1. Analyzing Usage Statistics of Electronic Resources Jagdish Arora Director, INFLIBNET Centre

2. Not everything that counts can be measured. Not everything that can be measured counts. – Einstein

3. Why do we measure Usage? Usage statistics provide essential evidence: for extent of usage of e-resources to showcase the trends in usage over a period of time, Patterns of usage can be helpful guide for future collection development decisions to take informed decisions regarding renewal / cancellation of resources to demonstrate value for money / return on investment

4. Why Collect Usage Statistics? To make best and justified use of financial resources Calculating Return on Investment (RoI) Accountability To find out emerging subject disciplines Reporting usage to administration, funding agencies, etc. Strategic planning Comparison with other libraries / institutions

5. Why Collect Usage Statistics? Justifications for change in document format – From print to electronics – Lesser number of users visiting library physically – Lesser no. of books being issued / Less re-shelving – Increase in usage of e-resources Bench Marking – Top-cited journals available in e-format as compare to other libraries – Results of usage of e-resources by existing libraries can serve as a bench mark for other libraries

6. Why Collect Usage Statistics?: Additional Information Journals that are used heavily Journals not being used at all Number of denials in case of limit of simultaneous usage Preference for formats: PDF, HTML Breach of license agreement: Heady downloads or systematic downloads; How to handle it?

7. Acquiring Usage Statistics Content Provider (Publishers / Database Vendors) – Some publisher do not provide usage data (eg. MathSciNet, ISID, etc.) – Data inadequate and inconsistent – Data retained on the publisher’s web site only – Inconsistency in usage not reflected – Server caching not reflected

8. What do libraries want from usage data? Reliable usage Report in consistent format Usage at journals titles level Usage by subject area Analyse trends over time Ready access for reporting Evidence of value for money Benchmarking (comparative usage)

9. Adding More Value Cost-benefit analysis and RoI Impact of usage on research output Benchmarking

10. Why Evaluate at the Consortia Level? Evaluation is Necessary Negotiation for renewal Cost / Benefit analysis Evaluation is Possible Relativity Comparability Generalizibility

11. Why Evaluate ? Why Evaluate at the Consortia Level ? Review of current & prospective contracts Continuing price escalation not sustainable Evaluate prices to consortia and members Review contracts with additional criteria Promote models for quality not just quantity Plan for future

12. Problems with Manual Collection of Usage Statistics The usage statistics has to be gathered manually from different publishers Each publisher has – Different formats for data and delivery – Different access methods – Different availability dates Cost has to be calculated separately Data needs to be cleaned up and aggregated manually It is a labor-intensive and cumbersome process prone to data loss and errors

13. Harvesting Usage Statistics using SUSHI Automated import of consortia stats Consortium can track statistics for each member Data can be retrieved across a series of dates, e.g. period of months Member logins are pre-populated The library can access all COUNTER compliant usage stats across their serials holdings The library can obtain a top level view of their most and least-viewed publishers and titles

14. Negotiate More Effectively With COUNTER-compliant costs-per-view in hand, negotiate with publishers to realize more realistic cost models Uncover previously hidden cost information Utilize consortium-wide data to negotiate optimal terms for the group as a whole Obtain a better understanding of our consortium members’ usage patterns and collection needs

15. INFLIBNET Usage Portal

16. Benefits of Portal for Usage Usage statistics for every e-journal package for every member institutions is automatically collected Consortia-wide data readily available to the whole group for analysis and reporting The usage data can be exposed completely or partially to member institutions / consortium Administrators

18. Consortium Usage Analysis

23. Cost Incurred vs Cost Recovered in 2011

27. Usage Trend Analysis for a Single Publisher (ACS)

32. Top Ten Journals of ACS in 2011 Sl. No. Journal Name Number of Downloads 1 Journal of the American Chemical Society194693 2 The Journal of Organic Chemistry149561 3 Organic Letters90272 4 Journal of Medicinal Chemistry84866 5 Inorganic Chemistry83202 6 Chemical Reviews65255 7 Langmuir58367 8 The Journal of Physical Chemistry B57635 9 The Journal of Physical Chemistry C56186 10 Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry49706

33. MEASURING RESEARCH OUTPUT AND IMPACT OF E-RESOURCES

34. Measuring Research Output The Science Citation Index (SCI), Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) and Arts and Humanities Index (A&HI) are internationally recognized database that works as a filtering mechanism as it indexes qualitative research output from selected journals. The source articles appeared in three indices for 50 first- phase universities of the Consortium was searched in blocks of five years from 1975 to 20010 with an aim to compare the research output in the last block year, i.e. 2005 – 2009. A un-precedental increase in research productivity in terms of number of research articles is evident during 2005-2009 as compared to previous block of five years, i.e. 1975-1979 to 2000-2004.

35. Increase in no. of articles in past 35 Years (In block of Five Years) Increase in No. of Articles1975-1979 to 1980-84: 22.97%2000-2004 to 2005-2009: 76.59%

36. Correlation Usage Vs. Publishing Output Pearson’s Ranks order Coefficient Correlation = 0.75

37. Usage analysis for A Single Institution

38. Does this institution need Complete Collection or Selected Subject Collections

39. No. of Titles Fulfilling the User needs of the Library

41. Correlation Usage Vs. Publishing Output Banaras Hind University Pearson’s Ranks order Coefficient Correlation = 0.98

42. Banaras Hindu University Annual Average Growth Rate

43. Relative Specialization Index Banaras Hindu University

44. Contribution of BHU as Compared to the World and India’s Total Publications

45. Publications Output of BHU

46. BHU’s Citation Impact in Nine Subject Areas

47. Contribution of BHU to the World’s Most Productive Areas of Research