Résumés
Abstract
This exploratory essay foregrounds the extraction and enclosure cycle between education technology (ed-tech) vendors and public academic special collections and archives departments. Education technology vendors, subsidiaries of academic publishers, often approach special collections libraries and archives with offers to digitize collections through services that McLaughlin et al. (2023) describe as open wrapping or freemium proposals. Since there seems to be no turning back, information professionals in public academic settings should, among other solutions, encourage decision-makers to negotiate preservation and conservation of physical archival materials. Drawing from the literature on commons practices, this essay introduces the concept of reciprocal relations to agreements between cultural heritage institutions and ed-tech companies. A reciprocal approach would disrupt the extraction and enclosure cycle and highlights the professional’s role as a steward of cultural heritage collections with an understanding that digitization is not preservation. Further, it would compel private sector companies to invest in the public sector instead of simply extracting public resources for profit.
Keywords:
- archives,
- enclosure,
- openwashing,
- special collections libraries,
- undercommons
Résumé
Cet essai exploratoire met en évidence le cycle d'extraction et de mise en enclos entre les fournisseurs de technologies éducatives et les départements de collections spéciales et d’archives publiques. Les fournisseurs de technologies éducatives, filiales d'éditeurs universitaires, contactent souvent les collections spéciales et les archives publiques avec des offres de numérisation par le biais de services que McLaughlin et al. (2023) décrits comme des propositions emballage ouvert ou « freemium ». Puisqu'il ne semble pas y avoir de retour en arrière, les professionnel.le.s de l'information dans les milieux universitaires publics devraient, entre autres solutions, encourager les décideur.e.s à négocier la préservation et la conservation des documents d'archives physiques. S'inspirant de la littérature sur les pratiques communes, cet essai introduit le concept de relations réciproques aux accords entre les institutions du patrimoine culturel et les entreprises de technologie de l'éducation. Une approche réciproque perturberait le cycle d'extraction et de mise en enclos et mettrait en évidence le rôle des professionnel.le.s en tant que gardien.ne.s des collections du patrimoine culturel, sachant que la numérisation n'est pas la préservation. De plus, cela obligerait les entreprises du secteur privé à investir dans le secteur public au lieu de simplement extraire des ressources publiques à des fins lucratives.
Mots-clés :
- archives,
- collections spéciales,
- enclos,
- ouvertisation,
- souscommuns
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- Audenaert, Neal, and Richard Furuta. 2010. “What Humanists Want: How Scholars Use Source Materials.” In Proceedings of the 10th Annual Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, 283-292. https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/1816123.1816166.
- Benoff, Emily. 2022. “The Clash of the Commons: An Imagined Library Commons Discourse.” Urban Library Journal 28 (2): 2. https://academicworks.cuny.edu/ulj/vol28/iss2/2.
- Bollier, David. 2020. “Commoning as a Transformative Social Paradigm.” In The New Systems Reader, edited by James Gustave Speth and Kathleen Courrier. Routledge.
- Carter, Nic. 2021. “How Much Energy Does Bitcoin Actually Consume?” Harvard Business Review 5. https://sankalagroup.com/waypoints/HBR_BTC.pdf.
- Clark, Alex, and Brenda Chawner. 2014. “Enclosing the Public Domain: The Restriction of Public Domain Books in a Digital Environment.” First Monday. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v19i6.4975.
- Cocciolo, Anthony. 2016. “When Archivists and Digital Asset Managers Collide: Tensions and Ways Forward.” The American Archivist 79 (1): 121-136. https://doi.org/10.17723/0360-9081.79.1.121.
- Collins, Patricia Hill. 1999. “Reflections on the Outsider Within.” Journal of Career Development 26 (1): 85-88. https://doi.org/10.1177/089484539902600107.
- Diver, Sibyl, Mehana Vaughan, Merrill Baker-Médard, and Heather Lukacs. 2019. “Recognizing ‘Reciprocal Relations’ to Restore Community Access to Land and Water.” International Journal of the Commons 13 (1): 400-429. https://doi.org/10.18352/ijc.881.
- Egiyi, Modesta Amaka, and Grace Nyereugwu Ofoegbu. 2020. “Cryptocurrency and Climate Change: An Overview.” International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET) 11 (3): 15-22. https://doi.org/10.34218/ijmet.11.3.2020.003.
- Fleischer, S. Victor, and Jo Ann Calzonetti. 2018. “Deferred Maintenance and Space Repurposing: The Impact on Libraries and Archives Disaster and Contingency Planning.” In Library Science and Administration: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications. Information Resources Management.
- Fournier, Valérie. 2013. “Commoning: On the Social Organisation of the Commons.” M@n@gement 16 (4): 433-453. https://doi.org/10.3917/mana.164.0433.
- Goggin, Gerard. 2012. “Borderlands or Enclosures?: Technology, the University, and Cultural Studies.” Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies 34 (1-2): 8-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714413.2011.643727.
- Gordon Nembhard, Jessica. 2018. “African American Cooperatives and Sabotage: The Case for Reparations.” The Journal of African American History 103 (12): 65-90. https://doi.org/10.1086/696361.
- Greenfield, Richard J., and Ermasova Natalia. 2023. “Disinvestment in Higher Education and Its Impact on Society: Case of Illinois Public Universities.” Public Organization Review 23 (4): 1311-1332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-022-00649-2.
- Harney, Stefano, and Fred Moten. 2013. The Undercommons: Fugitive Planning and Black Study. Minor Compositions. https://www.minorcompositions.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/undercommons-web.pdf.
- Harvey, David. 2011. “The Future of the Commons.” Radical History Review 2011 (109): 101-107. https://doi.org/10.1215/01636545-2010-017.
- Holder, Jane B., and Tatiana Flessas. 2008. “Emerging Commons.” Social & Legal Studies 17 (3): 299-310. https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663908093965.
- International Association for the Study of the Commons. 2023. “About the Commons.” https://iasc-commons.org/about-commons.
- Kachaluba, Sarah Buck, Jessica Evans Brady, and Jessica Critten. 2014. “Developing Humanities Collections in the Digital Age: Exploring Humanities Faculty Engagement with Electronic and Print Resources.” College & Research libraries 75 (1): 91-108. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl12-393.
- Kolbert, Elizabeth. 2021. “Why Bitcoin is Bad for the Environment.” The New Yorker, April 22, 2021.
- Koons, Robert C. 2019. “Individualism vs. Collectivism.” Academic Questions 32 (4): 529-541. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12129-019-09824-2.
- Lindquist, Thea, and Holley Long. 2011. “How Can Educational Technology Facilitate Student Engagement with Online Primary Sources? A User Needs Assessment.” Library Hi Tech 29 (2): 224-241. https://doi.org/10.1108/07378831111138152.
- Lookabaugh, Lara. 2022. “Body of Evidence: Time and Desire in Embodied Archives” Qualitative Inquiry 28 (10): 1039-1050. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004221096855.
- McLaughlin, Margaret, Ali Versluis, and Sarah Hare. 2023. “Current Issues in the Field: Introduction.” In Scholarly Communication Librarianship and Open Knowledge, edited by Maria Bonn, Josh Bolick, and Will Cross. Association of College and Research Libraries.
- Mills, Charles. 1997. The Racial Contract. Cornell University Press.
- Moten, Fred, and Stefano Harney. 2004. “The University and the Undercommons: Seven Theses.” Social Text 22 (2): 101-115. https://doi.org/10.1215/01642472-22-2_79-101.
- Nesmith, Tom. 2023. “The Cloud, the Public Square, and Digital Public Archival Infrastructure.” Archival Science 23: 501-525. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-023-09417-7.
- Nonini, Don. 2017. “Theorizing the Urban Housing Commons.” Focaal 2017 (79): 23-38. https://doi.org/10.3167/fcl.2017.790103.
- Padilla, Thomas G. 2018. “Collections as Data: Implications for Enclosure.” College and Research Libraries News 79 (6): 296. https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.79.6.296.
- Pal, Jiban K. 2016. “Evolution of Mutual Efforts in Libraries: The Consortia Boom.” SRELS Journal of Information Management 53 (4): 317-321. https://doi.org/10.17821/srels/2016/v53i4/84262.
- Prochaska, Alice. 2009. “Digital Special Collections: The Big Picture.” RBM: A Journal of Rare Books, Manuscripts, and Cultural Heritage 10 (1): 13-24. https://doi.org/10.5860/rbm.10.1.313.
- Pugliese, Joseph. 2011. “Embodied Archives.” Journal of the Association for the Study of Australian Literature 11 (1): 1-6. https://openjournals.library.sydney.edu.au/JASAL/article/view/9789.
- Sanders, Kevin and Simon Bowie. 2020. “Open or Ajar? Openness within the Neoliberal Academy.” Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202001.0240.v1.
- Schwartz, Joseph M. 2014. “Resisting the Exploitation of Contingent Faculty Labor in the Neoliberal University: The Challenge of Building Solidarity between Tenured and Non-Tenured Faculty.” New Political Science 36 (4): 504-522. https://doi.org/10.1080/07393148.2014.954803.
- Seiter, Alessandra. 2022. “The Information and Knowledge Landscapes of Mutual Aid: How Librarians Can Use Participatory Action Research to Support Social Movements in Community Development.” In Handbook on Participatory Action Research and Community Development, edited by Randy Stoecker and Adrienne Falcón. Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Soudias, Dimitris. 2021. “Imagining the Commoning Library: Alter-Neoliberal Pedagogy in Informational Capitalism.” Journal of Digital Social Research 3 (1): 39-59. https://doi.org/10.33621/jdsr.v3i1.58.
- Tansey, Eira. 2023. “A Green New Deal for Archives.” Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR). https://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/a-green-new-deal-for-archives.
- Teräs, Marko, Juha Suoranta, Hanna Teräs, and Mark Curcher. 2020. “Post-COVID-19 Education and Education Technology ‘Solutionism’: A Seller’s Market.” Postdigital Science and Education 2 (3): 863-878. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-020-00164-x
- Walker, Seth M. 2016. “‘It’s Not A Fucking Book, It’s A Weapon!’: Authority, Power, And Mediation In The Book Of Eli.” Journal of Religion & Film 20 (3): 29. https://doi.org/10.32873/uno.dc.jrf.20.03.29.
- Warren, Kellee E., and Jung Mi Scoulas. 2021. “Excessive Workload in Special Collections Public Services Librarianship: Challenges, Feelings, and Impact.” Journal of Library Administration 61 (3): 312-331. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2021.1883369.
- Williamson, Ben, Kalervo N. Gulson, Carlo Perrotta, and Kevin Witzenberger. 2022. “Amazon and the New Global Connective Architectures of Education Governance.” Harvard Educational Review 92 (2): 231-256. https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-92.2.231.
- Yüksel, Serhat, Hasan Dinçer, Çağatay Çağlayan, Gülsüm Sena Uluer, and Anton Lisin. 2022. “Bitcoin Mining with Nuclear Energy.” In Multidimensional Strategic Outlook on Global Competitive Energy Economics and Finance, edited by Hasan Dinçer and Serhat Yüksel. Emerald Publishing Limited.