PRINT-ON-DEMAND PUBLISHING

Pandemic Stopgap or the Future of the Publishing Industry?

---

Over the past couple of years, we have all witnessed the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, and the new and unforeseen challenges it has posed to supply chains and businesses across the globe. Within the publishing industry specifically, not only have many bookshops been forced to close, but disruptions to freight and diminished workforces have at times resulted in shortages in supply, delays in books reaching consumers and increased costs for publishers. As a result, Hachette has gone as far as ‘training members of [their] distribution team to become HGV drivers’, while other publishers have ‘moved many printing jobs to UK printers’ (Bayley, 2021). Perhaps the most fundamental change to the way the industry operates, however, has been the ‘huge swing towards print on demand’, described by Ingram’s senior vice-president, David Taylor (Chandler, 2020).

Print-on-demand (POD) publishing is the ability to quickly, digitally print books to order, either as a limited run or as individual copies (Clark and Phillips, 2020). Traditionally, publishers have used offset printing to produce a high quantity of their front-list titles at low unit cost by taking advantage of economies of scale, while POD has been reserved for lower demand or backlist titles, where a full print run would not be commercially viable. However, during the Covid-19 crisis, POD has made it possible to get books into the hands of consumers, despite disruptions to the supply chain.

According to Taylor, during the pandemic even front-list titles have been printed-on-demand by some publishers, whilst pre-printed inventory has sat in warehouses, unable to reach consumers (Chandler, 2020). Given the savings associated with negating storage and shipping costs, an argument has even begun to emerge that ‘large print runs are no longer needed to achieve attractive unit costs’ (Randall, 2021). So, is POD being used as a stopgap to fulfil demand during the pandemic, or are these savings significant enough that we will continue to see increased use of on-demand, digital publishing long into the future?

Despite the cost of POD becoming increasingly attractive, offset printing still provides the cheapest unit cost while supply chains are intact. However, thinking beyond the pandemic at the IPG Spring Conference, Taylor was also quoted stating that POD will continue to make the supply chain for books less fragile long after the crisis is over, and that many publishing houses will continue to use an increased amount of POD printing (Chandler, 2020). Given that Brexit, the freight crisis, and the Covid-19 pandemic were all able to cause supply issues, the pandemic has only ‘accelerated and magnified problems that already existed in the supply chain’, and the ability to respond to disruptions quickly will remain invaluable to publishers (Harapko, 2020).

Furthermore, POD offers significant environmental benefits, reducing the carbon footprint associated with waste and transporting books, an issue which is increasingly important to publishers (Bayley, 2021). Thirty-nine UK publishers have already demonstrated their commitment to sustainability by signing ‘Publishing Declares’, a pledge to join the effort to combat climate change. Additionally, new government guidelines following COP26 require businesses to publish plans for becoming carbon neutral by 2050, which a more sustainable operational business model will help facilitate (Joynson, 2021).

While E-books are the most environmentally friendly way to distribute content, consumers still seem to prefer physical books, and POD is a more sustainable method of providing them (Duffer, 2019). However, according to Martin Klopstock, some publishers do ‘not own the sources associated with creating the emissions’ in their supply chains, and are already choosing to negate their carbon footprint through offsetting rather than by altering their operations (Bayley, 2021).

Furthermore, there are still concerns that POD publishing sacrifices quality, and it is not possible to use POD for certain jobs, such as printing hardcover books. While developments in HP inkjet technology have begun to close the quality gap in certain formats, digital print is still limited to fewer applications and is less suited to certain tasks and paper types (Pymm, 2019, Haines, 2021).

Ultimately, while POD has proved to be a cost and time effective printing method while supply chains have been blocked, it is not able to compete with the low unit price offset printing is capable of offering. Despite improvements in digital print quality, offset printing still offers the most diverse and highest quality print, and although publishing houses want to operate in a more environmentally responsible way, utilising POD is not the most cost-effective way of doing so. As a result, POD is not likely to replace long print runs and will probably continue to see use primarily in a supplementary role. However, there are still clear benefits of digital POD, and as the technology improves, perhaps one day it will close the gap on print quality and unit price, becoming the more efficient, cost-effective and environmentally responsible method of printing.

---

Bibliography

VIEW...

Bayley (2021a) ‘Carbon Offsetting “a viable solution” for Independent Publishers’, The Bookseller, 22 June. Available at: <https://www.thebookseller.com/news/carbon-offsetting-viable-solution-independent-publishers-1265199> (Accessed: 20 December 2021). Bayley (2021b) ‘Supply Chain “perfect storm” Sparks Concern for Peak Pre-Christmas Period’, The Bookseller, 10 September. Available at: <https://www.thebookseller.com/news/titles-pushed-back-and-more-printing-uk-supply-chain-issues-continue-1279634> (Accessed: 2 January 2022). Chandler (2020) ‘Ingram Sees “huge swing” to Print on Demand During Coronavirus’, The Bookseller, 3 June. Available at: <https://www.thebookseller.com/news/ingram-sees-huge-swing-print-demand-during-coronavirus-1205425> (Accessed: 3 January 2022). Clark and Phillips (2020) Inside Book Publishing, Sixth Edition. Oxford: Routledge, 1988. Haines (2022) ‘Print on Demand Book Quality Restricts Self-Publishers Chances’, Just Publishing Advice, 15 July. Available at: <https://justpublishingadvice.com/where-self-publishers-will-continue-to-lose-out/> (Accessed: 9 January 2022). Harapko (2021) ‘How COVID-19 Impacted Supply Chains and What Comes Next’, EY, 18 February. Available at: <https://www.ey.com/en_gl/supply-chain/how-covid-19-impacted-supply-chains-and-what-comes-next> (Accessed: 2 January 2022). Joynson (2022) ‘Publishing Industry Makes Sustainability Pledge’, Publishers Association, 15 October. Available at: <https://www.publishers.org.uk/publishing-industry-makes-sustainability-pledge/> (Accessed: 9 January 2022). Pilkington (2012) ‘Print-On-Demand: The Future of Publishing? A Talk With Richard Curtis’, goodereader, 30 March. Available at: <https://goodereader.com/blog/electronic-readers/print-on-demand-the-future-of-publishing-a-talk-with-richard-curtis> (Accessed: 2 January 2022). Pymm (2019) ‘Keeping an Eye on the Future of Print’, The Bookseller. Available at: <https://www.thebookseller.com/insight/keeping-eye-future-print-1102051> (Accessed: 4 January 2022). Randall (2021) ‘The Threat of Climate Change and the Role Played by Book Publishing’, BookBrunch, 10 June. Available at: <https://www.bookbrunch.co.uk/page/free-article/the-threat-of-climate-change-and-the-role-played-by-book-publishing/> (Accessed: 3 January 2022).