Package deals unwrapped … or the librarian wrapped up? “Forced acquisition” in the digital library-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Package deals unwrapped … or the librarian wrapped up? “Forced acquisition” in the digital library

Published:2007-06-05 Issue:2 Volume:35 Page:66-73
ISSN:0264-1615
Container-title:Interlending & Document Supply
language:en
Short-container-title:

Author:

Hellriegel Patricia,Van Wonterghem Kaat

Abstract

PurposeThis paper sets out to give an overview of the history of electronic journal package deals in Flanders and the role of consortia. The influence of package deals on libraries' budget, collection management and their role in the advancing monopolization of the information market are highlighted. The article also seeks to clariy why package deals were so attractive in the beginning but turned into a poisoned chalice for many. As an illustration of why it is so hard to get out of a deal, an average package deal license agreement is described.Design/methodology/approachThe paper uses personal experience and views supported with background literature.FindingsThe article advocates better co‐operation between libraries and directed communication with the scholarly community which hold the key to making alternatives work.Originality/valueA resource for those not (completely) familiar with package deals and their wide influence. The available alternatives and the remaining obstacles are described.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Library and Information Sciences

Reference24 articles.

1. Arbor, A. (2000), “Peak and Elsevier Science”, paper presentated at PEAK conference, 23 March, available at: www.si.umich.edu/PEAK‐2000/hunter.pdf.

2. Barwick, M. (1997), “Interlending and document supply: a review of recent literature – XXXII”, Interlending & Document Supply, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 126‐32.

3. Bergé, K. (1999), “Elektron: Elektronische informatie voor Vlaamse Wetenschappelijke bibliotheken”, Mediagids, No. 4, pp. 37‐57.

4. Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Smith, J. and Rick, L. (2005a), “A framework for assessing the impact of units of scholarly communication based on OAI‐PMH harvesting of usage information”, paper presented at CERN Workshop on Innovations in Scholarly Communication (OAI4), 20‐22 October, available at: http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceOtherViews.py?confId=0514&view=standard&showDate=all& showSession=all&detailLevel=contribution.

5. Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Smith, J. and Rick, L. (2005b), “Toward alternative metrics of journal impact: a comparison of download and citation data”, Information Processing and Management, Vol. 41 No. 6, pp. 1419‐40.

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Zwischen Pay-per-View und »Big Deal«;Zeitschrift für Bibliothekswesen und Bibliographie;2011-08-15

2. Literature of Acquisitions in Review, 2004–7;Library Resources & Technical Services;2009-10-01

3. Interlending and document supply: a review of the recent literature: 59;Interlending & Document Supply;2007-06-05