1. Evaluation of PDA and EBS
models for e-books at
Stockholm University Library
UKSG 40th Annual Conference April 2017, Harrogate
2017-04-10 /Frida Jacobson, Stockholm University Library

2. Agenda
● Stockholm University and the University Library
● Patron-driven acquisition strategy
● PDA and EBS models
● Evaluation
● Findings
● Conclusions

3. Stockholm University
● Founded in 1878 – a free and radical college
● One of the largest universities in Sweden
● Science, Humanities and Social Sciences
● 70,000 students (28,000 FTE, 63% women)
– 12% Science, 88% HSS
● 1,700 doctoral students (50% women)
– 47% Science, 53% HSS
● 5,000 employees
– 450 professors (30% women)

4. Stockholm University Library
● Number of employees
– 115 (librarians, IT and economy staff, HR)
● Media acquisition budget
– approx. 4,8 million EUR (46 million SEK)
– 94 % e-resources, 6 % print
● Ebooks
– Access to approx. 800,000 e-books

5. Strategy for Stockholm University Library’s
patron-driven acquisiton
● Providing users with quick access to requested
media resources – anytime and anywhere
● From just-in-case to just-in-time acquisition model
● Users drive acquisition through
– purchase suggestions
– usage
– PDA/EBS models

6. PDA and EBS models
● Upfront payment to a publisher or aggregator
● Access to a large number of unowned e-books
● Accessible via library catalogue and e-book platform
● Access for a certain period of time, often a year
● The most used ebooks are purchased and owned – with
help of ’triggers’ or usage statistics
● Only e-books with proven usage are purchased
● Core idea – purchased e-books will continue to be used

7. Evaluation
Description and experiences
o Content
o Pricing model
o Accessibility
o Work input
o Support
Cost and usage analysis
o Cost
o Usage

8. Cost and usage analysis
● What is the average price per book at the time of purchase?
● What is the cost per download?
● How great a proportion of the titles is used?
● How great a proportion of the titles is purchased?
● Do purchased titles continue to be used?
● Usage by subject area?
● Usage by year of publication?

9. Method – cost and usage analysis
Yr 3Yr 2Yr 1Selection
period

10. PDA and EBS models from 2 aggregators
and 8 publishers were tested
Publisher / Aggregator Number of titles
Academic Video Online 43,000 (videos)
Brill* 4,600
Cambridge University Press 30,000
De Gruyter 33,000
Ebrary (aggregator) 140,500
EBSCO (aggregator) 60,000
Oxford Scholarship Online 11,600
Palgrave* 3,700
Wiley 18,000
Taylor and Francis: CRCnetBASE 9,400
*Less titles since SUB already owns subject collections from these publishers
310 800
e-books
in total

11. The vendors’ average price per e-
book varied
Publisher/aggregator Average price per title EUR
Publisher A (videos) 14
Publisher B period 1-2 103
Publisher B period 3 100
Publisher C period 1-4 107
Publisher C period 5 132
Publisher D 178
Publisher E period 1 192
Publisher E period 2 160
Publisher E period 3 129
Aggregator A 87
Aggregator B 278
Publisher F 177
Publisher G 99
Publisher H period 1 89
Publisher H period 2 79
Publisher H period 3 111
Publisher H period 4 118
Average price per title all models 127

12. Cost per download after purchase falls
Publisher / aggregator
1 yr after
purch. EUR
2 yrs after
purch. EUR
3 yr after
purch. EUR
4 yrs after
purch. EUR
Publisher A (videos) 880
Publisher B 119
Publisher C period 1 19 10 7 5
Publisher C period 2 22 12 8
Publisher C period 3 12 7
Publisher D 73
Publisher E period 1 49 25
Publisher E period 2 27
Aggregator A 1 1
Aggregator B 69
Publisher F 9
Publisher G 8
Publisher H period 1 7 3 2
Publisher H period 2 10 5

13. (
YEAR
1
YEAR
2
YEAR
3
YEAR
4
19 10 7 5Publisher C
Period 1
27 3Publisher H
Period 1
Cost per download falls (EUR)

14. Proportion of used titles and purchased
titles differ
Publisher Proportion of used titlesProportion of purch. titles
Publisher A (videos) 1% 15%
Publisher B period 1-2 23% 9%
Publisher B period 3 12% 4%
Publisher C period 1 15% 11%
Publisher C period 2 14% 6%
Publisher C period 3 14% 6%
Publisher C period 4 16% 7%
Publisher C period 5 19% 5%
Publisher D 10% 12%
Publisher E period 1 3% 2%
Publisher E period 2 5% 1%
Publisher E period 3 9% 1%
Publisher F 14% 2%
Publisher G 29% 9%
Publisher H period 1 18% 5%
Publisher H period 2 17% 6%
Publisher H period 3 13% 4%
Publisher H period 4 16% 5%

15. USED
%
PURCHASED
%
1
15
Publisher A
12
10
Publisher D Publisher H
period 1
18
5
Publisher C
period 1
15
11
Usage vs purchase – two examples

16. Purchased titles continued to be used
Publisher /aggregator
Proportion
of used titles
yr 1
Proportion
of used titles
yr 2
Proportion
of used titles
yr 3
Proportion
of used titles
yr 4
Proportion
of used title
yr 5
Publisher A (videos) 1%
Publisher B period 1-2 34%
Publisher C period 1 38% 51% 60% 67% 71%
Publisher C period 2 30% 46% 55% 61%
Publisher C period 3 42% 56% 64%
Publisher C period 4 38% 53%
Publisher D 21%
Publisher E period 1 34% 48%
Publisher period 2 38%
Aggregator A 68% 61%
Aggregator B 35%
Publisher F period 1 59%
Publisher G 63%
Publisher H period 1 54% 69% 75%
Publisher H period 2 53% 69%
Publisher H period 3 26%

17. YEAR
1
YEAR
2
YEAR
3
YEAR
4
YEAR
5
Proportion of used titles in %
7138
Publisher C
period 1 51 60 67
Publisher H
period 1 54 69 75

18. Humanities and social science were
popular subject areas
Linguistics and Semiotics
47%
Literary Studies
16%
Law
7%
Philosophy
10%
Classical Studies…
Social Sciences
3%
Theology and Religions Studies
6%
History
2%
Architecture, Art, Music
2%
Mathematics
1%
Library & Information Science…
Other
1%
de Gruyter: used titles by subject – period 1

19. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Social & Behavioral Sciences (42 titles)
Humanities (78 titles)
Mathematics & Statistics (176 titles)
Business, Economics, Finance & Accounting (46 titles)
Life Sciences (28 titles)
Medicine (11 titles)
Various subjects (25 titles)
Psychology (26 titles)
Earth, Space & Environmental Sciences (33 titles)
Computer Science & Information Technology (14 titles)
Chemistry (153 titles)
Physical Sciences & Engineering (105 titles)
Agriculture, Aquaculture & Food Science (11 titles)
90%
91%
82%
70%
61%
27%
64%
69%
58%
50%
55%
44%
36%
7%
1%
6%
7%
14%
45%
8%
0%
9%
14%
8%
12%
9%
2%
8%
11%
24%
25%
27%
28%
31%
33%
36%
37%
44%
55%
Wiley: Usage per subject 3 years after purchase (748 titles)
Titles used more than once Titles used only once Titles without usage

20. Usage stats indicates new interesting subject
areas
Asian Studies
23%
Biblical Studies
20%
Social Sciences
11%
History
11%
International Law
10%
Middle East & Islamic
Studies
9%
Language & Linguistics
8%
Human Rights &
Humanitarian Law
3%
Classical Studies
3%
Biology
2%
Materials & Surface
Science
0%
Brill: used titles – by subject

21. The most recently published titles have
been used the most
1990-2006
1%
2007-2009
11%
2010-2012
44%
2013-2015
44%
de Gruyter: used titles by year of publication – period 3

22. Summary cost and usage analysis
● The vendors’ average price per e-book varied
● Cost per download falls over the years
● Purchased titles continued to be used
● Social sciences and humanities were popular subject areas
● Recently published titles have been used the most
● Collected statistics are useful for future subject collections
purchases
● Two EBS models were not successful regarding cost and usage

23. ● One large publisher
● Less titles
● Access to all content, no STL*
● Purchase based on usage stats
● No DRM**-restrictions
● Unlimited number of users
● Less labour intensive
● Control over the money invested
PDA from aggregators EBS from publishers
*STL=Short Term Loan, *DRM=Digital Rights Managements
● Many different publishers
● Large number of titles
● Selection profiles, STL*
● ”Triggers” lead to purchase
● DRM**
● Limited number of users
● Labour intensive
● Invested money spent fast

24. Next steps
● Update the 2016 figures for all agreements
– titles continued to be used
– per year and subject area
● Perform a usage analysis of traditionally purchased e-book
packages
● Test more EBS models from publishers
● When deselect a successful EBS model where we own
a large part of the content on the platform?
● If not continue with EBS – what would then be the
alternatives?

25. Any questions?
Thank you for your attention.
Contact: frida.jacobson@sub.su.se
2017-04-10 /Frida Jacobson, Stockholm University Library