Consortia in Europe: describing the various solutions through four country examples.

ABSTRACT

This article describes and discusses consortia models in Europe. Emphasis is given to those consortia that support content provision and access to electronic information resources in society. Four country cases are introduced as examples of the heterogeneous solutions chosen by the consortia. The main results and impact of the consortia are discussed. International cooperation has played an important role in the development of consortia in Europe. Regional and global collaboration initiatives are also discussed.

INTRODUCTION

The number of library consortia existing worldwide is significant. More than 180 organizations are listed on the International Coalition of Library Consortia's Web site, and almost 40 of these are European organizations. Europe is a mix of different cultures, languages, and nationalities, with varying historical and cultural backgrounds; there are more than forty countries and around forty languages spoken in Europe. In many countries more than one language is spoken as a native language. In many parts of Europe, especially in the south and east, electronic resources in languages other than English are required. Very often, providing these alternate resources has proved difficult. The economic situation in European countries differs very much as well. In most parts of Europe, the national information technology (IT) infrastructure is of very high quality and forms the basis of the development of digital services. However, this is not yet the case in all European countries.

The models chosen for consortium cooperation in Europe range from centralized to decentralized solutions and from well-organized to poorly organized consortia; funding and staffing solutions vary as well. Giordano (2002) has analyzed library consortium models in Europe. He has found three basic models: national centralized models, national decentralized models, and regional models. National centralized models are typical for the Nordic consortia. France is an example of a national decentralized model. In Belgium the French and Flemish speaking universities have each formed their own consortium. These might be called regional consortia. In many countries, more than one model is in use. For example, in the UK there are discipline-based, regional, and national consortia.

Today there is a strong emphasis on national and international cooperation in libraries. In Europe, cooperation within the European Union is highlighted, and there are also some signs that cooperation with Asian countries is becoming more active. The changes in the working environment of libraries most likely have increased the need for and the benefits of cooperation. In the digital environment, services can be centralized, resulting in significant savings, and the division of labor between various stakeholders can be redistributed.

FINLAND

FinELib: The National Electronic Library Program

The National Electronic Library program of Finland--FinELib--was launched by the Ministry of Education in 1997. The aim of its activities during the first years of its operation was to support higher education, research, and learning in Finland. The program was started in accordance with the government's Information Society Programme. The basic goals of FinELib were to increase the amount of electronic information available to users, to improve information retrieval from the Internet, and to develop a graphical user interface to give access to heterogeneous information resources available to users from different sources. The goals have remained the same, but the focus of the program has been enlarged. Since 2004 the emphasis has been on promoting access to information for everybody.

For the period 1997-99, operations were of a project nature (Hormia-Poutanen, 1999), but from 2000 onwards operations have become a standard part of the activities of Helsinki University Library--the national library of Finland. During the first years of operation, the principles that guide the activities were formed. These principles cover such topics as licensing policy, share of central funding, selection of resources to be licensed, development activities, and cooperation with the library network as well as with other important national and international players (Hormia-Poutanen, 2002a).

The funding model is based on centralized funding from the Ministry of Education and consortium members' own funding. In the first years of operation there was government funding for the universities only. Today, polytechnics and public libraries also receive government funding. The level of central funding in 2005 is 4.5 million euro.

The FinELib Consortium: Crossing Organizational Boundaries

The National Electronic Library program is itself a consortium that, in 2005, consists of 108 members. All universities, polytechnics, and public libraries, as well as 36 research institutes, belong to the FinELib consortium. Libraries in Finland are accustomed to working within their own sector; funding is also allocated to each sector separately. FinELib is one of the first programs in which different types of organizations work hand-in-hand to obtain synergy from cross-sectoral cooperation. Due to large, shared national projects, such as the implementation of the national portal, the Ministry of Education has also seen the need to coordinate activities across the library sectors.

The main principles guiding the management of the consortium have been defined in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU, 2004), which has been updated recently and covers the period 2004-2006. FinELib has a service agreement that covers two main services: the licensing of e-resources and the maintenance of the national portal. In these service agreements, the responsibilities of the National Library and the customer have been defined.

The program is managed through three working groups. The high-level steering group is responsible for policy making, strategic planning, drawing up the annual Plan of Action, and evaluating the results. The group consists of top-level management from the universities, polytechnics, research institutes and their libraries, the public libraries, the Ministry of Education, and the end-users. The consortium group is responsible for more practical issues and consists of library directors from the four library sectors. The expertise of the various fields of science, as well as technology issues and the interests of end-users, are represented in the expert groups. Their main task is to submit proposals for resources to be licensed in the future and to develop National Electronic Library Interface (Nelli) portal services at the organization level. Although the final decisions have to be made by the National Library, this three-tier organization guarantees that all consortium members can make their voices heard and influence decisions.

National Electronic Library Program: An Active Player in the Development of the Information Society

In 2005 FinELib is a well-known and highly valued national program. Funding is directed toward the acquisition of high-quality electronic resources as well as the development of the national portal. The funding also includes additional costs, such as staff and staff development. The estimated total cost in 2005 is over 12 million euro, consisting of central funding and the organizations' own funding.

From the libraries' point of view, FinELib is regarded as a service center for libraries. A good deal of effort goes into developing the working methods within the service center to meet the needs of the libraries. Emphasis is also given to expanding the expertise of the staff. In 2005 the staff consists of twelve members, half of whom work on licensing issues and half on implementation and development of the national portal.

In 2005 FinELib signed license agreements covering 19,500 e-journals; 230 databases; and 25,000 e-books, dictionaries, handbooks, and even software (see Table 1). The acquisitions that are made through FinELib cover 84 percent of the acquisitions of electronic resources at Finnish universities. Thus, FinELib has a key role in providing electronic materials for the user population of universities. According to user surveys and usage information, the selection of resources meets the needs of the users well (Hormia-Poutanen, 2002b). Over the years FinELib has been operating, there has been a growing trend in usage.

The National Electronic Library Interface, Nelli, was launched for universities early in 2005. The implementation process was also started at public libraries and polytechnics. The portal will become a national service for end-users. The National Library will provide centralized services for the participating libraries, which will save a good deal of work. The portal will then be tailored at the organization level to meet the needs of local users. Individual users can tailor the portal to meet their needs as well.

Thus far, the most significant result of the FinELib program is the increase and improvement of high-quality content services on the Internet. The electronic material available to researchers, teachers, and students is considerably more extensive than ever before, and it can be accessed nationwide (Hormia-Poutanen, 2004).

Cooperation across organizational boundaries can also be considered as a very important result of the program (Hormia-Poutanen, 2002c). There is a strong emphasis on horizontal cooperation in the public sector in Finland today. Examples of this are the government policy programs, which encourage the ministries to cooperate to solve questions defined in the government platform. The impact of Nelli…