Collection Management Division

George A. Smathers Libraries

Preservation Bulletin 7.8

September 11, 1992


Binding: Monographs (Research Materials)


Speaking strictly in terms of preservation, hard-covers usually serve a book better than soft-covers. Hard-covers protect materials better than soft-covers from abrasion; deterioration of the leaf attachment (i.e.,binding); fire, smoke and water damage. Ideally, every volume acquired for permanent retention in the research collection should be bound in hard covers.

Purchase of a book with publisher's case binding, however, is not always the wisest selection decision. Two considerations immediately come to mind. First, the price differential is often substantial. A publisher's case binding copy usually costs more than a paperback copy, even when the library's cost for commercial binding and local labor are included. Second, the publisher's case binding is usually not as durable as hard-covers provided by commercial binding according to the specifications of the Library Binding Institute's Standard. Publisher's case bindings may promote deterioration and hinder later preservation of volumes printed on acidic or brittle paper, and they often require repair. Therefore, internal repair costs need to be factored into cost differentials.

Selection decisions should evaluate the need for hard covers. Ephemera and other materials with limited retention may not require hard-cover binding. Because no universal assumptions apply to limited retention or ephemeral materials and their use varies widely, the decision to purchase or provide hard-covers for these materials should be made by the collection manager relative to the anticipated use of the item and the need to extend its useful life in the collection.

If the volume is expected to be retained permanently, it should be bound eventually. Selection decisions should balance the immediacy of the need to protect a volume with hard covers and the library's ability to purchase or provide them. Purchasing a volume in soft-cover may result in savings for purchasing additional volumes but require increased funding for commercial binding, which is also part of he library's materials budget. If commercial binding funds are not sufficient, then heavily used soft-cover volumes will not be protected and will likely need to be replaced. Whether it is cheaper to buy a hard cover or a soft cover and bind it should not be considered in selection of monographs; these differentials often represent false economy and diminish the importance of preserving the collections through sound selection decision. Decisions made using the flow-chart below will save both collection development funds and collection materials over the long run.

Question: Is the volume likely to be used during the first year after its acquisition?