Motivations for managing and presenting digital heritage: An exploratory qualitative analysis on the open-source software Omeka S

1. Introduction

The heritage sector and humanities scholarship have long been intricately interconnected, with a continuous exchange and cross-fertilization of knowledge and expertise. Humanities scholars rely on sources that are kept in libraries, archives and museums, effectively becoming their research data (Sahle, 2016). Both digital heritage and digital humanities have benefited from cutting-edge technologies, software tools, and digital media, which have played a pivotal role in advancing the open access and sustainable preservation of heritage (Todorova 2021). Cultural institutions over the last decades have valorised collections by making them digitally accessible), which has facilitated access and public awareness to heritage as well as scholarly re-use (Terras 2022). Simultaneously, large digital humanities infrastructure projects across Europe, such as CLARIAH or DARIAH, have concerted their efforts on unlocking ‘collections as data’, and by creating sets of open-source software solutions to ease the scholarly use of collections (Bernadou et al. 2018). These efforts have enabled humanities researchers to collaborate more effectively using digital tools and leverage new ways the web can be utilized (Noiret et al. 2022). Stimulated by requirements for managing and presenting rich object information, there has been a rise in software projects aimed at addressing the needs of both humanities researchers and heritage specialists (Orlandi & Marsili. 2019).

An example of such a widely used set of software which borders on the two fields is Omeka. Omeka has garnered recognition for the creation of web-based exhibitions and digital archives surrounding collections and cultural content (Brennan 2016; Foket et al. 2022; Hashimoto 2024; Ingram-Monteiro / McKernan 2022;  Kim et al. 2022;). The software was built on the belief that historians should build useful digital platforms and projects that are not isolated from the larger networks of libraries, archives, and museums (Brennan 2016; Noiret et. al 2022). Its widespread adoption by heritage institutions and digital humanities networks has resulted in a variety of websites aimed at communicating scientific results and/or heritage collections to audiences, whether that be through a digital archive or a digital exhibition (Omeka S Directory, n.d.). 

Whilst there are many studies documenting how Omeka has been used in their specific research contexts, there has not been a systematic study on the different ways it has been used. Indeed, whilst lots of literature has focused on the technical processes behind the creation of digital archives and exhibits, not a lot of attention has gone towards evaluating these digital practices. Overall, scholars argue, there has been limited attention to audiences, a lack of clear objectives and thus little assessment of the results achieved (Noiret et al. 2022). Scholars argue that there is an immediate need for more research focusing on monitoring and understanding the impacts and sustainability of digital projects (Bonacchi / Moshenka, 2015). However, in order to understand and monitor the impacts of digital projects, we first need to gain insight into what the current practices for creating web-based exhibitions and archives look like. As an academic research subject, Omeka S not only serves as a practical tool for creating digital exhibitions and archives, but it also provides valuable insights into the current context and practices for managing, presenting and sharing collections. 

2. Research Question

This research paper will focus on Omeka S as a case-study. This research sets out to explore (1) the various contexts in which Omeka S has been employed, (2) the initiators or types of institutions involved those projects and (3) their motivations for doing so and (4) hurdles they encountered whilst using the software. By conducting a systematic study on over 50 digital projects created by Omeka S, this study intends to create a framework to better distinguish and evaluate these different practices for web-publication of collections. Moreover, considering that the success of open-source software is intricately linked to the dynamics of their communities (Martinez-Torres, M.R. / Diaz-Fernandez, M.C. 2014), the findings derived from this study aims to contribute to the sustained success of Omeka S. By unveiling the hurdles initiators face, this research furthermore aims to give recommendations and thus support future developments of the software. Additionally, by giving a holistic overview of various tasks and purposes that can be accomplished via Omeka S, this research furthermore aims to be of guidance for people without previous experience using the software.

3. Methodology

This study is conducted via an exploratory qualitative analysis, which is particularly useful when certain motivations or incentives of people are unknown. Firstly, an analysis of the Omeka S websites through the directory is conducted to gain a broad overview of the various front-facing outputs that have been produced with Omeka S. The data was collected using the Omeka S directory, put into excel. However, as the directory neglects cases where Omeka S was exclusively employed for backend purposes (e.g. for teaching projects) (Foket et al. 2022) and furthermore does not reflect potential additional motivations of initiators, an additional methodology is needed. Thus, secondly, a short questionnaire was sent out to initiators of Omeka S projects by using the community channels. The questions were open-ended in order to stimulate in-depth, unforeseen responses, asking initiators about the motivations for using Omeka S, contexts in which they use the software, and hurdles they encounter. Both sets of data were analyzed using the software package Atlas.TI and an inductive method was used to thematically analyze the data. This paper will present the early results of this ongoing research. The paper concludes by reflecting on the analyzed results and outlining future qualitative approaches, such as interviews or focus groups, to be explored in subsequent stages of this ongoing research.

4.

Appendix A

Bibliography
  1. Bernadou, Agiatis / Champion, Erik / Dallas, Costis / Hughes, Lorna M. (2018): Cultural Heritage Infrastructures in Digital Humanities. Digital Research in the Arts and Humanities. London/New York: Routledge.
  2. Bonacchi, Chiara / Moshenska, Gabriel (2015): “Critical Reflections on Digital Public Archaeology”, in: Internet Archaeology 40. DOI: 10.11141/ia.40.7.1.
  3. Brennan, Sheila K. (2016): “Public, First”, in: Gold, Matthew K. / Klein, Lauren F. (eds.): Debates in the Digital Humanities 2016. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 384–89.
  4. Derudas, Paola / Nurra, Federico / Svensson, Andreas (2023): “New AIR for the Archaeological Process? The Use of 3D Web Semantic for Publishing Archaeological Reports”, in: Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 16, 3: 57:1-57:23 https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3594722 [09.04.2024].
  5. Foket, Lise / Verbeke, Davy / Ducatteeuw, Vincent / Rombaut, Eef / Lamsens, Frederic / Verbruggen, Christophe (2022): “Using IIIF to teach Digital Humanities: practice-oriented approach to digital literacy skills”, in: IIIF Annual Conference and Showcase (IIIF), Cambridge, MA (USA) https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6671274 [07.06.2022].
  6. Hashimoto, Yuta (2024): “Omeka: Content Management System for the Digital Collection of Historical and Cultural Documents”, in: Historical Studies of the Western World 3 : 27-31.
  7. Ingram-Monteiro, Neah / McKernan, Ro (2022): “An Omeka S Repository for Place- and Land-Based Teaching and Learning”, in: Information Technology and Libraries 41, 3: 57:1-57:23 https://ital.corejournals.org/index.php/ital/article/view/15123 [15.09.2023].
  8. Kim, Boyoung / Nakamura, Satoru / Watanave, Hidenori (2022): “Using Archivematica and Omeka S for Long-Term Preservation and Access of Digitized Archive Materials”, in: Tseng, YH. / Katsurai, M. / Nguyen, H.N. (eds.): From Born-Physical to Born-Virtual: Augmenting Intelligence in Digital Libraries. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 13636 . Cham: Springer, 57:1-57:23. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-21756-2_20.
  9. Martinez-Torres, M.R. / Diaz-Fernandez, M.C . (2014): “Current Issues and Research Trends on Open-Source Software Communities”, in: Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 26, 1: 55–68 http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09537325.2013.850158 [09.04.2024].
  10. Noiret, Serge / Tebeau, Mark / Zaagsma, Gerben (2022): Handbook of Digital Public History. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Oldenbourg. DOI: 10.1515/9783110430295.
  11. Omeka S Directory (n.d.): https://omeka.org/s/directory/ .
  12. Orlandi, Lucia Maria / Marsili, Giulia (2019): “Digital Humanities and Cultural Heritage Preservation: The Case of the BYZART (Byzantine Art and Archaeology on Europeana) Project”, in: Studies in Digital Heritage 3, 2 : 144-155. DOI: 10.14434/sdh.v3i2.27721.
  13. Sahle, Patrick (2016): “What Is a Scholarly Digital Edition?”, in: Driscoll, Matthew James / Pierazzo, Elena (eds.): Digital Scholarly Editing: Theories and Practices. Digital Humanities Series. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers 19–39.
  14. Terras, Melissa (2022): ‘Digital humanities and digitised cultural heritage’, in: O’Sullivan, James (ed.): The Bloomsbury Handbook to the Digital Humanities. Bloomsbury Publishing, 255-66.
  15. Todorova - Ekmekci, Mirena (2021): "Using Innovative Technologies, Digital Media and Site Tools For Presentation and Sustainable Preservation of Cultural Heritage", in: 2021 5th International Symposium on Multidisciplinary Studies and Innovative Technologies (ISMSIT) , Ankara, Turkey: 135-140. DOI: 10.1109/ISMSIT52890.2021.9604569.
Lise Foket (lise.foket@ugent.be), Ghent University, Belgium