Re: Pricing of Journals

On 27 Jan 1999, Benedict A. Monachino <bam[_at_]p-a.com> wrote:
>
> One practical consideration that nobody has mentioned regarding the
> library spending issue is the question of how much physical space a
> particular library has. I'm guessing (and this is only a guess - I
> have no facts to support this theory) that limited physical facilities
> are one possbile contributing reason for the failure of library
> spending to match revenue growth according to the numbers quoted by
> Mr. Henderson. To increase the number of holdings that will fit
> within a library, I assume the library must either remove study
> carols or reading rooms or increase the size of the building.
> Removing study carols or reading rooms seems to me to be an
> undesirable course of action. However, increasing building size
> requires not only available real estate, but also a sizeable amount
> of money for design and construction costs. I know that my alma
> mater is currently in the design and planning stages for increasing
> the physical size of the libary, in anticipation of increasing the
> breadth and scope of its holdings. But such a project takes many
> years to complete.
>
> I admit that the above does not take into consideration the possiblity
> of subscribing to journals or periodicals through cd rom, database or
> other computer-based media (which require very little space). Thus, I
> don't know if the above theory really "holds water," at least as to the
> last five years or so. I am interested in hearing from those who are
> more informed about this issue to see if physical space is, in fact, a
> real factor in purchasing decisions.

Fremont Rider wrote, "There has always existed a direct correlation between the educational effectiveness of a college and the growth of its library, a correlation so close and consistent that it cannot have been fortuitious." He supported this notion with statistics going back to the 18th century (THE SCHOLAR AND THE FUTURE OF THE RESEARCH LIBRARY. New York: Hadham Press 1944)

The growth of academic research, measured by journal articles published, has grown at the same rate as the libraries, according to Derek de Solla Price. (SCIENCE SINCE BABYLON. Yale, 1961) Over the last 30 years, publishing and spending statistics indicate the growth of research continues unabated.

There is also the reasonable assertion made by Vannevar Bush that universities are responsible for conserving knowledge that is produced. (SCIENCE - THE ENDLESS FRONTIER. 1945)

The patterns were clear. Failure to plan for facilities has no excuse. Instead we find attempts to misrepresent Rider's observations.

During the post-World War II era, library growth was slowed even though libraries are presumably supported as indirect costs of Federally funding research. There are no justifications for choking off growth except opaque claims that universities have no money. They had plenty during the 1960s -- after Sputnik. I believe they have plenty now.

Rider advocated the adoption of optical microforms to reduce the costs of construction that you point to. The microform technology expanded to include digital laser disks by the 1980s, and CD-ROMS are widely used. Other digital forms of storage appear to bring their own high cost of maintenance along with the costs of obsolescance.

Albert Henderson, Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY <70244.1532[_at_]compuserve.com> Received on Fri Jan 29 1999 - 23:48:53 GMT