1 / 18

The CARM Repository – the first 10 years

Gary Hardy, Robert Stafford, Eva Fisch, Karen Kealy. The CARM Repository – the first 10 years. The CARM Model. Cooperative initiative of member libraries Capital contribution and annual maintenance Items ceded by members to the store Discovery via CARM Catalogue

newton
Download Presentation

The CARM Repository – the first 10 years

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Gary Hardy, Robert Stafford, Eva Fisch, Karen Kealy The CARMRepository – the first 10 years

  2. The CARM Model • Cooperative initiative of member libraries • Capital contribution and annual maintenance • Items ceded by members to the store • Discovery via CARM Catalogue • Best practice environmental storage • Items available to all libraries via Inter Library Loan.

  3. So far • 15,800 linear m. available • Allocations range from 198 to 3894 linear m. • 50% of available allocation utilized • Utilization by individual member libraries between 15% and 95% • 534,000 volumes

  4. The CARM ”Collection” • Most 1950’s – 1980’s (80%) • Around 300,000 volumes serials • 18,000 serial titles • 18% of serial titles published in Australia

  5. The good … • Pick list …discard of duplicates • Confidence in long term preservation • Much more economical than individual storage • Professional expertise in conservation • Book heaven

  6. …and the not so good .. • Issues with ceding materials • Auditors • Material needed again • Lack of incentives to store materials • Discovery no longer integrated • User resistance • Different contribution rates • Usage levels

  7. “An evolving absence of need”J.P.McCarthy • 85 loans per month • 63 copies per month • 70% of loan requests for monographs • 66% of requests from member libraries

  8. If CARM was a database, would we cancel it?

  9. Is the value of CARM symbolic and psychological rather than practical?

  10. Next ten years • Most of the librarians and academics who built our collections will leave • Mass digitization projects will resolve • Ongoing shift in the way our users access information will continue • Pressures on library space will intensify and with it the need for storage

  11. We don't have a storage problem ... we have a co-ordination problem.(misquoting Brad Wheeler...)

  12. Need to rethink our approach to storage • Do we know what we should save at regional, national and international level? • Do we have any clear idea what we are saving? • What are the overlaps with National and State Libraries? • What is the extent of duplication in Higher Ed storage efforts? • To what extent should we save material which has been digitized?

  13. A National Distributed Repository (Meta-repository?) • Mechanism for individual institutions to designate titles which they are preserving • Policy, standards, trust framework • Discovery mechanism • Incentive to preserve

  14. Thankyou Questions, comments?

More Related