Electronic records management

Annual Review of Information Science and Technology

Volumn 39, Issue , 2005, Pages 219-253

  Gilliland Swetland, Anne ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 10044234859     PISSN: 00664200     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1002/aris.1440390113     Document Type: Review

References (115)

1. Acland, G. (1992). Managing the record rather than the relic. Archives and Manuscripts, 20(1), 57-63.
2. Armstrong v. Executive Office of the President, 303 U.S. App. D.C. 107 (1993).
3. Atherton, J. (1993). From life cycle to continuum: Some thoughts on the records management-archives relationship. In T. Nesmith (Ed.), Canadian archival studies and the rediscovery of provenance (pp. 391-402). Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow.
4. Bailey, C. (1990). Archival theory and electronic records. Archivaria, 29, 180-196.
5. Bantin, P. C. (1998a). Developing a strategy for managing electronic records: The findings of the Indiana University Electronic Records Project. American Archivist, 61, 328-364.
6. Bantin, P. C. (1998b). Strategies for managing electronic records: A new archival paradigm? An affirmation of our archival traditions? Archival Issues, 23(1), 17-34.
7. Bantin, P. C. (1999). The Indiana University Electronic Records Project revisited. American Archivist, 62, 153-163.
8. Bantin, P. C. & Bernbom, G. (1996). The Indiana University Electronic Records Project: Analyzing functions, identifying transactions, and evaluating recordkeeping systems: A report on methodology. Archives and Museum Informatics: Cultural Informatics Quarterly, 10, 246-266.
9. Baron, J. R. (1999). Recordkeeping in the 21st century. Information Management Journal, 33, 8-16.
10. Bearman, D. A. (1990). Electronic records guidelines: A manual for policy development and implementation. Pittsburgh, PA: Archives and Museum Informatics.
11. Bearman, D. A. (1992a). Diplomatics, Weberian bureaucracy, and the management of electronic records in Europe and America. American Archivist, 55, 168-181.
12. Bearman, D. A. (1993). The implications of Armstrong v. Executive Office of the President for the archival management of electronic records. American Archivist, 56, 674-689.
13. Bearman, D. A. (1994). Electronic evidence: Strategien for managing records in contemporary organizations. Pittsburgh. PA: Archives and Museum Informatics.
14. Bearman, D. A. (1996). Item level control and electronic recordkeeping. Paper presented at the Society of American Archivists 1996 Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA.
15. Bellardo, T., & Carlin, L. (1992). Glossary for archivists, manuscript curators, and records managers. Chicago: Society of American Archivists.
16. Blake, R. (1998). Overview of the Electronic Records in Office Systems (EROS) Programme. In Electronic access: Archives in the new millennium (pp. 52-58). London: Public Record Office.
17. Bush, V. (1945). As we may think. Atlantic Monthly, 176, 101-108.
18. Committee on Preservation of Historical Records (1986). Preservation of historic records: Magnetic recording media. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
19. Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems/International Organization for Standardization. (1999). Space data and information transfer system: Open archival information system: Reference model. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.
20. Cook, T. (1992). Easier to byte, harder to chew: The second generation of electronic records archives. Archivaria, 33, 202-216.
21. Cook, T. (1994). Electronic records, paper minds: The revolution in information management and archives in the post-custodial and post-modern era. Archives and Manuscripts, 22, 300-329.
22. Cook, T. (1995). It's 10 o'clock - Do you know where your data are? Technology Review. 98, 48-53.
23. Cook, T., & Frost, E. (1993). The electronic records archival programme at the National Archives of Canada: Evolution and critical factors of success. In M. Hedstrom (Ed.), Electronic records management program strategies (Archives and Museum Informatics Technical Report No. 18, pp. 38-47). Pittsburgh, PA: Archives and Museum Informatics.
24. Cook, T., & Schwartz, J. (2002). Archives, records, and power: From (postmodern) theory to (archival) performance. Archival Science, 2, 171-185.
25. Council on Library and Information Resources. (2000). Authenticity in a digital environment. Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information Resources. Retrieved July 23, 2003, from http://www.clir.org/pubs/abstract/ pub92abst.html
26. Cox, R. J. (1994a). The first generation of electronic records archivists in the United States: A study of professionalization. New York: Haworth Press.
27. Cox, R. J. (1994b). The record: Is it evolving? Records and Retrieval Report, 10, 1-16.
28. Cox, R. J. (1994c). Re-discovering the archival mission: The Recordkeeping Functional Requirements Project at the University of Pittsburgh, a progress report. Archives and Museum Informatics, 8, 279-300.
29. Cox, R. J. (1996). The record in the information age: A progress report on reflection and research. Records and Retrieval Report 12, 1-16.
30. Cox, R. J., & Duff, W. (1997). Warrant and the definitions of electronic records: Questions arising from the Pittsburgh Project. Archives and Museum Informatics, 11, 223-231.
31. Cuddihy, E. F. (1980). Aging of magnetic recording tape. IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, 16.
32. Cullen, C. T., Hirtle, P. B., Lynch, C. A., & Rothenberg, J. (2000). Authenticity in a digital environment. Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information Resources.
33. Cunningham, A. (1994). The archival management of personal records in electronic form: Some suggestions. Archives and Manuscripts, 22(1), 94-105.
34. Cunningham, A. (1996). Journey to the end of the night: Custody and the dawning of a new era on the archival threshold. Archives and Manuscripts, 24(2), 312-321.
35. Daniels, M. F., & Walch, T. (1984). A modern archives reader: Basic readings on archival theory and practice. Washington, DC: National Archives and Records Service.
36. Day, M. (2001). Metadata for digital preservation: A review of recent developments. Proceedings of the European Conference on Digital Libraries, ECDL 2001, 161-172.
37. Dollar, C. M. (1992). The impact of information technologies on archival principles and method. Macerata, Italy: University of Macerata Press.
38. Duff, W. (1998). Harnessing the power of warrant. American Archivist, 61, 88-105.
39. Duff, W., & McKemmish, S. (2000). Metadata and ISO 9000 compliance. Information Management Journal, 34. Retrieved July 23, 2003. from http://rcrg.dstc.edu.au/publications/smckduff.html
40. Duranti, L. (1995). Reliability and authenticity: The concepts and their implications. Archivaria, 39, 5-10.
41. Duranti, L. (1998). Diplomatics: New uses for an old science. Lanham, MD: Society of American Archivists, Association of Canadian Archivists, and Scarecrow Press.
42. Duranti, L., Eastwood, T., & MacNeil, H. (2002). Preservation of the integrity of electronic records. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
43. Duranti, L., & MacNeil, H. (1996a). The protection of the integrity of electronic records: An overview of the UBC-MAS Research Project. Archivaria, 42, 46-67.
44. Duranti, L., & MacNeil, H. (1996b). Protecting electronic evidence: A third progress report on a research study and its methodology. Archivi & Computer, 6(5), 343-404.
45. Eaton, F. (1994). Electronic media and preservation. IASSIST Quarterly, 181, 14-17. Retrieved July 23, 2003. from datalib.library.ualberta.ca/iassist/ publications/iq/iq18/iqvol181-2eaton.pdf
46. European Commission. (2001). Requirements for the management of electronic records (MoReq Specification). Brussels, Luxemburg: Cornwell Affiliates.
47. Galloway, P. (2004). Preservation of digital objects. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 38, 549-590.
48. Gavrel, K. (1990). Conceptual problems posed by electronic records: A RAMP study. Paris: UNESCO, International Council on Archives.
49. Geller, S. B. (1983). Care and handling of computer magnetic storage media. (NBS Special Publication 500-101). Washington, DC: Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology, National Bureau of Standards.
50. Gilliland-Swetland, A. J. (2000). Enduring paradigm, new opportunities: The value of the archival perspective in the digital environment. Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information Resources.
51. Gilliland-Swetland, A. J. (2002). Testing our truths: Delineating the parameters of the authentic archival electronic record. American Archivist, 65(2), 196-215.
52. Gilliland-Swetland, A. J. (2003). Metadata: Where are we going? In G. E. Gorman (Ed.), International yearbook of library and information management 2003: Metadata applications and management (pp. 17-33). London: Facet Publishing.
53. Gilliland-Swetland, A. J., & Eppard, P. B. (2000). Preserving the authenticity of contingent digital objects: The InterPARES Project. D-Lib Magazine, 6. Retrieved July 29, 2003, from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july00/ eppard/07eppard.html
54. Gilliland-Swetland, A. J., & Kinney, G. T. (1994). Uses of electronic communications to document an academic community: A research report. Archivaria, 38, 79-96.
55. Graham, P. S. (1994). Intellectual preservation: Electronic preservation of the third kind. Washington, DC: Commission on Preservation and Access. Retrieved July 23, 2003, from http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/graham/intpres. html
56. Harris, V. (2001). Law, evidence and electronic records: A strategic perspective from the global periphery. Comma, International Journal on Archives, 1-2, 29-44.
57. Heazlewood, J., Dell'Oro, J., Harari, L., Hills, B., Leask, N., Sefton, A., et al. (1999). Electronic records: Problem solved? A report on the Public Record Office Victoria's Electronic Records Strategy. Archives and Manuscripts, 27(1). Retrieved July 23, 2003, from http://www.prov.vic.gov.au/vers/published/ publcns.htm#VERSPapers
58. Hedstrom, M. L. (2001). Recordkeeping metadata: Presenting the results of a working meeting. Archival Science, 1, 243-251.
59. Hirtle, P. (2000). Archival authenticity in a digital age. In Authenticity in a digital environment (pp. 8-23). Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information Resources. Retrieved July 23, 2003 from http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub92/hirtle.html
60. Hodge, G. (2000). Best practices for digital archiving: An information life cycle approach. D-Lib Magazine, 6. Retrieved July 23, 2003, from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january00/ 01hodge.html
61. International Council on Archives. Committee on Electronic Records. (1997). Guide for man aging electronic records from an archival perspective. Paris: International Council on Archives.
62. InterPARES Project (2002). The long-term preservation of authentic electronic records: Findings of the InterPARES Project. Retrieved July 23, 2003, from http://www.interpares.org/book/index.htm
63. Ketelaar, E. (2002). Archival temples, archival prisons: Modes of power and protection. Archival Science, 2, 221-228.
64. Lefcowitz, M. J., & O'Shea, R. M. (1963). A proposal to establish a national archives for social science survey data. American Behavioral Scientist, 6, 27.
65. Lesk, M. (1992). Preservation of new technology: A report of the Technology Assessment Advisory Committee to the Commission on Preservation and Access. Washington, DC: Commission on Preservation and Access. Retrieved July 23, 2003, from http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/lesk/lesk2.html
66. Levy, D. (2000). Where's Waldo? Reflections on copies and authenticity in a digital environment. In Authenticity in a digital environment (pp. 24-31). Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information Resources.
67. Ludaescher, B., Marciano, R., & Moore, R. (2001). Towards self-validating knowledge-based archives. In 11th Workshop un Research Issues in Data Engineering (Rode). Heidelberg, Germany: IEEE Computer Society. Retrieved July 29, 2003, from http://www.sdsc. edu/∼ludaesch/Paper/ride01.html
68. MacNeil, H. (2000a). Providing grounds for trust: Developing conceptual requirements for the long-term preservation of authentic electronic records. Archivaria, 50, 52-78.
69. MacNeil, H. (2000b) Trusting records: Legal, historical and diplomatic perspectives. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
70. MacNeil, H. (2002). Providing grounds for trust II: The findings of the Authenticity Task Force of InterPARES. Archivaria, 54, 24-58.
71. McClure, C. R., & Sprehe, J. T. (1998). Analysis and development of model quality guidelines for electronic records management on state and federal Websites: Final report. Washington DC: National Historical Publications and Records Commission. Retrieved July 23, 2003, from http://istweb.syr.edu/ ∼mcclure/nhprc/nhprc_title.html
72. McDonald, J. (1993). Information management and office systems advancement. In A. Menne-Hartiz (Ed.), Information handling in offices and archives (pp. 138-151). New York: K. G. Saur.
73. McDonald, J. (1995a). Managing records in the modern office: Taming the wild frontier. Archivaria, 39, 70-79.
74. McDonald, J. (1995b) Managing information in an office systems environment: The IMOSA Project. American Archivist, 58, 142-153.
75. McKemmish, S. (1994). Understanding electronic record keeping systems: Understanding ourselves. Archives and Manuscripts, 22, 150-162.
76. McKemmish, S. (2001). "Constantly evolving, ever mutating:" An Australian contribution to the archival metatext. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
77. McKemmish, S., Acland, G., & Reed, B. (1999). Towards a framework for standardising recordkeeping metadata: The Australian Recordkeeping Metadata Schema. Records Management Journal, 9, 177-202.
78. McKemmish, S., Acland, G., Ward, N., & Reed, B. (1999). Describing records in context in the continuum: The Australian Recordkeeping Metadata Schema. Archivaria, 48, 3-42.
79. McKemmish, S., & Parer, D. (1998). Towards frameworks for standardising recordkeeping metadata. Archives and Manuscripts, 26, 24-45.
80. Moore, R., Baru, C., Rajasekar, A., Ludaescher, B., Marciano, R., Wan, M., et al. (2000a). Collection-based persistent digital archives: Part 1. D-Lib Magazine, 6. Retrieved July 29, 2003, from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/march00/ moore/03moore-pt1.html
81. Moore, R., Baru, C., Rajasekar, A., Ludaescher, B., Marciano, R., Wan, M., et al. (2000b). Collection-based persistent digital archives: Part 2. D-Lib Magazine, 6, Retrieved July 23, 2003, from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/april00/ moore/04moore-pt2.html
82. National Academy of Public Administration. (1989). The effects of electronic recordkeeping on the historical record of the U.S. Government: A report for the National Archives and Records Administration. Washington, DC: National Academy of Public Administration.
83. National Archives and Records Administration. (1990). A National Archives strategy for the development and implementation of standards for the creation, transfer, access, and long-term storage of electronic records of the federal government (National Archives Technical Information Paper No. 8). Washington, DC: National Archives and Records Administration.
84. National Archives of Australia, (n.d.). The DIRKS manual: A strategic approach to managing business information. Retrieved July 23, 2003, from http://www.naa.gov.au/record keeping/dirks/dirksman/dirks.html
85. National Archives of Canada. (1990). Managing information in office automation systems: Final report on the FOREMOST Project. Ottawa, Canada: National Archives of Canada.
86. National Archives of Canada & The Canadian Workplace Automation Research Centre. (1991). IMOSA Project: Functional requirements: Corporate Information Management Application (CIMA). Ottawa, Canada: National Archives of Canada & The Canadian Workplace Automation Research Centre.
87. National Archives of Canada & Department of Communication. (1993). The IMOSA Project: An initial analysis of document management and retrieval systems. Ottawa, Canada: National Archives of Canada, Department of Communications.
88. National Association of Government Archives and Records Administrators. (1991). A new age: Electronic information systems, state governments, and the preservation of the archival record. Lexington, KY: NASIRE/The Council of State Governments.
89. National Historical Publications and Records Commission (1991). Research issues in electronic records: Report of the working meeting. St. Paul: Published for the National Historical Publications and Records Commission by the Minnesota Historical Society.
90. National Institute of Standards and Technology. (1989). Framework and policy recommendations for the exchange and preservation of electronic records, prepared for the National Archives and Records Administration. Washington, DC: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
91. National Research Council. (1995a). Preserving scientific data on our physical universe: A new strategy for archiving the nation's scientific information resources. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
92. National Research Council. (1995b). Study on the long-term retention of selected scientific and technical records of the federal government: Working papers. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
93. New York State Department of Education. (1994a). Building partnerships: Developing new approaches to electronic records management and preservation: Final report. Albany, NY: New York State Department of Education.
94. New York State Department of Education. (1994b). Building partnerships for electronic recordkeeping: The New York State Information Management Policies and Practices Survey: Summary of findings. Albany, NY: New York State Department of Education.
95. Newton, S. C. (1987). The nature and problems of computer-generated records. In M. Cook (Ed.), Computer generated records: Proceedings of a seminar (pp. 1-4). Liverpool, UK: University of Liverpool.
96. OCLC/RLG Working Group on Preservation Metadata. (2002). Preservation metadata and the OAIS information model: A metadata framework to support the preservation of digital objects. Retrieved June 9, 2003, from http://www.oclc.org/research/pmwg/pm_framework.pdf
97. Olson, D. (1997). "Camp Pitt" and the continuing education of government archivists, 1989-1996. American Archivist, 60(2), 202-214.
98. Park, E. G. (2001). Understanding "authenticity" in records and information management: Analyzing practitioner constructs. American Archivist, 64, 270-291.
99. Peterson, G. M. (2001). New technology and copyright: The impact on the archives. Comma: International Journal on Archives, 1-2, 69-76.
100. Public Record Office Victoria. (1998). Victorian Electronic Records Strategy Final Report. Melbourne, Australia: Public Records Office Victoria.
101. Reed, B. (1994). Electronic records management in transition. Archives and Manuscripts, 22(1), 164-171.
102. Rieger, M. (1966). Archives and automation. American Archivist, 29(1), 109-111.
103. Roberts, P. (1994). Defining electronic records, documents and data. Archives and Manuscripts, 22(1), 14-26.
104. Ross, S., & Gow, A. (1999). Digital archaeology? Rescuing neglected or damaged data resources. London: British Library and Joint Information Systems Committee. Retrieved July 29, 2003, from http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/services/elib/ papers/supporting/pdf/p2.pdf
105. Thibodeau, K. (2001). Building the archives of the future: Advances in preserving electronic records at the National Archives and Records Administration. D-Lib Magazine, 7. Retrieved July 29, 2003, from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/february01/thibodeau/02thibodeau.html
106. Thibodeau, K., & Prescott, D. (1996). Reengineering records management: The U.S. Department of Defense, Records Management Task Force. Archivi & Computer, 6(1), 71-78.
107. United Nations. Advisory Committee for the Co-ordination of Information Systems. (1990). Management of electronic records: Issues and guidelines. New York: United Nations.
108. United Nations. Advisory Committee for the Co-ordination of Information Systems. (1992). Strategic issues for electronic records management: Towards Open Systems Interconnection. New York: United Nations.
109. Upward, F. (1996). Structuring the records continuum part one: Postcustodial principles and properties. Archives and Manuscripts, 24, 268-285.
110. Upward, F. (1997). Structuring the records continuum part two: Structuration theory and recordkeeping. Archives and Manuscripts, 25, 10-35.
111. U.S. Department of Defense. (1997). DOD 5015.2-STD, Design criteria standard for electronic records management software applications. Retrieved July 29, 2003, from http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/html/50152std.htm
112. U.S. House of Representatives. Committee on Government Operations. (1990). Taking a byte out of history: The archival preservation of federal computer records (House report 101-978). Washington, DC: Committee on Government Operations, U.S. House of Representatives.
113. Walch, V. I. (1993a). Automated Records and Techniques Curriculum Development Project. Committee on Automated Records and Techniques. American Archivist, 56, 468-505.
114. Walch, V. I. (1993b). Innovation diffusion: Implications for the CART curriculum. American Archivist, 56, 506-512.
115. Wallace, D. A. (1993). Metadata and the archival management of electronic records. Archivaria, 36, 87-110.