ࡱ> ;=<8( / 0LDTimes New Roman8b8bDb0hbhb~0   @n?" dd@  @@`` <4pQ     c $@g4QdQdtb~0lbLNppp@ <4!d!dtz8b <4BdBd8b8b? %44Site Licensing, Bulk-Buying and the Current PositionKAnthony Pearce Chairman, Ingenta Institute ASA Conference 24 February 2003L, +   A library consortium is a co-operative library member organization that usually consists of a formal arrangement whereby materials, information and services provided by a variety of types of libraries and other organizations are made available to all members. (King, 1987)  A group of libraries with a common funding source. (Academic Press) "\Z"<  E Membership criteriaVThe participants in the consortium are primarily or exclusively libraries The scope of consortium activities involves resource sharing, e g: inter-library lending equipment staff with special skills collective development co-operative purchasing The operation of the consortium is based on a verbal or written agreement between its members RZjZ_Z"j"^"<I  ] History and development  Library co-operation from the late nineteenth century Academic library consortia from the 1930s Formal library consortia agreements from the 1960s 1971: 125 library consortia in the US 1986: 760 co-operative library member organizations in the US, comprising 72,000 libraries, meet the criteria cited 1990s: decline to 400-500 library consortia in the US, partly due to termination of grant funding, and consolidation  "x5 ) 2 % s t History and development (cont.)nUS consortia tend to be older and larger than European consortia (186 members on average, versus 83), but both the US and Europe have a few large consortia and many smaller ones By 1980s/1990s, US library consortia were collectively observed to provide well over 100 distinctive kinds of services to their members 1998: ICOLC - 150 library consortia internationally  on"<  3  Advantages >Library consortia have grown in number and size because they are shown to be highly beneficial to their member libraries in the provision of services higher quality faster delivery lower costs due to economies of scale expansion of resources for users increased electronic access stability in forward budgeting TZZZ"""  G       Advantages The development of formal library consortia has also brought advantages to publishers: wider readership of journals greater and faster market penetration opportunities to increase market share lower rate of attrition of print subscriptions single price and invoice dYK" """<X     Disadvantagesthe consortium moves only as fast as its slowest member members forfeit their ability to customize packages and control collection development members lose ability to influence platform and delivery issues L8W@"d7  V  >   Conclusion Despite the additional workload imposed by being a member of a consortium, the alternative (not being a member of a consortium) is viewed by many librarians as being a lot worse. (Woodward, 2002) The library consortium is  A Good Thing ,"P   (   t GOVERNMENT SAYS ALL LIBRARIANS TO HAVE EYE-TEST The Sun,;1"$ "1     dGOVERNMENT ABANDONS PLAN FOR LIBRARIANS EYE-TEST 33"$1    n A licence is essentially a way of providing use of a piece of property without giving up the ownership. (Okerson~ 1997) Formal licences that required signatures by both the licenser and licensee appeared in the early 1970s with CD-ROM products  Licences for electronic products continue to be used by publishers as legal contracts to control prices, limit access, define use and users, and protect their rights. (Davis and Reilly,1998) FZj""%"" a     l     ;The convergence of the consortium and the licence agreement<<"$,*    Early licences from publishers for the use of digital information contained very restrictive terms defining the user community and the amount of copying that could be done under the licence Publishers gradually began to take a more relaxed view and include categories such as  walk-in users (King, 2000) A similar process has happened with the definition of the  site in which use is licensed, moving from a very physical definition of one building to a virtual definition of the location of the authorized user wherever in the world that authorized user might be at any time (Cox, 2001) FQZ%""" "l     s    Advantages|The site licence provides a mechanism which allows the potential of electronic dissemination to be realized by facilitating faster access to research data to a larger audience within the framework of control and protection afforded by contract law The site licence was the obvious and timely instrument for consortia to adopt in negotiating access to electronic journals (Pearce, 2003) Conclusion The consortium site licence is  A Good Thing Z /s"" "."       z      2 So What s The Big Deal?  Mario Monti    In the Big Deal, libraries agree to buy electronic access to all of a commercial publisher s journals for a price based on current payments to the publisher, plus some increment. (Frazier, 2001) , " Advantages/DisadvantagesBig Deal users viewed almost 10 times as many titles and requested almost 9 times as many articles as users with no access to the Big Deal (Ciber, 2002) Few of the publishers questioned in the Key Perspectives research project for the Ingenta Institute believe that the Big Deal in its current form is anything other than a temporary phenomenon In the same research, many librarians considered that the Big Deal as such has only a very short time to run ,"l   R  g l Why? The packages are too large, crude and inflexible Librarians and users want greater selectivity and choice Increasing budgetary pressures on libraries Potential effects of the universal adoption of usage statistics Conclusion The Big Deal is  A Bad Thing VZZZ" ""x1 : - D     A perspectiveThe amount of reading of journals by scientists is increasing: 1977: 640 readings per article on average late 1990s: 900 readings per article on average, or well over 100,000 readings per journal over the life of the journal The number of articles published per scientist has remained stable and is perhaps increasing Scientists currently average about 125 readings per year of scholarly articles, an amount that appears to have increased over the past 25 years L??"""< ]   !From 30 to 80% of readings of scientists are from electronic journals As a result of more reading from electronic journals and the use of automated searching, the average number of journals used by scientists has increased from 13 per scientist 25 years ago to 20 currently (King, 2002) 4!"<F     Thank you Anthony Pearce Ingenta Institute  ` ` ̙33` 333MMM` ff3333f` f` f` 3>?" dd@,|?" dd@   " @ ` n?" dd@   @@``PR    @ ` ` p>> !(    6rz P z T Click to edit Master title style! !  0sz  z RClick to edit Master text styles Second level Third level Fourth level Fifth level!     S  0tsz `` z W*  0sz `  z Y*  04tz `  z Y*H  0޽h ? ̙33 Default Design<  0l(  l l 0zz P   z W*  l 0T{z    z Y*  l 6{z `P  z W*  l 6| `  z Y* H l 0޽h ? ̙33  $(  r  S 4zz`0 z r  S zz z H  0޽h ? ̙33 @$(  r  S } ~ r  S } ~ H  0޽h ? ̙33  Pd$(  dr d S }P  ~ r d S } ` ~ H d 0޽h ? ̙33  `$(  r  S }P   r  S $}  H  0޽h ? ̙33  p $(   r  S }P   r  S d}  H  0޽h ? ̙33  $$(  $r $ S }P   r $ S $}  H $ 0޽h ? ̙33  ($(  (r ( S }P   r ( S D}  H ( 0޽h ? ̙33  ,$(  ,r , S }P   r , S d}  H , 0޽h ? ̙33 0$(  0r 0 S }p  r 0 S }0@  H 0 0޽h ? ̙33 4$(  4r 4 S '}p  r 4 S $'} `    H 4 0޽h ? ̙33 8$(  8r 8 S D(}p  r 8 S '} `    H 8 0޽h ? ̙33  <$(  <r < S )}P   r < S (}  H < 0޽h ? ̙33  @$(  @r @ S d)}P   r @ S *}  H @ 0޽h ? ̙33  D$(  Dr D S $*}P   r D S +}  H D 0޽h ? ̙33 H$(  Hr H S D+}p  r H S d,}0`   H H 0޽h ? ̙33  L$(  Lr L S ,}P   r L S $-}   H L 0޽h ? ̙33  0P$(  Pr P S D.}P   r P S d/}  H P 0޽h ? ̙33  @T$(  Tr T S $0}P   r T S t  H T 0޽h ? ̙33  PX$(  Xr X S    r X S   H X 0޽h ? ̙33  `\$(  \r \ S |P   r \ S |  H \ 0޽h ? ̙33 p`$(  `r ` S |p  r ` S t| `    H ` 0޽h ? ̙33rh@8EG@KMOxQdSPU _PID_GUIDAN{7760878A-8292-4BD2-B60E-9D176F523B2C}Root EntrydO)7>@ Current User,SummaryInformation(@PowerPoint Document(  !"#$%&'()*+,-./01234567H9:RkIJKPQSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijlm8  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0$_㜪 presentation Oh+'0 `h    (05Site Licensing, Bulk-Buying and the Current Positiont Rollo Turnerg,  presentationg, 5esMicrosoft PowerPointBuy@c#@l-@@GoM  4& &Root EntrydO)04B@ Current User,SummaryInformation(@PowerPoint Document(  !"#$%&'()*+,-./01234567H9:RkIJKPQSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijlm8  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0$_㜪 presentation Oh+'0 `h    (05Site Licensing, Bulk-Buying and the Current Positiont Rollo Turnerg,  presentationg, 5esMicrosoft PowerPointBuy@c#@l-@@GoM  4& &@@`` D<pT     c $@g4MdMdXb~0Pb ppp@ <4!d!dxb <4BdBdbbL? %5ASA<What s the Big Deal? Journal Purchasing Bulk Buying or Cherry-Picking?H),$4Site Licensing, Bulk-Buying and the Current PositionKAnthony Pearce Chairman, Ingenta Institute ASA Conference 24 February 2003L, +   A library consortium is a co-operative library member organization that usually consists of a formal arrangement whereby materials, information and services provided by a variety of types of libraries and other organizations are made available to all members. (King, 1987)  A group of libraries with a common funding source. (Academic Press) "Root EntrydO)@O@ Current User,SummaryInformation(@PowerPoint Document(  !"#$%&'()*+,-./01234567H9:IJKPRkQSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijlm8  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0$_㜪 bpresentation Oh+'0 `h    (05Site Licensing, Bulk-Buying and the Current Positiont Rollo Turnerg,  presentationg, 5esMicrosoft PowerPointBuy@c#@l-@@GoM  4& &\Z"6  E Membership criteriaVThe participants in the consortium are primarily or exclusively libraries The scope of consortium activities involves resource sharing, e g: inter-library lending equipment staff with special skills collective development co-operative purchasing The operation of the consortium is based on a verbal or written agreement between its members RZjZ_Z"j"^"6I  ] History and development  Library co-operation from the late nineteenth century Academic library consortia from the 1930s Formal library consortia agreements from the 1960s 1971: 125 library consortia in the US 1986: 760 co-operDocumentSummaryInformation8ative library member organizations in the US, comprising 72,000 libraries, meet the criteria cited 1990s: decline to 400-500 library consortia in the US, partly due to termination of grant funding, and consolidation  "l5 ) 2 % s t History and development (cont.)nUS consortia tend to be older and larger than European consortia (186 members on average, versus 83), but both the US and Europe have a few large consortia and many smaller ones By 1980s/1990s, US library consortia were collectively observed to provide well over 100 distinctive kinds of services to their members 1998: ICOLC - 150 library consortia internationally  on"6  3  Advantages >Library consortia have grown in number and size because they are shown to be highly beneficial to their member libraries in the provision of services higher quality faster delivery lower costs due to economies of scale expansion of resources for users increased electronic access stability in forward budgeting TZZZ"""~  G       Advantages The development of formal library consortia has also brought advantages to publishers: wider readership of journals greater and faster market penetration opportunities to increase market share lower rate of attrition of print subscriptions single price and invoice dYK" """6X     Disadvantagesthe consortium moves only as fast as its slowest member members forfeit their ability to customize packages and control collection development members lose ability to influence platform and delivery issues L8W@"Z7  V  >   Conclusion Despite the additional workload imposed by being a member of a consortium, the alternative (not being a member of a consortium) is viewed by many librarians as being a lot worse. (Woodward, 2002) The library consortium is  A Good Thing ,"^     (   t GOVERNMENT SAYS ALL LIBRARIANS TO HAVE EYE-TEST The Sun,;1"$ "1     dGOVERNMENT ABANDONS PLAN FOR LIBRARIANS EYE-TEST 33"$1    n A licence is essentially a way of providing use of a piece of property without giving up the ownership. (Okerson~ 1997) Formal licences that required signatures by both the licenser and licensee appeared in the early 1970s with CD-ROM products  Licences for electronic products continue to be used by publishers as legal contracts to control prices, limit access, define use and users, and protect their rights. (Davis and Reilly,1998) FZj""%"" a     l       ;The convergence of the consortium and the licence agreement<<"$(*    Early licences from publishers for the use of digital information contained very restrictive terms defining the user community and the amount of copying that could be done under the licence Publishers gradually began to take a more relaxed view and include categories such as  walk-in users (King, 2000) A similar process has happened with the definition of the  site in which use is licensed, moving from a very physical definition of one building to a virtual definition of the location of the authorized user wherever in the world that authorized user might be at any time (Cox, 2001) FQZ%""" "b     s    Advantages|The site licence provides a mechanism which allows the potential of electronic dissemination to be realized by facilitating faster access to research data to a larger audience within the framework of control and protection afforded by contract law The site licence was the obvious and timely instrument for consortia to adopt in negotiating access to electronic journals (Pearce, 2003) Conclusion The consortium site licence is  A Good Thing Z /s"" "."       l        2 So What s The Big Deal?  Mario Monti    In the Big Deal, libraries agree to buy electronic access to all of a commercial publisher s journals for a price based on current payments to the publisher, plus some increment. (Frazier, 2001) , "(   Advantages/DisadvantagesBig Deal users viewed almost 10 times as many titles and requested almost 9 times as many articles as users with no access to the Big Deal (Ciber, 2002) Few of the publishers questioned in the Key Perspectives research project for the Ingenta Institute believe that the Big Deal in its current form is anything other than a temporary phenomenon In the same research, many librarians considered that the Big Deal as such has only a very short time to run ,"b   R  g l Why? The packages are too large, crude and inflexible Librarians and users want greater selectivity and choice Increasing budgetary pressures on libraries Potential effects of the universal adoption of usage statistics Conclusion The Big Deal is  A Bad Thing VZZZ" ""l1 : - D     A perspectiveThe amount of reading of journals by scientists is increasing: 1977: 640 readings per article on average late 1990s: 900 readings per article on average, or well over 100,000 readings per journal over the life of the journal The number of articles published per scientist has remained stable and is perhaps increasing Scientists currently average about 125 readings per year of scholarly articles, an amount that appears to have increased over the past 25 years L??"""6 ]   !From 30 to 80% of readings of scientists are from electronic journals As a result of more reading from electronic journals and the use of automated searching, the average number of journals used by scientists has increased from 13 per scientist 25 years ago to 20 currently (King, 2002) 4!"6F     Thank you Anthony Pearce Ingenta Institute  p<( pf4P  p p  04` 4 x p c $44P  4 H p 0޽h ? rnn&#TNPP0t & TNPP &&TNPP    - "-- !-- "-&G& - &Gy& --- !x0P--- Times New Roman- . 2 ASA:,:.--Y@-- Times New Roman- .%2 ~ Whats the Big Deal?7(*. ."2 &(Journal Purchasing!.Times New Roman- .42 nBulk Buying or Cherry-Picking?      .--"System-&TNPP & ՜.+,D՜.+,