68 · Survey Results: Survey Questions and Responses
research needs. The division between these endeavors is not absolute or perfectly consistent, but it is consistent enough
to be meaningful, and it must shape the way we think about print strategies.
Circulation of print steadily decreasing. Space is limited in remote storage unit.
Emory and Georgia Tech are partnering to transition to a single shared collection. While still in the planning phases this
will involve, in part, a shared Harvard style high-density storage facility and involve de-duping stored collections.
Expected new building that will house six of our libraries was the catalyst for hiring a consultant to provide a libraries-
wide assessment of our book collection. Increased focus on adding library materials in support of current research and
teaching needs of campus.
For our medical library: Basically we have limited medical campus storage space for older bound print journals, and
we do not have a budget for remote storage. Due to limited space in the library, we purchase only e-journals, and our
expenditures on e-books far exceeds our print book budget. Our print books aren’t expanding since we maintain a
balance weeding older books and purchasing new books based on our limited circulating collection space in the library.
Our strategy has primarily been to purchase electronic back files/archives with perpetual access agreements (and
PORTICO or LOCKSS back-up) since we do not have any more space available in our on-campus storage space.
I believe that if librarians and faculty trust the library administration and understand the process, there will be less
resistance to processes and projects that involve weeding.
Libraries will join HathiTrust, which will change approach to certain holdings, esp. to brittle volumes. One branch is
closing, and another may.
Moving to “just in time” rather than “just in case” wherever possible.
Since we have several projects in the works (off-site shelving facility and the CIC Shared Print) we are just starting the
process of these decisions. Our shelving and storage committee makes recommendations and we distribute and discuss
from there with ample time for input from various library constituencies.
The Libraries created a new position in 2012 for the Head of Collection Management. This position is responsible for
providing leadership and advocacy for furthering a comprehensive vision for the Libraries’ physical collections. This
includes: developing policies and procedures related to physical collections research, design, and implement data
collection and analysis strategies to support effective collection management of existing and prospective physical
collections and developing a comprehensive collection plan that integrates physical and electronic resources.
The library, including Special Collections, is very selective about the acceptance of gifts to the collection—insuring that
these materials fit well within the scope of our collection development policies.
The over-riding concern has been space constraints in the stacks and more recently space constraints in the RRS. As a
result, there have been increasing efforts at deaccessioning.
The questions on this survey suggest that some libraries now regard their print collections as liabilities to be minimized.
Although we have converted our journal subscriptions to electronic format whenever possible and appropriate, we
continue to value our existing print holdings and do not regard them as problems to be done away with. We also
purchase ebooks, but do not (yet) regard them as necessarily preferable to print books and we are still somewhat wary
concerning their permanence (especially patron-driven acquisition programs, which we do participate in and value for
their convenience to current users, but don’t see as replacing traditional collections at least in the near future).
The university is a participant in WEST. We plan to use the print archive to make decisions about drawing down print—
especially in the science library, which we plan to renovate and expand over the next several years.
research needs. The division between these endeavors is not absolute or perfectly consistent, but it is consistent enough
to be meaningful, and it must shape the way we think about print strategies.
Circulation of print steadily decreasing. Space is limited in remote storage unit.
Emory and Georgia Tech are partnering to transition to a single shared collection. While still in the planning phases this
will involve, in part, a shared Harvard style high-density storage facility and involve de-duping stored collections.
Expected new building that will house six of our libraries was the catalyst for hiring a consultant to provide a libraries-
wide assessment of our book collection. Increased focus on adding library materials in support of current research and
teaching needs of campus.
For our medical library: Basically we have limited medical campus storage space for older bound print journals, and
we do not have a budget for remote storage. Due to limited space in the library, we purchase only e-journals, and our
expenditures on e-books far exceeds our print book budget. Our print books aren’t expanding since we maintain a
balance weeding older books and purchasing new books based on our limited circulating collection space in the library.
Our strategy has primarily been to purchase electronic back files/archives with perpetual access agreements (and
PORTICO or LOCKSS back-up) since we do not have any more space available in our on-campus storage space.
I believe that if librarians and faculty trust the library administration and understand the process, there will be less
resistance to processes and projects that involve weeding.
Libraries will join HathiTrust, which will change approach to certain holdings, esp. to brittle volumes. One branch is
closing, and another may.
Moving to “just in time” rather than “just in case” wherever possible.
Since we have several projects in the works (off-site shelving facility and the CIC Shared Print) we are just starting the
process of these decisions. Our shelving and storage committee makes recommendations and we distribute and discuss
from there with ample time for input from various library constituencies.
The Libraries created a new position in 2012 for the Head of Collection Management. This position is responsible for
providing leadership and advocacy for furthering a comprehensive vision for the Libraries’ physical collections. This
includes: developing policies and procedures related to physical collections research, design, and implement data
collection and analysis strategies to support effective collection management of existing and prospective physical
collections and developing a comprehensive collection plan that integrates physical and electronic resources.
The library, including Special Collections, is very selective about the acceptance of gifts to the collection—insuring that
these materials fit well within the scope of our collection development policies.
The over-riding concern has been space constraints in the stacks and more recently space constraints in the RRS. As a
result, there have been increasing efforts at deaccessioning.
The questions on this survey suggest that some libraries now regard their print collections as liabilities to be minimized.
Although we have converted our journal subscriptions to electronic format whenever possible and appropriate, we
continue to value our existing print holdings and do not regard them as problems to be done away with. We also
purchase ebooks, but do not (yet) regard them as necessarily preferable to print books and we are still somewhat wary
concerning their permanence (especially patron-driven acquisition programs, which we do participate in and value for
their convenience to current users, but don’t see as replacing traditional collections at least in the near future).
The university is a participant in WEST. We plan to use the print archive to make decisions about drawing down print—
especially in the science library, which we plan to renovate and expand over the next several years.
