The document summarizes presentations from the 2014 Charleston Conference regarding the Association of Research Libraries' licensing initiative for university press ebooks. It discusses negotiations with publishers like Project MUSE, Oxford University Press, and De Gruyter to provide ebook collections to libraries. Presenters from Emory, Harvard, and Yale analyze usage data of ebook titles in their collections, finding varying levels of use across disciplines. Overall the initiative aims to establish sustainable models for academic libraries to access ebook content.

1. Association of Research Libraries
Licensing Initiative
for
University Press eBooks
Charleston Conference, 2014
Celeste Feather, LYRASIS

2. Background
 2011: ARL contracted with LYRASIS to negotiate
offers for university press ebooks to:
 Establish a model for the e-book landscape by
shaping offerings to serve the unique needs of the
academic library world in cost, ILL, platform
design, internal markup and search structures,
and interoperability
 Encourage partnerships between libraries and
university presses to address e-book economics
and licensing

3. Negotiated Offers
(All DRM Free Collections)
2012: Project MUSE/UPCC
2013-2015
Project MUSE/UPCC
Oxford University Scholarship Online
De Gruyter Online

4. Participation in MUSE Offers
through the ARL/LYRASIS License
15 libraries purchased entire MUSE collection
12 libraries purchased pub. year collections
25 libraries purchased subject collections

5. Titles Used To Date in MUSE/UPCC
2010-2013 eBook Collections
By Emory, Harvard, and Yale
Used by 3
Institutions
9% Used by 2
Institutions
21%
Used by 1
Institution
32%
Titles Not Used
38%
8232 Titles

6. Return on Investment
Libraries generally achieve savings over the
cost of purchasing individual titles at MUSE
after they use:
At least 15% of the titles in the entire MUSE
collection
At least 35% of the titles in an annual
collection
Less than 50% of the titles in subject
collections (varies depending on subject)

7. Chris Palazzolo, PhD
Head of Collections & Social Sciences
Woodruff Library
Emory University
Charleston Conference 2014

8. Emory and Project Muse

 Purchase of 2010-2013 complete collections; funding through common
good funds (funds shared by all Emory libraries)
 Supplements for 2010-2013 purchased in mid-2014 (not included in
current data analysis)
 2014 move to a la carte purchasing through YBP
MARC records loaded into back-end (Aleph) and piped into DiscoverE
(discovery layer)
 No change to existing approval plan; only around 60 titles were only
available to users in e-format

9. Catalog Display


10. BR4 Reports (Turnaway)

 Availability of this Counter4 Report only became available in January
2014
 95 un-owned titles were clicked on and patrons turned away
 Of these 95 titles, 35 were checked out during the same period (January-
August 2014), primarily titles pre-2005
 Led to addition of single title firm ordering in YBP to meet demand

11. Data Sources & Challenges

 Collection-use, institution-specific statistics from Project Muse
 Circulation statistics from ILS (Aleph) matched on print ISBN
 Call number information not included in Project Muse data; not extracted from
circulation figures, but could be used to disaggregate some of the results (see
Sarah’s report)
 Data leads to lots of hypotheses, but often times not definitive confirmations
 Did users utilize e-book when print book was not available, or do they just have a
preference for the e-book format?
 Who is utilizing the print title vs the e-book? Further analysis could be done on the
print side, utilizing demographic data from the ILS, but not from the e-book angle
(Shibboleth implementation may change this).

12. Overall Trends

Use of Project Muse Titles, 2010-2013
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
print titles circulated
print format only
titles accessed e-only
both formats circulated
titles accessed e
titles accessed e both formats circulated titles accessed e-only print format only print titles circulated
Series2 25.31% 8.61% 16.58% 7.93% 16.53%
Series1 2148 731 1407 673 1403

13. Specific Format Trends

45.00%
40.00%
35.00%
30.00%
25.00%
20.00%
15.00%
10.00%
5.00%
0.00%
% of Collections, 2010-3, Accessed in Specific
Format
Titles Accessed E (2010-2013) Both Formats (2010-2013)

14. Use of Collections by Format
Use of Collections by Format, 2010-2013

Ecology and Evolution
U.S. Regional Studies'
Political Science and Policy Studies
Poetry, Fiction and Creative Non-…
Philosophy and Religion
Language, Literature, Linguistics
History
Higher Education
Global Cultural Studies
Film, Theater and Performing Arts
Archaeology and Anthropology
0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00%
Print--All Print Format Only E-Only/Exclusively

15. Proportion Comparison of
Format Use

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Proportion Comparison of Format Use by Collection, 2010-
2013
Ecology and Evolution
U.S. Regional Studies'
Political Science and Policy Studies
Poetry, Fiction and Creative Non-Fiction
Philosophy and Religion
Literature
History
Higher Education
Global Cultural Studies
Film, Theater and Performing Arts
Archaeiology and Anthropology

16. Project Muse
Ebooks@ Yale University Library
Sarah Tudesco – Assessment Librarian

17. Project Muse Titles @ Yale
Brief History of Muse at Yale
• Acquired MUSE e-book package in FY2012
• Continued to receive print titles on approval through FY2014
• Adjusted approval profiles to electronic preferred in FY2015
Electronic Only
32%
Print & Electronic
68%

18. Print UPCC Circulation
Frequency @ Yale
34% of UPCC titles held at Yale circulated at least once. Includes
circulation that occurred before acquiring MUSE ebook package.
Never Circulated
66%
Circulated
34%

19. Print Circulation of UPCC Titles
3,402
2,460
1,908
1,385
775
3,554
3,086
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
1,733
2,722
2013
1,301
999
2015
893
502
2008
2012
2,561
2009 2010 2011 2014
900
Fiscal
Year
2,204
Unique Titles that Circulated
Print Circulation Transactions

20. Print Circulation Demographics
11% 9% 9% 10% 11% 11%
11%
6% 8%
15%
14%
8%
16%
11% 11%
12% 12%
29% 24% 24% 22% 23%
14% 16%
12% 12%
20% 18%
16%
15%
11%
17%
40% 43% 44% 45% 45% 43% 44% 41%
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008 2009 2010 2011
Other
Resource Sharing
Undergraduate
Fiscal
Year
2012 2013 2014 2015
Faculty
Graduate

21. Project Muse – Electronic Usage Frequency
24% of MUSE titles accessed at least once.
In FY2014 – Yale acquired some of the other packages offered by
MUSE. Those titles have only been available for a few months.
76%
Titles Never Accessed
Titles Accessed
24%

22. Project Muse: Print & Electronic
Circulated
34%
66%
Never Circulated
Titles Never Accessed
76%
Titles Accessed
24%
Print Titles
Project Muse

23. Project Muse – Yale Usage by Quarter
Notes:
• Data from COUNTER Report BR2
• FY2015 – Usage through 9/2014
16,424
17,624
14,914
13,147
971 908
18,000
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
Titles Accessed
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
FY201
4 Q2
FY201
5 Q1
FY201
3 Q3
FY201
3 Q2
FY201
3 Q1
FY201
3 Q4
FY201
4 Q4
FY201
4 Q1
1,447
1,055
FY201
4 Q3
1,701
1,353
1,135
1,565
44
Section Views
Individual Titles Accessed

24. Project Muse by LC Group
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000
7,517
2,198
16,081
2,576
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
26%
25%
22%
74%
75%
78%
15% 85%
Analysis of COUNTER data from
2012 through Sept. 2014.
Groups
• Humanities (B, C, D, E-F, M, N, P)
• Sciences (Q, R, S, T, U, V)
• Social Sciences (G, H, J, K, L)
• Other (A, Z, No LC Number)
Humanities
Social Sciences
Sciences
Other/Unknown
Titles Accessed
Titles Not Accessed

25. Project Muse: Total Titles by Classification
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000
P - Language and Literature
H - Social Sciences
E-F - History: America and United States
B - Philosophy, Psychology, Religion
D - History (except America)
J - Political Science
G - Geography, Anthropology
Q - Science
L - Education
K - Law
R - Medicine
M - Music
T - Technology and Engineering
N - Fine Arts
Titles Accessed
Titles Not Accessed

26. Activity by LC Classification: Print & Project Muse
Section Reqeusts (BR2) Print Circulation
0 10,000 20,000
P - Language and Literature 18,376
B - Philosophy, Psychology, Religion 14,676
H - Social Sciences 13,470
E-F - History: America 11,187
D - History (except America) 10,559
J - Political Science 4,233
G - Geography, Anthropology 3,434
K - Law 3,005
R - Medicine
Q - Science
2,749
2,504
N - Fine Arts 2,244
L - Education 1,295
M - Music 1,268
T - Technology 1,204
0 5,000 10,000
P 2,851
B 2,224
H 1,675
E-F 1,775
D 1,174
577
497
112
413
250
145
137
322
394
J
G
K
R
Q
N
L
M
T

27. What’s the Electronic/Print Overlap?
4,074
2,546
P+E
2,519
10,184

28. Discovery @ Yale
Title search (“Gather at the river”) in ORBIS – our main library catalog

29. More Discovery @ Yale
Title search (“Gather at the river”) in SUMMON – our discovery layer

30. Sarah Tudesco
Assessment Librarian
sarah.tudesco@yale.edu

31. Project MUSE eBooks at
Harvard University
Implementation and Assessment
Katherine Leach
Librarian for Western Languages Collections
Western Languages Division, Widener Library
Charleston Conference | November 7, 2014

32. Presentation Outline
• Project Overview
• Gathering and Interpreting Data
• Next Steps

33. The Big Question
“Stop the Presses:
Is the Monograph Headed Toward an E-only
Future?”
- Roger C. Schonfeld, Ithaka S + R, December 2013

34. Basics of the Project
• Purchase (August 2013)
• Record loads (November 2013)
• Data capture (January 2014 – May 2015)

35. What the patrons see

36. Intentional Duplication
in Electronic and Print
70.7% of Project MUSE held in print at Harvard
24%
20%
3%
23%
13%
3%
4%
10%
Breakdown as follow
History
Social Sciences
Music & Fine Arts
Literature
Science & Technology
Philosophy & Religion
Anthropology
Other

37. Disciplines used in MUSE
23 % of Project MUSE was used/accessed
25%
17%
6%
21%
14%
4%
12%
1%
History
Political Science and Policy Studies
Film, Theater, and Performing Arts
Literature
US Regional Studies, South
Philosophy and Religion
Global Cultural Studies
Other (less than 750 uses)

38. Circulation
Some Unexpected Results
20% 18% 20%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Anthropology
Philosophy & Religion
Science & Technology
Literature
Music & Fine Arts
Social Sciences
History
Project MUSE
Print 2013
Print 2014
14% 16% 14%
24% 21% 20%

39. The current issue…
‘Monographs are different…this transition will take thoughtfulness
and care’
Kevin Guthrie, ITHAKA
(Symposium on Sustainable Models for Print Storage
in 21st Century Libraries, October 2, 2014)

40. Next Steps
• Qualitative study / Survey
• Continue gathering statistics

41. Thank you
Katherine Leach
Western Languages Division
Harvard University Library
kleach@fas.harvard.edu