Document Delivery Working Group
25 June 2005
Chicago, IL
Present: Lynn Wiley, Sue Widmer, Thea Lindquist, Jim Niessen, Elizabeth Darocha Berenz, James Simon, Dale Askey, Dora Loh.
Lynn reflected that this working group was at a major decision point. Previous efforts to set up ILL and document delivery through GBVDirekt were successful for 18 months, but ended under the threat of legal action from the publishers. ILL and document delivery through subito was discontinued as a result of the (ongoing) lawsuit, still in negotiation.
Subsequent attempts to start new arrangements directly with German libraries were not as successful (Lynn reflected that these may have been imperfect as they were set up on the foundation of personal relationships rather than full institutional commitment).
Lynn opened the floor to a discussion of possible other directions the WG should take. How would this group continue to serve the members? Some possibilities:
- Pursue data collection and surveying engines to figure out more about what people were requesting from these systems. (UIUC's experience showed heavy use of humanities and literature, no STM).
- Develop a new landscape survey. If German libraries can load to OCLC, we would have better access.
- Engage in education and training of ILL practitioners with no training in German language resources. How can we help them locate and use resources?
Lynn announced she will step down as Chair following the meeting, due to other responsibilities.
The discussion included many points and possible pursuits:
One participant reflected that returnables are the most desired resources to pursue, especially since these are the kinds of rare and specialized materials the researchers want. However, that means they are also those least likely to be sent.
Would the partners be willing to try again on this component? Lynn's sense was that central coordinator is necessary for this to work well. It is difficult to achieve absent a strong organization model. Lynn's pilot attempted to set up a central institution in the US, bit there were problems in implementation.
Participants were encouraged by increasing digitization in Germany as a remedy to access.
Another development to watch closely is OCLC PICA, which is working to help libraries in Europe serve people by providing economical access to knowledge. Bringing in German holdings may facilitate international ILL.
One focus of conversation was learning more about what is being requested through ILL. More specifically, what materials are not being served? One possible solution is to coordinate data on rejected requests and seek to acquire these materials through purchase. Is there a way to generate data on materials not found or not loaned? Some combination of acquisition and digitization of materials may lessen the need for loan of returnables.
Old GBV information maintained by Mary. Had to manually cross-check. Possibility of pulling information from that?
Jeff Garrett's research into materials considered "rare" in US libraries that are likely very commonly held in Germany should be considered in the ILL context.
Instructional material on "how to find we find material and access German databases"? Or a broader page on Global access? A role for CRL.
Some follow-on activities were proposed:
1.Survey original members of GBVDirekt and subito: ask about the value of the service, releasing data? Cataloging and access?
2.Data Collection for unfilled requests?
3. Toolkits (instructional material) on how access material (Web site).
Notes submitted by James Simon 7/8/05.
