Retention costs for electronic records are higher than for physical records in every respect, the only exception being the actual space it takes to store digital materials. But that downside is balanced because electronic records allow for the presentation and retrieval of information in ways that have not been possible in an analog world.
Another critical point is that any record series is likely to shift from an analog to a digital format, so the repository will have to deal with the transition unless the decision is made to stop collecting something. In addition, in many cases, a digital record series will incorporate what on paper was several different record series, so teasing out the information required for appraisal decisions becomes more complex.
Archivists grapple with issues and concerns about selecting and appraising electronic records and try to explain how they apply in different institutional environments, types of collections, and what this means for being an archivist in the future.
Machine Dependence
Digital media requires hardware and software, which have changed dramatically throughout the years. A collection may have several different formats, with no information about how or when the records were created and not necessarily a way to find out.
Long Term Preservation
Once an archives makes the commitment to acquire a collection containing born-digital records and determines what the records contain, how the files are set up, how they will manage and preserve them, and how they will make them accessible to researchers, they also must commit to keeping them usable over time. To do so requires a significant amount of investment in hardware and software, equipment, skill, and labor.
Manipulability
Digital records are easily manipulated. Manipulability is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it increases the ability to use the data as it can be rearranged according to search terms. On the other, it is not always possible to determine its original form.
Traditional Archival Values
Traditional archival theory remains relevant in the digital world. Think of how the characteristic of being born digital would affect the assessment of evidential and informational value. Do the more complicated ways multiple creators produce electronic records clarify or muddy the waters in terms of evidential value? Does manipulability bring informational value into question? Are these records more revealing because their creation, if appropriately documented, reflects modern social and organizational structures? Think of all the extra information in an email message beyond the actual content.
Archivists care about how records were created: the levels of activity within an organization, importance of that activity, uniqueness of information, the usability of information, and relationship to other records, as well as research value. These factors help archivists appraise records and make selection decisions.
In a digital environment, traditional archivists will always be needed. In other words, paper is not going away, but archivists now must be able to meld approaches for both–sometimes in the same collection.
The Postcustodial Era
Electronic records are opaque, difficult to investigate by topic, and the emphasis must be on provenance and context. As a result, archivists have moved into a postcustodial era. While they may argue about the realism of records creators taking sufficient interest in the long-term preservation and access to their records, the fact that records do not become noncurrent according to the same life cycle means that more interaction with records creators is crucial at least in an institutional environment. The advantage of a postcustodial approach is that if the information is essential to the records creators, they will maintain the systems to keep it accessible.
Part of dealing with context is mapping relationships, which includes making connections among actors that illuminates provenance and context. This emphasis shifts attention away from the traditional archival functions of gathering, arranging, and describing records. Instead, it moves us towards how society (and its individual and institutional members) record, use, store, describe, and dispose of information. That translates into recordkeeping and helps us understand how the systems are being set up.
Content, Context, and Structure
Records have three components: content, context, and structure. All three components also exist in analog files but with more transparency. The complications for appraisal in an electronic environment include not having records stored in one physical location; the content may not be all together, but stored in different places and logically imported into documents or attachments; the form and content are not constant; software changes can alter how the system works, and can alter data values and relationships. The advantage to figuring all this out is the value-add that archivists can provide by understanding these relationships and the information world within an organization.
The blog was originally published on Lucidea's blog.
Get Started
Looking for archival advising, records management, and historical research services? Click below to speak with an expert consultant.
Institutions like universities and governments have traditionally controlled archives, deciding which histories to preserve. This model can sideline the voices of the communities whose stories are being recorded. In recent decades, participatory archiving has emerged, an approach that acknowledges people as active partners in shaping their own history.
With limited resources, increasing demand, and rapid technological change, archives cannot afford to work in isolation. Building partnerships has become a strategic necessity. Collaboration expands the reach of archives, providing access to expertise, technology, and funding that may be beyond the reach of any single institution.
Archivists often find themselves explaining the value of their work to administrators, funders, and the public. Stories about unique discoveries or heartwarming encounters with collections have their place, but when it comes to advocacy and decision-making, data provides a stronger foundation. Numbers create credibility, offering concrete evidence of outcomes rather than subjective impressions.
Archivists build archives to endure. Unlike many other institutional functions, their mission spans generations.
Society is increasingly treating cultural heritage as a commodity. Archives face broader economic forces that reduce cultural materials to objects for consumption and exploitation. This commodification risks reframing archives as curiosities with market value rather than repositories of cultural heritage that serve the public good. Institutions once preserved records to document the past, but market forces might now recast them as investments.
Archives often find themselves competing for limited resources within larger institutions. Universities prioritize teaching and research, nonprofits focus on programs and services, and corporations channel funds toward revenue-generating initiatives.
With shrinking resources and increasing demands, archivists cannot afford to view budgeting as an afterthought. A carefully developed budget is a strategic tool that connects an archives’ mission to its daily operations. It demonstrates accountability, supports advocacy efforts, and provides a framework for decision-making.
Archives often operate in environments defined by scarcity of space, staff, time, and funding. In these conditions, every decision carries weight. Without a plan, archives risk spreading their resources too thin, responding only to immediate crises, and missing opportunities for growth and impact. Strategic planning serves as a lifeline, providing archivists with a structured approach to prioritize, allocate resources, and communicate the value of their work to stakeholders.
Archivists have long recognized patterns of limited funding that shape their institutions, yet they have consistently responded with creativity, commitment, and innovation. Even when resources are scarce, archives continue to find ways to build and maintain essential infrastructure and strengthen public engagement. Each challenge underscores the importance of archivists’ labor and provides an opportunity to advocate for the central role archives play in their communities.
Archives safeguard treasures, including objects like the founding documents of a nation and photographs of defining cultural moments. These holdings inspire a sense of connection to the past, and at the heart of that work are archivists whose expertise brings these collections to life.
No archives is an island. Especially in resource-constrained environments, collaboration through shared infrastructure provides a lifeline. Consortia models turn scarcity into opportunity by spreading costs and expertise across multiple archives. By pooling resources, institutions achieve more than they could alone.
Well-resourced institutions have developed archival best practices, including comprehensive finding aids, climate-controlled storage, and digital preservation systems. For small or resource-constrained archives, these standards can feel out of reach. The danger is that the profession’s ideals may discourage institutions from taking action, leaving records vulnerable. The solution lies in paring down practices and procedures without abandoning principles.
Many archives exist within environments of chronic underfunding. Community archives, small historical societies, or lone arrangers may work with little more than donated materials, a handful of volunteers, and minimal budgets.
However, these institutions remain vital, safeguarding the histories of communities often absent from mainstream narratives. Scarcity shapes their reality, yet it can still allow meaningful work.
Humanity produces more digital content than at any other point in history. Every click, message, and post contributes to an expanding universe of data that represents the cultural memory of our time. At the center of this transformation stand archivists, the professionals uniquely trained to ensure that memories survive in the future. However, even as the scale of the challenge grows, their voices risk being sidelined in public conversations about digital preservation.
In recent years, the concept of “slow librarianship” has emerged as a thoughtful response to the accelerating pace and pressures placed upon library professionals. Drawing inspiration from the broader slow movement, it emphasizes care, reflection, ethics, and people-centered work over speed and efficiency.
The archival profession is characterized by dedication to public memory, cultural preservation, and service. However, beneath this noble mission lies a troubling reality: the increasing reliance on gig and contract labor.
Written documents have long occupied a privileged position in archives as the most authoritative memory source. However, this excludes vast repositories of knowledge that reside outside the written word, especially within Indigenous communities, where memory is often preserved and transmitted through oral traditions, performance, storytelling, ceremony, and embodied practices.
Archival description is often treated as a neutral or technical task: summarizing contents, assigning subject headings, and organizing metadata for retrieval. However, description is actually far from neutral. It shapes how users interpret records, which narratives are centered, and whose voices are made visible or erased.
As the archival profession reckons with the legacies of colonialism, more institutions and practitioners are turning toward Indigenous and decolonial approaches that reframe traditional archival practice. Central to this shift is recognizing cultural protocols and community-defined rules governing how knowledge is created, shared, accessed, and preserved. Cultural protocols are foundational to ethical, respectful, and reciprocal relationships between archives and Indigenous communities.
In recent decades, Indigenous communities and archivists have challenged the dominant frameworks that have long shaped archival practice. Traditionally, Western archival models have prioritized state authority, institutional control, and the presumption of neutrality. These models often fail to reflect Indigenous worldviews, community needs, or the rights of Indigenous peoples over their records and heritage.
As archival practice shifts to meet the challenges of the digital age, the ethical use of born-digital materials has become one of the most pressing concerns for archivists. These materials—emails, websites, text messages, digital photographs, spreadsheets, social media posts, and more—are created and stored digitally from their inception.
The fundamental principles of archival preservation focus on the agents of deterioration, preventive conservation, and essential preservation strategies applied in archival settings.
The monetary appraisal of archives and manuscripts is a critical yet underexplored intersection of library science and financial valuation. This article addresses the persistent knowledge gap between archival assessment and fiscal valuation and provides an overview of the monetary appraisal process in the United States. It focuses on concluding the fair market value (FMV) of noncash charitable contributions, a process governed by Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). By documenting practices and terminology, the article serves as a resource for archivists navigating the complexities of donor relations and institutional stewardship. It advocates for increased fiscal literacy within the archival profession, suggesting that an integrated understanding of market dynamics and stewardship costs is essential for the care and financial substantiation of collections.
Proper archival storage is one of the most critical aspects of archival preservation. In addition to housing collections in a dedicated archival storage room, using suitable storage materials and enclosures helps protect archival collections from environmental damage, physical wear, and chemical deterioration.
One of the core challenges archivists face is determining the appropriate description level for materials in their collections. From broad collection-level overviews to granular item-level details, descriptive hierarchies play a crucial role in conveying the context and structure of archival materials.
Description is a cornerstone of archival practice, providing the means for users and archivists to understand, access, and interpret materials.
Mixed-media archives, which contain physical and digital records, present unique challenges for archival arrangement. These collections require archivists to develop strategies that address the different needs of physical and digital materials while maintaining the collection’s coherence and accessibility.
Digital records have introduced new challenges to traditional archival arrangement practices. While the principles of original order and provenance remain relevant, the nature of digital materials requires archivists to adapt these principles to new formats and technologies.
Archival arrangement organizes and structures archival materials to ensure efficient management, access, and preservation.
Many archives invest significant time and effort in creating strategic plans. These documents articulate vision, mission, and goals, providing a roadmap for the years ahead. However, too often, plans remain just that: documents on a shelf rather than living guides that shape day-to-day work. The gap between strategy and execution is where many archives falter.