Reshaping the Research Library: Some Observations on the Future of Academic Collections Constance Malpas Program Officer, OCLC Research University of Maryland 28 April 2011
Roadmap [OCLC Research] A framework for academic collections Some remarks on libraries & the higher education landscape Emerging infrastructure and its impact on the organization of academic libraries University of Maryland libraries in a system-wide context
OCLC Research: what we do Supports global cooperative by providing internal data and process analysestoinform enterprise service development (R&D) and deploying collective research capacity to deepen public understanding of the evolving library system Special focus on libraries in research institutions: in US, libraries supporting doctoral-level education account for <20% of academic libraries;>70% of library spending changes in this sector impact library system as a whole; collective preservation and access goals, shared infrastructure, &c.
OCLC Research: who we are ~45 FTE with offices in Ohio, California and (soon) Leiden Sponsored by OCLC and a partnership of research libraries around the world that share: A strong motivation to effect system-wide change A commitment to collaboration as a means of achieving collective gains A desire to engage internationally Senior management ready to provide leadership within the transnational research library community Deep and rich collections and a mandate to make them accessible The capacity and the will to contribute
System-wide organization Research theme addresses “big picture” questions about the future of libraries in the network environment; implications for collections, services, institutions embedded in complex networks of collaboration, cooperation and exchange
Characterization of the aggregate library resource
Collections, services, user behaviors, institutional profiles
Re-organization of individual libraries in network context
Institutions adapting to changes in system-wide organization
Re-organization of the library system in network context
Collections Grid In many collections Purchased materials Licensed E-Resources Open Web Resources Licensed Purchased Low Stewardship High Stewardship Research & Learning Materials Special Collections Local Digitization In few collections Credit: Dempsey, Childress (OCLC Research. 2003)
Library attention and investment are shifting In many collections Less attention Licensed High attention Occasional Purchased Low Stewardship High Stewardship Limited Limited Aspirational Intentional In few collections OCLC Research, 2010.
Academic institutions are driving this change In Many Collections Redirection of library resource Licensed Purchased Low Stewardship High Stewardship +5 yrs today In Few Collections OCLC Research, 2010.
Shift to licensed electronic content is accelerating
Research journals – a well established trend Scholarly monographs – in progress
Print collections delivering less (and less) value at great (and growing) cost
Est. $4.25 US per volume per year for on-site collections Library purchasing power decreasing as per-unit cost rises
Special collections marginal to educational mandate at many institutions
Costly to manage, not (always) integral to teaching, learning
An Equal and Opposite Reaction As an increasing share of library spending is directed toward licensed content . . . Pressure on print management costs increases Fewer institutions to uphold preservation mandate Stewardship roles must be reassessed Shared service requirements will change
Erosion of library value proposition in academic sector institutional reputation no longer determined (or even substantially influenced) by scope, scale of local print collection Changing nature of scholarly record research, teaching and learning embedded in larger social and technological networks; new set of curation challenges Format transition; mass digitization of legacy print Web-scale discoverability has fundamentally changed research practices; local collections no longer the center of attention What factors are driving this change?
A critical question What operational changes will enable significant redirection of library resource from acquisition and inventory management Bringing the ‘outside in’ Toward more effective disclosure, discovery and (re)use of locally distinctive teaching/learning assets Moving the ‘inside out’ A renovation of the library service portfolio that supports more direct engagement with the research, teaching and learning mission of the university
Core library operations are moving “outside” institutional boundaries cooperative cataloging ILL, resource sharing approval plans digital preservation . . . print management As transaction costs fall, so do boundaries creating room for more distinctive library services
Boundary work at the University of Maryland Cooperative sourcing for ‘core business’ operations: Consolidation of cataloging operations into metadata services; exploring cooperative collections storage with regional partners; HathiTrust; Kuali OLE; WorldCatUM … OCLC RLP From infrastructure to customer relationship management: Terrapin Learning Commons provides space and services adapted to today’s student expectations; explicit commitment to aligning library strategic plan to institutional priorities; cultivating and projecting powerful student faculty connections to the library A new emphasis on innovation and moving ‘into the flow’: Maximizing integration of library collections and services into course-management; increasing digitization and web-scale presence, repositioning institutional repository to emphasize relevance to scholarly work
A long-term, system-wide trend OCLC Research. Derived from data reported in NCES Digest of Education Statistics: 2008.
Shift in provision of higher education Distribution of Post-Secondary Educational Institutions in the United States by Source of Funding Limited reliance on library infrastructure OCLC Research. Derived from data reported in NCES Digest of Education Statistics: 2008.
A limited population, growing economic pressure Increasing expense, decreasing purchasing power OCLC Research. Derived from data reported in NCES Digest of Education Statistics: 2008.
In US research libraries, a tipping point … Majority of research libraries shifting toward e-centric acquisitions, service model Center of gravity >75% in 2009-2010 Harvard Yale Shrinking pool of libraries with mission and resources to sustain print preservation as a ‘core’ operation OCLC Research. Derived from ARL Annual Statistics, 2007-2008
… the books have left the building In North America, +70M volumes off-site (2007) ~30-50% of print inventory at many major universities xx Vols. Off-site at UMCP? Growth in library storage infrastructure Derived from L. Payne (OCLC, 2007)
If the physical proximity of print collections had a demonstrable impact on researcher productivity, nouniversity would hesitate to allocate prime real estate to library stacks
In a world where print was the primary medium of scholarly communication, a large local inventory was a hallmark of academic reputation
We no longer live in that world.
Cloud-sourcing Research Collections (2009/10) Case study in de-composition of library service bundle: externalization of print repository functions Data-mining Hathi and WorldCat to determine where cost-effective reductions in print inventory can be achieved for individual libraries(micro-economic context) Characterizing optimal service profile for shared print/digital service providers; collective market for service (macro-economic context) Exploring social and economic infrastructure requirements; technical infrastructure a separate, secondary challenge
A global change in the library environment Academic print book collection already substantially duplicated in mass-digitized book corpus June 2010 Median duplication: 31% June 2009 Median duplication: 19% OCLC Research. Analysis based on HathiTrust and WorldCat snapshot data, Jun 2009 – Jun 2010.
Mass-digitized books in print repositories ~3.5M titles ~75% of mass digitized corpus is ‘backed up’ in one or more shared print repositories ~2.5M OCLC Research. Analysis based on HathiTrust and WorldCat snapshot data, Jun 2009 – Jun 2010.
Prediction Within the next 5-10 years, focus of shared print archiving and service provision will shift to monographic collections
large scale service hubs will provide low-cost print management on a subscription basis;
reducing local expenditureon print operations, releasing space for new uses and facilitating a redirection of library resources;
enabling rationalization of aggregate print collection and renovation of library service portfolio
Mass digitization of retrospective print collections will drive this transition
A third of titles held in UMCP Libraries are duplicated in the HathiTrust Digital Library ~2.5 million University of Maryland, College Park (UMC) holdings in WorldCat 94,421 titles 683,868 titles ~778K (31%) duplicated in HathiTrust Digital Library
Subject distribution of UMCP-owned titles duplicated in HathiTrust Digital Library Represents approximately 9 miles of library shelf space 1 mile if restricted to public domain N = 778,289 titles OCLC Research. Analysis based on HathiTrust and WorldCat snapshots. Data current as of April 2011.
Stewardship and sustainability: a pragmatic view Using recent life-cycle adjusted cost model* for library print collections, $4.25 per volume per year --- on campus $ .86 per volume per year -– in high-density storage the University of Maryland is spending between [778,289 titles * $.86 =] $670K to $3.3M [=778,289 titles * $4.25 ] annually to retain local copies of content preserved in the HathiTrust Digital Library The library is not financially accountable for these costs but it is responsible for managing them *Paul Courant and M. “Buzzy” Nielson, “On the Cost of Keeping a Book” in The Idea of Order (CLIR, 2010)
System-wide print distribution of UMCP titles duplicated in HathiTrust Digital Library Market for shared print provision increases Value of Hathi preservation increases N = 778,289 titles OCLC Research. Analysis based on HathiTrust and WorldCat snapshot data. Data current as of April 2011.
Time for a game! If you had to guess what percentage of titles in the UMCP library collection were unique, would you say… A) 10% or more B) 5-10% C) Fewer than 5%
Supports reconfiguration of library space & service portfolio
1) UMCP (potential) contribution to HathiTrust This title held by 5 libraries UMCP collections deliver more value in web-scale environment Incomplete run contributed by Princeton University, cf. UMCP digitized volumes in Internet Archive include 1860, 1863-1864, 1870-1871 etc.
2) Public domain content not held by UMCP This edition held by 17 libraries [None within Maryland] Source via ILL @ ~$20 / transaction? Or offer free download? As the library works to align collections with waxing and waning curricular interests, just-in-time fulfillment may become the norm
3) UMCP-owned title duplicated in HathiTrust 334 WorldCat holdings on this edition Increased discoverability & access Reduce wear & tear on local copy Opportunity to de-duplicate?
It all adds up: ROI for shared infrastructure Content UMCP can now manage more efficiently Content UMCP can now source at lower cost OCLC Research. Analysis based on HathiTrust and WorldCat snapshot data. Data current as of April 2011
As private institutions look to ‘tuition discounting’ to maintain undergraduate enrollment: … increased scrutiny of direct costs of traditional infrastructure including the library … increased reliance (tacit or explicit) on infrastructure provided by larger institutions While publicly funded universities struggle to maintain level funding and enrollments 2010-2011 tuition @ McDaniel = $33,280 [$19,170] UMD = $ 4,208/$12,415 In this context the true cost of library infrastructure really matters!
Entrepreneurial opportunities? University of Michigan, University of Minnesota have partnerships with Walden University of Alabama, Huntsville has a partnership with Kaplan Etc.
The next few years are critical Academic libraries in Maryland: a common trajectory, different timelines Jan ‘12 Mar ‘13 Sep ‘13 * * * OCLC Research. Analysis based on HathiTrust and WorldCat snapshot data. Data current as of April 2011
Local print management comes at a high cost How can UMCP leverage shared infrastructure to reduce local expenditure on legacy collections? Integrate HathiTrust in local discovery environment Maximize shift to local/shared off-site; full-text search Consider withdrawal where print can be sourced from regional collection And acquisitions? Public domain content can extend local holdings Selector expertise can be deployed to create disciplinary collections
UMCP as Shared Print supplier? ~ 247K McDaniel College (WTY) Library holdings in WorldCat Represents ~1 mile of shelving at McDaniel ~ 100K (41%) duplicated in HathiTrust Digital Library OCLC Research. Analysis based on HathiTrust and WorldCat snapshots. Data current as of April 2011.
UMCP as Shared Print client? ~2.5 million University of Maryland, College Park (UMC) holdings in WorldCat 94,421 titles Represents ~4 miles of shelving at UMCP 683,868 titles ~778K (31%) duplicated in HathiTrust Digital Library OCLC Research. Analysis based on HathiTrust and WorldCat snapshots. Data current as of April 2011.
A vision of the future University of Maryland College Park will . . . fulfill its preservation mandate by partnering with regional and national partners to ensure sustainable stewardship of shared print and digital repositories provide faculty, students and citizens of Maryland with access to an increasingly broad array of legacy and current content by sourcing content by the most efficient means enhance the University’s teaching and research reputation by supporting the process of scholarship, increasing the visibility and impact of locally created content
Academic print: it’s not the end . . . but it’s no longer the means Ongoing redefinition of scholarly function and value of print will entail some loss and some gain in library relevance “Archive of the available past” photograph by Joguldi. Abandoned books at the Detroit Central School Book Depository (6 May 2009) Flickr
Thanks for your attention. Comments, Questions? Constance Malpas email@example.com @ConstanceM