Bridging Global Standards and Local Contexts: A Hybrid Metadata Framework for ASEAN GLAM Institutions

Wirapong Chansanam; Treepidok Ngootip; Kanyarat Kwiecien; Kulthida Tuamsuk; Chunqiu Li

doi:10.23106/dcmi.952566549

Wirapong Chansanam ¹

Treepidok Ngootip ¹

Kanyarat Kwiecien ¹

Kulthida Tuamsuk ¹

Chunqiu Li ²

1 Khon Kaen University, Thailand

2 Beijing Normal University, China

Abstract

This study addresses the persistent challenges of metadata interoperability and cultural inclusivity within Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Museums (GLAM) institutions in the ASEAN region. It proposes a hybrid metadata framework that integrates international standards—such as Dublin Core, CIDOC-CRM, and EAD—with culturally responsive elements including indigenous protocols, multilingual support, and post-custodial metadata practices. Employing a mixed-methods approach, the research combined thematic analysis of existing metadata practices with case studies on Indonesian and Thai heritage collections. The resulting framework, implemented in the ASEAN GLAM Repositories prototype system, features modular metadata categories and technologies such as OAI-PMH, JSON API, and blockchain-based provenance tracking. Evaluation results indicate the framework preserves 98% metadata integrity, supports 47 minority languages across six scripts, and significantly enhances cross-institutional interoperability and user engagement. The findings demonstrate that ethical, context-aware metadata design is both feasible and impactful for digital heritage management. This study contributes a scalable model for inclusive and sustainable metadata practices, with broad applicability for global GLAM environments seeking to balance technical rigor with cultural sensitivity.

1Introduction

The digital transformation of cultural heritage institutions presents both opportunities and challenges, especially for the Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Museums (GLAM) sector in ASEAN countries. While global metadata standards like Dublin Core and CIDOC-CRM enhance interoperability, they often fall short in capturing the cultural specificities of non-Western contexts. Consequently, this study addresses critical gaps in metadata integration by proposing a hybrid metadata framework tailored to ASEAN GLAM institutions, combining international standards with culturally responsive descriptors [1], [2], [3].

2Methods

A mixed-method approach was adopted, incorporating systematic literature review, thematic analysis of metadata practices, and framework development. Metadata standards such as Dublin Core, EAD, FOAF, and CIDOC-CRM were analyzed alongside community-informed practices including indigenous protocols and post-custodial metadata. Case studies involving Indonesian colonial records and Thai multilingual archives informed the hybrid framework. The metadata model was implemented within the ASEAN GLAM Repositories system, utilizing OAI-PMH, JSON API, and blockchain for provenance tracking.

3Results

The resulting metadata framework encompasses core categories (Title, Creator, Format), repository-specific elements (e.g., Art Style, ISBN, Provenance), and extended components (e.g., Accessibility, Legal, Cultural metadata). It supports 47 minority languages across six scripts and preserves 98% metadata integrity. The ASEAN GLAM Repositories prototype demonstrated improved discoverability, user engagement, and cross-institutional interoperability. Integration with FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) was achieved through persistent identifiers, semantic mappings, multilingual vocabularies, and provenance tracking using PREMIS and blockchain [4], [5], [6].

4Discussion

This research advances current metadata scholarship by bridging the divide between standardized interoperability and cultural contextualization. Unlike prior works that focus solely on technical standards [7], [8], this framework operationalizes ethical and participatory approaches to metadata creation, informed by Caswell's liberatory metadata [9] and Cui et al.'s participatory archiving [10]. The modular design enables adaptation across GLAM domains while supporting user-generated content and local knowledge systems. However, challenges remain in scalability and institutional readiness, necessitating further empirical validation.

5Conclusion

This study offers a replicable and scalable metadata framework that addresses both technical and cultural dimensions of digital heritage management. The ASEAN GLAM Repositories system illustrates how combining global standards with local innovations can promote ethical stewardship, inclusivity, and sustainable digital preservation. Future work should explore AI-assisted metadata tools and broader cross-regional validation to enhance applicability and impact.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Fundamental Fund of Khon Kaen University. The research titled "Digital platform for cultural knowledge resources in GLAM for ASEAN" also received funding from the National Science, Research, and Innovation Fund (NSRF).

References

Candela, G. (2023). Towards a semantic approach in GLAM Labs: The case of the Data Foundry at the National Library of Scotland. Journal of Information Science. doi:10.1177/01655515231174386

Hendrawan, M. R.; Isa, A. M.; Samsudin, A. Z. H. (2024). Metadata interoperability for cultural heritage digital repositories: A case study in Indonesian world heritage site memory institutions. Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci., 14(8), 545-561. doi:10.6007/IJARBSS/v14-i8/22226

Laksmi, L.; Suhendra, M. F.; Shuhidan, S. M.; Umanto, U. (2024). The readiness to implement digital humanities data curation of four institutional repositories in Indonesia. Digital Library Perspectives, 40(1), 80-95. doi:10.1108/DLP-04-2023-0031

Wang, Q.; Zhu, F.; Ji, S.; Ren, Y. (2020). Secure provenance of electronic records based on blockchain. Computers, Materials & Continua, 65(2). doi:10.32604/cmc.2020.07366

Zeng, M. L.; Qin, J. (2020). Metadata. American Library Association.

Bettivia, R.; Cheng, Y. Y.; Gryk, M. R. (2022). Documenting the Future: Navigating Provenance Metadata Standards. Springer.

Baca, M. (2016). Introduction to Metadata. Getty Publications.

Massari, A.; Peroni, S. (2024). HERITRACE: Tracing evolution and bridging data for streamlined curatorial work in the GLAM domain. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2402.00477.

Caswell, M. (2021). Urgent Archives: Enacting Liberatory Memory Work. Routledge.

10.

Cui, C.; Pinfield, S.; Cox, A.; Hopfgartner, F. (2023). Participatory web archiving: multifaceted challenges. Proc. Int. Conf. on Information, 79-87. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-28035-1_7

[ref-candela2023] 1.
Candela, G. (2023). Towards a semantic approach in GLAM Labs: The case of the Data Foundry at the National Library of Scotland. Journal of Information Science. doi:10.1177/01655515231174386

[ref-hendrawan2024] 2.
Hendrawan, M. R.; Isa, A. M.; Samsudin, A. Z. H. (2024). Metadata interoperability for cultural heritage digital repositories: A case study in Indonesian world heritage site memory institutions. Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci., 14(8), 545-561. doi:10.6007/IJARBSS/v14-i8/22226

[ref-laksmi2024] 3.
Laksmi, L.; Suhendra, M. F.; Shuhidan, S. M.; Umanto, U. (2024). The readiness to implement digital humanities data curation of four institutional repositories in Indonesia. Digital Library Perspectives, 40(1), 80-95. doi:10.1108/DLP-04-2023-0031

[ref-wang2020] 4.
Wang, Q.; Zhu, F.; Ji, S.; Ren, Y. (2020). Secure provenance of electronic records based on blockchain. Computers, Materials & Continua, 65(2). doi:10.32604/cmc.2020.07366

[ref-zeng2020] 5.
Zeng, M. L.; Qin, J. (2020). Metadata. American Library Association.

[ref-bettivia2022] 6.
Bettivia, R.; Cheng, Y. Y.; Gryk, M. R. (2022). Documenting the Future: Navigating Provenance Metadata Standards. Springer.

[ref-baca2016] 7.
Baca, M. (2016). Introduction to Metadata. Getty Publications.

[ref-massari2024] 8.
Massari, A.; Peroni, S. (2024). HERITRACE: Tracing evolution and bridging data for streamlined curatorial work in the GLAM domain. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2402.00477.

[ref-caswell2021] 9.
Caswell, M. (2021). Urgent Archives: Enacting Liberatory Memory Work. Routledge.

[ref-cui2023] 10.
Cui, C.; Pinfield, S.; Cox, A.; Hopfgartner, F. (2023). Participatory web archiving: multifaceted challenges. Proc. Int. Conf. on Information, 79-87. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-28035-1_7

Bridging Global Standards and Local Contexts: A Hybrid Metadata Framework for ASEAN GLAM Institutions

Abstract

1Introduction

2Methods

3Results

4Discussion

5Conclusion

Acknowledgements

References

Article details

Described in Dublin Core