Impact of journal cancellations on interlibrary loan demand

  • 453 views
Uploaded on

 

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
453
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • This report lists journal titles and years where more than X number of that title and year have been filled (where you can choose the value of X). The date range selected notes the date that the request was submitted and not necessarily the date range where the request was filled.
  • Over half from current + previous year (prob. embargo)
  • 19 = 65%
  • Same number/fewer requests due to requesting older materials? Didn’t cross-check

Transcript

  • 1. IMPACT OF JOURNAL CANCELLATIONS ON INTERLIBRARY LOAN DEMAND Rachel Fleming, Serials Librarian, Western Carolina University Kristin Calvert, Electronic Resources Librarian , Western Carolina University North Carolina Serials Conference, March 15, 2013
  • 2. Agenda State of Literature on the Impact of Journal Cancellation on Interlibrary Loan Demand WCU Budget Reduction and Serials Cancellation Factors influencing Interlibrary Loan Demand Interlibrary Loan Demand for Cancelled Titles – One Year Out Implications and Discussion
  • 3. Literature Review Early Studies:  1980 University of North Dakota Study  As early as 1980, 100% of faculty in most departments were willing to rely on ILL for marginally important titles.  1995 University of Florida Study  Cut 1,377 ―marginal‖ titles, determined by collection managers  Over next five quarters, 38 requests for 24 cancelled journals  5 of these titles had more than one request, total requests for cancelled titles represented 0.2% of total loan requests.  Caveats: no undergraduate ILL  Study concludes that the low level of requests validates the review criteria
  • 4. Literature Review Early Studies (cont’d)  1996 Southern Illinois University – Carbondale Study  Cancelled 1241 titles in Spring 1990 based on: importance, price, inflation rate  Reviewed ILL January – June 1994  124 requests from 58 of the cancelled journals  30 titles with only one request  1999 Texas A&M Study  3095 titles cancelled 1990-1996  Reviewed titles with ≥ 5 requests May 1995 – June 1997  506 requests from 44 cancelled titles (1.4% of cancelled titles)  Based on subscription prices, ILL remained cost effective
  • 5. Literature Review Recent Research
  • 6. Literature Review Research Themes  Low number of requests validates our cancellations  Low number of requests indicates low ―real‖ need for titles  Availability of titles through ILL  Cooperative cancellations (keeping a subscription in the state)  Cancellations result in collections that are more core (duplicated across institutions), with fewer unique subscriptions That was then…
  • 7. WCU Background Budget Reduction of approximately $350,000 at WCU Cancellation of 799 subscriptions Reviewed subscriptions based on criteria:  Available through aggregator databases  Multiple formats  High cost-per-use  Low Use  Connection to Curricula  Database review (overlap)
  • 8. Profile of Cancelled Subscriptions Electronic Print Total Journals JournalsAvailable in databases 22 3% 287 36% 309 39%to the current issueAvailable in databases 27 3% 64 8% 91 11%with an embargoperiodNot otherwise available 22 3% 112 14% 134 17%Standing Orders 163 20%Microforms 92 12%Databases 10 1%
  • 9. Factors Influencing ILL Demand Duplicate formats Cancelled titles with online availability Cancelled titles with low use Cancelled titles which had marginal connection to WCU curricula Additional Full-Text availability through NC Live Subscriptions
  • 10. Concerns about ILL Demand Timeliness: High turnaround times for article requests cited as a concern during cancellation discussions Capacity: Small ILL department Limited student worker budget ―Real‖ Demand How will ILL demand compare with current demand
  • 11. Observed Demand Article requests increased 11% in 2012 Root cause uncertain  General fluctuations in demand  Serials cancellations  Implementation of EBSCO Discovery Service
  • 12. Our DataILLiad Web Reports >Borrowing reports >Journals received  Threshold set to 0 requests  For calendar years 2010, 2011, and 2012.Spreadsheet of collection review cancellations  Journal title  Format  Database/online availabilityCompared lists to match journal titles by hand
  • 13. Our Data, cont. ILL total article borrowing in 2012  1,816 journal titles  2,089 total requests  Avg. 1.13 requests per journal ILL for Cancelled Journal Titles in 2012  626 journal cancellations  50 article requests from 29 journals (4.6% of cancellations)  22 journals retained some online access  Avg. 1.74 requests per journal
  • 14. Demand for Cancelled Journals Requests by Date of Publication20 20121816141210 20118 6 2010 4 1993 2002 2006 2009 2 1978 1984 1988 1991 19950 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002 2007 2012
  • 15. Article Requests per Journal2018161412108 Community College 6 Journal of Research and Practice 4 (Taylor & Francis) 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
  • 16. Community College Journal of Research and Practice Taylor & Francis title cancelled because of online availability Journal subsequently removed from aggregator by the publisher Aggregator drops monitored, but not automatically picked back up  Resubscribed to this title at subject selector’s request Excluding this title: average requests per journal down from 1.74 to 1.5
  • 17. Initial Conclusions Caution: long publisher grace period for e-journals after cancellation—some active until April. High demand for current articles most likely due to embargoed online access. Prevalence of single requests per journal suggests low ―real‖ demand for individual journals. These requests do not account for the entire 11% increase in article borrowing in 2012. Some other factors in play. Can we be sure demand actually due to cancellation?
  • 18. Historical Comparisons 18 Reviewed requests for cancelled journals in 16 the 2 year period prior 14 to cancellation. 12 Noted whether the 10 number of requests 8 had changed relative to previous years. 6 4 2 0 First request More requests Same number Fewer requests
  • 19. Further Comparisons High demand journals  Overall 9 most requested titles during 2010-2012  5 with fewer requests in 2012  4 with more requests in 2012  Conclusion: no predictive ILL trend (up or down), title-dependent Current Subscriptions  9 print & 9 online journals  Zero requests in 2012  Conclusion: ILL demand for subscribed titles neglible
  • 20. Implications & Discussion Negligible impact on our ILL borrowing. Do we care about lending? What is the impact of lending rules for e-journals? Do we need last copy rules to preserve unique holdings? Is WCU’s experience similar to yours? Additional data from other institutions may be valuable.
  • 21. Bibliography Chadwell, F. A. (2012). Whats Next for Collection Management and Managers?: Assessing the Value of Collection Services. Collection Management, 37(2), 58-64. doi:10.1080/01462679.2012.664482 Chrzastowski, T., & Schmidt, K. (1997). 1994 LAPT research award: The serials cancellation crisis: National trends in academic library serial collections. Library Acquisitions: Practice And Theory, 21 431-443. doi:10.1016/S0364- 6408(97)00071-9 Crump, M. J., & Freund, L. (1995). Serials cancellations and interlibrary loan: The link and what it reveals. Serials Review, 21(2), 29. doi:10.1016/0098- 7913(95)90028-4 Thomas L., K., & Barbara G., P. (1996). Serial cuts and interlibrary loan: filling the gaps. Interlending & Document Supply, 24(1), 12. Warner, E. S. (1981). The Impact of Interlibrary Access to Periodicals on Subscription Continuation/ Cancellation Decision Making. Journal Of The American Society For Information Science, 32(2), 93-95. Wilson, M., & Alexander, W. (1999). Automated Interlibrary Loan/Document Delivery Data Applications for Serials Collection Development. Serials Review, 25(4) 11-19. doi:10.1016/S0098-7913(99)00043-X