Book Circulation Per U.S. Public Library User Since 1856
Douglas A. Galbi
Senior Economist
Federal Communications Commission[1]
July 29, 2007
Draft - Version 1.01
This paper is freely
available at www.galbithink.org/libraries/circulation.htm
(pdf version available on SSRN)
Comments and suggestions welcomed
More work on libraries
Digital forms and ubiquitous networks are greatly increasing opportunities to circulate authored symbolic works. Digitization projects are creating huge online libraries of digitized books that persons around the world can access at zero incremental cost. Storage prices are dropping so rapidly that one small device will soon be able to store all the music that most persons listen to throughout their lives. Video sharing sites are collecting and distributing large amounts of video across the Internet. Many persons can now easily create a huge library of digital works. How persons respond to vastly expanding access to works will significantly shape the communications industry.
To better understand the circulation of works, consider U.S. public-library users’ book borrowing behavior since the mid-nineteenth century. Measured relative to the unskilled wage, the dime novels that Irwin Beadle began selling in 1860 were almost five times more expensive than the twenty-five cent paperbacks being sold in 1950.[2] A lower real purchase price for books increased the incentive to purchase rather than borrow. Average time spent reading, according to the best available estimates, fell 50% from 1925 to 1995.[3] Less time spent reading implies less demand for borrowing books.
Other factors probably pushed toward more borrowing. The number of books in print, and the number of books in libraries, increased immensely from the mid-nineteenth century to the early twenty-first century.[4] Perhaps such a change encouraged persons to read a larger number of books less thoroughly, and hence favored borrowing books relative to purchasing books. Library users’ travel costs, in time and money, probably fell with improvements in transportation technology since the mid-nineteenth century. Lower travel costs reduce the total cost of borrowing books from a library.[5]
Library book circulation per user has no strong, long-run trend. From 1856 to 1978, library users borrowed from U.S. public libraries about 15 books per user per year. From 1978 to 2004, book circulation per user declined approximately 50%. The growth of audiovisuals circulation, estimated at 25% of total circulation in 2004, accounts for about half of this decline. These figures depend on estimates and disparate samples of libraries with varying circulation and user accounting methods. Nonetheless, these figures are of sufficient quality to suggest that historically established institutions significantly stabilize borrowing behavior.
I. Studies of Library Book Circulation
Statistics on library use are worth studying. Much data exists. Large individual libraries often issued annual reports that included statistical data on use of the library. In addition, since 1836 interested individuals, professional organizations, and government bodies have produced about 250 separate compilations of library statistics covering different dates and libraries. A leading library historian has observed:
Despite their value, little critical attention has been given by library historians to the purposes, methods, quality, and uses of the data.[6]
The data is not simple to analyze. One of the few scholars who has analyzed the data observed:
The writer did not find easy going in collecting and assembling this material. Gaps in reporting by individual libraries, lack of uniform standards in reporting, obvious misprints in tables, sporadic appearance of data, and frequent changes in the type of data reported are a few of the obstacles encountered.[7]
On the other hand, data encompassing large investments in communication across long periods of time are rare. Books require significant investments in writing and reading. Circulation of public library books is an important indicator of communication. Aggregate data on library use potentially offers important, long-run insights on communication.[8]
Circulation per user per year is a meaningful, feasible measure of library use across long periods. In this paper, circulation per user means borrowing for use outside the library per person who has affirmatively established the administrative right to borrow books from the library. Circulation per user indicates a significant type of individual behavior both in establishing an administrative relationship to a library and in using library materials. Total population, persons in libraries’ legal serving areas, and the number of persons who use libraries have risen over time. Circulation per user is conceptually distinct from these trends. Circulation per user is also conceptually distinct from changes in the distribution of library sizes and the scope and composition of the library sample.[9] Because circulation per user is a measure of average user behavior, it suggests user-weighted aggregation of library statistics. Sums of users and circulation across libraries implicitly is such an aggregation. Most importantly, sufficient data exist to estimate reasonably circulation per user since 1856.[10]
Kaiser’s study of large public libraries from 1908 to 1946 found that circulation per user did not change greatly.[11] This study collected data for all reporting public libraries in cities with population 200,000 persons or more.[12] The study also reported juvenile circulation for some years. Data reported to the American Library Association (ALA) in 1914 indicated that juvenile circulation per juvenile borrower was about 50% greater than adult circulation per adult borrower. This ratio and the juvenile circulation share series imply estimates for adult circulation per adult library user.[13] These estimates indicate that adult circulation per adult user was 13 in 1908, rose to 20 in 1930-33, and then fell to 14 in 1946 (see Table 1).
|
Table 1 Reported Public Library Circulation in U.S. Cities with Population 200,000 Persons or More
|
|||
|
Year |
Circulation. per User |
Percent Juvenile Circulation |
Adult Circulation per Adult User |
|
1908 |
15.4 |
38.0% |
13 |
|
1913 |
16.6 |
32.8% |
15 |
|
1921 |
15.5 |
34.1% |
14 |
|
1926 |
21.6 |
34.3% |
19 |
|
1930 |
22.8 |
35.3% |
20 |
|
1933 |
23.1 |
36.0% |
20 |
|
1937 |
21.1 |
36.9% |
19 |
|
1940 |
19.8 |
35.0% |
17 |
|
1943 |
16.4 |
40.9% |
14 |
|
1946 |
16.6 |
41.3% |
14 |
|
Source: Calculated from Kaiser (1948). |
|||
The Index of American Public Library Circulation provides annually from 1939 to 1983 circulation per person served.[14] These estimates were constructed from a representative sample of U.S. public libraries. The population that libraries serve, however, is larger than the number of registered library borrowers. Supporting data for the Index of American Public Library Circulation does not include the share of registered borrowers, but does include share of juvenile circulation.
The share of juvenile circulation is correlated with the share of juveniles in the population. In 1939, juveniles (persons ages 14 and under) were 25% of the population and juvenile circulation was 33% of total circulation. By 1957 these figures had risen to 30% and 51%, respectively. By 1980, with the passing of the post-World War II baby boom, juveniles had fallen to 22% of the population, and juvenile circulation had fallen to 31% of total circulation. Circulation per person served varies from 3.2 to 5.8 between 1939 and 1983 (see Table 2). A significant share of that variation is driven by the changes in the percentage of juvenile borrowers and juvenile’s higher borrowing per juvenile library user.
|
Table 2 Circulation from U.S. Public Libraries
|
||||
|
Year |
Total Public Library Circulation (1000s) |
Percent of U.S. Population Served |
Percent Juvenile Circulation |
Circulation per Person Served |
|
1939 |
415,924 |
60.4% |
33% |
5.3 |
|
1940 |
387,225 |
61.4% |
31% |
4.8 |
|
1941 |
358,526 |
62.5% |
34% |
4.3 |
|
1942 |
336,694 |
63.5% |
36% |
3.9 |
|
1943 |
333,365 |
64.6% |
36% |
3.8 |
|
1944 |
333,365 |
65.6% |
38% |
3.8 |
|
1945 |
333,365 |
66.6% |
38% |
3.8 |
|
1946 |
341,366 |
68.4% |
38% |
3.5 |
|
1947 |
342,602 |
70.2% |
42% |
3.4 |
|
1948 |
342,602 |
72.1% |
42% |
3.2 |
|
1949 |
376,529 |
73.9% |
45% |
3.4 |
|
1950 |
384,606 |
75.7% |
44% |
3.3 |
|
1951 |
392,683 |
74.7% |
44% |
3.4 |
|
1952 |
409,221 |
73.8% |
49% |
3.5 |
|
1953 |
429,175 |
72.8% |
49% |
3.7 |
|
1954 |
457,946 |
71.9% |
50% |
3.9 |
|
1955 |
474,426 |
71.0% |
50% |
4.0 |
|
1956 |
499,395 |
70.0% |
50% |
4.2 |
|
1957 |
515,876 |
70.4% |
51% |
4.3 |
|
1958 |
557,825 |
70.9% |
51% |
4.5 |
|
1959 |
582,795 |
71.3% |
50% |
4.6 |
|
1960 |
599,275 |
71.8% |
50% |
4.6 |
|
1961 |
632,735 |
72.2% |
49% |
4.8 |
|
1962 |
657,705 |
72.7% |
51% |
4.9 |
|
1963 |
657,705 |
73.1% |
50% |
4.8 |
|
1964 |
682,674 |
73.6% |
52% |
4.9 |
|
1965 |
761,849 |
74.0% |
51% |
5.3 |
|
1966 |
802,676 |
74.5% |
50% |
5.5 |
|
1967 |
822,319 |
74.9% |
50% |
5.6 |
|
1968 |
862,497 |
75.4% |
49% |
5.7 |
|
1969 |
883,033 |
75.8% |
44% |
5.8 |
|
1970 |
892,854 |
76.3% |
39% |
5.7 |
|
1971 |
923,211 |
76.7% |
37% |
5.8 |
|
1972 |
892,854 |
77.2% |
35% |
5.5 |
|
1973 |
883,033 |
77.6% |
34% |
5.4 |
|
1974 |
892,854 |
78.0% |
33% |
5.4 |
|
1975 |
979,940 |
81.0% |
34% |
5.6 |
|
1976 |
989,784 |
84.0% |
32% |
5.4 |
|
1977 |
986,715 |
87.0% |
32% |
5.2 |
|
1978 |
986,715 |
90.0% |
32% |
4.9 |
|
1979 |
966,981 |
93.0% |
31% |
4.6 |
|
1980 |
966,582 |
95.9% |
31% |
4.4 |
|
1981 |
1,037,037 |
96.0% |
30% |
4.7 |
|
1982 |
1,066,639 |
96.2% |
31% |
4.8 |
|
1983 |
1,070,000 |
96.4% |
32% |
4.8 |
|
Source: Goldhor (1985), Table 2. |
||||
|
Table 2b Circulation from U.S. Public Libraries |
||
|
Year |
Total Public Library Circulation (1000s) |
Circulation per Person Served |
|
1990 |
1,394,887 |
5.6 |
|
1991 |
1,465,962 |
6.1 |
|
1992 |
1,555,360 |
6.4 |
|
1993 |
1,585,859 |
6.5 |
|
1994 |
1,569,919 |
6.4 |
|
1995 |
1,609,872 |
6.4 |
|
1996 |
1,642,625 |
6.5 |
|
1997 |
1,690,203 |
6.6 |
|
1998 |
1,701,184 |
6.6 |
|
1999 |
1,693,416 |
6.4 |
|
2000 |
1,713,967 |
6.4 |
|
2001 |
1,789,927 |
6.5 |
|
2002 |
1,897,874 |
6.8 |
|
2003 |
1,965,000 |
7.0 |
|
2004 |
2,010,777 |
7.1 |
|
Source: ALA, Public Library Statistics, Statistical Trends; based on NCES data. |
||
Colorado historical library circulation data show the importance of accounting for changes in the share of registered borrowers. From 1920 to 2000, Colorado public library circulation per capita has risen by more than a factor of three (see Table 3). However, in 1941, 22% of the population was registered borrowers, while in 2000 the corresponding figure was 66%.[15] Those figures imply that circulation per registered borrower (user) has dropped from 16 in 1941 to 14 in 2000.
|
Table 3 Circulation from Colorado Public Libraries
|
|
|
Year |
Circulation Per State Population |
|
1920 |
2.33 |
|
1925 |
2.51 |
|
1930 |
3.24 |
|
1935 |
3.76 |
|
1941 |
3.62 |
|
1946 |
2.74 |
|
1951 |
3.24 |
|
1955 |
3.37 |
|
1960 |
4.58 |
|
1965 |
5.62 |
|
1970 |
5.41 |
|
1975 |
5.00 |
|
1980 |
4.89 |
|
1985 |
5.00 |
|
1990 |
6.45 |
|
1995 |
8.13 |
|
2000 |
9.09 |
|
Source: Colorado Library Research Service (2003). |
|
White’s study of library use indicates that circulation per registered library user changed little from 1890 to 1970. This study reports “library registrations as percent of total population” and “book circulation per capita” for varying collections of cities in 1890, 1900, 1910, 1920, and 1970.[16] The ratio of these figures gives book circulation per registered user. The median book circulation per registered user is within 14 to 18 books borrowed per year per user from 1890 to 1970 (see Table 4).[17]
|
Table 4 Median Circulation Per User Across Sets of U.S. Cities
|
||
|
Year |
Number of Cities |
Circulation per User |
|
1890 |
17 |
14.6 |
|
1900 |
25 |
14.9 |
|
1910 |
25 |
14.1 |
|
1920 |
22 |
17.8 |