I’ve been wondering to what extent books on tape and CD paved the way to the rapid adoption of e-books. I’ve also been wondering the extent to which “born digital” library users are driving commercial development of readers and content packet formats.
The number of public libraries *not* providing access to e-books continues to decline, down about 10% this year from last according to the 2009-2010 Public Library Funding & Technology Access Study (PLFTAS) (see figure C-21). Nearly 42% of libraries reported providing in-library access to e-books in 2009-2010 and about 55.6% support remote access (via the Web). When you consider availability by metropolitan area, the proportion increases significantly.
- Nearly 62% of urban libraries provide in-library e-book access, and nearly 76% support remote use.
- 46% of suburban libraries provide in-library e-book access, and about 64% support remote access.
- 31% of rural libraries provide in-library e-book access, and nearly 42% support remote access.
In an article prepared for the July/August 2010 issue of Public Libraries, the Public Library Association member magazine, I compiled e-book holdings and electronic materials expenditures reported by public libraries for FY2005-FY2008. The following is excerpted from the PL article:
Further, e-book collections in public libraries grew to 13.9 million in FY2008[i] from 8.9 million in FY2005[ii], an increase of about 36%. This e-book growth outpaces all other collection categories other than electronic serials, which increased nearly 90% between FY2005 and FY2008. While print has fluctuated, video increased 23%, and audio climbed about 19% over the same time period. Comparison of e-books with other parts of the collection is presented in the following figure.
E-book collections grew 27% in FY2006 from FY2005, another 16% in FY2007, and another 6% in FY2008. Are libraries providing enough access?
Geoffrey A. Fowler and Maria C. Baca writing for WSJ.com note that according to a study funded by Sony Corp, “A study of 1,200 e-reader owners by Marketing and Research Resources Inc. found that 40% said they now read more than they did with print books.” They also cite an Association of American Publishers (AAP) study indicating 176% increase in electronic book sales in 2009.(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703846604575448093175758872.html)
ALA found in its most recent household survey conducted by Harris Interactive (http://www.ala.org/ala/research/librarystats/2010HarrisPoll.pdf) that among those who have used their public library more in the past six months nearly half (43%) of those between the ages 18‐24, and one -third (32%) of those between ages 35‐44 have increased use over the past six months. The survey also found more people are visiting their libraries by computer (through the library website), and 35% of people who have logged on to their library did so more often in the past six months. With an increase in younger users, more likely to fit the e-book demographic, will libraries see more requests for e-books?
What is your sense of library users and e-books – are they reading more? Is the portability of the reader and mixed content support (e.g., books, newspapers, etc.) driving this?
Tell us what you think!
[i] IMLS. (2009). Public libraries survey: Fiscal year 2007, p. 70. Table 13. Retrieved April 14, 2010 from, http://harvester.census.gov/imls/pubs/pls/pub_detail.asp?id=122
[ii] National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2008). Public libraries in the United States: Fiscal year 2005, p. 20. Table 8. Retrieved April 14, 2010 from, http://harvester.census.gov/imls/pubs/pls/pub_detail.asp?id=116#
Washington Post Article that mentions e-reader use in public libraries:
Libraries launch apps to sync with iPod generation
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/29/AR2010092901518.html
This comment is in response to comments that have recently been posted in response to Denise’s “Library e-book growth outpacing most other categories” article/posting:
>>The large increase in the number of electronic serial subscriptions was primarily driven by the state of New York, which reported an increase of 357,566 electronic serials between FY07 and FY08 (86.5% of the total increase). Many New York libraries belong to the Suffolk Cooperative Library System, which makes a large number of electronic serials available to its member libraries. Because anyone can walk into any of those member libraries and access these serials, it has been determined that member library systems should report all of the electronic serials they have access to, even in cases where the serials are the same across library systems because of cooperative agreements like the kind mentioned above. When a large number of libraries in a state can access the same large pool of electronic serial subscriptions, the state level count of electronic serial subscriptions can grow very large because large numbers are being multiplied times other large numbers to obtain that count. In past years, not all New York state libraries included all of the electronic serial subscriptions that were available through the Suffolk Cooperative Library System, but they began counting these subscriptions in all member libraries during the FY08 collection process. Ultimately, the huge increase in electronic serial subscriptions happened because of a correction in interpretation/reporting in one state.
>>After much discussion and follow-up it was discovered that one state made a significant reporting error in counting eBooks during the FY2008 collection. The FY08 data is currently being corrected to reflect this error. After this correction is made, FY07 to FY08 national growth in eBooks will be more modest. A note alerting users to this forthcoming correction is now posted on the Public Libraries Survey data download page.
User Note: http://harvester.census.gov/imls/pubs/publications/fy2008_pls_report_usernote.pdf
Data Download Page: http://harvester.census.gov/imls/data/pls/index.asp
>> Definition of e-books, from FY2008 Public Libraries Survey:
E-books are digital documents (including those digitized by the library), licensed or not, where searchable text is prevalent, and which can be seen in analogy to a printed book (monograph). Include non-serial government documents. E-books are loaned to users on portable devices (e-book readers) or by transmitting the contents to the user’s personal computer for a limited time. Include e-books held locally and remote e-books for which permanent or temporary access rights have been acquired. Report the number of physical or electronic units, including duplicates, for all outlets. For smaller libraries, if volume data are not available, the number of titles may be counted. E-books packaged together as a unit (e.g., multiple titles on a single e-book reader) and checked out as a unit are counted as one unit.
Note: Under this category report only items the library has selected as part of the collection and made accessible through the library’s Online Public Access Catalog (OPAC).
>> The definition of e-books in the Public Libraries Survey does include books that are downloadable to portable reading devices such as Kindles, but the definition is broad enough to allow for downloadable pdfs like the kind J mentioned. This definitional flexibility is important because it allows for new technologies such as the eReaders (Kindle/Nook/Sony/etc.) that have become popular in recent years. Denise may have a better idea of how libraries are integrating these new technologies into their collections. At this time, we are not able to determine how many of the e-books that are counted in the PLS are viewable on a Kindle/Nook (or similar device), but if their popularity sustains, the Library Statistics Working Group and State Data Coordinators may begin collecting finer grained information on the prevalence of these formats in their collections and reporting it at the national level. I would recommend keeping an eye on the state-level surveys (http://www.lrs.org/public/other.php), because you will probably see systematic information on Kindle/Nook downloadables in public libraries collected in individual states before such data makes its way into the national survey.
Some of these statistics sort of fly in the face of everything I’ve been learning about the serials crisis. How can a mind-boggling 364.8% increase in electronic serials be part of a mere 8.4% increase in expenditures (Table 1)? Is this the consequence more of public libraries adding DOAJ records to their catalogs as opposed to actual purchases? I just cannot comprehend how such a leap is possible otherwise. It is certainly odd to see ubiquitous complaints of serials inflation (unperturbed by the rise of electronic resources) on the one-hand and this data’s display of decreasing cost-per-unit.
Thanks for writing Eric P. In addition to the above notes to Joe Mathews and J, I would add that e-serials, like other resources, may be purchased as part of a cooperative agreement or on behalf of libraries, so there may not be a corresponding collection expenditure with an increase in the number of subscriptions reported. Rather, if purchased through a network/cooperative the expenditure may be reported by public libraries as “other expenditures”. Or, if paid on the library’s behalf by the State Library, that information may be reported in the annual State Library Agency survey.
I would like to know how you are defining ebooks. I think that term is undergoing a definition change. Our ebooks are books you can read online in a pdf format. The public considers ebooks to be downloadable books to eReaders such as Nook, Kindle, etc. I wonder if the definition is spelled out for the libraries that responded to the survey.
I think the public is interested in ebooks for their type of eReader. I don’t think they are interested in other types of ebooks.
Thanks J. IMLS does provide a definition in the survey. You can find the current definition in Appendix C of the report. Is it the case that your library isn’t “circulating” its books to be read online in a PDF format (which do fit the current e-book definition)?
Something just is not right. There is not way that the number of current electronic serials in Table 1 can jump from 156,610 to 569,817 in one year with only a slight increase in spending! A real problem of definitions perhaps or ….
Simply puzzling!
Thanks for your note, Joe. My responses to you, J and Eric P are all interrelated, but I’ll start here. The data you refer to is pulled directly from the Public Libraries in the United States survey conducted by the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) and as reported by individual libraries (as Denise cited in the post). I’ve confirmed there are no typos, and it looks like the definitions stayed the same, so I agree the one-year change in electronic serial subscriptions is quite a leap.