992). The social construction of risk objects. In J.F. Short & L. Clarke (Eds.), Organizations, Uncertainties, and Risk (pp. 39–53). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
- Hitchcock, J.L. (2001). Gender differences in risk perception: Broadening the contexts. Risk: Health, Safety & Environment, 12, 179–204.
- Hughes, T. (2012). The evolution of large technical systems. In W. Bijker, T. Hughes, & T. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems (pp. 45–76). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Hutter, B.M. (2005). “Ways of seeing”: Understandings of risk in organizational settings. In B.M. Hutter & M. Power (Eds.), Organizational encounters with risk (pp. 67–91). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.1017/CBO9780511488580.003 Google Scholar
- Hutter, B.M., & Power, M. (2005). Organizational encounters with risk: An introduction. In B.M. Hutter & M. Power (Eds.), Organizational Encounters with Risk (pp. 1–32). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.1017/CBO9780511488580.001 Google Scholar
- Institute of Risk Management, Association of Insurance and Risk Managers & Public Risk Management Association. (2002). A Risk Management Standard. London: The Institute of Risk Management Retrieved from https://www.theirm.org/media/886059/ARMS_2002_IRM.pdf
- International Organization for Standardization. (2009). Guide 73: Risk Management - Vocabulary (No. ISO Guide 73:2009) (p. 15). Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.
- International Organbization for Standardization Technical Committee. (2018). Risk Management - Guidelines (Standard No. ISO 31000:2018). Washington, DC: International Organization for Standardization Retrieved from https://www.iso.org/obp/ui#iso:std:iso:31000:ed-2:v1:en
- Jantz, R., & Giarlo, M. (2007). Digital archiving and preservation: Technologies and processes for a trusted repository. Journal of Archival Organization, 4(1–2), 193–213. https://doi.org/10.1300/J201v04n01_10
10.1300/J201v04n01_10 Google Scholar
- Jasanoff, S. (1986). Risk Management and Political Culture: A Comparative Study of Science in the Policy Context. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
- Jasanoff, S. (1998). The political science of risk perception. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 59(1), 91–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(97)00129-4
- Kahneman, D. (2013). Thinking, Fast and Slow ( 1st pbk. ed.). New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
- Kaplan, S., & Garrick, B.J. (1981). On the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Analysis, 1(1), 11–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1981.tb01350.x
- Kasperson, R.E., & Kasperson, J.X. (1996). The social amplification and attenuation of risk. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 545, 95–105.
- Kasperson, R.E., Renn, O., Slovic, P., Brown, H.S., Emel, J., Goble, R., … Ratick, S. (1988). The social amplification of risk: A conceptual framework. Risk Analysis, 8(2), 177–187. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb01168.x
- Keitel, C. (2012). DIN Standard 31644 and nestor Certification. Presented at the International Conference 2012: Cultural Heritage On Line, Florence, Italy. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20121127235326/http://www.rinascimento-digitale.it/conference2012-culturalheritageonline-programme.phtml
- Kelton, K., Fleischmann, K.R., & Wallace, W.A. (2008). Trust in digital information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(3), 363–374. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20722
- Konheim, C.S. (1988). Risk communication in the real world. Risk Analysis, 8(3), 367–373. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb00499.x
- Lachlan, K.A., Burke, J., Spence, P.R., & Griffin, D. (2009). Risk perceptions, race, and hurricane Katrina. Howard Journal of Communications, 20(3), 295–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/10646170903070035
10.1080/10646170903070035 Google Scholar
- Lavoie, B. (2008). The fifth blackbird: Some thoughts on economically sustainable digital preservation. D-Lib Magazine, 14(3/4), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1045/march2008-lavoie
10.1045/march2008-lavoie Google Scholar
- Lavoie, B., & Dempsey, L. (2004). Thirteen ways of looking at Digital preservation. D-Lib Magazine, 10(7/8), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1045/july2004-lavoie
10.1045/july2004-lavoie Google Scholar
- Lawrence, G.W., Kehoe, W.R., Rieger, O.Y., Walters, W.H., & Kenney, A.R. (2000). Risk Management of Digital Information: A File Format Investigation. Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information Resources. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED449802
- Leveson, N., Dulac, N., Marais, K., & Carroll, J. (2009). Moving beyond normal accidents and high reliability organizations: A systems approach to safety in complex systems. Organization Studies, 30(2–3), 227–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840608101478
- MacKenzie, D. (2012). Missile accuracy: A case study in the social processes of technological change. In W. Bijker, T. Hughes, & T. Pinch (Eds.), The Social Construction of Technological Systems (pp. 189–216). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- MacNeil, H. (2000). Providing the grounds for trust: Developing conceptual requirements for the long-term preservation of authentic electronic records. Archiv, 50, 52–78.
- Maniatis, P., Roussopoulos, M., Giuli, T.J., Rosenthal, D.S.H., & Baker, M. (2005). The LOCKSS peer-to-peer digital preservation system. ACM Transactions on Computing Systems, 23(1), 2–50. https://doi.org/10.1145/1047915.1047917
- McHugh, A., Ross, S., Innocenti, P., Ruusalepp, R., & Hoffman, H. (2008). Bringing self-assessment home: Repository profiling and key lines of enquiry within DRAMBORA. The International Journal of Digital Curation, 3(2), 130–142. https://doi.org/doi:10.2218/ijdc.v3i2.64
10.2218/ijdc.v3i2.64 Google Scholar
- Mutula, S.M. (2011). Ethics and trust in digital scholarship. The Electronic Library, 29(2), 261–276. https://doi.org/10.1108/02640471111125212
- National Science Foundation. (2011). Grant Proposal Guide (No. NSF 11–1). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf11001/gpg_index.jsp
- Nelkin, D. (1989). Communicating technological risk: The social construction of risk perception. Annual Review of Public Health, 10(1), 95–113. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.pu.10.050189.000523
- Nickel, P.J., & Vaesen, K. (2012). Risk and trust. In S. Roeser, R. Hillerbrand, P. Sandin, & M. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of Risk Theory (pp. 857–876). Netherlands: Springer Retrieved from http://link.springer.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-94-007-1433-5_34.
10.1007/978-94-007-1433-5_34 Google Scholar
- Ohshima, S. (2010). Risks associated with digital preservation: Media deterioration, media obsolescence and file format obsolescence. Journal of Information Science & Technology Association, 60(2), 54–54.
- Olofsson, A., Zinn, J.O., Griffin, G., Nygren, K.G., Cebulla, A., & Hannah-Moffat, K. (2014). The mutual constitution of risk and inequalities: Intersectional risk theory. Health, Risk & Society, 0(0), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698575.2014.942258
- Otway, H. (1992). Public wisdom, expert fallibility: Toward a contextual theory of risk. In S. Krimsky & D. Golding (Eds.), Social Theories of Risk (pp. 215–228). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
- Parthasarathy, S. (2007). Building genetic medicine: Breast cancer, technology, and the comparative politics of health care. Retrieved from http://site.ebrary.com/id/10173530
- Perrow, C. (1999). Normal Accidents: Living With High-Risk Technologies (updated). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
- Pidgeon, N. (1998). Risk assessment, risk values and the social science programme: Why we do need risk perception research. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 59(1), 5–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(97)00114-2
- Renn, O. (1991). Risk communication and the social amplification of risk. In R.E. Kasperson & P.J.M. Stallen (Eds.), Communicating Risks to the Public (pp. 287–324). Netherlands: Springer Retrieved from http://link.springer.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/chapter/10.1007/978-94-009-1952-5_14.
10.1007/978-94-009-1952-5_14 Google Scholar
- Renn, O. (2008). White paper on risk governance: Toward an integrative framework. In O. Renn & K.D. Walker (Eds.), Global Risk Governance (pp. 3–73). Netherlands: Springer.
10.1007/978-1-4020-6799-0_1 Google Scholar
- Renn, O., Burns, W.J., Kasperson, J.X., Kasperson, R.E., & Slovic, P. (1992). The social amplification of risk: Theoretical foundations and empirical applications. Journal of Social Issues, 48(4), 137–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1992.tb01949.x
- Rijpma, J.A. (1997). Complexity, tight–coupling and reliability: Connecting normal accidents theory and high reliability theory. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 5(1), 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.00033
10.1111/1468-5973.00033 Google Scholar
- RLG-NARA Digital Repository Certification Task Force. (2007). Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist, Version 1.0. Retrieved from http://www.crl.edu/sites/default/files/attachments/pages/trac_0.pdf
- Ross, S., & McHugh, A. (2006). Preservation Pressure Points: Evaluating Diverse Evidence for Risk Management. Presented at the iPRES 2006. New York: Digital Curation Centre.
- Rowe, W.D. (1977). An Anatomy of Risk. New York: Wiley.
- Royal Society (Great Britain) & Study Group on Risk. (1983). Risk Assessment: Report of a Royal Society Study Group. London: Royal Society.
- Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236(4799), 280–285. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3563507
- Smith Rumsey, A. (2016). When We Are No More: How Digital Memory Is Shaping Our Future (Kindle Edition). New York: Bloomsbury Press.
- Starr, C. (1969). Social benefit versus technological risk. Science, 165(3899), 1232–1238. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.165.3899.1232
- Starr, C. (2003). The precautionary principle versus risk analysis. Risk Analysis, 23(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1111/1539-6924.00285
- The National Science Foundation. (2018). National Science Foundation FY 2019 Budget Request to Congress (nsf18022). The National Science Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2018/nsf18022/nsf18022.pdf
- Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131.
- van Est, R., Walhout, B., & Brom, F. (2012). Risk and technology assessment. In S. Roeser, R. Hillerbrand, P. Sandin, & M. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of Risk Theory (pp. 1067–1091). Netherlands: Springer Retrieved from http://link.springer.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-94-007-1433-5_43.
10.1007/978-94-007-1433-5_43 Google Scholar
- Vaughan, D. (1996). The challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Vaughan, D. (2005). Organizational rituals of risk and error. In B.M. Hutter & M. Power (Eds.), Organizational Encounters with Risk (pp. 33–66). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Vaughan, E., & Seifert, M. (1992). Variability in the framing of risk issues. Journal of Social Issues, 48(4), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1992.tb01948.x
- Vermaaten, S., Lavoie, B., & Caplan, P. (2012). Identifying threats to successful digital preservation: The SPOT model for risk assessment. D-Lib Magazine, 18(9/10), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1045/september2012-vermaaten
10.1045/september2012-vermaaten Google Scholar
- Wildavsky, A., & Dake, K. (1990). Theories of risk perception: Who fears what and why? Daedalus, 119(4), 41–60.
- Wilkinson, I. (2001). Social theories of risk perception: At once indispensable and insufficient. Current Sociology, 49(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392101049001002
- Wynne, B. (1992). Misunderstood misunderstanding: Social identities and public uptake of science. Public Understanding of Science, 1(3), 281–304. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/1/3/004
10.1088/0963-6625/1/3/004 Google Scholar
- Yakel, E., Faniel, I., Kriesberg, A., & Yoon, A. (2013). Trust in digital repositories. International Journal of Digital Curation, 8(1), 143–156. https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v8i1.251
10.2218/ijdc.v8i1.251 Google Scholar
- Yoon, A. (2014). End users' trust in data repositories: Definition and influences on trust development. Archival Science, 14(1), 17–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-013-9207-8
10.1007/s10502-013-9207-8 Google Scholar
- Yoon, A. (2016). Data reusers' trust development. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68, 946–956. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23730
