To Bind or Not to Bind - summary of responses -- Iris Anderson Stephen D. Clark 28 Oct 1999 13:05 UTC
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: To Bind or Not to Bind - summary of responses Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 12:54:23 -0400 From: "Anderson, Iris" <IANDERSON@IMF.ORG> > Dear Colleagues, > > I am pleased to submit a summary of the excellent responses I received > this past May concerning the management of paper journals in library > collections. The responses have been incorporated into a broader paper on > this topic called To Bind or Not to Bind: Pros and Cons of Maintaining > Paper Periodicals in the Library's Collection. It will be published in the > November 1999 issue of Information Outlook published by the Special > Libraries Association. My intent in writing the paper was to stimulate > ongoing discussions of the need for BOTH paper and electronic journals in > libraries, in the present and near future, and possibly, much longer than > that. > > With thanks to all of you! > > Iris W. Anderson, Team Leader > Document Delivery > Joint Bank-Fund Library > ianderson@imf.org > > > Summary of Online Discussions about whether "to bind or not to bind" > periodicals > > In order to gather information from a wide cross section of librarians > from around the world, the author posed several questions to a broader > audience. Specifically, the following questions about the pros and cons of > binding periodicals were sent out in May, 1999 to the Serials in Libraries > Discussion Forum (SERIALST). The following is a list of the original > questions with a summary of the responses: > > I am interested in hearing from other libraries about the pros and cons of > continuing to bind journals that you are currently receiving > electronically through services such as JSTOR or other electronic sources. > 1. How do you determine the value of paper vs. electronic archives for > individual titles? Do you look at circulation statistics or rely more on > perceived or historical value of "core" journals? How do you envision best > serving your clientele in the future, while also considering physical > space constraints, shrinking budgets, and pressure to downsize your > in-house periodicals holdings? > 2. Do you think binding journals will become a thing of the past? If you > have stopped binding or never done it, have there been any awful > consequences? > > > Here is a summary of the responses: > > Pros to Binding Paper Periodicals: > 1. Media Obsolescence - > "the newest info tech seems fabulous today but in 20 years it will look > quaint and old-fashioned...we might not have the machines that can read > them...so if you have materials you want to be able to access in 10 -20 > years, good old fashioned acid-free paper could outlast today's electronic > formats by many years" > "acid free paper is the best medium for long-term storage of information" > 2. Technology not universal - > "not all of our students have access to a computer" > "not all workstations have a printer" > "often all the computers/workstations are busy-100 are available to the > public" > 3. Maintenance & preservation issues - > "we have not bound as a policy due to cost but the collection is looking > very tattered and torn" > "in favor of binding for organization and security reasons" > "we also get microforms for some titles in lieu of binding" > 4. Archival concerns - > "willing to regard the electronic as archival if securely maintained by a > permanent trusted organization...I do not regard any of the commercial > publishers, even the largest, as suitable in this context because it is > impossible to be sure of future business considerations" > "whether JSTOR and other such organizations are secure enough for this may > still be an open question" > "the assumption here is that those libraries whose key field of > concentration it is will regard archival access as their responsibility" > "we are considering retention of one paper copy in the consortium for > items available electronically" > > > > Cons to Binding Periodicals: > 1. Lack of Space - > "we no longer have room to bind and shelve all the periodicals we > subscribe to...for those titles we have electronic access to, we plan on > putting the volumes into remote storage, which will essentially not be > accessible" > 2. Lack of Usage - > "if there is a layer of dust on a run of a bound periodical, then it > appears to be unused" > 3. Non-Core Journals - > "for widely held journals which are not in one of our key fields of > concentration, we rely on the electronic access" > 4. Availability of Electronic Access - > "we are subscribing to JSTOR, Ideal, ACS, OCLC Electronic Collections > Online" > END