3. Response rates

This year 89 forms were returned representing a response rate of 82.4%, an improvement on last year's 75%, and only a little short of the record of 85.4%, set in 2003/2004. I am grateful to all those law librarians who took the time to respond. Unfortunately, there is a core of institutions which rarely if ever make a return – you know who you are! The return of the response rate to above 80% and to around record level is very welcome and should permit the presentation of a reasonably accurate picture of academic law libraries in the British Isles.

To help detect patterns in law library provision, the data have been analysed, as in previous years, by type of institution:

• • “Old” universities incorporated before 1992

• • “New” universities incorporated in or after 1992

• • Institutes of higher education and other types of institution.

Forty-five old universities responded (43 last year), as did 40 new universities (35 last year) and 4 other institutions (3 last year). The changed response profile, especially amongst new universities, will have affected comparisons with past results.

4. Definitions

In many of the following sections, the survey responses are analysed using range, mean and median.

• • The range indicates the smallest and the greatest value of the responses and helps us understand the diversity of responses.

• • The mean has been calculated by adding up all the responses and dividing by the number of responses to get an “average”. The mean can be distorted by one or two responses which are very large or very small.

• • The median is the mid point and is calculated through ordering the responses by size from the smallest to the greatest and finding the middle response. There will be an equal number of responses below the median and above the median and so it provides a benchmark of what a “typical” university is doing.

All percentages from this point onwards have been rounded to the nearest whole number.

5. Student numbers

A representation of the number of law students served by the libraries helps in understanding the framework in which provision is made and can assist librarians in comparing their provision with institutions of similar sizes.

Respondents were asked to indicate the total number of taught course students (bodies, not FTEs) in the Law School enrolled on exempting undergraduate law degrees or professional or academic postgraduate courses in law. Eighty-nine respondents, or 100%, gave figures for student numbers, ranging from 40 to 6,968. The median number of law students was 702 (685 in 2007). The mean number however was 886 (960 in 2007).

Respondents in old universities reported student numbers between 40 and 2,002 (141 to 1,900 last year), with a mean of 782 (788 last year) and a median of 731 (714 last year). In new universities, the range was 95 to 2,730 (143 to 4,500 last year), with a mean of 765 (last year: 901) and a median of 586 (last year: 580). Amongst the four other institutions, the number of students varied hugely as usual and included two small schools and the two largest law schools in the survey, with numbers ranging from 208 to 6,968. The mean was 3,273 and the median was 2,958, a decrease of 80% in the mean and a 53% fall in the median on last year.

Eighty-seven or 98% of respondents (78 or 96% in 2007) offered an exempting undergraduate law degree. 30 or 34% of respondents (24 or 30% in 2007) hosted the Legal Practice Course (LPC), Bar Vocational Course (BVC) or Diploma in Legal Practice (Scotland). This represents 24% of old university respondents, 43% of new universities and 50% of other institutions. Twenty-six or 29% (25 or 31% in 2007) of respondents provided courses leading to other law professional awards, such as the Common Professional Examination or Institute of Legal Executives qualification. Nine percent of old universities, 48% of new universities and 75% of other institutions ran such courses. The final category was for other taught courses, such as LLM, which led to a postgraduate award in law. Eighty or 90% (69 or 85% in 2007) of institutions ran these postgraduate taught courses, including 96% of old and 85% of new universities and 75% of other institutions.

The movements in the percentages of respondents offering particular courses may be put down to the changed response profile compared with last year.

Respondents also indicated whether the law school enrolled students onto research courses, such as those leading to PhD and MPhil. Sixty-seven or 75% (59 or 73% in 2007) of institutions indicated that they did. Ninety-one percent (2007: 91%) of old universities, 65% (2007: 57%) of new universities and 0% (2007: 0%) of other institutions had such students. Research students were not included in the count of law students detailed above.

In 2007 the figures indicated a 13% rise in institutions responding to the survey enrolling PhD and MPhil students, with the bulk of the increase occurring in old universities. This year the figures have stabilised except for a small increase in new universities enrolling such students.

As in 2006, the SLS asked for the inclusion of the question asking for the numbers of students following distance learning courses where the institution was not wholly given over to offering this mode of study. Only 22 or 25% of the 89 respondents (2006: 25 or 28%) offered such courses. They gave figures for student numbers ranging from 12 to 1,324 (2006: 3 to 733). The median number of students was 81 and the mean 51 (2006: median 70 and mean 122).

In more detail, 11 old universities, 9 new universities and 2 other institutions reported having students registered on this mode of study. At the old universities numbers were reported between 22 and 404, with a mean of 107 and a median of 80. New universities reported student numbers ranging between 12 and 1,324, with a mean of 294 and a median of 100. The two other institutions reported student numbers ranging from 237 to 451, with a mean of 344 and a median of 344 also.

6. Location of the law library

Respondents were asked to indicate, from a list, which most closely matched the circumstances in their institution.

• • 30% had a single law library in a location separated from other subject collections (38% in 2007). Of these, there were 17 (2007: 22) old universities, 9 (2007: 9) new and 1 (2007: 0) other institution.

• • 39% had a law collection not so separated but shelved so as to form a single identifiable unit (31% in 2007). These included 20 (2007: 12) old universities, 14 (2007: 12) new and 1 (2007: 1) other institution.

• • 23% had several law collections each in a different location (20% in 2007). These included 6 (2007: 5) old, 12 (2007: 9) new universities and 2 (2007: 2) other institutions.

• • 8% had a law collection dispersed wholly or partly among other subject collections (9% in 2007). Of these, 2 (2007: 4) were old universities, 5 (2007: 5) were new universities and 0 (2007: 0) other institutions.

The change in the response profile, with more institutions represented in all categories, may be the reason for the variations in the results as compared with last year.

Thirty-eight percent of old universities responding had a single and separate law library, while 23% of new universities and 25% of other institutions had a single and separate law library.

Forty-four percent of old universities described their law collection as being shelved so as to form a single identifiable unit but not separate from other collections. Thirty-five percent of new universities described their law collection in a similar way, and 25% of other responding institutions.

Thirteen percent of old universities had several law collections, each in a different location, but 30% of new universities and two other institutions (50%) reported several collections. Last year, 12% of old universities and 26% of new universities and two higher education institutions had this arrangement. As in past surveys, the main reason for more than one law collection was the establishment of a separate library targeted at the vocational students, such as those on the LPC or BVC, in addition to a main law collection. Other respondents mentioned separate locations: for module texts while main law materials are held elsewhere, for Asian materials regardless of subject and separate collections for Graduate Diploma students.

The comments to the SLS Statement of Standards 3.1 (Society of Public Teachers of Law, 1995 and Society of Legal Scholars, 2003) on space and physical facilities require “the housing of all relevant collections … as a unified whole in one place …”. This year the figures suggest that this criterion was not met by at least the 8% of institutions reporting dispersed collections. Four percent of old universities, 13% of new universities and 0% of higher education institutions had law collections wholly or partly dispersed among other subject collections. Last year the figure was 11% of institutions overall; in detail, in 2007, 9% of old, 14% of new and 0% of other institutions had dispersed collections.

Changes in the general profile of responding institutions have influenced this year's results. However, the overall figure of 8% is lower than in past years in which it has varied between 10% and 15% of responding institutions. The fall is welcome but 8% of institutions still appear not to meet Standard 3.1 on space and physical facilities, set out in the SLS Statement of Standards.

7. Provision of seating

Respondents were asked to indicate the number of seats in study areas by the law collection/s, excluding workstation places. This question has been asked in alternate years so the data for 2008 can be compared with that for 2006 and 2004.

Eighty-nine institutions provided figures. The figures ranged from 8 to 1,525 with a mean of 214 (2006: 214; 2004: 172) and a median of 130 (2006: 133; 2004: 137). The results must be viewed with some caution. As has been noted in section 6 above, there is a significant number of institutions where the law collection is not separate from other subjects, and respondents have taken different views on how to count the amount of seating which was ‘by the law collection’ as required by the survey question.

A more useful measure is the ratio of students to seats. Eighty-eight of the 89 responding institutions were able to provide data for both variables. The ratio ranged from 0.45 to 87.38 students per seat, with a median of 5.41 (2006: 5.64; 2004: 5.30) and a mean of 8.10 students per seat (2006: 6.53; 2004: 6.31). The data were analysed according to the type of institution. The 44 old universities had a ratio of between 0.45 and 30.00 (2006: 0.52 and 15.58; 2004: 0.49 and 26.25) with a median of 4.81 (2006: 5.15; 2004: 4.80). 40 new universities had a ratio of between 0.59 and 87.38 (2006: 0.50 and 24.05; 2004: 0.36 and 29.73), with a median of 6.28 (2006: 7.30; 2004: 6.33). The four other institutions had a ratio of between 3.66 and 13.12 (2006: 0.47 and 10.67; 2004: 1.40 and 11.30), with a median of 8.51 (2006: 2.74; 2004: 4.20).

Fifty-five percent (2006: 45%; 2004: 56%) of old universities were at or below the overall median ratio of 5.41, as compared with 45% (2006: 62%; 2004: 41%) of new universities and 50% (2006: 17%; 2004: 56%) of other institutions.

A further analysis highlights the differences between the various categories of respondent: 14% of old universities were in the quartile of respondents with the least favourable student to seat ratios, as compared with 33% of new universities and 50% of other institutions (2006: 12%, 43%, 17%; 2004: 19%, 35%, 22%). The percentage of old universities appearing in the quartile with the least favourable student seat ratios, is at the second lowest level since 2000, while the percentage of new universities with the least favourable student seat ratios has fallen to levels reported in 2004 and earlier.

The median ratio of students to seats in a selection of past surveys has been 1994: 3.5:1, 2004: 5.3:1, 2006: 5.6:1. This year's ratio of 5.4:1 is a slight improvement on the ratio calculated for 2006, which was the least favourable ever reported. Some caution should be expressed in using the student: seat ratio, for many librarians noted the difficulty of identifying the number of ‘seats by the law collection’, where the trend in design is towards seating areas provided according to different study environments (silent, quiet, group activity) rather than made available to serve a particular subject.

The ratio may be compared with the former University Grants Committee ratio for law libraries of 2:1. This ratio received indirect endorsement in the Follett Report of 1993. Further, the comments to SLS Standard 3.2 states that ‘a ratio of students per seat exceeding 5:1 should be regarded as high and in need of early reduction, or of compensation through extended opening hours’. The survey results indicate that study space is under continuing pressure from student numbers in all sectors but, as discussed in section 10 below, there continues to be a considerable increase in the opening hours of responding libraries.

8. Workstations

The survey asked respondents to indicate the number of PC or Mac workstations which can access electronic law materials, and are available for law student use:

• • adjacent to, or in the same building as, the law collection.

• • in the building where the law school is housed.

In response to the first part of the question, a number of respondents noted that, although the workstations counted as ‘in the same building as the law collections,’ they were shared with non-law students. It was difficult to determine accurately the numbers available for law student use.

Eighty-seven respondents (98%) provided figures for the numbers of workstations near the law collections. The numbers ranged from 4 to 949. 50% (the median) had at least 126 (2006: 96; 2004: 120) and the mean was 188 (2006: 166; 2004: 166). The trend of providing further workstations to complement traditional study places appears to have picked up again.

Eighty-six respondents (97%) provided figures for the number of workstations in the law school. Of these, 19 law schools did not have any workstations for student use (2006: 23; 2004: 28). For those who did, the range was from 2 to 949, with a mean of 75 (2006: 84; 2004: 59) and a median of 29 (2006: 52; 2004: 30). The results see-saw and this may be due to changes in the response profile.

The ratio of law students to workstations gives a more effective picture of the levels of provision. The figures for workstations adjacent to the law collections and in the law school were combined for this measure. 86 (2006: 53) institutions were able to provide data for both parts of the ratio.

The ratio ranged from 0.36 to 250.00 students per workstation (2006: 0.61 to 22.92; 2004: 0.14 to 39.30), with a median of 3.44 (2006: 3.25; 2004: 3.92) and a mean of 9.10 (2006: 5.15 (2004: 6.75). Twenty-three institutions had a ratio of law students to workstations of less than 2 (2006: 17; 2004: 23). When interpreting these figures the comments at the beginning of this section should be noted: the difficulty of identifying accurately the numbers of PCs ‘in the same building as the law collections’, which were shared with non-law students. One ratio stood out as quite different, at 250.00; without this ‘spike’ the range was 0.36 to 40.00, more in line with past results.

As in the past surveys on this topic, the results for the average law student to workstation ratio were dissimilar in the old and new university sectors. In the 42 old universities, the mean ratio was 13.92 and the median was 5.06 (2006: 6.57 and 4.82; 2004: 8.90 and 5.40). For the 40 new universities, the mean was 4.59 and the median 2.39 (2006: 4.27 and 2.74; 2004: 4.91 and 2.83). The figures for the 4 other institutions were a mean of 3.64 but a median of 3.19 (2006: 1.44 and 1.42; 2004: 3.43 and 1.75).

Two respondents mentioned lap-top loan schemes, each having 50 machines available for loan. Clearly this is a topic which should feature in future survey questions.

9. Library use

This year we continued to monitor trends in the number of visits to the law library, last measured in 2006. The aim was to determine whether increased access to law databases from outside the university or college campus had affected the number of visits to the library. The question asked respondents to compare the number of visits to the law collections in 2007 with 2008. The question recognised that a level of judgement would be needed but asked respondents to note the basis for their comparison. 87 institutions responded. Twenty-six institutions or 29% (2006: 30%; 2004: 41%) saw an increase in visits, in 44 or 49% (2006: 52%; 2004: 44%) the number of visits remained constant, and in 17 or 19% (2006: 18%; 2004: 14%) the number of visits decreased.

Twenty-three (26%) respondents mentioned more than one basis for comparison. Personal observation was mentioned 55 times (2006: 55), exit gate logs 24 times (2006: 22), SCONUL statistics 10 (2006: 12), issue statistics 4 times (2006: 7), enquiry desk statistics 4 times (2006: 4), occupancy counts 0 times (2006: 4), shelving statistics 2 times (2006: 0). The continued heavy reliance on personal observation as the basis for comparison might suggest the results are subjective rather than objective, but the number of institutions reporting an increase in the number of visits has fallen slightly, about half report stable numbers and slightly more than in 2006 report a decrease in the number of visits.

10. Opening hours and services

Opening hours were last surveyed in 2006. For the 89 responding libraries (2006: 91; 2004: 88) the median number of term-time weekly opening hours was 81 (2006: 79; 2004: 77.5). The mean for weekly term-time hours was 89.87 (2006: 84.82; 2004: 82.11). Hours ranged from 32 to 168 (2006: 54 to 168; 2004: 54 to 168). Five libraries (all new universities) stated that they provided 24 hour access throughout the term to their paper-based collections. This is an increase on the 2 new universities noted in 2006. Eighteen responding libraries were open for more than 100 hours per week (2006: 15; 2004: 7); they were 7 old, 10 new and 1 other institution (2006: 6 old, 8 new, 1 other; 2004: 0 old, 6 new, 1 other). Seventy percent of institutions offered at least 72.3 hours (2006: 71 hours; 2004: 70 hours) and 25% at least 96 hours (2006: 93 hours; 2004: 90 hours).

Eighty-eight respondents gave details of opening hours in vacation. The median for weekly opening times was 49.6 hours (2006: 45; 2004: 46) and the mean was 56.3 hours (2006: 51.7; 2004: 52).

The results for term-time weekday opening indicate that more libraries continue to open for longer than ever before. Vacation opening hours having reached a plateau in 2004 and 2006 are also increasing dramatically.

All 89 respondents gave details of term-time weekend opening. Only one did not open on Saturdays (2006 & 2004: all opened). The number of institutions opening on Sundays continues to increase. In 2008, 89% of institutions opened as compared with 85% in 2006, 82% in 2004. The incidence of term-time Sunday opening varied between types of institution, though the gap between old and new universities is closing quickly: 87% of old universities, 93% of new universities, and 50% of other institutions (2006: 80%, 92%, 71%; 2004: 77%, 89%, 78%).

Most of the results for term-time weekend opening in 2008 indicate continued extensions in opening hours.

Information was sought on the time at which the law library closed in a standard term-time week, Monday to Thursday. This information was first sought in the 2002 survey. All 89 respondents provided this information. 11 libraries, comprising 3 old and 8 new universities (2006: 6 libraries, comprising 1 old and 5 new universities; 2004: 5 libraries all new universities) stated that they provided 24 hour access during these days. Of the remaining 78 libraries, 20 or 23% of respondents (2006: 20 or 24%; 2004: 26 or 30%) closed at 10pm and 18 or 20% of respondents (2006: 21 libraries or 25%; 2004: 16 or 18%) at 9pm. The earliest closing time was 5pm, (2006 & 2004: 7pm) and the latest 2am (2006: 2am; 2004: 1.30am). The median time was 10pm (the same as in 2006 & 2004). A few respondents closed at different times on different nights over the period Monday to Thursday.

Not all facilities are necessarily available throughout opening hours. To help provide an indication of key opening hours, respondents were asked to indicate the number of hours during a term-time week when a book loan service was available for law items. All 89 institutions responded and the mean was 67.6 hours (2006: 69.1 hours; 2004: 70.3 hours). The median was 70 hours (2006: 71 hours; 2004: 70.1). The range was 0 hours to 108 hours (2006: 0 to 94 hours; 2004: 47 to 94 hours). Two institutions (both new universities) reported that there was no staffed issue service.

This year, the survey results for the availability of a book loan service show a continued slight fall in the number of hours for which a staffed issue service is available and the continued availability in two institutions of an entirely self-issue service.

As in 2004 and 2006 we asked whether respondents provide a self-issue system for use with items from the law collection. All 89 institutions replied. 83% (2006: 74.7%; 2004: 62.5%) said they did provide self-issue facilities. As was also noted in the 2006 survey results, institutions which offered a self-issue service were more likely than those which did not, to be open longer than the median number of hours.

89 respondents (100%) indicated the number of hours during term-time weeks that a reader enquiry service for law was provided by professionally qualified staff. Hours when professional staff could only offer a service of referral onto a law specialist were to be excluded. Two respondents did not provide a reader enquiry service for law (2006: 4; 2004: 1). For the remainder, the mean number of hours for which an enquiry service was available was 35.8 hours (2006: 38.1 hours; 2004: 38.3 hours) and the median was 37 hours (2006 & 2004: 37 hours). The range was 3 to 76 hours (2006: 2 to 75 hours; 2004: 5 hours to 84 hours). 51% of respondents provided an enquiry service for between 35 and 40 hours per week (2006: 57%; 2004: 54%).

There continue to be slight falls in the number of hours a reader enquiry service is provided but with a continued concentration of availability within the range of 35 to 40 hours a week.

As in 2002 and 2004 we asked about membership of reciprocal borrowing schemes. Eighty-eight respondents were members and provided details (87 in 2006; 59 in 2004). Since the last survey, SCONUL Access has been formed from the merger of UK Libraries Plus and SCONUL RX, so comparison with past years is not possible. In 2008, 94% of respondents were members of SCONUL Access, whilst 38 or 43% (2006: 41 or 48%; 2004: 25 or 42%) were members of regional schemes and 5 or 6% (2006: 11 or 13%; 2004: 4 or 7%) of other schemes, four mentioning the Inspire scheme.

11. Distance learning

At the request of the Society of Legal Scholars we asked more questions this year about special support provided by the law library for distance learning courses. As has been noted in section 5, above, only 25% of the 89 responding institutions (2006: 25 institutions or 27%) offered this type of course. Four of these institutions (3 old and 1 new university) had made arrangements for their distance learning students studying law to have access to a physical (not electronic) law library other than at the institution where they were registered and outside the national reciprocal borrowing schemes mentioned in section 10 above. 4 institutions (all old universities) provided no additional support other than reciprocal borrowing arrangements.

Nineteen institutions provided additional support to distance learners other than that already described. 16 or 84% (2006: 78%; 2004: 83%) provided postal delivery of photocopying (subject to copyright), 14 or 74% (2006: 73%; 2004: 65%) postal loans, 14 or 74% (2006: 73%; 2004: 89%) a phone/e-mail/fax legal research enquiry service, 10 or 53% (2006: 53%; 2004: 50%) undertook database searches by library staff on behalf of the distance learning students. The following additional services mentioned in 2006 and 2008 were not noted in 2004: four (2006: 7) provided study packs of readings and 1 (2006: 3) provided enhancements to the inter-library loan service, such as posting items out to students working from home and setting an ILL quota for each student. For the first time one respondent said they provided a pack of textbooks to students. Eighteen respondents or 95% (2006: 94%; 2004: 94%) offered a package including more than one of the services noted.

Some further questions probed the nature of the additional services a little deeper. All 22 institutions (2006: 96%) offering law by distance learning provided access for learners outside the campus to databases and learning materials. Twenty-one or 95% (2006: 92%) used a virtual learning environment (VLE) for the delivery of law distance learning courses. All twenty-two of these institutions provided details of how access to law library materials (by which was meant the law and commentary on it) for distance learning students was provided through the VLE. Respondents were asked to include as many means of access as applied. Seventeen (77%) provided links to full text online subscription databases, 19 (86%) provided a link to the library catalogue, 19 (86%) scanned full text material into the VLE. Twenty (91%) institutions provided more than one means of access, with 13 (59%) providing all three suggested on the questionnaire: link to library catalogue, link to full text databases and full text of materials scanned into the VLE. This last result is a considerable improvement on 2006, where 43% suggested all three means of access.

12. Legal Databases

Contrary to the rest of the questionnaire, respondents were asked to indicate their legal database subscriptions at the present time, rather than in the year 2007/2008. The results below therefore show the position in February 2009.

As in recent years, all respondents gave details of subscription databases used in connection with the teaching and research work of the law school. The ten most frequently mentioned law databases are displayed in the graph.

Graph 1:

Top 10 legal databases

The law databases' academic market is still fluid but less so than in the past. Only 10% of respondents (26% last year and 17% the year before) were planning new subscriptions in the next five months and 24% (30% last year and 28% the year before) noted planned or recent cancellations.

A small number of law databases continue to dominate the market. Westlaw UK was taken by every respondent but LexisNexis Butterworths (LNB) was taken by all bar one (98% of respondents). LNB was renamed Lexis@Library after the survey was conducted. In this report the old name is retained as that was the brand name on the survey form. Last year both databases were taken by all respondents. HeinOnline, improved its market position being taken by 62 or 70% of respondents, retaining the third position it gained the year before. Lawtel UK held on to 4^th place but with a reduced percentage of respondents, with 44 or 49% of respondents (last year: 42 or 52% of respondents) taking the database.

Of the other databases mentioned by respondents falls were recorded by Justis Law Reports, Justis English Reports and Index to Legal Periodicals. Justis Weekly Law Reports held its ground. The only title to improve its position was Index to Foreign Legal Periodicals. Lawtel EU reached the top ten for the first time, taken by 14% of respondents (same as 2008), but probably reached this position only because BOPCAS (placed ninth last year) ceased and support for the Justis English Reports (placed tenth last year) waned with their free availability on both BAILII and as part of HeinOnline. European databases in general continue to show weakening demand this year.

Looking at the returns for Westlaw UK in more detail, no respondents reported plans to extend the coverage of their subscriptions in the year to July 2009. Eight respondents (2008: 9) subscribed to Westlaw IE (Irish Law) and all also subscribed to Westlaw UK. Six of the eight were based in the Irish Republic (2008: 4).

All except one respondent subscribed to LNB (2008: 100%; 2007: 98%). One respondent said they took the ‘Complete Academic Library’.

HeinOnline retained its third position with a 70% share of the market (2008: 67%; 2007: 57%; 2006: 37%). One respondent hoped to increase the coverage of their existing subscription by July 2009.

Lawtel UK has continued to lose market share, dropping to 49% of respondents, from 52% in 2008 and 56% in 2007. Kemp on Lawtel was listed by 3 respondents. No respondents hoped to increase the coverage of their existing subscription to Lawtel by July 2009. Three respondents were considering cancelling Lawtel UK by July 2009 due to budgetary constraints and one other planned to reduce the number of modules taken.

Respondents were asked to indicate the subscriptions they took to particular parts of the LNB product. Journals on LNB was the most popular LNB product, taken by 90% of respondents. Cases on LNB was second most popular, taken by 83% of respondents (2008: 78%). Third most popular LNB product was International Materials, taken by 80% of respondents (2008: 75%) and fourth was UK Parliament (Legislation) taken by 79% (2008: 74%). Halsbury's Laws has recovered its former position, to be taken by 73% of respondents (2008: 65%). In contrast with past years, no respondents expected to take out new subscriptions to Halsbury's Laws on LNB by July 2009.

Encyclopaedia of Forms and Precedents in electronic format was taken by 44% of respondents (2008: 35%). No other LNB products were taken by 10% or more respondents. The next most popular were Employment Law by 6% of respondents to LNB products (2008: 13%) and Family & Child Law by Civil Procedure 5% (2008: 10%). A further 19 Butterworths databases were each mentioned by less than 5% of respondents. Unlike past years, no respondents hoped to take out subscriptions to specific LNB databases before July 2009.

Justis Weekly Law Reports was subscribed to by 23 institutions, representing the same percentage of respondents as last year (2008: 26%). However, 3 respondents noted they hoped to cancel their subscription by July 2009. The main reason given was that the reports were available on Westlaw UK. Another Justis product, The Law Reports, was taken by 19 respondents or 21%, a continued fall on the last two years (2008: 25%; 2007: 32%). Two respondents cited availability elsewhere as the reason for hoping to cancel The Law Reports by July 2009. Two respondents said they took all Justis products. Eight respondents (2007: 9) took the English Reports, still the most popular product apart from Weekly Law Reports and The Law Reports. But, four respondents were hoping to cancel their subscription to the English Reports as it is available free on HeinOnline and through BAILII. Three respondents hoped to take out subscriptions before July 2009 to a new module: Justis – International Law Reports. JustCite improved its position and was mentioned by 23 or 26% (2007: 7 or 9% of all respondents), and 10 other products were each taken by no more than seven respondents each.

Subscriptions to the Current Legal Information (CLI) database continue to decline, down from 88% of respondents subscribing in 2000 to just 4 respondents or 5% in February 2009. One respondent planned to cancel by July 2009.

Databases of European legal information continue to be casualties in the changing academic legal database market. Eurolaw has slipped down the list again, subscribed to by 7 respondents or 8% (2008: 9%), and one respondent planned to cancel Eurolaw before July 2009. Lawtel EU was taken by 12 respondents or 14% (2007: 14%). One respondent hoped to take out a new subscription while another planned to cancel Lawtel EU by July 2009 because of duplication of materials elsewhere and lack of use. Other full text EU databases were taken by only 7 respondents, the equivalent of 8% of respondents (2008: 3%).

The median number of legal database subscriptions taken in responding law libraries in February 2009 was 4, the same as in 2008. The numbers of legal databases offered by institutions ranged from 2 to 64 (2008: 2 to 35). As noted last year, these results should be treated with caution for, with the advent of the LNB ‘packaging’ policy, the question on the survey form was altered accordingly, and it is difficult to accurately calculate the total number of different legal databases to which respondents subscribe.

Other than the databases already discussed in detail, the following databases were mentioned by (10%) or more respondents:

Two databases which have featured in the above table in the past have continued to drop down the rankings: the UN Treaty Series was taken by only 3 responding institutions (3%) and UKOP by only 3 also (3%). As noted earlier, BOPCAS ceased to be available in 2008.

As an indication of the broad range of databases thought to be relevant to the study of law in UK universities, a total of 100 databases other than those already featured were each mentioned by under 10% of survey respondents (2008: 97 databases).

Virtually all databases were accessed via the internet. Only two respondents were taking one database in CD-ROM format. Weighting each database by the number of respondents who subscribed to it in each format, the survey based on February 2007 showed that 98% of the legal databases in academic law libraries were internet based, compared with 97% in February 2006. The transfer from CD-ROM to the internet was rapid and is now almost complete. In 1999 just 32% of legal databases were internet based.

13. Other databases

In addition to law databases, law schools use a range of more general information databases such as the newspapers which are of relevance to students in a wide range of disciplines. 46 respondents (52%) noted other subscription databases which contribute significantly to the teaching and research work of their law school. This is a continued fall from the 64% last year 74% in 2007 and the 80% of respondents in 2006.

The EBSCO journal subscription service was mentioned by 13 institutions and IBSS (International Bibliography of the Social Sciences) by just 8 respondents. ISI Web of Science service, the most widely used of the general databases mentioned last year, held on to this position with 44 respondents (49%) mentioning the service this year.

By February 2009, 50 (56%) law schools served by responding libraries used a web-based combined newspaper database to access the full range of newspapers, the same percentage as last year. The three main suppliers were Nexis UK used by 30 respondents (2008: 26), Proquest with 11 respondents (2008: 11), Factiva with 7 respondents (2008: 5), Infotrac with 3 respondents (2008: 3), Gale with 2 respondents (2008: 3) and Newsbank with 2 respondents (2008: 2). No other newspaper databases were mentioned. The results for 2009 indicate an increased popularity for Nexis UK, but apart from that there are only slight changes in the subscriber newspaper databases used to contribute significantly to teaching and research in the law school.

ASSIA was mentioned by 34 respondents (38%), a slight rise on the 35% recorded last year and 36% in 2007.

Bookfind was used by 7% of law schools (2008: 7%). Thirty-seven respondents mentioned a total of 41 (2008: 41) other cross-disciplinary or social science indexes or electronic journal providers which contributed significantly to the teaching and research work of the law school. Criminal Justice Abstracts was mentioned by 23% of respondents, EBSCO Academic Search or Business Source Premier by 21% of respondents, JSTOR by 10% and IBSS by 9%.

14. E-journals and e-books

In 2004 and 2006, we asked questions about electronic journals and books, a sector of the publishing market which has developed rapidly in the last few years. We repeated the same questions as used in 2006, to try to gauge the impact electronic materials are having on print subscriptions.

79, or 89% of respondents (2006: 75, 82%; 2004: 75, 85%), said they subscribed to an electronic journal database which includes law titles, excluding LexisNexis Butterworths, Westlaw UK, HeinOnline, e-journal gateways (e.g. Swets) and special deals (e.g. NESLI). The pattern across different types of institution was broadly the same as in 2004. 45 were old universities (2006: 41; 2004: 38), 32 were new universities (2006 & 2004: 32) and 2 (2006: 2; 2004: 5) were other types of institution.

However, as a result of subscribing to a law e-journal database 27, or 30%, of those with access had cancelled a print subscription to a law journal (2006: 20 or 22%; 2004: 21 or 28%). Seventeen (2006: 12; 2004: 7) old universities, 10 (2006: 7; 2004: 13) new universities but not one (2006: 1; 2004: 1) other institution had replaced a law journal print subscription with electronic access.

An increasing number of institutions: 39 or 44% of respondents (2006: 33 or 36%) said they had cancelled subscriptions to the print version of law material during the current year where the same resource was available electronically. They were 21 old universities, 17 new and 1 other institution.

As in 2006 we sought information about the impact electronic subscriptions were having on print subscriptions. Were institutions starting to cut specific print subs when the same material was available electronically? Which types of print publication were being cut? Were there differences in the cuts made by the different types of institution?

Thirty-eight institutions provided details of the titles of print materials they had cancelled where the same material was available electronically. They comprised 19 old institutions, 18 new and 1 other.

Excluding the instances where respondents said they were cancelling duplicate subscriptions to leave only a single subscription, a total of 290 (2006: 186) print titles was cancelled. That number also excludes one institution mentioned the cancellation without details of ‘many specialist law reports’ and ‘most loose-leaf encyclopedias’, and another respondent stating ‘all print journals on Westlaw UK’. Two institutions mentioned that the ‘cancellation list is too long to reproduce’, one institution cancelling second rank US law reviews (‘no list to hand’) and another which has rationalised subscriptions to the US National Reporter System, but gave no details. All this adds up to more cancellations than was recorded in 2006, as a result of considerably greater pressure on budgets.

In 2006 the cancellations axe was falling heaviest on practitioner encyclopedias (titles such as Tolley's Charities Manual, Woodfall on Landlord and Tenant, Encyclopedia of Health and Safety at Work, Encyclopedia of Forms and Precedents) with 63 titles cancelled. In 2008, 33 cancellations of practitioner encyclopedias were listed (30 from new universities alone). In addition, four institutions were cancelling subscriptions to Halsbury's Laws and two to Halsbury's Statutes, much less than in 2006.

In 2008 the bulk of all cancellations (197) fell on law journals and law reports, especially where they were available on the large databases such as Westlaw UK and LexisNexis Butterworths. Old universities mentioned 95 (19 in 2006) law journal titles which had been cancelled, whilst new universities mentioned 31 (18 in 2006) and other institutions 18 (none in 2006). Fewer law report than law journal titles were cancelled: 13 by old universities (2006: 23), 15 by new universities (2006: 9) and 25 by one other type of institution (2006: 1). The titles cancelled in many instances were not specialised or esoteric but often featured such core titles as Cambridge Law Journal, Common Market Law Reports, Criminal Law Review, Family Law, Family Law Reports, Journal of Law and Society and Public Law.

Very few materials containing statutes appeared in the list of cancellations with only 1 title noted: Halsbury's Statutes, cancelled by one old and one new university. This is much less than reported in 2006.

Finally, only 3 official publications were mentioned for cancellation: the Official Journal of the European Communities, Law Commission Consultation Papers and the UN Treaty Series. All these titles appear in the SLS Indicative List of Library Holdings.

In summary, this snapshot of cancellations indicates that the priority for cancellation appears to have shifted to law journals and law reports, with practitioner encyclopedias featuring less prominently than in 2006.

We also went on to ask about subscriptions to e-book publishers. Seventy-seven respondents (2006: 55) listed the e-book publishers to which they subscribed for law titles. They were 39 old universities and 36 new universities and 2 other types of institution. 51 subscribed to My-i-library (2006: 4; 2004: not featured); 41 subscribed to Dawsonera (2006: 5; 2004: not featured); 31 subscribed to NetLibrary (2006: 37; 2004: 30); 24 to E_bray (2006: 10; 2004: 2); 8 to Oxford Scholarship Online (2006: 10; 2004: 7); 4 to Taylor and Francis e-books (2006: 5; 2004: 7) and the remaining 12 e-book publishers were subscribed to by two or fewer respondents.

15. Expenditure

Eighty-six of the 89 respondents were able to provide total expenditure figures for 2007/8.

In contrast with some earlier years only one institution included ‘exceptional sums’ in their returns, such as capital sums for stock building prior to or in the first year of offering a new law degree programme. These figures were removed from the calculations and the results set out below.

15.1. Total expenditure on law materials

Total expenditure on the acquisition of law materials ranged from £19,671 to £1,082,096 (2007: £23,884 to £873,961), the first time an institution has topped one million pounds expenditure. Mean expenditure was £145,531 (2007: £143,408), 1.5% up on 2007, a sharp reduction on the 11.3% rate of increase between 2006 and 2007. Even so, the rate of increase in mean expenditure is much less than earlier in the decade. The median expenditure was £113,247 (2007: £106,422), a 6.4% increase, similar to 2004 (5.7%).

It is helpful in understanding these changes to compare the expenditure in the different types of institution.

Old universities 42 responses (2007: 40)

Range £19,679 to £569,099; median £130,689, up 4.6% on 2007; mean £152,663, up 2.7% from last year. 75% of old universities spent at least £89,973 (up 11.8% on last year) and 25% spent more than £184,155 (up 9.4% on last year).

New universities 40 responses (2007: 34)

Range £21,384 to £330,000; median £87,161, up 4.1% on 2007; mean £103,017, up 4.1% from last year. 75% of new universities spent at least £63,755 (up 9.8% on last year) and 25% spent more than £140,225 (up 8.3% on last year).

Other institutions 4 responses (2007: 3)

Range £46,770 to £1,082,096; median £427,135, down over 53.6% on 2007; mean £495,784, down over 14% from last year. 75% spent at least £52,236 (down 12% on last year) and 25% spent more than £1,007,980 (up 26% on last year).

The above figures suggest that the increase in expenditure has continued at slightly above inflation rate in both old and new university sectors. The figures for other institutions are severely distorted due to the small number of responses from these institutions.

For each law student in a typical university (looking at the median) £161 was spent on law materials. This is a 1% increase on the figure for 2007 and a considerable reduction on the 12% increase on the figure for 2006. In an old university, that figure was £167 (2007: £164) and for a student in a new university the median was £153 (2007: £143), a gap between old and new universities of 9%. In other types of institution the median spend per student was £149 (2007: £144). As graph 2 illustrates, the gap between old and new universities fluctuates over time but is continuing to close, due to two factors: a slow down in the rate of increase in expenditure in old universities and an apparently large increase in per capita expenditure in new universities. Per capita expenditure at other types of institution has increased but less than at new universities and is now, for the first time, at a slightly lower level than new universities.

Graph 2:

Library materials expenditure per student

Taking the mean rather than the median the pattern is of a widening of the gap between sectors. Mean law materials expenditure per student in old universities was £213, up 16% from 2007 whereas in new universities it was £167, a 9% increase on 2007. In other types of institution the mean spend per student was £192 (2007: £168), but these results have been calculated over only four respondents. The difference in median total expenditure per student between old universities and new universities has widened considerably to 27%, from 14% in 2007 and 22% in 2006.

16. Sources of income

Eighty-two (2007: 75) respondents gave details of the source of the funds from which law material expenditure was met.

The greatest proportion of acquisitions was funded from general library funds and all except six institutions responding received at least part of their income this way. Using the mean, 86% of old universities', 81% of new universities' and 78% of other institutions' income for law library materials was from general library funds (86%, 86%, 75% last year). When the median is used the figures are 82%, 95%, 100% (2007: 92%, 99% and 75%). The high figure for ‘other institutions’ is due to one of the larger institutions being funded entirely by the law school and not from any central budget. As in past years, some libraries in all categories obtained considerable funds from outside the usual main source of general library funds.

Law schools contributed to funding the acquisition of law materials in 44 institutions (2007: 40). As has been noted in previous survey reports, a considerable number of law schools make no such contribution at all (48% this year, 48% in 2007, 49% in 2006). 53% (2007: 60%) of old university law schools, 45% (2007: 41%) of new university law schools and 50% (2007: 67%) of other institutions' schools contributed something.

Of the law schools that contributed, the amount ranged from £404 to £785,634. The median contribution was £23,860, a fall of 17% on last year and the mean was £57,190, up 14% on last year.

For the libraries that received funds from the law school, these funds represented a mean of 28% of the total income for the purchase of law materials, with a median of 24% (27% and 22% last year). The percentage contributions by law schools based in old and new universities more close this year. Of the old university law schools who contributed anything, the mean contribution represented 25% of the funds for library materials (2007: 21%), while new university law schools contributed 28% (2007: 29%). Two ‘other’ institutions received funds from the law school and the mean was 75% (2007: 75%).

In old universities, median law school funding for law materials was £16,779, down 2% on last year. The mean was £40,940, up 42% on last year. In new universities the comparative figures were a median of £35,500, up 20% on last year and a mean of £39,675, up 14% on 2007.

Overall, about the same percentage of law schools as last year contributed to funding the acquisition of law materials but there are variations between the sectors, with a fall in the percentage of old university law schools contributing. The pattern across the three sectors has begun to even out this year, though in 2007, law schools in old universities continued to contribute less as a proportion of the total library budget while law schools in new universities contributed a greater proportion than before.

Six institutions (2007: 6) reported receiving income from other university budgets for law materials. For these three old universities and three new universities, the amount of income from these sources ranged from £2,146 to £42,752.

One old university reported funding from user charges (2007: 2). The sum was £12,003.

Finally, just four institutions (2007: 9) reported receiving financial contributions towards law materials from outside bodies. The sums ranged from £5,826 to £119,000 with a median income of £11,727 (2007: £6,048) and a mean income of £37,070 (2007: £18,256). Of these, three were old universities, one was a new university.

17. Staffing

The responses to the questions on staffing provide a picture of the number and qualifications of library staff in academic law libraries. The definition of law library staff provided in the questionnaire was the same as for the previous surveys. To be included in the survey, library staff were to spend 50% or more of their working time on the care and servicing of the law collection. Seven (8%) of the 89 responding institutions had no staff which met this criterion. Of these, 2 were old universities and 5 were new universities. The results are a slight worsening on the position in 2007, possibly due to the changed profile of respondents this year. Three respondents noted that whilst there was at least one professional member of staff available, none spent 50% or more of their time on the care and servicing of the law collection since they had broader subject and operational responsibilities.

For the 82 respondents (2007: 76) with staff who met the criterion, the full time equivalent (FTE) number of staff ranged from 0.5 to 28.10 (2007: 0.5 to 28.30) with a median of 1.5 (2007: 1.5) and a mean of 3.0 (2007: 3.6). 37% (2007: 34%) had exactly one FTE member of law library staff.

As in previous surveys, old universities ranged most widely in the number of law library staff and 27% had four or more FTE (2007: 33%), compared to 5% of new universities (2007: 6%).

The median for old universities' FTE law library staffing was 2.0 (2007: 2.0) with a mean of 3.8 (2007: 4.3). The median for new universities was 1 (2007: 1) and the mean was 1.7 (2007: 1.6). The three other institutions were very varied in their staffing levels, from 1 to 23 FTE. Two of the four had over 20 staff.

The staffing picture includes only a few minor changes.

Respondents were asked for the FTE number of staff in professional, clerical and other posts.

18. The future

In 2004 and 2006, we asked for the personal views of respondents on the changes they envisage over the next five years to the provision of legal information within their library. We repeated the questions this year.

Eighty-nine (100%) of respondents (2006: 87 or 96%; 2004: 88 or 100%) gave their views on the balance of provision between electronic and paper access to legal information. 51% (2006: 41%; 2004: 33%) felt the move would be significantly in favour of electronic access. However, 42% (2006: 47%; 2004: 58%) considered that in the next five years in their library the balance would move only marginally in favour of electronic access. Just 8% (2006: 12%; 2004: 9%) felt the balance would remain constant. As in both previous surveys no respondents considered there would be a move away from electronic access.

It seems that over the last four years respondent's views on the future have moved away from considering a marginal move towards electronic provision possible, towards a significant move towards electronic provision.

Looking at differences between the types of institution, 40% (2006: 44%) of old universities felt the move towards electronic would be marginal, whilst 45% (2006: 50%) of new universities and other types of institution also thought the move would be marginal. There was close agreement in the proportion of old and new universities who thought that the move towards electronic would be significant: 49% (2006: 44%) and 50% (2006: 42%) of respondents respectively. 75% (2006: 17%) of other types of institution thought the balance between paper and electronic sources would move significantly in favour of electronic. Not one (2006: 33%) other type of institution thought the balance would remain constant. Twenty-five percent (2006: 0%) of other types of institution thought the move would be marginal.

In 2004, the views of old and new university respondents were divergent, but in 2006 and now those views have become much more closely aligned.

Eighty-eight (99%) respondents provided their views on the balance of expenditure between monographs and serials. In most respects the results closely followed those obtained in 2004 and 2006. Just 7% (2006: 3%; 2004: 9%) considered that the balance would move significantly in favour of serials, 20% (2006: 22%; 2004: 23%) felt the balance would move marginally in favour of serials, but the majority 46% (2006: 60%; 2004: 52%) considered the balance would remain constant. 24% (2006: 13%; 2004: 15%) thought the balance would move marginally in favour of monographs, and 2% (2006: 2%; 2004: 1%) that the balance would move significantly in favour of monographs.

There was substantial agreement between respondents from the three types of institution.

Finally, 88 (99%) respondents provided their views on the changes over the next five years in the proportion spent in their library purchasing legal materials relating to the law of Great Britain and the European Union as compared with foreign and international law. The pattern is similar to that reported for 2006. 4% (2006: 3%; 2004: 0%) considered the proportion would move significantly in favour of Great Britain and the EU, 9% (2006: 9%; 2004: 19%) considered the proportion would move marginally in favour of Great Britain and the EU. 66% (2006: 68%; 2004: 58%) considered the proportion would remain constant. Twenty percent (2006: 20%; 2004: 19%) thought the proportion would move marginally in favour of foreign and international law, and 1% (2006: 0%; 2004: 2%) considered the proportion would move significantly in favour of foreign and international law.

When analysed by type of institution there was greater unanimity of response than in past years. Similar numbers (around 65% to 69%) believed that the balance would remain constant. Also, this year, similar numbers thought that that the balance would move marginally in favour of foreign and international law (old: 18%, new: 20%). Those respondents believing the balance would move marginally in favour of Great Britain and the EU were old universities: 7% (same as 2006) and new: 13% (2006: 11%).

Overall, there seems to be greater uniformity in responses on future trends across the three parts of the higher education sector than was apparent in past years.