Previous by Date Index by Date
Threaded Index
Next by Date

Previous by Thread Next by Thread

re: the post-ILL era

Starting from where we are today, publishers see the switch to the
electronic format as a way to try and do away with ILL altogether by
attaching such bans to contract agreements.  Some reasons for this may be
some libraries may not be paying their CCG bills, or a fear that libraries
will start blanket agreements to share e-journals, or some publishers would
like to get into the ILL business themselves, marketing directly to
end-users.  This ties in with the "end of the journal as we know it" idea,
as publishers may find it even more lucrative to sell piecemeal than the
present subscription arrangement.

I know it would be a hard-sell for me to explain to my faculty that I'm not
buying their favorite weeklies in electronic format because I won't be able
to send ILL's to other institutions. It may also be more efficient in the
long run to be able to use large centers or vendors to request ILL's so
that libraries would not have to track down just who owns what.
Additionally, proximity to the requesting library is no longer of concern
for delivery of electronic materials.  It makes me wonder, as well, whether
libraries should put more effort into other challenges, such as the
archiving question.

Paul Wrynn
Collection Development Librarian
© 1996, 1997 Yale University Library
Please read our Disclaimer
E-mail us with feedback