October Ivins, Column Editor Serials Prices, 15

SERIALS PRICES: COLUMN 15

October Ivins with contributions by Lisa Macklin and Murray S. Martin

Introduction

This column includes reports on serials pricing aspects of two meetings: my own report on the ALA Midwinter meeting in January 1992 and Lisa Macklin's report on the Oklahoma Conference in February 1992o A discussion of the Aqueduct retreat in February 1992 and resulting Aqueduct Action Agenda is included. Murray S. Martin shares the results of a materials cost impact survey of College and University Library Association members who are not also ARL members. Information from the 1990-91 ARL statistics and from ALCTS on state taxation of periodicals subscriptions is provided. Annotations for five recent publications conclude the column.

RECENT MEETINGS American Library Association

Midwinter Meeting 24-28 January 1992, San Antonio, TX

Ivins is head of serials services at Louisiana State Universities, Baton Rouge, LA.

Association of College and Research Libraries Journal Costs in Academic Libraries Discussion Group

An audience of more than 100 heard presentations by two speakers and participated in a lively discussion. Ann Okerson, Association of Research Libraries, Office of Scientific and Academic Publishing, previewed highlights from the ARL 1990-91 statistics, due for

-- SERIALS PRICES, 15 -- FALL 1992 59

release in February. Since 1986, interlibrary lending has increased by 45 percent and interlibrary borrowing by 47 percent. During the same period, serials expendi- tures have increased by 70 percent while the number of serials purchased has declined by 2 percent. Mono- graph expenditures have increased by 25 percent while the numbers of monographs purchased has declined by 15 percent. Tom Leonardt, university librarian at the University of the Pacific, next shared insights from the non-ARL library perspective. His facts were equally grim: he noted that, despite ongoing serials cancella- tions, in the current year only $2,000 was spent on monographs inhis library. Questions from the audience covered many issues, but prevailing opinion seemed to indicate that many librarians are prepared to adopt more aggressive measures in confronting the continuing problems of increasing costs and shrinking budgets.

Association for Library Collections and Technical Services Scholarly Communication Committee

The newly created committee, chaired by Fred Lynden, Brown University, met for the first time and discussed its charge and other concerns, which include but are not limited to the following:

1) We need to determine how scholars are really doing research, as opposed to how they say they are working.

2) We need to communicate with other groups, within ALA and elsewhere, that are considering the same issues.

3) It was noted that these issues have been discussed in the library community for the past five years and are just now coming to the forefront in scientific and other scholarly societies.

4) We need to include all types of libraries, not just academic libraries. This is not an ACRL commit- tee.

5) Focus should be broader than electronic publish- ing. SCC has responsibility to deal with scholarly communication in all formats. Focus should be more on scholarly communication as facilitated by librarians--for instance, what is the process of acquiring scholarly communications?

6) Practical issues such as cataloging should also be considered. How do changes in scholarly informa- tion systems change the way librarians catalog?

7) Unless librarians involve themselves now, they could be cut out of the picture. If scholars encoun- ter roadblocks in the library, they may go else- where and not come back.

8) We should create an information kit to send to libraries to keep faculty informed.

9) With an electronic newsletter, librarians could reformat and distribute to faculty and administra- tion. News could include events, cancellations, pricing issues, access standards, and so on.

lO) We should identify what communication vehicles already exist. Can SCC appropriate a portion of the already existing communication vehicles? Column in ALC'/S Newsletter initially?

Finally, the committee discussed plans for a program for the 1993 Annual Conference, to be tentatively titled "Electronic Access and Scholarly Communication." The committee agreed that the following would be undertaken or explored: plan the program for the New Orleans conference; start a column in the ALCTS Newsletter, with Fred Lynden as "column editor" at first, but this task will rotate; and compile a list of newsletters/publications of scientific and other scholarly societies. 1

Association for Library Collections and Technical Services Serials Section Acquisitions Committee

Two manuscripts, the Serials Acquisitions Glossary and the Guide for Handling Library Orders for Serials and Periodicals, have been accepted for publication by ALA Publishing. ALA Publishing is considering combining them into a single publication and a decision is expected early in 1992. The committee plans to distributedraft copies of its third manuscript, the Guide to Performance Evaluation of Serials Vendors, to outside readers in April 1992. With these projects largely completed, the committee began planning a program on claiming for the 1993 annual meeting. (The program was approved by the ALCTS SS Executive Committee and by the ALCTS Board.)

Association for Library Collections and Technical Services Serials Section Research Libraries Discus- sion Group

The primary topic was "exploring organization models for serials processing" but two topics related to pricing were continued from the 1991 Annual Conference: status reports on cancellation projects and gift policies for serials.

60 SERIALS REVIEW -- OCTOBER IVINS --

Other ALCTS News: State Taxation of Serials and Electronic Journal Discussion Group

ALCTS President Arnold Hirshon has demonstrat- ed concern over the growing practice of state govern- ments assessing tax on library serials purchases in several ways. He wrote ALA President Patricia Schumann in October 1991 and has requested that the ALCTS legislative committee take action to repeal existing laws and prevent the enactment of new legisla- tion. He suggests that new developments and informa- tion be directed to ALCTS Executive Director Karen Muller (u 19466@uicvm.bitnet). 2 Barbara Winters has announced the establishment of a new discussion group to address--electronic journals.

Reference and Adult Services Division Collection Development and Evaluation Committee

A session entitled "The Serials Killers" drew a large audience. The four panelists (Linda Lester, University of Virginia; Fred Yeungling, University of California at Santa Cruz; Suzanne Wise, Appalachian State University; Lola Warren, Johnson County (Kansas) Library) addressed the logistics of making cuts by describing their organizations, how users were consulted, and methods of identifying candidate titles for cancellation. Wise's list of recommendations for university libraries included involving teaching faculty, keeping the university's mission in mind when making cancellation decisions, continuing to use statistics for reference serials, using the crisis as an opportunity to analyze and weed the reference collection, and remind- ing administrators of the critical importance of the reference collection in providing access to information. Audience discussion focused on the comparative usefulness of CD-ROM sources and their print counter- parts?

Collection Assessment and Acquisitions Budgets: A Conference Report

by Lisa A. Macklin

Approximately 75 people attended this year's annual University of Oklahoma Libraries conference on library acquisitions, which was held 20-21 February 1992 in Norman, Oklahoma. The speakers covered a wide range of topics dealing with the general theme of "Collection Assessment and Acquisitions Budgets." This report highlights those speakers who focused on topics relating to serials.

Daniel Richards, director, Biomedical Libraries at Dartmouth College, spoke on the topic of "Serials Can- cellation Projects: Necessary Evil or Collection Assess- ment Opportunity." In this paper, Richards presented the preliminary findings of a survey of serials cancella- tion projects among medical libraries, based on 94 responses received from the 125 libraries that were surveyed. The purpose of the survey was to ascertain the prevalence of cancellation projects among medical libraries. Specifically, project coordinators wanted to identify the criteria applied, examine the methodology, and determine the level of similar cancellation decisions among different medical libraries. The survey, which covered the period from 1986 to 1990, found that more than half of the libraries had cancelled serials every year. The cancellation projects conducted by these libraries included 3,341 unique titles. The highest number of cancellations occurred in 1988 when there was a rapid devaluation of the dollar.

Criteria for the cancellations included low use, cost, availability from other sources, diminished need, duplicate subscriptions, lack of coverage in indexes, and language or geographic origin. The methods for determining low use, the most commonly used factor in cancellations, included statistics from circulation systems and reshelving statistics. The survey questioned who was involved in making the cancellation decisions, the impact of the cancellations, the methodology used, and whether anyone was interested in participating in cooperative cancellation projects and at what level: either national, regional, or local. The results of the survey were used to create a generic serials review project outline, whose steps included the following: statement of goals, general guidelines for the review, criteria for cancellation to be considered, methodology of review, and statement of expected outcome. Richards concluded his presentation by stating that libraries have become more systematic about serials control and more willing to cooperate.

Robert Houbeck, director of libraries at the ldni- versity of Michigan-Flint, presented "Locked in Conversation: The College Library Collection and Pluralist Society," which was based on research he conducted to determine whether journals bought by academic libraries are mostly liberal, mostly conser- vative, or even-handed. To answer this question Hou- beck compiled one list each of conservative and liberal journals as an assessing instrument. Each list consisted often core titles plus 20 additional titles that were more peripheral. Houbeck drew his lists carefully and used several sources to determine which journals are considered core titles. Houbeck asked a serials vendor for a report on the number of subscriptions they serviced for academic libraries for each of the titles onhis lists and found that academic libraries as a whole

-- SF~JAI~ PRICES, 15 -- FALL 1992 61

did subscribe to more liberal titles than conservative titles. However, further research indicated that if only indexed journals were included in the comparisons academic libraries have fairly even-handed collections. The fact that a relatively large number of the unindexed titles are conservative may account for the disparity between liberal and conservative journals.

Houbeck raised several issues for academic librar- ies. The first is, "Why have academic libraries been better at collecting liberal journals than conservative journals?" Part of the answer to this question is the indexing coverage. Another factor Houbeck identifies is that academic libraries have been cancelling subscrip- tions rather than adding. He does not, however, consider this a wholly satisfactory reason since sub- scribing to all of the titles on the conservative list would cost no more than $2,000. Secondly, Houbeck suggests that, if students on academic campuses are more liberal than conservative, perhaps academic libraries collections properly reflect their users.

Adrian Alexander, region manager for Faxon, presented "Annual Survey of Serials CollectionAssess- ment Programs, Practices and Policies in Academic Libraries-- 1991-1992." This serials assessment collec- tion survey received responses from 14 academic librar- ies, seven of which are ARL libraries. The respondents represented all areas of the country. All the libraries, which remained anonymous for the purposes of this presentation, were coping with the increases in journal prices. However, each had a different method of dealing with the increases. Many had sacrificed strong monograph collections to maintain serial collections. Several were also planning to re-allocate some funds from traditional methods of purchasing materials to access. One mentioned taking a percentage from each department. Another planned to take specified amounts from the sciences over the next several years to fund access.

One focus of the survey was the use of reports in serials collection assessment. Twelve respondents used price projection reports from their vendors and 11 reported some use of vendor management reports. Several libraries indicated a need for more specific price projections which are arranged by publisher. One expressed a need for a collection assessment tool designed only for serials. Many libraries also wanted more local data to use in their budget allocations and projections. Although there was no consensus among the libraries on the usefulness of current collection assessment tools, Alexander did observe that automation ability has become a critical factor for libraries in collection assessment.

Carol Hawks, acquisitions librarian at Ohio State University, presented a comprehensive picture of the tools available for acquisitions and collection assessment

in her paper "In Support of Collection Assessment: The Role of Automation in the Acquisitions and Serials Departments." Hawks described the development of a scholar workstation and noted that one that can provide the decision-making skills necessary for collection development and ordering library materials is not yet widely available, even though the ability to create such a workstation does exist. Other areas of automation that affect acquisitions and serials include vendor-produced services and other products such as Bowker's Books in Print Plus and Ulrich's on CD- ROM. Book Quest and Serials Quest are new services that assist libraries in locating out-of-print books and back issues of journals, while a Blackwell North America database designed to be used with NOTIS allows faculty to order books included on a library's approval plan. Many more possibilities will be available in the future.

Charles Hamaker, assistantdirector for collection development at Louisiana State University, presented "Management Data for Selection Decisions in Building Library Collections." In this study of LSU's circulation statistics, Harnaker concluded that approximately 43 percent of the book collection circulated during 1987- 1990. Also, 45 percent of the books cataloged from January 1991 through August 1991 circulated during this same eight-month period. Of those books that circulated, Hamaker discovered that 63 titles accounted for the most check-outs. In trying to determine if second copies of these titles should be ordered he discovered that 25 percent of the 63 most heavily circulated titles were out-of-print as of January 1992. This bears heavy consequences for the preservation of the collections of LSU's library.

Baker & Taylor's Dana Alessi presented "Me and My Shadow: Vendors as the Third Hand in Collection Evaluation," an overview of the services available from vendors and how vendors are able to provide these services. Charles Osburn, dean, University Libraries at the University of Alabama, presented "Collection Evaluation and Acquisitions Budgets: A Kaleidoscope in the Making," an overview of collection evaluation and its many facets. Anthony Ferguson, resources group director at Columbia University, presented "Collection Assessment and Acquisitions Budgets," in which he discussed the importance of collection assessment and the benefits a library can reap with a continual review of the collection.

Those interested in reading more about the presentations can read the conference proceedings in a future issue of Journal of Library Administration. This annual two-day conference is a valuable way to learn more about all aspects of collection assessment, collection development, and acquisitions.

62 SERIALS REVIEW -- OCTOBFZ~ IV~S --

Maeklin is serials records librarian, University of North Texas, Libraries, Denton, Texas.

The Aqueduct Retreat

The Aqueduct Action Agenda and its introductory statement (which follow) were released to the media on 6 April 1992 when a brief article appeared in the Chronicle of Higher Education. 4 The complete agenda was issued in two electronic newsletters, the Newsletter on Serials Pricing Issues 5 and A CQNET, and to various electronic lists. Credit for the retreat concept and planning goes to Marcia Tuttle, University of North Carolina, who wanted to find a way to encourage collaboration and creative solutions and individual action to address many of the pressing issues we all confront regarding library materials budgets and scholarly publishing. The retreat was one of the most rewarding professional activities I have ever experi- enced. Retreat participants do not intend to maintain "ownership" of the action items or of the retreat concept. Indeed, it is hoped that many other librarians will be inspired to create and participate in similar discussions. Early responses to the agenda have been primarily favorable. Agenda items about vendor service charges and journal list prices have generated the most discussion to date. Future columns will address some agenda items in greater detail.

From 7-9 February 1992, 19 serials, acquisitions, and collection development librarians ~ met in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, for a retreat at the Aqueduct Conference Center. They discussed pressing issues in regard to serials acquisition and scholarly communica- tion. Participants in the retreat came from ten states and the District of Columbia. After 15 hours of intense discussion on five topics (strategies for counteracting high prices, the library's role in document delivery, library treatment of electronic journals, serials cancella- tion projects, and copyright), the retreat participants developed the following action agenda. The points are directed to individual librarians and their libraries, and to library organizations. The issues must be addressed at a grassroots level, as well as by organizations.

Action Agenda

The Aqueduct participants urge all librarians to discuss, adopt, and promulgate the points in this Action Agenda.

1) Examine carefully all of the implications and ramifications of the access versus ownership debate. Access and ownership are both critical

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)

7)

8)

9)

library functions. While access has many advan- tages, a critical mass of library ownership must be maintained as ownership is the ultimate form of access.

Article delivery services using research libraries' journal collections are becoming highly effective. If libraries are to maintain a competitive role in information and article delivery they must enhance technical and human resources to speed and improve interlibrary access. Likewise, libraries relying on article delivery from other libraries must accept the costs incurred by the supplying library in providing access.

Standards, strategies, costs, and responsibilities for archiving electronic journals are uncertain. Librarians should respond to this opportunity by working with publishers and computer centers to create standards and cost-effective strategies, and to determine libraries' role in storing, accessing, and archiving electronic journals.

Donald Koepp, director of libraries at Princeton University, targeted Pergamon Press journals for cancellation because of inordinately high price increases on top of already high prices. His action is an example of focused cancellations intended to send a message to publishers. Librarians should share the Koepp letter with library users and pursue additional measures of focusing attention on the expensive prices of some publishers.

In selection and cancellation decisions, openly acknowledge journal price and price history as significant criteria.

Notify journal editors and publishers directly of reasons for canceling journal titles.

Share cancellation lists and criteria for cancellation within a consortium or region in order to promote cooperative collection development.

Research articles produced by federal employees as a consequence of their employment are exempt from copyright. Likewise, librarians and library organizations should seek regulations that prohibit copyright of written reports of all publicly funded research.

Encourage authors to retain the rights to their written work for their own use, for teaching, and for use by their libraries and institutions.

-- S~ALS PI~JCES, 15 -- FALL 1992 63

lO)

11)

12)

13)

14)

Engage library users in a continuing dialogue 10 reported about the issues associated with serials pricing. 11 reported Among these issues is the wide disparity between 13 reported individual and institutional prices. Devise strate- 6 reported gies for identifying excessive institutional journal 1 reported 200-299 prices and seek user support in eliminating these 5 reported 300-399 journals from our collections. 1 reported 400-499

2 reported 500-599 Encourage authors and editors to consider 0 reported 600-699 price-competitive publishers for dissemination of 1 reported 700-799 their research. 0 reported

4 reported Inform subscription agents that firm prices must be distinguished from preliminary prices on all invoices. Further, inform vendors that additional billings will not be accepted on titles where previous billings indicated firm prices.

Analyze subscriptioninvoices carefully and verify the accuracy of vendor service charges.

The Aqueduct group will compile and produce a benchmark list of 100 journal titles for compari- son of prices paid to various subscription agents and directly to the publishers.

Cost Containment and Serial Cancellations

by Murray S. Martin

Recently, the Center for Planning Information, on behalf of the College and University Library Association, sent out a survey on cost containment. It was sent to libraries from comprehensive and doctoral degree-grantinguniversities, excludingthose who were members of ARL. Seventy-four libraries replied, from public and private universities and colleges across the country. Among the questions included were those asking about changes in the total budget between 1991 and 1992; changes in the percentage spent on acquisi- tions; actual numbers of subscriptions added or can- celed; and changes in the numbers of monographs and audio-visual materials added. Seventeen gave no figures for the question on new or canceled subscriptions, which may have meant no change, but since that was not explicitly stated they have been omitted from this report.

Of the 74 responses, 18 did not report on serial cancellations and 11 reported neither cancellations nor new subscriptions, leaving 45 who reported one or the other, and mostly both:

000-220 net additions, no cancellations, no additions, 001-099 net cancellations, 100-199 net cancellations,

net cancellations, net cancellations, net cancellations, net cancellations, net cancellations, net cancellations,

800-899 net cancellations, 1,000 plus net cancellations.

The total number of subscriptions canceled was 12,941. New subscriptions placed numbered 2,193; making a net loss of 10,748 subscriptions. The actual number of cancellations ranged from 4 to 2,000.

There is little consolation to be found elsewhere in the library materials budget. Only 3 libraries with net cancellations reported any increase at all in the numbers of monographs purchased, as contrasted with 24 which had decreased by 4 percent or more in numbers of titles purchased. Since audio-visual materi- als are often quasi subscriptions, they might be expect- ed to show less variation, but while 6 libraries reported increases of 2 percent or more, 10 reported decreases of 4 percent or more.

The correlations between actual changes in the total budget and changes in acquisitions expenditure are less clear, but it appears that, except for those libraries with overall budget cuts of more than 4 percent where every part of the budget suffered but left proportions largely unchanged, the attempt to maintain something like a balanced collection development program has required that the percentage of the budget allocated to acquisitions be increased. It should also be kept in mind that "other" expenditures decreased for most respondents, so that the increases in acquisi- tions are that much more significant for the future. For most of these libraries the level of general budget increase paralleled that for acquisitions. Where it did not, there are indications of further bad times ahead.

Although some regions are underrepresented, and the absence of ARL libraries somewhat skews the picture, it seems apparent that state-supported libraries are having problems in most parts of the country. There are, surprisingly, some New England exceptions, and one or two other bright spots, but most state systems seem to be in trouble. Particularly worrisome were the reports from California, Florida, Texas, and Tennessee, where all responding publicly supported libraries indicated cuts across the board. Between them the 16 libraries from those states reported a total of 6,837 net cancellations (Florida 3,121, California 1,561, Texas 1,430, and Tennessee 725). This shows a disturbing

64 SeeaAh~ REVIEW -- OCTOBER IVINS --

downward spiral in regional resources, which is likely to continue unless there are major upward shifts in funding, an unlikely event for at least the next year or two. It suggests that the very concept of resource sharing may be in trouble. As if this were not enough, the single library reporting from Wyoming indicated a cancellation of 2,000 subscriptions in a state not having many institutions of higher education.

Because it is impossible in such a questionnaire to ask about specific titles, there is no way of knowing whether the same title recurs, or whether there was any coordinated action to preserve titles within a region or systems. The numbers indicate that in some cases the total serial pool must have been impoverished. It will be important to see whether libraries can indeed find other ways of ensuring access, whether through interlibrary loan, purchase on demand through sources such as University Microfilms, or network services such as CARL. One other troubling aspect is the slowness with which such cancellations enter the public record. The utilities have not offered incentives for reporting cancellations fast, and there is always the fact that the current subscription must run out before the library closes it holdings. Nevertheless it appears likely that union lists and similar finding tools will become increasingly less useful, which will cause even more frustrations for interlibrary loan librarians and users.

If this situation even slightly presages the total national scene, all libraries are in severe trouble, since the methods they would adopt to compensate for local losses may not be viable. Adopting closer consultation within groups, systems, and consortia seems the very least that could be done. This path is, however, made harder by the chance nature of institutional budget decisions, which seldom leave libraries with much time to carry out any elaborate consultative measure. Nor is any simple mechanism for consultation available. Even e-mail would be overburdened by the correspon- dence represented by the total number of communica- tions required. If serial holdings in the United States are to be retained at a level adequate for meeting the level of demand, these problems must be addressed more cogently than they have been. They are particular- ly urgent for the middle range of libraries, since the major research libraries are also in deep trouble and cannot become perhaps the one national source for any particular title unless they receive additional recom- pense. Continuing increases in prices and decreases in budgets may cause rents in the library network, which will be excessively costly to repair.

Martin is librarian emeritus of library science, Tufts University, and library consultant.

RECENT PUBLICATIONS

Haley, Jean Walstrom, and James Talaga. "Academic Library Responses to Journal Price Discrimination." College and Research Libraries 53, no. 1 (1992): 61- 70.

The authors surveyed libraries regarding their actual responses to price discrimination (higher rates for institutions or geographically) as well as their opinions of which responses might be most useful. Based on the results, the authors conclude with four suggestions of successful strategies: 1) Libraries could engage in protest cancellations of expensive titles, but such actions must be substantial and well publicized. 2) Library actions and rationale need to be made known to the faculty. 3) Increased resource sharing should be used to reduce costs to any particular library. 4) Libraries may wish to enter into price negotiations with journal publishers.

Hayman, Lynee Myers, "Serials Budget Management Using a Microcomputer." Serials Librarian 21, no. 1 (1991): 13-27.

"This paper describes a database application designed and programmed in dBase III+ for manage- ment of serials subscriptions and serials budgeting at a small academic library. Use of a database manager enables the allocation of serials subscription costs to academic departments, and allows library managers to track changes in the serials budget, to assign addi- tional funds to the book budget as they become avail- able, or to subtract costs, as necessary."

Hawthorn, Margaret, "Serials Selection and Deselec- tion: A Survey of North American Academic Librar- ies." Serials Librarian 21, no. 1 (1991): 29-45.

This useful article details the results of a survey of 223 academic libraries in the United States and Canada regarding serials selection and cancellation policies. Although the majority have no written serials collection policies, the author notes uniformity of criteria in use and an encouraging level of valuative criteria, such as user needs and use statistics. Other results indicated that subscription and cancellation decisions are made by librarians or committees com- posed of librarians. Cost proved more significant in the cancellation decision than in the decision to sub- scribe.

Kirk, Thomas G., "Periodicals in College Libraries: Are the Challenges of Rising Subscription Costs Being Met?" College and Research Libraries News 53, no. 2 (1992): 94-97.

The author tested the hypothesis that "the escalat- ing costs of serials which confront the research libraries

-- SERIALS PRICES, 15 -- FALL 1992 65

have not been as significant an issue for college libraries." Readily available data from 30 college libraries with highly selective admissions were broad- ened by surveying an additional 20 college libraries. A number of comparisons of data from 1973/74 and 1988/89 provide results to support the hypothesis. The portion of the materials budget spent on serials has increased from a mean of 31 percent to 42 percent in 1988/89. The number of subscriptions has increased by 25 percent, with an increase in average subscription price per title of 19.7 percent. Interlibrary loan activity has increased 161 percent over the same period. The author is careful to indicate the limitations of his conclusions since the sample was not representative of college libraries and calls for additional research.

Lowry, Charles B., "Reconciling Pragmatism, Equity, and Need in the Formula Allocation of Book and Serial Funds." College and Research Libraries 53, no. 2 (1992): 121-38.

The primary weakness of most allocation formulas, their inability to allocate funds for serials as well as books, appears to be successfully overcome by Lowry's approach. His well-considered article makes a strong case for the effectiveness of using a matrix formula in "determining the variables which best represent institutional goals, normalizing them and explicitly determining the percent of funds allocated by the individual variable." While suggesting that such methods provide a fair technique for handling scarce resources, the appropriate limits of their use are also discussed.

Comments or Suggestions?

To comment or supply news, please contact October Ivins at (504) 388-4364, or by electronic mail: NOTORI@LSUVM.B1TNET. Mailing address: Serials Services Department, 241 Middleton Library, Louisiana State University Libraries, Baton Rouge, LA 70803.

NOTES

1. This report is summarized from AN2 3, no. 14 (lines 22-92). Readers are invited to contact Fred Lynden via e-mail (ap010037@brownvm).

2. Arnold Hirehon, "The Taxation of Information and Your Right to Know," ALCTS Newsletter 3, no. 1 (1992): 3-6.

3. Report based on Donnelyn Curtis, "Panel of Serials Killers Gives Advice," Cognotes (27 January 1992): 1-2.

4. Julie Nicklin, "University Librarians Promise to Fight High Journal Prices," Chronicle of Higher Education 38, no. 31 (8 April 1992): A33-A34.

5. Newsletter on Serials Pricing Issues NS 24 (6 April 1992).

6. Participants at Aqueduct Conference Center included the following:

Deana Astle, Clemson University; Christian Boissormas, Comell University; Michele Crump, University of Florida; Caroline Early, National Agricultural Library; Doiua Farkas, University of Florida; Suzanne Freeman, Virginia Common- wealth University; Chuck Hamaker, Louisiana State Univer- sity; Cindy Hepfer, SUNY, Buffalo Health Sciences Center; October Ivins, Louisiana State University; Danny Jones, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio; Jana Lonberger, Georgia Tech; Mary McLaren, University of Kentucky; Sylvia Martin, Vanderbilt University; Jim Mouw, University of Chicago; Steve Murden, Virginia Commonwealth University; Ann O'Neill, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill School of Information/Library Science; Ann Okerson, Association of Research Libraries; Bill Robnett, Vanderbilt University; Marcia Tuttle, Universi- ty of North Carolina-Chapel Hill.

All

Pierian Press Indexing and Abstracting

Services are available in machine-readable format.

For additional information please cont~ The Pierian Press

P.O. Box 1808 Ann Arbor, MI 48106

1-800-678-2435

66 SERIALS REVIEW -- OCTOBER IVINS --