[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

FW: R&D spending and library spending

Science & Engineering Indicators, 2004

Support for Academic R&D: current dollars.

1986	$10,928 (in millions of dollars)
2001	$32,723 (in millions of dollars)
Ratio: 2001/1986	2.986

ARL Average library expenditures for serials

1986	$1,496,775
2001	$4,939,225
Ratio 2001/1986	3.29

I think this means ARL libraries average expenditures for serials have
been running ahead of Academic R&D dollar increases.

Chuck Hamaker
Associate University Librarian Collections and Technical Services
Atkins Library
University of North Carolina Charlotte
Charlotte, NC 28223
phone 704 687-2825

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Jan Velterop
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 5:38 PM
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: R&D spending and library spending

Chuck writes:

> Library expenditures for serials HAVE risen in line with
> research spending. You are complaining about something else?

Not so much a complaint, Chuck, but more an observation. Heather 
finds it inconceivable that budgets rise in line with the 
production of scientific literature and yet the production of 
scientific literature is, broadly, a direct consequence of 
spending on R&D. The NSF reports a compound annual growth rate 
(CAGR) of 9.15% for R&D spending in the US in the 5 years between 
1998 and 2003 (a 55% increase in total:

http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf05315/). If US serials 
expenditures have gone up by the same percentage each year, I'll 
eat my words, and I'd be delighted to do that.

However, in the period covered by the ARL graph 
(http://www.arl.org/ newsltr/204/big1.html) -- still often used 
even though it covers 1986-1998 -- the CAGR for serials prices is 
8.8%. Price rises probably reached their peak in that period and 
have been going down since, so this percentage is likely to be 
smaller for 1998-2003.  For serial expenditures the CAGR in the 
same, earlier, period is 8%. If you are right, that has 
materially gone up since.

Perhaps there's someone on this list who has these figures for 
the period 1998-2003 to compare them with the NSF R&D statistics?

Jan Velterop