Providing Perpetual Access

Authors

  • Sarah Glasser

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.58n3.144

Abstract

This paper presents the results of an online survey about perpetual access for electronic serials that have been canceled, have ceased, or have transferred to different publishers. The survey sought to ascertain the true experiences of libraries working to maintain perpetual access. Results indicate a high success rate for providing perpetual access. Results also indicate a lack of standardization for and many challenges to keeping track of and providing perpetual access. A discussion section expands on key findings and the most common obstacles to providing perpetual access.

References

Although the survey uses the term “electronic serials,” many of the respondents as well as many of the articles cited in the literature review use “e-journals.” For this reason, both terms are found in the article; their meaning is interchangeablenEugenia Beh, Jane Smith, “Preserving the Scholarly Collection: An Examination of the Perpetual Access Clauses in the Texas A&M University Libraries’ Major E-Journal Licenses,”

Serials Review

, no. 4 (December 2012): 235–42nJim Stemper, Susan Barribeau, “Perpetual Access to Electronic Journals: A Survey of One Academic Research Library’s Licenses,”

Library Resources & Technical Services

, no. 2 (April 2006): 91–109nIbid., 102nRobert Wolf, () “Budget Crisis: A Review of Perpetual Access,”

North Carolina Libraries

, no. 1–2 (2009): 34, accessed November 27, 2013, nJennifer Watson, “You Get What You Pay For? Archival Access to Electronic Journals,”

Serials Review

, no. 3 (2005): 203nBeh and Smith, “Preserving the Scholarly Collection,” 242nPatrick L. Carr, “The Commitment to Securing Perpetual Journal Access: A Survey of Academic Research Libraries,”

Library Resources & Technical Services

, no. 1 (January 2011): 5nWatson, “You Get What You Pay for?” 204nMagaly Bascones, “JISC Collections: Post-Cancellation Entitlement Registry Scoping Project,”

Collaborative Librarianship

, no. 3 (2012): 85–95. Bascones uses the term “post-cancellation,” but for consistency, this paper will use “perpetual access.”nBascones, “JISC Collections,” 92nWatson, “You Get What You Pay for?” 203nBeh and Smith, “Preserving the Scholarly Collection”; Stemper and Barribeau, “Perpetual Access to Electronic Journals”; Watson, “You Get What You Pay for?”nBeh and Smith, “Preserving the Scholarly Collection,” 239nWatson, “You Get What You Pay for?” 203nCurrently, it is possible to link CLOCKSS, LOCKSS, and Portico content through many link resolversnComment section following Question 3, from author’s Perpetual Access SurveynResponse to question 7 from author’s Perpetual Access Survey (see appendix)nBascones, “JISC Collections.”n () “ONIX-PL,” EDItEUR, accessed December 23, 2013, n () National Information Standards Organization, “SERU Recommended Practice (RP-7-2012),” accessed December 23, 2013, nIbid., 5n () Cornell University Library and Columbia University Library, “Final Report of the 2CUL LOCKSS Assessment Team,” October 2011, accessed December 13, 2013, n () “CLOCKSS: A Trusted Community-Governed Archive,” CLOCKSS, accessed December 16, 2013, n () “E-Journal Preservation Service,” Portico, accessed December 16, 2013, n () “Who Participates in Portico? Publishers,” Portico, accessed December 16, 2013, nCornell University Library and Columbia University Library, “Final Report of the 2CUL LOCKSS,” 3nWatson, “You Get What You Pay for?” 203nBeh and Smith, “Preserving the Scholarly Collection,” 242n () United Kingdom Serials Group (UKSG), “Transfer Code of Practice: Version 3.0” (consultation draft), 5, accessed November 27, 2013, n

Downloads

Published

2014-07-23

Issue

Section

Articles