Unfortunately, the reality is that collections in many Canadian academic libraries today are diminishing--not developing, or even remaining static as a result of budget cuts, fund reallocation, the GST and other government initiatives. The GST does more than add to the cost of each purchase. Many small and alternative presses in other countries have refused to "collect Canadian taxes" and will not send materials to Canada, thus limiting the resources available to Canadian researchers.

The financial situation at some libraries has reached desperate proportions. For example, the University of British Columbia announced last year that their library serials budget would be cut by one million dollars. The UBC library, once ranked twelfth in the annual American Research Libraries Survey, fell to twenty-seventh. Balancing library collections has taken on a new meaning and imperative: how can we achieve the goals of academic freedom and the inclusive academic library with the current funding crisis that exists in many institutions?

Given that the higher price increases typically occur among the costliest and most prestigious journals of a subject discipline, libraries may have to weigh the cancellation of several moderately-priced, but less critical journals against that of a few indispensable ones. Those that are dispensable may include publications of secondary importance within a given research field, journals that are basic resources for a particular subject but are comparatively little-used, cross-disciplinary journals that may not be of intense interest to anyone academic department, and journals that cover subject disciplines that have a lower priority at a particular university.

Cutting large numbers of less prominent journals to save a small number of prestigious titles can have serious implications for the inclusive university. Scholars in less mainstream disciplines or in academic fields with relatively lower profiles face a greater likelihood that their journals will be cut than do those in other disciplines. Creative and thorough research in the affected disciplines thus becomes more difficult, as researchers have to expend more time and effort to obtain the literature they require.

These implications can be of special importance to women, visible minorities, and others who represent non-mainstream interests. Given that scholarly journals also reflect particular theoretical, methodological or ideological approaches, there is the additional risk that journal cuts may not be ideologically neutral, that the diffusion of alternate or non-standard viewpoints might be restricted.

The process of selection at university libraries usually involves a partnership of . faculty and librarians, and usually reflects; the current curriculum. The majority of faculty in Canadian universities is still overwhelmingly white, male, able-bodied and heterosexual. These people usually recommend materials that support mainstream views and issues and do not reflect the widest possible range of social and political issues and philosophies.

There are other factors at play. Many university libraries rely on purchasing plans and machine ordering. With limited budgets, libraries can find enough materials to buy through the "easy" routes and may not search for elusive, ephemeral material representing more diverse viewpoints. It is, therefore, the responsibility of librarians to be aware of this systemic bias and avoid the easy route of restricted ordering that may be time-saving, but may not include material representative of divergent groups.

Along with selecting materials, most librarians also weed the collection regularly to make room for new acquisitions. The criteria used to weed unwanted materials may eliminate many of the ephemeral, alternative materials that support the inclusive university. The physical condition of these materials may be poor--many alternative presses cannot afford to bind their materials as well as the mainstream publishers. A book in poor physical condition is often discarded since it cannot be loaned. Frequency of use is another criterion for weeding. Small press books with a small readership may be weeded in favor of mainstream, widely cited material.

A note of hope is that with increasingly restricted purchasing power, many libraries are re-evaluating their weeding policies in favor of keeping more materials. The shelves are not filling up as quickly and it is still cheaper to rebind than replace.