Unit Cost Comparisons One value of the ARL statistics during the serial pricing crisis has been the ability to generate unit cost figures to document significant price increases. Expenditures for current serials divided by current serials purchased for the past 12 years have generated a vivid picture of the rate of increase of serial subscription costs to member libraries. Even though these figures do not represent the complete academic membership of ARL, the reporting base has been large enough to validate the trends. In order to generate unit cost comparisons, the reported unit must correlate with a comparable expenditure. Some individuals have suggested ARL use bibliographic record counts for serials.
Most libraries have automated systems in which a count of serial records can be run.
Like title counts, however, the problem with bibliographic record counts is that it would include active and inactive titles as well as title changes, and using this count implies that all serials be cataloged. Counting records is dependent on library cataloging policy regarding record creation for multiple versions of items and current library cataloging policies for electronic serials varies widely. Some libraries create separate records for each version of the serial, while others include information on all electronic versions of a title on the record for the print serial. A bibliographic record count limits libraries from including titles to which they have web access, but for which they do not create catalog records. While many catalogers support creation of bibliographic records, others have suggested that institutions with well-developed web sites can provide just as good or better access to electronic serials as those who have cataloged them.