|
|
Cornell Faculty Senate Resolution
Resolution
regarding the University Library’s Policies on Serials Acquisitions,
with Special Reference to Negotiations with Elsevier
Submitted by the Faculty Library Advisory Board for consideration
at the December 17, 2003 meeting of the University Faculty Senate
BACKGROUND
A Crisis in the Cost of Journals in the Sciences and Social
Sciences
For many years, increases in the prices of library materials have
exceeded increases in library acquisitions budgets, at Cornell and
abroad. One significant reason is the growing commercialization of
scholarly publishing, especially in the sciences and social sciences
and especially where journals are concerned. Statistics from the Association
of Research Libraries (http://www.arl.org/stats/arlstat/graphs/2001/2001t2.html)
show that over the fifteen years from 1986 to 2001 the prices of serials
generally increased by 215%, library expenditures on serials went
up by 210%, and the number of serials titles purchased by large academic
research libraries decreased by 5%. The Consumer Price Index during
the same period increased by only 62%.
At Cornell, Ithaca campus library budgets for materials increased
by 149% during approximately the same period, but the number of serials
titles purchased increased by only 5%—at a time when the number
of serials published increased by approximately 138%. The contract
colleges subscribe to 14% fewer serials than they did fifteen years
ago, even though their combined library acquisitions budgets have
increased by 117% during that period.
Commercial publishers charge more—sometimes many times more—for
their materials than scholarly societies or university presses do.
The Dutch company Elsevier, which publishes mainly science journals,
is the best example. Over the last decade Elsevier’s price increases
have often been over 10% and occasionally over 20% on a year to year
basis. (They have recently announced a policy of not raising prices
by more than 10% in a given year.) In 2003 Cornell subscribed to 930 Elsevier titles at
a cost of approximately $1.7 million. Those 930 titles represent fewer
than 2% of the total number of serials titles to which Cornell subscribes;
the $1.7 million comprises something over 20% of the library’s
total serials expenditures, including those of the Medical School.
Elsevier’s proposed price increase of 6.5% for 2004 would have
required an increase in the library’s serials expenditures of approximately $100,000. By
contrast, the library’s total materials budget, including materials
for the Medical School, has in fact decreased by 1.4%. It is clear
that increases of the magnitude that Elsevier regularly expects have
become quite literally unbearable. The long-term trends of which these
particular increases are a part are therefore also unsustainable.
The Cornell library’s relationship with Elsevier has given definition
and urgency to problems the library has been facing for some time
and that extend beyond Elsevier to include other commercial publishers.
Elsevier’s pricing practices
One way the library can accommodate increases in serials prices that
exceed increases in the library’s budget is by canceling some
titles. Elsevier’s pricing practices, however, make this straightforward
solution especially costly. In the past, Cornell has contracted with
Elsevier for a package of journals and electronic services. The contract
has been priced as a “bundle,” that is, in such a way that, if
the library cancels any of the Elsevier journals it currently subscribes
to, the pricing of the other individual journals the library chooses
to keep increases substantially. (The actual process is somewhat more
complicated than this, but this is the end result.) Because the prices
of the journals that are retained greatly increase when others are
cancelled, the only way to achieve any real savings is to cancel a great many journals.
In 2003 the library was able to maintain its subscriptions to Elsevier
journals only because of one-time assistance from an extra-budgetary
source. Given that the library cannot bear Elsevier’s price
increases for 2004, it has decided that it must withdraw from the
bundled pricing plan that has characterized past contracts and begin
canceling Elsevier journal titles. The library, in consultation with
affected faculty, has identified several hundred Elsevier journals for cancellation at the end of 2003.
There are two clear benefits to this course of action: it enables
the library to retain the most important Elsevier titles without drastically
impacting serials collections and the library’s ability to acquire
non-Elsevier journals and non-serials materials, and it frees the
library, in 2004 and in the future, from contractual obligations that
have in effect compromised its ability to make case-by-case judgments
about the value to thecollection of particular Elsevier journals.
Understandably, there is growing dissatisfaction at universities in
the United States with Elsevier’s prices and pricing practices
and increasing militancy among university librarians and faculty with
regard to modes of response. Cornell’s announced intention to
withdraw from the standard contractual arrangements with Elsevier
for 2004 has received substantial attention in the press. Cornell
is clearly perceived as assuming a leadership role in these matters. Moreover, the faculty at some other
major universities have endorsed or are considering endorsing resolutions
designed to address, in varying ways, this same set of issues.
(For more information, see the web page the
library has set up to explain these issues: http://www.library.cornell.edu/scholarlycomm/problem.html)
BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
(1) The University Faculty Senate supports the library’s
efforts to maintain and enhance the outstanding quality of Cornell’s
library collections for teaching and research. Moreover, recognizing
the special challenges presented by current economic, market, and
budgetary conditions, the University Faculty Senate supports the library’s
efforts to bring serials costs under control while at the same time
maintaining the collection’s uality.
(2) Recognizing that given present and future budget
constraints, the library requires autonomy and flexibility to manage
its materials acquisitions decisions effectively, the University Faculty
Senate endorses the library’s decision to withdraw from Elsevier’s
bundled pricing plan and undertake selective cancellation of Elsevier
journals as deemed appropriate by the library in consultation with
the faculty.
(3) Recognizing that current trends regarding serials
costs are unsustainable and that the current business models and marketing
strategies of commercial publishers bear significant responsibility
for those trends, the University Faculty Senate encourages the library
to take an aggressive approach in negotiating new contractual models
and pricing structures with Elsevier and other commercial publishers designed
to bring serials costs in line with realistic long-term library budget
projections.
(4) Recognizing that the cost of Elsevier journals
in particular is radically out of proportion with the importance of
those journals to the library’s serials collection (measured
both in terms of the proportion of the total collection they represent
and in terms of their use by and value to faculty and students), the
University Faculty Senate encourages the library to seek in the near
term, in consultation with the faculty, to reduce its expenditures
on Elsevier journals to no more than 15% of its total annual serials acquisitions expenditures (from in excess of 20% in 2003).
Moreover, the University Faculty Senate encourages the library to
work toward long-term pricing structures with Elsevier and other publishers
based on reasonable measures of a subscription’s importance
to the Cornell collection.
(5) Recognizing that the increasing control by large
commercial publishers over the publication and distribution of the
faculty’s scholarship and research threatens to undermine core
academic values promoting broad and rapid dissemination of new knowledge
and unrestricted access to the results of scholarship and research,
the University Faculty Senate encourages the library and the faculty
vigorously to explore and support alternatives to commercial venues for scholarly communication.
|
