AN ANALYSIS OF DIRECT RECIPROCAL BORROWING AMONG CREPUQ LIBRARIES

Joanna Duy, Associate Librar ian, Concordia University Librar ies

Vincent Larivière, Professeur Adjoint, ÉBSI, Université de Montréal

Spectrum of Resource Sharing:

INTRODUCTION

Interlibrary Loan • ILL system• ILL staff

Consortial Shared catalogue • circulation system• circulation staff

Direct Reciprocal Borrowing

Higher cost Lower cost

How much resource sharing activity is there within CREPUQ (ILL and direct reciprocal borrowing)? What is the rat io of ILL to direct reciprocal borrowing?

Is the amount of direct reciprocal borrowing activity related to the size of the l ibrary’s col lect ion, student size, or physical distance from other l ibrar ies?

What can social network analysis tel l us about direct reciprocal borrowing within CREPUQ?

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Direct Reciprocal Borrowing Total Circulat ion FTE students Collect ion s ize (physical)

CREPUQ ILL –COLOMBO Stat is t iques Annuel les (2007-10)

Distances between inst i tut ions – Google Maps

Analysis : Excel, SPSS, UCInet and NetDraw

METHODS

CREPUQs Statistiques générales des bibliothèques universitaires québecoises (2005-10); Tables 24, 20, 4, 14

RESULTS: GENERAL OBSERVATIONS

2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-100

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

Total Circulation and Reciprocal Borrowing (2005-10) for CREPUQ

Circulation TotalRecip Borrowing Total

Year

Tota

l Circ

ulat

ion

(CR

EPU

Q*)

Tota

l Rec

ip. B

orro

win

g (C

REP

UQ

*)*Some institutions are missing data for certain years

Montréal institutions account for 91% of the traffic in reciprocal borrowing, 67% of the traffic for total circulation

RESOURCE SHARING BREAKDOWN

ILL 14%

Recip. Borrowing 86%

Montréal CREPUQ Libraries' Resource Sharing Ac-tivity 2007-10

(Borrowing + Lending)

ILL 64%

Recip. Bor-rowing36%

Non-Montréal CREPUQ Libraries' Resource Sharing Activity 2007-10

(Borrowing + Lending)

TELUQ and INRS were not included in either category due to their multi-campus/online nature

Significant cost savingsExample: Concordia users borrowed on average (05-10) 15,361 items from other CREPUQ libraries through direct reciprocal borrowing

Signif icant posit ive correlat ions were observed between total i tems borrowed and loaned through direct reciprocal borrowing and:

Number of FTE students

Library’s collection size (physical materials)

CORRELATIONS

The total amount of borrowing and lending done between CREPUQ insti tut ions between 2005-10 was averaged and plotted in relat ion to the distance in ki lometers between the two inst i tut ions

EFFECT OF DISTANCE

Institution 1 Institution 2 Distance (KM)Borrowing +

LendingConcordia McGill 1,4 17455,6Concordia UdeM 4,3 7688,2Concordia HEC 4,5 476,8Concordia Poly 4,3 971,8Concordia Sherb 151 722,8Concordia Laval 247 322,6Concordia UQAC 458 2,6Concordia UQAM 2,5 4633,3Concordia UQAR 542 0,4Concordia UQAT 628 36,3Concordia UQO 202 67,5Concordia UQTR 139 9,0Concordia ENAP 254 38,3Concordia ETS 1,7 579,8Concordia INRS 254 45,5Concordia Bishop's 155 69,0

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 7000

2000400060008000

100001200014000160001800020000

R² = 0.367360580469586

R² = NaNR² = NaN

Concordia

Distance (km)Tota

l Len

d +

Borro

w (A

vg. 0

5-10

)

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 7000

2000400060008000

100001200014000160001800020000

R² = 0.468534381976216

R² = NaNR² = NaNUniversité de Montréal

Distance (km)

Tota

l Len

d +

Borro

w (A

vg. 0

5-10

)

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 7000

2000400060008000

100001200014000160001800020000

R² = 0.392174607243128

R² = NaNR² = NaN

McGill

Distance (km)

Tota

l Len

d +

Borro

w (A

vg. 0

5-10

)

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 7000

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

R² = 0.321101677641215

R² = NaNR² = NaNR² = NaN

UQAM

Distance (km)Tota

l Len

d +

Borro

w (A

vg. 0

5-10

)

Montréal Universities

Non-Montréal Universities

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 10000

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

R² = 0.0117577842459536

R² = NaNR² = NaNLaval

Distance (km)Tota

l Len

d +

Borro

w (A

vg. 0

5-10

)

100 200 300 400 500 600 7000

20406080

100120140160180

R² = 0.0710932222898439

R² = NaNR² = NaNR² = NaN

UQ Chicoutimi

Distance (km)

Tota

l Len

d +

Borro

w (A

vg. 0

5-10

)

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 14000

50100150200250300350400450

R² = 0.187616935755925

R² = NaNR² = NaNR² = NaN

UQ Rimouski

Distance (km)Tota

l Len

d +

Borro

w (A

vg. 0

5-10

)

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 8000

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

R² = 0.175897230689834

R² = NaNR² = NaNR² = NaN

UQ Outaouais

Distance (km)Tota

l Len

d +

Borro

w (A

vg. 0

5-10

)

SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS (SNA)

Networks are “a general yet powerful means of representing patterns of connections or interactions between the parts of a system” 1

“ the opportunit ies for social network analysis research in l ibrary specif ic contexts remain outstanding” 2

1. Newman, M.E.J. (2010). Networks: an introduction. Toronto: Oxford University Press. 2. Schultz-Jones, Barbara. (2009). Examining information behavior through social networks. Journal of Documentation 65, 592-631.

UQO

UQAT

ENAP

UQTR

UQAR

UQAC

Bishop’s

Sherbrooke

Concordia McGill

ETS

Polytechnique HEC

TELUQ

Laval

UdeM UQAM

Network Diagram: CREPUQ Direct Reciprocal Borrowing 2005-2010

INRS

CONCLUSIONS/RELEVANCE

Different resource sharing patterns between Montr éal and non-Montréal l ibrar ies; effect of distance, col lect ion size, FTE

Resource sharing of physical mater ials may play an important role as questions of storage space escalate (e.g. consort ia-wide storage of physical materials?)

Studying resource sharing patterns wil l al low us to better understand and plan for the use of these services

CREPUQ

Concordia University Librar ies

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Questions?