Libraries have historically been associated with their collections, and even more

Transcription

1 Michael Levine-Clark 425 Access to Everything: Building the Future Academic Library Collection Michael Levine-Clark abstract: Academic libraries have always been deeply associated with their collections, but the nature of those collections has changed radically as we have entered the digital age. As libraries continue to evolve, they will focus strongly on special collections while adopting a goal of providing access to as much other content as possible. The collection will be everything that the library can identify that fits local curricular and research needs, and the means of access will be driven by cost. Discovery will be crucial, since a powerful discovery tool will allow the library to conceptualize the collection as the broadest possible range of content accessible to the local scholarly community. Libraries have historically been associated with their collections, and even more directly with their collections of books. The term library derives from the Latin liber (book), and terms for library in many languages are based on their connection to books. The library can be the collection, the building housing that collection, or the organization as a whole, but for many people only the first definition matters; the Academic libraries are now as other senses of library are subservient to the collection. As libraries have evolved, the definition of collection has expanded to encompass of all types as they are about much about digital resources other types of material; academic libraries printed volumes. are now as much about digital resources of all types as they are about printed volumes. Though few academics would disagree with this more expansive definition, for many the library is still fundamentally about the collection. Yet libraries have taken on a range of functions to manage those collections, and the services and tools that libraries have built to provide access to content have evolved to the point that they may become just as important to the institutional mission as the collection itself. portal: Libraries and the Academy, Vol. 14, No. 3 (2014), pp Copyright 2014 by Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD

2 426 Access to Everything: Building the Future Academic Library Collection Practically speaking, if a library did not acquire a book or journal issue near the point of publication, the chances of procuring it later were small. In building library collections, academic libraries have traditionally fulfilled two functions to provide materials to serve the immediate needs of current students and faculty, and to store those materials for future generations of scholars. Until very recently, these functions were operationally indistinguishable. To have available a range of resources books, journals, and archival collections to serve immediate needs, libraries had to acquire them and add them to a permanent collection. This was partly the case because it was much harder to purchase print materials after the point of publication than it is today. Once books went out of print, the only way to find them was by sending out lists of desired titles through sources such as AB Bookman s Weekly. This search was a cumbersome process with no guarantee of success. And once initial journal runs were exhausted, the only way to acquire them was to hope they would become available via microform or a reprint service. Practically speaking, if a library did not acquire a book or journal issue near the point of publication, the chances of procuring it later were small. Though it was possible to add some materials nearer the point of need by purchasing them from out-of-print dealers or by borrowing them from another library, the only way to be sure that a library would have adequate coverage in a given subject was to add material to the collection at the point of publication. The reality that ownership was the only practical means to provide access to most material meant that in the process of serving current needs, libraries naturally served another important function that of stewarding the cultural record for future scholars at their own institution, and by extension, future scholars from any institution. This is a vital but expensive role, so it is probably not one that any but the largest of academic libraries would have taken on if it were easier to serve the needs of current students and scholars through other means. As access models have evolved, it has become possible to serve most needs of current students and scholars without worrying at all about future researchers. This change has profound implications for academic libraries and their users. Current Trends in Managing Collections Over the past twenty years, and especially over the last five to ten years, libraries have fundamentally changed how they provide access to content for their users. The first shift occurred when libraries moved from print to online provision of journal content. At first, libraries subscribed to title-level bundles of print and electronic journals. Instead of canceling the print title to which they already subscribed, they added electronic access for a small fee. As libraries became more comfortable with electronic journals (e-journals), they began canceling print when licensed digital perpetual-access rights were available. Libraries added JSTOR and other perpetual-access journal packages, expanded those to include some titles without perpetual-access rights, and increased their journal offerings substantially by subscribing to large aggregator packages. But many in academic libraries were wary of relying on access to anything but perpetual-access content. At my library, and at many others, librarians were willing to cancel a subscription to a print journal if

3 Michael Levine-Clark 427 they had perpetual access to the electronic version but would maintain dual subscriptions if electronic access was not perpetual. Now many libraries no longer worry about perpetual access. If they can provide cheaper access to a version through an aggregator database, they will cancel the pricier perpetual-access version, which they can usually reinstate if it is dropped from the aggregator s collection. Though a gradual process, the first few decades of the e-journal era have resulted in an uneven mix of big deal packages of journal content: some titles with perpetualaccess rights, but most with only temporary access; access-only aggregator packages; and smaller numbers of direct-subscription titles with perpetual-access rights. It took a while to get Most academic libraries here, but libraries are now at the point where they have become comfortable with only licensed access today provide access to far to most journal content, not because they would more titles than they did not prefer perpetual access, but because they can even a few decades ago at provide access to far more content at a far cheaper price than perpetual access allows. Licenses for e- the expense of decreased journal packages stipulate a range of rights, with long-term rights to that post-cancellation rights to some content, often even insured through services such as Portico or content LOCKSS/CLOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe/Controlled LOCKSS), but no long-term rights to a large percentage of the licensed content. 1 The most important aspect of this shift is that most academic libraries today provide access to far more titles than they did even a few decades ago at the expense of decreased long-term rights to that content, a trade-off that presents current users with much deeper and richer collections. Librarians have also begun to experiment with tools such as ReadCube and the Copyright Clearance Center s Get It Now service, which allow libraries to lease access to articles on a temporary basis. 2 Though most libraries are currently using these tools to supplement subscriptions, they will likely increase in appeal as library budgets are cut and libraries ability to maintain journal subscriptions erodes. DeepDyve, which provides consumers the ability to purchase articles directly, is a model that could also work for libraries in this regard. 3 And SIPX, which is a tool designed to allow universities to manage copyright clearance for course packs and course reserves on an on-demand basis, provides an interesting model that might be adapted to enable broader access to content. SIPX is currently designed only for course-related content and triggers a relatively low copyright fee each time a student accesses an assigned article that is Get It Now and SIPX have received criticism from some librarians as potentially eroding fair-use rights. not part of a journal already licensed by the library. 4 Though intended just as a service that will work with course reserves or to replace course packs, SIPX has the potential to develop into a delivery mechanism on a much broader scale. As replacements for interlibrary loan or traditional course reserves, both of which have traditionally relied on fair-use arguments to provide users with some content for free, Get It Now and SIPX have received criticism from some librarians as potentially eroding fair-use rights. If

4 428 Access to Everything: Building the Future Academic Library Collection these sorts of services were expanded, however, to provide access to article content at a much broader level as part of the regular provision of research support, then the fair-use concern would become less relevant. As libraries move to this sort of model, it becomes less important to have access to the entire run of a journal and more important to provide powerful tools to help guide users and deliver content to them. Related to the shift in how libraries build journal collections is a change in emphasis in regard to monographs. As journals became more expensive, and libraries subscribed to larger and larger numbers of journal and article databases, the funding that libraries had to spend on books decreased. As a percentage of overall materials budgets at university libraries within the Association of Research Libraries, for example, the median amount spent on monographs annually has decreased steadily from 41.4 percent in 1986 to 17.7 percent in Monograph acquisitions have shifted much more slowly to digital formats than did journal subscriptions. Libraries began acquiring electronic books (e-books) in the middle to late 1990s, but until recently e-book acquisition provided only a small complement to the real business of buying print books. Even now, many scholarly monographs are not published in electronic form until well after the print version is published, and may never be released in a version that libraries can use. YBP Library Services, for example, reported in late 2012 that only 42 percent of book titles offered on approval by YBP were available within two months in both print and electronic formats. 6 For most of the still brief history of e-books, then, academic libraries have treated the e-book as secondary to print. There are signs, however, that this attitude is changing. E-books are being more closely integrated into approval plans, with many libraries stipulating a preference in these plans for the e-book if it is available at the point of publication; and libraries have used subscriptions and demand-driven acquisition (DDA) to extend the reach of their e-book collections. Just as libraries shifted from ownership of print journals to online access, with a concomitant increase in the number of titles available, the move to e-books as the preferred monographic format is beginning to change the way that libraries think about the long-term availability of books in their collections. When libraries subscribe to a package of e-books from an aggregator, they are making a choice to provide users with a large pool of titles that may or may not be available in the future. And making a pool of titles available via The move to e-books as the preferred monographic format is beginning to change the way that libraries think about the long-term availability of books in their collections. DDA does much the same thing. In both cases, libraries have opted to make available as broad a collection of material as possible by trading away the guarantee that those titles will be there for future generations of scholars. In a fundamental way, this decision to privilege access over ownership means that libraries have decided to favor the interests of current students and faculty over their future counterparts. Demand-driven acquisition can be implemented in multiple ways, but within some DDA programs there is a choice between purchasing a book early in the usage cycle versus allowing many uses (sometimes paid short-term loans) before an ultimate pur-

5 Michael Levine-Clark 429 chase. The latter option tends to be cheaper overall, 7 and therefore allows a library to provide access to a larger collection than is possible when purchasing based on earlier uses. Within DDA, then, the choice about how many short-term loans to allow per title should force a library to think carefully about the nature of its collection. It should be possible to think about the DDA consideration pool as part of the collection, with books waiting for use being no different than already-purchased print titles sitting on the shelf. But because many books in a DDA pool have not yet been used, they are at risk of disappearing because of publisher and aggregator business decisions. So far libraries have largely ignored this risk, as many have considered DDA to be only an adjunct to regular collection development. To some extent, this shift in emphasis from ownership to access, reflected in decisions to embrace DDA and subscribe to aggregator packages of e-books, is made possible by three trends relating to long-term availability of monographs in the marketplace. The first, a broadening of availability of out-of-print books through online sources such as Alibris and Abebooks, means that the risk of not buying a book at the point of publication is In many cases, a book not much lower than it once was. 8 In many cases, a book not acquired when it is published can acquired when it is published be purchased (often for a cheaper price) years can be purchased (often for a later. Second, publishers are increasingly making books available through print-on-demand cheaper price) years later. (POD) solutions such as Lightning Source after the initial print run is exhausted. 9 Traditionally, a publisher would print a limited number of volumes, and once those were sold, would declare the title either out-of-print or outof-stock indefinitely. In either case, a library could not acquire that title. POD solutions eliminate this problem for publishers that choose to use this option. Third, e-books, which never have a print run to begin with, should also never go out of print, though there may be situations when publishers find that the costs of storing and managing extremely low-use e-books are financially infeasible. In combination, these factors mean that it is now much less necessary to acquire monographs before the point of need. Environmental Impacts Layered on top of decisions about the acquisition of journals and monographs is the inevitable shift of some portion of that content to an open-access (OA) publishing model. At this point, OA publishing has not impacted library budgets or collections in any meaningful way. Hybrid OA publications, where authors pay to provide open access to their articles within a traditional subscription publication, have not led to a decrease in fees paid by libraries to maintain a subscription to that title. Nor have green OA practices, in which an author archives a prepublication version of his or her article in an OA repository, made it possible for libraries to cancel subscriptions to the journals in which those articles were originally published. Though OA has made it easier for end users to access some articles, it has not yet made it possible for libraries to either cut subscription costs or to shift those costs into financial support for OA initiatives.

6 430 Access to Everything: Building the Future Academic Library Collection The growth of OA publication mandates from governments, from private foundations, and within universities suggests that libraries will begin to see an impact on library budgets, either because some titles go entirely OA or because a critical mass of articles across a range of journals becomes OA. In either case, libraries could then opt to cancel some subscriptions because a large enough volume of OA articles from those titles and in those disciplines will be available. To the extent that this occurs, it could alter the landscape radically, with universities transferring large portions of journal subscription budgets toward funding for OA publication initiatives, or subtly, with a slight decrease in funding for journal subscriptions to offset OA costs. While the shifts in publication and access models for journals and monographs have been significant, and OA has the potential to reshape the scholarly publishing landscape even further, a far more radical change has been the sheer growth in content available to the average person, whether affiliated with a university or not. For most of their history, academic libraries were the place to go to find most information; while a student might find Because libraries no longer have a monopoly on the provision of access to information, the value that they add to that content is now just as important as the content itself. information in other places (such as public libraries, bookstores, or individual subscriptions to newspapers, magazines, and journals), in reality he or she was dependent on the campus library for most academic information needs. The Internet, obviously, has changed all that. An undergraduate today can realistically expect to find what he or she needs for many assignments on the free Web. Because libraries no longer have a monopoly on the provision of access to information, the value that they add to that content is now just as important as the content itself. As users have been confronted with an ever vaster and more complex information landscape, libraries have begun to invest heavily in tools and resources that enhance the use of information. Citation and content management tools such as EndNote, Refworks, Mendeley, Zotero, and Papers are increasingly necessary for students and scholars to keep track of the sources they use in their research, 10 and libraries are often the funding sources for such tools. It will soon become the norm for universities not only to provide access to such resources but also to supply their community with a range of tools. Content management tools are becoming as fundamental a part of the research workflow as discovery, and libraries should make sure, by their decisions about how and whether to fund such tools, that they do not create the impression that library support for research ceases at discovery. Similarly, academic analytics tools, which can be used to measure research strengths and weaknesses at the institutional or departmental level, are increasingly important to determine potential collaborators (or recruitment targets) at other institutions, to help understand the overall strengths and weaknesses of research at an institution, and to identify funding opportunities. 11 While the offices responsible for sponsored or institutional research often fund and manage tools of this sort, libraries should consider them as an important component of research support and a natural extension of their role in assisting students and faculty in the full process of scholarly research. Therefore, libraries

7 Michael Levine-Clark 431 should take on funding and management of such tools whenever possible. A much broader trend, one that impacts all aspects of our lives, is the growth of an on-demand culture. We are all used to getting what we want whenever we want it. This plays out most noticeably in retail, where most products can be purchased instantly and delivered quickly. In a world where a student can buy, download, and begin reading a Kindle book instantly or have a print book delivered in a day or two from Amazon and where he or she can discover and purchase new music instantly from itunes, Spotify, or Pandora it is ludicrous to assume that students should not expect the same level of service from libraries. Discovery Academic libraries have always considered resource description and retrieval to be crucial functions. Without cataloging and classification, the content in library collections could not be found. But description of materials was governed by the limitations of the card catalog and the printed index. Even when those tools were converted into electronic databases, many of the same constraints remained, including separate sources to find different types of materials and descriptions limited to basic bibliographic information, and therefore uneven access to content. Libraries have invested in Web-scale discovery tools to make it easier to search across a range of types of material, and often with deeper descriptive metadata than was available in the past. As library collections evolve, this emphasis on robust discovery tools will continue to grow. Libraries are providing access to more journals through aggregator packages and big deals, more e-books through subscriptions and DDA, more physical books and journals through regional partnerships, more primary source materials As it becomes easier to acquire content through digitized collections from commercial vendors and cultural heritage institutions, and more of demand), the ability to help users find everything through the open Web. that information will become increasingly important. Being able to help users find and access the right material from this ever-growing mass of content is becoming increasingly vital for libraries. As it becomes easier to acquire content (for free, as part of bulk purchases, or on demand), the ability to help users find that information will become increasingly important. Academic Library Budgets (for free, as part of bulk purchases, or on An additional factor that will surely impact library collections is the budget. Though librarians have worried about academic library budgets for years, it seems likely that a number of pressures will come to bear in the next five to ten years that will force the restructuring of library budgets, giving libraries less money to spend on collections in traditional ways. The first of these is the likely shifting of funds from grantors and universities toward the coverage of article processing charges (APCs) and funding the

8 432 Access to Everything: Building the Future Academic Library Collection infrastructure to support deposit of pre- and post-print versions of articles in repositories. Though it is unclear yet what the impact of these shifts will have on OA article publication broadly, it does seem likely that funder and university mandates will lead to a significant increase in the number and variety of articles available via OA sources. As universities take on funding of some portion of this evolution, they will probably tap the library collections budget as the most comparable source of money. While this is logical, in the short term, at least, it seems unlikely that the availability of some OA articles, or even of some entire journals, will drive down the costs of subscriptions or the need to maintain those subscriptions. Libraries will then be forced to either cancel necessary journal content or find other ways to fund access to the range of resources students and faculty need. Another budget pressure will come from within the library. As libraries stress the need for better discovery and added value through research analysis and content management tools, they will tap collections budgets to fund these services. Discovery tools that help users navigate the world of subscribed, perpetual access, purchased, and unowned content will become just as important as the content to which they point. Tools that help users navigate the research environment either at the macro level, comparing institutional-level research strengths, or at the micro level, keeping track of all of the relevant research on a topic will be ever more valuable. And funding both will erode the ability to purchase content at the levels to which libraries have become accustomed. A third budget pressure is one libraries have worried about for quite some time the huge percentages of collections budgets tied up in big deals with a handful of large publishers. 12 While these deals are generally wonderful for most libraries in terms of use, they are also dangerous. With such a large portion of the journals budget tied into them, libraries have little flexibility to make significant changes to that budget without canceling some of these deals. Moreover, as big deals and other subscriptions increase in cost at a rate higher than increases to overall collections budgets, they will eventually prove impossible to sustain. A recent survey of librarians shows that 60.9 percent believed that some level of unbundling had to take place, and a related survey of publishers showed that only 31.9 percent saw long-term stability for big deals. 13 As libraries begin to back out of some big deals, or at least make the bundles smaller, they will inevitably have to find ways of providing alternative access to what is often popular content. Finally, economic pressures across higher education generally may force down library budgets at many institutions. Most public higher education systems within the United States have seen significant decreases in public funding over the past several decades. 14 As public universities scramble to make up for decreases in funds, library budgets will likely be targets in any cases where cuts are proportional across the institution, and possibly in other cases as well. This will inevitably impact partner libraries, even at private universities, as state schools are forced to cut subscriptions that benefit consortial licensing agreements. Peering into the Future: Academic Libraries and Content Delivery With decreasing budgets or reallocations of funds toward other priorities, a much wider range of resources available both for free and commercially, and expectations by users

9 Michael Levine-Clark 433 that they will be able to find and access whatever content they need immediately, what will be the future of library collections? Perhaps counterintuitively, as libraries are faced with smaller budgets and everincreasing amounts of digital content to acquire, they will refocus their efforts on special collections. Defined broadly to include not just rare and valuable books, a library s special collections will include any material in any format that helps distinguish the library The university with a library that from every other. It has become relatively easy to deliver mainstream scholarly content, so there is now less distinction between a broad range of content in an can provide unique resources and most academic libraries in terms of journal area of scholarly interest will set subscriptions and database access than ever before. The university with a library that itself apart in attracting faculty can provide unique resources and a broad and students. range of content in an area of scholarly interest will set itself apart in attracting faculty and students. To serve this goal, libraries will invest more in rare books, manuscripts, archives, and mainstream publications supporting crucial subject areas, as well as other resources, such as audio, video, and data sets, that serve the needs of researchers in a particular area of focus. This shift will be funded at the expense of other content, such as scholarly journals and monographs in less emphasized areas. While libraries will build strong and deep collections in these areas of strategic interest, they will have an entirely different method of providing access to all other scholarly content. Whether books, journals, videos, or data sets, libraries will provide intellectual access to the widest range of content possible, providing it fits local curricular and research needs, and will consider access the primary goal for material in these subject areas. The default approach for collecting content outside of special collections will be whatever is most cost-effective. Libraries will pay for broad subscription or demand-driven access to most content, with licensed perpetual access or outright purchase only for content for which Libraries will invest more usage dictates that as the most cost-effective means than ever in discovery tools of acquisition. Libraries will never purchase material outside of core special collections areas unless there that provide access to both is no cheaper means of providing access. 15 special collections content Under such a system, discovery and access and this range of other are crucial. Libraries will invest more than ever in discovery tools that provide access to both special material. collections content and this range of other material. Some of this other material will be instantly accessible to the user either in digital or tangible format; other tangible formats will need to be delivered and that is the only distinction that should matter to the user. The means of acquisition or access will vary. Some content will be owned in tangible format, either as part of a legacy paper collection or because purchasing the paper volume was the cheapest and most efficient means of acquiring that title. Some will be part of aggregations of subscribed digital content. Some will be unowned books, articles, streaming media, or data, which will be acquired

10 434 Access to Everything: Building the Future Academic Library Collection by short-term loan or purchased at the point of need. Some will be free content housed somewhere on the open Web. Some will be physical volumes housed in nearby libraries. And some will be tangible materials that the library will purchase and have shipped at the point of need. To the extent possible, the preferred mode of acquisition will be DDA for monographs, articles, and any other material types. In some cases, DDA will not be offered, and in others usage statistics will show that a subscription or even a package purchase makes more sense. But DDA will be the default. DDA will continue to grow because it allows libraries to spend money more wisely and to provide their users with much deeper and broader collections than was ever possible under traditional speculative purchasing models. Just as DDA will become the default means of access, smaller chunks of content will become the norm. Libraries will not buy a package when it is possible to lease an individual title; they will not acquire a journal when it is possible to acquire an article; and they will not purchase a book when it is possible to rent a chapter. But in cases where it is most cost-effective to pay for the entire book or journal or package, libraries will do so. Under this scenario, the collection will be a purely intellectual concept, since the material in the collection will be owned and unowned, Libraries will not buy a package when it is possible to lease an individual title; they will not acquire a journal when it is possible to acquire an article; and they will not purchase a book when it is possible to rent a chapter. onsite and offsite, tangible and digital. Libraries and their partners will build strong discovery tools to aggregate this content and to make it easy for users to find what they need, either through keyword searching or via systems that replicate physical shelf browsing and serendipitous discovery. Libraries will also have strong tools in place to allow delivery of content. Users will expect to receive a book or other physical object purchased by the library quickly, and libraries will make it possible to have that item delivered directly to an office, dorm room, or apartment, bypassing the library facility until the item is returned. Libraries and their partners will also have to develop tools that make it possible to curate content at this much broader level. If, for instance, libraries want to supply users with e-books through a DDA program, they need to develop rules to determine which books get included and how long they remain in the collection. Collection development will largely be the process of determining what is available for discovery. Powerful profiling tools will make it possible to determine rules for what unowned material remains in the collection forever and what material gets removed at various points for various reasons. While libraries expand the definition of collection and focus even more on discovery tools, they will also work collaboratively to better manage print collections. Initiatives such as the Western Regional Storage Trust (WEST) and others allow libraries to downsize legacy print collections in an informed and careful way, 16 and ultimately will allow them to build collaborative print collections in a more intentional way. Libraries will focus more on special collections and divide up remaining print collection responsibilities

11 Michael Levine-Clark 435 within a consortium. Consortial decisions will be tied into national and international registries of long-term retention commitments. At the consortial level, academic libraries will take a page from the public library playbook and establish floating collections, in which print volumes borrowed from one library will remain at the borrowing library until needed at another. Collaboration will also be crucial in maintaining the vital role of stewarding the cultural record. While no one library has ever been able to collect everything, it becomes even less possible when so much more content exists and is dispersed so broadly. Libraries will make long-term retention commitments for some portions of their holdings (most typically the material in special collections), with networked agreements providing for broad preservation of a large range of content. If libraries do shift their collecting focus toward special collections, then they will no longer purchase much of the basic research material of the sort currently held in their monograph and journal collections. If access becomes the norm for most published scholarly works, then no library, inevitably, will preserve some materials, and libraries and vendors must band together to establish long-term preservation plans for that content. Portico and LOCKSS are obvious models for this sort of collaborative enterprise, but so far they have managed only to archive a relatively small portion of the monographs and journals held by academic libraries. 17 Libraries should work with publishers to ensure that all published content is preserved in these systems, perhaps paying fees to help supplement the costs that publishers incur to participate. This would be a worthwhile investment in preserving the cultural record, and a relatively small one for any given library relative to the cost of buying and housing purchased materials. Conclusion Libraries will focus more on special collections and divide up remaining print collection responsibilities within a consortium. The academic library of the future will still provide its users with access to scholarly material. It will continue to provide curricular and research support to students and faculty. But the collection will be a very different thing. Instead of being material that is either owned or leased by the library, the collection will be anything that the library can reasonably expect to deliver to students or faculty. Collection development will be the process of managing access to and delivery of a broad range of content through strong discovery systems. At the same time, libraries will reemphasize special collections, carefully building and curating collections in key areas of strength. These two strands will work together to provide users with the broadest and deepest collections possible. From the user perspective, the library discovery tool will provide access to anything he or she might need for an assignment or research project. Most of that content will be instantly available digitally; whatever is not will be delivered in a few days or less. The library The library will be as efficient and information-rich as Amazon, itunes, or Google.

12 436 Access to Everything: Building the Future Academic Library Collection will be as efficient and information-rich as Amazon, itunes, or Google. But the library will also offer services that allow the user to make more efficient use of the information she or he has already found. Behind the scenes, libraries will have banded together to develop more efficient collaborative collection development decisions, making it more likely that a broad range of titles is intentionally secured for the future. At the same time, libraries will work together to develop strategies and tools that enable the collective preservation of the cultural record. This set of scenarios is based on assumptions relating to current budgetary, collection development, and discovery trends, and connected to broader assumptions about user expectations for immediate access to content. Not included here are concerns about scholarly publishing. Demand-driven acquisition and purchases of ever-smaller chunks of content, while appealing to libraries because of the possibility of providing access to far more content for the same amount money or less, are disquieting to publishers, who worry legitimately about their sustainability. And publishers that cannot remain in business cannot provide the crucial functions of peer-review and quality control on which the academy relies. Similarly, unbundling the big deal, while probably a financial necessity for many libraries, is hardly good for users in terms of providing access to a wide range of content at a reasonable price per use. Developing a sustainable model for article delivery that allows libraries to walk away from the big deal is a difficult challenge, and one that rightly concerns publishers and libraries. While this vision of the future is grounded firmly in current trends and is based on an assessment of how those trends may play out, it is by no means certain that some aspects of content delivery will be sustainable for publishers, so their concerns and resulting actions might force libraries to move more slowly toward this vision of the library of the future. Michael Levine-Clark is associate dean for scholarly communication and collections services at the University of Denver Libraries; he may be reached by at: michael.levine-clark@du.edu. Notes 1. Portico currently archives fewer than 18,000 titles (many of which are likely title changes for the same journal family), a small percentage of the number of titles held by libraries. Portico, Who Participates in Portico? Titles, accessed February 23, 2014, portico.org/digital-preservation/who-participates-in-portico/participating-titles. 2. ReadCube, ReadCube Solutions for Libraries, accessed January 27, 2014, Copyright Clearance Center, Get It Now, accessed January 27, 2014, productsandsolutions/getitnow.html. 3. DeepDyve, DeepDyve Read and Share from Thousands of the Top Scholarly Journals, accessed January 27, 2014, 4. SIPX, How SIPX Works, accessed February 8, 2014, 5. Martha Kyrillidou and Shaneka Morris, eds., ARL Statistics (Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries [ARL], 2011): 14; Kyrillidou, Morris, and Gary Roebuck, eds., ARL Statistics (Washington, DC: ARL, 2012): 44; Kyrillidou, Morris, and Roebuck, eds., ARL Statistics (Washington, DC: ARL, 2012): 44.

13 Michael Levine-Clark Matt Nauman, Academic Digital Content Manager, YBP Library Services, Hopkinton. NH, message to the author, October 31, Doug Way and Julie Garrison, Financial Implications of Demand-Driven Acquisitions: A Case Study of the Value of Short-Term Loans, in David A. Swords, ed., Patron-Driven Acquisitions: History and Best Practices (Boston: DeGruyter Saur, 2011): Robert P. Holley and Kalyani Ankem, The Effect of the Internet on the Out-of-Print Book Market: Implications for Libraries, Library Collections, Acquisitions, and Technical Services 29, 2 (2005): Lightning Source, Lightning Source, accessed February 8, 2014, lightningsource.com/default.aspx. 10. Thomson Reuters, EndNote, accessed February 8, 2014, RefWorks COS/ProQuest, RefWorks, accessed February 8, 2014, com; Elsevier, Mendeley, accessed February 8, 2014, Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media, George Mason University, Zotero, accessed February 8, 2014, Springer, Papers, accessed February 8, 2014, Donald M. Norris and Linda L. Baer, Building Organizational Capacity for Analytics, EDUCAUSE, February 2013, accessed February 8, 2014, library/pdf/pub9012.pdf. 12. See, for instance, David Ball, What s the Big Deal, and Why Is It a Bad Deal for Universities? Interlending & Document Supply 32, 2 (2004): Tim Collins, The Current Budget Environment and Its Impact on Libraries, Publishers, and Vendors, Journal of Library Administration 52, 1 (January 2012): State Higher Education Executive Officers, State Higher Education Finance FY 2012 (2013), accessed February 8, 2014, SHEF%20FY% rev.pdf. 15. For a similar argument, see Rick Anderson, Can t Buy Us Love: The Declining Importance of Library Books and the Rising Importance of Special Collections (Ithaka S+R, 2013), accessed February 8, 2014, Anderson.pdf. 16. California Digital Library, WEST: Western Regional Storage Trust, accessed February 8, 2014, Center for Research Libraries, PAPR: Print Archives Preservation Registry, accessed February 8, 2014, Cornell University Library in Ithaca, NY, reports that less than 15 percent of its e-journal holdings are archived by LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe) and Portico combined. Cornell University Library and Columbia University Libraries, Final Report of the 2CUL LOCKSS Assessment Team, October 2011, accessed March 3, 2014, default/files/2cullockssfinalreport.pdf.

14