Within eGovernment, trust in electronic stored information (ESI) is a necessity. In the last decades, most organizations underwent substantial reorganization. The integration of structured data in relational databases has improved documentation of business transactions and increased data quality. That integration has improved accountability as well. Almost 90% of the information that organizations manage is unstructured (e.g., e-mail, documents, multimedia files, etc.). Those files cannot be integrated into a traditional database in an easy way. Like structured data, unstructured ESI in organizations can be denoted as records, when it is meant to be (and used as) evidence for organizational policies, decisions, products, actions and transactions. Stakeholders in eGovernment, like citizens, governments and courts, are making increasing demands for the trustworthiness of this ESI for privacy, evidential and transparency reasons. A theoretical analysis of literature of information, organization and archival science illustrates that for delivering evidence, reconstruction of the past is essential, even in this age of information overload. We want to analyse how Digital Archiving and eDiscovery contribute to the realization of trusted ESI, to the reconstruction of the past and to delivering evidence. Digital Archiving ensures (by implementing and managing the ‘information value chain’) that: [1] ESI can be trusted, that it meets the necessary three dimensions of information: quality, context and relevance, and that [2] trusted ESI meets the remaining fourth dimension of information: survival, so that it is preserved for as long as is necessary (even indefinitely) to comply to privacy, accountability and transparency regulations. EDiscovery is any process (or series of processes) in which (trusted) ESI is sought, located, secured and searched with the intent of using it as evidence in a civil or criminal legal case. A difference between the two mechanisms is that Digital Archiving is implemented ex ante and eDiscovery ex post legal proceedings. The combination of both mechanisms ensures that organizations have a documented understanding of [1] the processing of policies, decisions, products, actions and transactions within (inter-) organizational processes; [2] the way organizations account for those policies, decisions, products, actions and transactions within their business processes; and [3] the reconstruction of policies, decisions, products, actions and transactions from business processes over time. This understanding is extremely important for the realization of eGovernment, for which reconstruction of the past is an essential functionality. Both mechanisms are illustrated with references to practical examples.
In summer 2020, part of a quay wall in Amsterdam collapsed, and in 2010, construction for a parking lot in Amsterdam was hindered by old sewage lines. New sustainable electric systems are being built on top of the foundations of old windmills, in places where industry thrived in the 19th century. All these examples have one point in common: They involve largely unknown and invisible historic underground structures in a densely built historic city. We argue that truly circular building practices in old cities require smart interfaces that allow the circular use of data from the past when planning the future. The continuous use and reuse of the same plots of land stands in stark contrast with the discontinuity and dispersed nature of project-oriented information. Construction and data technology improves, but information about the past is incomplete. We have to break through the lack of historic continuity of data to make building practices truly circular. Future-oriented construction in Amsterdam requires historic knowledge and continuous documentation of interventions and findings over time. A web portal will bring together a range of diverse public and private, professional and citizen stakeholders, each with their own interests and needs. Two creative industry stakeholders, Yume interactive (Yume) and publisher NAI010, come together to work with a major engineering office (Witteveen+Bos), the AMS Institute, the office of Engineering of the Municipality of Amsterdam, UNESCO NL and two faculties of Delft University of Technology (Architecture and Computer Science) to inventorize historic datasets on the Amsterdam underground. The team will connect all the relevant stakeholders to develop a pilot methodology and a web portal connecting historic data sets for use in contemporary and future design. A book publication will document the process and outcomes, highlighting the need for circular practices that tie past, present and future.
