This is part of a series of profiles detailing the experiences of institutions that have unbundled or canceled big deal journal contracts. The aim of the series is to provide insights, lessons learned, and inspiration to libraries that might consider a similar move.
Summary
Colorado State University negotiates its library contracts with publishers through the Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries. In 2021, the Alliance signed a 3-year contract that removed perpetual access in exchange for lower costs. A few years later, both CSU, CU Boulder, and the University of Wyoming were unable to meet the rising costs of the bundled contract. The Alliance negotiated a deal with Elsevier in January 2024, where some institutions could opt in to the bundle and others could unbundle. All of the large institutions opted for unbundling. Alternative access expenses, through on-demand purchasing and interlibrary loan, have been lower than anticipated at CSU. Faculty have been supportive of the change. In the first year, CSU saved about $500,000 in subscription costs.
Preparation
CSU Dean of Libraries Karen Estlund and her predecessors have had an active and continuing agenda topic on the unsustainable journal pricing issues with the Faculty Council Committee on Libraries. Estlund asked the vice provosts and deans for time on their agendas to discuss the prospect of unbundling when presenting to the Provosts’ Leadership Council. She offered to speak with department heads and chairs, but only the College of Engineering took her up on the offer. Then Estlund presented to the Faculty Council with the chair of the Faculty Council Committee on Libraries. The campus was receptive to the change, as funding is perennially tight at an institution with relatively low levels of state funding.
“The community was understanding about the financial pressure the library was facing,” Estlund said.
CSU was one of the top three contributors to COVID vaccine research, and many recognize the success was linked to the free sharing of information, including preprints. Estlund said there has been a culture change emerging on campus as researchers have become big proponents of open access, especially younger scholars and those in engineering and biomedical sciences. In explaining the untenable situation with Elsevier, there was broad agreement about the publisher’s reputation for inflating prices.
Estlund noted that the irony of the cost structure of these increasingly unaffordable big deals is that the institutions with the most access to research outputs are those conducting comparatively less research.
Following similar resolutions at the University of Wyoming and CU Boulder, the CSU faculty council passed a resolution supporting this library’s negotiating position and licensing priorities in 2024. This helped lay the foundation for unbundling by articulating the campus values related to scholarly communication.
Decision, Outcomes, Campus Response
CSU’s big deal contract with Elsevier ended in January 2024. The news was shared in an online campus newsletter, and the library sent out an email to all faculty. At the same time, the library rolled out a new article purchasing service to assuage concern about turnaround time for getting materials.
“We expected to see a flood of requests for some of this content so we budgeted high,” said Laura DeLancey, associate dean for collections and discovery. “But what we’re actually seeing is very much in line with ILL requests – a steady trickle. No journal has gotten enough requests that we think we need to re-subscribe.”
CSU budgeted $100,000 for Article Galaxy Scholar in 2025 but spent closer to $30,000, according to DeLancey. That cost is on track to double in 2026.
Looking at usage and turn away stats can give an inflated idea of the actual demand for that content, Estlund said. Sometimes people need a specific article, which can be retrieved through Interlibrary Loan (ILL), but other times they’re doing a general search and are open to other articles on a topic. That process could still generate a “turn away,” but it doesn’t translate into that next step of really seeking out that content, she said. Many users, especially our students, might not require one specific article, and suitable alternatives may exist in other journals.
The library staff was braced for complaints and planned to direct calls to Estlund and DeLancy, but they were pleasantly surprised by the response.
“It was so quiet,” Estlund said. Only a handful of people inquired, most asking for language to share with their colleagues to explain the reasoning behind the move.
There was a lot of positive feedback from the administration and appreciation for the money saved for the university.
CSU library leaders are open to alternative publishing models to address the long-term access landscape. The university has supported some Subscribe to Open (S20) agreements. They’re also investigating with the University Press of Colorado (a collective of university presses from Colorado, Wyoming, Utah and Alaska) to expand open access book publishing and consider an open journal publishing spinoff. Estlund suggests that the savings from leaving bundled deals may be applied to these kinds of opportunities that expand access and provide critical support in other areas—and that are healthier for the scholarly publishing ecosystem overall. Estlund said: “Publishing costs money, but not that much money. How can we support publishing at a cost that doesn’t do harm to our universities and their budgets?”
“I think the federal impacts and the loss of funding may be the tipping point that actually gets [OA publishing by universities] in action, even though these discussions have been going on since I was in library school,” Estlund said. In 2025, Estlund wrote regular situation reports for the university president on the federal policy landscape, which has helped to position the library as a leader in navigating federal changes and their impact on research communication practices.
CSU reports that unbundling Elsevier led to 30% savings, about $500,000 annually. The library plans to review other big contracts and looks forward to additional savings in the future.
Advice and moving forward
CSU Libraries encourages other campuses to consider taking the leap to unbundle. A close look at the extreme profit margins by publishers solidified the decision for Estlund.
“Does your money follow your values? For us, it doesn’t in these big deals,” Estlund said.
The key to the future is looking for long-term solutions and for research libraries to continue to collaborate. Added Estlund: “The only way we’ll be able to provide access to scholarly communication that serves all of our interdisciplinary needs is through collective publishing – that’s what needs to be next.”