Presented at the 2015 Charleston Conference by Julia Gelfand, Applied Sciences, Engineering & Public Health Libn, Univ of Calif, Irvine Libraries; Scott Ahlberg, Chief Operations Officer, Reprints Desk; Eric Archambault, CEO and President, 1Science and Science-Metrix; Jan Peterson, Publisher Relations & Director, Reprints Desk; Thomas Ramsden, Director Publisher Relations & Licensing Operations, Wolters Kluwer.

1. New Methods for Extending Access
Implications for Publishers and Library Collections & Services

2. Today’s Discussion Points & Speakers
ILL and document supply
Scott Ahlberg (Reprints Desk)
Publisher view of non-subscription access models
Tom Ramsden (Wolters Kluwer)
Open Access
Eric Archambault (1Science)
What do these new models mean for collection development?
Julia Gelfand (Univ California, Irvine)

3. Why this topic?
Why discuss new methods for extending access?

4. ILL & Document Supply
> No library can afford to acquire or subscribe to everything
> Shifting research demands
> Budgetary constraints
= New access models needed

5. Other Diversifying Access Models

6. Acquisitions & ILL/DocDel:
Two sides of the same coin
> Balance low cost with maximum access
> Acquisitions: Persistent, ongoing access; High use titles
> ILL & document delivery: Demand-driven access; lower use titles

7. Considerations & Questions
 Price (consortial and direct)
 Speed of delivery
 Link resolver target
 Native PDF
 All users or just faculty and grad students?
 Use only after CONTU ceiling?
 Book chapters and journal articles
 Integration with ILL tools such as ILLiad & Rapid
 Metrics for decision making
 Will more publishers establish lower academic
rates to meet growing demand?
 How much mediation to apply to document
supply?
 Extend to undergraduates?
 Use transactional purchases for pre-CONTU
ceiling?

8. “The forces which made ILL and document delivery services
so critical for researchers are growing, not diminishing.
Materials budgets in libraries generally are not expanding;
there is still no way that academic libraries can afford to
permanently collect all the materials that a patron desires.
The number and variety of indexing databases that increase
awareness of resources continue to grow, thus exerting
pressure on ILL operations, whereas almost every other
type of library service has diminished.”
Wil Weston, from
Revisiting The Tao
of Resource
Sharing, The Serials
Librarian,, v. 69
issue 1, 2015

9. Publisher view of non-subscription access models

10. In the ever changing landscape of content
management and document delivery companies and
librarians are seeking to maximize their budgets and
in turn the publishing world continues to develop
alternative types of access models to grow revenue
and meet the needs of the customer.
One hurdle a number of publishers and vendors face
is that library budgets are historically divided into two
categories: Sub (journals and databases) and Non-
Sub (books and archives) and their budgets must be
allocated accordingly.
In the typical case the Sub pool of funds are usually
set aside at the beginning of the fiscal year while there
may be some non-sub money set aside in the event of
specific requests from faculty or students during the
year.
At the end of the fiscal year, if this money is not spent,
the library is typically in a “use it or lose it” situation
and more willing to spend on non-sub content.

11. Review of alternate acquisitions models
• ILL (Interlibrary loan) - The tried and true option but the service is in decline due
to a number of factors such as the time it takes to receive a document and the
limitations on the number of articles that can be requested. As an alternative,
document delivery companies have launched commercial solutions of ILL which
enables the requesting library to receive the article immediately for a fee which a
large number of publisher are participating in.
• Purchase (Perpetual Access) – Allows libraries to buy and own content. It long
held view of customers that books should be under a purchase model.
• Document delivery – Overall publishers are seeing in the pharma market a
greater use in the service as it adds the flexibility to access articles which are not
published in high impact factor journals.

12. Review of alternate acquisitions models
• Content Rental – Allows patron to rent the article for a specific amount of time
and is becoming more attractive in the academic space especially among nurses.
• Content Purchase / PPV – pay per view – Has limitations on how the document
can be used even if the company has an RRO license. As the price becomes a
bigger factor, customers are willing to go with other lower cost options such as
rental
• Deposit Accounts – allows the medical and scientific community to expand their
information reach by purchasing immediate access to full-text articles regardless
of whether your institution has a journal subscription. The optional Pay-Per-View
Deposit Account service provides extra value by enabling you to have funds
deducted automatically from a central account with each purchase

13. Review of alternate acquisitions models
• DDA / PPA – (Demand Driven / Patron Driven Acquisition) - is driven by the patron, with
the library setting the parameters of the “buy” / “triggers.” The Vendor determines what
‘triggers’ it will offer in its DDA/PDA model. Publisher’s and vendor’s opinions vary on the
model as on one hand it helps get content to new or lost customers while on the other
they are assuming all the risk with no guaranteed revenue.
• EBCM – (Evidenced Based Collection Management) – Not a traditional DDA / PPA model
in this case the librarian is making the purchase decisions based on usage as well as
collection development policies, subject specialist input and other criteria. This model
may offer a vendor a better margin and a purchase guarantee up front It also offers a
library more control, as librarian review “use” of all titles “as a whole” at the end of the
set time period, and can then use other collection metrics to make decisions about
purchases.
• Pay-as-you-Go – A service a number of publishers and vendors offer where you either
pay for the content over a series of days or based on usage over a selected time frame.

15. Availability of OA

16. OA for on-demand library: 2015 and 2025
2015 OA situation
≈50% of papers just published available
during the year
≈60% of papers published 18 months ago
are available
In 2025
Between 80-90% of papers just published
OA available

17. Model for journal shelf-less, quasi on-demand library
On-demand
Fast ILL and near real-time document delivery (aka ILL, Reprint Desk)
Comprehensive contents access
OA discovery systems (aka oaFindr, DOAJ, …)
Digital libraries (aka JSTOR, ProQuest Research Library …)
Digital and print preservation archives (e.g. LOCKSS, Portico, …)

18. Issues to Discovery of OA peer-reviewed papers
How do you facilitate discovery of all OA (green, hybrid, gold)
OA papers from more than 30,000 top-level domains
Crisscrossing of institutional repositories, mega repositories (e.g.
arXiv), gold aggregators(e.g. DOAJ), publishers, etc.
Multiple copies of articles
Link to documents
Self-updating
Distributed licensing and embargoes responsibilities

20. A New Way to Think About
Journal Collections
Julia Gelfand
University of California, Irvine Libraries
Charleston Conference 2015
jgelfand@uci.edu

21. Journal Collections: Just in Time or
Just in Case?
• Perhaps a bit of both –
• Collection management vs collection building but still collection development
• Assumptions
ib2-business-
p7.wikispaces.com

22. ILL vs Document Delivery
• Libraries in business of sharing resources when it makes sense &
saves cents
• Already using third party providers for content:
• Full-text databases
• Big package deals – aggregators
• Document supply options – buy by the article as needed
• Responding to user needs without major financial commitment
• Specialized journals are truly specialized
http://rethinkingresourcesharing.org

23. Long Term Consequences
www.socialsciencespace.com
• Journal collection costs unsustainable – ratio of subscribed content to
books/other materials continues to soar
• Ability to shift as needs for content realign with academic program
changes
• OA landscape increasing
• Some libraries contributing to ACP charges
• Ability to respond to immediate requests at reasonable fees
• Publishers providing more content on demand

24. Impact of Ne oof New Directions(marialuisaaliotta.wordpress.com)
• Library collections redefined – not by subscription but by access
• Content is still king
• Publishers unite in distributing at the article level than via journal
• Libraries build collections that are more unique
• Subscriptions still critical for major needs, but likely reduced at more expensive tiers
• Reliance on more OA content as it increases & alternative access models
• Due to OA mandates, more dependency on repository content
• Usage and demand for content will shape future journal holdings
• Browsing changes landscape – perhaps less serendipity

25. Journal Collections: New Frontier in Libraries
• Academic & Scholarly Publishing will remain vital, however
• New economic models likely to emerge
• New partnerships will form between authors, publishers & libraries
• Library holdings will be more elastic and incomplete
• Users will depend on multiple sourcing for their needs
• Publishers, Libraries and OA will influence & transform each other
Justice League The New Frontier DC
Comics Superman Batman Wonder
Woman

26. Discussion / Q&A