Academic Libraries of Indiana (ALI), 18
access, 19. See also open access monographs
accuracy, 34
administration considerations, 24
administration costs, 21
agreements
review of, 24
shared print collection, 16–25
applicability, 34
architectures of commitment, 11
Arizona State University (ASU), 131
Arizona Universities Library Consortium (AULC), 131
artifactual value, 192–193
ASERL Documents Disposition Database, 82–83, 88
Association of American Universities (AAU), 111
Association of Research Libraries (ARL), 111
Association of Southeastern Research Libraries (ASERL), 17, 21, 62, 186–188. See also Collective Federal Depository Program, ASERL
B
Ballestro, John, 30
borrowing considerations, 20
Breitbach, William, 127
Bryn Mawr, 185
budgets. See costs
business models
agreements for, 19–25
future of, 193–194
C
California Digital Library (CDL), 156, 184. See also UC Libraries Digital Collection (UCLDC)
California State University Fullerton, 127
California State University (UC) System, 130, 131
Calisphere, 156, 163, 170–174, 172fig
Casalini Libri, 116
Center for Research Libraries (CRL), 5–6, 31, 60, 102, 186, 189
Centers of Excellence (COE)
agreements for, 80
challenges and benefits of, 84–85
establishment of, 78
responsibilities of, 80–84
Central Iowa Collaborative Collections Initiative (CI-CCI), 18
centralization, 191
Chepesiuk, Ron, 62
Clarage, Elizabeth, 129
Clark, Bonnie, 129
collaboration
communities of, 4–5
reasons for, 11–12
collection analysis, 20
collection holder, withdrawal by, 24
Collection Registry, 165–167
collection-driving approaches, 29–30
collections, evolving nature of, 3–4
collections management
future of, 189–195
survival probabilities and, 42–44
Collective Federal Depository Program, ASERL
background for, 78–80
benefits of, 85–87
description of, 78
digital access and, 81
future of, 87–88
role of, 77
See also Centers of Excellence (COE)
Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries
demand-driven acquisition and, 126
description of, 132–133
evaluation of, 150–151
origin of, 135
planning for, 136–137
predecessors to, 134–135
record load process for, 138
titles available in, 141
usage of, 139t, 140, 142–149, 142t, 143t, 144t, 145t
Colorado College, 137
Colorado Mesa University, 137
Colorado State University (CSU), 133, 137, 143
Columbia University, 109, 112–113, 115
Committee on Institutional Cooperation Shared Print Repository (CIC SPR)
access and discovery of, 69–70
administrative framework of, 67–68
approach of, 186–187
background for, 59–63
business model of, 65–67
collection of, 68–69
cost sharing and, 22
review of, 73–74
weeding and deselection in, 72–73
workflow for, 70–72
communities of collaboration, 4–5
communities of cooperation, 4–5
comprehensiveness, 184–185
Connect New York, 62
Consortium of Academic and Research Libraries in Illinois (CARLI), 129
Cooper, Michael, 62
cooperation, communities of, 4–5
cooperative licensing of electronic resources, 6–7
costs
administration, 21
for CIC SPR, 66
incurred, 20–21
of library storage, 62
shared, 21–23
cost-sharing models, 22–23
Council of State University Libraries (CSUL), 131
Courant, Paul, 110–111
Cramer, Carol Joyner, 128
CTW Library Consortium, 130, 131
D
Dahl, Candice, 127
Darnton, Robert, 49
data collection, 34
Davis, Kate, 130
decision-making, clauses for, 24
delivery, 19
demand-driven acquisition (DDA)
concerns regarding, 184–185
consortial programs for, 128–132, 134–135
description of, 125
evolution of, 149–150
literature review for, 126–127
local programs for, 127–128
Dempsey, Lorcan, 4
Depository Library Act (1962), 62, 79
deselection of materials, 20. See also withdrawal
digital asset management system (DAMS), shared, 157–162, 174–175
digital collections, future of, 194–195
Digital Public Library of America, 168
Digitalia, 115–116
digitization, 7, 28, 31, 36, 84–85, 188, 194–195
Dillon, Dennis, 127
domain-based sharing, 187–188
Downey, Kay, 128
drawdown, managing, 191–192. See also withdrawal
Drott, Carl, 30
E
Eastern Academic Scholars Trust (EAST), 17, 104–105, 192, 196
E-book Library (EBL), 127–128, 132, 133–134, 136–138, 140–143, 141t, 142t, 144t, 146–149, 146t, 147t, 148t
ebooks
demand-driven acquisition and, 125–126
evolution of, 149–150
ebrary, 127, 131, 132, 133–134, 136–137, 138, 140, 141–142, 141t, 143t, 145t, 149
Electronic Information Access Enhancement Act (1993), 79
electronic resources, cooperative licensing of, 6–7
Emery, Jill, 129–130
Erma de Bretschneider, L,’ 117
evidence-based acquisitions (EBA), 116
evidence-based selection (EBS) models, 149
F
Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP), 62, 78–79, 186, 187–188. See also Collective Federal Depository Program, ASERL
Fischer, Karen S., 127
Five Colleges, Incorporated, 17
Florida Academic Repository (FLARE), 62
Florida State University (FSU), 131, 132
foreign language scholarly monographs, 114–117
Freeman, Robert S., 127
free-rider problem, 23
G
Garrison, Julie, 148
Google, mass digitization and, 7
governance structures, 10–11, 23
Government Publishing Office (GPO), 79
GPO Access Act, 79
Graves, Tonia, 129
great collections approach, 29
H
HathiTrust, 7, 28, 47–48, 48t, 49, 60, 98, 104, 120, 184, 195, 196
Haverford, 185
Hayes, Robert, 29
Hazen, Dan, 114
Hilton, James L., 4
Hinken, Susan, 129
holding locations, 19
holdings data, preservation decisions and, 27–28
holdings-based decision making, 36–37
Housewright, Ross, 62
Huddy, Lorraine, 130
hybrid collections, future of, 194–195
I
Ingram Content Group, 131, 132
Ingram Coutts, 131
Internet, effect of, 183
item-driven approaches, 29
Ithaka S+R, 31–32
J
Jones, Elizabeth, 110–111
K
Kent State University, 128
L
Lambert, Joy E., 127
Lavoie, Brian, 4
lending considerations, 20
Lesk, Michael, 29
Levine-Clark, Michael, 128, 136
licensing, cooperative, 6–7
Lugg, Rick, 188
M
Machovec, George, 129
Magnitude, Costs and Benefits of the Preservation of Brittle Books, The (Hayes), 29
Maine Shared Collections Cooperative (MSCC), 104–105
Maine Shared Collections Strategy (MSCS)
context for, 91–92
data analysis and, 94–97
future of, 104–106
OCLC reclamation and, 94–95
project scope of, 92–93
retention commitments and, 100–103
retention criteria for, 97–99
retention responsibilities and, 99–100
storage, access, and delivery for, 103–104
Malpas, Constance, 4
Mandel, Carol, 109
Manhattan Research Library Initiative (MaRLI)
description of, 185
foreign language monographs and, 114–117
open access scholarly monographs and, 117–121
university press scholarly monographs and, 110–111
UPSO collaboration and, 111–114
vision of, 109–110
561 field, 70
Mareck, Robert, 29–30
McElroy, Emily, 129
membership
adding new, 24
agreements for, 16–18
withdrawal of, 24
memorandums of understanding, 24–25
Merrill-Oldham, Jan, 30
metadata application profile (MAP), 165, 168
Michigan Shared Print Initiative (MI-SPI), 62
Microsoft LiveSearch, 31
Minnesota Library Access Center (MLAC), 62
monographs
as arena for collaboration, 8, 8fig
foreign language, 114–117
MaRLI’s focus on, 110
open access, 117–121, 185, 186, 195
overview of case studies involving, 185–186
retrospective collection management and, 9
survival probabilities of, 32–34
university press, 110–111
verification of, 187
Mosbo, Julie, 30
MyiLibrary, 130, 131, 132, 133
N
New York Public Library (NYPL), 109, 112, 115
New York University (NYU), 109, 112–113, 115
Nixon, Judith, 127
“Noah’s Ark Problem, The” (Weitzman), 33
Northern Arizona University, 131
Novanet, 135
Nuxeo, 159–162
O
OCLC Local Holding Records, 102–103
OCLC Print Archives Disclosure Pilot, 63
OCLC reclamation, 94–95
OCLC symbol, 63, 70, 71–72, 71fig, 103
OhioLink, 186
Old Dominion University (ODU), 129
Olschki collection, Leo S., 117
Online Archive of California (OAC), 156, 163, 167
Ontario Council of University Libraries (OCUL), 129, 130
open access monographs, 117–121, 185, 186, 195
Open Content Alliance, 31
Orbis Cascade Alliance, 129–130, 131, 132, 134, 186
ownership of materials, 19
Oxford University Press, 185. See also University Press Scholarship Online (UPSO)
P
paper decay, 35
parable of the talents, 181–182
Patron-Driven Acquisitions (Swords), 127–128
policies, agreements for, 18–19
Portico’s Ebook Preservation Service, 114, 195
preservation
cooperative, 31
further research on, 50–51
outcomes of, 35–36
role of consortial holdings on, 27–28
selection of materials and, 29–30
Preservation in the Age of Large-Scale Digitization (Reiger), 31
Preserving America’s Printed Resources (PAPR), 31
Print Archive Network Forum (PAN), 189
Print Archives Preservation Registry (PAPR), 25, 102, 189
print collections
centralization of, 191
functions of, 28–29
future of, 190–194
Private Academic Library Network of Indiana (PALNI), 18
program staff, 21
ProQuest Ebook Central, 151
prospective collection management, 8, 8fig, 10
Prospectus for an Institutionally Funded First-Book Subvention (AAU and ARL), 111
Provocations and Irritations for the Globalized Research Library (Hazen), 114
Puvill, 115
R
reformatting, 35
Regis University, 137
Reiger, Oya, 31
replacement
agreements and, 24
model of, 32–34
threshold for, 36, 38t, 44–49, 45t, 46t, 47t, 48t, 50–51
Research Collection and Preservation Consortium (ReCAP), 62
retention commitment, 18–19
retrospective collection management, 8, 8fig, 9
risk assessment, 32–34
RLG Conspectus program, 6, 185–186
S
Schonfeld, Roger, 62
“Selection for Preservation of Research Library Materials” (Lesk), 29
selection of materials, 18, 29. See also evidence-based acquisitions (EBA); evidence-based selection (EBS) models
as arena for collaboration, 8, 8fig
prospective collection management and, 10
retrospective collection management and, 9
survival probabilities of, 32–34
services, agreements for, 18–19
shared print collections
agreements for, 16–25
increase in, 15–16
Smith, Patricia, 136
space considerations, 20, 21–22, 85
staff, program, 21
structural damage, 35
survival probabilities, assessing, 32–34, 35, 37–39, 38t, 40t, 41fig
Sustainable Collection Services (SCS), 96, 186, 188, 196
Swarthmore, 185
Swords, David A., 127
T
“Taking Care” (Merrill-Oldham), 30
talents, parable of the, 181–182
tiered fees, 23
transport of materials, 20
Triangle Research Library Network (TRLN), 130, 186
TriCollege Consortium, 185
Trinity College, 185
U
UC Libraries Digital Collection (UCLDC)
aggregation of resources and, 162–167
context for, 156–157
digital asset management system and, 157–162, 174–175
public access and, 167–174
service model for, 164fig
University of Arizona (UA), 131
University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), 28, 33, 34–51, 41t, 42t, 43fig
University of California (UC) system, 155–157, 184, 187, 196. See also UC Libraries Digital Collection (UCLDC)
University of Colorado Colorado Springs, 137
University of Denver (DU), 127–128, 133, 137
University of Florida (UF), 131, 132
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC), 129
University of Iowa, 127
University of Northern Colorado, 137
University of Texas, 127
University of Wyoming, 137
university press scholarly monographs, 110–111
University Press Scholarship Online (UPSO), 111–114
US Newspaper Program, 29
V
Virtual Library of Virginia (VIVA), 129, 186
W
Walters, William H., 126
Ward, Suzanne, 127
Washington (DC) Research Library Consortium (WRLC), 62
Way, Doug, 148
Weeks, David, 62
Weitzman, Martin L., 33
Wesleyan University, 185
Western Regional Storage Trust (WEST), 17, 22, 62, 186–187
What to Withdraw? (Schonfeld and Housewright), 31–32, 62
Wheeler, Brad, 4
Wiley, Lynn, 129
withdrawal
agreements and, 24
threshold for, 36–37, 38t, 44–49, 45t, 46t, 47t, 48t, 50–51
WorldCat, 33, 36, 41t, 43fig, 50–51
Y