Obtaining Journal Titles via Big Deals Most Cost Effective Compared to Individual Subscriptions, Pay Per View, and Interlibrary Loan
A Review of: Lemley, T. Li, J. (2015) "Big deal" journal subscription packages: Are they worth the cost? Journal of Electronic Resources in Medical Libraries, 12(1) 1 10. http:/dx.doi.org/10.1080/15424065.2015.1001959 Abstract Objective To determine if "Big Deal" journal subscription packages are a cost effective way to provide electronic journal access to academic library users versus individual subscriptions, pay per view, and interlibrary loans (ILL) Design Cost per article use analysis. Setting Public research university in the United States of America. Subjects Cost per use data from 1) journals in seven Big Deal packages, 2) individually subscribed journals, 3) pay per view from publishers' websites, and 4) interlibrary loans. Methods The authors determined cost per use for Big Deal titles by utilizing COUNTER JR1 metric Successful Full Text Article Request (SFTAR) reports. Individual journal subscription cost per use data were obtained from individual publishers or platforms. Pay per view cost was determined by recording the price listed on publishers' websites. ILL cost per use was established by reviewing cost per article obtained from libraries outside of reciprocal borrowing agreement networks. With the exception of pay per view numbers, title cost per use was averaged over a three year period from 2010 through 2012. Main Results Cost per article use for journals from Big Deals varied from $2.11 to $9.42. For individually subscribed journals, the average cost per article ranged from $0.25 to $84.00. Pay per view charges ranged from $15.00 to $80.00, with an average cost of $37.72. Conclusion The authors conclude that Big Deals are cost effective, but that they consume such a large amount of funds that they limit the purchase of other resources. The authors go on to outline the options for libraries thinking about Big Deal packages. First, libraries should keep Big Deal packages in place if the average cost per article is less than individual subscriptions. Second, libraries could subscribe only to the most used journals in Big Deals, cancel the packages, and rely on ILL and pay per view access. Third, consortia could be joined to favourably negotiate Big Deal package prices. Fourth, Big Deals could be dropped completely. Fifth, individual libraries armed with JR1 reports can negotiate with publishers for better deals.