ILLUSTRATIONS

FIGURES

1.1. Arenas for collaborative collection management

3.1. Comparison of asymptotic survival probability curves, 1 and 2 percent loss rate projections

3.2. Holdings of the sample set in WorldCat, California, and the University of California

3.3. Logarithmic plot of holdings with implied preservation activity

4.1. Holdings in Indiana University’s public catalog appear as being located in the CIC Print Archive

4.2. The shared print repository’s OCLC code, IULSP, appears among results in a WorldCat search as “Indiana University Shared Print in Storage”

9.1. Digital object in the UC Libraries shared DAMS

9.2. UCLDC service model

9.3. Object in the old Calisphere site

9.4. Object in the new Calisphere site

TABLES

3.1. Thresholds for preservation action

3.2. Survival probabilities at each preservation threshold

3.3. Probabilities for survival of a single perfect copy in 2100 CE (based on Yano et al.)

3.4. Median, average, and maximum holdings

3.5. Actions derived from each formula

3.6. Average and median holdings

3.7. Withdraw and retain thresholds for each formula and holdings group

3.8. Percentage of decisions with varied holdings groups

3.9. Retention scenarios without California holdings group

3.10. Moderate formula with varied holdings groups

3.11. Impact of HathiTrust holdings on the moderate formula, with varied holdings groups

8.1. Cost data by institution

8.2. Percentage of titles available by publisher

8.3. EBL month-by-month activity

8.4. eBrary month-by-month activity

8.5. EBL usage by institution

8.6. eBrary usage by institution

8.7. Paid usage of EBL titles with an auto purchase

8.8. Paid usage and owned loans of EBL titles with an auto purchase

8.9. Paid usage and owned loans of EBL titles with at least one STL

8.10. EBL purchasing if each institution had acted alone