{"title":"Recordkeeping for accountability","authors":"D. Wallace","doi":"10.4314/ESARJO.V23I1.30960","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Records and archives are sources of evidence of human agency. They are a form of “social glue” which holds together, sustains, and sometimes unravels organizations, governments, communities, individuals, and societies. This notion of records and archives as a form of “social glue” can be viewed from many perspectives – as cultural memory, as evidence of a decision trail, as a trigger for deliberative action, as a requirement to meet regulatory obligations, and so on. \n\nAn essential aspect emanating from these perspectives is that records and archives are vehicles supporting accountability. However, the often determinative role that records and archives frequently play in the social construction of accountability are mostly muted within the larger narratives they participate in. While records and archives frequently provide the scaffolding for the stories relayed and sometimes even play central roles, rarely are they explicitly surfaced as accountability objects necessitating concentrated attention. Instead they are subsumed as objects that help to tell “the story” and not as active devices that implicate what kind of story may even be able to be told in the first place. The experiences of South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission in its efforts to document the crimes of apartheid are demonstrative here. This obscuring of the accountability dimensions played by recordkeeping and archiving limits societal understanding of how they can and do profoundly shape social interactions and memories of them. In that regard, records and archives are worthy of concentrated examination on their own terms in relation to how they enable, enforce, limit, ignore, and deny accountability.\n ESARBICA Journal Vol.23 2004: 17-22","PeriodicalId":125371,"journal":{"name":"ESARBICA Journal: Journal of the Eastern and Southern Africa Regional Branch of the International Council on Archives","volume":"434 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ESARBICA Journal: Journal of the Eastern and Southern Africa Regional Branch of the International Council on Archives","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/ESARJO.V23I1.30960","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Records and archives are sources of evidence of human agency. They are a form of “social glue” which holds together, sustains, and sometimes unravels organizations, governments, communities, individuals, and societies. This notion of records and archives as a form of “social glue” can be viewed from many perspectives – as cultural memory, as evidence of a decision trail, as a trigger for deliberative action, as a requirement to meet regulatory obligations, and so on. An essential aspect emanating from these perspectives is that records and archives are vehicles supporting accountability. However, the often determinative role that records and archives frequently play in the social construction of accountability are mostly muted within the larger narratives they participate in. While records and archives frequently provide the scaffolding for the stories relayed and sometimes even play central roles, rarely are they explicitly surfaced as accountability objects necessitating concentrated attention. Instead they are subsumed as objects that help to tell “the story” and not as active devices that implicate what kind of story may even be able to be told in the first place. The experiences of South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission in its efforts to document the crimes of apartheid are demonstrative here. This obscuring of the accountability dimensions played by recordkeeping and archiving limits societal understanding of how they can and do profoundly shape social interactions and memories of them. In that regard, records and archives are worthy of concentrated examination on their own terms in relation to how they enable, enforce, limit, ignore, and deny accountability. ESARBICA Journal Vol.23 2004: 17-22
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
为问责制保存记录
记录和档案是人类能动性的证据来源。它们是一种“社会粘合剂”,将组织、政府、社区、个人和社会凝聚在一起,维持下去,有时也会瓦解。记录和档案作为一种“社会粘合剂”的概念可以从许多角度来看待-作为文化记忆,作为决策线索的证据,作为审议行动的触发因素,作为满足监管义务的要求,等等。从这些观点中产生的一个重要方面是,记录和档案是支持责任的工具。然而,记录和档案在社会责任建设中经常发挥的决定性作用,在它们参与的更大的叙述中大多是沉默的。虽然记录和档案经常为故事的传播提供支撑,有时甚至发挥核心作用,但它们很少作为需要集中关注的问责对象明确出现。相反,它们被归类为帮助讲述“故事”的对象,而不是暗示一开始可以讲述什么样的故事的主动设备。南非真相与和解委员会在努力记录种族隔离罪行方面的经验在这里具有示范意义。这种对记录保存和存档所扮演的责任维度的模糊限制了社会对它们如何能够和确实深刻地塑造社会互动和对它们的记忆的理解。在这方面,记录和档案值得按其本身的条件进行集中审查,以了解它们如何使责任得以实现、执行、限制、忽视和否认责任。生物医学工程学报Vol.23 2004: 17-22
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Factors influencing access to archives at Botswana National Archives and Records Services Records management in an ISO certified environment: a case study of Botho University in Botswana Infrastructure for the implementation of artificial intelligence to support records management at the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research in South Africa Embedding digital preservation strategies in the management of institutional repositories in South Africa Digital records management practices in the public sector in Manicaland Province of Zimbabwe
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1