Open Access News

News from the open access movement


Saturday, May 06, 2006

Librarians are less and less satisfied with the big deal

Karla Hahn, The State of the Large Publisher Bundle: Findings from an ARL Member Survey, ARL Bimonthly Reports, April 2006. Excerpt:
There is no doubt that large commercial publishers’ bundles are a substantial part of research library collections. It is also clear that significant changes in library collections are underway. Cancellation projects are common. Shifts to e-only collecting for journal bundles are proceeding rapidly....Nondisclosure agreements are common, although more so with some publishers than others. Long-term contracts are similarly common. Cancellation of bundled titles has been effectively limited in recent years. Publisher’s archiving arrangements are unsatisfactory to at least a substantial minority of the community. Satisfaction with bundle pricing is decreasing through successive negotiations....With the majority of respondents reporting recent cancellation projects, the inescapable conclusion is that other segments of research library collections have been reduced to a greater extent in compensation for the protection afforded to bundles. This should be of concern to the library community and to publishers without the market power to gain similar protection for their titles. A few libraries believe they have [gained ground in renogotiating contracts], but a nearly similar number believe they are losing ground....

This survey focused on research libraries’ perspectives on journal bundles. It in no way measures publishers’ experiences with these business models. Presumably commercial publishers reporting excellent profitability are not pursing a pricing model that is unsuccessful. Rather, it seems safe to conclude, journal bundling has been working quite well from the perspective of the bundling publishers. With libraries reporting relatively little progress in successive contract negotiations, it seems likely that there is room for concessions from publishers that increase library satisfaction without risk of substantial damage to “the bottom line.”