Page 109 - JOURNAL OF LIBRARY SCIENCE IN CHINA 2015 Vol. 41

108 Journal of Library Science in China, Vol. 7, 2015

of samples meanwhile. Nonetheless, this approach is incapable in auto-matching of hybrid OA
journals.

3 Conclusion and discussion

The joint literature guarantee rate of sample citations is 87.97%, and the joint literature guarantee
rate of the source journals is 73.34%. In general, as the central regional information center
of the China Academic Library and Information System (CALIS) and the China Academic
Humanities and Social Sciences Library (CASHL), the Wuhan University Library has made some
achievements in electronic and print journal selection, print journal’s continuity building, and OA
journal integration.
In the current OA environment, electronic and print journal collections remain the foremost
knowledge sources suited to the scholarly demands of the Wuhan University. Being extensive,
comprehensive, convenient and flexible, electronic collections have kept local scholarly
communication up to date. What’s more, the capability and potential of electronic collections have
been surpassing other resources. However, it should be kept in mind that, with a poor capability
in backfiles supporting, the patchy journals of integrated full-text database also have a weakness
of collection continuity in common. Being superior in quality and continuity, the print collection’s
performance of meeting the booming and diverse demands of users is far too satisfying because
of a narrow scope of collecting. Meanwhile, literature guarantee rate of print collection has been
continuing to slide for recent years. Starting from scratch, OA journals have made notable progress
in quantity and quality. With commendable purpose and momentum, OA resources deserve
massive attention of academic libraries in collection development, though OA journals still aren’t
the preferred intelligence source for now.
Academic libraries should focus on the coordinated development between electronic and print
collections for the present OA environment. Attributing to the rising acceptance of e-only policy,
the print collection has a declining literature guarantee rate in recent years. This phenomenon
should arouse necessitous concern of academic libraries. 1) The backfile holding of academic
libraries is caught in a vicious circle. Lacking of acquisition funds results in a low backfile
guarantee rate of electronic collection; the massive cancellations of print subscriptions have
crippled the guarantee capability of print format greatly. We can neither predict substantial growth
of acquisition funds, nor do we provide enough print subscriptions. Here comes the question:
how can we guarantee the backfiles in the future? 2) The cultural heritage of academic libraries
is seriously weakened. Duplicate procurement of full-text databases stands in sharp contrast to
cancellations of print subscriptions, which results in the waste of fund and deficiency of print
resources. Furthermore, local optimum doesn’t equal global optimum: the high literature guarantee
rate owing to electronic resources may not last long; at the cost of inefficient funds and print
reduction, the high guarantee rate of few large academic libraries doesn’t mean much. Accordingly,