eBooks’ Impact on Print: A Library Perspective

Transforming Libraries for an Enriching CommunityKoguan Law School, Shanghai Jiao Tong University

January 6, 2014

Michael Levine-ClarkAssociate Dean for Scholarly Communication and

Collections ServicesUniversity of Denver Libraries

eBooks’ Impact on Print: A Library Perspective

Transforming Libraries for an Enriching CommunityPeking University, Beijing

January 9, 2014

Michael Levine-ClarkAssociate Dean for Scholarly Communication and

Collections ServicesUniversity of Denver Libraries

Library Acquisitions

We’re Moving As Fast As We Can!

• eBooks preferred• More is better• Ownership doesn’t

matter

Monograph Purchase Trends, University of Denver

FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 20130

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

Print Books Acquired

Purchase Trends, University of Denver

FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

$1,000,000

$1,200,000

$1,400,000

$1,600,000

e STL

e Subscription

e Purchase

Print

Types of eBook Acquisition• Direct purchase– Title-by-title– Package

• Subscription– Package

• Demand-Driven Acquisition– Unowned– STL– Purchase

eBooks in the Catalog by Acquisition Method

573243; 58%

253765; 26%

153302; 16%

Perpetual Access

Subscription

DDA Available

494,609 (50.5%) titles published since 1950

Implications of this Shift

• Larger collections• Less permanence– We need to develop solutions• Portico, LOCKSS, what else?

• Unintended consequences?– Harder for publishers?– Fewer books published?

What does this mean for our users?

Duke University Press eBooks

• Added October 2008• Loaded MARC records December 2008• Purchase all e/p• 1,480 e-books– Frontlist approximately 120 per year– Backlist

• 2,416 p-books• Many predate the e-book collection

• 1,150 in both formats

The Data

• Gathered circulation data – Through December 2008– Each subsequent December (2009-2012)– Cumulative

• Compiled e-book use data– At end of each year, 2009-2012– For each year

Apples and Oranges

• pBook checkouts– Undergrad: 3 weeks– Grad: 10 weeks– Faculty: 1 year– Potentially many uses per checkout, and some

when deciding to checkout• eBook use– One time accessing the book is one use

eBooks• User Sessions– 588 titles used (39.7%)– 5,149 sessions

• 8.8 per title used• 3.5 per title in the

collection

– 892 titles not used

• Pages Viewed– Total pages: 35,236– Average (for books

used): 59.9– Highest: 2,861

eBooks

• Pages Printed– 68 titles– Total pages: 3,244– Average: 47.7 pages– Highest: 380

• Pages Copied– 54 titles– Total pages: 640– Average: 11.9 pages– Highest: 64

pBooks

• 1,528 titles used (63.2%)• 903 titles used since Dec

2008 (37.4%)• 4,611 checkouts (2,930

before Dec 2008)– 3.0 per title used– 1.9 per title– 1.1 per title (post 2008

use)– 0.7 per title (post 2008)

Dual Format Availability: A Preference for Print

• 1,150 titles available in both formats• Print Use– 619 titles checked out since Dec 2008 (53.8%)– 825 titles checked out (including before Dec 2008)

(71.7%)• Electronic Use– 451 titles with user sessions (39.2%)

Dual Format Use

• 394 titles used in both formats– 4,221 user sessions • 10.7 per title used

– 1,524 p-book checkouts (801 before Dec 2008)• 3.9 per title used (1.8 for uses since 2008)

– 54 titles with pages printed (out of 68)• 7.4 pages per title used

– 68.4 pages viewed on average

Dual Format Use post-2008

• 332 titles used in both formats– 3981 user sessions • 12.3 per title used

– 712 p-book checkouts• 2.2 per title used

– 48 titles with pages printed (out of 68)• 8.3 pages per title used

– 72.0 pages viewed on average

P Used, E Not

• 431 titles– 1,004 checkouts• 2.3 per title used

– 297 titles with checkouts since 2008• 479 checkouts

– 1.6 per title used

E Used, P Not

• 57 titles• 246 user sessions– 4.3 per title

• 906 pages viewed– 15.9 per title

• 3 titles with pages printed

eBook Use

eBook Use

Print Use

How Closely Are P/E Usage Linked?

Increased Checkouts, 2008-2012

• For titles available at the start of the project (Dec 2008), how many more checkouts were there by Dec 2012?

• Was that increase linked in any way to e-usage?

• Was it linked in any way to type of e-usage?

Increased Checkouts 2008-2012

• 686 titles with increased checkouts– Measuring titles available prior to Dec 2008

• 408 available in both formats• 235 also had e-use– 15.5 user sessions per title– 81.2 pages viewed per title

Observations

• Use of E may lead to use of P• Use of P doesn’t seem to lead to use of E• If both formats are used,– they are both used at a higher rate than average– They have greater meaningful use as e-books• Pages viewed• User sessions

Thoughts

• If dual format usage is higher by all measures, does this mean that people’s preference is for good content, not format?

BUT• When both formats are available, print is

more likely to be used (53.8% vs 39.2%).– Does e-discovery drive p-use?

Thank You

Michael Levine-ClarkAssociate Dean for Scholarly Communication and Collections

ServicesUniversity of Denver Librariesmichael.levine-clark@du.edu