Coalition for Innovation in Scholarly Communication

A Series of Snapshots of the Size and Nature of Recent Economic Investment in Library and Information Infrastructure

Prepared for

The Coalition for Innovation in Scholarly Communication

Council of Australian University Librarians

August 2000 Coalition for Innovation in Scholarly Communication - Project 1 - Report 2 Foreword

This project was designed to produce time series data to illustrate the changing trends in the scholarly information collected and accessed through Australian university libraries. Additionally, sample data was collected on some specific patterns of expenditure, for which data is not readily and/or generally available, such as the purchase and use of electronic journals and databases. The information is presented along with similar data collected by the US Association of Research Libraries (ARL).

Academic library statistics are collected annually for the Council of Australian University Librarians (CAUL) by CAVAL Ltd (Cooperative Action for Victorian Academic Libraries). They are published as the September supplement to Australian Academic and Research Libraries and at http://www.caul.edu.au/stats/. The CAUL statistics are monitored and reviewed on an ongoing basis by its Statistics Focus Group, with the goal of ensuring that the data elements collected are relevant, valid and benchmarkable, or that they are otherwise required for continuity and completeness.

The top 111 US and Canadian university and research libraries are members of the Association of Research Libraries. ARL statistics are collected annually and are available online at: http://www.arl.org/stats/.

Total Materials Expenditure 1998 Minimum Maximum Median # Libraries CAUL AU$0.7m AU$9.3m AU$2.6m 39 ARL US$2.3m US$19.3m US$5.6m. 111 Total Library Expenditure 1998 Minimum Maximum Median CAUL AU$1.4m AU$26.6m AU$7.3m 39 ARL US$7.1m US$75.8m US$15m 111

Patterns of expenditure on and access to electronic resources do not currently form part of the CAUL data collection, nor are they included in the ARL annual statistics survey. The ARL Library Materials Budget Survey 1998/99, a survey which is supplementary to the main annual survey, has sought to identify the proportion of materials expenditure devoted to electronic resources. Problems of definition have made this a difficult exercise but it was considered valuable to construct a questionnaire and conduct a survey of research libraries in Australia to provide some insight into the transition from paper-based to electronic serials.

The statistical presentations and parts of the survey were prepared by CAVAL Ltd.

Diane Costello CAUL Executive Officer August 2000

Coalition for Innovation in Scholarly Communication - Project 1 - Report 3 1. SERIALS, MONOGRAPHS AND INTERLIBRARY BORROWING. a. Monograph and Serials Costs in CAUL Libraries, 1986-1998.

Using the presentation format employed by ARL (Association of Research Libraries), we tabulated and graphed median data from all Australian university libraries' statistics from the years 1986 to 1998 inclusive. The data items included are:

 Serials expenditure  Serial subscriptions purchased  Serials unit cost ie Serials expenditure ÷ Serial subscriptions purchased  Monograph expenditure  Monograph volumes purchased  Monograph unit cost ie Monograph expenditure ÷ Monograph volumes purchased

Additional relevant data included are:

 CPI increase against base year (Sourced from ABS, 1989-1990 = 100.0)  Exchange rate against the US dollar for year ending 30th June (Sourced from Australian Economic Indicators Catalogue. Base: May 1970 = 100.0)

Graph 1 is in the ARL format with calendar year plotted against the % change since 1986. Graph 2 shows the equivalent ARL data.

Much of the significant increase in median expenditure which occurred in 1990 can be attributed to university (and library) amalgamations. In 1986, the sample included 50 institutions, both university and CAE libraries, reducing to 39 in 1998. The percentage increase from a base year of 1986 is therefore exaggerated in this case, and a more realistic presentation of the data might be achieved by using 1990 as the base year.

Spikes in the graphs are attributable to a mix of factors, including fluctuations in the exchange rate between the Australian dollar and the US and European currencies in which universities purchase 80-90% of their information resources; gaps in the data collection where figures for some years from some institutions are not available; amalgamations of higher education institutions.

Recommendations:

That gaps in CAUL data be completed by extrapolation and interpolation of known data for the years 1990 to 1998. (Action: CAUL)

That the data be recompiled to reduce the impact of the "binary divide" of the higher education system on the presentation of the data.. (Action: CAUL)

Coalition for Innovation in Scholarly Communication - Project 1 - Report 4 Graph 1. M onograph & Serial Costs in CAUL Libraries 1986-1998 Median Values

-200 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998

Serials Unit Cost Serials Expenditure Monograph Unit Cost Monograph Expenditure

Serials Purchased Monographs Purchased CPI Increase Exchange rate against US$

Coalition for Innovation in Scholarly Communication - Project 1 - Report 5 Graph 2 Monograph and Serial Costs in ARL Libraries, 1986-1997 Median Values for Time-Series Trends

Coalition for Innovation in Scholarly Communication - Project 1 - Report 6 b. Supply and Demand in CAUL Libraries, 1986-1998.

Using the presentation format employed by ARL, we tabulated and graphed median data from all Australian university libraries' statistics from the years 1986 to 1998 inclusive. The data items included are:

 Interlibrary borrowing ie the total number of loans and (photocopied) items received  Serial subscriptions purchased  Monographs volumes purchased  Total number of students (fte (full-time equivalent students))  Number of higher degree students (fte)  Number of academic staff (fte)

Graph 3 chart is in the ARL format with calendar year plotted against the % change since 1986. Graph 4 shows the equivalent ARL data.

Again, much of the significant median increase in purchasing which occurred around 1990 may be attributed to university (and library) amalgamations.

1994 saw a considerable boost in the number of Higher Degree students - although the impact on the total student population was relatively minor. One might have expected this to have caused concomitant increases in the number of inter-library loans, but this appears not to have been the case. A recent qualitative study of the literature cited in a small number of Australian PhD theses has raised the question of whether post-graduate students tend to use whatever is available in their own university library rather than the larger body of published literature wherever it may be located.1

1 Australian Library Collections Taskforce. 1999.

Coalition for Innovation in Scholarly Communication - Project 1 - Report 7 Graph 3. Supply and Demand in CAUL Libraries, 1986-1998, Median Values

300 6 8 9 1

e c n i

e g n a h C

-100 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998

Interlibrary Borrow ing Serials Purchased Monographs Purchased Total Number of Students (FTE) Number of Academic Staff Higher Degree Students

Coalition for Innovation in Scholarly Communication - Project 1 - Report 8 Graph 4. Supply and Demand in ARL Libraries, 1986-1999 - Median Data

Coalition for Innovation in Scholarly Communication - Project 1 - Report 9 2. ELECTRONIC RESOURCES.

CAUL ran two surveys to test the feasibility of collecting a range of data on the nature and quantity of electronic resources being purchased, and the infrastructure required to support access to them. They were directed at libraries who already collect data on electronic resources for their own purposes. Hence, it was a self-selected sample. The data collected covered:

 electronic journals subscriptions, whether selected individually, by publisher package or by an aggregation of publishers in one or more disciplines;  bibliographic databases, which may or may not link to the full text cited;  collections of data eg business forecasts, company data, etc;  all serials made available by the library, whether purchased or free, but clearly identified as such.

In addition, the surveys attempted to identify:

 expenditure on the provision of electronic resources;  if that expenditure includes hardware or software, then identify how much is spent on:  hardware;  software;  electronic resources as outlined above;  expenditure on electronic resources by discipline:  science, technology, medicine;  arts and humanities;  social sciences;  other;  expenditure on electronic resources as a proportion of the total materials resources budget.

Results. Initial work on expenditure on electronic resources tested the feasibility of collecting a range of data on the nature and quantity of electronic resources being purchased. Many comments referred to the very detailed questions, which were intended to break down the varying kinds of electronic resources into their narrowest definitions. These narrow breakdowns were then intended to be aggregated as appropriate. Each question for print serials was broken down into four different categories for electronic serials:

Electronic journals as individual subscriptions Electronic journals as part of a publisher package Electronic journals as part of an electronic dataset or aggregation Subscriptions to sets of data eg statistical or company data whether purchased or by gift, exchange or freely available whether duplicate current subscriptions (eg many journals are available in multiple packages)

Coalition for Innovation in Scholarly Communication - Project 1 - Report 10 Comments received from participating libraries in the initial survey included:  Time consuming, too detailed.  Can not collect from Innopac; Took 4 days.  Would not be able to comply. Trial makes sense but complicated.  Time consuming, open to inaccuracies.  Can not differentiate between unique/duplicate, current/non current.  Where do free with print fit in?  Data gathering difficult and time consuming.  Meaning of 'publisher-defined electronic packages'  Use multiple records for aggregated journals but single record for dual print/electronic.  Cannot give current figures. Currently developing a serials management database to better monitor and control the serial collections.  Guidelines too detailed.  Recognise the need but would be unable to provide accurate data.  The figures for various datasets (eg Expanded Academic ASAP and EbscoHost) include many potential duplicates and are misleading for libraries that either have both print and electronic or subscribe to several services and get duplicate electronic journals.

The second part of the survey attempted to track expenditure on electronic resources and infrastructure. Eleven universities responded. Not one university collected all the data requested. The sample size is too small to draw any valid conclusions. The following comments are therefore illustrative only.

 Infrastructure expenditure comes from IT, not library. IT would require very clear definitions to provide costings.  Faculties do not match with the discipline divisions in survey, and some of the packages include full-text journals across many disciplines.  You do not mention any telecommunications charges (eg Internet charges).  It is very difficult to estimate this expenditure. It includes staff costs, licences, software and hardware.  Estimated costs: Staffing E-products @ Services Unit (50% of salary cost): $134,000 Cataloguing/Serials Management: $40,000 Info Literacy/User Education (Guesstimate): 1500hrs @ $22 =$33,000 Estimated cost of the casual staff working on desks: $150,000 Provision of Electronic Reserve: $40,000 Electronic Exam Papers: negligible Hardware/Software Hardware (50% of expenditure): $127,350 Software (50% of expenditure): $20,000 Software licences (Total Guess??): $20,000  Expenditure on electronic resources as a proportion of the total materials resources budget varied from 6.6% to 36%, with an average of 18.6%

The complexities of collecting data on electronic resources are known and understood. No libraries currently collect all the information requested. New data categories need to be defined very carefully to ensure that they are comparable across institutions as well as outside the education sector.

Coalition for Innovation in Scholarly Communication - Project 1 - Report 11 International.

Major projects are currently underway in both the US and Europe on the collection of data for electronic information resources. The EQUINOX Library Performance Measurement and Quality Management System is a project funded under the Telematics for Libraries Programme of the European Commission. Performance Indicators for University Libraries conducted by Cranfield University is funded by the British Library Research and Innovation Centre and will be monitored by the Funding Councils, SCONUL, CURL, CVCP, SCOP and HCLRG.

ARL has begun a project - Usage Measures for Electronic Resources - to explore the feasibility of collecting data on the usage of electronic resources, due for completion in December 2001. ARL has provided a model for data collection and presentation to the research library community particularly over the last fifteen years. The investment in the current projects is likely to achieve more reliable and sustainable outcomes than can be achieved within the resources of the much smaller Australian university library community. It is likely that CAUL will design its collection mechanisms in line with the results of those projects.

Recommendations.

That CAUL monitors and contributes to the international projects developing indicators for the purchase of and access to electronic resources, and adopts data collection and presentation methods which will allow the data to be benchmarked internationally against comparable universities. (Action: CAUL)

Coalition for Innovation in Scholarly Communication - Project 1 - Report 12