IRIS Photos

E-Only Review Nets Savings for CUL

Mary Ochs and Bill Kara

During the last several years CUL’s online collections have grown considerably. Not only has the number of titles available online increased dramatically, but there has been a significant shift among many researchers in how those collections are being used. In her March 2006 memorandum to Cornell’s Deans, Directors, and Department Heads, Sarah Thomas explained the rationale for reviewing part of CUL’s journal collection for electronic-only access:

Electronic Only (E-Only) Journal Subscriptions

Many researchers prefer electronic access to published journal literature because of the flexibility of access provided. In three surveys conducted over the past five years, Cornell Library users have indicated that increased access to full-text publications was a highly desired service. In November 2005, Cornell administered a survey (LibQUAL) on service quality that was sponsored by the Association of Research Libraries to a random sample of undergraduates, graduate students and faculty. All three groups indicated that access to “electronic resources from home or office” and “electronic information resources I need” were priorities. Responding to this change in user behavior, the Library has begun a multi-year project to transition to e-only in circumstances where this format offers advantages over paper or when there is no loss of content. The decision to move to e-only has come after serious consideration of how the Library can best serve the Cornell community with the limited resources it has at its disposal. Moving to e-only for a small fraction of Cornell’s 60,000 serials is resulting in savings in subscriptions, processing, binding, and shelving costs that are being used by subject specialists to protect other subscriptions. Were we not to take this move, we would be forced to cancel subscriptions to an even greater number of journals than is currently the case.

Recognizing that researchers in different disciplines were at different stages of their acceptance and use of e-only resources, the Library’s subject specialists across campus have approached their reviews in different ways. The science libraries were the first to undertake significant reviews of their journal collections for e-only access. They have now been joined by other subject specialists campuswide.

Reviewing Journals for E-Only Access

Decision making and communication regarding the transition to “E-only” has been carefully planned. Collection development staff developed a set of criteria for retaining journals in print. Librarians worked under the assumption that if a journal met any of these criteria, a print subscription would be retained (within budget limits). Lists of titles under consideration were posted on a special project Web site managed by Fred Muratori. The Web site allowed students and faculty to review lists by subject and send feedback via e-mail to selectors.

Criteria for Retaining Print Subscriptions 

Function

  1. If the title is especially high profile (e.g., Daedelus, Nature, Lancet, Diacritics).
  2. If the print journal functions better as a browsing journal or current awareness source (e.g., due to poor interface design in the electronic version)
  3. If the quality of images or graphics is demonstrably poorer in the electronic journal.
  4. If the print has significant artifactual or aesthetic value.

Electronic Archival Availability

  1. If there is no guarantee that the publisher will continue to provide access to the electronic volumes to which we subscribed in case of future cancellation.
  2. If there is no evidence of an institutional commitment to the journal’s long-term preservation.

Print Retention Responsibility

  1. If CUL has either a consortial responsibility to retain a paper copy or another strong responsibility to retain a print archive of this journal title or the subject area to which it belongs.

Timeliness and Reliability

  1. If there is any delay between publication of print and availability of online content.
  2. If the provider of the electronic journal is unreliable.

Content

  1. If the content of the print differs from that of the electronic (e.g., the print version contains significantly more material than the electronic version.)

Project Status

Using the above criteria and through communications with the Cornell community, there has been substantial progress in the journal reviews across campus. A total of approximately 2,400 titles have been converted to E-only since the science libraries began their review several years ago. The most significant cost savings were achieved through the cancellation of duplicate subscriptions, relying on a single subscription (e-only or electronic with print). The cancellation of over 200 duplicate subscriptions that were necessary in a print environment resulted in saving over $300,000 in annual subscription costs. Access to current issues of those journals continues online. Subject specialists have been particularly aggressive in identifying savings in this area. In addition to those 2,600 subscriptions converted to e-only access, many hundreds of titles clearly matched the criteria for retaining print subscriptions. For these, the Library will continue print and electronic subscriptions. 

CUL has also realized significant nonsubscription savings in processing, binding, and shelving for the 2,400 unique subscriptions moved to e-only. Unit libraries that have converted a larger number of their titles are already realizing savings in staff time and resources, which have been redirected to support new initiatives and programs.

The CUL staff is already planning for the review of additional titles for e-only access for the 2008 subscription year. For these reviews the Library will continue to seek input from the Cornell community as we support an ongoing commitment to provide reliable, quality access to the current journal literature.