Education and training program in the hospital APR.pptx
Reshaping the Research Library: Some Observations on the Future of Academic Collections
1. Reshaping the Research Library:
Some Observations on the
University of Maryland
28 April 2011
Future of Academic Collections
Constance Malpas
Program Officer, OCLC Research
2. Roadmap
[OCLC Research]
• A framework for academic collections
• Some remarks on libraries & the higher education landscape
• Emerging infrastructure and its impact on the organization
of academic libraries
• University of Maryland libraries in a system-wide context
3. OCLC Research: what we do
Supports global cooperative by providing internal data
and process analyses to inform enterprise service
development (R&D) and deploying collective research
capacity to deepen public understanding of the evolving
library system
Special focus on libraries in research institutions:
in US, libraries supporting doctoral-level education account for
<20% of academic libraries;>70% of library spending
changes in this sector impact library system as a whole;
collective preservation and access goals, shared infrastructure, &c.
4. OCLC Research: who we are
• ~45 FTE with offices in Ohio, California and (soon) Leiden
• Sponsored by OCLC and a partnership of research libraries
around the world that share:
• A strong motivation to effect system-wide change
• A commitment to collaboration as a means of achieving collective gains
• A desire to engage internationally
• Senior management ready to provide leadership within the transnational
research library community
• Deep and rich collections and a mandate to make them accessible
• The capacity and the will to contribute
6. System-wide organization
Research theme addresses “big picture” questions about the
future of libraries in the network environment; implications
for collections, services, institutions embedded in complex
networks of collaboration, cooperation and exchange
• Characterization of the aggregate library resource
Collections, services, user behaviors, institutional profiles
• Re-organization of individual libraries in network context
Institutions adapting to changes in system-wide organization
• Re-organization of the library system in network context
“Multi-institutional” library framework, collective adaptation
7. Collections Grid
In many Open Web
Purchased materials
Licensed E-Resources collections Resources
Licensed
Purchased
High Low
Stewardship Stewardship
Special Collections In few Research & Learning
Materials
Local Digitization collections
Credit: Dempsey, Childress (OCLC Research. 2003)
8. Library attention and investment are shifting
In many
collections
Licensed
Less attention
Purchased
High attention Occasional
High Low
Stewardship Stewardship
Limited
Limited Aspirational
Intentional
In few
collections
OCLC Research, 2010.
9. Academic institutions are driving this change
In Many
Collections
Licensed Redirection of library
resource
Purchased
High +5 yrs Low
today
Stewardship Stewardship
In Few
Collections
OCLC Research, 2010.
10. Change in Academic Collections
• Shift to licensed electronic content is accelerating
Research journals – a well established trend
Scholarly monographs – in progress
• Print collections delivering less (and less) value at great (and
growing) cost
Est. $4.25 US per volume per year for on-site collections
Library purchasing power decreasing as per-unit cost rises
• Special collections marginal to educational mandate at many
institutions
Costly to manage, not (always) integral to teaching, learning
11. An Equal and Opposite Reaction
As an increasing share of library spending is directed
toward licensed content . . .
Pressure on print management costs increases
Fewer institutions to uphold preservation mandate
Stewardship roles must be reassessed
Shared service requirements will change
12. What factors are driving this change?
• Erosion of library value proposition in academic sector
institutional reputation no longer determined (or even
substantially influenced) by scope, scale of local print collection
• Changing nature of scholarly record
research, teaching and learning embedded in larger social and
technological networks; new set of curation challenges
• Format transition; mass digitization of legacy print
Web-scale discoverability has fundamentally changed research
practices; local collections no longer the center of attention
13. A critical question
What operational changes will enable significant redirection
of library resource from acquisition and inventory
management
• Bringing the ‘outside in’
Toward more effective disclosure, discovery and (re)use of
locally distinctive teaching/learning assets
• Moving the ‘inside out’
A renovation of the library service portfolio that supports more
direct engagement with the research, teaching and learning
mission of the university
14. As transaction costs fall, so do boundaries
Core library operations
are moving “outside”
institutional boundaries
cooperative cataloging
ILL, resource sharing
approval plans
digital preservation
. . . print management
creating room for more
distinctive library services
15. Boundary work at the University of Maryland
Cooperative sourcing for ‘core business’ operations:
Consolidation of cataloging operations into metadata services;
exploring cooperative collections storage with regional
partners; HathiTrust; Kuali OLE; WorldCatUM … OCLC RLP
From infrastructure to customer relationship management:
Terrapin Learning Commons provides space and services adapted to
today’s student expectations; explicit commitment to aligning
library strategic plan to institutional priorities; cultivating and
projecting powerful student faculty connections to the library
A new emphasis on innovation and moving ‘into the flow’:
Maximizing integration of library collections and services into course-
management; increasing digitization and web-scale presence,
repositioning institutional repository to emphasize relevance to
scholarly work
16. A long-term, system-wide trend
US Academic Library Expenditures
vs. Total Spending on Post-Secondary Education
$400,000,000 3.00%
$350,000,000
2.50%
$300,000,000
2.00%
$250,000,000
$200,000,000 1.50%
$150,000,000
$6.8 billion in 2008 1.00%
$100,000,000
0.50%
$50,000,000
$0 0.00%
Aggregate US Spending on Post-Secondary Education US Library Operating Exp. as % of Ed. Spending
OCLC Research. Derived from data reported in NCES Digest of Education Statistics: 2008.
17. Shift in provision of higher education
Distribution of Post-Secondary Educational Institutions
Distribution in Post-Secondary Educational Institutions
of the United States by Source of Funding
(derived from NCES data)
in the United States by Source of Funding
Limited reliance on library infrastructure
3,000
No. of Institutions
2,500
2,000 For P
1,500 Public
1,000 Privat
Distribution of Post-Secondary Educational Institutions
500 in the United States by Source of Funding
(derived from NCES data)
0
3,000
No. of Institutions
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
2,500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-2
-2
-2
-2
-2
-2
-2
-2
2,000 For Profit
00
1
02
03
04
05
06
07
0
1,500 Public
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
1,000 Private Not-for-Profit
OCLC Research. Derived from data reported in NCES Digest of Education Statistics: 2008.
500
0
18. A limited population, growing economic pressure
US Academic Libraries & Operating Expenditures
1977-2008
Operating Expenditures Libraries
$8,000,000 4,500
$7,000,000 4,000
3,500
$6,000,000
3,000
$5,000,000
2,500
x 1000
$4,000,000
2,000
$3,000,000
1,500
$2,000,000
1,000
Increasing expense, decreasing purchasing power
$1,000,000 500
$0 0
OCLC Research. Derived from data reported in NCES Digest of Education Statistics: 2008.
19. In US research libraries, a tipping point …
100
Majority of research libraries shifting toward
90
e-centric acquisitions, service model
Licensed Content as % of Library Materials $
80
70 Center of gravity
>75% in 2009-2010
60
50
40
30
Harvard
20 Yale
10
Shrinking pool of libraries with mission and resources
to sustain print preservation as a ‘core’ operation
0
$- $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 $30,000,000 $35,000,000 $40,000,000
Library Materials Expenditures (2007-2008)
OCLC Research. Derived from ARL Annual Statistics, 2007-2008
20. … the books have left the building
140,000,000
In North America, +70M volumes off-site (2007)
120,000,000 ~30-50% of print inventory at many major universities
Built Capacity in Volume Equivalents (2007)
100,000,000
xx Vols. Off-site at UMCP?
80,000,000
60,000,000
40,000,000
20,000,000
Growth in library storage infrastructure
0
1982 1986 1987 1992 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Derived from L. Payne (OCLC, 2007)
21. It‟s not about space, but priorities
• If the physical proximity of print collections had a
demonstrable impact on researcher productivity, no
university would hesitate to allocate prime real estate to
library stacks
• In a world where print was the primary medium of
scholarly communication, a large local inventory was a
hallmark of academic reputation
We no longer live in that world.
22. Cloud-sourcing Research Collections (2009/10)
• Case study in de-composition of library service bundle:
externalization of print repository functions
• Data-mining Hathi and WorldCat to determine where cost-
effective reductions in print inventory can be achieved for
individual libraries (micro-economic context)
• Characterizing optimal service profile for shared
print/digital service providers; collective market for
service (macro-economic context)
• Exploring social and economic infrastructure
requirements; technical infrastructure a
separate, secondary challenge
23. A global change in the library environment
60%
Academic print book collection already substantially
duplicated in mass-digitized book corpus
50%
June 2010
% of Titles in Local Collection
Median duplication: 31%
40%
30%
20%
June 2009
10%
Median duplication: 19%
0%
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Rank in 2008 ARL Investment Index
OCLC Research. Analysis based on HathiTrust and WorldCat snapshot data, Jun 2009 – Jun 2010.
24. Mass-digitized books in print repositories
~3.5M titles
3,500,000
~75% of mass digitized corpus is ‘backed up’ in
3,000,000
one or more shared print repositories
~2.5M
2,500,000
Unique Titles
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
0
Sep-09 Oct-09 Nov-09 Dec-09 Jan-10 Feb-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 May-10 Jun-10
Mass digitized books in Hathi digital repository Mass digitized books in shared print repositories
OCLC Research. Analysis based on HathiTrust and WorldCat snapshot data, Jun 2009 – Jun 2010.
25. Prediction
Within the next 5-10 years, focus of shared print archiving
and service provision will shift to monographic collections
• large scale service hubs will provide low-cost print
management on a subscription basis;
• reducing local expenditure on print operations, releasing
space for new uses and facilitating a redirection of library
resources;
• enabling rationalization of aggregate print collection and
renovation of library service portfolio
Mass digitization of retrospective print collections
will drive this transition
26. A third of titles held in UMCP Libraries are
duplicated in the HathiTrust Digital Library
~2.5 million University of Maryland, College Park (UMC) holdings in WorldCat
94,421 titles
683,868 titles
~778K (31%) duplicated in HathiTrust Digital Library
27. Subject distribution of UMCP-owned titles
duplicated in HathiTrust Digital Library
Unknown Classification
Communicable Diseases & Misc.
Health Facilities, Nursing
Medicine By Body System
Physical Education & Recreation
Preclinical Sciences
Anthropology
Chemistry
Psychology
Medicine
Medicine By Discipline
Agriculture
Represents approximately
Performing Arts
Computer Science 9 miles of library shelf space
Geography & Earth Sciences
Law
Health Professions & Public Health
1 mile if restricted to public domain
Mathematics
Biological Sciences
Physical Sciences
Education
Library Science, Reference
Political Science
Sociology
Full view
Music
Philosophy & Religion
Engineering & Technology
Search only
Art & Architecture
Government Documents
Business & Economics
History & Auxiliary Sciences
Language, Linguistics & Literature
0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000
N = 778,289 titles Titles / Editions
OCLC Research. Analysis based on HathiTrust and WorldCat snapshots. Data current as of April 2011.
28. Stewardship and sustainability:
a pragmatic view
Using recent life-cycle adjusted cost model* for library print collections,
$4.25 per volume per year --- on campus
$ .86 per volume per year -– in high-density storage
the University of Maryland is spending between
[778,289 titles * $.86 =] $670K to $3.3M [=778,289 titles * $4.25 ] annually
to retain local copies of content preserved in the HathiTrust Digital Library
The library is not financially accountable for these costs
but it is responsible for managing them
*Paul Courant and M. “Buzzy” Nielson, “On the Cost of Keeping a Book” in The Idea of Order (CLIR, 2010)
29. System-wide print distribution of UMCP titles
duplicated in HathiTrust Digital Library
Market for shared print provision increases
Value of Hathi preservation increases
N = 778,289 titles
OCLC Research. Analysis based on HathiTrust and WorldCat snapshot data. Data current as of April 2011.
30. Time for a game!
• If you had to guess what percentage of titles in the UMCP
library collection were unique, would you say…
A) 10% or more
B) 5-10%
C) Fewer than 5%
32. How HathiTrust adds value at UMCP
UMCP holdings [eventually] contributed to HathiTrust
Increased visibility, accessibility
Shared investment in repository infrastructure
HathiTrust content not held by UMCP
Extends local collection at reduced cost
UMCP-owned content duplicated in Hathi
Redirection of local print management
Reduces costs as inventory is rationalized
Supports reconfiguration of library space & service portfolio
33. 1) UMCP (potential) contribution to HathiTrust
This title held by 5 libraries
UMCP collections deliver
more value in web-scale
environment
Incomplete run contributed by
Princeton University, cf. UMCP
digitized volumes in Internet
Archive include 1860, 1863-
1864, 1870-1871 etc.
34. 2) Public domain content not held by UMCP
This edition held by 17 libraries
[None within Maryland]
Source via ILL @ ~$20 / transaction?
Or offer free download?
As the library works to align collections
with waxing and waning curricular
interests, just-in-time fulfillment may
become the norm
35. 3) UMCP-owned title duplicated in HathiTrust
334 WorldCat holdings on this edition
Increased discoverability & access
Reduce wear & tear on local copy
Opportunity to de-duplicate?
36. It all adds up: ROI for shared infrastructure
HathiTrust titles duplicated at UMCP HathiTrust Public Domain Titles NOT held by UMCP
1,000,000 60,000
900,000
800,000 Content UMCP can now 50,000
manage more efficiently
700,000
40,000
Linear Feet of Shelving
600,000
Title / Editions
500,000 30,000
Content UMCP can now
400,000
source at lower cost 20,000
300,000
200,000
10,000
100,000
0 0
OCLC Research. Analysis based on HathiTrust and WorldCat snapshot data. Data current as of April 2011
37. As private institutions look to
‘tuition discounting’ to maintain
undergraduate enrollment:
… increased scrutiny of direct
costs of traditional infrastructure
including the library
… increased reliance (tacit or
explicit) on infrastructure
provided by larger institutions
While publicly funded universities
struggle to maintain level funding
and enrollments
2010-2011 tuition @
McDaniel = $33,280 [$19,170]
UMD = $ 4,208/$12,415
In this context the true cost of
library infrastructure really
matters!
38. Entrepreneurial opportunities?
University of Michigan, University of Minnesota have partnerships with Walden
University of Alabama, Huntsville has a partnership with Kaplan
Etc.
39. Academic libraries in Maryland:
a common trajectory, different timelines
Private liberal arts Community College Public non-ARL Private ARL Public ARL
80%
70%
The next few years are critical
60%
Jan „12 Mar „13 Sep „13
50%
40%
* * *
30%
20%
10%
0%
OCLC Research. Analysis based on HathiTrust and WorldCat snapshot data. Data current as of April 2011
40. UMCP as Shared Print supplier?
~ 247K McDaniel College (WTY) Library holdings in WorldCat
Represents
~1 mile of
shelving at
McDaniel
~ 100K (41%) duplicated in HathiTrust Digital Library
OCLC Research. Analysis based on HathiTrust and WorldCat snapshots. Data current as of April 2011.
41. UMCP as Shared Print client?
~2.5 million University of Maryland, College Park (UMC) holdings in WorldCat
94,421 titles Represents
~4 miles of
shelving at
UMCP
683,868 titles
~778K (31%) duplicated in HathiTrust Digital Library
OCLC Research. Analysis based on HathiTrust and WorldCat snapshots. Data current as of April 2011.
42. A vision of the future
University of Maryland College Park will . . .
• fulfill its preservation mandate by partnering with regional
and national partners to ensure sustainable stewardship of
shared print and digital repositories
• provide faculty, students and citizens of Maryland with
access to an increasingly broad array of legacy and current
content by sourcing content by the most efficient means
• enhance the University‟s teaching and research reputation
by supporting the process of scholarship, increasing the
visibility and impact of locally created content
43. Academic print: it‟s not the end . . .
but it’s no longer the means
Ongoing redefinition of scholarly
function and value of print
will entail some loss
and some gain in library relevance
“Archive of the available past” photograph by Joguldi.
Abandoned books at the Detroit Central
School Book Depository (6 May 2009) Flickr
44. Thanks for your attention.
Comments, Questions?
Constance Malpas
malpasc@oclc.org
@ConstanceM
Editor's Notes
In Maryland, we are glad to count both College Park and the Johns Hopkins University as partners.
This is a model we have used to frame some discussions about library collections and operations in the past. The horizontal axis is a measure of the stewardship or curation efforts that have traditionally been needed to manage these materials in libraries. The vertical axis is a measure of how widely held the materials are in the library system: at the top are resources that are abundant in the library community, at the bottom are materials that relatively rare.In the upper left quadrant are the materials that libraries traditionally purchased and increasingly are leasing. Below that are special collections, rare books and manuscripts. The bottom right includes research outputs and teaching materials. The upper right includes a wide variety of resources found on the Open Web – web sites, discussion lists, blogs etc.Libraries may be interested in all of these areas, but not equally. Traditionally, library acquisitions and operations have focused on the upper left quadrant: published materials in print. Licensed resources were a secondary focus. And, except for research and academic libraries, there was limited attention to managing rare books and manuscripts, instructional course materials, or Web archiving.materials, which are now more ubiquitous and also require less local management effort.
Increasingly, [click] we have seen this attention shift to licensed electronic materials, which are now more ubiquitous and also require less local management effort. Note that Maryland is somewhat unusual in its dedication (with Columbia University) to web archiving. Recall Carlen Ruschoff and Bob Wolven presentation at CNI – how to integrate metadata practices for born digital in cataloging workflows.Re: Intentional – UMD has digitized historical course catalogs with IA (also digitizing trade union publications. Has digitized 2500+ vols with IA) – nbPrinceon also digitized this content with Google and it is now included in Hathi. But it appears that Maryland’s collection (in IA) is more complete
There are a number of important changes in the academic library environment that we should be paying attention to. First, the shift to reliance on externally sourced, licensed content is accelerating – this is no longer just about e-journals but e-books as well.Secondly, print collections aren’t delivering the value they once did. There is increasing attention to the long term cost burden of acquiring and retaining low-use print books locally.Finally, special collections are not universally perceived to be a key part of the library’s service mission in higher education. They may contain a few items regarded as treasures by the university, but the acquisition of rare books and manuscripts is rarely viewed, or funded, as a core library function.
There are three main drivers I want to call out here, though one could certainly point to others. First, there is general agreement that the traditional library value proposition -- acquiring and amassing a comprehensive or substantially representative physical corpus of material for local use – is no longer perceived to be relevant.Second, the nature of the scholarly record has changed and is no longer adequately captured in traditional print and licensed collections. There is increased attention to the need for managing ‘upstream’ research outputs and traditional print operations are viewed as something of a distraction from this.Finally and most importantly for the purposes of our discussion to day is the impact of mass digitisation on the discoverability of and perceived ‘location’ of library collections. Digitized books are no longer regarded as the property of individual libraries but instead considered part of the network.
This work is already underway at the University of Maryland
Externalizing low-value operations is one way to enable a redirection of library attention and resources.
Very impressed by annual reports and tight integration of library strat plan in larger institutional plan.2500 volumes already digitized with the Internet Archive; anticipating 200K more through Google librayr partnership
A scary picture? Academic libraries are increasing pressure to do more with less.Trend toward diminished support for academic libraries is not a new phenomenon and it is not merely a knock-on effect of regional or institutional economic pressures. It is a reflection of much broader changes in the higher education environment, including funding mandates that create incentives for increased institutional attention to science and engineering, a decline in the number of students pursuing advanced degrees in the humanities, and new models of educational provisioning -- including distance learning – that are no longer reliant on locally-sourced collections or infrastructure.
In the US, the last five years have been marked by significant growth in for-profit education market, dominated by online universities. These institutions are not reliant on traditional physical infrastructure of the library. Their success is forcing traditional HE institutions to compete for students and to revitalize their institutional reputations. The core library operations associated with print based collections do not have much relevance here.
Over the same 3 decade period, we’ve seen US academic library spending grow steadily, from just over a billion dollars in the mid ‘70s to about $7 bn in 2008. This is not a reflection of growing library infrastructure – or “new library starts” – since as you can see the total number of academic libraries has remained relatively stable.
In the US, a majority of research libraries are already spending more than half of the library materials budget on licensed resources. Print is no longer at the center.
In fact, more and more of it is at the periphery.In the past 25 years, massive growth in off-site library storage infrastructure in the US.http://www.lib.umd.edu/CLMD/ossguidelines.html‘low use only’ for OSS since 2001
So why is so much of the print inventory at major research institutions managed off-site? Why does a work as important and useful as Religion and the Decline of Magic live ‘outside the building’? It’s not a matter of space pressures in academic libraries – as we so often say – but of priorities.
I want to turn now to the issue of shared infrastructure. Specifically, the emergence of the HathiTrust, a shared digital repository developed within the CIC. This isn’t the only example of cooperatively sourced infrastructure in the higher education environment – one could point to open source platforms like SAKAI, or e-prints – but I believe it will be one of the most important for academic libraries. Over the past year, OCLC Research has studied the rising rate of duplication between titles held in the shared HathiTrust digital repository and in the academic print book collection.This scatter chart provide a simple but effective visualization of an important pattern that this project has revealed: that is, that the risks and opportunities associated with moving collection management ‘into the cloud’ are uniformly distributed across the research library community as a whole. [CLICK] This is a picture of the ARL membership (a microcosm of the larger research library community) that shows the level of duplication between individual library collections and the mass digitized book collection in Hathi. Over the course of this project, we have seen the rate of duplication between locally held print and mass digitized books increase steadily and significantly. In June 2009 an average of 20% of print titles in an academic library were duplicated in the Hathi repository; today that figure is above 30% (up to 40% for some institutions). [CLICK] In real terms, this means that rate of digital replication is exceeding the pace of growth in print acquisitions in most academic institutions. We estimate that the rate of duplication has increased by about 8% per library in the past year. Print acquisitions typically grow at about 2% per year in research libraries.[CLICK] We project that in a year’s time, many academic libraries are liable to find themselves “underwater,” holding a massive inventory of over-valued assets.Library directors will be called to account and expected to respond to questions about how an increasingly redundant local print collection is serving the educational and research mission of theparent institution. We need to be preparing for a world in which just-in-time, print on demand delivery is an option for a large share of the retrospective book collection.
Another major finding of our study is that the mass digitized book corpus is substantially ‘backed up’ in one or more large-scale storage collections. As I mentioned earlier, we have a very incomplete picture of what’s currently in storage, so this figure may actually be quite a bit higher. The figures here are based on just 5 major repositories The important point is that we seem to have the beginnings of what I characterized earlier as a ‘strategic reserve’ of print that could significantly offset the costs of local operations. As you can see here, the proportion has remained relatively stable over the course the past year. As of this month, about 2.5 million of the 3.5 million digitized books in Hathi are also held in one or more of 5 large scale shared print repositories.
With that as background, I’d like to offer a prediction about the future of shared print, and that’s our attention will begin to shift to pooled management of the retrospective print book collection. With this shift, I think we will see the emergence of a relatively small number of larger service hubs providing just-in-time delivery and longterm preservation services on a subscription basis. Individual academic libraries will contract with those service providers because they offer a cost efficient alternative to local operations and more importantly because they allow the library to redirect its attention and resources to renovating its service portfolio. As a result, I think we will see a progressive rationalization of the systemwide print book collection.I believe mass digitization of retrospective print collections will be a primary driver in this transition, preceding a broader shift to commercial provisioning of e-books.
This is where the rubber meets the road. I mentioned that there has been increased attention to the long-term costs of acquiring and retaining low-use print materials. This is especially true for retrospective print collections that have been digitized. On recent study by the Dean of Libraries at the University of Michigan suggests that it costs about $4.25 per volume per year to store a book on campus, and less than a third as much to manage it off-site. This means that the University of Minnesota is currently spending between $1M and $5 million dollars each year to retain copies of books that are preserved in the HathiTrust repository. Which the U is also paying for. The library is not accountable for these costs – they are not charged to the library budget – but is in some sense responsible for them.
More than 300 holdings in WorldCatMultiple copies in group University System of Maryland catalog; 3 copies at College Park alone. One in OSS (offsite).
Online courses to expand revenue base Cost-cutting measures: flat salaries, scrutiny of cost centers
http://www.degreeinfo.com/distance-learning-discussions/29520-johns-hopkins%92-entrepreneurial-library-program.htmlA non-profit distance learning provider with a strong market in continuing ed for military servicepeople
As we look to the future, it is clear that the academic library environment as a whole is changing. Here I have plotted projections for the duplication of academic print collections in the HathiTrust Digital Library for a range of academic libraries in the state of Minnesota. The blue and green lines at the top of the stack represent smaller academic institutions . We predict that 50% of their library holdings will be duplicated within the coming year. At research intensive institutions, that watershed moment will occur somewhat later. At top tier institutions like the University of Minnesota, it may take another year or two before redundant print inventory begins to look less like an asset and more like a liability. But this change is coming, and we need to plan for it.