A multi-dimensional perspective on OSU & CIC print collections

Brian Lavoie, Research Scientist

16 January 2014

Right-scaling Stewardship

Constance Malpas, Program Officer

SELECTED FINDINGS

CIC Webinar

Roadmap

• Background• The print book landscape• Ohio State & CIC: View from the “supply

side”– Profiles of rare and core

• Centers of distinction & Network demand– Local and group dimensions

• Policy and strategy implications– Regional Print Management symposium

• Discussion

Background• Future of print books

– Declining use of print collections (OCLC/Ohio Link study); ever-expanding array of digital alternatives

– Resources supporting print needed for new service priorities

• Trends in cooperative print management– Locus of print management moving above the institution– Regions favored as appropriate scale of cooperation– “Distributed consolidation”: local collections

supplemented by shared, centralized collections

• Questions– What to manage locally?– What to manage above the institution?

4

OSU/CIC print book study• Explore regional-scale cooperative print strategy

– From an institutional (OSU) perspective– From a consortial (CIC) perspective

• Based on shared, centrally managed core and network of local collections

• Counterfactual– Use WorldCat bibliographic & holdings data to simulate

this organizational structure

• Findings intended to inform, not prescribe– Do not necessarily reflect intentions of OSU or CIC– Not making recommendations, but an evidence base to

inform strategic planning– Specific to OSU/CIC; patterns of analysis of broader

interest

5

The Print Book Landscape

2.7m

12.4m

CHI-PITTS:19.0m

N. America:49.8m

World:157.4m

*As represented in

Print books: Distinct manifestations*

January 2013

7

Key Insights

• Scale adds scope and depth• Uniqueness/scarcity is relative• Coverage requires cooperation

8

OSU & CIC

Size: Distinct print book manifestations

12.4 million

2.7 million

Bilateral overlap

OSU vis-à-vis CIC

MICHIGAN 49ILLINOIS 49CHICAGO 46WISCONSIN 44INDIANA 43MINNESOTA 41IOWA 37PENN STATE 37MICH STATE 35NORTHWESTERN 32NEBRASKA 26PURDUE 20

% of OSU’s print book collectionalso held by comparison institution CIC vis-à-vis OSU

PURDUE 59NEBRASKA 58PENN STATE 48MICH STATE 48IOWA 47NORTHWESTERN 42INDIANA 39MINNESOTA 39ILLINOIS 35MICHIGAN 34WISCONSIN 34CHICAGO 31

% of comparison institution book collection also held by OSU

Distinctiveness is relative

# of Books Overlap w/CICPURDUE 0.9m 0.93NEBRASKA 1.2m 0.93IOWA 2.1m 0.89MICH STATE 2.0m 0.88PENN STATE 2.1m 0.85NORTHWESTERN 2.0m 0.83OHIO STATE 2.7m 0.83INDIANA 3.0m 0.83MINNESOTA 2.9m 0.81WISCONSIN 3.9m 0.80ILLINOIS 3.8m 0.79MICHIGAN 3.9m 0.76CHICAGO 4.1m 0.76

% of local collection held by at least 1 other CIC member

OSU: Rare and core

3 or less:38%

4 to 7:30%

8 to 10:18%

More than 10:14%

Total # of CIC holdings

Percent of OSU collection

OSU’s“rare” print book

asset(~1 m books)

OSU’s“core” print book asset

(~400K books)

CIC: Rare and core

3 or less:76%

4 to 7:16%

8 to 10:5%

More than 10:3%

Total # of CIC holdings

Percent of CIC collective collection

CIC’s“core” print book asset

(~400K books)

CIC’s“rare” print book

asset(~9.4 m books)

OSU rare & core: LanguageEnglishGermanRussianChineseJapaneseFrenchHebrewArabicSpanishOthers

EnglishGermanFrenchOthers

Rare

Core

236 distinct languages

65 distinct languages

EnglishGermanFrenchSpanishRussianLatinItalianGreek, AncientOthers

EnglishGermanFrenchSpanishChineseRussianItalianJapaneseArabicPortugueseOthers

CIC rare & core: Language

Core

Rare

458 distinct languages

67 distinct languages

pre1850

18501860

18701880

18901900

19101920

19301940

19501960

19701980

19902000

2010

unknown0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Rare Core

Decade

Perc

ent

OSU rare & core: Age

Rare:23% published pre-1950

Core:9% published pre-1950

pre1850

18501860

18701880

18901900

19101920

19301940

19501960

19701980

19902000

2010

unknown0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Rare Core

Decade

Perc

ent

CIC rare & core: Age

Rare:27% published pre-1950

Core:9% published pre-1950

OSU rare & core: Subject

Rare

Core

STEM: 16%

STEM: 20%

Social Sciences: 18%

Social Sciences: 30%

Humanities: 66%

Humanities: 50%

CIC rare & core: Subject

Humanities: 50% STEM: 20%

Social Sciences: 30%

Humanities: 63% Social Sciences: 22%

STEM: 15%

Rare

Core

20

Some takeaways …• Re the three insights …

– Scale adds scope and depth: “Collective rare” ~25x larger than “collective core”; language diversity ~2x “collective rare” vs. “OSU rare”

– Uniqueness is relative: no single CIC member accounts for more than half of OSU’s collection; CIC as a whole accounts for 83%

– Coverage requires cooperation: Three-quarters of CIC collective collection held by 3 or fewer members

• Re the two fundamental questions …– Rare print book in institutional /collective collection:

• Highly likely to be non-English-language• Highly likely to be humanities-focused• Probably older than average

– Core print book in institutional/collective collection:• Almost certainly English language• Even chance that book is humanities or social sciences/STEM• Probably more recent than average

– Profiles virtually identical at both scales: micro (OSU) & macro (CIC)– First step toward characterizing areas of convergence & divergence in

local and collective collecting decisions

21

Centers of distinction

22

Centersreveal patterns in local investmentinstitutional prioritiessingular strengths

Comps reflect scope of local holdingscoverage of global literaturecooperative synergies

http://outgoing.typepad.com/outgoing/2013/05/centers-and-coverage.html

More information:

Many related titles

Many representative works

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 10

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Distribution of 'Centers' among CIC Libraries(Based on Top 25 Centers for 13 CIC Symbols)

Libraries in Group

Top

ical

Cen

ters

58% of centers are associated with single CIC member

“Scale adds scope and depth”

OSU Centers and Comps

FAST

Coverage compared to

WorldCat Heading

OSU Rank compared to

other WorldCat libraries

OSU Rank compared to

other CIC libraries

fst01008312 67.20% Manuscripts, Church Slavic 1 1fst00848081 61.20% Cartoonists 1 1fst00980348 59.80% Israeli poetry 4 1fst00807464 43.80% American wit and humor, Pictorial 1 1fst00954398 36.80% Hebrew poetry 13 1fst01205076 33.10% Ohio—Columbus 1 1fst00812274 30.30% Arabic fiction 10 2fst01108635 26.90% Science fiction, American 11 1fst00812533 23.70% Arabic poetry 13 2fst00869145 20.40% Comic books, strips, etc. 1 1

“Coverage requires cooperation”

Shared Centers

South Asia: Chicago & Wisconsin

Africa: Northwestern, Michigan State, Indiana, Chicago . . .

Women & Literature: 12 of 13 libraries

&c

Opportunities to deepen collaboration

26

CICHathiTrust

Holding Libraries (OCLC symbols)

Cove

rage

9 of the 50 most comprehensive collections related to Chad are held by CIC institutions

27

Centers and Print Management

• Shared centers represents areas of shared investment that can be leveraged as collective asset – Candidates for ‘above the institution’ management

• Institutionally distinctive centers may be important differentiators for library, university ‘brand’– Local management priority

• Coverage requires cooperation– Preserving scope of collective resource is a shared

responsibility

28

Network Demand

29

Demand-side Analysis

CIC borrowing

• 1,215,831 requests• 801,700 titles borrowed• 5,160 libraries

(symbols) filled requests from 29 CIC libraries

• Avg. requests per title: 1.45

• Avg. holdings per title: 138 (median = 44)

• 84% books

CIC lending• 1,330,831 requests• 888,996 titles requested• 29 CIC libraries (symbols)

filled requests from 5,266 libraries

• Avg. requests per title: 1.43

• Avg. holdings per title: 128 (median = 43)

• 90% books

Analysis based on all returnable CIC borrows/loans placed via WCRS 1 Jan 2006-10 May 2013

InboundOutboun

d

CIC Libraries

WorldCat Libraries

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

< 5 libraries63%

12%

25%

8%

12%

17% 29% > 99 libraries34%

Group and System-wide Supply for Titles Requested from CIC Libraries> 5 libraries 5 to 9 libraries 10 to 24 libraries 25 to 99 libraries > 99 libraries

Percent of Titles Requested

88% held by 5 or more libraries in WorldCat

37% held by 5 or more libraries in CIC

< 5 libraries

“Uniqueness/scarcity is relative”

31

38% of requesting libraries are located within ChiPitts

51% of request volume originates within ChiPitts region

Aggregate CIC print book resource supports broader inter-lending economy

Distributed curation requires deliberate coordination

52044843%

69538357%

CIC Returnable Borrowing Requests by Source of Fulfillment

Filled by CIC Filled by Non-CIC

More than half of all CIC requests were filled by non-CIC libraries

N= 1,215,831 requests placed 1 Jan 2006 - 10 May 2013

Because CIC inventory is ‘incomplete’? Unavailable? Hard to find/request?

544,616 titles68%

257,084 titles32%

CIC Returnable Borrowing Requested titles held by CIC libraries vs. non-

CIC librariesHeld by CIC Not held by CIC

CIC collective collection looks sufficient to meet 68% of demandN = 801,700 titles requested 1 Jan 2006 – 10 May 2013 compared to CIC/non-CIC holdings as of June 2013

Lack of availability or discoverability?What impact will UBorrow have?

34

Alternative Supply Chain: HathiTrust

Titles Borrowed by CIC Libraries

Titles Loaned by CIC Libraries

Digital surrogates available for 2-3% of titles borrowed and loaned by CIC

35

Policy & Strategy Implications

36

Selected Implications

• Aggregate CIC print book resource is rich and varied; it supports thousands of libraries across North America– Institution and group-scale decisions about

print retention will affect larger library system

• ~75% of CIC print book collection is held by fewer than 4 CIC libraries, yet system-wide supply of these resources is comparatively abundant– Shared print strategy will need to assess

strength of external partnerships if CIC is to reduce in-group holdings

37

Implications [cont.]

• Cumulative network demand is relatively low compared to total collection size; most titles are available from alternative suppliers– Removing frictions in discovery/delivery of

collective CIC resource may increase its value

• 30% of titles loaned by CIC libraries, and 20% of titles borrowed by CIC, are duplicated by HathiTrust; 3% or less are available as public domain– CIC shared print strategy should be

articulated in coordination with HathiTrust

38

Panel and Plenary Sessions Right-scaling: Group, Region & System-wide Approaches Selecting for Sustainability: Shared Monographs Service Models: 21st Century Operations

Keynote speakers: Carol Diedrichs, Roger Schonfeld, Brian Lavoie & Constance Malpas

Hear from organizations shaping the future of print management CIC, HathiTrust, Ithaka S+R, MCLS, Maine Shared Collections, OSU OCLC Research, OhioLINK, Orbis-Cascade, ReCAP

27-28 March 2014OCLC Conference Center, Dublin OH

Regional Print Management Right-Scaling Solutions

Registration details forthcoming

* sponsors

©2013 OCLC. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Suggested attribution: “This work uses content from [presentation title] © OCLC, used under a Creative Commons Attribution license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/”

lavoie@oclc.orgmalpasc@oclc.org

Questions and feedback are welcome.

40

For Discussion

41

Right-scaling Stewardship

• To what degree is the CIC responsible for long-term stewardship of widely-held print book titles vs. distinctive or uniquely-held titles? 

• Would your university library consider a strategy that relies on external (non-CIC) stewardship guarantees for “commodity” titles or works?

 

42

“Above the Institution” strategies

• Does your library engage in cooperative collection development or management programs with other CIC libraries? With non-CIC libraries? If you partner with non-CIC libraries, is it for reasons of geographic proximity, distinctive collection strengths, past partnership or something else? 

• How is your library leveraging CIC investments in HathiTrust in its current print book management strategy? 

 

43

Local, group, network demand

• What do you know about print book circulation and inter-lending trends at your institution? 

• Over the past five to ten years has internal or external demand for your monographic collections increased, decreased or remained about the same?