SPEC Kit 337: Print Retention Decision Making · 47
32. If yes, please briefly describe what criteria were used to select items for retention as part of the
collaborative retention agreement(s). N=35
Agriculture journals
American Chemical Society, Royal Society of Chemistry. Print volumes of journals from major publishers. Two copies of
full runs kept within the consortia.
Areas of strength at each institution
Assigned by consortium.
Based on criteria identified by WEST. University of California shared print agreements were based on coordinated
recommendations from consortia-wide subject bibliographer groups.
Bronze archive criteria: electronically available where the digital form is also preserved in Portico, CLOCKSS, or LOCKSS.
These titles are also highly duplicated in print among WEST members.
Chosen by publisher: American Chemical Society, American Institute of Physics, and the American Physical Society.
Completeness and condition of journals holdings, subject emphases on campus
Completeness of run, centrality to curriculum/local needs
Completeness, local significance, availability in other libraries/repositories
Cost, campus location determined by academic interest or need
Each institution uses their own criteria.
Focuses on retaining at least one print copy of a journal in the region.
GT used four sets of criteria for determining our contributions to the ASERL project. 1) Online access (leased or
purchased) and important to our institutional mission (e.g., ACM, IEEE, AIAA). 2) Online access (purchased with ILL
rights) not contributed by another school, where our holdings were complete. 3) Mostly complete titles related to the
state of Georgia. 4) Mostly complete titles related to paper science.
GWLA members retain Annual Reviews collaboratively. Retention based on completeness of title run. WEST: see their
website.
Health sciences journals for which we had complete print back files.
Heavily duplicated journals with stable e-versions in first phase. Subsequent phases will include less widely held journals
and may include monographs or items of local historic interest and relevance.
Here are the criteria, excerpted from the BLC policy: No library will discard/withdraw the last copy of a monograph
edition in serviceable condition, and deemed to have intellectual or research value, held within the consortium unless
there are more than 50 holdings reflected in OCLC. No library will discard/withdraw a copy of a monograph edition in
serviceable condition, and deemed to have intellectual or research value, held by only one other BLC member (i.e., a
total of two copies within the BLC), unless there are more than 30 holdings reflected in OCLC. For all monographs with
less than 30 holdings reflected in OCLC, it is recommended that at least three copies be retained within the BLC.
Initial selection of journal series title “Annual Reviews,” widely held, small runs
Kentucky-related publications and ornithology
32. If yes, please briefly describe what criteria were used to select items for retention as part of the
collaborative retention agreement(s). N=35
Agriculture journals
American Chemical Society, Royal Society of Chemistry. Print volumes of journals from major publishers. Two copies of
full runs kept within the consortia.
Areas of strength at each institution
Assigned by consortium.
Based on criteria identified by WEST. University of California shared print agreements were based on coordinated
recommendations from consortia-wide subject bibliographer groups.
Bronze archive criteria: electronically available where the digital form is also preserved in Portico, CLOCKSS, or LOCKSS.
These titles are also highly duplicated in print among WEST members.
Chosen by publisher: American Chemical Society, American Institute of Physics, and the American Physical Society.
Completeness and condition of journals holdings, subject emphases on campus
Completeness of run, centrality to curriculum/local needs
Completeness, local significance, availability in other libraries/repositories
Cost, campus location determined by academic interest or need
Each institution uses their own criteria.
Focuses on retaining at least one print copy of a journal in the region.
GT used four sets of criteria for determining our contributions to the ASERL project. 1) Online access (leased or
purchased) and important to our institutional mission (e.g., ACM, IEEE, AIAA). 2) Online access (purchased with ILL
rights) not contributed by another school, where our holdings were complete. 3) Mostly complete titles related to the
state of Georgia. 4) Mostly complete titles related to paper science.
GWLA members retain Annual Reviews collaboratively. Retention based on completeness of title run. WEST: see their
website.
Health sciences journals for which we had complete print back files.
Heavily duplicated journals with stable e-versions in first phase. Subsequent phases will include less widely held journals
and may include monographs or items of local historic interest and relevance.
Here are the criteria, excerpted from the BLC policy: No library will discard/withdraw the last copy of a monograph
edition in serviceable condition, and deemed to have intellectual or research value, held within the consortium unless
there are more than 50 holdings reflected in OCLC. No library will discard/withdraw a copy of a monograph edition in
serviceable condition, and deemed to have intellectual or research value, held by only one other BLC member (i.e., a
total of two copies within the BLC), unless there are more than 30 holdings reflected in OCLC. For all monographs with
less than 30 holdings reflected in OCLC, it is recommended that at least three copies be retained within the BLC.
Initial selection of journal series title “Annual Reviews,” widely held, small runs
Kentucky-related publications and ornithology
