JSTOR has recently signed an agreement with the University of California (UC) and is close to signing a second agreement with a major university to maintain paper repositories of JSTOR titles at those locations. Both institutions will compile and archive complete paper back runs of the 353 titles (and all previous titles) publicly available in the JSTOR archive as of October 2003. The repositories will stay current with JSTOR's moving wall for each title.

Since its inception, JSTOR has acknowledged the need to preserve original paper copies of the journals in the archive. Such repositories would maintain the paper artifacts for future consultation and use by JSTOR. As digital archival standards and computing platforms evolve, the JSTOR archive will need to evolve, as well. While some upgrades can be implemented through use of the current digital files, major upgrades to image files or migrations to new platforms may require re-scanning part or all of the archive. These repositories will play a critical role as a resource for JSTOR when the re-scanning of content is required. Maintaining paper repositories will also provide a fail-safe in case of a disaster in which the digital archive was damaged or degraded. Finally, JSTOR, through these agreements, hopes to provide a practical example of how paper repositories may be compiled, managed, and maintained. The Center for Research Libraries' project to build a distributed archive of JSTOR journals is a complementary example.

It was clear to JSTOR that we had neither the expertise nor the resources to build and maintain our own repository. In September 2002, key JSTOR staff met with selected members of the library community from around the United States to discuss dark vs. light archives, distributed vs. centralized archives, JSTOR vs. library ownership of the paper volumes, and the logistics and costs of collecting, validating, and storing paper volumes to be included in a repository. The recommendations coming from that meeting were that two (2) complete sets of back files should be collected and stored in centralized, dark archives, and that JSTOR — acknowledging its lack of expertise in the storage and preservation of paper volumes — should consult with those institutions (i.e., libraries) that had such expertise. It was also noted that JSTOR did have considerable expertise in reviewing and validating journal back runs for completeness and that such expertise would be a valuable contribution to these efforts to build paper repositories. Because JSTOR did not own a complete set of back issues for every title (some volumes were loaned and had to be rebound and returned post-digitization), it was suggested that we turn to the library community for donations of the paper volumes that we did not already have on hand.

In early 2003, JSTOR began separate preliminary conversations with a few universities to determine whether or not partnerships with JSTOR for developing a complete paper repository at each institution would be of mutual interest. In all cases, the universities were already considering how best to de-duplicate and/or develop shared print collections in order to maximize scarce shelf space. The fact that JSTOR titles were available online made de-duplication of print copies a practical facet of their larger collection management plans, and it was agreed to continue discussions in order to address the details of such an agreement.

Throughout the rest of 2003 and into 2004, discussions between JSTOR and the universities continued. Two candidate institutions emerged as the most likely partners for a first round of repositories. JSTOR shared samples of its page-by-page issue validation data, and worked with the institutions to develop practical in-house validation processes that built on JSTOR's previous work. At the same time, the universities were facilitating discussions among their own staff and/or faculty to ensure that areas of concern were identified and addressed. By May of 2004, discussions had reached a point where JSTOR could draft written agreements and forward them to both institutions for review and comment.

Although JSTOR's discussions with both institutions followed similar paths, the nature of the final agreement differed in each case. In one, the institution will retain ownership of all volumes, including any duplicates that JSTOR may donate from its own holdings. To address an access-related concern, JSTOR agreed that a "very dim," rather than completely dark, archive would be acceptable. Under these conditions, library patrons may only gain access to a volume from the repository if all other practical means of access are deemed unacceptable. In such cases, a volume will be circulated for in-library use only and will undergo a thorough review upon its return and re-deposit into the repository. Although a patron may occasionally need to consult a paper volume from the repository, it is anticipated that such cases will be very rare.

With the other agreement, it is likely that JSTOR will supply as many of the paper volumes as possible and the institution will supply as much of the balance as possible from duplicates within its own collections. JSTOR will hold ownership of all volumes within this repository in perpetuity, even should the agreement be terminated. This repository will act as a dark archive to be accessed only by JSTOR or the institution's library staff on our behalf.

JSTOR looks forward to working with these partner institutions on the actual implementation of this project. JSTOR will provide its issue validation data to both institutions as a reference tool. We will also coordinate with both institutions on finding volumes not already in-house and available to the repositories. We expect to host visits from both institutions to JSTOR's Production unit in Ann Arbor, MI, where our own issue validation reviews are conducted. Likewise, JSTOR staff will visit the repositories and meet with repository staff to review storage conditions and validation record accuracy. The life of the current agreement is two years, which will be devoted to acquisition and validation of the paper volumes. If mutually agreeable, we anticipate renewal of the agreement, which will be more focused on storage and maintenance, each five years thereafter.

If you have any questions about the establishment of these paper repositories, or how they fit into our overall archiving strategy, please don't hesitate to contact us at support@jstor.org

Last updated on September 8, 2006