LIBRARY BUDGET PREDICTIONS FOR 2013€¦ · LIBRARY BUDGET PREDICTIONS FOR 2013 . Contents List of...

LIBRARY BUDGET PREDICTIONS FOR 2013

Contents

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................................................ 2 What was done ............................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Summary of Results ..................................................................................................................................................................... 2

Who was surveyed.......................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Sample Frame .............................................................................................................................................................................. 6

Length of Impact of the Economic Crisis ..................................................................................................................................... 7

Overall Library Expenditure ........................................................................................................................................................... 8 Overall Library Budget Broken Down ........................................................................................................................................... 8 Overall Library Budget Change for 2013 ...................................................................................................................................... 9

Materials Expenditure ................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Materials Budget Change for 2013............................................................................................................................................. 11 Expenditure of Materials Budget on Electronic Information Sources ......................................................................................... 13 Materials Budget Change to 2016 .............................................................................................................................................. 14

Serials Expenditure ...................................................................................................................................................................... 16 Serials Budget Change for 2013 ................................................................................................................................................ 18 Reasons for Decrease in Serials Budget ................................................................................................................................... 20 Reasons for Increase in Serials Budget ..................................................................................................................................... 20 Budget used for electronic and full text databases ..................................................................................................................... 20 Plans for Serial Additions and Cancellations .............................................................................................................................. 20 Electronic Journals and Breakdown of Serial Subscription into Format Type ............................................................................ 22 Expenditure on Electronic Serials .............................................................................................................................................. 24 E-Journal Budgets ...................................................................................................................................................................... 25

Abstracting and Indexing Services ............................................................................................................................................. 25

Books Expenditure ....................................................................................................................................................................... 26 Books Budget Change for 2013 ................................................................................................................................................. 26 New Books in 2012 .................................................................................................................................................................... 28 Percentage of Books Budget Spent on Electronic Books in 2012 .............................................................................................. 28 E-Books Budget Change for 2013.............................................................................................................................................. 29 Proportion of front list books ...................................................................................................................................................... 30

Major Reference Works ................................................................................................................................................................ 31 Major Reference Works – Predicted Change for 2012 ............................................................................................................... 31 Reasons Why the Number of MRWs is Likely to Change in 2012 ............................................................................................. 33 Major Reference Works Formats Being Purchased ................................................................................................................... 33 perpetual vs yearly access of mrws ........................................................................................................................................... 34

Institutional Repositories ............................................................................................................................................................. 35 How Information in Repositories is Stored ................................................................................................................................. 35 How Information in Repostiories is Maintained .......................................................................................................................... 36 Growth of Institutional Repositories............................................................................................................................................ 36

© 2013 Publishers Communication Group, 38 Chauncy Street, Boston, MA 02111 - (617) 497-6514. Reproduction strictly prohibited.

P a g e | 1

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Budget % Change by Type of Institute................................................................................................................................ 2

Table 2: Average number of Faculty and Students by Type of Institute ........................................................................................... 5

Table 3: Consortia Membership ........................................................................................................................................................ 5

Table 4: Institutional Repository Ownership ..................................................................................................................................... 5

Table 5: Breakdown of sample by country and type of institute ........................................................................................................ 6

Table 6: Library Budget change for 2013 - Overall Library Budget ................................................................................................. 10

Table 7: Material Budget change for 2013 ...................................................................................................................................... 12

Table 8: Percentage Expenditure On Electronic Information Resources ........................................................................................ 13

Table 9: Material Budget change 2016 ........................................................................................................................................... 14

Table 10: Ave. Serial Cost for ARL Institutes Reporting in the Year of Estimation ........................................................................ 17

Table 11: Serials Budget Change for 2013 ..................................................................................................................................... 19

Table 12: Serials Additions in 2013 ................................................................................................................................................ 21

Table 13: Breakdown of serials subscriptions into format type in 2012 .......................................................................................... 23

Table 14: Percentage of Serials Expenditure on Electronic Serials (Current year) ......................................................................... 24

Table 15: Abstracting & Indexing Budget Predictions for 2013 ....................................................................................................... 25

Table 16: Books Budget Change for 2013 ...................................................................................................................................... 27

Table 17: Book Purchasing in 2012 Compared to 2011 ................................................................................................................. 28

Table 18: Average Number of books in 2012 per institute type ...................................................................................................... 28

Table 19: Library Book Budget - % spent on electronic books ....................................................................................................... 28

Table 20: E-Books budget change .................................................................................................................................................. 29

Table 21: E-books access models .................................................................................................................................................. 29

Table 22: Proportion of front list books ........................................................................................................................................... 30

Table 23: MRW Budget change for 2013 ........................................................................................................................................ 32

Table 24: Purchasing patterns for MRWs by region and organisation (up to current year) ............................................................ 33

Table 25: MRW access models ...................................................................................................................................................... 34

Table 26: Usage of Institutional Repositories.................................................................................................................................. 35



Table 29: Who maintains the repository ......................................................................................................................................... 36

Table 30: Availability of repository .................................................................................................................................................. 36

Table 31: Growth of Institutional Repositories ................................................................................................................................ 36

Table 32: Growth of Institutional Repositories ................................................................................................................................ 37

Library Budget Survey - 2013


P a g e | 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

WHAT WAS DONE

A global telephone survey was carried out at 525 institutional libraries. Institutes in North America, South America, Europe and Asia Pacific Region were contacted.

Senior librarians with control over and knowledge of library budgets for 2013 were contacted.

Academic institutions were split into categories reflecting the size of their institute.

The telephone survey was carried out by two independent research agencies both of whom have specialist knowledge of the library markets.

SUMMARY OF RESULTS

The global economic outlook at the start of 2012 was relatively positive. Improving market sentiment, combined with “quantitative easing” in developing countries, meant a rebound in economic activity in both developing and advanced countries. However, since May, progress has faltered. Austerity measures in EU countries have negatively impacted growth in the European economy, which in turn has impacted the global economy. America’s recovery remains slow, whilst even strongly performing Asia-Pacific emerging countries such as China have seen a slowdown in their growth (their GDP growth slowed in Q2). The global economic outlook is important because GDP growth impacts the amount of funds available in institutional budgets, which in turn impinges on library budgets. Therefore, it is not surprising that the results of this year’s library budget survey show small growth predictions.

The overall library budget is predicted to increase in 2013 by 0.8% and the materials budget by 0.7%. However, as these rates are lower than the inflation rate in most countries, many libraries will be pressed maintaining existing services. The pressure is greatest on the serials budget, which shows the lowest percentage increase at just 0.3%. Librarians continue to juggle their subscriptions to gain best value. An examination of library data for North American institutes (ARL) shows that average serial cost continues to decline. The cost to the library of a serial in 2011 ($139) is very similar to the cost paid in 1990 ($138).

There is slightly more optimism in the forecasts when librarians look further forward. From 2013 to 2016 librarians, estimate that year on year the materials budget will increase by 2%. Looking at the regional breakdown, there are some distinct differences in predicted budgets for 2013. South America’s prediction of decrease shows a worsening position after last year’s relatively static picture. Brazil, the world’s sixth biggest economy, has been hardest hit by the overseas downturn and is expected to grow more slowly than other regional economies1. Asia Pacific continues to have the most optimistic predictions. The picture in North America improves on last year with growth, albeit very modest, for all areas except books. Europe continues to decline across all budget lines. The key findings of the study are:

Table 1: Budget % Change by Type of Institute

NB: At a base size of 525, error margin is ±3.7. At base sizes of around 100, the error margin is ±5.8. Arrows green or red indicate change greater than 0.5%

1 Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/aug/15/brazil-latin-america-economic-growth



P a g e | 3

When reviewing the results of this survey while knowing the absolute increases is valuable, what is important are the relative differences between regions, budgets and institute types.

Overall library budgets are set to increase by 0.8% (last year a 0.2% increase was forecast).

South America predicts the biggest decrease at -3.4%. (n.b. our respondent base for South America is 35, so these figures should be treated with caution), Europe is the only other region to predict a decrease (-1.4%).

Asia Pacific continues to perform strongly with a 4.9% increase .This is the fifth successive year that librarians in the Asia Pacific region have predicted an increase of 2% or above.

Emerging countries predict a 5.3% increase, mainly driven by the strong performance in Asia Pacific.

Just over a third (34%) of institutes expect their budget to increase, 41% to remain static, 23% to decrease, 2% were unable to say.

Materials budgets (all information content provision) are predicted to increase by 0.7% (last year saw a forecast of a 0.3% increase).

In tandem with the overall budget, South America predicts a -3.4% decrease, a sharp contrast to last year’s prediction of a 0.6% increase. North America returns to a projected increase, though only just, at 0.1%. Europe remains broadly on a par with last year, predicting a -0.9% decrease (last year -1.0%). Asia Pacific continues to have the healthiest budget, with an expected 4.5% increase. The emerging countries group also performs well with a 3.4% increase.

34% of institutes predict an increase, 42% remain static, 21% predict a decrease, 3% were unable to say.

It is estimated that approximately 51% of the library materials budget is spent on electronic information sources (up 1.7%)

Looking ahead to the 2016 materials budget, overall, institutes expect their budget to increase by an average of 2.0%, year on year.

Serials budgets are forecast to increase by 0.3% (last year a 0.5% increase was predicted)

North America predicts a 0.7% increase, an improvement on last year’s 0.1% decrease. Europe however, sees a worsening picture for serials with a -1.1% decrease (last year was -0.2%). South America expects a 3.3% decrease. Asia Pacific expects to increase spending by 2.4%. Emerging countries perform less well on the serials budget: just a 0.1% increase.

While the overall increase is relatively low, more institutes than last year are predicting their budget will increase (40% vs 34%).

A reduction in available funds was the main reason given by those who expect their serials budget to decrease.

The Library Journal periodical survey (see p20) indicates that the average serial price increased 7.1%. An analysis of ARL serial expenditure suggests that the average serial cost actually dropped by 7.7%.

Book expenditure is forecast to increase by 0.8% (a decrease of 0.1% was predicted last year).

Only Asia Pacific’s strong performance (4.8% increase) saves the overall forecast from sliding into decline. North America (-0.4% decrease), Europe (-0.6% decrease) and South America (-3.6% decrease) all predict reductions in their books budgets.

However, these figures do show improvements on last year for North America and Europe. Last year, North America had predicted a -2.4% decrease, while Europe forecasted -0.8%.

Emerging countries show strong purchasing intention for books with a 6.5% expected increase

The majority (51%) of institutes believe their budgets will remain static. 27% predict that budget expenditure for 2013 will increase while 21% predict a decrease.

On average, 15.5% of the book budget is spent on e-books. Predicted change in e-book expenditure is 6.1%

The number of Major Reference Works (MRWs) to be purchased in 2013 is set to decrease by -2.9% (last year was a predicted decrease of -1.4%). All regions predict a decrease in MRW expenditure, with Europe hardest hit (-4.0% decrease)

E-Journal services 97% of institutes take an e-journal service. E-only journals represent 59% of journal subscriptions, rising 3% from last year. Institutes still take a reasonable portion of their subscriptions in print only form (22%), while the remainder (19%) is part of a combined print and electronic package.

28% of those with E-journal services have a separate budget for them. The average budget change for e-journals is a 4.2% increase. Adding in those respondents who do not have a separate budget but are aware of how the e-journal portion will change, this figure drops to a 3.3% increase



P a g e | 4

A&I Services are provided by 85% of institutes. 35% have a budget separate to the serials budget. These institutes forecast an increase of 1.2% Adding in those respondents whose A&I budget was within serials but were able to predict change on the A&I element, this increase drops to 0.1%.

Institutional Repositories – These are fairly widespread with just over half (57%) of institutes either owning or sharing ownership. This figure rises to 83% for top academic institutes. Research articles continue to be the most commonly stored information type, with 87% of repositories holding them. In terms of content expansion, 46% felt that the repository was growing fast or very fast.

Europe

2013 (change)

Overall -1.4%

Materials -0.9%

Serials -1.1%

Books -0.6%

North America

2013 (change)

Overall 0.3%

Materials 0.1%

Serials 0.7%

Books -0.4%

Asia Pacific

2013 (change)

Overall 4.9%

Materials 4.5%

Serials 2.4%

Books 4.8%

South America

2013 (change)

Overall -3.4%

Materials -3.4%

Serials -3.3%

Books -3.6%



P a g e | 5

WHO WAS SURVEYED

Altogether 525 institutes were successfully surveyed, from a range of countries and institute types reflecting the market generally.

This provides a 3.7%± confidence interval at 90% confidence levels; however it must be borne in mind that the estimates made by some librarians are indications, rather than the known budgeted amount.

Librarians who were surveyed last year were approached again this year to take part in the survey.

The survey was completed in North America, South and Mid-America, Europe and the Asia Pacific Region.

Institutions were chosen from North America (USA, Canada), South America (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Columbia, Mexico, Venezuela), Europe (20 countries) and Asia Pacific (9 countries). Since the 2009 survey, we have included a category, ‘emerging countries’, which cuts across geography (see next section for countries included in this group).

Librarians were asked to quantify the number of faculty and studetns for the library. The average results by region and institute type are in the table opposite.

Consortia Membership

The majority of those surveyed are consortia members, with the proportion highest among academic institutes (92%).

Table 3: Consortia Membership

Institute Type Yes No

Academic Top 89% 11%

Academic Middle 94% 6%

Academic Lower 94% 6%

Medical/Health 71% 29%

Government 65% 35%

Corporate 42% 58%

Total 79% 21%

Institutional Repositories (for more detail please see the final section)

Librarians were asked if their institute had its own institutional repository. Overall, more than a half (57%) have an institutional

repository, with academic institutes being most likely to have a repository (74%).

Table 4: Institutional Repository Ownership

Institute Type Yes No





Government 39% 61%

Corporate 40% 60%

Total 57% 43%

Table 2: Average number of Faculty and Students by Type of Institute

Region Level Members/Users

North America

Academic top 26,217

Academic middle 13,750

Academic lower 4,925

Medical/Health 4,579

Government 5,493

Corporate 8,793

Europe

Academic top 26,765




Government 3,511

Corporate 2,167

Asia Pacific

Academic top 29,375




Government 2,008

Corporate 3,436

South America

Academic top 31,875


Academic lower 11.125


Government 22,250

Corporate 11,000



P a g e | 6

SAMPLE FRAME

The sample frame was constructed into several organisation types: Academic, Corporate, Government, and Medical. The Academic sector was further split into three groups based upon size of the institute. The breakdown by country and type is in the table below. Emerging countries are a grouping introduced in 2009 and are a subset of countries that cross the below geographical categories and includes: India, China, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Russia, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Columbia, Mexico and Venezuela.

Table 5: Breakdown of sample by country and type of institute

Region Country

Academic

Corp. Gov't Medical Total

% of overall sample top middle lower

Asia Pacific

Australia 4 0 2 1 1 1 9 2%

China 6 10 5 3 2 4 30 6%

HK 1 1 1 0 0 0 3 1%

India 5 3 3 3 1 2 17 3%

Japan 8 13 12 10 6 9 58 11%

Korea 3 1 2 3 1 2 12 2%

Malaysia 3 1 1 0 0 0 5 1%

New Zealand 1 1 1 0 0 0 3 1%

Taiwan 1 1 4 2 1 2 11 2%

Total 32 31 31 22 12 20 148 28%

Europe

Austria 1 1 1 1 0 1 5 1%

Belgium 2 0 1 1 1 1 6 1%

Czech Republic 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1%

Denmark 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1%

Finland 1 1 1 0 0 1 4 1%

France 2 4 3 3 3 3 18 3%

Germany 3 5 4 4 3 3 22 4%

Hungary 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1%

Ireland 0 1 2 0 0 1 4 1%

Israel 1 1 1 0 0 1 4 1%

Italy 3 3 3 2 2 2 15 3%

Netherlands 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1%

Poland 2 2 1 1 1 1 8 2%

Portugal 1 1 1 0 0 1 4 1%

Romania 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1%

Russia 3 2 1 1 1 1 9 2%

Spain 3 2 1 2 2 2 12 2%

Sweden 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1%

Switzerland 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1%

UK 4 3 5 4 3 4 23 4%

Total 33 33 32 26 23 29 176 34%

North America

Canada 3 3 3 2 2 2 15 3%

USA 27 27 27 20 18 32 151 29%

Total 30 30 30 22 20 34 166 32%

South America

Argentina 2 2 2 1 1 1 9 2%

Brazil 2 2 2 1 1 2 10 2%

Chile 1 1 1 0 0 1 4 1%

Colombia 1 1 1 0 0 1 4 1%

Mexico 1 1 1 0 0 1 4 1%

Venezuela 1 1 1 0 0 1 4 1%

Total 8 8 8 2 2 7 35 7%

Grand Total 103 102 101 72 57 90 525 100%

Overall % 20% 19% 19% 14% 11% 17% 100%



P a g e | 7

LENGTH OF IMPACT OF THE ECONOMIC CRISIS

Since the start of the economic crisis we have asked librarians how long they expect their budgets to be impacted by the crisis. As the crisis rumbles on, so too does its impact. Most believe budgets will be affected until next year at least, with a minority (22%) believing they will still be feeling the effect in 4 years time or even longer. In North America, the proportion is as high as 45%, the equivalent figure for Europe is 8%.

Overall, 26% believe the economic crisis has had no impact on their budget. This rises to 39% amongst institutes in Asia.

Europe has the highest proportion of institutes (27%) which feel the budgets will be affected until the end of next year.

Figure 1

Figure 2



P a g e | 8

OVERALL LIBRARY EXPENDITURE

OVERALL LIBRARY BUDGET BROKEN DOWN

The overall library budget includes the ongoing costs of maintaining a library, salary, materials and operating expenditure.

By examining the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) expenditure we can get an idea of how library budgets breakdown.

The ARL statistics include details of collections, expenditures, staffing, and service activities for its member libraries and the majority of the libraries are large North American academic institutes.

For 2011 the 126 members of the ARL reported a combined expenditure of $4.6 billion. This expenditure broke down into four areas: salaries (45%), materials (43%), binding (0.4%) and other operating expenditures (12%) made up the remainder of the budget.

The materials budget further broke down into serials expenditure (68%), books expenditure (20%) with the remaining being allocated to miscellaneous expenditure or other materials. (NB this split is based upon 91 institutes reporting on all elements of the budget)

Figure 3



P a g e | 9

OVERALL LIBRARY BUDGET CHANGE FOR 2013

% Change: The overall library budget continues to show modest recovery from the 0.1% decline that was forecast for 2011. After rising to a 0.2% increase for last year, librarians expect to see a 0.8% increase for 2013.

o Region: After having predicted decreases for the past two years, the position in North America returns to a forecast of increase at 0.3%. In Europe the situation remains relatively static, with librarians predicting a decrease (-1.4%), compared to last year’s prediction of -1.3%. South America shows the biggest change year on year, with a -3.4% decrease following the 0.6% increase forecast last year. Asia Pacific performs strongly with a predicted increase of 4.9%, although this is partly influenced by three institutes who are predicting a 100% increase. The emerging countries forecast the highest increase of 5.3% (again influenced by the three 100% scores).

o Type of institute: Academic markets expect a 0.6% increase overall, North American and European academics predict their budgets to shrink (-0.2% and -1.6% respectively) but less than in 2012. Asia Pacific shows strong performance at 4.5% increase as do academic institutes in the emerging countries (6.2%).

Qualitative predictions: (see table 9) suggest that less than half of the institutions (41%) believe their budget will remain static. The proportion of institutions predicting increases reaches 34%, 8 points up from last year’s 26%. Those predicting decreases remain as 23%. Only Government institutes expect a decline (-0.9%) with 30% expecting a decrease. South America and Europe are the two regions where there are more institutes predicting decreases than those predicting increases

Figure 4 Figure 53

Figure 6



P a g e | 10

Table 6: Library Budget change for 2013 - Overall Library Budget

Qualitative Predictions Quantitative Predictions

% respondents predicting

Region Organisation Increase Static Decrease % Budget Change

North America

Academic Top 43% 40% 17% 0.0

Academic Middle 33% 40% 27% 0.0

Academic Lower 33% 37% 30% -0.7

All Academic 37% 39% 24% -0.2

Medical/Health 50% 32% 18% 2.3

Government 30% 35% 30% -3.6

Corporate 59% 32% 9% 2.6

Overall 42% 36% 22% 0.3

Europe

Academic Top 18% 48% 27% -1.5

Academic Middle 18% 48% 30% -1.6


All Academic 22% 42% 30% -1.6

Medical/Health 17% 55% 28% -1.0

Government 26% 48% 26% -2.7

Corporate 38% 31% 23% -0.1

Overall 24% 43% 28% -1.4

Asia Pacific

Academic Top 44% 41% 16% 1.8


Academic Lower 39% 42% 13% 5.9

All Academic 40% 37% 19% 4.5


Government 33% 33% 33% 8.5

Corporate 32% 64% 5% 4.1

Overall 39% 41% 17% 4.9

South America

Academic Top 50% 25% 25% 0.0



All Academic 33% 38% 29% -2.3


Government 0% 50% 50% -10.0

Corporate 0% 50% 50% -10.0

Overall 23% 46% 31% -3.4

Emerging Countries

Academic Top 52% 33% 11% 3.4



All Academic 51% 33% 12% 6.2


Government 40% 30% 30% 8.5

Corporate 38% 38% 23% 2.2

Overall 48% 35% 14% 5.3

Overall

Academic Top 36% 42% 20% 0.1



All Academic 33% 39% 25% 0.6


Government 28% 40% 30% -0.9

Corporate 42% 42% 14% 1.8

Overall 34% 41% 23% 0.8



P a g e | 11

MATERIALS EXPENDITURE

MATERIALS BUDGET CHANGE FOR 2013

The material budget covers all the costs a library incurs when purchasing content for the library, including journal subscriptions, book costs, inter-library loans etc.

% Change: Overall material budgets are set to increase in 2013 by 0.7% (last year was a 0.3% increase). o Region: North America predicted a 0.1% increase, a slight improvement in contrast to last year’s decline (-0.5%).

Europe remains on a par with last year with a 0.9% decrease (last year: -1.0%). South America performs poorly with a forecast of -3.4% (in contrast to last year’s 0.6% increase). The Emerging countries grouping perform strongly with a predicted 3.4% increase. The Asia Pacific region is forecasting the biggest increase of 4.5%.

o Type of institute: Academic libraries show a slight improvement with a 0.5% mean increase (last year was a 0.3% increase). As with overall budgets, Asia Pacific and Emerging countries are healthiest, with predicted increases of 3.4% and 3.9% respectively. In tandem with their overall budget, Government institutes are seeing negative growth (-0.2%). They are not the only institute type predicting a decrease. Academic Lower expect to see a downturn (-0.1%)

Qualitative predictions: suggest that 34% of institutes will see an increase in their budget (6 points up on last year) with the majority (42%) believing their budget will remain static. The number of institutes forecasting a drop in budget for 2013 is 21%. o Region: South America has the highest proportion of institutes predicting a decrease (31%), followed by Europe

(27%). This is a 5% improvement on 2012 predictions for Europe. o Emerging countries form the most optimistic group, with 45% predicting an increase (a 6% rise on last year). Asia

Pacific performs best of the geographical regions with an increase of 39%, a slight drop from last year’s 41% o Type of institute: Academic Lower institutes have the smallest proportion of institutes predicting an increase in the

budget (27%) which is in sharp contrast to Academic Top (43%). Government institutions predict the highest proportion of budget decreases (26%), however, this is a 4% improvement on 2012.

Reasons for change: In terms of reasons why budgets are decreasing, institutes report that it is mostly due to reduction in funding. As for budget increases, most common reasons include the inflation of prices for materials, and the acquisition of new subscriptions.

Figure 7 Figure 8

Figure 9



P a g e | 12

Table 76: Material Budget change for 2013




North America

Academic Top 50% 40% 10% 0.9



All Academic 36% 43% 20% 0.0


Government 20% 35% 30% -4.0

Corporate 36% 55% 5% 1.5

Overall 35% 43% 18% 0.1

Europe

Academic Top 36% 36% 21% -0.5



All Academic 30% 39% 28% -1.1


Government 35% 39% 22% -1.9

Corporate 35% 35% 27% -0.3

Overall 30% 39% 27% -0.9

Asia Pacific

Academic Top 41% 34% 16% 3.2



All Academic 38% 41% 15% 3.4


Government 50% 25% 25% 10.1

Corporate 41% 45% 14% 6.4

Overall 39% 42% 14% 4.5

South America

Academic Top 50% 25% 25% 0.0



All Academic 33% 38% 29% -2.3


Government 0% 50% 50% -10.0

Corporate 0% 50% 50% -10.0

Overall 23% 46% 31% -3.4

Emerging Countries

Academic Top 48% 22% 15% 2.9



All Academic 45% 33% 12% 3.9


Government 50% 30% 20% 8.0

Corporate 46% 31% 23% 1.3

Overall 45% 36% 15% 3.4

Overall

Academic Top 43% 36% 17% 1.1



All Academic 34% 41% 22% 0.5


Government 32% 35% 26% -0.2

Corporate 36% 44% 17% 2.1

Overall 34% 42% 21% 0.7



P a g e | 13

EXPENDITURE OF MATERIALS BUDGET ON ELECTRONIC INFORMATION SOURCES

The below figures do not represent a prediction, but an estimate of spend on electronic resources during the year the survey was conducted.

With the exception of North America, all regions have increased their percentage spend on electronic resources. Overall, the percentage spend increased by 1.7 points.

At organisation level, the take-up in Government institutes dropped by 6.3 points to 41.2% while the Academic Lower started to show a strong inclination to increase the expenditure, with a 6 point increase to 49.0%

Regionally, North America still has the highest proportion of spend on electronic information resources at 59.3%. Asia Pacific is catching up with 50.1%.

Table 8: Percentage Expenditure On Electronic Information Resources

Region Organisation %

(2005) %

(2006) %

(2007) %

(2008) %

(2009) %

(2010) %

(2011) %

(2012)

North America

Academic Top 30.6 30.5 39.1 51.3 60.2 61.3 64.0 69.5

Academic Middle 34.5 31.5 37.1 54.3 52.2 64.4 65.6 66.3

Academic Lower 23.1 25.1 23.4 44.2 44.6 50.5 49.6 56.7

Medical/Health 30.1 33.1 34.2 39.3 46.4 54.8 59.1 55.4

Government 34.7 32.5 51.4 43.6 52.7 50.9 62.6 45.7

Corporate 45.5 39.9 48.8 48.1 54.1 72.0 62.2 59.5

Overall 31.4 31.4 37.2 47.7 51.2 58.8 60.4 59.3

Europe

Academic Top 38.2 27.9 45.7 43.5 44.5 50.5 46.3 51.5

Academic Middle 34.1 34.0 38.3 40.7 40.7 42.9 45.7 52.9

Academic Lower 27.3 31.1 33.8 40.7 41.8 47.2 43.8 52.9

Medical/Health 44.1 38.8 40.0 42.1 36.8 44.7 41.9 40.6

Government 32.6 31.4 45.5 42.5 46.2 46.7 37.8 38.4

Corporate 37.9 45.6 45.3 50.8 31.2 46.9 46.4 48.3

Overall 35.5 34.0 40.7 42.7 40.8 46.4 43.9 48.0

Asia Pacific

Academic Top 30.0 29.8 38.8 37.8 41.4 51.3 53.4 54.6

Academic Middle 38.6 31.3 39.2 28.6 42.8 45.5 48.8 50.0

Academic Lower 26.4 16.3 23.2 39.7 37.5 34.3 42.5 43.5

Medical/Health 15.3 7.6 33.3 54.9 32.7 56.0 43.1 55.6

Government 14.9 31.4 33.0 29.4 28.9 46.3 47.3 41.9

Corporate 19.1 22.6 45.3 29.2 51.7 52.0 55.1 52.6

Overall 25.7 23.5 33.2 39.1 39.4 46.8 48.1 50.1

South America

Academic Top 29.4 42.5 40.6 42.9 43.9

Academic Middle 29.2 38.6 39.3 40.0 40.6

Academic Lower 21.0 23.3 22.5 27.9 28.1

Medical/Health 15.0 27.1 27.1 29.9 29.9

Government 15.0 15.0 15.5 18.5 27.5

Corporate 15.0 15.0 15.5 17.5 29.0

Overall 24.2 30.6 30.6 33.8 34.9

Emerging

Academic Top 28.9 48.5 40.4 43.5 44.6

Academic Middle 33.4 44.0 35.9 39.8 49.0

Academic Lower 36.5 39.5 28.7 29.4 34.9

Medical/Health 17.5 38.4 37.2 32.5 41.6

Government 26.9 41.6 22.8 25.6 30.6

Corporate 37.5 42.5 37.7 36.3 34.4

Overall 38.0 42.5 34.6 35.8 41.0

Overall

Academic Top 33.5 29.4 41.7 43.7 48.5 53.2 53.7 57.1

Academic Middle 35.4 32.4 38.2 44.3 44.0 49.6 51.6 54.3

Academic Lower 25.5 23.6 27.1 38.9 39.5 42.2 43.9 49.0

Medical/Health 32.9 30.2 36.9 37.0 38.4 49.6 48.1 49.0

Government 28.2 31.7 44.9 41.0 41.6 46.9 47.5 41.2

Corporate 34.0 37.7 46.7 48.8 42.5 55.9 53.1 52.7

Overall 32.0 30.0 38.0 42.0 42.5 49.3 49.6 51.3



P a g e | 14

MATERIALS BUDGET CHANGE TO 2016

Respondents were asked to think ahead to 2016, in order to predict whether their budget was likely increase year on year, remain static year on year, decrease year on year or vary (i.e. increase one year, but decrease the following year) and by how much the materials budget would change year on year. It is important to note that many librarians found it difficult to answer and therefore figures are likely to be indicative.

North America and Asia Pacific predict a year on year increase (2.4% and 5.9% respectively) while South America and Europe expect their current downturns to continue (-3.1% and -0.5% respectively).

Emerging countries predict the largest year on year increase of 6.0%.

Table 9: Material Budget change 2016



Region Organisation Increase Same Decrease Vary % Budget Change

North America

Academic Top 63% 20% 10% 0% 3.3

Academic Middle 43% 33% 23% 0% 1.5

Academic Lower 33% 40% 20% 0% 0.4

All Academic 47% 31% 18% 0% 1.7

Medical/Health 44% 24% 21% 3% 1.5

Government 40% 35% 15% 0% 2.3

Corporate 68% 23% 0% 5% 6.7

Overall 48% 29% 16% 1% 2.4

Europe

Academic Top 15% 33% 24% 6% -1.8

Academic Middle 24% 27% 33% 9% -0.3

Academic Lower 25% 47% 16% 0% -0.7

All Academic 21% 36% 24% 5% -0.9

Medical/Health 14% 41% 21% 7% -1.5

Government 30% 35% 22% 4% -0.1

Corporate 35% 42% 15% 0% 1.3

Overall 23% 38% 22% 5% -0.6

Asia Pacific

Academic Top 48% 28% 14% 10% 3.7


Academic Lower 33% 37% 13% 13% 4.4

All Academic 44% 27% 17% 10% 5.2

Medical/Health 50% 28% 17% 0% 9.6

Government 42% 8% 25% 17% 6.8

Corporate 50% 32% 9% 5% 5.1

Overall 45% 26% 16% 9% 5.9

South America

Academic Top 50% 25% 25% 0% 0.0

Academic Middle 38% 38% 25% 0% -1.3

Academic Lower 25% 38% 38% 0% -4.4

All Academic 38% 33% 29% 0% -1.9

Medical/Health 0% 71% 29% 0% -3.6

Government 0% 50% 50% 0% -10.0

Corporate 0% 50% 50% 0% -10.0

Overall 26% 43% 31% 0% -3.1

Emerging Countries

Academic Top 46% 21% 8% 4% 4.4


Academic Lower 55% 25% 15% 5% 4.2

All Academic 56% 21% 11% 0% 6.7

Medical/Health 25% 50% 13% 0% 2.5

Government 40% 20% 20% 10% 7.0

Corporate 38% 23% 15% 8% 5.9

Overall 40% 36% 7% 12% 6.0



P a g e | 15

Overall

Academic Top 42% 27% 17% 5% 1.6


Academic Lower 30% 41% 18% 4% 0.9

All Academic 37% 32% 21% 0% 1.6

Medical/Health 32% 34% 20% 3% 1.9

Government 35% 30% 21% 5% 1.8

Corporate 49% 33% 10% 3% 3.8

Overall 37% 32% 19% 4% 2.0

As this question required respondents to think 4 years ahead, we wanted to have an idea of the certainty of the answer. Respondents were asked how confident they were of their prediction.

Figure 10

Taking into account only the predictions of those who were confident or somewhat confident of the accuracy of their predictions, the overall percentage change increases to 2.7% (n=322).

Figure 11



P a g e | 16

SERIALS EXPENDITURE

In this section we track several measures drawn from two sources: Library Journal periodical survey2 for the average serial cost, and the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) statistical data for serial expenditure and number of serials purchased by North American institutes3.

The ARL in North America annually tracks library expenditure and includes amongst its members some of the largest universities in the USA and Canada. 113 university libraries contributed data to the ARL statistics for 2011.

In reference to figure 18 below, until 2002, broadly annual changes in serial expenditure reflect annual changes in average serial costs as tracked in the Library Journal. Although serials expenditure change appears to follow serials cost change, they do so at a lower level. After 2002 the changes are no longer in tandem.

This disconnect is likely due to the impact of a number of factors. It should be borne in mind that the average serial prices produced by the Library Journal are based on catalogue prices. In recent years serials agents and publishers have introduced more and more individualized deals. Consequently the list price of journals rarely reflects the actual cost paid. Since 1997, there have been increases year-on-year in the number of subscriptions taken. The year-on-year increases are likely to be explained by the addition of electronic versions, at modest additional costs, via individualized deals and/or libraries accommodating the purchase of new and cheaper subscriptions through cancellation of a few expensive titles.

The ARL average serial costs, instead of the Library Journal average serial costs are perhaps more indicative of the true costs incurred by institutes (it is derived by dividing the number of serials purchased by serial expenditure). These figures suggest that the cost paid by institutions per serial has broadly been falling since 2001. In fact the average serial cost in 2011 at $139.18 is only slightly higher than the 1990 cost of $138.24 (see table 13).

Figure 12 NB. From 2007 the ARL has changed its method for tracking serials purchased, no longer reporting institutes count the number of subscriptions, but instead unique titles, thus an institute that previously took 3 copies of ‘Nature’ would now be counted as taking 1, this is likely to explain the subsequent decline in the number of serials purchased.

2 http://www.libraryjournal.com/info/CA6435067.html?q=periodical+survey

3 http://interactive.arlstatistics.org/home



P a g e | 17

Table 70: Ave. Serial Cost for ARL Institutes Reporting in the Year of Estimation

Year

No of

Institutes

reporting

Ser Unit Cost:

US$ Mean % Change

1990 68 138.24 8.3%

1991 76 151.00 9.2%

1992 76 166.16 10.0%

1993 77 185.77 11.8%

1994 81 194.20 4.5%

1995 81 210.71 8.5%

1996 81 231.17 9.7%

1997 81 248.67 7.6%

1998 80 252.82 1.7%

1999 82 261.41 3.4%

2000 83 276.81 5.9%

2001 82 267.13 -3.5%

2002 86 266.82 -0.1%

2003 84 266.87 0.0%

2004 89 270.70 1.4%

2005 88 247.55 -8.6%

2006 89 241.60 -2.4%

2007 101 201.26 -16.7%

2008 107 178.17 -11.5%

2009 108 161.95 -9.1%

2010 112 150.78 -6.9%

2011 113 139.18 -7.7%

NB: ARL institutes reported in table above and in Figure 18 are only those institutes that are universities and have reported values for the number of serials purchased and serial expenditure in a given year.



P a g e | 18

SERIALS BUDGET CHANGE FOR 2013

% Change: The serials budget in 2013 is set to increase by 0.3%, this is on par with last year’s increase of 0.5%. o Region: North America returns to a positive forecast (0.7%), after predicting decreases for the last two years. However,

the position in Europe worsens, where a decrease is predicted (-1.1% - last year -0.2%). Asia Pacific predicts an increase of 2.4% (last year was 2.3%), while South America predicts the largest decline (-3.3%).

o Type of institute: Academic institutional budgets are predicted to increase overall by 0.6% (last year: 0.5% increase). In reverse to last year’s picture, Academic Top institutes predict the biggest growth (1.2%) across the institutional types.

Qualitative predictions: suggest that 40% of institutes forecast an increase in their serials budget for 2013 – 6 points up on the last year. 20% predict a decrease, a slight drop from last year’s figure of 19%.

Figure 13 Figure 14

Figure 15



P a g e | 19

Table 81: Serials Budget Change for 2013

Qualitative Predictions Quantitative Predictions % respondents predicting


North America

Academic Top 67% 27% 7% 2.9



All Academic 50% 31% 19% 1.2


Government 35% 40% 15% -1.3

Corporate 36% 36% 27% 0.4

Overall 46% 33% 19% 0.7

Europe

Academic Top 36% 42% 21% -0.6



All Academic 31% 45% 23% -1.1


Government 43% 35% 22% -0.3

Corporate 27% 58% 15% 0.1

Overall 31% 43% 24% -1.1

Asia Pacific

Academic Top 59% 22% 16% 1.8



All Academic 52% 33% 13% 2.6


Government 42% 42% 17% 5.8

Corporate 18% 59% 18% -1.5

Overall 46% 36% 14% 2.4

South America

Academic Top 50% 25% 25% 0.0



All Academic 33% 38% 29% -2.1


Government 0% 50% 50% -10.0

Corporate 0% 50% 50% -10.0

Overall 23% 46% 31% -3.3

Emerging Countries

Academic Top 52% 36% 16% 1.3



All Academic 50% 35% 15% 1.0


Government 50% 30% 20% 5.5

Corporate 0% 69% 23% -5.8

Overall 39% 39% 17% 0.1

Overall

Academic Top 53% 30% 16% 1.2



All Academic 43% 37% 19% 0.6


Government 39% 39% 19% 0.3

Corporate 26% 51% 21% -0.6

Overall 40% 38% 20% 0.3



P a g e | 20

REASONS FOR DECREASE IN SERIALS BUDGET

Librarians were asked why they believed their budgets had changed.

Altogether 107 librarians gave reasons as to why they thought it had decreased. Reduction in available funds remains the top reason (62%). 22% ascribe the decrease to consequence of the shift from print to electronic. This year 15% indicate that it is due to price inflation, a drop of 10 points compared with last year. Although price inflation has not directly reduced budgets, it does erode the purchasing power of the libraries.

REASONS FOR INCREASE IN SERIALS BUDGET

206 librarians were able to specify why their budget had increased. The most often stated reason (52%) was due to price increase and new subscriptions, followed by price inflation (44%).

BUDGET USED FOR ELECTRONIC AND FULL TEXT DATABASES

Librarians were asked which part of the library budget is used to cover the cost of electronic journals and full text databases.

71% said that these costs were borne by the serials budget.

For the 28% that used a separate budget, this tended to be an Electronic Resources budget or “One line item in overall budget”

PLANS FOR SERIAL ADDITIONS AND CANCELLATIONS

Many libraries manage their budgets by cancelling and subscribing to different journals in order to minimize costs. It is entirely feasible for an institute to see a decrease in their serials budget but an increase in the number of journals purchased (through the acquisition of more inexpensive titles). Change is often based upon usage data, a desire to streamline particular subjects, or simply cancelling the most expensive titles.

The percentage of institutes cancelling (46%) is higher than those adding (31%). The average number of serials added (11) is lower than those cancelled (32).

Asia Pacific, which showed the highest level of predicted additions (150) last year, predicts the highest level of cancellation (76) for 2013. The level is even higher for its academic sector of which the predicted cancellations reach 114. The highest cancellation comes from an Academic middle institution in Hong Kong (5,000), an Academic top one Hong Kong (2,000), and a middle one from China (1,400).

It is difficult to be precise about how institutes go about deciding how to cancel titles, in order to gain further insight it is worth looking at the strategy that Stanford University follows for cancellations, it is referenced by other members of the library community. Source: http://sulair.stanford.edu/scholarly_com/cancels.html#projects STANFORD’s strategy for cancellations:

Consult with faculty to identify the highest priorities for collections.

Eliminate virtually all remaining duplicate print subscriptions.

Migrate subscriptions from print or print plus online to online only whenever possible.

Perform cost-benefit analysis for titles, cancel higher cost per use titles and acquire articles on-demand as needed.

Reduce expenditures on books and other non-serials.

Cancel unique titles.

Continue to pursue cooperative agreements that benefit campus.

Monitor and influence the future of scholarly publishing.

http://sulair.stanford.edu/scholarly_com/cancels.html#projects



P a g e | 21

Table 92: Serials Additions in 2013

Serials Cancellations in 2013




Region Organisation Increase No

Additions Unable to say

Ave no. of Additions

Cancels No

Cancels Unable to say

Ave no. of Cancels

North America

Academic Top 47% 33% 20% 24.0

43% 57% 0% 54.9


60% 40% 0% 30.3


57% 43% 0% 15.0

All Academic 47% 38% 16% 13.1

53% 47% 0% 33.1


62% 38% 0% 6.6

Government 30% 70% 0% 5.6

45% 55% 0% 24.0

Corporate 64% 27% 9% 6.8

64% 36% 0% 5.1

Overall 47% 42% 11% 11.6

55% 45% 0% 22.6

Europe

Academic Top 18% 45% 36% 26.2

48% 52% 0% 23.5


45% 55% 0% 13.9


25% 75% 0% 1.9

All Academic 21% 46% 33% 11.0

40% 60% 0% 12.6


59% 41% 0% 1.9

Government 13% 43% 43% 0.6

39% 61% 0% 9.7

Corporate 15% 69% 15% 0.9

35% 65% 0% 6.4

Overall 19% 50% 31% 6.4

42% 58% 0% 9.7

Asia Pacific

Academic Top 47% 28% 25% 18.7

44% 50% 6% 80.0


45% 52% 3% 245.9


45% 48% 6% 20.8

All Academic 33% 35% 32% 24.2

45% 50% 5% 113.6


35% 45% 20% 7.1

Government 25% 58% 17% 7.0

58% 42% 0% 4.2

Corporate 23% 41% 36% 1.2

45% 41% 14% 2.6

Overall 32% 38% 30% 16.8

45% 47% 8% 76.1

South America

Academic Top 25% 50% 25% 8.3

38% 63% 0% 5.1


25% 75% 0% 2.5


50% 50% 0% 8.8

All Academic 17% 58% 25% 5.0

38% 63% 0% 5.5


14% 86% 0% 0.9


0% 100% 0% 0.0

Corporate 0% 100% 0% 0.0

0% 100% 0% 0.0

Overall 11% 71% 17% 3.1

29% 71% 0% 3.9

Emerging Countries

Academic Top 30% 37% 33% 35.0

41% 59% 0% 9.3


33% 79% 4% 12.8


24% 60% 0% 2.9

All Academic 24% 36% 41% 33.3

33% 66% 1% 27.7


20% 100% 0% 4.1


22% 89% 0% 0.0

Corporate 8% 77% 15% 0.1

17% 92% 0% 10.2

Overall 18% 47% 35% 20.5

26% 65% 8% 7.2

Overall

Academic Top 36% 37% 27% 21.7

45% 53% 2% 49.6


48% 51% 1% 87.8


43% 55% 2% 12.1

All Academic 32% 41% 27% 15.0

45% 53% 2% 48.9


51% 44% 4% 4.8

Government 21% 58% 21% 4.2

44% 56% 0% 13.7

Corporate 32% 49% 19% 3.0

46% 50% 4% 4.7

Overall 31% 46% 24% 10.7

46% 52% 2% 31.7



P a g e | 22

ELECTRONIC JOURNALS AND BREAKDOWN OF SERIAL SUBSCRIPTION INTO FORMAT TYPE

Librarians were asked if they took an e-journal service and if they did what proportion of their subscriptions were received in electronic form.

97% of institutes surveyed currently use e-journal service providers.

The proportion of journals taken in e-only format has gone up 3 points to 59% while subscriptions in combined format dropped 3 points to 19%. Just over a fifth of subscriptions are taken in the print only format (22%).

North America has both the highest proportion of e-only subscriptions (69%) and the lowest proportion of print only format (16%) and combined (15%).

South America has by far the lowest take up of e-only subscriptions (33%), with combined subscriptions being their preference (43%). This is the only region where e-only is not the most commonly taken format.

Academic institutes are more likely to take e-only subscriptions (62%) than other types, and the take-up for Academic Top reached 66% in 2012.

Only North and South America have 100% take up on provision of electronic journal services.



P a g e | 23

Table 103: Breakdown of serials subscriptions into format type in 2012

% of journals received in different formats

% of institutes using electronic journal services


Region Organisation e-

only Comb Print

North America

Academic Top 76% 12% 12% 100%

Academic Middle 72% 12% 16% 100%

Academic Lower 69% 16% 15% 100%

All Academic 72% 13% 15% 100%

Medical/Health 63% 17% 20% 97%

Government 63% 16% 21% 100%

Corporate 67% 20% 13% 100%

Overall 69% 15% 16% 100%

Europe

Academic Top 57% 22% 22% 100%



All Academic 54% 20% 26% 100%


Government 49% 20% 31% 91%

Corporate 45% 17% 38% 88%

Overall 52% 20% 28% 97%

Asia Pacific

Academic Top 71% 13% 15% 100%



All Academic 67% 15% 18% 99%


Government 41% 27% 32% 92%

Corporate 57% 12% 30% 82%

Overall 63% 16% 21% 95%

South America

Academic Top 41% 42% 17% 100%



All Academic 35% 44% 21% 100%


Government 25% 35% 40% 100%

Corporate 30% 25% 45% 100%

Overall 33% 43% 24% 100%

Emerging Countries

Academic Top 58% 21% 21% 100%



All Academic 54% 25% 22% 100%


Government 44% 11% 45% 80%

Corporate 56% 15% 29% 62%

Overall 51% 24% 24% 92%

Overall

Academic Top 66% 18% 16% 100%



All Academic 62% 18% 20% 100%


Government 51% 21% 28% 95%

Corporate 55% 17% 28% 90%

Overall 59% 19% 22% 97%



P a g e | 24

EXPENDITURE ON ELECTRONIC SERIALS

Within the serials budget the proportion spent on electronic information source has dropped slightly since 2011 to 55%. Europe has also seen a decline when compared to 2011 – there is no clear indication as to why we might be seeing such adjustments. In South America and emerging countries the amount being spent on electronic services continues to be considerably lower than other regions.

Table 114: Percentage of Serials Expenditure on Electronic Serials (Current year)

Region Organisation 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

North America

Academic Top 42 48 69 65 80 81

Academic Middle 39 48 63 64 75 78

Academic Lower 21 32 55 62 65 68

All Academic 35 44 62 64 73 75

Medical/Health 34 31 40 57 64 55

Government 50 45 54 60 64 58

Corporate 40 27 48 69 75 73

Overall 37 40 55 63 71 69

Europe

Academic Top 40 45 52 52 57 56



All Academic 38 44 51 48 56 53


Government 44 38 55 54 47 39

Corporate 38 41 36 45 58 43

Overall 39 42 47 48 55 49

Asia Pacific

Academic Top 38 35 40 61 56 64



All Academic 43 37 42 49 52 54


Government 31 44 35 43 46 42

Corporate 37 39 40 47 54 52

Overall 41 37 40 49 50 53

South America

Academic Top n/a 38 41 41 42 43

Academic Middle n/a 41 41 39 42 41

Academic Lower n/a 21 23 23 26 28

All Academic n/a 34 34 34 37 37

Medical/Health n/a 50 27 27 30 31

Government n/a 15 15 15 21 35

Corporate n/a 15 15 15 21 33

Overall n/a 32 31 31 34 36

Emerging Countries

Academic Top n/a 27 34 45 45 49

Academic Middle n/a 31 39 35 44 40

Academic Lower n/a 34 31 37 35 30

All Academic n/a 31 35 39 41 40

Medical/Health n/a 38 31 31 30 37

Government n/a 17 38 29 31 22

Corporate n/a 29 30 41 43 31

Overall n/a 29 34 38 39 37

Overall

Academic Top 41 44 52 58 63 64



All Academic 39 41 48 52 58 58


Government 43 41 48 52 52 45

Corporate 39 34 39 53 61 54

Overall 39 40 45 52 57 55



P a g e | 25

E-JOURNAL BUDGETS

28% of institutes with a serials budget indicate that they have a separate budget for e-journals.

E-journal budgets overall are set to increase by 4.2% (last year’s forecast was 3.1%). Adding in the institutes without a separate budget but that were able to make an estimate, this figure is less and a 3.3% increase is forecast.

61% of those institutes with a separate e-journal budget forecast an increase for 2013. 31% expect to maintain their current position while 5% forecast a decrease. Overall, a 4.2% increase is expected.

ABSTRACTING AND INDEXING SERVICES

The majority of institutes (85%) provide electronic access to abstracting and indexing (A&I) services.

% Budget Change: Of those who take A&I services, 35% have a separate budget outside of the serials budget for A&I services. 63% of the institutes pay for their A&I service using their serial budgets. Of those institutions with knowledge of the A&I budget (whether separate or part of the serials budget), 60% believe that it will remain static in 2013, whilst 23% expect an increase. Here, an average increase of 0.1% is expected. Concentrating on those with a budget outside of serials, on average, a rise of 1.2% is predicted.

Number of A&I Services Taken: Of the institutes that provide access to A&I databases, the majority (80%) take two or more A&I services. 52% took four or more.

Table 15: Abstracting & Indexing Budget Predictions for 2013

All responses Respondents with an A&I budget separate from serials.

Forecast % Mean % n % Mean % n

Increase 23.5 6.4 110 32.3 6 54

Same 60.0 0.0 281 58.7 0 98

Decrease 11.3 -12.7 53 4.8 -17.25 8

Don't Know 5.1 - 24 4.2 - 7

Total 100 0.1 468 100 1.2 167

Figure 16



P a g e | 26

BOOKS EXPENDITURE

BOOKS BUDGET CHANGE FOR 2013

Books budgets, which includes electronic books, are predicted to increase by 0.8% in 2013 (last year was -0.1%). o Regions: In spite of the global increase, both North America and Europe still predict drops (-0.4%, and -0.6%

respectively), but this represents a 2 point improvement for North America compared to last year. Europe remains broadly consistent with last year (-0.8% decrease in 2012).

o Those in Asia Pacific continue to be more optimistic and predict an increase of 4.8%, higher than the 3.7% increase forecast last year. Academic institutes are set to perform even better, with a 5.4% increase predicted. None of the sectors in APAC predict decreases.

o As with the other main budget areas, the South American region expects the biggest decrease (-3.6%). All sectors except Governmental institutes (which is predicted to remain static) report decreases for 2013.

o Emerging countries predict a 6.5% increase, remaining the strongest performing group for a third consecutive year. o Overall, all types of institutes predict increase for the books budget.

Qualitative forecasts indicate that the majority (51%) of institutes believe their budgets will remain static. 27% of institutes predict that their budget expenditure for 2013 will increase, 6 points higher than those predicting a decrease. The majority of non-academic institutes expect their budget to remain static.

Figure 17 Figure 18

Figure 19



P a g e | 27

Table 16: Books Budget Change for 2013



North America

Academic Top 40% 23% 37% -0.3



All Academic 32% 34% 33% -1.6


Government 20% 60% 20% -1.1

Corporate 36% 55% 9% 3.9

Overall 29% 46% 25% -0.4

Europe

Academic Top 27% 39% 33% -0.9



All Academic 26% 48% 27% -0.7



Corporate 23% 46% 31% -2.2

Overall 23% 53% 24% -0.6

Asia Pacific

Academic Top 38% 47% 16% 5.2



All Academic 37% 47% 15% 5.4


Government 33% 50% 17% 6.3

Corporate 27% 73% 0% 3.3

Overall 36% 51% 12% 4.8

South America

Academic Top 25% 50% 25% -1.3



All Academic 8% 63% 29% -3.3



Corporate 0% 50% 50% -10.0

Overall 6% 66% 29% -3.6

Emerging Countries

Academic Top 52% 37% 11% 7.2



All Academic 39% 49% 11% 6.3


Government 60% 40% 0% 16.4

Corporate 33% 44% 17% 4.6

Overall 41% 46% 11% 6.5

Overall

Academic Top 34% 38% 28% 1.1



All Academic 30% 45% 25% 0.7


Government 25% 63% 12% 1.5

Corporate 28% 57% 15% 1.1

Overall 27% 51% 21% 0.8



P a g e | 28

NEW BOOKS IN 2012

We asked librarians to indicate whether or not the number of books purchased this year represented a decrease or increase when compared to the previous year.

Librarians estimate that the number of books purchased this year is on a par with 2011 (0.5% change).

We also asked librarians how many books they purchased this year. The average number of books is 9,096.

Table 17: Book Purchasing in 2012 Compared to 2011

Movement of books 12 against 11 Count % Mean Min Max

Increase 131 25% 15.2 1 150

Same 245 47% 0.0 0 0

Decrease 116 22% -15.1 -99 -1

Don’t know 33 6%

Total 525 100% 0.5 -100.0 100.0

Table 18: Average Number of books in 2012 per institute type

Institution Mean Count

Academic Top 21,368 76

Academic Middle 15,267 76

Academic Lower 5,404 81

Medical/Health 599 70

Government 6,834 41

Corporate 954 51

Overall 9,096 395

PERCENTAGE OF BOOKS BUDGET SPENT ON ELECTRONIC BOOKS IN 2012

Librarians were asked to estimate the proportion of their book budget spent on electronic books. After last year’s sizeable increase, the proportion levels out at 15.5% - a slight drop from 2011. Academic Top institutes are still leading the way (18.3%) although the increase is 4 points lower than last year.

Table 19: Library Book Budget - % spent on electronic books

Region Organization 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Overall

Academic Top 5.7 4.7 8.3 14.1 22.4 18.3

Academic Middle 5.9 5.6 8.5 9.0 14.8 17.7

Academic Lower 5.7 5.1 8.0 7.1 15.7 15.4

All Academic 5.8 3.2 8.3 10.0 17.6 17.1

Medical/Health 5.9 3.7 6.5 4.8 15.0 17.5

Government 9.2 5.9 2.4 9.4 10.9 7.7

Corporate 3.8 3.5 2.7 11.5 16.8 11.5

Overall 6.0 4.9 6.6 9.4 16.3 15.5



P a g e | 29

E-BOOKS BUDGET CHANGE FOR 2013

Librarians were asked to indicate their expectations for the level of expenditure change on e-books for 2013. Although these figures seem healthy for most regions, the overall books budget increase of 0.8% suggests that these increases are at the expense of print books. Also, the e-books budget currently stands at only 15.5% of the overall books budget (see table 26).

Table 120: E-Books budget change

Region Predicted % change in e-

book expenditure

North America 8.6

Europe 7.3

Asia 4.2

South America -1.2

Overall 6.1

Librarians that purchase e-books were asked to specify the proportions spent on perpetual one-time purchases and yearly subscription models. The majority choose to take perpetual models, with Medical being the only group to take a higher proportion of yearly models.

Table 131: E-books access models

Proportion of budget spent on perpetual

models (%)

Proportion of budget spent on

yearly models (%)

Academic Top 74.1 25.9

Academic Middle 75.4 24.7

Academic Lower 60.8 39.2

Medical 44.3 55.8

Government 70.0 30.0

Corporate 61.1 38.9

Total 65.8 34.2



P a g e | 30

PROPORTION OF FRONT LIST BOOKS

Librarians were asked to give the proportion of books bought in 2012 that were front list and also to estimate the proportion of front list books for 2013. Overall, 75% of books purchased are front list. There is little difference between the proportions across the two years.

Table 22: Proportion of front list books

Region Organisation 2012 2013

North America




All Academic 77% 78%


Government 77% 79%

Corporate 69% 70%

Overall 76% 76%

Europe






Government 76% 75%

Corporate 73% 67%

Overall 77% 72%

Asia Pacific






Government 72% 67%

Corporate 73% 74%

Overall 67% 67%

South America






Government 100% 100%

Corporate n/a n/a

Overall 96% 96%

Emerging Countries






Government 92% 84%

Corporate 65% 67%

Overall 77% 75%

Overall






Government 76% 75%

Corporate 72% 70%

Overall 75% 73%



P a g e | 31

MAJOR REFERENCE WORKS

MAJOR REFERENCE WORKS – PREDICTED CHANGE FOR 2012

Librarians were asked whether the number of Major Reference Works (MRWs) to be purchased in 2013 would be greater, remain the same or be less than in 2012. 501 librarians answered these questions.

% Change: Overall, the budget for MRWs is predicted to decrease (-2.9%) which returns close to the levels predicted two years ago (-2.4%) after last year’s slight improvement to a -1.4% decrease.

o Region: Europe is the weakest area, with a drop of 4.0% predicted (last year a 2.2% drop was forecast). o Asia Pacific budgets show the biggest change on last year – a 2.3% decrease this year compared to a 1.5%

increase for 2012 budgets. o North America again predicts a decrease (-2.4%), but this is an improvement on the -3.1% predicted last year. o South America predicts a -2.6% decrease following last year’s -0.1% decrease. o Academic institutes in Europe and North America are harder hit than non-academic sectors.

Qualitative Predictions: Just 7% of institutes feel that the number of Major Reference Works purchased in 2013 will increase. The majority of institutes (70%) believe the number of purchases will remain static, and 18% anticipate a decline. Explanations as to why these changes may have occurred are listed in the next section.

Figure 20 Figure 21



P a g e | 32

Table 23: MRW Budget change for 2013



North America

Academic Top 10% 63% 27% -4.5



All Academic 10% 64% 24% -2.9


Government 0% 80% 15% -3.2

Corporate 0% 91% 9% -1.6

Overall 7% 72% 19% -2.4

Europe

Academic Top 6% 67% 24% -2.5



All Academic 8% 58% 32% -4.3


Government 4% 78% 9% -1.4

Corporate 20% 12% 68% -10.9

Overall 7% 65% 22% -4.0

Asia Pacific

Academic Top 9% 66% 19% -2.0



All Academic 7% 68% 15% -2.0



Corporate 18% 73% 0% 1.2

Overall 9% 71% 11% -2.3

South America

Academic Top 0% 75% 25% -3.1



All Academic 0% 79% 21% -2.9



Corporate 0% 100% 0% 0.0

Overall 0% 83% 17% -2.6

Emerging Countries

Academic Top 7% 67% 15% -1.5



All Academic 9% 66% 13% -1.2



Corporate 23% 54% 8% 0.9

Overall 11% 67% 10% -0.4

Overall

Academic Top 8% 66% 23% -3.0



All Academic 8% 65% 24% -2.4


Government 4% 82% 9% -1.5

Corporate 7% 76% 10% -3.9

Overall 7% 70% 18% -2.9



P a g e | 33

REASONS WHY THE NUMBER OF MRWS IS LIKELY TO CHANGE IN 2012

Librarians were asked why the amount of MRWs purchased had changed from the previous year. The top three reasons for increases and decreases are below: Increases:

New publications/ updated editions are coming out User demand Price increases

Decreases: Budget cuts Information is available for free on the internet Low usage of MRWs

MAJOR REFERENCE WORKS FORMATS BEING PURCHASED

93% of organisations surveyed have purchased an MRW in one form or another (up 3% from last year).

Print still predominates as the format of choice (83%), with online purchases slightly behind (69%). Just under a quarter of institutes have purchased MRWs in all three formats (22%), a 4% decline on last year.

Asia Pacific continues to lag behind other regions in terms of uptake of online MRWs (51%). North America has the highest percentage of online MRW uptake (84%).

Overall, academic institutes have the highest uptake of online (78%), government institutes have the lowest (51%). Europe, North America and South America all have 100% uptake of MRWs by Academic institutes

Table 24: Purchasing patterns for MRWs by region and organisation (up to current year)

% all respondents taking

MRW % respondents purchasing different MRW

formats

Region Institution

MRW

None Total MRW Print

MRW CD ROM

MRW Online

All MRW Formats (any

format)

North America

Academic Top 100% 0% 100% 80% 7% 97% 7%

Academic Middle 100% 0% 100% 90% 20% 100% 20%

Academic Lower 100% 0% 100% 83% 17% 97% 17%

All Academic 100% 0% 100% 84% 14% 98% 14%

Medical/Health 82% 18% 100% 74% 6% 68% 6%

Government 80% 20% 100% 70% 5% 70% 5%

Corporate 77% 23% 100% 50% 9% 64% 9%

Overall 91% 9% 100% 76% 11% 84% 11%

Europe

Academic Top 100% 0% 100% 91% 42% 76% 30%

Academic Middle 100% 0% 100% 91% 33% 91% 30%

Academic Lower 100% 0% 100% 91% 22% 66% 19%

All Academic 100% 0% 100% 91% 33% 78% 27%

Medical/Health 79% 21% 100% 62% 17% 45% 14%

Government 78% 22% 100% 65% 52% 61% 35%

Corporate 88% 12% 100% 77% 19% 54% 15%

Overall 92% 8% 100% 81% 31% 66% 24%

Asia Pacific

Academic Top 94% 6% 100% 75% 34% 75% 25%

Academic Middle 97% 3% 100% 94% 48% 52% 23%

Academic Lower 100% 0% 100% 100% 32% 68% 26%

All Academic 97% 3% 100% 89% 38% 65% 24%

Medical/Health 85% 15% 100% 80% 20% 20% 5%

Government 100% 0% 100% 100% 33% 33% 17%

Corporate 95% 5% 100% 91% 41% 32% 18%

Overall 95% 5% 100% 89% 36% 51% 20%



P a g e | 34

South America

Academic Top 100% 0% 100% 100% 100% 75% 75%

Academic Middle 100% 0% 100% 88% 75% 75% 75%

Academic Lower 100% 0% 100% 100% 75% 63% 63%

All Academic 100% 0% 100% 100% 83% 71% 71%

Medical/Health 100% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Government 100% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Corporate 100% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Overall 100% 0% 100% 97% 89% 80% 80%

Emerging Countries

Academic Top 96% 4% 100% 81% 63% 67% 41%

Academic Middle 96% 4% 100% 96% 54% 64% 50%

Academic Lower 100% 0% 100% 100% 43% 52% 33%

All Academic 97% 3% 100% 92% 54% 62% 42%

Medical/Health 83% 17% 100% 78% 50% 61% 44%

Government 90% 10% 100% 90% 90% 60% 60%

Corporate 100% 0% 100% 100% 54% 46% 46%

Overall 95% 5% 100% 91% 56% 60% 44%

Overall

Academic Top 98% 2% 100% 83% 34% 82% 25%

Academic Middle 99% 1% 100% 92% 37% 80% 28%

Academic Lower 100% 0% 100% 92% 28% 75% 24%

All Academic 95% 5% 100% 80% 35% 78% 29%

Medical/Health 83% 17% 100% 73% 20% 52% 16%

Government 84% 16% 100% 75% 25% 51% 23%

Corporate 88% 13% 100% 74% 33% 60% 17%

Overall 93% 7% 100% 83% 30% 69% 22%

PERPETUAL VS YEARLY ACCESS OF MRWS

Those librarians who had purchased online MRWs were asked to specify the proportion of the budget spent on perpetual and yearly models. Academic Top and Middle institutes have a preference for perpetual models, whilst Medical institutions have the highest proportion of yearly models.

Table 25: MRW access models

Proportion of budget spent on perpetual models (%)

Proportion of budget spent on yearly models (%)

Academic Top 63.9 36.1

Academic Middle 67.5 32.5

Academic Lower 49.5 50.5

Medical 35.7 64.3

Government 53.5 46.5

Corporate 48.6 51.4

Total 55.7 44.3



P a g e | 35

INSTITUTIONAL REPOSITORIES

Institutional repositories are fairly widespread, with just over half (57%) of all institutions either owning, or sharing ownership of a repository. This figure remains broadly static from last year (56%).

As expected, the most widespread repository ownership is in the academic sector, with close to three quarters (74%) of institutions providing a repository. This rises to 83% for top academic institutes. The lowest level of repository ownership remains in the medical sector (22%). This has decreased 6% from last year.

Research Articles are the most preferred content with 87% of institutes indicating they post research articles into their repository. Dissertations and Theses (75%) are the next most frequently mentioned type. The “other” formats mentioned include books and in-house publications.

The number of institutions storing datasets has dropped from 53% in 2011 to 39% this year, with Corporate institutes down to 34% from 54% previously. Government also shows a 12% decrease against last year

Table 26: Usage of Institutional Repositories

Organisation % access a repository

Type kept in repository

Dissertations/ theses

Research articles

Teaching materials

Datasets Other

Academic Top 83% 88% 86% 52% 35% 13%

Academic Middle 77% 91% 84% 47% 43% 13%

Academic Lower 61% 92% 87% 31% 34% 10%

All Academic 74% 90% 85% 44% 37% 12%

Medical/Health 22% 30% 90% 20% 60% 10%

Government 39% 27% 86% 14% 36% 23%

Corporate 40% 24% 93% 14% 34% 21%

Overall 57% 75% 87% 38% 39% 13%

HOW INFORMATION IN REPOSITORIES IS STORED

The 298 institutions which reported having a repository were asked some follow up questions about the format of information being stored and how the repositories are maintained.

99% of institutions keep information in text format. This rises 1% against last year. Images remain the second most popular format to be stored, but this has decreased 7% from last year. Video remains broadly static (down 1%) whereas audio presence declines from 54% to 48%.


Organisation Format kept in repository

Text Video Audio Images

Academic Top 99% 58% 56% 67%



All Academic 100% 54% 48% 57%


Government 95% 45% 41% 55%

Corporate 100% 41% 38% 34%

Overall 99% 53% 48% 56%



P a g e | 36

HOW INFORMATION IN REPOSTIORIES IS MAINTAINED

Currently, most of the information stored within institutional repositories is deposited voluntarily. The proportion of academic institutes requiring mandatory storage of research articles is 23%.

The majority of institutional repositories are maintained by library staff (88%)

53% of repositories are available to all. This is a decrease of 1% compared to last year.


Type Mandatory Voluntary

Academic

Dissertations/ theses 40% 60%

Research articles 23% 77%

Teaching materials 12% 88%

Datasets 9% 91%

Other 33% 67%

Non-Academic

Dissertations/ theses 42% 58%

Research articles 34% 66%

Teaching materials 45% 55%

Datasets 33% 67%

Other 38% 62%

Table 29: Who maintains the repository

Maintenance Proportion

Library staff at the institute 88%

Staff at the institute, but not based in the library

9%

3rd party agency 3%

GROWTH OF INSTITUTIONAL REPOSITORIES

All institutes were asked how fast they thought their institutional repositories were growing, 46% thought they were growing fast or very fast, but the majority indicated that they were growing slowly or very slowly (54%).

Geographically, South America continues to make the least progress with repositories – all institutes surveyed say they are growing slowly or very slowly.

Table 161: Growth of Institutional Repositories

Organisation It is

growing very fast

It is growing

fast

It is growing slowly

It is growing

very slowly

Academic Top 16% 36% 41% 6%



All Academic 12% 35% 48% 6%


Government 14% 41% 41% 5%

Corporate 3% 41% 48% 7%

Overall 10% 36% 48% 6%

Table 150: Availability of repository

Maintenance Proportion

It is only available to individuals based in your institute

42%

Available to anyone in the country in which the institute is

5%

Available to all 53%



P a g e | 37

Table 32: Growth of Institutional Repositories

Region It is growing

very fast

It is growing

fast

It is growing slowly

It is growing

very slowly

North America 11% 33% 50% 6%

Europe 13% 40% 39% 8%

Asia Pacific 9% 48% 40% 3%

South America 0% 0% 97% 3%

Emerging Countries 8% 33% 58% 1%

Overall 10% 36% 48% 6%



P a g e | 38

About Publishers Communication Group Publishers Communication Group, Inc., a division of Publishing Technology, is a full-service marketing and sales consulting firm with locations in Boston, Oxford, São Paulo, New Delhi and Beijing. PCG was established in 1990 as a resource for scholarly publishers to more effectively work with the global library market. PCG offers international multi-lingual telemarketing services, qualitative and quantitative marketing research, customer services operations based in the UK, US, Brazil, India and China, sales representation and strategic consulting. PCG's original aim was to direct European publishers to the gateway of North American libraries and the goals they could achieve. Our services quickly expanded to include the needs of North American publishers and our focus shifted to the global library community. Our work has become more intricate and involved, allowing PCG to provide comprehensive marketing services that expand and maintain publishers' presence in the world's libraries. Our Market Intelligence Services are designed to uncover the valuable market information that is not available from other sources because each campaign addresses the unique issues and concerns of an organization. PCG's Promotion Services expand the awareness of publications or products to a carefully identified and strategically compiled audience, encouraging them to initiate a subscription or expand their current holdings. PCG's Sales Representation Services offer programs to publishers worldwide that will minimize costs and provide customers with easy, direct contact with them. Publishers Communication Group, Inc. 617-497-6514 www.pcgplus.com www.publishingtechnology.com

http://www.pcgplus.com/

http://www.publishingtechnology.com/

LIBRARY BUDGET PREDICTIONS FOR 2013€¦ · LIBRARY BUDGET PREDICTIONS FOR 2013 . Contents List of...

Documents

Transcript of LIBRARY BUDGET PREDICTIONS FOR 2013€¦ · LIBRARY BUDGET PREDICTIONS FOR 2013 . Contents List of...