Universities Research libraries ( Collections ) Boundaries

1. Universities Research libraries (Collections)Boundaries Lorcan Dempsey U Washington Libraries 19 March 2010 With thanks to Brian Lavoie and Constance Malpas

2. Worldwide demand for cars will never exceed one million, primarily because of a limitation in the number of available chauffeurs.Daimler

4. A diversion: UW book collections

5. University of Washington in WorldCat Scale Diversity Total number of UW holdings in WorldCat: 4,045,667 378 languages (31% of titles non-English) 236 countries of publication (52% of titles non-US) Contribution Number of UW-contributed records in WorldCat: 412,197 Value of Contribution Number of holdings attached to UW-contributed records: 2,088,555 Rareness Number of items held by UW & 4 or fewer other institutions: 541,551 Statistics current as of January 2010

6. HathiTrust: 12 month growth trajectory Equal in scope to University of Washington (UW) Equal in size to median ARL collection (2008) Data current as of February 2010

7. N=3.2 million titles ; 5.3 million volumes Humanities content (literature, history) dominates – presages shift in scholarly practice? Hathi Trust: Subject Distribution Data current as of February 2010

8. University of Washington ‘mirrored’ in Hathi = 27% of titles held by UW 11 miles of recoverable shelf space Data current as of February 2010

9. UW: Potential Redistribution of Print Resource Choices?

10. Overview

11. Education & research Crude Collections Simplistic Research libraries Reductive

12. The business of education Research and learning workflows Information products and services Library technology

13. The business of education Research and learning workflows Information products and services Library technology

14. Overview

15. a quick look at education

17. 71 270

19. Colleges have three basic business models for attracting and keeping students. Two will continue to work in the next decade, and one almost certainly will not. Chronicle of Higher Education

20. Research/elite (Strong brand, connected to international network of science and scholarship; educate many of the political and business elite; flagship), Convenience(community colleges and for-profit providers, focused on preparation for further education or for a career) Education as a service. The mixed middle (broad education. Not kept up with distance and convenience agendas, high overhead, limited research funding, value of 4 year immersive experience, …). (vocabulary adapted - LD)

21. Obvious? Alignment with mission of parent institution … … in a network environment … … and focus on costs … … will continue to redraw the boundaries of the academic library … and force choices.

22. Libs in ‘convenience’ sector • An infrastructure cost • ROI • Make learning more effective • Focus on ‘packaged digital’ and integration with learning process • Organizational integration with learning and student support • Focused on institutional goals not on ‘community of libraries’.

23. ‘Middle’ academic • Make research and learning more productive • Selective local engagement around creation and curation of scholarly and learning materials • with the exception of a small number of large research libraries, retrospective print collections will be managed as a pooled resource and physically consolidated in large regional stores • 80+% of library materials spending in the academic sector will be directed toward licensed electronic content distributed by a small number of large aggregators • Strong downward pressure on costs will push towards library consolidation, more ‘instrumental’ resource sharing, and a move to outsourced services.

24. Research libs • Resources. Libraries that support doctoral education • <20% US academic libraries but account for .. • >50% library spending and … • >75% of expenditures on information resources. • Digital infrastructure. • Preservation mandate: the scholarly record. Comprehensive collections. • Support for scholarly resources. • Support for digital scholarship

25. research

26. “Emerging global model”

27. Many countries have initiatives which try to concentrate resources on research excellence, aiming to maintain or establish their presence in the Research/elite group. These include China, Germany, S Korea, Japan, Canada, Taiwan, France. Some countries/regions more consciously support ‘directed diversity’, looking at the balance between research excellence, broad-based education and vocational/convenience approaches: these include Australia, Norway, and Catalonia. (Several sources – LD)

28. Predictably, institutional attention and resources are directed at activities and local infrastructure that supports high-profile research activities, especially in the natural and social sciences, where federal funding can account for up to 70% of the institutional research portfolio. Scholarship in the humanities, by contrast, is much more dependent on institutional budget allocations and private grant funding. As a result, support for library-based research in the humanities is especially vulnerable to changes in academic priorities and the availability of endowment funds. The importance of STM

29. Eigenfactor project Tony Hey, Microsoft Scholarly work that used to depend on local research collections and infrastructure is increasingly reliant on content and services that are created and managed outside of individual academic institutions. Disciplinary resource (Arxiv, Repec, SSRN, ..) Community, tools, … Around and above the institution …

30. collection trends

31. Volume of publications will continue to grow. Format will become less important than channel: Education (text books, learning materials), Consumer (Amazon/Google/Apple), professional publishing (Pearson, Reed-Elsevier, Thomson Reuters), … Growth in public and research materials but concerns about how to sustain in longer term. Research and learning materials as social objects. Social will become a major element of all publishing – content will be the basis for learning and social experiences. Move to digital raises major issues around ‘knowledge enclosure’ through licensing which create interesting service issues for (public) libraries.

32. Data from NCES. Analysis by Constance Malpas.

33. Five Years* Front Back 85% 100% 50% 25% Trade: 30% 10% 75% 100% Acad/Prof: Text books: 10% 90% 20% 100% 1% 20% 5% 50% H/S: Forecasts – Digital Availability ofbooks Current* Segment Ten Years# College: Memo: *Assumes top tier publishers – 1,000 active publishers # Assumes any active publisher selling on Amazon.com Impact of Google Book Search and GoogleEditions? OCLC work commissioned from Michael Cairns. Based on interviews with selection of industry experts.

34. Five Years* Front Back 25% 60% 5% 3% Trade: 5% 1% 10% 80% Acad/Prof: 10% 50% 5% 90% 0% 5% 5% 30% H/S: Forecasts – Digital Revenues(books) Current* Segment Ten Years# Text books: College: Memo: *Assumes top tier publishers – 1,000 active publishers # Assumes any active publisher selling on Amazon.com OCLC work commissioned from Michael Cairns. Based on interviews with selection of industry experts.

35. Models of Provision for Scholarly Communication/Journals Small but growing segment, aided by public policy support Free Access Mostly experimental at this point Open Access (e.g., PLoS) ArXiv.org RePEc.org PubMed Central NARCIS Author Pages Social Networks (e.g., Nature Network) Open Access (e.g., BioMed Central) Non-Profit For-Profit ICPSR American Economic Review JSTOR “trad” Publishing Often enhanced with new forms of value added: e.g., bundling articles with data; semantic enrichment Long tradition of coexistence with commercial publishing Paid Access

36. Models of Provision for Scholarly Communication/Journals Small but growing segment, aided by public policy support Free Access Mostly experimental at this point Research institutions: significant funder? Open Access (e.g., PLoS) ArXiv.org RePEc.org PubMed Central NARCIS Author Pages Social Networks (e.g., Nature Network) Open Access (e.g., BioMed Central) Non-Profit For-Profit Research institutions: 75% of academic revenue? ICPSR American Economic Review JSTOR “trad” Publishing Often enhanced with new forms of value added: e.g., bundling articles with data; semantic enrichment Research institutions: major constituency? Long tradition of coexistence with commercial publishing Paid Access

37. 5 years? Free Access Non-Profit For-Profit Paid Access

38. “In other words, throughout history, libraries have depended on destruction. And today, in an era of electronic abundance they still operate within an increasingly imaginary economy of scarcity – fragments, incunabula, manuscripts, rare books. ….Once, books were chained to the wall. Today, print is an afterthought: “Do you want a receipt with that?” LisbetRausing

39. COLLECTIONS GRID Stewardship/scarcity high low Low-High Books & Journals Newspapers Gov Documents CD & DVD Maps Scores Low-Low Freely-accessible web resources Open source software Newsgroup archives low Uniqueness High-Low Research & Learning Materials Institutional records ePrints/tech reports Learning objects Courseware E-portfolios Research data Prospectus Insitutional website High-High Special Collections Rare books Local/Historical Newspapers Local History Materials Archives & Manuscripts Theses & dissertations high

40. You see the problem. What is the library, when the totality of experience approaches that which can be remembered? What is it when we no longer preserve only those fragments that time, fire, and barbarians have left us? When we are no longer able to safeguard only remnants of our discourses on thought, memory, and images, but the thoughts, memories, and images themselves – complete? What do we do when we have not only the Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects, but also Vasari’s blog, wiki, twitter, texts, emails, chatroom, Facebook, radio interviews, TV appearances, and electronic notebooks? LisbetRausing

41. COLLECTIONS GRID Stewardship high low All institutions: shift to licensed All institutions: manage transition from print? Licensed channel providers: consumer, education, scholarly, .. low Uniqueness Research institutions: managing institutional assets Research institutions: new scholarly outputs All institutions: learning materials high All institutions: How much investment?

42. library trends:boundaries,focus, scaling and sourcing

43. Analysis based on NCES data: Constance Malpas If this trend continues library allocations would fall below 0.5% by 2015. Growth in for-profit sector, concerns about infrastructure costs in the ‘middle’ and budget issues in the research sector all support this trend.

44. The scholarly record • Legacy print • Digitized print • Licenced (books + J) • New scholarly outputs • Primary sources • Data • Archives/SpecColl • Communications Research infrastructure Offsite storage Repositories Facilities Services (Arxiv, …) Management of institutional assets Records Reputation Resources – R&L

45. a Coasian view of the academic library Universities find it useful and economical to internalize a bundle of library-related activities • As the pattern of transaction costs change, so too will the boundaries of the library. • Researchers/learners have more options – network.

46. Unbundling the corporation Harvard Business Review (1999)

47. Core components of a firm Attracting and building relationships with customers “Service-oriented”, customization Economies of scope important Develop new products and services and bring them to market Speed/flexibility important Customer Relationship Management Product Innovation Infrastructure Back office capacities that support day-to-day operations “Routinized” workflows Economies of scale important

48. Customer relationship management • Vital to maintain? • Deeper engagement with the university mission • Local customization • Analytics: data driven engagement • Fragmented

49. Innovation • Customer relationship management • Shared services • Organizational?

50. Infrastructure challenge • Print increasingly collaborative: • Collaborative arrangements for print • Collaborative arrangements for digital • Licensed materials: • Reduce cost of management through private providers • Institutional research and learning materials: • Selective investments; leave to others where appropriate • Search for collaborative solutions where possible • Relationship management • Systems infrastructure • Consolidation of traditional management environment • Selective local investment in digital infrastructure • Collaborative and third party cloud offerings