JISC CETIS Conference 2007 - Parallel session: Learning Resources in the Ecology of Repositories

Thoughts and questions

1. This session appealed to me because I think that it is an interesting research concept.

2. As I read "An ecological approach to repository and service interactions. Draft Version 0.9" from the Repositories Research Team (http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/repositories/digirep/index/Ecology) back in July 2007, I thought that approaching repositories and their wider settings in this way provides us with the potential for prediction. Population ecology confirms this supposition. This possibility was also discussed in the workshop. I also liked the way that ecology seemed to fit with the organic nature of repository development, and the ways in which repositories establish themselves in a wider setting: within institutions; with each other, publisher systems, or teaching and learning arenas. My initial thinking was that ecologies describe entirely natural situations, whereas repositories are situated within managed environments. The report corrected my thinking on this when it referred to managed, as opposed to wild, ecologies (p5). But then again any species that exerts an influence over the things around it could be said to have a role in managing its ecology. As humans we tend to elevate our role in the scheme of things. Are we controlling ecologies or are we fated to fulfill our role to construct and deconstruct our environment.

3. Can the ecology metaphor be used to convey the complex interactions between system and human?

4. Can it be used to describe the interactions and situations that repositories are situated in to a non technical audience?.

5. Do we know what is meant by ecology or do we just think that we do? Many of us remember the typical pictorial representations of ecology that were used in the session and report – cyclical flow of nitrates and water, pond ecology with species that consume, and are consumed. We all recognise animals, trees, rain, and the like. Therefore, as a metaphor ecology works well. But, as you dig a bit deeper you begin to realise that your knowledge of ecology is very superficial, on the surface of the discipline and not that well formed. What are entities, keystone species, environmental factors? How do we map repositories, institutions, people, funding, systems, services, support, etc onto these. Ecologies are complex in terms of the relationships between the entities within them and how they relate to other ecologies. In essence, how much do we have to learn about ecologies before we can understand and explain repositories in this context to others.

6. The images of ecology that we are all familiar follow a hierarchical theme. Successful, but limited in number, carnivore type species at the top, through to the plentiful, but much maligned, lower order species at the bottom. Obviously repositories are just beginning to establish their place in the general scheme of things. During the session we were tasked with a piece of group work where we created an ecology featuring a repository, or repositories. The ecology maps we created did not readily translate the concept of influential entity, but these are evolving ideas. As Morville (2003, p45) states in his book Ambient Findability, “Technology moves fast. Evolution moves slow”. Repositories are setting up in established ecologies, they are finding their niche and balancing their impact on the other entities around them.

7. I for one look forward to reading more about this topic.