DRAMBORA

DRAMBORA
Name	DRAMBORA
Developer	Digital Preservation Coalition
Released	2007
Latest release	2011
Programming language	N/A
Operating system	Platform-independent
License	Open
Website	N/A

DRAMBORA

DRAMBORA is a risk assessment and audit toolkit designed for archival and digital preservation organizations to appraise and manage institutional risks. It was created to help institutions such as the British Library, National Archives, and Smithsonian develop evidence-based risk registers and audit trails, interfacing with standards and practices used by bodies like the International Council on Archives, the International Organization for Standardization, and the Council on Library and Information Resources. The toolkit aims to align organizational risk analysis with practical workflows used at institutions such as the Library of Congress, Yale University Library, and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

Overview

DRAMBORA (Digital Repository Audit Method Based on Risk Assessment) provides a structured process that enables institutions—including the National Archives and Records Administration, British Library, Bibliothèque nationale de France, and Australian National University—to identify, evaluate, and mitigate risks to digital collections. It complements existing audit methods tied to standards from the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and audit frameworks promoted by the Open Archival Information System and the Research Data Alliance. DRAMBORA’s outputs are intended to be interoperable with tools and registries used by cultural heritage institutions such as the Wellcome Library, Harvard Library, and Koninklijke Bibliotheek.

History and development

DRAMBORA was developed in the mid-2000s through collaboration among the Digital Preservation Coalition, King’s College London, and partners including the British Library, National Archives (UK), and the University of London Computer Centre. Influences included audit and certification efforts led by the International Organization for Standardization, the Open Archival Information System model endorsed by the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems, and preservation policy work at institutions such as the Library of Congress and the National Library of Australia. Funding and project support drew on initiatives associated with the JISC, the European Commission, and national research councils whose programs intersected with projects run by organizations like the Research Libraries UK and the Digital Curation Centre.

Methodology and Framework

DRAMBORA uses a process-based methodology that guides stakeholders through scoping, asset identification, risk identification, consequence evaluation, and mitigation planning. The framework uses terminology and mapping approaches compatible with certification schemes advanced by the International Organization for Standardization and with preservation metadata practices used at institutions such as OCLC, PORTICO, and CLOCKSS. DRAMBORA’s toolkit includes templates and checklists to document institutional context, dependencies on third parties such as commercial cloud providers, and legal obligations linked to bodies like the Data Protection Act and directives from the European Commission. Auditors can map risks to specific operational units—paralleling governance structures found at universities like Oxford, Cambridge, and MIT—and to technical systems used at organizations such as CERN and NASA.

Applications and Use Cases

Institutions including the British Library, National Archives (UK), Library of Congress, and state archives have applied DRAMBORA to assess digital repository maturity, to inform preservation policy at research libraries like Columbia and Stanford, and to evaluate collaborative preservation services such as LOCKSS and Portico. Cultural heritage organizations like the Smithsonian Institution and the Getty Trust have used the toolkit to assess risk to born-digital collections, while academic consortia including HathiTrust and DuraSpace have used DRAMBORA exercises to guide shared infrastructure decisions. The toolkit has been used in projects funded by entities such as the European Commission, JISC, and the Mellon Foundation to evaluate service-level agreements involving vendors like Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure, and to inform accreditation efforts with bodies such as the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions.

Adoption and Impact

DRAMBORA influenced subsequent audit and certification frameworks adopted by institutions such as the National Archives (UK), the National Library of Scotland, and major university libraries. Its risk-based orientation contributed to the development of ISO-related auditing practices and informed guidance from organizations such as the Digital Preservation Coalition, Research Data Alliance, and the Open Preservation Foundation. DRAMBORA’s outputs—risk registers and audit reports—have shaped strategic planning at institutions like the British Library, Library of Congress, and the Netherlands Institute for Sound and Vision, and have been cited in working groups convened by UNESCO, the European Commission, and national heritage agencies.

Criticisms and Limitations

Critiques of DRAMBORA note its dependence on expert judgment and institutional self-assessment practices similar to those debated within audit communities like the International Organization for Standardization and the National Archives’ appraisal programs. Some practitioners at institutions such as university libraries and regional archives have found the toolkit resource-intensive compared with automated monitoring tools developed by organizations like NIST and the Open Preservation Foundation. Others have highlighted limitations in mapping DRAMBORA outputs directly onto compliance regimes administered by bodies like the European Commission, the Information Commissioner’s Office, or sector-specific accreditations used by consortia such as Portico and CLOCKSS. Finally, adoption has been uneven across jurisdictions including the United States, Europe, and Australia where differing legal frameworks and institutional capacities—exemplified by variations among the Library of Congress, Bibliothèque nationale de France, and National Library of Australia—affect implementation.

Category:Digital preservation