Original Research

Obstacles in the project (2018–2021) of digitising archival records (1921–2019) of enduring value at the University of Fort Hare

Vuyolwethu E. Feni-Fete, Acquinatta N. Zimu-Biyela

Received: 24 Dec. 2025; Accepted: 02 Apr. 2026; Published: 13 Aug. 2026

Copyright: © 2026. The Authors. Licensee: AOSIS.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Abstract

Background: The digitisation of archival records is essential for the preservation of and enhanced access to heritage collections. However, universities, including the University of Fort Hare (UFH), face significant challenges in sustaining effective digitisation initiatives.

Objectives: This study examined the challenges faced in the 2018–2021 project of digitising the archival records of enduring value (1921–2019) at the UFH, focusing on historical records of key university committees such as the Council, Senate, and Audit Committee.

Method: A qualitative interpretive case study design approach was adopted for this study. Data were collected through purposive sampling, using semi-structured interviews with seven participants involved in the project. Observations and document analysis were used to support data triangulation. The study was guided by the Records Continuum Model and the Digital Preservation Triad (DPT).

Results: Of the total of 2254 UFH administrative record folders assessed, only 1693 (75%) records were ready for digitisation.

Conclusion: The project encountered major challenges, including a lack of policy, inadequate resources, and persistent budgetary constraints.

Contribution: The study provides senior management with empirical evidence regarding the need to design and implement strong policies, digitisation standards such as the Open Archival Information System reference model, budget, and partnerships in support of successful archival digitisation.

Keywords: digitisation; archival records; university archives; university committee records; University of Fort Hare.

Introduction

The digitisation of archival records is increasingly recognised as an essential strategy in higher education institutions for ensuring the long-term preservation, accessibility, and usability of valuable heritage collections (Luyombya & Ndagire 2020). Malik (2024) and Khan (2023) agree that safeguarding of the heritage collection is vital – not only for the protection of physical artefacts but also for preserving the shared cultural identity and historical memory of communities. Africa has not been entirely excluded from the global digitisation landscape and has made efforts to integrate into the international digitisation ecosystem. However, due to persistent constraints, including limited technical skills and inadequate financial resources, progress has been comparatively slow. Despite these challenges, notable initiatives have been undertaken. For example, in Africa, numerous academic institutions, including academic libraries, have embarked on digitisation projects for the purpose of long-term preservation, accessibility, and visibility – particularly of institutional repository resources (Masenya 2018). Malik (2024), who regards collaborative projects as important in addressing the complexities of digitisation projects, opines that collaborative digitisation projects of heritage resources for local communities should involve governments, non-governmental organisations, academic institutions, and local communities, with each contributing unique perspectives and resources. An example of such a collaborative digitisation project among African universities is the Association of African Universities (AAU), which involves Rhodes University (South Africa), the University of Nigeria, and the African Digital Library (ADL) (Masenya 2018).

Luyombya and Ndagire (2020) emphasise that universities typically generate records reflective of their institutional functions, and such records serve as evidence of the institutional mandate and accountability. In universities, records are created to fulfil various institutional functions, including administration, teaching, research, and community engagement, all of which require efficient management systems (Ndenje-Sichalwe, Ngulube & Stilwell 2011). These records not only serve as vital evidence of organisational decisions, but also help institutions meet legal, regulatory, and financial requirements, while ensuring accountability and good governance (Cunningham 2008).

For example, Zimmer (2025) reiterates that South African libraries and archive services are now faced with challenges of digitising and preserving historically significant collections that are threatened by degradation challenges. Furthermore, they must ensure that digital surrogates are globally accessible and interoperable.

Consequently, this requires robust solutions that can handle diverse record formats while also meeting international standards such as ISO 19264-1:2021 for image quality and the Federal Agencies Digital Guidelines Initiative (FADGI) for capture process control. It makes sense why Kgamedi and Schellnack-Kelly (2025) recommend the adoption of the Open Archival Information System (OAIS) reference model to guide long-term preservation and retrieval of records for university archives in the Gauteng province of South Africa.

Notwithstanding the significance of digitisation in enhancing accessibility, higher education institutions in Africa often face considerable obstacles in implementing sustainable and effective digitisation practices, including the University of Fort Hare (UFH) archival centres (Dewah & Feni-Fete 2014). For example, Dewah and Feni-Fete’ (2014) study revealed that during the digitisation project of the National Heritage and Cultural Studies Centre (NAHECS) audio-visual collection in 2011, one of the challenges that hindered progress was the lack of a comprehensive digitisation strategy. The focus of this study is on the digitisation of UFH archives (2018–2021). Against this background, this study deemed it important to delve deeper into the obstacles that hindered its completion. This confirms Zimmer’s (2025) view that in many South African libraries and archival centres, the condition of records is dilapidated, requiring digitisation to facilitate accessibility and operability.

Contextual background

Originally founded as the Native College of Fort Hare in 1916, the UFH holds the distinction of being the first South African university established for non-Europeans (Morrow & Gxalabashe 2000). The institution is the repository of two separate important archival repositories, the University Archives and the NAHECS comprising of fine art collection, heritage archives and the archives of liberation movements such as the African National Congress (ANC), Pan Africanist Congress of Azania (PAC), the Black Consciousness Movement of Azania (BCMA), Azania People’s Organisation (AZAPO) (Dewah & Feni-Fete 2014). Dewah and Feni-Fete (2014) lament the ongoing deteriorating condition of the vital historical records of enduring value and their under-utilisation. According to these scholars, this is mainly due to technological limitations, financial constraints, and a lack of systematic records management frameworks that limit the UFH archives’ potential to contribute to ongoing scholarly and educational initiatives (Dewah & Feni-Fete 2014).

Problem statement

Digitising archival records at higher education institutions has become a critically important approach to safeguarding institutional memory, promoting broader access, and ensuring the long-term preservation of heritage materials. However, despite its importance, several South African universities – including the UFH – continue to encounter substantial challenges in establishing sustainable digitisation practices (Kgamedi & Schellnack-Kelly 2025; Ngoepe 2022; Zimmer 2025). For example, Dewah and Feni-Fete (2014:79–83) raise concerns regarding the digitisation function of the sound and image archives, Liberation Movement Archives (LMA) at the UFH, which had to be outsourced to the International Library of African Music (ILAM) at Rhodes University, Grahamstown, due to factors such as inaccessibility issues, the lack of a comprehensive digitisation strategy, scarcity of digitisation skills and funding challenges. However, as indicated by Kavishe and Garabe (2025), this challenge is not unique to the UFH, as in several African universities, there has been little or no improvement in the management of university records.

It is concerning that, despite the UFH holding two historically significant archives – NAHECS and university archives – which can make highly significant contributions to the academic and political legacy of the African continent, efforts to digitise its records remain limited and insufficiently explored. Considering the intensifying demand for digital preservation to improve access, discoverability, and the safeguarding of institutional heritage, the need for this study, which aimed at exploring the specific barriers hindering effective digitisation at the UFH, cannot be over-emphasised. This study explored the challenges encountered in the digitisation of archival records at the UFH, focusing on a digitisation project (2018–2021). The digitisation project targeted the historical records of university committees – including the council, senate, and audit committee – spanning from 1921 to 2019. As one of the oldest and most historically significant African institutions, the UFH archive is a repository of numerous records of enduring value. Given the legacy of the university, preserving its administrative history through digitisation is of national and global significance.

Aim of the study

The aim of this study was to explore the challenges associated with the digitisation of archival records of enduring value (1921–2019) at the UFH, with a specific focus on a digitisation project that was conducted between 2018 and 2021.

Objectives of the study

The objectives of the study were to:

• Identify the types of archival records produced between 1921 and 2019 at the UFH that have been selected for digitisation.
• Examine the processes (strategies and policies) that guide the digitisation of archival records at the UFH.
• Determine the obstacles involved in the implementation of the archival digitisation project of the UFH (2018–2021).
• Provide recommendations for improving digitisation initiatives in university archival settings at the UFH.

Conceptual framework

To gain a deeper understanding of the challenges explored in this study, two interrelated theoretical models were adopted: (1) the Records Continuum Model and (2) the Digital Preservation Triad (DPT). These frameworks offer valuable insights into holistic management and long-term preservation of archival records, particularly in the context of digitisation projects. These models were selected for their complementary benefits, as they both offer theoretical depth and practical application. The Records Continuum Model provides a strong conceptual foundation of understanding records as institutional memory, while the DPT offers a practical framework for analysing the daily challenges of digitisation. Both models are well-established in archival science digital preservation, ensuring that this study was grounded in academic rigour while remaining practically relevant.

The Records Continuum Model, which emerged in the 1990s through the work of Ian MacLean, an Australian archivist and records manager, views recordkeeping as a continuous, integrated process (Xiaomi 2008). Contrary to the traditional lifecycle model, which treats records management and archival processes as separate and sequential, the Records Continuum Model asserts that records exist simultaneously in multiple contexts – creation, use, management, and preservation – across time and space (Ngoepe 2008).

Xiaomi (2008) and Ngoepe (2008) agree that the Records Continuum Model comprises the following four guiding principles:

• Records should be maintained by the creating agency and preserved in their original order.
• Over time, records pass through multiple stages of value.
• Recordkeeping should be continuous rather than segmented.
• Records must be organised hierarchically to reflect their origin and administrative structure.

This approach erases the strict divide between current records and archives, promoting the idea that documents can serve both administrative and historical purposes from the moment of their creation (Xiaomi 2008). This closely aligns with the description of the records continuum of Australian Standard 4390 – the pioneering Australian national standard for records management, published in 1996. The standard describes the records continuum as:

‘… [A] consistent and coherent regime of management processes from the time of the creation of records (and before creation, in the design of recordkeeping systems) through to the preservation and use of records as archives.’ (P1, Xiaomi 2008)

The Records Continuum Model challenges record managers and archivists to manage records and archives in ways that promote social justice, inclusivity, transparency, visibility, and accountability (Upward, McKemmish & Reed 2011).

The DPT, designed by Sandy and Corrado (2018), focuses on three fundamental pillars of digital preservation: (1) management, (2) technology and (3) content.

• Management: Management represented at the apex of the triad, emphasising the importance of institutional support and strategic planning. Without leadership and structured policies, digital preservation initiatives risk failure. Sandy and Corrado (2018) highlight the need for comprehensive documentation, such as governance frameworks, digitisation policies, and preservation protocols, to guide operational practices and instil trust in the digital archive.
• Technology: Although essential, technology is constantly evolving. Preservation professionals should continuously adapt to changes in hardware, software, and storage solutions. Sandy and Corrado (2018) emphasise that the sustainability of digital archives depends on the institutional ability to respond to rapid technological advancements while maintaining access and integrity of digital assets.
• Content: Content serves as the foundation of the triad, driving the relevance and long-term utility of the archive. High-quality, well-selected content ensures that digital archives remain valuable to users over time. The significance of content is reflected in the definition of digital preservation by the Alliance Permanent Access to the Records of Science in Europe Network (APARSEN), which describes DPT content as ‘… a comprehensive set of lifecycle management and appraisal activities to ensure current and future use of digital assets’ (Sandy & Corrado 2018:9).

The DPT complements the Records Continuum Model by supporting four core archival functions: (1) selection and acquisition, (2) arrangement and description, (3) reference and access, and (4) preservation and disposal (Ngoepe 2008). The two models are linked by the critical element of appraisal, which involves evaluating a document’s significance based on factors such as its origin, purpose, creator, and required retention period (Ngoepe 2008; Sandy & Corrado 2018).

Masenya and Ngulube (2020) and Masenya (2018) reiterate the importance of a well-established digital triad framework that comprises the three key elements of: (1) a sustainable digital preservation as management-related activities, (2) technological-related activities, and (3) content-centred activities.

Literature review

The literature review serves to integrate existing findings, identify key issues, critique prior studies, and establish connections relevant to the topic under investigation (Creswell & Creswell 2018). In this context, the discussion is guided by the objectives of the study.

Digitising archival records

Archival records, which vary widely in form, function, and historical significance, are often selected for digitisation based on their enduring value. According to Gilliland-Swetland (2000), records of enduring value are those that continue to serve as evidence of institutional operations, legal obligations, or cultural heritage over time. These typically include administrative documents, governance records (council and committee minutes), academic materials (curricula, examination records, and theses), and student-related files (enrolment registers, graduation records, and alumni correspondence).

The identification of record types ensures compliance with legal and ethical considerations, particularly when handling sensitive or confidential information in personnel or student records (National Archives and Records Service of South Africa 2006). The reviewed literature highlights that proper selection and categorisation are critical first steps in digitisation projects, as they influence project planning, cost management, and the overall sustainability of digital archives (Huang, Nie & Zhao 2020). For example, Zimmer (2025) posits that during the pilot digitisation project of South African university theses and historical papers, document selection was guided by preservation urgency (i.e. degree of physical decay), demand for access, and institutional digitisation priorities. The Digitisation Policy of Western Cape Governmental Bodies argues that the selection of materials for digitisation must be guided by strategic priorities, such as historical significance, demand, access restrictions, vulnerability, and technological obsolescence (Western Cape Government, Department of Cultural Affairs and Sport 2017). Moreover, materials already digitised elsewhere, or those of limited value or accessibility, should not be prioritised. Before proceeding with digitisation, memory institutions must address intellectual property (IP) rights accordingly.

Zimu-Biyela (2022) reiterates that copyright issues must be investigated to ensure that IP rights are granted before digitisation is executed. Memory institutions need to identify all content that is part of the project, including copyright holders, to ensure that permission is granted to digitise their IP. It is under this premise that the DPT model was adopted for this study because of its focus on three important elements: (1) management, (2) technology, and (3) content. Equally important is the Records Continuum Model (see Table 1) and its focus on four important elements: (1) identification and acquisition, (2) intellectual control, (3) access, and (4) physical control (Zimu-Biyela 2022). The DPT element of content and identification and acquisition element helped in articulating objective one for this study, as it aimed to understand the types of archival records that were selected for digitisation and the rationale behind that.

Processes (strategies and policies)

A strategy refers to a plan outlining how goals will be achieved, providing direction on the coordination and implementation of multiple inputs, options, and outputs to accomplish policy goals and objectives (Masenya & Ngulube 2020). Furthermore, Masenya and Ngulube (2020) point out that strategies should also guide the organisation in determining the time frame for preserving various types of digital content, as stipulated in preservation policies. In other words, strategies play a critical role in achieving policy goals.

Multiple studies raise concerns regarding the lack of well-planned policies, strategies, and standards that guide digitisation projects – particularly in African institutions. For example, Matlala, Ncube, and Parbanath (2022) raise concerns that African institutions, particularly those in South Africa, continue to lack strategies and appropriate technological tools for sustainable digital preservation. In addition, Kgamedi’s (2023) study revealed challenges faced by university archives in Gauteng (South Africa), including the absence of formal digital preservation workflows, policies, and technical expertise, insufficient digital storage facilities and software, and limited archivist involvement in digitisation efforts. The study recommended the implementation of strategic interventions in support of digital preservation, including the development of robust digitisation policies, the upgrading of infrastructure, and the strengthening of collaboration between archives and information and communication technology (ICT) departments (Kgamedi 2023).

Masenya and Ngulube (2020) emphasise the importance of alignment between institutional preservation policies and national legislation, such as the National Archives and Records Service of South Africa Act, No. 43 of 1996 (Republic of South Africa 1996) and the application of South African national records management standards by governmental bodies within the framework of the National Archives and Records Service of South Africa Act, 1996 (National Archives and Records Service of South Africa Act 2006). The retention periods for records, whether short-, medium-, or long-term, must be clearly defined to ensure sustainable preservation. Kalusopa (2018, 167) supports this view, arguing for the establishment of national technical committees, with inclusive stakeholder representation, responsible for drafting digital preservation policies.

Dewah and Feni-Fete (2014) assert that different types of standards may be used for different types of resources, pointing out that there are six types of metadata standards that are important for digitisation of records – that is, administrative, descriptive, structural, technical, use, and preservation standards. According to Kgamedi (2023) and Masenya (2018), the OAIS is the commonly used international standard in the development of digital archives, digital libraries, and digital repositories. It guides the long-term preservation of digital materials. It is important for archival managers to apply the OAIS principles, which promote open access digitisation processes in line with the OAIS model. The model facilitates the migration of records as and when needed to facilitate long-term access (Kgamedi 2023; Masenya 2018).

In this context, the Records Continuum Model (see Table 1) was adopted because it advocates for the integrated approach when managing records and archives. According to Xiaomi (2008), it helps in the understanding of content, technological infrastructure, standards, best-practice criteria, interdisciplinary approaches, collaborations, and management processes needed for recordkeeping and archiving processes for both paper and digital worlds.

Challenges in digitisation projects

While digitisation presents numerous opportunities, scholars have noted persistent challenges, particularly in the African context. As inferred earlier, concerns regarding the dearth of digitisation policies, standards, and strategies have been highlighted by many studies (Balogun & Kalusopa 2021; Masenya & Ngulube 2020; Matlala et al. 2022).

Kalusopa (2018) and De La Porte and Higgs (2019) highlight infrastructural weaknesses in technology and telecommunications as barriers to successful digitisation. In addition, Tsvuura and Ngulube (2020) point to weak legislative frameworks that compromise the preservation of vital digital records.

De La Porte and Higgs (2019) identify the following risks in digitisation projects:

• Technological obsolescence (technical challenges)
• Limited sustainability of digital services
• Interoperability issues
• Human capital shortages

De La Porte and Higgs (2019) lament that most heritage institutions suffer from limited technical expertise, insufficient staffing, and inadequate staff training. This situation is compounded by budgetary constraints, making it difficult to implement comprehensive digitisation projects. It is not clear if the records management processes at the UFH are guided by the well-planned digitisation strategies and policies, which is exactly what this study aimed to determine.

Research methods and design

This study adopted a social constructivist research paradigm approach because it promotes the understanding of research from the perspectives of both the researcher and the participants (Kim 2014). A qualitative case study design research approach was employed because of its focus on exploring a central phenomenon by employing open-ended questions that allow for detailed insights and the emergence of meaningful themes (Creswell & Creswell 2018). This approach encourages participants to share their perspectives and experiences in their own words, providing a rich narrative grounded in context (Creswell & Creswell 2018). This design was deemed important because it allowed one of the researchers and authors, who serves as an academic and Records Management Coordinator, to use a practitioner-based inquiry data collection method involving observation and analysis. The aim was to assess the integrity of the targeted UFH administrative records to determine whether they were ready for the digitisation process. The focus was on the series and sub-series of the university committees’ historical records, including the council, senate, audit committee, and deans’ forums (1921–2019). These series records included agendas, minutes, and annexures of various UFH committees.

In addition, this study aimed to establish if there was a programme that guided the digitisation project. Objective two was considered important because findings of a study that was conducted by Dewah and Feni-Fete (2014) revealed that in the 2011 digitisation project, almost all the NAHECS audio and sound recordings were digitised offsite by the ILAM in Rhodes University, Grahamstown, as there was no digitisation programme and policy to guide the process. It is under this premise that Garaba (2012) suggests that UFH, as a historic and iconic university, must strive to make its records visible and accessible by digitising them, particularly those from the NAHECS (Dewah & Feni-Fete 2014:79).

For this study, a purposive census sampling method was used because all seven UFH staff members who were directly involved in the digitisation project (2018–2021) from its inception became sources of information (Maharaja 2020). The use of small samples to gather substantive data for qualitative studies is supported by Creswell and Creswell (2018). Given that the use of all the personnel who participated in the project is considered appropriate for this study. These participants were selected based on their extensive knowledge and hands-on involvement in the project. The profile of the participants is described in Table 2.

Primary data were collected through semi-structured interviews and observation methods. The latter method helped in triangulating and strengthening data. Document analysis helped in gathering secondary data. For example, Cook (2010), as cited in Zimu-Biyela (2022), asserts that in records and archival management, the issue of context remains critical even in the 21st century, such as where, when, how, and why and what changes have taken place with the record over time and why. In this context, the provenance principle was considered crucial.

Data were analysed thematically in line with the objectives of the study. Thematic analysis was guided by Braun and Clarke’s (2006) steps, such as: (1) familiarisation with data, (2) generation of initial codes, (3) searching for themes, (4) reviewing of themes, (5) defining and naming of themes, and (6) producing the report (Vaismoradi, Turunen & Bondas 2013:402). Document and content analysis were guided by Elo and Kyngäs’s (2008) steps as cited in Vaismoradi et al. (2013:402). The steps include: (1) selection and preparation of folders, including the assessment of records to establish their integrity and completeness in terms of provenance, such as who made it, where, when, how, and why, and what changes have taken place with the record over time and why; (2) organising and open coding of records according to categories and sub-categories in line with the objectives of the study; and (3) reporting the analysis in line with categories and sub-categories that were used (Vaismoradi et al. 2013:402).

The study adhered to the UFH’s research ethics policy. The ethical clearance was obtained from the UFH Inter-Faculty Research Ethics Committee (IFREC). In addition, to help protect the participants’ integrity, they were reassured by the insider researcher that their personal identification information was not going to be used, but only biographical information related to their gender, age range, qualification, work, and digitisation experience was required. To protect their identity, their answers would be coded.

Participants were informed that interviews would be transcribed for later use. Following that, they were then asked to sign the consent form. Before signing the consent form, the information sheet was used to explain the purpose and objectives of the study. Notwithstanding the significance of the study, it was clearly explained that they have the right to decline to participate or withdraw from the study, even after signing the consent form. They were also informed that they were not obliged to answer all the questions if they felt uncomfortable or did not wish to.

Validity and reliability of the study

Maher et al. (2018) argue that trustworthiness is considered more appropriate in evaluating qualitative studies. It comprises four elements: credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. Credibility ensures that the study measures what it intends to. Transferability refers to the ability of the findings of the study to be transferred to other contexts. Dependability ensures that the findings of the study are explained in detail to assist other researchers in repeating the work. Confirmability helps in minimising researcher bias by acknowledging the study’s limitations. To strengthen the trustworthiness of this study, triangulation of methods was used, including semi-structured interviews, observation, and document analysis. The objectives of the study helped ensure that the study measures what it purported to. In addition, the DPT and Records Continuum Model helped in assessing whether the operational plan aligned with the recommended principles and standards of digitisation processes.

Ethical considerations

Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the Inter-Faculty Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of Fort Hare (Ref. No. FEN001-23 [Project]).

Results

Findings are presented in line with the objectives of the study, which were to: (1) understand the types of archival records prioritised for digitisation (2018–2021), (2) examine the processes (strategies and policies) that guide the digitisation of archival records at the UFH, and (3) determine the obstacles of the UFH archival digitisation project (2018–2021).

Archival records for the digitisation project at the University of Fort Hare (1921–2019)

Objective one focused on gaining insight regarding the type of records that were prioritised for the digitisation project (2018–2021) and the rationale behind that.

Participant 6 indicated that:

‘The focus was on paper-based records of committees (1921–2019), including Council, SENEX, ARDRI, Deans Forums, and other committees. This included the series and sub-series of agendas, minutes, and appendices.’ (Participant 6, Male, Project Manger [Senior Archivist])

When asked about the reason for prioritising these types of records.

Participant 6 indicated that:

‘These records are prioritised because of their evidential value about the political-historical university management activities that took place at the time. In addition, these records are paper-based, and their condition was deteriorating and thus needs to be saved by digitising them.’ (Participant 6, Male, Project Manger [Senior Archivist])

The insider researcher also observed the deteriorating condition of the records, hence the need for digitisation.

Participant 6 further indicated that prior to the implementation phase, two workshops were held to prepare archivists and records managers on the arrangement, description, and evaluation of records. The results indicated that the archival team successfully sorted almost half of the targeted records. In this context, ‘sorting’ entailed implementing preservation measures, including removing metal fasteners and rehousing the documents in new acid-free folders. The contents of each folder were carefully organised to maintain the chronological order of record creation. These folders were subsequently grouped into distinct collections and, in some cases, incorporated into previously sorted but incomplete collections to ensure their completion. The arrangement of the standalone folders was undertaken to re-establish the original order. Establishing original order involved identifying record series and the interrelationships among records within each series and sub-series. To ensure adherence to the principle of original order, the team engaged in continuous consultation with the Project Manager (Senior Archivist) regarding existing records management and current archival arrangement principles and practices.

Participant 6 also indicated his disappointment that the project could not proceed with the actual digitisation phase due to the challenges of limited or inadequate financial and material resources, a shortage of skilled personnel, and the absence of a well-planned digitisation policy. It is concerning that similar challenges prevented the digitisation project of the NAHECS at the UFH from reaching its completion stage between 2011 and 2012 (Dewah & Feni-Fete 2014). These challenges suggest that the UFH is not unique, but rather reflects broader difficulties and challenges encountered by other digitisation projects across Africa.

Lack of digitisation strategy and policy framework

Objective two aimed to assess processes (strategies and policies) that guide the digitisation of archival records at the UFH. When participants were asked about the availability of digitisation policy, the following verbatim responses confirmed what was expected.

Participant 2 reported that:

‘There was no digitisation policy that guided them in the digitisation project’. (Participant 2, Female, Student Archivist)

Participant 4 similarly observed:

‘A digitisation policy to guide them through the project was absent’. (Participant 4, Male, Graduate Archivist)

Participant 6 further confirmed this concern, stating:

‘The project was undertaken without a guiding digitisation policy’. (Participant 6, Male, Project Manger [Senior Archivist])

These responses are concerning, as the absence of policies renders the digital archive fragile, prone to errors, and unsustainable over time, thereby undermining the fundamental purpose of digitisation as a tool for preservation and access. Without clear institutional guidelines, the project operated without defined procedures for selection, digitisation standards, metadata creation, and digital storage.

Masenya and Ngulube (2020) assert that the absence of institutional digitisation strategies often results in fragmented efforts and missed opportunities for preserving and accessing archival content. Policies are not only essential for setting technical benchmarks, such as image resolution, metadata schema, and file formats, but also for aligning digitisation initiatives with broader institutional and national archival mandates. Additionally, Matlala et al. (2022) observe that numerous South African institutions continue to digitise records without proper policy frameworks, making it difficult to ensure legal compliance, resource allocation, and technological sustainability. This undermines the authenticity, reliability, and long-term accessibility of digital records. Based on the foregoing information, it can be concluded that the absence of a comprehensive digitisation strategy at the UFH not only stalled the progress of the digitisation project but also jeopardised its sustainability and its ability to serve scholarly, administrative, and heritage functions in the future.

Technical skills and expertise of the digitisation team

Objective three was intended to establish the obstacles that hindered the progress of the UFH digitisation project (2018–2021). As indicated in Table 2, the results indicated that the digitisation project at the UFH was largely executed by recently graduated professionals who were appointed on a temporary basis for the duration of the digitisation initiative. Although these individuals demonstrated commendable enthusiasm and possessed relevant academic knowledge, they lacked practical experience in handling large-scale archival digitisation processes. This limitation posed challenges in the effective management of the technical and organisational complexities of the project. However, under the supervision of a seasoned archives and records management expert, the team was able to focus on establishing a systematic structure and organisation of the archival materials. This foundational step was vital for the success of the digitisation process, as emphasised by Huang et al. (2020), who assert that well-organised archives are crucial for ensuring long-term preservation of historical records and enhancing access to these records.

University archives unit capacity

A major obstacle identified in the study was the absence of a fully functional and institutionalised archives management unit at the UFH, which broke the Records Continuum Model. Instead of records moving seamlessly from creation through long-term access, they were left unmanaged at the early stages, thereby making effective digitisation practically impossible. The other contributory factors to the destabilisation of the Records Continuum Model and the DPT – particularly the management pillar – were the lack of a permanent, professionally trained university archivist, and an insufficient number of skilled archival staff. These factors emerged as significant impediments to the digitisation project. Additionally, the inadequacies in professional infrastructure impeded essential preparatory activities, including appraisal, organisation, and cataloguing of archival materials – processes that are critical to effective and sustainable digitisation.

As emphasised by Huang et al. (2020), without qualified archival personnel, institutions are more likely to experience disorganisation in their archival systems, which compromises the efficiency of records retrieval and undermines the long-term preservation of valuable documents. In the case of the UFH, the limited institutional capacity in the existing archives unit risks further marginalising historically significant collections, reducing their accessibility to academics, researchers, and other stakeholders who depend on these records for scholarly and heritage-related pursuits.

Discussion

This section interprets the result in line with the objectives of the study. For example, Objective one aimed to understand the types of records that were prioritised and the reason behind that. Results confirmed that paper-based records were prioritised because of their evidential value, and their condition was deteriorating and thus had to be saved before they got worse. As already inferred, the Western Cape Government, Department of Cultural Affairs and Sport (2017) underscores that the selection of records for the digitisation project must be guided by their historical significance, demand, access restrictions, vulnerability, and technological obsolescence.

Furthermore, results indicated that preparation plans also entailed engaging participants in a workshop to prepare them for the appraisal of records. Thereafter, records were arranged according to their series and sub-series orders, gaps identified and addressed accordingly. The appraisal process was done in consultation with the Project Manager (Senior Archivist). Of the total of 2254 record folders assessed, only 1693 (75%) records were appraised and made ready for digitisation. The advantage of adopting the Records Continuum Model for this study is that it allows flexibility in the management of archives and records in the 21st century (2026). This model supports recordkeeping as a continuous, integrated process (Xiaomi 2008); hence, records were appraised prior to the digitisation process.

In line with Objective two, the results revealed that there was no digitisation programme or policy that guided the project. Challenges that emerged indicated that the project was not properly planned, largely executed by the newly graduated professionals who were not sufficiently skilled in the digitisation expertise, despite the fact that some were part of the NAHECS digitisation project that was conducted in 2011. Similarly, the permanent staff lacked digitisation skills. The other critical factor that hindered progress was weak planning and a limited budget to sustain the project to its completion.

Recommendations

Therefore, in line with the DPT and Records Continuum Model principles which were adopted, this study recommends that the UFH records management centre must invest in the:

• Proper planning and establishment of a strategic digitisation programme that can prioritise the digitisation of records in line with the institutional needs, and the deteriorating condition of records. In addition, the programme must take cognisance of national and international digitisation standards such as the OAIS reference model (Kgaledi & Schellnack-Kelly 2025). For example, Zimmer (2025) recommends the use of international standards such as ISO 19264-1:2021 for image quality, and FADGI for capture process control.
• Human resources development in digitisation skills and competencies.
• Technological infrastructure development that takes cognisance of challenges of obsolescence over a specific period.
• Strategic collaboration with digitisation experts and experienced institutions (Tenley 2024).
• Sufficient budgeting that will cater for the project’s needs throughout the time frame.

Limitations and delimitations of the study

According to Theofanidis and Fountouki (2019), limitations of the study refer to potential weaknesses that are, in most cases, beyond the researcher’s control, but closely associated with the chosen research design, statistical model constraints, funding constraints, and other related factors. Delimitations refer to intentional boundaries set by the researcher to define the scope of the study, such as the study’s title, aim and objectives, research methodology, and theoretical and conceptual framework. Delimitations are not as much about ‘why I did this’ but rather ‘why I did not do this’.

The limitations of this study included the sample size, as only a small number of participants were involved in the study. They comprised five archivists, one of whom was the Project Manager (Senior Archivist), one an ICT staff member, and one was the grant funding coordinator. The ICT specialist provided advice regarding digitisation equipment that was to be procured and hired. The grant funding coordinator was responsible for monitoring and reporting on expenditures. But their roles were not realised as the collection had to go through the appraisal process first. It is apparent that the success of the digitisation project is dependent on partnership with other disciplines such as ICTs and metadata capturers.

Dewah and Feni-Fete (2014) underline that digitising the university’s fast deteriorating paper-based archives is crucial in facilitating access and visibility, as these records carry the history of the organisation. One delimitation for the study was its focus on paper-based records at the expense of born-digital records. Dewah and Feni-Fete argue that the born-digital records are predominantly housed at the NAHECS. Kgamedi and Schellnack-Kelly (2025) describe born-digital records as those created in digital form without an analogue equivalent, requiring distinct preservation methods compared to digitised physical records. The themes for the meeting agendas and minutes were not clearly articulated, except for an indication that the types of records were the agendas and minutes of the university administrative records. The types of questions that were asked do not help the reader to clearly understand the type of technological infrastructure that existed or was to be procured in preparation for the digitisation project. Put differently, the planning procedures in terms of workflow are not clearly articulated.

In addition, the study relied on a qualitative approach. It is envisaged that it would benefit more from the quantitative approach. For example, for objective one, it would be interesting to learn how many folders were deteriorating faster and how many had provenance gaps relative to their counterparts.

Conclusion

Digitisation is important for long-term preservation, visibility, and accessibility of both paper-based and digitally born records. Notwithstanding, its importance, literature indicates that many universities in South Africa including the University of Fort Hare continue to face challenges in maintaining sustainable digitisation practices (Kgamedi & Schellnack-Kelly 2025). The UFH archival centre and it’s National Heritage and Cultural Studies Centre (NAHECS) both comprise of records that are of national and global significance yet not sufficiently visible and accessible. It is concerning that it has had two digitisation projects, the NAHECS (2011) and the UFH Archival Centre (2018–2021) which both did not yield positive results. This has been due to various reasons such as lack of financial resources, lack of skills and most importantly lack of a comprehensive digitisation strategy. Based on that, this study concludes that for the successful digitisation projects, the UFH needs to implement strategic interventions in support of digital preservation, such as the development of robust digitisation policies, infrastructure, skilled human resources, and the strengthening of collaboration between archives and ICT departments (Kgamedi 2023).

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank everyone who participated in data collection, such as the University of Fort Hare senior archivist, the records managers, and students who were involved in the digitisation project (2018–2021).

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.

CRediT authorship contribution

Vuyolwethu E. Feni- Fete: Conceptualisation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Visualisation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Acquinatta N. Zimu-Biyela: Conceptualisation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Visualisation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. All authors reviewed the article, contributed to the discussion of results, approved the final version for submission and publication, and take responsibility for the integrity of its findings.

Funding information

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are not openly available as it contains information that could compromise the privacy of research participants. The data are available from the corresponding author, Acquinatta N. Zimu-Biyela, upon reasonable request.

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and are the product of professional research. They do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated institution, funder, agency, or the publisher. The authors are responsible for the article’s results, findings, and content.

References