DATA CURATION PRESERVATION (ORGANISATIONAL ISSUES): THE HIDDEN CRISIS IN DATA PRESERVATION
Introduction
In cases where the organisation
loses valuable research data, the first thought to come to mind will be
technological problems such as hardware failure or outdated software. However,
there is a growing body of research showing that the real reason why data is
lost is organisational issues rather than technological ones.
The Accountability Vacuum
Data governance within research
organisations is seriously underdeveloped. A groundbreaking study from 2003 on
e-Science data curation noted that there can be uncertainty as to
institutional responsibilities for long-term data management, leading to
significant deficiencies in preservation procedures (Digital Archiving
Consultancy, 2003). Almost twenty years later, the same issue still applies.
Despite organisations' investments in their technological infrastructure,
questions related to ownership persist. Whose responsibility is it to preserve
the data? Whose job is it to maintain the metadata so that it is readable? Such
questions will be asked only after the crisis happens.
There are costs associated with
curatorial work, which is described as being expensive both in terms of time
and effort. A large-scale study conducted recently found that despite such
expenses, there was a consistent underestimation of the personnel needs for
preservation (AFFORD Project, 2025).
The Problem with Invisible Work
It is important to note that data
curation is not a simple, linear process. Observations of curators working at
large social science archives showed that the real work done by these experts defies the rote sequence of events implied by many lifecycle or workflow
models (Thomer et al., 2022). The practice of curating is largely based
on craft knowledge, including tacit knowledge, contextual judgment, and
collaboration. This practice is invisible to organisational management, and
therefore, it does not receive enough recognition.
Once that knowledge leaves an
organisation together with a departing curator, the possibility of preserving
digital information disappears. As noted in IDCC (2026), workforce continuity
and knowledge transfer have been identified as persistent organizational
vulnerabilities.
Deferred curation will almost
certainly never occur. However, funding agencies usually do not contribute to
the cost of concurrent curation. Furthermore, there are very few incentives in
organisations for such curation. In particular, the AFFORD Project (2025)
states that the creation of reusable data involves a significant cost at
the front end in documentation and formatting that organisations tend to
neglect. The 2003 e-Science report wisely predicted that managing
activities performed contemporaneously with the process of research generation
prove far more effective than retroactive approaches (Digital Archiving
Consultancy, 2003). Now it has been almost twenty years since.
Moving Forward
Solving organisational problems
entails much more than making policy statements. First, institutions have to
appoint curation custodians, compensate curators for their labour, and create
cross-disciplinary teams. As suggested by Thomer et al. (2022), viewing
curation as a craft activity is the first step towards maintaining it.
Technology ensures digital survival while organisations ensure meaningful preservation.
References
AFFORD Project. (2025). Affording
reusable data: Recommendations for researchers. Scientific Data, 12, 258.
Carlos, J. (2025). Transforming
practices: Challenges related to the operationalisation of research data management services in academia. Canadian
Journal of Information and Library Science.
Digital Archiving Consultancy.
(2003). e-Science Data Curation Report. JISC / UK National Archives.
IDCC (International Digital
Curation Conference). (2026). Contemporary Curation Challenges Session. Zagreb, Croatia.
Ncube, M. M., & Ngulube, P.
(2025). Beyond service inventories: A three-dimensional framework for diagnosing structural barriers in
academic library research dataset
management. Information, 16(12), 1046.
Thomer, A. K., Akmon, D., York, J.
J., et al. (2022). The craft and coordination of data curation. Proceedings of
the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 6(CSCW2), 414.

Wow. This is nice. Well articulated
ReplyDeleteWonderful
ReplyDeleteVery true solving organisational problems entails much more than just making policy statements .
ReplyDeleteWell done
ReplyDeleteWell done bro
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWell done
ReplyDeleteIndeed, solving organisational issues means more than just formulating policies
ReplyDeleteI like the phrase "Accountability Vacuum". Such a vacuum is synonymous to lack of a well articulated policy on Data Preservation.
ReplyDeleteNice work
ReplyDelete