Preprints der Zeitschrift BIBLIOTHEK – Forschung und Praxis, 2017, AR 3170 MacColl AR 3170 John MacColl Towards a Shared Print Collection in UK Research Libraries Abstract: This paper1 describes a recent project by Research Libraries UK to analyse the ‘collective collection’ of its member libraries, in order to understand the implications for the community of a collectively-managed print resource in the future. It discusses the work of OCLC Research in using the OCLC WorldCat database for this analysis, taking account of inaccurate data matching and its effects, and considers how the RLUK analysis feeds in to broader work across the UK, led by Jisc, to create a UK National Bibliographic Knowledgebase. It compares the findings of the OCLC Research study to those of an earlier similar analysis of the collective Association of Research Libraries collection in North America. The governance and funding complexity of the UK is described to account for the challenges inherent in taking a national approach to the problems of managing a collective collection. The UK Research Reserve is described as an example of a shared print approach, thus far only applied to journals, which has over the last 10 years been a successful initiative for a number of participant libraries in allowing them to free up shelf space by removing duplicate holdings. The collective collection work of a subset of RLUK, the White Rose University Consortium in Yorkshire, is described as an exemplar of an implementation of the findings of the RLUK-wide study within a regional context. Keywords: RLUK; Jisc; OCLC; WorldCat; COPAC; Sconul; UK National Bibliographic Knowledgebase; ‘collective collection’; HathiTrust; UK Research Reserve; union catalogues; White Rose University Consortium; GreenGlass; e-books Auf dem Weg zu einer verteilten Sammlung von Drucken in Forschungsbibliotheken in Großbritannien Zusammenfassung: Vorliegender Artikel beschreibt ein jüngeres Projekt der Forschungsbibliotheken von Großbritannien, um die ‚kollektive Sammlung‘ ihrer Mitgliedsbibliotheken zu analysieren und die Implikationen einer gemeinschaftlich verteilten Sammlung für die Gemeinschaft der Zukunft verstehen zu können. Die Arbeit von OCLC Research, die die WorldCat-Datenbank der OCLC für ihre Analyse verwendet, wird diskutiert. Dabei werden sowohl fehlerhafter Datenabgleich und als auch dessen Auswirkungen untersucht. Des Weiteren wird im Artikel sorgfältig geprüft, wie die RLUK- Analyse durch Jisc landesweit genutzt wird, um eine ‚National Bibliographical Knowledgebase‘ zu entwerfen. Es werden die Ergebnisse dieser Studie mit einer früheren, ähnlichen Studie über Forschungsbibliotheken in Nordamerika verglichen. Die Komplexität der Regierungs- und Forschungsförderung in Großbritannien wird beschrieben, die Herausforderungen eines nationalen 1 With thanks to my colleagues Janet Aucock (University of St Andrews Library) and Rosemary Stenson (University of Glasgow Library) for their comments and advice. 1 Preprints der Zeitschrift BIBLIOTHEK – Forschung und Praxis, 2017, AR 3170 MacColl Ansatzes für die ‚kollektive Sammlung‘ werden aufgezeigt und die UKRR wird als ein Beispiel eines gemeinschaftlich verteilten Ansatzes für Drucke beschrieben, dass in den letzten zehn Jahren nur erfolgreich bei Zeitschriften funktionierte, da diese Initiative es den beteiligten Bibliotheken ermöglichte, Zweitexemplare zu entfernen. Überdies wird im regionalen Kontext beispielhaft die Arbeit der ‚kollektiven Sammlung‘ am ‚White Rose University Konsortium‘ in Yorkshire, einem Teilprojekt der wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken von Großbritannien, bei der Umsetzung der Forschungsergebnisse vorgestellt. Schlüsselwörter: RLUK; Jisc; OCLC; WorldCat; COPAC; Sconul; UK National Bibliographic Knowledgebase; ‚kollektive Sammlung‘; HathiTrust; UK Research Reserve; union catalogues; White Rose University Consortium; GreenGlass; E-Books 1 Introduction: Research Libraries UK Research Libraries UK is a membership organisation that consists of 33 of the leading research university libraries, including those of Oxford and Cambridge, the four ancient Scottish universities (St Andrews, Glasgow, Aberdeen and Edinburgh), the English ‘red brick’ universities (Birmingham, Bristol, Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool and Sheffield), and various of the Colleges of the University of London. It also includes the UK’s three national libraries (the British Library, the National Library of Scotland and the National Library of Wales), and – perhaps oddly – Trinity College Dublin (which is a ‘legal deposit’ library under the terms of UK law). There are also some newer university members, and the Wellcome Trust Library, a specialised biomedical library. RLUK has for many years maintained its own catalogue (Copac), which aggregates records from its member libraries and some 60 or so other research collections across the UK and Ireland. The service is hosted and managed by Jisc, on behalf of RLUK. It currently contains some 40m records. As an adjunct service, RLUK has its own record supply database. This record retrieval service provides records in MARC21 format and is open to any non-profit organisation. 2 Evaluation of UK bibliographic infrastructure Both Copac and the RLUK Database were subject to review in 2015-16. The aims of the review, agreed jointly between RLUK, Jisc, SCONUL (the Society for College, National & University libraries) and the British Library were: • To help inform shared collection management decisions across RLUK. • To recognise the implications of an OCLC Research analysis of aggregate bibliographic holdings across RLUK, and understand the preservation fragilities in our collective aggregation. • To compare the RLUK system-wide aggregation with a recently completed study of ARL holdings, also conducted by OCLC Research. 2 Preprints der Zeitschrift BIBLIOTHEK – Forschung und Praxis, 2017, AR 3170 MacColl • To link up with other UK-wide collection management work (Jisc’s ’National Monograph Strategy’ and the UK Research Reserve). • To move from piecemeal collection analysis based on patchy holdings metadata in WorldCat, to system-wide analysis. • To provide a step towards identifying the ‘long tail’ of publications which may have no formal preservation arrangements, and to consider our collective responsibility for its preservation. RLUK’s report led to Jisc issuing a tender for what it called a ‘National Bibliographic Knowledgebase’ service in the autumn of 2016. All of this activity fitted well with the RLUK Strategy – which is currently being refreshed. The previous strategy (2014-17) has as a theme: A Collective Approach: Re-shaping the modern research library collection, and under that the objective to Work towards a shared approach to the management of print, manuscript and archive collections across RLUK. A related objective was Coordinate and rationalise digital collections across the UK. The fit was also appropriate more generally. Jisc commissioned a study which appeared in 2015 to examine the implications of pursuing specific bibliographic data strategies. This work was undertaken as part of a set of activity within Jisc as it adjusted its focus and shape for the future, in the light of reduced government funding. The report recommended that Jisc should focus on ensuring that bibliographic data services are available, and building relevant partnerships, rather than continuing with the relatively labour-intensive task of operating Copac. In its paper summarising the report, it was stated quite boldly that: The primary focus of future effort should be on supporting UK academic libraries with collections management. Resource discovery and records delivery are of secondary importance2 3 Charge to OCLC Research RLUK commissioned OCLC Research to use the WorldCat database in order to provide the RLUK community with intelligence on its bibliographic profile. OCLC Research was asked to: • Explore the characteristics of the aggregate RLUK bibliographic resource in the context of members’ strategic priorities. • Use WorldCat to obtain a multi-scalar perspective on the RLUK profile, at local, group and global levels. 2 Bibliographic data services and the National Monographic Strategy – next steps (2015). 3 Preprints der Zeitschrift BIBLIOTHEK – Forschung und Praxis, 2017, AR 3170 MacColl • Complement and advance recent work it had done on the ‘collective collection’ and shared print.3 • Refine its analysis via consultation with an RLUK Advisory Group that was established to work with the OCLC Research team. Fundamental to the analyses that OCLC Research would conduct was the currency of the data with which they were working. As a catalogue of catalogues, WorldCat has great potential to be used for bibliographic analysis of this type – but the picture it provides is only as accurate as the data within it. In the UK, the convention for a long period of time has been that most libraries upload their own catalogue records to WorldCat on a batch basis, which may or may not be regular. They do not catalogue directly into WorldCat, as is more common in the US. This particular study therefore revealed, not surprisingly, that quite a number of RLUK member libraries had not performed batch uploads to WorldCat for some time. The first part of the project therefore involved a number of libraries in undergoing WorldCat ‘reclamations’ – a process which took several months. Once finally complete, however, the analysis could be performed, and it led in May 2016 to publication of the report Strength in Numbers: The Research Libraries