National Licensing Forum

Summary of comments received in response to 2005 issues paper on national licensing.

 

Background: in mid-2005, the Reference Group established at the 2004 Forum issued a paper for comment, covering various aspects of the national licensing proposal. Comments on the paper were sought from all library sectors in Australia.

There have been a large number of comments received, and the majority are overwhelmingly positive about this initiative, with, understandably, concerns about affordability and the difficulties of arriving at an appropriate funding model.  With the government response to the Senate inquiry on the Role of Libraries in the Online Environment making it clear that the Federal government is not prepared to provide the National Library of Australia with any additional funding to support national licensing, the issue of coming up with the right funding model is crucial.  The number of responses from the school and public library sectors was very encouraging.

Comments on particular areas of the issues paper:

  • Many enthusiastic responses, summed up by the respondent who says "Let's do it", including a number of small libraries currently unable to afford access to subscription resources.
  • A small number of less enthusiastic responses, wanting more work on confirmation of the need for such an initiative, pointing out that much information is already available free on the Internet.
  • The close involvement of libraries in general, and the National Library in particular, was questioned by a small number of respondents. However, most recognise that it is only through library action that this initiative could be achieved.  Others query whether the needs of public and school libraries could be met in another way, and point out that in some states some progress has been made.  There are still, though, many who have not been able to join a consortium or subscribe on an individual basis.
  • A small number of responses suggest (despite the published government response to the Senate enquiry) that national licensing should be directly funded by the government.

Objectives

  • Many enthusiastic responses, summed up by the respondent who says "Let's do it", including a number of small libraries currently unable to afford access to subscription resources.
  • A small number of less enthusiastic responses, wanting more work on confirmation of the need for such an initiative, pointing out that much information is already available free on the Internet.

Benefits of national licensing

  • Many of the comments from the school and public libraries sector in particular refer to the need for an initiative such as this to address the needs of rural and remote communities, those in other areas of socio-economic disadvantage, and those not served by current consortia.  A number of school responses said they feel their students are very disadvantaged when compared to those at metropolitan or wealthier schools, because their school has few or no electronic resources and there are few avenues open to the students to access information.
  • This initiative will not address other problems such as lack of connectivity, equipment and technical support.
  • The advantages of centralised licence negotiations was mentioned by several respondents as being of benefit to them.  Smaller libraries in particular do not have the staff with expertise in this area, nor the time to devote to the process. 
  • The issues paper stated that any new arrangements will only work if they operate in a "no disadvantage" way for those already accessing the suggested products either individually or through other consortia.  Some responses indicate a confidence that a national licence will result in lower prices for all users.

Governance model

  • Adequate representation at a state level within each sector was a concern for some existing state networks of libraries.  There are some groups who don't believe they have been adequately represented to date, so there may be a need for additional representation of some sectors.
  • Some respondents thought the proposed governance structure needed to be streamlined.

Charging/funding models

  • Not unexpectedly, there were many comments on the proposed funding model. It is probably the case that no solution will fit all situations, but the subgroup working on this issue has relied on data from within each sector.  Both the divisions within sectors, and the bases for allocating costs, come in for some criticism and some agreement.  Diversity within and across sectors will obviously have to be accommodated.
  • Schools find it difficult to find funds to subscribe to electronic products, and many have little or no access at the current time. 
  • Any funding model must take into account some very small libraries in each sector.  Some respondents suggested that a model should cater for libraries with virtually no acquisitions budget, and volunteer staffing, which is the case for the libraries of many small organisations and interest groups.
  • Start-up will have to take into account existing agreements many libraries have for individual or other consortia-based access to products identified for this initiative.
  • The relationship of this proposal to existing consortial arrangements was of concern to a number of respondents.  Getting this initiative off the ground will impact on existing consortia, publishers/vendors and these impacts may be very significant in some cases.

Content/product range

  • There was general support for the range of products suggested in the issues paper, but a number of other titles were suggested.  While most agree that the initial offering should be a "core set" there is also support for the next stage of "opt-in/opt-out" for more targeted products.
  • There is some support for the inclusion of a general reference product such as an encyclopaedia in the "core set", particularly from school libraries.
  • The emphasis on Australian content is questioned by some respondents, but supported by others.  As some point out, later stages would obviously look at more non-Australian products.

Administration, communication and marketing

  • Communication via electronic means is essential for remote libraries.
  • The need for the National Library to take a lead role was recognised in a number of the responses.
  • Some respondents asked for more information about the administration costs.  A small number of respondents questioned the cumbersome nature of a centralised administration process, but many more would be happy to pass these responsibilities on.
  • Meeting the needs of a wide range of libraries will be more challenging that dealing with a single type of library, as most consortia do at present.

Other comments

  • Some respondents mentioned issues of slow or unreliable Internet access, lack of equipment and lack of technical support. 

 

About This Site | Copyright | Privacy | Accessibility | Site Map | Site Search | Content A-Z | Contact Us