ALA Annual, Electronic Resources Interest Group, “Pay-Per-View Options: Is Transactional Access Right For My Institution?”

Transportation challenges in Chicago caused me to miss the first 45 minutes of 1.5 hour presentation. That being said, I was able to glean a few useful bits of information. The meeting of the ALCTS Electronic Resources Interest Group focused on pay-per-view models.

What does pay-per-view have to do with libraries? Quite a bit in these tight budget times, actually. Some of speakers referred to the model as pay-per-view access while other speakers called the model transactional access. The model is one response to continued serials cancellation projects and is an attempt to provide users and library staff with nearly instant, desktop delivery of the most recent journal articles. It is quicker than traditional interlibrary loan and often involves the most current articles. Is a pay-per-view model right for your library? That depends.

Some of the issues needing thoughtful consideration include:

• How much does one set aside for pay-per-view? Running out of funds puts a halt on what could be a popular or much needed service. Placing too much money in a pay-per-view account could be dangerous as well as tokens only have a certain calendar life and do not carry over from year to year.

• Are monthly spending caps appropriate and/or needed? Who controls the tokens? Staff in Interlibrary Loan, students, faculty, etc.? Is there any way to control dispersing in order to promote even usage?

• Should one spend all of the tokens on e-journal access? What about ebooks? Is the purchase of ebooks one chapter at a time useful or effective?

• What, if any, processes are in place for libraries to archive their token purchases from the vendor. For instance, IEEE is reported to allow a library to hold all purchases in a kind of electronic locker so one does not need to repeatedly purchase titles popular with a large number of researchers at one’s institution.

Pay-per-view models show potential for low-use, high cost journal titles and it will be interesting to see how it develops. The greatest drawback is the lack of any archiving of purchases by vendors.