Abstract
This article explores three different discourse, found by analyzing a panel discussion on digital archives held in Sweden in 2011. The aim was to identify the varying implications of different discourse on the holistic concept of the archive. The overall aim was to increase understanding of information governance within the context of e-government. To this end, discourse theory is used to compare and analyze ideas and visions connected to digital archives and then discuss whether the differences depend on different perceptions of the concept of the archive. The result shows that plans and suggestions connected to digital archives vary greatly, possibly as an effect of conflicting discourse. This article argues that the concept of the archive is multifaceted and that it is important to take into account the power of discourse when discussing and planning for archives and records creation, management, preservation and use.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1. Riksarkivet eARD, “Delprojekt 1 (Dp1) Inom,” Citation2013.
3. All citizens have the right to access public records from the time of creation or receipt, unless the record is confidential (for reasons of official secrecy, personal integrity, etc.). This is seen as a foundation for democratic empowerment.
6. There are also other types of archival institutions, for example social movement archives and business archives. The main difference is that public sectors have a supervisory role supported by legislation.
13. Gorman & Clayton, Qualitative Research, Citation3.
14. Börjesson & Palmblad, Citation2007Diskursanalys I Praktiken.
18. Winther Jørgensen, Phillips, & Torhell, “Diskursanalys Som”, Citation47.
25. Hildebrand, Om Den S. K. Ursprungsprincipens, Citation90, author’s translation.
27. McKemmish, “Traces: Document, Record”, Citation14.
28. Currall, Moss, & Stuart, “What Is a Collection?”, Citation145.
Riksarkivet eARD. Delprojekt 1 (Dp1) Inom E-Arkiv Och E-Diarium (Begreppsdefinitioner) Ordlista [Subproject 1 within E-Archive and E-Diarium (Concept Definitions) Glossary] Version 1:1, 14 January 2013. Stockholm: Riksarkivet, 2013. SFS. Sweden. Tryckfrihetsförordning [The Freedom of the Press Act], 105 Stockholm, 1949. SFS. “Archives Act.”, pp. 782 1990. Hörnfeldt, Torbjörn. “The Concept of Record – On Being Digital.” In The Concept of Record: Report from the Second Stockholm Conference on Archival Science and the Concept of Record, 30–31 May 1996, edited by K. Abukhanfusa. Stockholm: Riksarkivet, 1998. Statens servicecenter. En Förvaltningsgemensam Tjänst För E-Arkiv – Delrapport [A Common Management Services for E-Archives – Interim Report]. Gävle, 2015. Geijer, Ulrika, Eva Lenberg, and Håkan Lövblad. Arkivlagen. En Kommentar [The Archives Act. A Comment]. Finland: Norstedts, 2013. Gorman, G. E., and Peter Clayton. Qualitative Research for the Information Professional. 2nd ed. London: Facet Publishing, 2004. Börjesson, Mats, and Eva Palmblad. Diskursanalys I Praktiken [Discourse Analysis in Practice], 1. uppl. ed. (1st Rev. ed.), edited by Mats Börjesson and Eva Palmblad. Malmö: Liber, 2007. Foucault, Michel. Vetandets Arkeologi [The Archaeology of Knowledge]. [Ny utg.]/aktualiserad och genomgången av Sven-Erik Torhell edited by C. G Bjurström and Sven-Erik Torhell. Lund: Arkiv, 2002. Howarth, David. Discourse. Buckingham: Open University Press, 2000. Wreder, Malin. “Ovanliga Analyser Av Vanliga Material: Vad Diskursteorin Kan Göra Med Enkäter [Unusual Analyzes of Common Materials: What Discourse Theory Can Do to Surveys].” In Diskursanalys I Praktiken [Discourse Analysis in Practice], edited by Malin Börjesson and Eva Palmblad. Malmö: Liber, 2007. Winther Jørgensen, Marianne, Louise Phillips, and Sven-Erik Torhell. Diskursanalys Som Teori Och Metod [Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method], edited by Louise Phillips and Sven-Erik Torhell. Lund: Studentlitteratur, 2000. Beckman, Ludvig. Grundbok I Idéanalys: Det Kritiska Studiet Av Politiska Texter Och Idéer [Introduction to the Analysis of Ideas]. Stockholm: Santérus, 2005. Bergström, Göran, and Kristina Boréus. Textens Mening Och Makt: Metodbok I Samhällsvetenskaplig Text- Och Diskursanalys [Power and Meaning of the Text: Methods of Textual and Discourse Analysis in the Social Sciences], 2., [omarb.] uppl. ed (2nd Rev. ed.), edited by Göran Bergström and Kristina Boréus. Lund: Studentlitteratur, 2005. McKemmish, Sue. “Are Records Ever Actual?” In The Records Continuum: Ian Maclean and Australian Archives First Fifty Years, edited by Sue McKemmish and Piggott Michael. Clayton: Anchora Press in association with Australian Archives, 1994. McKemmish, Sue. “Placing Records Continuum Theory and Practice.” Archival Science. International Journal on Recorded Information – Incorporating Archives and Museum Informatics 1, no. 4 (2001): 333–359. Harris, Verne. “Against the Grain: Psychologies and Politics of Secrecy.” International Journal on Recorded Information 9, no. 3 (2009): 133–142. Upward, Frank. “Structuring the Records Continuum, Part Two: Structuration Theory and Recordkeeping.” Archives and Manucscripts 25, no. 1 (1997): 10–35. Hildebrand, Emil. “Om Den S. K. Ursprungsprincipens Tillämpning Vid Ordnande Af Offentliga Arkiv [About the So-Called Principle of Provenance's Application in the Subordination of Public Archives].” Meddelanden från svenska Riksarkivet (1903): 85–92. Statens servicecenter. En Förvaltningsgemensam Tjänst För E-Arkiv – Delrapport [A Common Management Services for E-Archives – Interim Report]. Gävle, 2015. McKemmish, Sue. “Traces: Document, Record, Archive, Archives.” In Archives: Recordkeeping in Society, edited by Sue McKemmish. Wagga Wagga, NSW: Centre for Information Studies, Charles Sturt University, 2005. Currall, James, Michael. S. Moss, and Susan Stuart. “What Is a Collection? [Philosophical Examination of Term “Collection” and Subsequent Implications].” Archivaria, 58 (2004): 131. Duranti, Luciana. “The Impact of Digital Technology on Archival Science.” Archival Science 1, no. 1 (2001): 39–55. [In English].10.1007/BF02435638. Statens servicecenter. En Förvaltningsgemensam Tjänst För E-Arkiv – Delrapport [A Common Management Services for E-Archives – Interim Report]. Gävle, 2015. Additional information
Funding
Funding and collaborative partners are critical to promote purposeful research. I would like to thank the County Administrative Board in Västernorrland and Härnösand Municipality for funding the Good Information Governance project (GoInfo) together with Mid Sweden University. I am also grateful to the Regulatory Network Västernorrland and the National Archives for participating and contributing to the project. Last but not least, I wish to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their valuable help. This work was supported by Länsstyrelsen Västernorrland [00171892].