Authenticity and Provenance in Long-Term Digital Preservation: Analysis of the Scope of Content
Regina Varnienė-Janssen
Vilnius University
Jūratė Kuprienė
independent researcher
Published 2018-12-28


digital environment
data quality
trustworthiness of digital objects
Lithuania’s Information System of Virtual Electronic Heritage (VEPIS)

How to Cite

Varnienė-Janssen, R. and Kuprienė, J. (2018) “Authenticity and Provenance in Long-Term Digital Preservation: Analysis of the Scope of Content”, Informacijos mokslai, 82, pp. 131-160. doi: 10.15388/Im.2018.82.9.


[full article, abstract in English; abstract in Lithuanian]

Authenticity is a fundamental issue for the long-term preservation of digital objects; however, the validation of authenticity is a complex task – it requires the representation of provenance as a precondition for trust. For that matter, it is crucial to define the key conceptual elements that provide the foundation for such a complex framework. The main objective of this paper is to define how authenticity has to be managed in the digital preservation process: to identify the semantic units needed to support core preservation functions in order to ensure the trustworthiness of digital objects and ensure interoperability – i.e., the ability to exchange data between institutions. This paper presents results from the first stage of the research: the scope of authenticity and provenance content needed to support core preservation functions and ensure interoperability – the ability to exchange data between institutions and assess the added value of the Europeana and VEPIS regarding authenticity and provenance based on the adequacy of analyzed international models for authenticity and provenance.
Methodology: by applying the EU 2–3–6 concept of added value for electronic publishing and qualitative content analysis of research literature, we conceptualized the Content Creation Process, which refers to the structure and meaning of authenticity and provenance. This approach enabled us to identify the scope of the content of authenticity and provenance.



APARSEN (2012). D24.1 Report on Authenticity and Plan for Interoperable Authenticity Evaluation System.
BUNEMAN, Peter, SANJEV Khanna and WANG-CHIEV Tan. Why and Were: A Characterization of Data Provenance,
CAPLAN, P. (2009). Understanding PREMIS.
CCSDS – Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems. (2012). Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS).
CHARLES, V., Isaac, A. (2015). Enhancing the Europeana Data Model (EDM).
CRMdig: Model for provenance metadata. Version 3.2.1, April, 2016,
DAPPERT, A., ENDERS, M. (2010). Digital Preservation Metadata Standards, In ISO: Information Standards Quarterly, 22:2 (2010): 5-13,
DLM Forum Foundation (2011). Modular Requirements for Records Systems (MoReq2010).
DOERR, M. (2009). An Ontological Approach to Digital Preservation Metadata. ICS-FORTH May 23, 2009.
DOERR, M., Theodoridou, M. (2011). CRMdig: A Generic Digital Provenance Model for Scientific Observation, in 3rd USENIX Workshop on the Theory and Practice of Provenance (TaPP ‘11).
DROGE, E., et al. (2015). DM2E, ICP-PSP-297274, Digitised Manuscripts to Europeana, Technical specification.
European Commission, DG XIII, Andersen Consulting, (1996). Strategic Developments for the European Publishing Industry towards the Year 2000.
Europeana (2013). Europeana Data Model Primer.
Europeana (2017). Definition of the Europeana Data Model v5.2.8 06/10/2017. At:
Europeana (2017). Europeana Data Model – Mapping Guidelines v2.4.
Europeana (2013). Extending the Europeana Licencing Framework.
FACTOR, M., HENIS, E., NAOR, D., RABINOVICI-COHEN, S., RESHEF, P., RONEN, S. (2009). Authenticity and provenance in long term Digital preservation: modeling and implementation in preservation aware storage.
GAVRILIS, D. DALLAS, C., ANGELIS, S. (2013). A Curation-Oriented Thematic Aggregator. In: Aalberg T., Papatheodorou C., Dobreva M., Tsakonas G., Farrugia C.J. (eds) Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries. TPDL 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8092, https://
GIARETTA, D. (2011). Advanced Digital Preservation. Springer Heidelberg Dordrecht London New York e-ISBN 978-3-642-16809-3. DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-16809-3
GROTH, P. et al. (2012). Requirements for Provenance on the Web. In International Journal of Digital Curation, Vol. 7, No. 1,
GUERCIO, M., SALZA, (2012). Managing Authenticity through the Digital Resource Lifecycle. In Italian Research Conference on Digital Libraries IRCDL 2012: Digital Libraries and Archives pp. 249–260, 2013.
InterPARES 3 Project (2009). InterPARES 2 Project Chain of Preservation (COP) Model Metadata.
InterPARES 3 Project, TEAM Canada (2016). General Study 15 – Application Profile For Authenticity Metadata: General study Report. V.2.3.
International Organization for Standardization (2016). ISO 15489-1:2016. Information and documentation – Records management.
MOREAU, L. et al. (2011). The Open Provenance Model Core Specification (v1.1), In Future Generation Computer Systems, Vol. 27 (2), Issue 6. P. 743–756.
National Archives of Australia (2008). Australian Government Recordkeeping Metadata Standard version 2.0.
PREMIS Editorial Committee (2015). PREMIS Data Dictionary for Preservation Metadata. Version 3.0.
ROGERS, C. A literature review of authenticity of records in digital systems from ‘machine-readable’ to records in the cloud (2016).
TENNIS, J. T., ROGERS, C. (2012). Authenticity Metadata and the IPAM: Progress toward the InterPARES Application Profile. In Proc. Int’l Conf. on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications. The Kuching Proceedings.
The InterPARES 2 Project Dictionary (2018).
VEPIS Techninis aprašymas (Specifikacija) (2014). Nr.V2.0.
W3C (2013). Provenance Working Group,
W3C (2013). PROV-O: The PROV Ontology, W3C Recommendation 30 April 2013.
W3C Provenance Incubator Group (2015). Overview of Provenance on the Web.
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Please read the Copyright Notice in Journal Policy


Download data is not yet available.