Abstract
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to present a case study of the planning and construction of a print repository for CAVAL, an Australian consortium of academic libraries. A key service is the management of the CARM (CAVAL Archival and Research Materials Centre), a purpose‐built, high‐density, environmentally controlled storage facility designed for the long‐term storage and preservation of print materials. The initial module, CARM1, began operations in 1996 and filled to capacity over a ten year period. To meet predicted demand for ongoing storage of low‐use paper‐based research materials, CAVAL has now built a second storage facility, CARM2.Design/methodology/approachThe planning for CARM2 commenced with a review that assessed options available to CAVAL member universities for the long term storage of low‐use print material. This review analysed alternative storage solutions from the perspective of university users to assess the financial and non‐financial impacts associated with each option. The results provided an indicative evaluation of the comparison of alternative storage options taking into consideration the quantitative, qualitative and risk implications of each from the perspective of a potential user. Nine options are described and analysed, and the reasons for the selection of the CARM2 option as the preferred model.FindingsThe development and implementation of the business model, the impact on the design and funding model, the lessons learned from the management of the original CARM facility and the construction and commissioning of CARM2 are described. This is followed by a discussion of ongoing issues associated with the ownership and governance of the shared facility and the trends away from the shared collection model.Originality/valueThis paper will be of interest and value to other organisations or consortia with an interest in the feasibility, possible business models, development and construction, and/or operations of a print repository.
Subject
Library and Information Sciences
Reference11 articles.
1. Anderson, C. (2012), “Rethinking resource sharing: the case for a shared national research collection”, Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA) Biennial Conference 2012, Sydney, Australia.
2. Courant, P.M. and Nielsen, M. (2010), “On the cost of keeping a book”, The Idea of Order: Transforming Research Collections for the Twenty‐first Century, Council on Libraries and Information Resources, Washington DC, pp. 81‐105.
3. Ernst & Young (2008), Options Analysis of Alternative Storage Options, Unpublished report for CAVAL Board.
4. Genoni, P. and Varga, E. (2009), “Assessing the benefits of a national print repository: an Australian overlap study”, College and Research Libraries, Vol. 70 No. 6, pp. 555‐567.
5. Genoni, P. and Wright, J. (2011), “Australia's national research collection: overlap, uniqueness, and distribution”, Australian Academic & Research Libraries, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 162‐179.
Cited by
4 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