Seton Hall University
eRepository @ Seton Hall
$++1.&$-$)(, ($/ +,$-1$++$ ,
Are print books dead? An investigation of book
circulation at a mid-sized academic library
Lisa Rose-Wiles
Seton Hall University
)&&)0-#$,($-$)(&0)+%,- #3*,,#)&+,#$*,#. .&$*.
+-)!-# $++1((!)+'-$)($ ( )'')(,
)'' ( $--$)(
), $& ,$,+ *+$(-))%, ($(/ ,-$"-$)()!))%$+.&-$)(-'$,$2 '$&$++1 Library
Publications
#3*,,#)&+,#$*,#. .&$*.
1
ARE PRINT BOOKS DEAD? AN INVESTIGATION OF BOOK CIRCULATION
AT A MID-SIZED ACADEMIC LIBRARY.
PREPRINT
The published version of this article is available in Technical Services Quarterly 30.2 (2013): 129-152.
Dr. Lisa M Rose-Wiles
Science Librarian / Assistant Professor
Seton Hall University
400 South Orange Avenue
South Orange, NJ 07079-2671
Email: lisa.rose-wiles@shu.edu
2
Abstract: I analyzed circulation of print books at Seton Hall University Libraries using the
WorldCat Analysis tool and Voyager data. Only 21.5% of our collection circulated between
2005 and 2009, but circulation varied by subject area. Circulation was higher for subjects with
more current collections. Over one-third of recent science books circulated, while older science
books had low circulation. Print book circulation declined by 23% between 2005 and 2009.
Results of this study informed collection development and prompted a comprehensive weeding
project, participation in an international scholarly reading study, and an e-book, patron-driven
acquisition program.
Keywords: circulation, science books, WorldCat analysis tool, patron-driven acquisition.
Running Head: are print books dead?
In most academic libraries today, shrinking budgets coupled with rising costs have
seriously eroded purchasing power, leading to cuts in many areas of library expenditure and
bringing all under close scrutiny. Electronic databases and journals consume a large and
growing part of most library materials budgets. Print books may represent a relatively small
proportion of the budget, but book purchases may be cut strategically to reduce overall expense,
or simply because there is little money left once commitments to database and journal
subscriptions have been met. In addition, as reliance on electronic resources increases, print
book use is declining, and many librarians fear that books will sit unread upon shelves, gathering
dust and taking up valuable space. Electronic books (e-books) offer a tempting alternative,
particularly under the recent “patron-driven acquisition” (PDA) model, where book records are
placed in the library’s online catalog but need not be purchased until some predetermined
threshold of use.
3
In this paper, I examine the circulation of our print book collection, particularly in the
sciences, with the aim of informing future decisions about collection development, book budget
allocations, and possible investment in a PDA e-book collection.
Seton Hall University (SHU) is a private, Catholic diocesan university located in South
Orange, New Jersey. It is the oldest diocesan university in the United States and is classified as a
doctoral research university with balanced arts and sciences/professions. As of fall 2010, SHU
had an enrollment of 8,603, including 5,301 undergraduates (90% full-time) and 3,402 graduate
students, 38% full-time (Seton Hall University Fact book 2010-11). SHU’s Walsh library houses
the Walsh Gallery, Monsignor William Noé Field University Archives, and numerous special
collections as well as extensive collections of print books and journals. However, online
databases and journals account for over 65% of our materials budget. A National Endowment for
the Humanities grant has funded the purchase of humanities resources since 1990, but we rely on
our general budget for almost all other information resources. Non-humanities book purchases
declined from almost 16% of the materials budget in fiscal year 2008 to 3.3% in 2010. While the
decline in book purchases seems alarming, it may be appropriate if there is a corresponding
reduction in demand for and use of print books. To help address this question, I undertook an
analysis of our print book and e-book holdings and circulation patterns.
Literature Review
As academic libraries increasingly invest in electronic resources, investment in print
books and print book circulation have typically declined (Carlson, 2001; Martell, 2008;
Anderson, 2011; Bullis & Smith, 2011; Kolowich, 2011; Rose-Wiles, 2011; Stewart, 2011a).
The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) 2008-9 report indicates that the median ARL
4
university library spent 56% of its materials budget on electronic materials (Kyrillidou & Morris,
2011). Between 1991 and 2009, the median number of monographs purchased increased by
24%, and the median expenditure on monographs increased by 41%. During the same period,
median reported expenditure on serials rose from $2,548,677 to $7,193,291, an increase of
182%. The proportion of the materials budget spent on serials rose from 63% to 71%, while the
proportion spent on monographs fell from 35% to 19%,
The subscription-based service ACRLMetrics provides access to Association of College
& Research Libraries (ACRL) statistics and the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)
Academic Libraries Survey data (Stewart, 2011b). ACRLMetrics for 324 reporting doctoral
granting institutions indicate that in fiscal year 2010, the median proportion of the materials
budget spent on electronic resources was 66% and the median spent on monographs was 14%.
This is a substantial reduction from the median of 39% that 423 doctoral institutions spent on
monographs in 2000.
The ARL report for 2008-9 showed a 27% drop in median values reported for initial
circulation (checkouts excluding renewals) and a 19% decrease in total circulation since 1991
(Kyrillidou & Morris, 2011). ACRLMetrics annual circulation reports indicate a 7% decline in
initial circulations and a 12% decline in total circulations between 2000 and 2009. The number
of libraries reporting circulation figures decreased from 424 to 315 (27%) during the same
period.
Anderson (2011) notes that raw circulation figures underestimate the drop in monograph
use, since library holdings and student enrollment typically increase over time. Anderson found
that for many ARL libraries, measuring book circulation per student over time showed a