Zero-based serials review: An objective, comprehensive method of selecting full-text journal resources in response to local needs

Abstract

Most serials reviews have focused on the cancellation of currently held resources with high cost per use. In contrast, the latest serials review at Manhattan College employed a more fundamental indicator of cost-effectiveness and did not use the library's initial holdings as a starting point. After compiling a list of 2717 wanted journals—those identified by departmental faculty—we evaluated several thousand full-text journal resources (online databases and single-journal subscriptions) to identify those that provide the most cost-effective access to the wanted journals. Our iterative process led to a 50% increase in the percentage of wanted journals held, a 35% reduction in cost per wanted journal, a 3% reduction in total expenditures on full-text journal resources, and a substantial reduction in inequality of holdings across academic departments. Because costs are low in the initial rounds of the process, the same general method can be used to reduce expenditures. Two-thirds of the selected journals could have been acquired for just one-third of the total expenditure, and 80% could have been acquired for just 53%. Our results demonstrate that objective methods based on cost per wanted journal can achieve good results, and that commercial publishers' databases can be central to a cost-effective journal collection.