Editorial

In looking back over the last six months one thing stands out like a sore thumb: the lack of attention given to document supply in two of the major debates that dominate the pages of the LIS literature and even the national presses, Open Access and Bundling or “Big Deals”. Open Access advocates bemoan the inflexibility of the “Big Deals” but, by and large, fail to argue for the rational alternative – subject based packages combined with document supply for less used (but nonetheless important)material. Usage statistics are starting to appear which shine light on the murky debate of how journal usage changes with “Big Deals” and indeed generally the use of subscribed-to journals. They indicate that there are indeed many journals that are very low use and do not justify a subscription. Again the option of document supply – which can increasingly mean almost instantaneous delivery to the user’s desk top – is rarely mentioned. Document supply needs a big hitting advocate to replace Maurice Line – any takers?

This issue of ILDS has a very European emphasis. An article from TU Delft and another from FIZ Karlsruhe describe the services offered by these two substantial players in the document supply market place. We see a Spanish take on the impact that the large-scale purchase of electronic journals is having on document supply. A robust and statistics based argument from Emerald defends the cost effectiveness of their “Big Deal”. We receive another in our regular reports from France and a report on the ALPSP seminar on the future of publishing. The Literature Review is double its normal length owing to the last issue being a festschrift for Maurice Line. The issue winds up with a review of Mary Jackson’s important work on performance of interlending and document supply in US libraries and the eponymous column of her “musings”– this time on – yes, you’ve guessed it, the “Big Deals”!