The Library Planning and Action Initiative Advisory Task Force (ATF) was charged to identify organizational, budgetary, and functional changes required to ensure the continued scholarly and economic vitality of the University of California's (UC) libraries, to guide library evolution over the next decade, and to ensure that immediate actions are taken in support of such changes and evolution.

Early on, we reached several critical conclusions:

• There is indeed a serious library crisis, multifactorial in scope, which threatens the ability of UC's libraries to support adequately the University's education, research, and public service missions.
• The crisis in scholarly and scientific communication is not confined to UC; its impacts are international.
• Current practices, including the building of nine comprehensive research collections, cannot be sustained.
• The libraries have been leaders in re-engineering processes for operational efficiencies, but further re-engineering to achieve additional cost savings, while potentially practical, does not address the fundamental crisis.
• Solutions to this crisis need involvement from all stakeholders; the libraries cannot solve this crisis in isolation as it has deeper roots in current policies and practices of both scholarly and scientific communication and academic advancement.
• Certain immediate strategic actions need to be taken as steps to building a foundation for a sustainable UC library system.

It has become evident to this Task Force that neither a rededication of resources to traditional methods of building print collections, nor the uncritical acceptance of digital technologies as a complete substitute for those traditional collections, will successfully address the problem. Our goals must include 1) a balanced blend of traditional and digital resources; 2) a combination of traditional and innovative services that provide effective access to needed information resources regardless of format; and 3) a new partnership between faculty, libraries and publishers that can develop viablenew models of scholarly and scientific communication and curricula for this new environment. The challenge for UC is to foster and guide the transition to the new environment in the face of continuing business uncertainty and rapid technological change, and in a manner that is economically sustainable for all parties and leverages the diverse resources and capabilities of the nine-campus UC system.

To achieve this transition, which will take place over a decade or more, the University must, first and foremost, take immediate and responsible action. We cannot wait until all uncertainties have been resolved, and in many cases only direct experience with new technologies and modes of service can inform our strategic direction. The commitment to act must be accompanied by a willingness to plan, continuously and intensively, to ensure that we apply the lessons of our actions to our future plans within a framework of shared goals.

The Task Force has one primary goal in mind, that UC should seek innovative and cost-effective means to achieve comprehensive access to scholarly and scientific communication for all members of the University community. The Task Force recommends seven strategies to achieve this goal, which are described in further detail later in this report:

The Task Force has formulated and advocated several initial action steps to further these strategies. The most visible of these is the California Digital Library (CDL), which was launched in October, 1997 with the appointment of a founding University Librarian, a commitment of initial permanentand temporary funding from President Atkinson, and the unveiling of a request for additional funding from the state to support establishment of the CDL and development of its initial collection, the Science, Technology and Industry Collection. The CDL, inaddition to representing a key strategic development in its own right, provides an essential foundation for action on other recommended strategies, including resource sharing, collaboration, and scholarly and scientific communication. The Task Force has also endorsed UCOP matching support for the Digital Library-initiated Encoded Archival Description (EAD) project, now part of the Online Archive of California, which will establish a platform for network access to UC's archival and manuscript collections and other primary research resources throughout the University.

Several actions have also been taken to advance the strategy of increased collaboration. The California State Library has awarded the CDL a grant of Federal funds to demonstrate its collaborative benefits with a group of California libraries of different kinds. A first-ever joint statement of collaborative principles has been crafted and endorsed by the libraries and administrations of both the UC and CSU systems. Initial consultations have also taken place with the libraries of the California Community Colleges and with major private universities in California.

Dissemination of knowledge from faculty to peers, to students, and to future generations is a key component of the research and education processes. As explained in a recent report of the National Humanities Alliance, "Because it carries information that ranges from complex graphical and sound data to plain text, and must reach an audience that ranges from Nobel scientists to freshmen in remedial courses to citizens visiting a museum, scholarly communication must include the full range of content and take place in all media. It must flow back and forth between all of its participants and be capable of moving rapidly enough to contribute to the evolution of understanding and knowledge. It must be disseminated through an economically viable system, and it must not be overwhelmed by a permissions system so burdensome that it makes rapid movement impossible."

The free flow of information required for scholarly and scientific communication is now threatened by rising costs in a monopoly-like marketplace that is increasingly dominated by large commercial publishers and information vendors. Universities subsidize the costs of faculty research. Faculty then give the results of that research to publishers, who sell it back at ever increasing costs and, in the case of digital information, with unprecedented new restrictions on distribution and use. Libraries have been among the first partners in the scholarly and scientific communication system to feel the ill effects of this model, but in the long-term, it will restrict the entire flow of scholarly discourse. Libraries have been first because the effect of changes in the information marketplace has been coupled with the growth in demand for digital documents and with minimal relief in the demand for print and other formats. This has resulted in a non-sustainable "business model" for campus libraries individually and for the University as a whole. Old formulae developed for State funding of libraries are no longer relevant to new situations and no longer operational under the University's budget compact with the Governor. UC's librarians are in an increasingly untenable position of trying to mediate between and among faculty/student needs and increasingly onerous budgetary constraints.

The unique nature of the UC System - with nine first-class research campuses - compels us to take leadership in establishing a library system and scholarly communication model that can both support traditional modes of scholarship and take advantage of emerging technologies to establish new modalities. To provide this leadership, the University and each campus need to integrate library planning with academic and information technology planning and decision-making.

At a May 1996 retreat, the nine campus Chancellors, Academic Vice Chancellors, and leaders of the Academic Senate, agreed that a Universitywide approach to library planning was now essential in order to maximize the information resources available through the libraries and take best advantage of emerging technologies. The University Librarians had also been considering how to address these issues, as had the Executive Budget Committee, the Academic Planning Council, the Academic Senate and others.

In light of this broad interest in enhancing the UC library system in substantive and cost-effective ways, an 18-month Library Planning and Action Initiative was undertaken. The initiative, which began on September 1, 1996 was designed to identify organizational, budgetary, and functional changes required to ensure the continued scholarly and economic vitality of UC's libraries; guide library evolution over the next decade; and ensure that immediate actions are taken in support of such changes and evolution.

• Propose specific recommendations for improving the organizational, functional and budgetary context within which the UC Libraries operate, as a framework for library evolution over the next five to ten years. In particular:

1. Recommend a sustainable model or models for the University Library System to accommodate changing funding, intellectual, service, collection development and technology environments;
2. Develop viable options for collaborating with other segments of the State's educational system, with industry, and with other educational and research institutions to improve access to informationresources and effectiveness of library services across the State;
3. Determine the most effective ways to exploit digital technologies to provide new opportunities and to mediate changing demands, exponential growth, and rising costs; and assess how thepresence of these technologies may shift the role and scope of libraries, librarians, and library services; and
4. Initiate actions and strategic projects that can both provide information critical to planning and address immediate issues faced by the University's Libraries.

• Strengthen on-going efforts to:

1. Assess the effects of recent campus library acquisitions decisions on current demands of scholarship and teaching, and project future adequacy in the light of trends, academic programming, and changing faculty interests; and
2. Enhance sharing of information resources and services among UC's libraries, including: greater coordination of collection development; increased non-bibliographic resource sharing; greater leveraging of the University's purchasing power; and more effective inter-library loan processes.

To accomplish the goals of the Library Planning and Action Initiative, a Planning Team was established in the Office of the President and an Advisory Task Force, chartered by the Provost,was formed to work closely with the team. To assure the breadth of input necessary, the Task Force (see Appendix A) was composed of Vice Chancellors, other Academic Administrators, University Librarians, a LAUC representative, Information Technologists, and Faculty, including relevant Academic Council representation. The Advisory Task Force was charged with advising the Provost and the Planning Team on achievement of the initiative's goals.

1. The UC Library System constitutes a shared University-wide resource, and in the upcoming decentralized fund allocation environment, new organizational and budgetary means may be necessary to sustain andenrich the concept of "one University, one library."
2. A process is needed to develop new business models that integrate library planning and actions with University-wide and campus academic programs, as well as information technology plans. This process should not be wedded to existing approaches to library planning and budgeting.
3. The UC Libraries can play a critical role as providers of information services to other California higher education segments and to the state as a whole. The University's libraries are essential to the teaching and research mission of the University and an invaluable ancillary resource to the state's knowledge-based economy.
4. The planning process must reach out beyond the Advisory Task Force and the Planning Team to the full range of stakeholders, including the Council of Chancellors (COC), Council of Vice Chancellors (COVC), the Academic Planning Council (APC), the Academic Senate, University Librarians, the Librarians' Association of UC (LAUC), the Library Council, Information Technologists, and others.
5. The planning process should comprehend the full range of academic and library issues, including digital and non-digital.
6. Initiatives must be launched in the immediate future. The University must include strategic action as an integral part of its planning.

The planning effort recognized from the outset that the detailed operational design embodied in earlier systemwide library plans was neither possible nor appropriate given the fluidity of the technical, institutional and economic environments in which universities currently exist. Instead, the future of the University's libraries must unfold more organically, with an extended period of continuous innovation in organizational, financial and technical structures. This report is therefore intended to provide a framework for a unified model that will guide future library planning and provide the libraries with new incentives to stimulate strategic change.

As the libraries of the University of California (UC) approach the 21st Century they face new and difficult challenges. The past decade has seen a compounding differential between needs and capacities that have pushed the library system beyond the limits of its present operating model. Simultaneous developments in all of the following areas are placing inordinate pressures on our libraries:

• Scholarly and scientific communication: new means of communication and publication promise to transform the modes by which scholars exchange and preservethe results of their work. Libraries must accommodate different ways of communicating new knowledge, while still continuing to preserve and collect material disseminated in traditional formats.
• Higher education: changes in higher education including a new emphasis on distance learning, on the use of digital resources in the classroom, on addressing the needs of adult learners, and on educating an increasingly diverse student body are creating pressures for change on both Universities and the library collections that support faculty and student needs for teaching and research.
• Technology infrastructure: new infrastructure is needed to support access to digital resources, and UC libraries have received no capital or operations funding for technical infrastructure or automation.
• Costs and amounts information: the cost of scientific information has skyrocketed, as have the costs for scholarly monographs. The percentage of published information acquired by libraries is declining, yet faculty and students continue to need increasing amounts of information, both to support work in traditional disciplines as well as for new interdisciplinary studies.
• Organizational culture: library, technical and academic planning have moved forward in isolation from each other both on each campus and systemwide. There is a tension between campus autonomy and the concept of "One University, one library," and rewards are based on incremental change rather than collaborative risk-taking and innovation.
• Funding: the current funding model was abandoned in the late 1980's; UC has not funded inflation for libraries since 1989; and the UC library allocation model does not reflect changes in library functions and responsibilities nor academic program expansion on any of the campuses.
• Information market place: no new business model has emerged for digital information costs. There is a rising tendency to price by transaction; intellectual property is shifting in favor of the publisher; and standards for content or access have yet to be adopted.

These changes in scholarly and scientific communication, higher education, technology and the information marketplace have been accompanied by rising costs, the absence of a funding model, and an organizational culture unaccustomed to innovation and risk-taking. Taken together these developments have severely and negatively impacted the ability of UC's libraries to meet the needs of faculty and students.

• While the number of students and faculty in the University of California has remained relatively constant, and the number of programs has continued to grow, the purchasing power of UC Libraries has declined. During the period 1992 to 1996, the price of materials purchased by UC libraries increased over 30%,but due to budgetary limitations, UC libraries were only able to increase their expenditures for library materials by 10%. Meanwhile, during 1996 alone, the University added eleven new undergraduate programs and 12 new graduate programs, putting further strains on library budgets.
• Not surprisingly, both serial and monographic acquisitions have declined. UC libraries receive 20,000 fewer serials today than they did in 1992-93, and although UC libraries purchased over 400,000 monographs in 1995-96, that figure represents a decline of 13% from acquisition levels in 1992-93.
• Collection growth has slowed to far below those levels identified in the 1977 UC Library Plan. Instead of the over 800,000 additional volumes which the plan would have funded for 1995-96, UC Libraries added only 650,000.
• Faced with declining buying power, campus libraries have been forced to buy much more selectively than they have in the past, reducing the richness and diversity of the University's holdings. The creation and maintenance of broad and in-depth subject collections for current and future specialized research needs provided the University strong collections with which to attract new faculty and students in cutting-edge research areas. Such a strategy is no longer affordable.
• Campus libraries have cancelled subscriptions to unique and specialized serial titles in favor of subscriptions to highly cited titles, producing greater overlap in UC Library serial collections among the nine campuses.
• Monographic purchases are becoming limited to materials that support core campus academic programs. Unlike serial cancellations, this strategy produces less overlap in collections, reducing the availability systemwide of specialized materials to support advanced teaching and research.
• In the past UC Libraries had forged a number of cooperative collection development arrangements, within and outside of the UC System. These arrangements assured easy access to lower use materials, but as buying power has declined, our libraries have been unable to maintain many of these agreements. Universities with collections important to UC's academic programs have become increasingly wary of collaborative collection building and resource sharing with UC.
• As campus collections have diminished, students and faculty have had to rely on Interlibrary Loan to fill their information needs. The number of loan requests has increased almost by half since 1990-91. While three-quarters of these continue to be filled from other UC campus libraries, the need togo beyond UC is increasing, particularly in the sciences. Requests for photocopies that can only be filled outside of UC increased by 84% during this period.
• Of all the materials purchased by UC Libraries, scientific serials have experienced the highest rates of inflation, averaging 12%/year since 1992. To partially accommodate the rise in scientific serial prices, UC Libraries have made some shifts in their materials budgets from support of social sciences and humanities collections to the sciences. However, these shifts, in the neighborhood of 3-4% over the entire period, have been small by comparison to the inflationary costs incurred for scientific materials. UC libraries have been forced to continually and substantially reduce their scientific serial subscriptions to meet budgetary constraints.
• In addition to shortfalls in collection budgets, UC Libraries have also experienced declines in staffing. The actual number of staff lost has varied widely, with older and larger campuses reporting the largest losses. UC Davis, UC Berkeley, and UCLA have lost over 20% of their staff since 1990-1991.

Continuing rapid developments in information technology, coupled with uncertainty about the characteristics, requirements, and costs of digital publications, will make the library planning environment fluid for at least the next decade. Notwithstanding this uncertainty, the University cannot let the quality of its collections and access to critical information continue to deteriorate while waiting for these issues to be resolved. Instead, the University must adopt strategies that will guide its libraries through the transition to the digital future while promoting and sustaining the integration of traditional and digital library collections and services, and continuing to provide the access to information needed to support the University's teaching, research and service missions. During this transitional period, the organizational, financial and technological changes needed to ensure the continued viability of the University's libraries will be identified and put into place on an ongoing basis.

In considering transitional strategies, we continue to be guided by "One University, One Library," a concept reaffirmed in the University of California's 1977 Library Plan. This concept has served our faculty and students well; the emphasis on shared resources, shared programs, shared services, and shared planning has allowed our Libraries to achieve far more than they could have done individually. Our libraries have been able to draw on each other for resources while at the same time permitting the growth of distinctive collections supporting campus needs; the regional library facilities and the MELVYL Union Catalog are tangible results of the success of the "One library" concept.

To integrate this concept into a future library system that can provide comprehensive, ubiquitous access to diverse information that supports the University's academic programs, we now add to our vision of "OneUniversity, One library" the concept of a shared knowledge network. The collections at each of the libraries of the University of California are a common good, serving the faculty and students on a particular campus, as well as the faculty and students atthe other eight University of California sites. Our libraries provide support for programs that cut across campus boundaries and, through well-established patterns of intercampus interlibrary loans, they enable us to share unique research collections as well. The shared collections in the libraries of the 1980's consisted of printed materials that were mailed across the state. The increasingly digital environment of the soon-to-arrive 21st Century forces us to redefine the notion of the commons so that it comprises a network of all the key academic information resources of the University. The University's knowledge network includes robust campus collections supporting the core academic programs of each campus, specialized collections distributed among the campuses to support the advanced research and teaching needs of the University, and a single digital collection to serve the University's common and specialized information needs. Also included are associated systems and services that can make the University's shared knowledge assets, in any format, readily accessible and available to every member of the UC community, as well as services that provide access to information from other universities and information providers. This diverse knowledge network, when combined with a robust information infrastructure, will provide the comprehensive access to information required to support the University's teaching, research and service missions in the 21st Century.

Informed by these concepts, the Task Force has identified the following seven strategies to guide our libraries during the transition to the digital future:

1. UC should seek innovative and cost-effective means to strengthen Resource Sharing.

Resource sharing should be extended among the UC campus libraries (and other important libraries) as a strategy to maximize limited resources in support of building print collections that meet the needs of students and faculty for comprehensive access to information required for teaching and research. Successful adoption of increased reliance on resource sharing as a strategy to meet needs for printed materials will require support from all stakeholders within the University as well as innovative uses of technology and transportation. Strong faculty and library leadership and consultation with numerous sectors of the University community will be needed to implement this strategy.

2. UC should establish the California Digital Library.

The University should develop the California Digital Library according to the recommendations in The University of California Digital Library: a framework for planning and strategic initiatives (October 1996). As a "co-library" with the 9 campus libraries, the CDL should have responsibility for developing a statewide digital collection to serve the University's common and specialized information needs. The CDL should also provide new services and extend existing ones to guide our libraries in the transition to successful integration of traditional and digital formats. The programs of the CDL should support information access and delivery via electronic communications; information preservation, storage and retrieval; information management consultation and training; new forms of scholarly and scientific communication; and development of the knowledge network of the University.

3. UC should sustain and develop mechanisms to support campus Print Collections.

UC's great print collections will remain critical to the University's teaching, research and service obligations for the foreseeable future. Comprehensive access to scholarly and scientific communication for faculty and students requires the development of a structure that maintains and develops diverse print collections systemwide. Adopting the financial, political and administrative measures to sustain these collections must be a priority for all campuses of the University and will require firm commitments from the President and Chancellors over an extended period.

4. UC should seek mutually beneficial Collaboration with Libraries, Museums, other Universities, and Industry.

UC should adopt collaboration as a strategy to extend library access, to share the costs of library collections and services, and to develop an academically and economically sustainable model of scholarly communication. Mutually beneficial relationships with the University should be developed with selected members of the Library of California network, other research and teaching universities as well as museums and industry.

5. UC should develop an Information Infrastructure that supports the needs of faculty and students to disseminate and access scholarly and scientific information in a networked environment.

A sophisticated and robust technological infrastructure is required to disseminate and access digital information. UC must invest in technology to support delivery of digital collections and UC's libraries must be tightly integrated into information management and technology planning at all levels.

6. UC should play a key leadership role in national efforts to transform the process of Scholarly and Scientific Communication.

For paper-based libraries, core collections are defined in terms of materials that are purchased. In the digital environment, the emphasis will be on access rather than ownership, and licensing allows additional possibilities for providing access to academically important content. However, licensing content from commercial providers is only a short-term strategy to deal with the transition to a goal of comprehensive access. New means of communication and publication promise to transform the very modes by which scholars exchange and preserve the results of their work, in turn transforming our libraries. The California Digital Library should be configured to play a prominent role in this arena, identifying opportunities for supporting creative and innovative alternatives for disseminating scholarship and research.

7. UC should organize an environment of Continuous Planning and Innovation.

The library and scholarly information environment is expected to be highly fluid for at least the next decade, as the University attempts to meet the challenges of scholarly and scientific communication in the 21st Century. The University should develop a planning process that that will support our libraries as they continue to engage in innovation and the development of organizational, technical, policy, and financial structures needed to make the transition to integrated print and digital collections. Planning structures should also develop and encourage strategies to enhance the transmission of scholarly and scientific communication in a digital environment. Planning should immediately begin to address each of the six strategies outlined above.

Strategy #1: Resource Sharing

While robust print collections will continue to be critical to the University's teaching, scholarly and service obligations for the foreseeable future, the University of California can no longer sustain the funding model that supported comprehensive collection building at nine campuses. In the current fiscal and technological environment, our focus must be on comprehensive, ubiquitous, seamless access to scholarly and scientific communication, rather than collection building per se.

To attain comprehensive access, the University should enhance the practice of resource sharing among UC campus libraries. Resource sharing can be an effective strategy to leverage limited resources and build diverse print collections systemwide. However, for this strategy to be viable, it will be necessary to build new systems, create new funding models, and revise policies. Specifically, UC should develop and implement direct borrowing and more efficient methods for the delivery of physical volumes as soon as possible. UC should also adopt appropriate strategies and funding models that support coordinated development of diverse print collections and encourage resource sharing with external partners, including outsourcing of services and access where appropriate.

The high labor costs associated with scanning combined with the limitations imposed by copyright make it unlikely that campus print collections can easily be transmitted and shared in electronic format. Physical delivery systems are in place, but they are expensive and inadequate. Faculty and students perceive the current mediated system as cumbersome and time-consuming, while libraries find it is only cost-effective to borrow rather than own an item if demand for the item is expected to be minimal. As a result, print collections cannot be shared on any widespread basis without negative effects on teaching, research and budgets.

Technology must be developed and supported to facilitate expeditious access to printed materials from users' desktops. Systems and policies must permit users to request materials from any campus as easily as they can from their local collection, and to search and request materials from libraries and information providers outside the UC system with relative ease. The UC Libraries can thenmove towards developing a more appropriate mix of shared systemwide collections and locally purchased materials.

• Automated, patron-initiated borrowing

Technology should be acquired and integrated into the digital environment for an automated patron-initiated borrowing system in operation at all campus libraries. This system will permit faculty or students to identify and enter requests for material at another campus from their desktop computer and will automatically route their request to the appropriate library, eliminating much of the delay and inconvenience currently associated with Interlibrary Loans.

• Rapid delivery

For faculty and students to rely on material at another campus for instruction or research, it must come to them quickly. A delivery system that transports material across the state in a reliable and speedy manner, with the goal of achieving overnight delivery of library material between any two campuses in the UC system, is an essential ingredient to the success of a shared collections strategy. This delivery system should be extended to include other important libraries as appropriate.

• Appropriate strategies and funding models to support coordinated development of diverse print collections and to encourage resource sharing with external partners.

The UC Libraries have a long history of coordinated collection development; shared purchase funds have been used to obtain single copies of lesser used materials as well as shared databases mounted on the MELVYL® system. Cost-effective coordination of monographic purchases on a regular basis, however, will require a planning effort to develop and implement new, innovative policies and procedures to assure that adequate support for academic programs is maintained in an environment of shared resources. Incentives should be established to encourage the development of collections that meet systemic needs, as well as support local programs. The current funding model for UC Libraries encourages each campus to build a collection that supports local core academic programs. In the long-term this model is likely to produce largely duplicative collections across the UC system. To provide faculty and students with comprehensive access to information, incentives should be established to create and maintain diverse specialized collections distributed among the campuses that support the advanced research and teaching needs of the University. Structures are also needed that will determine the most cost-effective methods for providing comprehensive access and encourage cost-effective use of shared resources available from other academic libraries and information providers, including the outsourcing of services and access, where appropriate.

An emphasis on resource sharing to provide comprehensive, cost-effective access, and to move away from traditional collection building, requires a fundamental shift in the way faculty, administrators, and librarians think about campus library collections. Successful adoption of increased reliance on resource sharing as a strategy to meet needs for printed materials will require strong leadership from faculty, academic administration, and libraries, and consultation with numerous sectors of the University community.

Strategy #2: California Digital Library

To provide leadership in support of a vision that integrates digital technologies into the creation of collections and improved access to information and to guide the transition to increasingly digital collections, the University should establish the California Digital Library (CDL). As the key strategic initiative for meeting the challenges facing our libraries, the CDL will have responsibility for providing new services and extending existing ones to successfully transform our libraries over the next decade.

An integral strategic component of the library system and a collaborative effort of all nine campuses, the digital library should comprise a number of key elements that support and sustain the University's teaching and research mission:

• High-quality electronic knowledge resources
• Personal communication tools to create, share, manipulate, store, and use information
• An effortless network interface for dissemination of and access to the world's knowledge
• Distributed resources and services integrated at the point of use

To accomplish its goals, the CDL (see Appendix B for details) should

• license, acquire, develop, and manage electronic (digital) content in support of campus academic programs,
• facilitate access to the collection,
• support digitization of paper-based material,
• establish policies and procedures for archiving digital content,
• encourage and support new forms of scholarly and scientific communication,
• and assist campuses in providing user support and training.

The initial focus of the CDL should be on the information needs of UC students and faculty. To meet their needs, it will provide access to digital information, relieve pressures on print collections, and develop systems that encourage and enable the campuses to coordinate and sharetheir print and digital resources. Ultimately the CDL should build the partnerships that will allow the University to deliver information to all Californians. As other entities such as the California State University, leading private institutions such asthe University of Southern California, and private corporations become partners, digital collections will be enriched and sharing mechanisms strengthened. The digital library is also expected to become a essential adjunct to the State's increasingly knowledge-based economy, so that the University's investment in the CDL will create a vital resource for the entire State.

Strategy #3: Collection Support

The Library Planning and Action Initiative Task Force strongly believes that traditional print collections will continue to be highly important to teaching and learning and to the scholarly and research activities of University of California students and faculty for the foreseeable future. Annual increases to the collection budgets of the University's libraries will continue to be essential while new models for scholarly and scientific communication are developed. That said, expectations that those increases will mirror actual cost increases are both unrealistic, given the University's budget compact with the state, and counter-productive, given that we must convince the publishing community that the current business model for price increases is unacceptable to the academy and cannot be sustained.

Improved resource sharing and the creation of a shared digital collection represent key strategies to leverage limited University resources in support of library collections. Yet while the quantity of information available in digital formats is increasing, it still represents only a small portion of the total published literature required to support teaching and research at the University of California; printed materials continue to be critical to the University's teaching, research and service mission. Moreover, while a strategy of resource sharing will maximize limited resources, that strategy requires that funds be invested in all aspects of the University's knowledge network. Funds must be invested in both print collections that support core campus programs and print collections of specialized resources, so that these materials can be the foundation for a cost-effective resource-sharing program among UC libraries.

Committees of the Academic Senate and individual faculty have emphasized that, especially in the humanities and social sciences, the University's excellence in teaching and research depends on continuing access to high quality printed information. Similarly, the Final Report of the Task Force on the Research Climate in the University of California cites strong and accessible library collections as an essential foundation for a productive research climate. University support for campus collections enhances not only instruction and research but also the direct value of the University to our communities. The University's multiple contributions to California's leadership in the knowledge economy may derive primarily from teaching, research, and applications, but they are also facilitated through the accessibility of our libraries' collections. Because the University's libraries represent a common good, serving both core campus programs and distributed systemwide information needs, funding campus collections must be a priority for all the campuses of the University. Systemwide structures are required that will encourage local development of strong specialized collections that can be shared among all students and faculty of the University.

Strategy #4: Collaboration with Libraries, Museums, Universities, other Institutions, and Industry

Collaboration and partnerships are an essential strategy for developing a sustainable business model for the University's libraries. It is recognized that such cooperation also represents an important strategy for the State of California in making maximum use of limited state resources for higher education.

• CSU/UC

The Libraries of the University of California and the California State University are dedicated to supporting faculty, students and staff in their educational and service missions. In recent years, the Libraries of both Universities have recognized that they can strengthen their services and extend their collections through various forms of cooperation. Individual UC and CSU Libraries have found that by sharing resources they can improve service in areas ranging from document delivery to disaster recovery. Now, with the emergence of networked digital information resources, collaborative projects on regional and statewide levels also promise to enhance the ability of both systems to deliver information to their primary clientele as well as to the citizens of California. The Library Planning and Action Initiative convened a Task Force, composed of UC University Librarians and CSU Library Directors, to investigate potential collaborative library activities. This group was charged to identify and coordinate implementation of UC/CSU intersegmental library initiatives of mutual benefit. The Task Force has issued a joint statement of collaboration and initiated several cooperative activities (see Appendix C).

• Library of California Network

Another potentially fruitful area for collaboration is the Library of California (LOC). The LOC is an important public policy initiative designed to encourage resource sharing, cooperation and collaboration among the libraries of California. The California Digital Library is designed to encourage resource sharing, deliver digital content to the students and faculty of the University of California, and facilitate delivery of digital content to the citizens of California. These two initiatives complement each other; the LOC isbuilding an infrastructure to deliver information throughout the State while the CDL can provide leadership in access to digital knowledge. The Library of California Statewide Coalition Council and the Library of California Networking Task Force have both endorsed the CDL as the primary provider of digital information for the LOC. A demonstration project that will provide access to digital environmental information by the CDL to LOC participants has been funded. Working with the Library of California, the California Digital Library can forge new collaborative links with other segments of California education and make the vast information resources owned by UC available to a wider community.

• Other Academic Institutions and Industry

The CDL will work closely with other California institutions of higher education to deliver digital content. Discussions have already begun with other private universities. These discussions should be extended as appropriate to allow the development of mutually beneficial relationships between the University of California and private colleges and universities in the State. At the same time, the Science, Technology and Industry Collection offers us the opportunity to investigate the business and institutional arrangementsthat will be required to provide CDL collections to industry partners, with appropriate compensation from that sector. Through economies of scale, these arrangements offer the potential to lessen the costs connected with providing digitally available content to faculty and students of the Univerity of California. Universities and other institutions external to California also represent important sources of scholarly information, and the CDL should pursue mutually beneficial partnerships with such institutions when those relationships can ensure comprehensive access to scholarly information for UC faculty and students.

Strategy #5: Information Infrastructure

A sophisticated and robust inter- and intra-campus technological infrastructure is an essential prerequisite to the distribution of digital information and the establishment of the California Digital Library. Without such an infrastructure, the CDL cannot deliver expected content and services. It is important to emphasize that this infrastructure must be designed with the understanding that content will outlive generations of access, storage, and retrieval technology and data formats and must migrate repeatedly without loss or distortion. It is important, however, to recognize that infrastructure development will require continuous investment centrally and by the campuses. The Office of the President and the nine campuses should continue and expand their investment in information technology networking infrastructure and in equipment and software that will facilitate faculty/student/staff access to digital content. The University should explore the development of network access capabilities beyond the physical boundaries of the University. Working with system-wide information technology and network planning groups, opportunities should be sought to conduct pilot projects in cooperation with communications companies, ranging from local cable firms to global enterprises.

The University should also support the development of the authentication infrastructure that will be implemented by the newly formed Authentication Project Steering Committee. Generalized "authentication" is one of the fundamental building blocks of modern information systems. Strong, common authentication can enable distributed "authorization" in support of a wide variety of administrative and academic services. A common University-wide authentication methodology that can support the broadest possible range of applications will enable greater and appropriate use of distributed digital library systems, particularly in the case of licensed information resources.

Strategy #6: Scholarly Communication

For paper-based libraries, core collections are defined in terms of materials that are purchased. In the digital environment, the emphasiswill be on access rather than ownership, and licensing allows additional possibilities for providing access to academically important content. However, licensing content from commercial providers is only a short-term strategy to deal with the transitionto a goal of comprehensive access. New means of communication and publication promise to transform the very modes by which scholars exchange and preserve the results of their work, in turn transforming our libraries. The California Digital Library shouldbe configured to play a prominent role in this arena, identifying opportunities for supporting creative and innovative alternatives for disseminating scholarship and research.

The present system of journal publication no longer meets faculty needs to distribute information quickly and effectively. Commercial journals are too slow to publish new scientific information, their peer review processes are perceived as cumbersome, and their prices limit distribution to a few relatively wealthy institutions in developed countries. The increasing domination of the information marketplace by large commercial companies threatens to both increase and extend the problems faculty already experience in communicating the results of their research to their peers and theirstudents. Publishers of digital information are placing restrictions on its distribution and use while they have yet to establish methods to archive this information and ensure that it will be readily available to future scholars and students. To captureand distribute effectively the fruits of the knowledge developed by UC faculty requires new forms of scholarly and scientific communication. Since such a transformation also promises a long-term solution to the financial problems facing our libraries, the newly formed California Digital Library should play a leadership role in developing, supporting, and implementing practical opportunities for faculty to publish and archive material in digital form.

One strategy to effect such a transformation involves redefining the concept of ownership of intellectual property that is created within the university. Possibilities under discussion among libraries and scholarly societies range from requiring individual faculty to retain ownership of copyright to the university exerting ownership to the notion of a consortia or society owning and managing rights. A University of California task force has convened to consider the current legal environment and propose revisions in University policies which will enhance the creative work of members of the academic community in the digital age. The Copyright Task Force recognizes that, "the academic ethic of early dissemination and respect for authorship fosters the creation of new knowledge and new works and has contributedto the development of a tradition in which scholarly work is freely available for use by others for educational and research purposes. This tradition meshes uneasily with the growing commercialization of information and the rapid growth of digital media."

The discussions and analysis of the Copyright Task Force will likely lead to recommendations for changes in the models the University has used to publish and communicate scholarly and scientific information. The role of the CDL should be to provide theservices and support necessary to build and implement these new models. The models may well require new publication initiatives on the part of the University. These could be initiatives to publish scholarly electronic journals by the University, similar to the initiatives currently underway at Stanford with respect to Highwire Press, or they could be initiatives to establish web-based publishing such as the preprint server managed by Los Alamos National Laboratories for the physics community. The exact nature of the new models is likely to emerge over the next few years.

One component of the content in the CDL will be secured by licensing the right to use and archive the intellectual property contained in a work rather than, as in a paper environment, purchasing a copy of the work. These licensing activities, and the role of the CDL in publication of unique materials produced by UC faculty, will inevitably raise issues with respect to intellectual property and ownership in the digital environment.Thus beyond implementation of new initiatives required by the work of the current Copyright Task Force, the CDL will have an ongoing role in bringing issues surrounding scholarly communication and intellectual property to the attention of the appropriateUniversity bodies for analysis and solution.

The strategies outlined here are designed to guide the UC libraries through what we anticipate will be a ten-year period of transition from completely print-based holdings to integrated digital and paper collections. During this period, we expect that the changes in the external environment outlined above will continue at a rapid pace. Our libraries will be required to engage in an extended period of continuous innovation in organizational, financial and technical structures in order to make this transition. The strategic initiatives outlined here provide the first of many opportunities to derive data critical to the policy, financial, organizational and operational decisionsthat must be made. To permit UC libraries to respond quickly and appropriately to a rapidly changing landscape, mechanisms for continuous planning are required. The newly formed Systemwide Library and Scholarly Information Committee has been established to guide this planning effort (see Appendix D). To be successful, these plans must be created in a highly relational environment with contributions from all stakeholders in the University's libraries: faculty, students, librarians, information technologists and administrators. Planning structures must accommodate the lengthy time period our users and our institutions will require to integrate the transformations now beginning in the process of scholarly and scientific communication.

One of the goals of the Library Planning and Action Initiative was to "recommend a sustainable model or models for the University Library System to accommodate the changing funding, intellectual, service, collection development and technology environment." The Task Force has determined that such an effort is premature. Instead, we must create an environment in which we can progress to a point where the development of such models is possible. During the next few years, changes in the information marketplace will force us to look at new ways of funding our libraries. There is an increasing desire among providers to price by transaction, and intellectual property law is shifting away from 'fair use' in favor of the publisher. At the same time, content providers are experiencing enormous difficulties absorbing change into their business practices. As yet, no new business model has emerged for digital information and, because of rapid and continuing change in technology, scholarly publication and the information marketplace, it will likely be several years before any definitive cost model is in place. In the interim, UC experience with resource sharing, the digital library, and innovations in scholarly communication should suggest a new financially sustainable business model that will provide comprehensive access to scholarly information for UC faculty, staff, and students. This model will likely include market-based and fee-based systems, constructs that may cause tension with the value the University places on access to information that supports teaching, learning, and research. The model must therefore be developed through close collaboration between University administrators, faculty and librarians.

As noted above, the UC Libraries' strong print collections will continue to be essential to the teaching and research mission of the University for the foreseeable future, both to provide effective local support for campus academic programs and to create the distributed network of shared specialized collections that will be needed in the future. Planning efforts must seek to understand, clarify, and bolster the sources of support for maintenance and enhancement of these collections, to elucidate roles and responsibilities for financial support of the University's library collections regardless of format, and to put in place the planning and management mechanisms required to sustain the shared UC library collection. A planning mechanism is required to support and expand resource sharing and identify innovative means to enhance meaningful collaborative collection building, and should involve all stakeholders in that planning effort.

A strong information infrastructure will be required to support access to both print and digital collections. This infrastructure requires a University-wide strategic plan for library technology. Such a plan would define the roles and responsibilities of the UC library system within the overall infrastructure, thereby providing a point of departure for wider discussion, as well as facilitating the coordination of campus library technology plans with each other and with the technology strategies of the campuses.

Collaboration is also an important element of the transitional strategies identified in this report. Further discussion is needed on the nature of the partnerships that: (1) should be formed by the CDL with institutions such as universities, industry, libraries and museums; and (2) are critical to a viable long-term resource sharing strategy. The development of principles and guidelines that describe the financial terms for partnerships and delineate the differences between collaborators and customers should become part of the continuous planning effort.

Facilitating and supporting changes in the process of scientific and scholarly communication will be an additional important role for systemwide library planning bodies. The report of the Copyright Task Force and other University advisory bodies will provide guidance to this effort.

Plans for the future of our libraries must take place in an environment that encourages reasoned debate and discourages discussion that will polarize library stakeholders. Too often, the transition toward a new organizational model is cast in terms of print vs. digital media, or in terms of scientists vs. humanists. In truth, the UC Libraries of the future must accommodate multiple formats, and our libraries must continue to serve all types of faculty and students. Print and digital collections and services complement one other, and researchers and students use material from a wide-range of disciplines. We must establish a structure that supports a continuing dialog among all parties and solutions that appeal to a wide range of library users.

Advisory Task Force

Karen L. Andrews
Librarians' Association
Head, Physical Sciences Library
University of California, Davis

Carole A. Barone
Associate Vice Chancellor Information Technology
University of California, Davis

Donald W. Crawford
Executive Vice Chancellor
University of California, Santa Barbara

Joanne R. Euster
University Librarian
University of California, Irvine

Charles F. Kennel, Chair
Executive Vice Chancellor
Vice Chancellor's Office
University of California, Los Angeles

John L. King
University Committee on Planning and Budget
Professor, Information & Computer Science
University of California, Irvine

Robert S. Lapiner
Dean, Continuing Education & UCLA Extension
University of California, Los Angeles

Gerald R. Lowell
University Librarian & Associate Vice Chancellor
Academic Information Technology
University of California, San Diego

Richard E. Lucier
University Librarian & Assistant Vice Chancellor, Academic Information Management
University of California, San Francisco
Special Assistant for Library Planning
University of California, Office of the President

Peter Lyman
University Librarian
University of California, Berkeley

Anthony A. Newcomb
Professor & Dean of Humanities
University of California, Berkeley

Denis O. Rodgerson
Chair, University Committee on Library
Professor, Pathology & Laboratory Medicine
University of California, Los Angeles

Terrence R. Smith
Professor, Computer Science
University of California, Santa Barbara

Michael E. Urban
Professor, Dept.of Politics
University of California, Santa Cruz

Carlos Velez-Ibanez
Dean, College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences
University of California, Riverside

Hal R. Varian
Dean, School of Information Management and Systems
University of California, Berkeley

Sandra J. Weiss
Vice Chair, Academic Council
UC Office of the President

Staff:

Gary Lawrence
Director, Library Planning and Policy Development
UC Office of the President

Susan Starr
Library Planning and Action Initiative Coordinator
UC Office of the President

Library Planning and Action Initiative Planning Team

Richard E. Lucier
University Librarian & Assistant Vice Chancellor, Academic Information Management
University of California, San Francisco
Special Assistant for Library Planning
UC Office of the President

Gary Lawrence
Director, Library Planning and Policy Development
UC Office of the President

Susan Starr
Library Planning and Action Initiative Coordinator
UC Office of the President

The Science, Technology and Industry Collection

The first shared electronic collection of the CDL will be the Science, Technology and Industry Collection, covering a literature that accounts for over 80 percent of the published electronic material now available. Choosing a collection focused on science and technology will permit the University to achieve economies of scale when accessing the highest cost literature, establish a digital collection with the critical mass needed to investigate a variety of issues relating to scholarly and scientific communication, create a resource that will encourage collaborative activities with the private sector, and relieve the campuses of the need to provide additional support for the development of these digital collections.

Programs

The California Digital Library (CDL) will be responsible for the design, creation and implementation of systems, which support the shared collections of the virtual library of California. It will enable knowledge generation, access, and use through programs, which provide:

Information access and delivery via electronic communications;

• Licensing and acquisition of shared electronic content
• Managing electronic content to assure its efficient and effective delivery
• Supporting digitization of paper-based materials

Information preservation, storage and retrieval;

• Establishing policies and procedures for archiving Digital Library electronic content
• Developing secure, reliable, electronic delivery mechanisms
• Fostering standard that promote interoperability

Information management consultation and training;

• Providing user support
• Training information providers at the campus level

Online publishing of scholarly and scientific knowledge, or knowledge management;

• Encouraging digital publishing in support of scholarly communication
• Encouraging the migration of selected campus-based content into the Digital Library

Support for the knowledge network of the University;

• Developing technologies, which facilitate distribution of print-based content across the University
• Developing partnerships with other entities and encouraging shared access to collections among California institutions of higher education.

Full development of the California Digital Library will take place over 5-7 years. Phase 1 will concentrate on establishing an organizational framework designed to provide enhanced access to electronic and printed content. In Phase 2, the CDL will begin to create new content by digitizing texts and facsimiles and by supporting scholarly communication through digital publishing. In Phase 3 new technologies will be used to transform the delivery and creation of information resources.

Structure

The California Digital Library will be a separate entity, representing a collaborative effort of all campuses of the University and complementing the existing University Library system. An Executive Director and a small staff with specialized skills in finance, user training, networked information delivery and information technology will manage the Library. The Director will work closely with an Advisory Board. To assure the breadth of input necessary, the Board will be composed of Vice Chancellors, other Academic Administrators, University Librarians, a LAUC representative, Information Technologists, and Faculty, including relevant Senate committee representation. Librarians on each campus will be formally appointed to the CDL and participate in its design and in its implementation at the campus level.

Support for faculty research

Although the CDL will focus on delivery of information to users, it can also play an important role as a testbed for research. UC faculty in many fields, including computer science, sociology, human factors, and public policy, all have interests in the use of digital information. Through the CDLwe can align their research interests and those of others outside of the University within an operational unit. The CDL has already begun to explore the possibilities for coordinated programs. The Interlib concept developed for the NSF Digital Library program proposes a cooperative effort involving UCSB, UCB, Stanford, SDSC and the CDL that supports faculty research and studies the application of that research to CDL users. Interlib will provide an opportunity for the CDL to provide a new model of academic communication, a migration path for transferring technology, and an application for evaluating digital library technology. At the same time Interlib provides opportunities for faculty research on large-scale distributed digital library and collaborative workspace services and for scalable, interoperable systems services.

The Libraries of the University of California and the California State University are dedicated to supporting faculty, students and staff in their education, research and community service missions. In recent years, the Libraries of both Universities have recognized that they can strengthen their services and extend theircollections through various forms of cooperation. Individual UC and CSU Libraries have found that by sharing resources they can improve service in areas ranging from document delivery to disaster recovery. Now, with the emergence of networked digital information resources, collaborative projects on regional and statewide levels also promise to enhance our ability to deliver information to both our primary clienteles as well as to the citizens of California.

Through collaborative projects, systems, services and policies, the UC and CSU Library systems will strive toward accomplishing the following:

1. Provide joint union catalog services by developing reciprocal access through Z39.50 interfaces to the UC MELVYL Union Catalog and the CSU Unified Information Access System.
2. Establish joint consortium contracts and interagency purchasing agreements for information resources and services, thus leveraging the buying power of both Universities for measurable cost savings.
3. Strengthen programs, such as overnight point-to-point document delivery, for the cost-effective transfer of physical information resources.
4. Cooperatively exploit technologies that enhance access to information resources and facilitate resource sharing.
5. Develop cooperative programs for user and staff training and support.
6. Support joint initiatives of the UC and CSU systems, such as outreach to K-12 education and to the business community.
7. Support regional and individual campus cooperative initiatives

Joint Task Force on University of California/California State University Collaborative Activity

Noreen Alldredge, CSU Hayward
Hiram Davis, California Polytechnic State University
Lan Dyson, UC Santa Cruz
Susan Harris, Sonoma State University
Gerald Lowell, UC San Diego
Richard Lucier, UC San Francisco. Co-Chair.
Charles Martell, CSU Sacramento. Co-Chair.
Gloria Werner, UCLA

Charge: The library and scholarly information environment is expected to be highly fluid for at least the next decade, as the University attempts to meet the challenges of scholarly and scientific communication in the 21st Century. During this critical period, the Systemwide Library and Scholarly Information Committee will advise the University on systemwide library policies and strategic priorities, on systemwide long term planning for the UC libraries including the 9 campus libraries and the California Digital Library (CDL), and on strategies that will enhance and facilitate the transmission of scholarly and scientific communication in a digital environment. The Committee's guidance will be essential to the University as it seeks to:

• Establish an environment that supports continuous planning and innovation for UC's libraries,


• Develop policies and strategic priorities for the newly created California Digital Library, including policies that support the extension of CDL services beyond the University,


• Implement strategies to sustain and develop both campus and shared print and digital collections and identify mechanisms that facilitate sharing resources across campus boundaries, and


• Initiate projects to improve the process of scholarly communication and assist faculty in distributing the results of their research.

The Committee reports to the Provost and Senior Vice President, Academic Affairs and works closely with the University Librarian and Executive Director, California Digital Library, particularly in his systemwide library planning role In 2001, as part of the scheduled evaluationof strategies identified and implemented during the 1997-1998 Library Planning and Action Initiative, the Committee will provide specific advice to the Provost on future organizational and advisory structures as well as governance and location of the California Digital Library.

Membership: Although the primary criteria for appointment are functional, to insure the necessary breadth of input, the Advisory Committee includes individuals from all campuses of the UC System. The Committee is appointed by the Provost and includes:

• 2 Academic Vice Chancellors;


• Academic Council representatives, inconsultation with Academic Council;


• Additional faculty as needed to provide appropriate disciplinary perspectives (as determined by the Provost, in consultation with Academic Council);


• 4 additional campus administrators including two Information Technologists, one Dean, and one budget officer;


• 2 University Librarians;


• A LAUC representative;


• A representative from the UC-managed Department of Energy Laboratories; and


• Liaisons from other appropriate committees, such as the Copyright Task Force.

In addition, the following serve as ex-officio Advisory Committee members:

• Vice Provost, Academic Initiatives;


• Associate Vice President, Information Resources and Communications;


• University Librarian and Executive Director, California Digital Library;


• UC Budget Office Representative.

An Academic Vice Chancellor will serve as Chair.

Appointment Process: All appointed members will serve an initial three-year term to insure consistency and stability during this period of great library change and transition.

Meetings: The Committee meets quarterly. Meeting locations rotate among the nine campuses.

March 18, 1998

Carol Christ
Vice Chancellor & Provost
200 California Hall
University of California, Berkeley
Berkeley, CA 94720

Dear Carol:

On February 2, 1998, the Library Planning and Action Initiative (LPAI) Advisory Task Force held its final meeting, and responsibility for oversight of the California Digital Library and ongoing Universitywide library planning is expected to pass to your new Systemwide Library and Scholarly Information Committee. Upon this occasion, the members of the outgoing task force have asked me to convey some thoughts about ongoing issues and possible approaches to tackling them.

I believe that many within and outside UC share my view that the Library Planning and Action Initiative has been a remarkably successful enterprise, leading within about a year of its inception to the development of a seven-point strategy for the libraries and to the implementation of the California Digital Library (CDL). This achievement owes much to the prior efforts of the University Librarians in preparing the planning foundation for the digital library, and to the leadership and hard work of Richard Lucier and his planning team. However, I think that the key to our success liesin two characteristics of the LPAI process itself. First, the breadth of talent and diversity of perspective represented on the Advisory Task Force brought fresh insight and creativity to our deliberations and allowed us to move forward with a high degree of confidence that our direction would be supported by the broad University community. Second, the commitment to simultaneous planning and action made it possible for us to achieve early success, permitted us to test our planning ideas against concreteimplementation proposals, and fostered an ethic of continuous planning that has already been incorporated into the management culture of the CDL. Provost King has bequeathed the benefits of a broad and diverse constituency on your new committee; the opportunity for your committee to sustain the momentum created by the planning/action strategy is in your able hands.

It is important to keep in mind that while the CDL is the most visible action initiative arising from our work, it is but one element of the planning framework that we have developed. The Task Force has identified seven strategies to guide our libraries' transition over the next 3-5 years, as described fully in the enclosed Final Report. They can serve as a point of departure for the initial efforts of the Systemwide Committee. No doubt the committee will be asked to study the comments resulting from the Universitywide review of our final report. This will provide a useful opportunity for your committee to begin the process of refining and extending these strategies.

Planning for the acquisition and delivery of digital content by the CDL has already begun. As implementation proceeds, the University will need leadership and advice from the committee in order to foster and guide the transition from print to digital formats, where appropriate, and reduce duplicative purchase of printed material. To achieve comprehensive access, coordinated efforts will also be required to promote access to the university's shared print collections and to encourage deployment of the necessary information infrastructure.

One of the goals of the LPAI was to "recommend a sustainable model or models for the University Library System to accommodate the changing funding, intellectual, service, collection development and technology environment." The ATF quickly determined that such an effort would have been premature -- indeed, one purpose of the CDL, under the "planning/action" rubric, is to create an environment in which we can progress to a point where the development of such models is possible. This will clearly be a long-term undertaking for the University, but I encourage the new committee to keep this charge in mind, and to pursue it aggressively at the appropriate time.

Collaboration is also an important element of the transitional strategies identified by the ATF. Further discussion is needed on the nature of the partnerships that: (1) should be formed by the CDL with institutions such as universities, industry, libraries and museums; and (2) are critical to a viable long-term resource sharing strategy. The Systemwide Committee should develop principles and guidelines that describe the financial terms for partnerships and delineate the differences between collaborators and customers.

Finally, as noted in the ATF final report, "The discussions and analysis of the Copyright Task Force will likely lead to recommendations for changes in the models the University has used to publish and communicate scholarly information. The role of the CDL should be to provide leadership in the development and implementation of the services and support necessary to build and implement these new models." The Advisory Committee should assist the CDL in building on the report of the Copyright Task Force.

I look forward to working with you on the new committee. These are issues to which credible and creative solutions are fundamental to the ongoing health of the University.

Sincerely

Charles F. Kennel
Director, Scripps Institution of Oceanography

Cc: Judson King, Senior Vice President, Academic Affairs
Carol Tomlinson-Keasey, Vice Provost, Academic Initiatives
Richard Lucier, University Librarian & Executive Director, California Digital Library

Last updated: 6 April 1998