Supporting Capacity Building for Archives in Africa: initiatives of the Cooperative Africana Materials Project (CAMP) since 1995

Abstract

IntroductionIn May 1963, discussions between the African Studies Association (U.S.), the Midwest Interlibrary Center (now Center for Research Libraries), and Africana librarians from twelve North American institutions helped create the Cooperative Africana Microform Project (CAMP). Owing to the rise in digital information and preservation formats, CAMP renamed itself the Cooperative Africana Materials Project in 2010. Its mission has been to collect and preserve African newspapers, serials, and ephemera not typically held at U.S. institutions. As its original name suggests, microfilming continues to be an important method of preserving CAMP holdings. While building the collection involved some direct purchases of microfilm from Africa and Europe, the role of collaboration among U.S. and later African institutions enhanced collections and expanded the scope of CAMP's work. The history of these initiatives prior to 1995 has been documented by several CAMP members.2Expanding on these writings, this article will examine collaboration efforts between CAMP and African archives giving particular interest to history and political economy. Issues concerning access, collection, and preservation of African archival materials continue to reflect the legacy of colonialism. CAMP has tried to carefully navigate these unequal power relations. Through collaboration, it seeks access and preservation of African materials for institutions and scholars residing largely in the Global North. However, collaboration between institutions in the Global North and South may still appear as one-way flows of information. African archival materials, in physical and increasingly digital forms, continue to experience this dynamic. With this in mind, CAMP-funded initiatives undertake preservation in situ or return preserved materials to their home African institution(s). In return, CAMP asks that its members be granted microfilm or digital access to these materials. While this arrangement has worked between CAMP and numerous African institutions, it has not suited others. Initiating projects in African countries with strict legislation protecting the export of national cultural heritage remains difficult. With the growth of projects digitising African heritage, tensions persist between protective policies of African governments opposing a "virtual stampede" (Lalu, 2007) versus seemingly greater access for all.African archives, like African mineral resources, are a commodity usually exchanged unequally between the Global North and South. The rise of digitisation projects, funded by U.S. and European institutions, may continue to make Africans largely consumers and not producers of their own documentary heritage. One way to mitigate this problem is supporting capacity building for self-sustaining African preservation efforts. CAMP pursued this model beginning in the 1990s. Resources were first directed to the National Archives of Senegal to support microfilm equipment purchase and onsite training. Starting in 2010, CAMP again funded onsite stafftraining and equipment purchases to digitally preserve the Kabarole District Archives in western Uganda. These efforts suggest thoughtful capacity building initiatives may expand African-initiated archival projects. Even with the conscientious work of CAMP librarians and scholars, the history and political economy of preservation and access to African archival materials remain contentious.Political Economy of Archives in AfricaLibraries and archives are social constructs. They are created and informed by present economic, social, and political conditions as much as the histories they claim to represent. Archival materials are also commodities, reflecting the social relations of capitalist exchange throughout much of the world. As South African archivist Michele Pickover suggests, archives are sought-after commodities, the soul of which is a fragmented construct of the past. Archives are really not so much about what information they contain, but how that information can be used, hidden, or destroyed to suit the needs of ordinary individuals, researchers, archivists, Capital and the State (2005). …