The license and the deal reflected in it are part of a larger strategy to
 build an economically more sustainable relationship with a large STM
 publisher, notably, by reducing expenditure on content while minimizing
 impact on faculty access. To this end it is worth drawing attention to the
 following:

 - a five year contract with a funding contingency clause which permits the
 University libraries to terminate the contract within the 5-year term if
 and when their budgets can no longer afford to sustain it

 - a wholesale volume discount on a selected list of titles (we did not buy
 the whole Science Direct database).

 - a substantial reduction in our subscription costs, 2004 over 2003. In
 2003, the UC libraries paid nearly $8 million for Science Direct Online
 and did not receive titles from Cell Press. Had the UC libraries received
 Cell Press titles in 2003 under the previous agreement, their subscription
 cost in 2003 would have been $8.3 million. In 2004, the UC subscription
 price will be $7.3 million and will include Cell Press titles. This
 represents a million dollar saving in the subscription cost from 2003 to 2004

 - average annual inflationary increments near to the current CPI rate of
 inflation. The total increase in the subscription cost to UC over the six
 year period from 2003 ($8 million) to 2008 ($8.4 million) is 5% or an
 average of 1% per year which is about half the current rate of CPI inflation

 - a one-time backfile purchase undertaken to add substantially to the
 libraries' online holdings (and faculty online access) and to drive down
 the ongoing costs associated with the subscription. The backfile is a
 digitally reformatted version of titles in Science Direct which had
 hitherto been available digitally from c.1995. It comprises some 40
million pages of scholarly journal literature

 - a single print copy of all titles in the database stored in a regional
 library facility. The "shared print archive" was negotiated in 2000 and
 continues into the current contract. It gives campus libraries the
 confidence they need to curtail their local expenditure on Elsevier print
 subscriptions. Between 2003 and 2004, campus libraries will curtail their
 expenditures for print subscriptions by $1.9 million (they spent 2.3 in
 2003 and will spend 400,000 in 2004). It is important to note that
  reductions in campus expenditure on print subscriptions have been achieved
 by the libraries acting collectively.

 In summary, the UC libraries spent $10.3 million on Elsevier in 2003 ($8
 million for the systemwide subscription to the online content and a
 further $2.3 million in campus print subscriptions). They will spend $7.7
 million in 2004 (7.3 million for the systemwide online subscription and
 400,000 for campus-based print subscriptions).