This report looks at a range of issues and characteristics pertaining to income generation by special collections, including permissions services, licensing for publication use, high-resolution reproduction requests, turnaround times, fee structures, rights language in donor agreements, reproduction revenue, and revenue streams otherwise ganrered by academic library special collections.
The report finds that permissions and licensing services are common but not always formalized. 50.00% of respondents say they provide permissions or licensing services for publication use, while 38.46% say they do so sometimes. Only 3.85% say they do not provide such services.
High-resolution reproduction requests are common; 7.69% receive such requests daily, 26.92% weekly, 15.38% monthly, and 34.62% only a few times per year. Research universities receive substantially more frequent demand: 43.75% report weekly requests and 12.50% report daily requests.
Turnaround-time satisfaction is strong. 53.85% are satisfied and 19.23% very satisfied with turnaround times for reproduction requests, for a combined positive rating of 73.08%. No respondent reports being dissatisfied or very dissatisfied.
The dominant fee model is cost recovery. 46.15% use a cost-recovery fee structure, 26.92% provide reproductions for free, 11.54% use a revenue-generating model, and 7.69% report no fee structure. Donor agreements often address rights and access terms: 46.15% say they always do, and 23.08% say they usually do.
Reproduction and licensing revenue is generally modest. The mean revenue from sale or licensing of physical or digital reproductions was $8,158.95, but the median was $0.00, with a maximum of $75,000. For most institutions, such revenue is marginal: 38.46% say it represents 0% of the operating budget, and 23.08% say it represents under 1%.