 I don't know whether we're going to be joined by very many because there's quite a lot of competition, so I'm very grateful you all came, because there's been about seven sessions all together as we go through in parallel. And on our part, we are four of us, as it's listed here, almost in the same order, but not quite. I'm Peter Bernhill, as Gail, and then it's Ted, and then Alan. So just to save the introductions, we're almost in the same order. And in terms of the session, we've got one stack of slides, and we're going to attempt some form of, we're thinking about it's like country dancing, because we'll get up and we'll move around and we'll join the partner and he'll come through. So we're going to attempt, we haven't had any practice on this particular issue, so we're going to start through. So that our theme is that of stewardship, and of the digital scholarly record, in other words what we produce of our scholarship, and then what it is that we require as our scholarship. So moving through, let's see where it clicks, moving through, yes. So this whole area was a big topic for CNI and for the community in the States and in Canada, but particularly in the States and the UK and Australia, it ran about 2003 or so. And what's interesting is that you had this sort of important statement, e-journal archiving meets and bounds survey of the landscape, which Ann Kenny played quite a significant role in moving that. And she's recently given presentation at NACIC, and in that presentation, which I think those who go to NACIC had picked it up, but many of us who didn't go to NACIC hadn't quite picked this up. And then there's an article that she's published as well, building a social compact for preserving e-journals. So we're going to be drawing on some of that as background, if you like, of a driving force in Ann Kenny and that and some of the principles that we should be going. But there's a lot of our own material we're doing. So essentially what you've got is people who are working around the keepers registry and those who are working as part of the keepers organisations, keeping the digital content of our shelves. And to some extent, what we reckon is that there is an unintended consequence of the web that's done in lots of different ways. And we've got on our shelves, or did use to have on our shelves, journals, government publications, newspapers, news media, what you expected when you went into a leading research library that it would have that. Not every library had everything, but in some sense we hope that everything was catered for in some ways by the research libraries. Many of these research libraries are university-based research libraries, but other research libraries are around national libraries and the rest. And there were collection management to make sure that there was not just the product of our scholarship, as I said, but there was material about what we could call our published heritage. So inside that what we had and we learnt that after a while, this should click sensibly, and it disappears. And so what it recognises is that we then had of so-called boasting of e-collections, but in practice they were e-connections. Libraries no longer have those collections of journals, of news media, of government doctors, as they used to be called. They're no longer on their shelves, so the question is, where are they? And part of what we've been talking about today is the efforts that have been made taking the actions and call to arms, if you like, that there was in 2003, to show how there has been some progress, but also there are now some challenges and there are some things to be done, especially as we might broaden our focus from the scholarly literature into that literature that we want to make sure also is kept, from government publications, from news media and to new forms as they are. So in some ways it's therefore time to take stock. And we're going to divide our presentation into three groups essentially. It's what do we know and thinking about the task. We're going to boast of some of our collective achievements, being yourselves as well as ourselves, of what we actually have done. We've moved from ground zero, so to speak, but also the number of challenges which we present as amber alerts. Things to just take note of. And there's going to be a lot of statistics, so you just scribble away. But actually the presentation will be available afterwards, and indeed there are some slides that we're not presenting, because there won't be time, and so they'll be in the stack to be able to download and the rest later on. And then there's the next section really about what is to be done, having described the problem, and then ending up with in some sense something we're trying to open up, we're going to try and make sure we've got enough time, so that we can decide collectively, to some extent, on the priorities for our attention and our action. And it's liberally this idea of priorities for our attention, because it is a shortage of attention. But we've got to work out how you as research libraries, or we collectively as the research world, we decide what we really care about, and therefore those priorities need to be brought together, listed and shared, and then we can act on those priorities for our attention and our resource effort is what we need to do. So there was a way in which we could reckon that the task in hand, diagrammatically, is ease and continuing access to what we need to have for our staff and students and the rest of it. And so in some sense we know there's a world where it's easier now, much easier to get hold of staff than ever it was before. But there's focus upon the long-term preservation and also the things just in case we need. So in the case that it's not becomes available. So there's a blend there between long-term preservation, but also if you like persistent access, if there are crashes in servers belonging to publishers or whatever it is. So there's this mixture of things to be able to take account of. And obviously there are challenges to do with restricted and open and the licensed content and that way of breaking it up. So there's a segue which we'll do here and begin to say how do we define our focus. So to begin with we have a focus of the stewardship of our scholarly record. Because if we as research libraries don't look after that, we can't expect the US Marines to do it. You know there's a sense in which it's our responsibility individually as research libraries of communities of disciplines and of countries, but then collectively that we've got this work to be done. So this is where we do our attempt at an elegant segue. And I stand up and that's where the ISSN comes in, because we were lucky to participate in this initiative right from the start, right at the inception of the project. And as you know the ISSN has played the role of a linchpin for transaction relating to printed serials, but also to digital serials. And we've been acting and thriving for more than 40 years now. And what more is that the international network of ISSN centres have been acting and identifying as well printed journals as well as digital serials, but not only serials. As you can see here, we also identify conference proceedings, government publications. And so across the different national centres, these collily record or parts of these collily record are being identified. What we can see here on this table is that there was a massive increase in e-serials over the past 20 years. You have a few figures here dating from 2009 until today, 2017. And what we can see is that there has been like a 60% increase in the protection of digital serials over these seven years. And we know that we will reach 200,000 online serials by the end of this year. So these grows in online resources has been a global experience. And that's why we've put in the table a few figures for different countries pertaining to the ISSN network. Oh, sorry. And all centres are involved in this process of identification. And here on this map, you can see the percentage of, for example, digital serials identified in Germany and how much that represents over the global figure. Very dry. So what have we been doing as we move forward to stay the achievements of the Keeper's Registry? We've been working with three different types of organisations and some are, well, most of them are really familiar to you. Clocks and Portico, of course, which depend on publishers and also libraries to get some titles ingested. But also the nationals, or what we call the nationals, which are organisations with a remit to cover the publication over the national territory. And also some consortia or university-based cooperatives working in the same field. So there are at the moment all these organisations involved in the Keeper's Registry and more are going to join. And we're mentioning here the Swiss National Library, which at the moment has expressed in its interest in joining the Keeper's Registry. So what shall we do next? What are our main concerns with the preservation of the digital scholarly record and the published heritage? It is important to have different archiving organisations involved in the process because we know that in the past there were some destructions and destructions of libraries, material, print or analytic material was destroyed at that time. We know also that buildings or libraries such as, for example, the Bosnian National Library in Sarajevo was destroyed. So there are, you know, kinds of catastrophes happening everywhere so that the reason why we need so many organisations involved and also different regulations in these organisations to keep our things, our material, our digital record safe. But what is the problem? We know that something is happening here with regarding digital preservation, but what happened before the Keeper's Registry existed is that we didn't know exactly which material was preserved or archived and also to what extent it was archived. So today the Keeper's Registry, which is available at thekeepers.org, you have the address there, is a kind of monitor, is a global monitor for archiving e-journals, e-serials and the like. And the main purpose of this service is to enable librarians, policymakers and all people concerned with this issue to discover who is looking after what. So how can you do that? In fact, by using this service you can upload a list of ISSN or of titles and find out which organisation is keeping what and see also where you may encounter some lags or where some issues or some titles lack. The secondary purpose of the Keeper's Registry is to be a showcase for the organisations which archive our digital scholarly record. The idea is also to provide information on this organisation at this single point of entry so that if you want to get in touch with them, you know where to find this information and then contact them. Another purpose is to generate statistics on the progress being made to secure our scholarly record. In some cases we have progress or we can see progress is made. In some others regarding some titles, if you look for titles, you can find that no progress is being made. So that's also a way to alert librarians about this issue. So for example, just one title we wanted to mention but there are many, many more. The Origins of Life and the Evolution of the Biosphere, you can see that. Here you have both ISSN for the print version, the online version, the publisher, and you can see where this title is being preserved. We mentioned all the organisations preserving this title and also with the collection which is preserved. You can see here also that often you get the point that not all the volumes are an issue. Again, if you take a live perspective, one wants to ensure that what volumes and issues are missing and who's got volume 47 for example. The maturity of co-operation between the keepers is something which we are looking towards so that we can do comparisons to find out where there are missing runs and how that can be done. So that's part of just showing that particular one where actually Springer is well collected as we'll see as we go along because what we then can do has just been touched upon is the fact that we can use the keepers register to generate data and evidence about progress of archiving. And some good news. So we're going to start with some good news which is that over the last three years or so the proportion of known titles to be archived has increased considerably. That's a mixture therefore of more archiving going on but also we know about more archiving. We've had an increase in the number of those who keep digital shelves reporting in through the keepers register. So our ability collectively to know what's going on has increased and this is like a good thing. We've still got some gaps as has been said so some of the nationals that you'd expect to have like the German National Library, the French National Library, the Canadian Library and Archives in Canada there are a number of big ones that we want to get in but also what's going on in Italy and Spain etc. So there are areas that we want to make progress but the progress is nevertheless being made. So what we would then look on to think is that in that progress can we come up with a couple of stats some sort of key performance indicators, they're very fashionable. So this is where I get to reuse my masters in statistics to do some long division. And essentially it's the number ingested divided by the number that could be ingested and then the number ingested by three or more which we've nicknamed the keepers, the keep safe ratio which in some sense measures this extent to which there's a robustness in the system. Lots of copies keep stuff safe or whatever but nevertheless multiple copies in different places as has been said. So eggs in one basket so to speak. So if we began just by the total that's on the ICSN register by what we know to be kept then this in some sense is a measure of progress we're making for the global published heritage if you want such a phrase. So across the world what we know the ICSN has been assigned to that in regards to whether a government publication on news media but certainly including a lot of the things we've regarded as scholar resources. So what we need to know now is try and be a bit more precise. So I'll go through it a bit of a canter. This you might have seen before if you've been interested in the subject because this was where we were approached by Columbia and Cornell and then by Duke and we did some statistical analysis and this has been in some of the published literature. What you can see essentially is that three quarters of the list of each library which they thought to be important was unknown as to whether or not it was being kept. Now there's update on those stats and there's a little bit better with some progress has been made like it's now only two thirds not known but still it's a considerable list and the thing for all you all to note is that you can use the members area to upload a list of your own library of titles that you care about and you're subscribing to or you are depending upon in some sense. You can do that inside the members area just uploading it and you can get back a report of which titles have been archived and by whom and which are not being archived. So you can do this yourself now. And that's one of the things that we're trying to do with the Keepers Registry is that we're producing some statistics about that and telling you about that and that's all very fine but we're shifting it round to have this like an observatory, a telescope and you will have access to the data from that telescope, from that monitor. So you can do your own analysis of what you care about particularly for yourself or whether you've got a more strategic view nationally or in terms of disciplines or in other areas of doing that. So we're trying to improve the monitoring of that. So another way of looking at it is what do our readers use? So we run a system in the University of Edinburgh for the UK with the Open UR Ruto because there are different Open UR Resolvers. There's a way in which you can go, we have a table to know on the basis of the institutions at which resolvers. So we have a little roundabout that reroutes these things. So this is on the basis of four million of those requests and we're gating it using the ISSN up to the 50,000 or so titles and then there's the ingest ratio and the keepsafe ratio. So those two simple statistics, if you like, one being that just less than half, 40% is being ingested by it, in other words, 60% we don't know about and the keepsafe ratio again about a quarter. So what we're trying to do is get measures that we can have in the progress we want to make over time, robustness. So another one which is looking at discipline, subject areas. Now this is UK based but we have a system in the UK in 2014, a research excellence framework before that was a research assessment exercise and no doubt more and more places in Europe and otherwise are inventing these mechanisms to lead tables, they're one institution for another and there's points mean prizes and you get more money if you get put in. So what happened here is that there are about 60 units of assessment where each institution put in to say these are our best articles, these are our best books across the different things and so they submitted those and these therefore are the elite journals, at least in terms of the ones being assessed. And typically what you can see is that the STEM journals were reasonably well archived and so you can see there into the 90s and whatever. But actually the arts and humanities are very much more at risk. So these are ones which you would expect to be well archived. So there's a much longer tale of things where not being included as the journals that people want to be assessed in because of course the assessment is that way. So this is another way of looking at it, the variation by country of publication. And the thing to notice here is not just necessarily the amber alert to do with the fact that it's highly variable, as you can see it is highly variable, but in some senses what's interesting is that the countries, Netherlands in particular, but the countries where there's a high ingest ratio is typically where there is a big publisher or a collection of big publishers. And in some sense let us make a big shout out that actually the publishers are doing well, they're doing the right thing. Amidstly with your money, but nevertheless they are doing the right thing. They are engaging with Portico, they're engaging with Clox and in fact many national libraries also try to engage with them because there are big numbers to be had if you ingest them. So we go down there Egypt, I wonder, UK 43, but actually as you go down it's still not that clever, it's still not very full. And if you rip on to look actually at the next one, the Keepsafe ratio, there's some concerns there too. So this again is country by country, so to say to Canada, but also other countries are available, though the ingest ratio is pretty low. And if you look at the Keepsafe ratio that's really quite low. So there's a lot of progress to be made in terms of amber alerts. What we did do earlier, and we haven't updated it that much, is the different types. Remember we had this category with the Clox and Portico as one type and then the national and the research card. There's a sense in which they're all collecting the same sort of thing and there's a worry there about what you could then move on to sort of is this long tail problem. The big publishers are being well collected, but there's a long tail and then some of our presentation next is going to be how do we look at that long tail and what progress can be made. So on that I'll pass on to Ted. I can make the magic of the slides work. Just want to talk a little bit about, when Peter's talking about the long tail, it is not strictly between say scholarly communications and what we call the published heritage, but obviously much of the scholarly record is taken care of by large publishers and the sort of non-scholary record, which really is an important part of the published heritage and times I tend to think of it as, in many cases it's almost like the primary sources, not the academics talking to each other, but the raw material academics need to do to write the article in the first place that then turns up. And that is a large part of the long tail is what we want to talk about here. I'm going to talk a little bit about nationals and legal deposit and then Alan can talk about research library co-ops from our friends in the snowy north. So the first thing, the important thing about legal deposit is it does not care, it does not differentiate between scholarly, trade, personal, anything. It cares about is it, does it fall within sort of the law for that country and therefore anything within that and it really is scholarly, trade, personal. The pictures I have here are three screenshots of part of journals or serials, let's say, or periodicals that we are already obtaining through mandatory deposit in the U.S. and we have an industry newsletter, we have an association magazine and we have actually an organization by professional hobbyists but in any case it's a hobby magazine but all of them are very important and we're able to gather all of them. So there's a great advantage that obviously we're capturing the scholarly publications but we also are already gathering the other aspects of the publications within the United States and one thing it does is it actually is to give value there. Some of these things may not cost that much though I don't think many people can afford polymer scan, it is very expensive but some of the other ones are very cheap. They're very cheap, they're very niche and they're not academics talking to each other but in and of themselves they're very important as well and we do collect them. This has been happening in print for a century. It is increasingly happening with electronic one of the values of the National Library and its remit over the publications of the nation and of legal deposit having the same thing is it does give that a premature and we do find this that it's the same reason people want their copyrighted materials sent to the National Library. They want us to have it is because it does give that sort of value and so this is very good, it's important and it's a valuable way in which National Library's and legal deposit and publish heritage is not forgotten as we look at the large beast but we work through the long tail. That is the good side. So one thing I do want to say is the caveats. There is a natural tendency to go for the low hanging fruit. I'm talking about the small publishers but of course we go after the scholarly publishers that is a vast amount of very valuable material and we get springer, we get tailor in Francis and we're getting a lot of material and when you play out with this you really need to show them you can really punch hard. You get one of the big publishers and you say this is not a minor part this is a major part and it is important part. It's how we've got up to at this point of all the serial issues we acquire annually through copyright mandatory deposit, legal deposit 10 to 15% are now electronic. That's how we're doing it and so we do pursue that. And then the other thing inside the United States as a nation is that it's not just from US publishers it's widely distributed in the United States so we can use this to capture the multinational model of the world. The picture up here you probably can't see it but at the bottom the Rotslav review of law administration and economics is not part of the American published heritage as far as I can tell. There are probably a whole bunch of Polish Americans who would say yes it is. But still this is something we're getting through legal deposit because it's still valuable to us. We are not single-mindedly on the published heritage of the United States. It's an important part but of course it is also fighting for limited resources with the scholarly publications we can acquire this way. And then there are just the general challenges and I don't think these are shocking to anyone but I do want to talk briefly about the legal situation. At the high level the law is very nation by nation and you can't see it but that's a wonderful little shot in on the Holy Roman Empire during its really decayed stage where they walk ten feet and suddenly be in another minor principality it still feels like that sometimes. In a lot of these cases and in each case it's sort of a high-profile, delicate negotiation trust me because we're doing it again in the US is working this out and engaging with them. And the funny thing is we're often talking to the same large multinationals. We're talking to a lot of the same people but it's a different political environment a legal environment can be a different cultural environment and so each time libraries want the same thing publishers sort of want the same thing but we're talking in very different ways and so it's very difficult to get what would be easier if we all just sat down together and we all came to sort of agreements but since it is nation by nation that is very hard if not impossible and it is one of the challenges is that legal deposit another challenge is that it is very difficult to know what the legal deposit is unless you look country by country and do research on them. There's no place that we could find and maybe somebody has it and if you do please tell me that tells what it is. I've seen things recently one from 2014 and even that's out of date in parts it's a rapidly moving situation sometimes the laws have to be changed sometimes it's regulation has to be changed it's very very difficult to know what it's out there so everything is a little uncertain legal deposit is very useful but it's so fluid and it's so dependent on the nation and then of course technically we've let a thousand flowers bloom which is wonderful it's beautiful means a large number of individual publishers especially for the small public publications especially published heritage that long tail we've had a lot of flower picking the great thing about the big ones is they can give us the material in bulk and we love it and they give us wonderful metadata and we love that even more and the small publishers we can't do just talking to someone this is an old thing I say is that I need to know show me how much the technology can get me to a certain point when the return of us means a flatten out then I'll know what people have to throw at managing this but we expect that this is where libraries are going to have to do more work is and the little guys the guys that can't do the metadata the guys that don't understand this and we are going to have to reach out to them make it easy for them to get us the stuff make it easy for them to even do basic metadata and this is where if we can get the scholarly publishers under control and do that in a very simple way this is where we think most of the resources are down for go and it's going to be a lot of resources but there's valuable publications out there there's at least one many other people have the same situation but one of our scholarly open access journals a year ago stopped adding new content and the publisher put up a thing saying we're not getting new content we're going to stop publication a few years on board of this I'm taking down the website but we've got it, we've got the whole thing but I don't know what else it does and when it takes down that and the website goes away this is ten years worth of good scholarly publication by good academics and it could be gone so so the impact of legal deposit in general it is difficult to tell potentially there's a lot but it's very difficult to tell because one as I said we don't really know how broadly it is either allowed what the scope then is and how it's actually rolling out and the US if it's online only do you get it unless we've made a deal with them to get electronic and lew of print which is up to the publishers if they want to go this way so not all nations have it as far as we know anyone they do it is a slow business even getting the big publishers it takes effort to get that stuff in and then very few are keepers even if they are a national library who is using legal deposit to collect your published heritage we don't know what you're getting right now there are the five up here which are keepers and the goal is to get more on board to show our colleagues at other national libraries they can be cool too they can join us there is a real value in legal deposit so having done the challenges having done the caveats and lew of print it's increasing the useful collecting of electronic we have materials that might not be collected otherwise that other areas which need to focus on the scholarly journals and scholarly communication and scholarly record have to focus on first and we understand that but legal deposit allows us to expand out from there and it will be useful I think the important thing is though and I don't think anyone thinks this but it's good to drive it home legal deposit is not silver bullet it's not it is an important tool it's not the whole toolbox which I hope is a nice segue my colleague so please let me know if you can't hear me I tend to speak to my slides they've never spoken back yet but I think that's probably a good thing I'm going to be talking to you about initiatives at within the context of a regional library consortia quite different from the legal deposit context and even very different from services that on the surface have a similarity such as portico and clocks which operate at a quite a different level the consortium I work for is the Ontario Council University Library so we're a consortium of about 21 academic libraries in the province of Ontario representing about 450,000 FTE students wide variety in the sizes of the institutions from schools under 5,000 to schools close to 80,000 and one of the key elements is that all of the services including scholars portal supported by Oakville are fully funded by our member fees so we're not we're not reliant on publishers for additional funding to support our preservation activities it also means that all members are active in preservation activities whether they're a small school at the 5,000 level or the very biggest research library so the key fact about our solution or our approach to digital preservation of electronic journals is that what we focus on is collecting the material that Oakville members have acquired through purchase principally from a variety of subscription agreements either at the provincial level or at the national level and the way we've been able to do this is by working really hard to build into our local loading agreements three critical rights local loading and a right for us to be able to take content from a publisher load it onto a local platform and serve it up serve it up to our members who have subscriptions to that content so it's an open bright archive we also secure post cancellation rights for the material that we load on the platform meaning that if a school chooses to cancel a subscription of an entire package or one or more titles they continue to have access to what they purchased on our platform and then finally we've also secured from the publishers what we call transformation rights which basically give us the right to be able to modify and transform their content into new formats over time as technology becomes obsolescent and the material needs to be refreshed so scholars portal is a technology service of local and runs both our journals platform and what referred to as our trusted digital repository our TDR so the TDR was audited by CRL in 2012 and again emphasizing it's about library based governance we preserve what our members collect it's an open or bright archive model and it provides seamless post cancellation access so very different than the legal deposit model very different than Portugal something that's really focused on working libraries so I want to talk about now switch tax here and just talk a bit about the nature of scholarly publishing in Canada and I'm going to use this very simplified scheme that's going to be very simplified view but when we're looking at serial publications they really break down into four major quadrants big international journals national what we call national or regional journals open access journals and there's a lot of overlap between national and open access and government serial publications so some of those large serial registration numbers that we saw for Canada in fact reside in this fourth quarter where there's a lot of publication of government serials that have been registered with ISSNs so in terms of the Canadian Canadian Scholarship and this is probably true of many small countries most of our STEM based scholarship the science and technology scholarship and with some exceptions of course is published in big international journals so we acquire these from the large publishers through big deals they're very high cost journals and so the rationale for collecting them is very easy to make within a simple risk management context we paid all this money for it we should be able to secure access to that going forward so the challenges we face there really are the challenges around negotiating rights to the material so while this is often described as the low hanging fruit of preservation sometimes you have to tug really hard at that fruit to get it out of the hands of the publishers and into your own platform so it's not always that easy as Ted was mentioning quality assurance and managing a system at scale particularly for a small regional consortia are critical issues the national journals however are really where what we think of as Canadian scholarship in a local sense resides so these tend to be in the arts and humanities area they're very low cost but high value journals in the sense that they're unique and not generally preserved outside of Canada and they're very small number of journals but with a very large number of publishers there are patterns you see in international publishing with concentration and a few large publishers it's the exact opposite in a national context where you have many many organisations involved in publication another key fact is that they have a much higher rate of cessation than international journals so one of the key challenges in tracking down these types of journals for preservation is that by the time you identify them and go after them you can often be out of business open access journals have a lot in common with national journals and in fact a lot of the national journal publication in Canada especially in English Canada is switching over to an open access model and this makes a lot of sense because these these arts and humanities journals tend to be low cost journals and they fit the open access financial model quite easily and they can make that transition quite easily there are except the downside of that however is that well we have a lot of burgeoning ray of open access journals again there's a low cost low barrier cost to publication there's many many new journals often outside bibliographic control high rates of cessation and to be frank the people who are producing them are focused on publication rather than preservation issues they're really interested in getting the research out not thinking much about the preservation side of things finally on the government serial side of things there have been significant challenges in this space with the demise of the old print based depository programs so with the rise of electronic publishing in government there's been a strong focus to move away from maintaining historical or archival back copies of material and really focusing on the content that's applicable to the government of the day for the situation of the day so there's a real danger we're seeing facing a real danger of these critical publications going lost so the library and archives Canada has a role through its depository services program to attempt to create web archives of this but at the same time that the switch was happening they were also losing funding and so creating huge gaps now some of that's been addressed but there's still a strong issue around fugitive publications that are falling outside the archiving programs so in Canada our current situation really is a loosely coupled network of different preservation initiatives and generally it speaks to I think one of the key messages of the keepers registry that no single solution fits all types of material or all types of national situations so on the international side scholars portal has a really good handle on that for most schools we have over 13,700 journals still tracking down others but we have a mechanism in place for that and we have plans for scaling using scaling out potentially becoming a national preservation service under the ages of the Canadian national research network on the national side there's strong support regionally for journals through RUD which is a Quebec based organization which has really made great efforts in both supporting publication but also preservation of national journals from Quebec and it's trying to build bridges with English Canada to provide those services as well for open access journals we're really excited about a new initiative coming out of the PKP project in a partnership with Stanford University to build into the PKP's open journal publishing system a very simple easy method for journal publishers to push their content into a preservation network basically a private locks network with nodes distributed around the world so in scholars portal we are participating both with RUD in trying to preserve the journals that they're managing Quebec and with PKP by hosting a locks box within our own environment and talking with them ways of how we might be able to expose the content in those locks boxes into our preservation service. Finally on the Canadian government side nine universities got together in about 2012 again in partnership with Stanford to build another private locks network working with the internet archives our private service to grab to harvest web harvest Canadian government publications and take the resulting work files and transfer those into a locks private locks network and again those nodes are hosted all across the country and there's a node in Toronto as well so essentially what I'm saying I guess about this national case study is that each nation is going to be different in the proportion of material that fit these various categories and the solutions that we take we're going to have to be varied both in terms of the partnerships we established but also the technologies we use so not everything can be done in the big large monolithic preservation model that suits the international journals well and that scholars portal fits we need to build these relationships and partnerships and this is I think a key message of the keepers registry as well so the previous speakers have touched upon the topic of open access at the ISSN International Centre we've set up a service called RODE which is the directory of open access quality resources and it was set up in 2013 and relying on Peter's abilities regarding statistics we've been able to calculate that the same number of open access titles are at risk of loss approximately 75% 75.4% of open access titles that are registered and described in RODE in our directory are at risk of loss so we know that there are also other resources which are concerned not only e-journals but also conference proceedings or academic repositories so what shall we do to ensure that open access means assured access or continuing access we know that open access has been supported by libraries as a whole in Canada we've just seen it but also elsewhere in the world and so there's a big involvement of libraries in support of open access and furthermore they've also helped in developing open access by becoming or by supporting publishing services and we've seen that here at the CNI there are many presentations about academic repositories there's also another player, another key player in this field and in the preservation also the dissemination of open access journals which is DOAG that you may know and they've recently implemented a seal of approval requiring from the titles their register and their promote that they require first an ISSN so we are grateful for that and also the deposit with the keeper also and Alan I've just mentioned PKP it's important to know that ODS open journal system is also used widely and for example it is used by Reda Carinyana in Brazil and so it's really important that this system has also developed a feature allowing these titles to be preserved you've gathered with picking up speed just in order to get through things and so in terms of conclusions this is picking up a game from Anne Kelly we began with that we recall referring back to 2003 and then her reprise that she did in 2015 at NACI and so she picked up on the various things that you can go through but much so there's repetition here but there was a nice little quote in her saying great thing called the keeper's registry so we're on message together on that and I think it's to see how you can connect with what has been a programmatic work and the progress that's been made along the way so what we did is gather around the keeper's registry those who were keeping the content the digital shelving after all are the real heroes of the story and the way in which they could work together and they had a couple of meetings that we've hosted one in Edinburgh, one in Paris as to how they might share and actually not have to talk to the gallery so to speak but talk among themselves to find out how do you do this well this exercise of keeping content and it's attracted some endorsements from various places across the world and we were going to say we're looking for engagement support from the international alliance of research library associations but that was breaking news on Clifford this morning or on this afternoon that IALA which is this combination this friendship between new association or of alliances between ARL, Canadian association research libraries and EBO in Europe RLUK UK and the association of Australian university libraries so that's a beginning of a group which in some sense you can reckon has stewardship of research content research stewardship of scholarly record very much at its heart and I think that's where we're working together to keep his registry and IALA we're also going to see how we can reach out to IFLA because that and the national libraries because we're talking about material not just what is produced from scholarship but what scholarship requires again that's going out pushing necessary to how each national library but also public libraries and the rest can take this to their agenda and understand it and it's also an important aspect whereby you would have come across the UNESCO digital memory of the world perhaps but inside that is the published heritage and that's what we're trying to push the important stuff that you would have got in the research library in the print era which now you've got to make sure you still can get so to snip through very quickly these recommendations there are recommendations for national libraries there aren't many in the room so these are calling to them as to how they provide leadership in various ways and we're using that as we go out to IFLA to call not just national libraries but also I suppose national leadership groups associations of research libraries of other groups to go through and then I think for research libraries each and every library to say what you might do so typically it's important that if the archiving agencies are doing work they need to have your support and your support comes in a variety of fashion one is to do with give it support by way of moral support and financial support because it needs it to go on those that need it but also I think that within an organisation that there's a staff member who's recognised is doing that thing and then that allows the organisation if you're in a leadership position that allows it to have somebody who does engage with this whole area and be able to report back what's going on and typically I think also to make sure that your judgement as research librarians is to say what is important and so one of the groups that's actually supporting the statement is the Ivy League Plus the development group and we're really pleased about that because a development group is exactly the sort of people that we want to engage to say which titles are important so that they gain the prioritisation of attention so I won't go into that other than nip on to hand over again to Ted he'll see us through to the end very quickly there's a very easy thing and I think it comes up to the beginning where Ann Kenny had the article ten years ago it's very easy to come to the end of this and agree we all stroke our chins and say yes that is a problem let's meet again in a year and see if it's gone away obviously that will not work and the goal of this the goal of the keepers registry the goal of the keepers network the goal of keepers extra meetings is in fact to take action there are things we need to do our attention action have to be focused on time for some contribution from the floor I'm not quite sure we may have to talk with you after the presentation because we're running on time but we definitely do need it because this is not something those of us behind the table are going to solve on our own not even remotely is that possible I feel there are some strategic objectives targets we can agree upon and some sort of division of labour we can work on so very quickly this is a slide from Ann's presentation but it applies more broadly what can they do but what can CNI do because there are things CNI can do and all these other organizations bring the other people who do have a vested interest in this it can raise awareness of this issue and it is important because it can just it can be out of sight, out of mind people might not even be aware of it or it's like any number of things it's down the bottom of your list there is an important thing in collective action the principles and the actions and international cooperation I think that's been crucial to keepers registry and despite what I said earlier the challenges at legal depositation by nation the ability to work internationally is important because you know what the publishers are often international are international ones so it is important and so as we get to the end of this there are things we would like to see that can be done and should be done by the time we're back here in Washington next December we really do need to have a long tail there we want at least 20 academic libraries we provide the keepers with priority titles of e-publications it is very easy for the academic libraries now to think because it is work to maintain those e-connections and they are putting resources and that is crucial but on the other hand they still have a role in this sort of preservation side and identifying those priority titles is crucial but they must provide it they're the ones on the ground with the ideas get it to us we can't save it if we don't know it exists you know it exists let us know because we'd like each keeper to have acquired at least 20 journals published by small publishers we like getting the big publishers but we feel guilty because the small publishers are the ones that are at risk and they are just as valuable it will give a very poor image of the published heritage if all we do is collect the big stuff that will be skewed and that will be wrong for any scholar we want a significantly increased the keep safe ratio a keepers badge which will be designed by Peter himself awarded to publishers who invested at least three keepers I thought I was thinking about that earlier in multiple places the Titanic had four watertight containers and it still did not work for it let us hope that three keepers however should be what we absolutely require keep it safe in all of us and just increase the support of keepers the keepers registry double the number of research libraries active come and talk to us we are not selling you a timeshare we are not trying to sign you up to something where you have to go back and cry in front of your management because you signed your name to something you can help us in ways which are not going to put you in a bad spot you are going to help us so we can help you and this will all ensure that these publications which are valuable to researchers to faculty, students now and for generations to come will be preserved and then very quickly because I'm probably over there are just a few keep propositions underneath this whole thing assigning and identifying the point of issue some way of identifying it tag it ensure that it is archived routinely and preferably have others do so as well as I said three is good more is better but three is really good and say for archiving institutions say what you are doing there are as I said the five national institutions which are keepers there are more doing the same thing say what you are doing so we know this is being preserved say what you are doing so we can try and work collaboratively in ways that will reach economies of scale divisions of labour as possible while still maintaining the keep safe ratio and published in terms of access this is interesting and challenging but it is important one of the challenges we find is you may have it, I may have it someone else may have it but what can you do with it and it makes it difficult to reach that collaboration until we know those things as well that I think we are at the very end yes I think we have reached the end so I apologise that we haven't left much time for questioning and I apologise we haven't rehearsed sufficiently but let's open the floor to questions