Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This paper presents the challenges of post custodial management of digital records in the context of Botswana. This is a qualitative study which used a focused review literature supplemented by interviews with seven (7) purposively selected records management experts. The study has revealed that the post-custodial management of digital records is a challenging vocation in Botswana. Such challenges include poor information and communication technology infrastructure, lack of capacity for digital records management, and an inadequate legal and policy framework conceptualized upon the capability to guide digital records preservation. These challenges suggest that records creating agencies may not be prepared and capacitated to manage digital records in a post custodial context. This study recommends that funds be made available to Botswana National Archives and Records Services to set up a digital archive that meets best practice standards in digital records preservation.

Keywords

archival theory archives botswana cloud computing digital records ICTs post custodial management

Introduction and background

Across the globe, many countries realised the benefits brought by e-government in the delivery of improved service to citizens (Wamukoya and Mutula, 2005; Mutula and Mostert, 2010). In Southern Africa, the motivation to amass the benefits of e-government like the reduction of operational and administrative costs, and the provision of a relevant and timely service to both citizens and businesses added to the impetus to adopt e-government (Sethibe and Bwalya, 2014). Jumping onto the bandwagon, the government of Botswana implemented e-government as a public service reform to improve public service delivery (Nkwe, 2012). The advent of e-government in Botswana was preceded by challenges related to the management of paper records whose history is traceable to newly independent Botswana and post-independence (Thompson, 1970; Keakopa, 2018). A survey of the status of records management in the Botswana public sector revealed records management challenges related to paper records management systems and manifest in the form of inadequate records storage and funding for records management activities inclusive of records preservation and staff training (Thompson, 1970). Basically, these emanated from the records management function being neglected and not allocated adequate resources to improve records management initiatives, including record storage. The management of records was also left to the care of very junior members of staff, while senior management paid little attention to the records management agenda (Thompson, 1970). The initial mandate of Botswana National Archives and Records Services (BNARS) was the preservation, custody, control and disposal of public archives (Government of Botswana, 1978). A turning point to improve records management was when the role of BNARS was expanded through Office of the President Directive No. 2 of 1992 to include records management services side by side with archives administration (Mbakile, 2004). This led to the appointment of records managers seconded to ministries and departments to provide a records management service.

More recent literature has shown that the recordkeeping problems experienced right from Botswana's independence have persisted over time (Ngoepe and Keakopa, 2011; Keakopa, 2018). Often, recordkeeping problems arise because there is lack of appreciation of the important role records management plays in organisational management (Ipinge and Nengomasha, 2018). The implementation of e-government did not eliminate paper-based records management problems. New ones related to digital records management were brought to the fore. The implementation of e-government in the public sector of Botswana (Government of Botswana, 2012; Nkwe, 2012) has seen the automation of business process in the public sector value chain (Bwalya and Mosweu, 2017). The deployed e-government systems generate digital records whose management brought recordkeeping challenges (Keakopa, 2006; Moloi and Mutula, 2007). The digital records were generated by business systems that automated various processes from business function such as Enterprise Resource Planning Systems (ERPs), Electronic Document and Records Management Systems (EDRMS) and Enterprise Content Management systems ECMs (Keakopa, 2006; Motlhasedi, 2012; Mosweu, 2014; Mosweu, 2018; Kalusopa et al., 2021). These deployed systems are cloud-based or accessed through the Internet. Cloud-based records management enable improved storage, file sharing, records preservation, digitization, and dissemination of records as well as their creation in an efficient manner (Kibe, 2019). Some of these benefits have also been highlighted in a study by Mosweu et al. (2019) which focused on the implications of cloud-based records management in the digital era in Africa. Challenges related to back-up procedures, long-term preservation of digital, issues of access and coping with the transition from manual to computerised systems have been reported in Botswana (Keakopa, 2006).

Business systems are by nature not recordkeeping systems and lack records management functionalities (Kastenhofer, 2016). Among others, such systems have been implemented to automate government functions from livestock management, student loan management, land management, financial and human resources management. These were implemented at the Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Lands, Department of Tertiary Education Financing, Directorate of Personnel Management, and the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (Government of Botswana, 2012; Mosweu, 2014). The management of digital records generated in such systems need to be assisted by integrating such systems with truly recordkeeping systems (Kalusopa, 2016).

Public sector organisations in Botswana have implemented digital records management systems. A study on e-records in an e-government setting in Botswana by Moloi and Mutula (2007) discovered that e-records management was still at infant stage, and without a policy to guide the proper preservation of electronic records. Keakopa (2008) studied email management by archivists and records managers in the Botswana public sector and found that it was commonly used. However, its usage was not consistent as private email accounts could be used for official business although they had official email accounts. In addition, there was no policy guidance on its usage. The courts, both magistrate and High Courts deployed the Court Records Management Systems successfully, resulting in improvements in justice delivery (Motsaathebe and Mnjama, 2009; Mosweu, 2012). At Companies and Intellectual Property Authority, Rakemane and Serema (2018) evaluated the management of electronic records generated by business processes at the organisation. The researchers realised that electronic records were critical to the operations of the Authority, but their management was ineffective and without any sort of guidance in the form of a policy or procedures. Mosweu (2014) investigated factors that informed the adoption of an electronic document and records system at the Ministry of Trade and Industry and found that performance expectancy and effort expectancy accounted for a 55% variance in the behavioural intention to adopt the system, with change management also an important factor. In a recent study on the use of enterprise-wide systems in Botswana by Kalusopa et al. (2021), it emerged that although legislation for digital records management was there, it was inadequate regarding records management processes such as the capture, retention, disposal and custody of archival electronic records.

In the context of e-government, Kalusopa et al. (2021) opine those digital records generated by and managed through ECMs can be optimized for recordkeeping through integration in the networked environment where they can be managed for effective e-government services. The purpose of this study was to assess the status of the implementation of the post-custodial management of digital records in the public sector of Botswana, demonstrating that as much as the increasingly networked environment in which public services are delivered are amenable to the post-custodial management of records, that is not feasible under the circumstances. These dictate that rather, BNARS and the Department of Information Technology should be resourced and strengthened to respectively facilitate and provide custody for digital archival records. Cloud computing technology which is one of the various Fourth Industrial Technologies available can be utilised to provide some form of custodial management for digital records that are current. The focus of this paper is the public sector of Botswana and excludes private and non-governmental organisations. The next section discusses the custodial management of records as part of the life cycle view of records management whose focus was on paper records.

Custodial management of records and the records life cycle

The records life cycle concept brought order and a systematic approach to the management of records. The records life cycle is attributed to Theodore Schellenberg, and others in North America (Atherton, 1985). It views the life of a record as like that of a living organism where a record is created presumably for a legitimate reason and according to certain standards (first stage). During the second stage, the record is maintained, stored and used for ease of use and access (New York State Archives, 2021).

At the end of stage three, the record may be reviewed for continued relevance and can be destroyed if deemed unworthy of continuous upkeep. Those deemed worthy of continued maintenance are semi current and used occasionally and are stored off site in a records centre. At the fourth and last stage, the records are reviewed once more to determine whether to destroy them or keep them as archives in the long term. Such records constitute about 5% of the total documentation and are sent to an archival repository for permanent storage (Bantin, 2008). The custodial management of records fits in well with paper records where are treated as physical tangible objects whose life is equated to that of living organism with segmented stages in life from birth, dearth, and rebirth as archives (Yusuf and Chell, 2000). The records life cycle view of records promotes the custodial view of records management whereby the national archives is the ultimate place where archival records are transferred for storage. In this outlook of a record, the medium which carries the record is prominent (Mnjama, 1996). Although the life cycle concept seems linear in its view of records management, Atherton (1985) pronounced that the management of records should be a continuum rather than a cycle such that the creation or receipt of records and their classification should be followed by scheduling of information, with maintenance and use of records whether current or noncurrent, coming next. Atherton (1985:48) stated that “all four stages are interrelated, forming a continuum in which both records managers and archivists are involved, to varying degrees, in the ongoing management of recorded information.”

The early 20th century English Archivist, Hillary Jenkinson asserts that the primary role of an archivist is the custody of records, with providing access as a secondary role. Creating agencies must transfer records to archival repository for custody (Jenkinson, 1922). Custodial management of records promote archives as a place for the management and preservation of archival records (Zelenyj, 1999; Duranti, 2007). Custodial management of records emanate from Roman law notion which views archives as a place where records can be safely kept with no chance of being corrupt. Such records are trustworthy enough to serve as evidence of past transactions (1996). The archive in this sense is a place where records can be preserved without being tainted. Archival institutions are regarded as trusted parties even amid changing technological changes. Although NARA's 40 distributed archival repositories across the US does not imply it manages paper records, it is a good example of custodial thinking and practice that the national archive should manage archival records transferred in from creating agencies (Government Accountability Office, 2010). A records administration programme was established in 1941 as a measure to assist in the development of principles and practices for filing, selection, and segregation of records that will facilitate the transfer to the National Archives for custody one they became non-current (Zelenyj, 1999:68). Looked at this way, records management was viewed as the vehicle to serve archival ends. The maintenance of trustworthy records in traditional recordkeeping systems is achieved by maintaining records in the same form and state of transmission in which they were when made or received and set aside (Duranti and MacNeil, 1996). Such a notion of trust on traditional archival records deposited in an archive is traceable to the legal precedent and accumulated knowledge developed over centuries (Duranti and Rogers, 2014). Archival documents thus attained the highest authority when preserved in an archive, a public place (Duranti, 1996). Duranti (2007) adds that as trusted places for archives management, archives gave archival documents the capacity to serve as evidence and continuing memory of action. The limitations of the records life cycle towards the management of digital records led to an alternative view, the records continuum model which is discussed in the next section.

Post-custodial management of records and the records continuum

Archival institutions are known as custodians of archival records. Traditionally, that has been for a long time their role in so far as records preservation is concerned (International Records Management Trust, 1999; Boadle, 2004). The advent of electronic records forced a rethink. While the traditional custodial movement vested custody on archival repositories, the post-custodial model advocated for archival records to remain in the care of creating agencies (Bantin, 2008), with archival institutions exercising the role of adviser, auditor or regulatory organisation (Bearman, 1991). The post-custodial management of records was influenced by changes in recordkeeping technologies. An alternative to the records life cycle was hatched by Upward (2000). According to Upward (2000), the last half of the twentieth century has seen the life cycle models dominated thinking in the arena of information management, archives and records management included. According to Upward (1996), the basis for the post-custodial view of managing records emanated from the notion that it was no longer feasible for archival profession to be looked at mainly as the physical caretakers if appropriate care was to be rendered to the management of electronic records.

The Australians endeavored to get records management right, especially in recordkeeping environments built around electronic communications, and that brought continuum thinking to the fore (Upward 2000). According to Yusuf and Chell (2000), the introduction of information technology in the automation of records management process rendered the records life cycle approach unsuitable, bringing in some new debates on its suitability to guide records management. Its approach to the management of records was based on them as tangible objects and embedded in the information carrier while in the digital environment records lose their physicality as they exist as bits and bytes which are fluid and reassembled to be sensible and readable with the aid of information technology (Yusuf and Chell, 2000). McKemmish (1994:8) succinctly explains this loss of physicality as follows:

The loss of physicality that occurs when records are captured electronically is forcing archivists to reassess basic understandings about the nature of the records of social and organisational activity, and their qualities as evidence. Even when they are captured in a medium that can be felt and touched, records as conceptual constructs do not coincide with records as physical objects. Physical ordering and placement of such records captures a view of their contextual and documentary relationships but cannot present multiple views of what is a complex reality.

The fluidity of electronic records and the difficulty in their management because of their nature prompted Cook (2013) to assert that archival thinking should constantly evolve and adapt to changes in records, the environment in which records are created such as the cultural, legal, technological, social, and philosophical trends in society. This includes recordkeeping systems and the use of records. Referring to the impact of technology itself, Turnbaugh (1997) likens technology to a stray dog that joins an archivist towards some destination. It can either be an aggressive dog which may bite and inflict pain on the archivist or peacefully accompany and lead the archivist safely through the city. Information technologies that generate digital records are unpredictable and unstable, a feature which puts digital records at risk of deletion or corruption intentionally or by error of judgement (Duranti, 2010; UK National Archives, 2012). Deliberate measures are therefore a necessity to protect the integrity of records generated in the digital environment. Metadata management is one key aspect of such protection as it provides critical context and controls that allows and controls access to information, its use and reuse (Latham, 2015).

According to Cook (2013), for long periods, archivists managed paper records and so applied paper minds to their management. Despite the changes in the management of records in the digital space, “almost all the concepts, practices, procedures, and even accepted terminology of the profession reflect our legacy of paper records” (Cook, 2013:403). Section 14 of the Public Records Act of Victoria in Australia empowers the Public Records Office of Victoria to declare some places outside the PRO to be places of deposit if they are suitable for the safe keeping and preservation of records for specified classes of records (Public Records Office of Victoria, 1973). The records are still regarded as in the custody of the records Keeper as the Keeper can inspect their upkeep unannounced and even fund their preservation at the place of deposit. To Upward and McKemmish (1994), this kind of custody is more akin to that of guardianship. Custodial supervision is exercised through the setting of standards and monitoring of their implementation in the place of deposit, and the inclusion of records held by the place of deposit in the inventory of the Public Records Office

Hence, calls for archives to have a paradigm shift from using paper minds to deal with digital issues related to digital records management. Krahn (2012:6) observes that:

The same qualities that make electronic information systems so appealing to users – the ease with which records can be created, manipulated, altered, copied, shared, and destroyed - are the same qualities that make them difficult to process following the conventional methods and procedures in the records management and archival toolkit

There is no doubt that archival practices used to manage records in the manual environment no longer hold in the digital environment due to the coming in of technological innovations in the form of information and communication technologies. Alternatives were therefore needed to manage records following archival principles despite the changes in the technologies in which records are generated. Eastwood (1994) succinctly illuminates the short comings of the records life cycle to practically guide electronic records management by saying that “if method and practice based on theory do not work out, there may be something wrong with the theory.” It is in this context that Upward (2000) viewed the records continuum as a technologically driven paradigm shift within all information management and systems practice. It provides a continuum of care for records regardless of media, focusing on the nature of records, the recordkeeping processes, the behaviours, and relationships of records in certain environments, and digital world and its emphasis on content, context, and structure (Upward, 2005).

The paradigm shift in archival theory and practice

Traditional archival theory informed archival practice for long periods. It was exemplified in Schellenberg's ideas which were designed for the management of paper records (Bailey, 1988). The coming in of information and communication technologies forced a rethink of archival theory and eventual led to a paradigm shift as a response to new realities. The development of computers initially raised hopes of reducing problems associated with the physical bulk of records in view of the storage abilities of electronic media but all that soon fizzled out as new problems reared ugly heads (Henry, 1998). The computer brought with it the realisation that the relevance and applicability of archival concepts and principles were not certain with records in digital format. This led to a paradigm shift on how to deal with digital records.

Some success stories on the post-custodial model have been reported in literature as in memory institutions such as libraries, archives, and museums. The University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) successfully adopted the post-custodial model and built diverse collections and established ties with the Las Vegas Jewish Communities and the local culinary workers union. On a continuous basis, librarians selected archival documents documenting the history of the groups, scanned, returned, prepared finding aids and made the collections available online (Memory, 2019). Notably, not everyone embraced the post-custodial model but according to Shein and Lapworth (2016), custody of the collections by the communities built a relationship of trust in view of past differences between the Las Vegas communities and repositories such as UNLV.

The post-custodial model has gained ground in community archiving and the involvement of communities has helped build post-custodial programmes (Suárez, 2021). One such example is work undertaken by the University of Texas Libraries in relation to projects such as the Human Rights Documentation Initiative (HRDI)which preserved video and born digital materials belong to the Kigali Genocide Memorial Center (KGMC) in Rwanda. The post-custodial model allowed KGMC to keep memories of the Rwandan Genocide by maintaining the custody of the collections (Albert-Abrams et al., 2019). In the words of Suárez (2021), the post-custodial of records management allows creators of records to retain them as owners, thereby enabling represented communities to have control over ownership and access, instead of entrusting their collections to archival institutions. Collaboration, trust and equality are tenets of community archiving which manifest as post-custodialism. Memory (2019) avers that through digital archiving, memory institutions can provide for the preservation of and access to digital records which do not necessarily reside in their repositories but stay with creators. Some form of agreement involving transfer, loan or sharing of copy right in a non-exclusive or distributed custody loan or licensing agreement may be entered between the records creators and institutions (Shein and Lapworth, 2016).

Yet another success story illustrating post-custodial management of records is the Latin American Digital Initiatives (LADI), and initiative of the LLILAS Benson Latin American Studies and Collections at the University of Texas at Austin. It applies the post-custodial model through digital archiving which facilitates the redistribution of heritage resources generated and owned by communities (Alpert-Abrams et al., 2019). The LLILAS Benson has been able to build and sustain partnerships while continuing to manage widely recognized collections the post-custodial model. One way has been through established formal agreements with small and resource constrained institutions with archival holdings, inclusive of community archives and nonprofit organisations in Latin America. The relationship is such that creators main custody of the original collections, and intellectual rights over digital copies while LLILAS Benson provides training, funding and support in the production and preservation of surrogate copies made accessible online (Alpert-Abrams et al., 2019).

Form the three examples cited, it is notable that there is mutuality between communities as creators of original records, and wealthier archival institutions, depicting that the post-custodial works where there is collaboration. Rich archival institutions do not have to take custody of original records but can have digital copies which they can make accessible online while supporting the post-custodial programme at creating agencies. In that way, there is a win-win situation for everyone. Although the post-custodial model may not be feasible in the current situation in Botswana, as a small economy, lessons can be drawn from the cited examples and others. Stories and histories of minority communities and other interest groups which are comparatively less documented use the post-custodial model to entrench their documentary heritage for the benefit of future generations. Put in a different way, the continuum way of records control caters for physical custody and continued access at creating agencies with archival institutions retaining their accountability of the archival record through intellectual and legal control (Upward and McKemmish, 1994). In the words of Bastian (2004), the archivist becomes the auditor of the records themselves, and the recordkeepers.

Purpose of the study

The purpose of this study was to assess the status of the implementation the post-custodial management of digital records in the Botswana public sector to ascertain whether BNARS as the custodian of public records is ready for the post-custodial management of digital records or not. The specific objective was to establish the challenges facing the post-custodial management and preservation of records in Botswana.

Methodology

This paper adopted a qualitative approach. A focused review of literature was undertaken using various sources such as thesis and/or dissertations, books, published journal articles, legislation and policy documents and conference papers. The search for literature was limited to Google Scholar and Scopus databases. A total of 50 information resources were identified. A perusal of the abstracts resulted in 18 relevant articles which were used primarily for the situation in Botswana. The sources ranged from 2000 to 2021. Those included referred to Botswana while those excluded referred to other countries. In addition, legal and policy instruments were searched through a google search and four were identified and selected. Seven (7) records management experts coded as RME 1, RME 2, RME 3, RME 4, RM 5, RME 6 and RME 7 were purposively selected, and emailed interview questions to supplement the focused literature review. They were selected purposively and their experience in public sector records management is at least (10) years. The search terms covered digital records management, digital records preservation, post-custodial records management, and Botswana, and e-government and electronic records management. Supplementing data collected from a focused review of literature, data from manual document analysis of the stated documents was organised thematically for presentation. The results of the analysis are in line with Ngoepe's literature review which demonstrated the unconscious archival orthodoxy of post-custodial realities of digital records management in South Africa (Ngoepe, 2017).

Findings and discussions

The findings and discussions presented in this study focus on the themes derived from the study objective. These are inadequate ICT infrastructure, limited archival legislation, poor awareness for records preservation, lack of policy guidance, financial challenges, limited implementation of EDRMS, lack of requisite knowledge, skills and competencies, lack of adoption best practice standards as well as a lack of digital preservation strategy and policy guidance.

Lack of infrastructure for digital records management

The plethora of implemented business systems in the realm of e-government has seen the generation of digital records (Government of Botswana, 2012). The ICT infrastructure for digital records management is the responsibility of the Department of Information Technology. The implemented business systems are not designed as recordkeeping systems and the availability of records over time in such systems is not guaranteed (Mosweu, 2018). That is why Mnjama and Wamukoya (2004) aver that with the implementation of e-government systems, there is need to properly manage digital records and protect them as valuable assets. In agreement, Moatlhodi and Kalusopa (2016) opine that the implementation of EDRMSs would ensure that quality accurate and reliable records with integrity are captured. It is of paramount importance that digital records are preserved over time accountability and good governance

A study by Mosweu and Kenosi (2018) has shown that the Court Records Management System implemented did not have functionalities to preserve digital records. In attempt to preserve records in the system, they are periodically migrated to newer software versions. According to King (2005) and Shimray and Ramaiah (2018), migration is a useful digital records preservation, but constant changes in technology it can be expensive, and some records can be lost during the migration process. The question is, “can the government ministries and departments manage such records in a post-custodial manner?” RME 3 observed that the ICT infrastructure is weak, and said:

“The government ICT infrastructure seem not to be stable as evidenced by the systems that are always down and that would not sustain the post custodial management of digital archives”.

RM 2 said,

At our ministry…we are not ready at all as there is poor infrastructure in the management of digital records. For instance, currently the ministry stores all the digital records in a server that needs to be restarted almost every day. There are times when the digital records stored in a server cannot be retrieved due to viruses.

Meanwhile RME 4 observed that:

The current ICT infrastructure in the ministries is not ready to fully embrace post-custodial management of records. To deal with the costs of involved, it is better to fund BNARS to establish a digital archive so that there is one centralized repository for digital records

Given the inputs from the experts, it was apparent that a limitation in the availability of appropriate technology infrastructure was one of the key factors limiting proliferation of contemporary records management in Botswana.

Ngoepe and Keakopa (2011) have indicated that Botswana does not yet have the infrastructure to ingest digital records. In reference to government departments and BNARS, RME 5 indicated that “they currently do not have systems to transfer the digital records to the archives, on the other hand the national archives do not have proper means to accept digital records into custody”. This is not peculiar to Botswana. In South Africa, studies by Ngoepe (2017), Shibambu and Ngoepe (2020) and Shibambu and Marutha (2022) show the country is also in a similar predicament as there is inadequate of infrastructure to ingest digital records in archival custody). Some positive development in South Africa is that the State Information Technology Agency has started work towards the development of ICT infrastructure to facilitate digital records management in the cloud. Back to Botswana situation, in terms of the ICT infrastructure in place, the country is not ready to adopt the post-custodial management of digital records (Moatlhodi and Kalusopa, 2016). The National Archives of Zimbabwe (NAZ) also faces a similar challenge in that due to adequate digital storage infrastructure, it is currently unable to ingest digital records from public departments for preservation (Magama, 2018; Mutsagondo, 2021).

Inadequate archival legislation

The proper management of records needs to be supported by strong legislation. Notably, the National Archives and Records Services Act of 1978 (as amended in 2007) lacks the steel to guide digital records management in the country. Studies by Keakopa (2006), Moloi (2009), Ngoepe and Keakopa (2011), Mosweu (2012), Moatlhodi and Kalusopa (2016), Ngoepe and Saurombe (2016), Mosweu (2018) and Mosweu (2021) all point to an archival legislation that is incapable of providing guidance for the management of digital records. However, there are positive aspects in relation to legislation as the Electronic Records Evidence Act and the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act provide general guidance for digital records management though inadequate (Government of Botswana 2014a, 2014b). These recognize electronic signatures as the equivalent of signatures appended to authenticate paper records. In addition, records generated through electronic records systems are admissible as evidence in the courts of laws (Government of Botswana 2014a, 2014b). According to RME 4:

Available legislation and policies such as the Electronic Records and Evidence Act, Electronic Transactions and Communications Act, the National ICT Policy and the E-Government Strategy are supportive of post-custodial management of records. The legislation is inadequate though.

According to Mosweu (2021), although social media is used by the Government of Botswana to deliver public services, resultant records are not catered for in legislation, including providing guidance for their management. Weak archival legislation in developing countries such as the one in Africa is common reality. Kemoni (2009) reviewed literature on the management of digital records in countries in Eastern and Southern Africa also found that they generally have outdated archival legislation. South Africa is an exception as it has strong archival legislation which caters for the management of digital records (Ngoepe and Saurombe, 2016). An earlier study by Wamukoya and Mnjama (2004) reported that some of the challenges faced by member countries of ESARBICA included an absence of archival legislation to guide archival practice.

Lack of digital preservation strategy and policy guidance

Nowadays, a lot of information is being created in digital form. It is either converted to digital format from existing materials or it is born digital whereby there is no other format but the digital original (Digital Coalition Preservation, 2008). One of the weak spots in the management of digital records in the ESARBICA region has been a lack of organizational policies, rules, frameworks, and procedures for records preservation (Mnjama and Wamukoya, 2007). There is bound to be problems if in such an environment there is no digital records policy to provide guidance. RME 5 argued that there was inadequate policies and guidelines to guide digital records preservation. This finding corroborates the one by Porogo (2020) whose study of seven (7) ministries and departments in the public sector of Botswana revealed that none of them had promulgated a digital records policy although digital records are generated by various business systems implemented to drive processes. Although Botswana has an e-Government Strategy (Government of Botswana, 2012) through which the country seeks to transform from a resource to a knowledge-based economy (where information is a critical resource), it has no Digital Records Preservation Strategy nor a National Digital Records Management Policy (Moloi, 2009). It does not have a paper based national records management policy either. Other countries such as Kenya and South Africa have national policies on records management whose purpose is to provide guidance on the procedures, practices, and regulations on the management of records, including digital records (Government of South Africa, 2007; Government of Kenya, 2009).

The preservation of digital records is a global problem (Mnjama, 2016). The use of ICTs in public service delivery value chains has created the challenges in preserving the records in digital format (Ngoepe and Saurombe, 2016). Records in in the digital environment are prone to accidental or deliberate alteration because of evolving digital technologies (Duranti and Blanchette, 2004; Xie, 2011). If there is no focused digital records preservation strategy in place, the records can be lost, or they can lose their authenticity over time and cease to have evidentiary value. Thus, Kootshabe and Mnjama (2014) point out that there is a need to find ways to ensure the long-term preservation and continued accessibility of digital records in Botswana.

Limited knowledge, skills, and competencies for digital records management

The post-custodial management of digital records requires that records be managed entirely at the place where they are initially generated in organisations. Bearman and Hedstrom (1993) recommend “reinventing archives” entirely by moving the focus away from actual custody of records in archives and more towards remote control of records left on interconnected computers all over the government or business. Information is an important organisational resource, and just like vehicles, buildings, or money, it needs to be managed by professionals with appropriate competencies, skills, and knowledge (National Archives of Australia, 2017). Several studies conducted in Botswana over the years have revealed that archives and records management professionals lack skills and competencies to manage digital records (Moloi, 2009; Motlhasedi, 2012; Mosweu, 2012; Moatlhodi and Kalusopa, 2016; Rakemane and Serema, 2018; Mosweu, 2019). These studies were conducted in diverse government departments such as Botswana Qualifications Authority, Gaborone Magistrates’ Court, Companies and Intellectual Property and mainline government ministries. A similar assertion by RM3 was that:

Most of the records professionals have inadequate skills on the preservation issues. Some of them were recruited with first degree in Humanities, Social Science…. and they have never acquired pre-requisite skills on the preservation of records.

RME 4: “There is a shortage of ICT based skills required to run and manage a post-custodial digital records management programme”.

RME 5: “Lack of knowledge and skills in the management of digital records”.

RME 2 was of the view that:

Most of the Records Professionals have inadequate skills on the preservation issues. Some of them they were recruited with first degree in Humanities, Social Science…. and they have never acquired pre-requisite skills on the preservation of records.

Notably, archives and records management professionals are trained at certificate, diploma and bachelor's degree in archives and records management, library and information studies and some related or other degree. Inadequate ICT skills is a major impediment even beyond Botswana. Similarly, the National of Archives of Zimbabwe has also been unbale to ingest digital records from departments into its repository due to lack requisite skills (Magama, 2018). This situation is also mirrored in studies in the entire eastern and Southern Africa region, and even Africa as a whole (Kemoni, 2009; Adu and Ngulube, 2017). The management and preservation of digital records in Botswana therefore remains a challenging vocation for archivists and records managers due to lack of capacity.

Financial challenges

The ICT infrastructure for digital records preservation is expensive while the government must apportion money to the different sectors of the economy in terms of priority. Allocating funds for records and heritage management competes with other services expended by the government of Botswana to the public, so it is not likely that the government would adequately finance digital records preservation in the face of a limited budget. Keakopa (2004) also notes that efforts to preserve and conserve records need to be budgeted for and costed within a limited national budget to maximize resources in the ESARBICA member countries. Government offices are congested with records, including non-current records due to shortage of in-house records storage (Ramokate and Moatlhodi, 2010). Records storage is not a priority due to lack of funding. The RMEs interviewed also pointed out that funding for archives and records management initiatives is a challenge due to competing interests before government. For example, RME 6 averred that funds were inadequate to help facilitate the preservation of records. As far back as the early 1990s, Bearman and Hedstrom (1993:87–88) opined that most expensive records to keep are those whose physical form is most fragile, i.e., digital records due to the need to continuously copy records over time and retain software independent formats holding the records, or the appropriate software required to read them.

Basically, it is costly properly manage digital records (Bote et al., 2012). The International Records Management Trust (2009) observes that the currency of computer technology is short (possibly 5 to 10 years), and thus becomes obsolete quickly. The rapid obsolescence affects technologies in the representation network, including file formats, software, operating systems, and hardware. The digital records preservation challenge is not only to ensure continued access to digital objects in the face of constant technological obsolescence (Adu and Ngulube, 2017) but to also ensure the authenticity and reliability of records in digital systems (IRMT, 2009).

Lack of awareness of records preservation

Awareness about the need for records preservation promote actions towards efforts to with compliance with all records management practices which contribute to the accessibility and integrity of records and archives (Harvey, 1993; Ngulube, 2003). In a study on the preservation of records in government ministries, Kootshabe and Mnjama (2014) found that the government ministries failed to understand and commit to records preservation and its importance to records management, and that awareness of preservation was very low while resources expended to ensure protection and preservation of records were negligible. Porogo (2020) reported positive developments regarding digital preservation of records in 7 ministries and departments. Strategies such as migration data from the old systems to the new updated systems and back up, are used for digital preservation but by ICT officers as archives and records management professionals lack capacity. According to Kootshabe and Mnjama (2014), the function of records management is lowly regarded and less appreciated, resulting in lack of commitment to proper care, storage, and handling of records for long term use. An earlier study in eastern and Southern Africa by Wamukoya and Mnjama (2004) revealed that low awareness of the importance of records management to support organisational efficiency and accountability was one of several challenges among others.

Lack of adoption of standards on records management and preservation

Globally, the development of records management standards has influenced the likelihood of success of EDRMS implementation (Kaupa and Chisa, 2020). For example, in Botswana, they have been used to frame functional requirements for EDRMS implementation (Mosweu 2014). Although standards provide best practice, their contextual characteristics need to be contextualized to the local environment (Mosweu, Bwalya & Mutshewa 2016). More commonly used standards include the following non-exhaustive standards (as there are many others):

MoReq 2: Model Requirements Specification for the Management of Electronic Records.

ISO 15489: 2016: Information and Documentation – Records Management.

ISO 16175–2: Guidelines and functional requirements for records in electronic office environments.

ISO 16175–3: Guidelines and functional requirements for records in business systems.

ISO 14721: 2012 (Open Archival Information System).

Botswana is yet to adapt any of the ISO standards, including ISO 15489-1 (2016) which is a general records management standard. The post-custodial management of records in creating agencies need to be monitored through implementation of standards. In this instance, Botswana is not ready due to lack of standards. Ambira (2016) also notes that Kenya is yet to adopt ISO standards for records management. South Africa is an exception and has domesticated the standard, by developing SANS 15489-1 (2005) from an adaptation of the original ISO standard. Thus, without guidance provided by standards, the distributed management of digital records in creating agencies will remain a far-fetched reality.

Limited implementation of EDRMS or ECM

As part of e-government and the desire to improve public services, public sector agencies in Botswana have implemented a lot of business systems (InterPARES Trust, 2018). These were originally meant to drive business processes in a faster way. The business systems generate digital records. By design, these systems were not designed to manage records across their life cycle or for as long as they are needed for business activity. More importantly, they do not have repositories archival records can be deposited and managed properly and be preserved over time.

Truly recordkeeping systems have been implemented in a few government agencies. Botswana Housing Corporation implemented an EDRMS to rekindle efficiency and effectiveness in its operations. The automation of records and information management processes removed constraints presented by manual systems, and ushered in a better flow of information, giving the Corporation a competitive niche on the road towards a knowledge-based economy (Botswana Housing Corporation, 2019). The High Court of Botswana, the Gaborone Magisterial District Court, Botswana Qualifications Authority (BQA) and the Ministry of Investment, Trade, and Industry automated their records management processes through the deployment of an EDRMS (Motsaathebe and Mnjama, 2009; Mosweu, Bwalya and Mutshewa, 2016; Mosweu and Kenosi, 2018). EDRMS implementation computerized public sector records management processes to leverage on work processes.

Due to the low rate of adoption of ECMs or EDRMS to manage digital records, it appears that the records and information management landscape is not yet ready to embrace post-custodial management of digital records. More transactional systems than ECM or EDRMS have been implemented and so the survival of records generated over time is low, let alone their preservation. RME 7 however noted that computerization initiatives at BNARS and Ministry of Trade and Industry proved that an EDRMS can manage electronic records across their life cycle. Kalusopa et al. (2021) support this assertion by observing that the current hybrid manual-electronic system environment in Botswana provides an opportunity for some improvement and increased focus on digital records management.

Conclusion

This study undertook a focused review of literature to demonstrate that the post-custodial management of records by the public sector of Botswana is not yet feasible. The greatest danger posed to digital records is when they are in a transition from one system to another. It therefore made sense for the advocates of post-custodialism to prefer that digital records should be managed as archives in their creating agencies to avoid records losing their integrity and authenticity when migrated. The reality as shown in this study is that much as post-custodialism is ideal as put forward by its proponents, challenges such as cost implications for digital records perseveration, inadequate archival legislation, absence of digital records preservation, poor ICT infrastructure required to ingest and maintain digital records, limited skills by archives and records management professionals in the context of Botswana, just to cite a few, point out to the fact Botswana is not ready for a paradigm shift and manage digital records in a post-custodial manner. The implementation of truly recordkeeping systems is still a challenge due to costs involved and lack of appreciation of the role played by records in organisational management. The National Archives of the UK, NARA of USA, the Library and Archives of Canada and the National Archives of Australia, all from developed countries have mainly adopted the custodial management of digital records by the national archives (Eastwood, 1996; National Archives of UK, 2006; Niu, 2012). Under special circumstances, creating agencies follow the post-custodial model as in Canada and Australia (Cook, 1995; Niu, 2012), and Botswana is not yet ready for such. Scholars such as Eastwood (1996) and Duranti (1996) respectively support the custodial management of digital records as not keeping them in the archives signifies failure to undertake its principal mission while keeping them ensures their trustworthiness.

There are implications that arise from the findings of this study. Firstly, BNARS can benchmark on best practices for digital records management with archival institutions in developed countries such as Australia, the UK, and the USA. Lessons leant can be used to inform the road map for establishing a digital archive for digital records transferred from creating agencies. Secondly, the findings from the study can be used by policy makers to effect changes required to support the establishment of a digital archive with its associated equipment by releasing funds for the same. Lastly, some form of collaboration is required between BNARS as the custodian of public records, educational institutions offering training in archives and records management as well as industry to curriculum that prepares graduates for the job market.

Recommendations

In view of the weaknesses identified in relation to realities of the post-custodial management of digital records in Botswana, the paper proposes the following recommendations:

Higher budgetary considerations should be made in favour of BNARS by the mother ministry, the Ministry of Youth, Gender, Sport and Culture so that the department can establish a digital archive that meets international standards, and which can ingest digital records preservation received from public organisations.

BNARS needs to lobby government to enact a more enabling legislation required to guide digital records management practices, including records generated through social media platforms.

Awareness of digital records preservation is low. The drive towards Botswana being knowledge-based economy can be facilitated when BNARS raise awareness among top government managers so that they appreciate it and its contribution to organisational efficiency and accountability, and to the wider envisaged knowledge economy. The government through the Department of Information Technology needs to renew its ICT infrastructure to facilitate digital records management as that would in the future allow the post-custodial management of digital records. Currently, the Government Data Network is old and needs modernization to enable it to support the country's transformation to digital government.

Collaboration between BNARS, Botswana Bureau of Standards, ICT experts, universities, research institutes and, archives and records management practitioners to adapt already existing and available digital records preservation standard for purposes of guiding the preservation of digital archival documents.

It also recommends that creating agencies consider using cloud computing platforms to manage records which can later be transferred to an established digital archive run and managed by BNARS.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Olefhile Mosweu

About the authors

Olefhile Mosweu is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow in the Department of Information and Knowledge Management,School of Consumer Intelligence,and Information Systems,University of Johannesburg,South Africa,in the College of Business and Economics. He regularly reviews academic works and is an editorial board member of the Journal of the South African Society of Archivists,and the ESARBICA Journal editorial team. He is a National Research Foundation of South Africa C2 rated researcher. He is also an external examiner for the Department of Information Science,University of South Africa,Pretoria. His research interests are archival education,digital records management,research methodology,and the impact of Industry 4.0 on records management. He was a Research Assistant and member of Team Africa in the International Research on Permanent Authentic Records in Electronic Systems project (

. He is a participant on the international research project,InterPARES Trust AI (2021-2026),a multi-national interdisciplinary project aiming to design,develop,and leverage Artificial Intelligence to support the ongoing availability and accessibility of trustworthy public records. He can be reached at olfmos@gmail.com

Kelvin Joseph Bwalya is a full professor of information systems and Knowledge Management at the School of Consumer Intelligence and Information Systems,University of Johannesburg. Kelvin is an established C1 NRF rated researcher and experienced international consultant in applied aspects of computer information systems and information management. Kelvin has a PhD in Information Management (University of Johannesburg),master’s in computer science (Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology) and Bachelors in Electrical Electronics Engineering (Moscow PE Technical University). He has worked as a Senior Researcher at Samsung Electronics (Taejŏn,South Korea) specializing in Digital Image Processing and MPEG 7/21 Digital Media Adaption. He has also worked at the University of Botswana as a senior scholar. He has given over 10 keynote speeches on topics surrounding e-Government,blockchain and smart cities in five different countries. His research interests include business process automation,business process as a service (BPaaS),block chains,ambient intelligence,Big Data and predictive analytics,business intelligence,and cloud and fog computing. He currently focusses on supervising Master and PhD students working on areas bordering the Fourth Industrial Revolution and dynamic information management. Kelvin is also a founding partner of Kel IT and Business Advisory,a company offering IT and business consulting services in Southern Africa. He is currently the Vice Dean for Research in the College of Business and Economics where he has pioneered a strong research culture.

References

Adu

Ngulube

(2017) Key threats and challenges to the preservation of digital records of public institutions in Ghana. Information, Communication & Society 20(8):1127–1145.

Alpert-Abrams

Bliss

Carbajal

(2019) Post-Custodialism for the Collective Good: Examining Neoliberalism in US-Latin American Archival Partnerships. in Cifor M and Lee JA(eds) Evidences, Implications, and Critical Interrogations of Neoliberalism in Information Studies. Journal of Critical Library and Information Studies 2(1): Available at: doi: 10.24242/jclis.v2i1.87.

Ambira

(2016) A framework for management of electronic records in support of e-government in Kenya. PhD Thesis, University of South Africa. Pretoria.

Atherton

(1985) From lifecycle to continuum: Some thoughts on the records management archives relationship. Archivaria 21: 43–51.

Bailey

(1988) Archival theory and machine-readable records: some problems and issues. Masters in Archival Studies Dissertation. University of British Columbia. Available at: https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/831/items/1.0097573#downloadfiles (accessed 20 October 2017).

Bantin

(2008) Understanding Data and Information Systems for Recordkeeping. New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers.

Bastian

(2004) Taking custody, giving access: A post-custodial role for a new century. Archivaria 53: 76–93.

Bearman

(1991) An indefensible bastion: Archives as repositories in the electronic age. Archival Management of Electronic Records 13: 14–24.

Bearman

Hedstrom

(1993) Reinventing archives for electronic records: alternative service delivery options. Available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0129/92f132b1d842e830543c7e97861469eed993.pdf?_ga=2.249202567.1061707653.1570684371-2073668745.1562564277 (Accessed 7 October 2019).

10.

Boadle

(2004) Reinventing the archive in a virtual environment: Australians and the non-custodial management of electronic records. Australian Academic and Research Libraries 35(3): 242–252.

11.

Bote

Fernandez-Feijoo

Ruiz

(2012) The cost of digital preservation: A methodological analysis. Procedia Technology 5: 103–111.

12.

Botswana Housing Corporation (2019) Botswana Housing Corporation 2019 Annual Report. Available at: https://www.bhc.bw/sites/default/files/2019%20BHC%20Annual%20Report.pdf (accessed 4 March 2022).

13.

Bwalya

Mosweu

(2017) Integrating document workflow management system in the business processes of a public institution. Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence (CSAI) 1(3): 6–8.

14.

Cook

(1995) Leaving archival electronic records in institutions: policy and monitoring arrangements at the national archives of Canada. Archives and Museum Informatics 9(2): 141–149.

15.

Cook

(2013) What is past is prologue: A history of archival ideas since 1898, and the future paradigm shift. Archivaria 43: 17–63.

16.

Digital Preservation Coalition (2008) Preservation management of digital materials: the handbook. Available at: https://www.dpconline.org/docs/digital-preservation-handbook/299-digital-preservation-handbook/file (accessed 07 October 2019).

17.

Duranti

(1996) Archives as a place. Archives and Manuscripts 24(2): 242–255.

18.

Duranti

Blanchette

(2004) The authenticity of electronic records: the InterPARES approach. Available at: https://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/blanchette/papers/ist2.pdf (accessed 2 March 2022).

19.

Duranti

MacNeil

(1996) The protection of the integrity of electronic records: An overview of the UBC-MAS research project. Archivaria 42: 46–67.

20.

Duranti

(2007) Archives as a place. Archives & Social Studies: A Journal of Interdisciplinary Research 1: 445–466.

21.

Duranti

(2010) Concepts and principles for the management of electronic records, or records management theory is archival diplomatics. Records Management Journal 20(1):78–95.

22.

Duranti

Rogers

(2014) Trust on records and data online. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290042093_Trust_in_Online_Records_and_Data (accessed 2 March 2022).

23.

Eastwood

(1994) What is archival theory and why is it important? Archivaria 37: 122–130.

24.

Eastwood

(1996) Should creating agencies keep electronic records indefinitely? Archives and Manuscripts 24(2): 256–267.

25.

Government of Botswana (1978) National Archives and Records Services Act (Amended 2007). Gaborone: Government Printer.

26.

Government of Botswana (2012) Botswana National E-government strategy. Available at: https://www.researchictafrica.net/countries/botswana/Nationa_e-Government_Strategy_2011-2016.pdf (accessed 28 February 2022).

27.

Government of Botswana (2014a) Electronic Communications and Transactions Act. Gaborone: Government Printer.

28.

Government of Botswana (2014b) Electronic Records (Evidence) Act. Gaborone: Government Printer.

29.

Government of Kenya (2009) National policy on records management. Available at: http://www.archives.go.ke/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/NATIONAL-RECORDS-MANAGEMENT-POLICY-10_04_2009.pdf (accessed 7 October 2019).

30.

Government of South Africa (2007) Records management policy manual. Available at: https://www.nationalarchives.gov.za/sites/default/files/RM%20Policy%20Manual_2.pdf (accessed 7 October 2019).

31.

Harvey

(1993) Preservation. In: Ellis (Ed.) Keeping Archives. Port of Melbourne: Thorpe in association with the Australian Society of Archivists Inc., 74–102.

32.

Henry

(1998) Schellenberg in cyberspace. The American Archivist 61: 309–327.

33.

Ipinge

Nengomasha

(2018) An investigation into the records management profession in the public service of Namibia. Information and Learning Sciences 119 (7/8): 377–388.

34.

InterPARES Trust (2018) Investigating the management of digital records in enterprise-wide systems: Botswana AF04 Available at: https://interparestrustorg/assets/public/dissemination/AF04_FinalReport_July2018.pdf (accessed 2 March 2022).

35.

IRMT (1999) Managing Archives. London: International Records Management Trust

36.

IRMT (2009) Preserving Electronic Records. London: International Records Management Trust

37.

Jenkinson

(1922) A Manual for Archives Administration. London: Oxford Claredon Press.

38.

Kastenhofer

(2016) Identifying digital records in business systems: The definition of a problem. Journal of the South African Society of Archivists 49:1–13.

39.

Keakopa

(2006) The management of electronic records in Botswana, Namibia and South Africa: opportunities and challenges. PhD Thesis, University College London, UK.

40.

Kalusopa

(2016) Extent of the integration of information communication and technology (ICT) systems in the management of records in labour organisations in Botswana. Journal of the South African Society of Archivists 49: 1–14.

41.

Kalusopa

Mosweu

Bayane

(2021) Implementation of enterprise-wide systems to manage trustworthy digital records in Botswana’s public sector. New Review of Information Networking 26(1): 1–20.

42.

Kaupa

Chisa

(2020) Adoption of the electronic document records management system within the public sector in Namibia: Exploring the challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Operations Management 1(1): 7–18.

43.

Keakopa

(2004) Costing and budgeting for preservation and conservation in the east and Southern Africa regional branch of the international council on archives (ESARBICA) region. Esarbica Journal 23: 63–74.

44.

Keakopa

(2008) Management of electronic mail: A challenge for archivists and records managers in Botswana, Namibia and South Africa. ESARBICA Journal 27: 72–83.

45.

Keakopa

(2018) Management of public sector records and archives in Botswana. In Ngulube

(ed) Handbook of Research on Heritage Management and Preservation. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 235–256.

46.

Kemoni

(2009) Management of electronic records – review of empirical studies from the eastern, Southern Africa regional branch of the international council on archives (ESARBICA) region. Records Management Journal 19(3): 190–203.

47.

Kibe

(2019) Impact of cloud-based services on records management in public organisations in Kenya. Available at: http://repository.tukenya.ac.ke/bitstream/handle/123456789/1774/Impact%20of%20Cloud%E2%80%93Based%20Services%20on%20Records%20Management%20in%20Public%20Organisations%20in%20Kenya%20%281%29.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed 23 April 2022).

48.

King

(2005) Developing an electronic records preservation strategy. Available at: https://www.ed.ac.uk/files/imports/fileManager/ElectronicPreservationStrategy.pdf (accessed 9 October 2019).

49.

Kootshabe

Mnjama

(2014) Preservation of government records in Botswana. Journal of the South African Society of Archivists 47: 26–49.

50.

Krahn

(2012) Looking under the hood: Unraveling the content, structure and context of functional requirements for electronic recordkeeping systems. Masters dissertation. University of Manitoba, Canada. Available at: https://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/bitstream/handle/1993/8105/Konrad%20Krahn%20Thesis%20Final.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed 2 March 2022).

51.

Latham

(2015) Information management advice: The value of recordkeeping metadata. [Online] https://www.informationstrategy.tas.gov.au (accessed 12 July 2022).

52.

Magama

(2018) Strategies for preservation of digital records in masvingo province of Zimbabwe. ESARBICA Journal 37: 18–38.

53.

Mbakile

(2004) Records management and change in Botswana: Improving the Ministry of Local Government. Masters Thesis. University of Wales, Aberystwyth.

54.

McKemmish

(1994) Understanding electronic recordkeeping systems: understanding ourselves. Archives and Manuscripts 22(1): 150–162.

55.

Memory

(2019) Pos-custodial and collaborative: A primer for memory institutions beginning digital archiving projects. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4205&context=facpub (accessed 4 March 2022).

56.

Mnjama

(1996) National archives and the challenges of managing the entire life cycle of records, S. A. Archives Journal 38: 24–29.

57.

Mnjama

(2016) Preservation of recorded information in public and private sector organizations. In: Jain P and Mnjama N (2016) (eds) Managing Knowledge Resources and Records in Modern Organisations. Hershey: IGI Global, 149–167.

58.

Mnjama

Wamukoya

(2004) E-government and e-records management. Paper presented at the SADC Workshop on E-government, Gaborone, Botswana, 14-16 April 2004.

59.

Mnjama

Wamukoya

(2007) E-Government and records management: an assessment tool for e-records readiness in government. The Electronic Library 25(3): 274–284.

60.

Moatlhodi

Kalusopa

(2016) An assessment of e-records readiness at the ministry of labour and home affairs. Mousaion: South African Journal of Information Studies 34(3): 1–22.

61.

Moloi

Mutula

(2007) E-Records management in an e-government setting. Information Development 23(4): 290–306.

62.

Moloi

(2009) E-records readiness in the public sector in Botswana. ESARBICA Journal 28: 105–127.

63.

Mosweu

(2014) Factors influencing adoption of the Document Management Workflow System by action officers and records officers at the Ministry of Trade and Industry in Botswana. Master’s Dissertation. University of Botswana, Gaborone.

64.

Mosweu

(2018) A framework to authenticate records in a government accounting system in Botswana to support the auditing process. Available at: http://uir.unisa.ac.za/handle/10500/25704 (accessed 9 October 2019).

65.

Mosweu

(2019) Knowledge and skills requirements for a records manager in Botswana in the networked environment. Journal of the South African Society of Archivists 52: 110–132.

66.

Mosweu

(2021) A review of the legislative framework for social media records in Botswana. Records Management Journal 32(1): 62–74.

67.

Mosweu

(2012) Assessment of the court records management system in the delivery of justice at the Gaborone Magisterial District. Masters Dissertation. University of Botswana, Gaborone.

68.

Mosweu

Bwalya

Mutshewa

(2016) Examining factors affecting the adoption and usage of document workflow management system (DWMS) using the UTAUT model: Case of Botswana. Records Management Journal 26(1): 1–30.

69.

Mosweu

Kenosi

(2018) Implementation of the court records management system in the delivery of justice at the Gaborone magisterial district, Botswana. Records Management Journal 28(3): 234–251.

70.

Mosweu

Luthuli

Mosweu

(2019) Implications of cloud computing services in records management in Africa: archilles heels of the digital era? South African Journal of Information Management 21(1): 1–12. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337638226_Implications_of_cloud-computing_services_in_records_management_in_Africa_Achilles_heels_of_the_digital_era (accessed 23 April 2022).

71.

Motsaathebe

Mnjama

(2009) The management of high court records in Botswana. Records Management Journal 19(3): 173–189.

72.

Motlhasedi

(2012) E-records management at Botswana Training Authority. Masters Dissertation. University of Botswana. Gaborone.

73.

Mutsagondo

(2021) The role of the national archives of Zimbabwe in fostering professional management of email in Zimbabwe’s central government. International Journal of Management Research and Emerging Sciences 11(1): 94–103.

74.

Mutula

Mostert

(2010) Challenges of e-government in South Africa. The Electronic Library 28(1): 38–53.

75.

National Archives of UK (2006) Custodial policy for digital records. [Online] http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk (accessed 12 July 2022).

76.

New York State Archives (2021) The records life cycle. Available at: http://www.archives.nysed.gov/common/archives/files/the-records-lifecycle-2021-05_dlowry_08.02.2021.pdf (accessed 1 June 2022).

77.

Ngoepe

Keakopa

(2011) An assessment of the state of national archival and records systems in the ESARBICA region: A South Africa-Botswana comparison. Records Management Journal 21(2): 145–160.

78.

Ngoepe

Saurombe

(2016) Provisions for managing and preserving records created in networked environments in the archival legislative frameworks of selected member states of the Southern African development community. Archives and Manuscripts 44(1): 24–41.

79.

Ngoepe

(2017) Archival orthodoxy of post-custodial for digital records in South Africa. Archives and Manuscripts 45: 31–44.

80.

Ngulube

(2003) Preservation and access to public records and archives in South Africa. [Online] https://researchspace.ukzn.ac.za/xmlui/handle/10413/11402 (accessed 12 July 2022).

81.

Niu

(2012) Appraisal and custody of electronic records: findings from four national archives. Archival Issues 34(2): 117–130.

82.

Nkwe

(2012) E-Government: challenges and opportunities in Botswana. International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences 2(17): 39–48.

83.

Porogo

(2020) A strategic framework for digital preservation capability maturity readiness in the context of e-government in the public service in Botswana. PhD Thesis. University of South Africa.

84.

Public Records Office of Victoria (1973) Public records act. Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-force/acts/public-records-act-1973/041 (accessed 3 January 2022).

85.

Rakemane

Serema

(2018) Electronic records management practices at the companies and intellectual property authority in Gaborone, Botswana. Journal of the South African Society of Archivists 51: 148–169.

86.

Ramokate

Moatlhodi

(2010) Battling the appraisal backlog: a challenging professional obligation for Botswana National Archives and Records Services 29:

87.

Sethibe

Bwalya

(2014) Botswana’s e-government development trajectory: the experience of local authorities. In Digital Access and e-Government: Perspectives from Developing and Emerging Countries. Hershey: IGI Global, 151–163.

88.

Shein

Lapworth

(2016) Say yes to digital surrogates: Strengthening the Archival Record in the post-custodial era. Journal of Western Archives 7(1): 1–50.

89.

Shibambu

Ngoepe

(2020) When rain clouds gather: digital curation of South African public records in the cloud. South African Journal of Information Management 22(1): 1–9.

90.

Shibambu

Marutha

(2022) A framework for management of digital records on the cloud in the public sector of South Africa. Information Discovery and Delivery 50(2): 165–175.

91.

Shimray

Ramaiah

(2018). Digital preservation strategies: an overview. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327221006_Digital_Preservation_Strategies_An_Overview (accessed 5 October 2019).

92.

Suárez

(2021) Diversifying the archives. [Online] https://blogs.princeton.edu/techsvs/tag/post-custodial-models/ (accessed 12 July 2022).

93.

Turnbaugh

(1997) Information technology, records and state archives. The American Archivist 60(2): 184–200.

94.

Thompson

(1970) Report by Government Archivist on Five Years Work 1965-1970. Gaborone: Botswana National Archives.

95.

UK National Archives (2012) Managing digital records without an electronic record management system Available at: https://cdn.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/information-management/managing-electronic-records-without-an-erms-publication-edition.pdf (accessed 2 March 2022).

96.

Upward

McKemmish

(1994) Somewhere beyond custody. Archives and Manuscripts 22(1): 136–149.

97.

Upward

(1996) Structuring the records Continuum part one: post-custodial principles and properties. Archives & Manuscripts 24(2): 268–285.

98.

Upward

(2000) Modelling the continuum as paradigm shift in recordkeeping and archiving processes, and beyond – a personal reflection. Records Management Journal 10(3): 115–139.

99.

Upward

(2005) The records continuum. In McKemmish

Piggott

Barbara

Upward

(Eds.), Archives: Recordkeeping in Society. Wagga Wagga: Charles Sturt University, Centre for Information Studies, 197 − 1222.

100.

Wamukoya

Mutula

(2005) Capacity building requirements for e-records management: the case in eastern and Southern Africa. Records Management Journal 15(2): 71–79.

101.

Xie

(2011) Building foundations for digital records forensics: A comparative study of the concept of reproduction in digital records management and digital forensics. The American Archivist 7: 576–599.

102.

Yusuf

Chell

(2000) The records life cycle: An inadequate concept for technology-generated records. Information Development 16(3): 135–141.

103.

Zelenyj

(1999) Archivy ad portas: the archives-records management paradigm Re-visited in the electronic information. Available at: https://archivaria.ca/index.php/archivaria/article/viewFile/12698/13872 (accessed 3 March 2022).

The challenges of post custodial management of digital records in Botswana laid bare

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction and background

Custodial management of records and the records life cycle

Post-custodial management of records and the records continuum

The paradigm shift in archival theory and practice

Purpose of the study

Methodology

Findings and discussions

Lack of infrastructure for digital records management

Inadequate archival legislation

Lack of digital preservation strategy and policy guidance

Limited knowledge, skills, and competencies for digital records management

Financial challenges

Lack of awareness of records preservation

Lack of adoption of standards on records management and preservation

Limited implementation of EDRMS or ECM

Conclusion

Recommendations

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

Funding

ORCID iD

About the authors

References