How Can We Curb the Soaring Cost of Textbooks?

Between 1998 and 2014 the price of new textbooks increased by 142 percent.

According to College Board estimates, in the current school year the average higher education student will shell out about $1,300 for books and supplies, regardless of school type. That cost is shocking. But even more alarming is the rapid rise in textbook prices over recent years. As illustrated in the above video, between 1998 and 2014 the cost of new textbooks increased by 142 percent, versus 44 percent for all other goods and just 1.6 percent for your average beach read. And the picture looks even worse if you go further back in time. According to government data, new textbook prices have been rising at a fairly steady 6 percent per year for ages, racking up a total increase of more than 800 percent since 1978 (around the era when prices began to seriously spike). Outpacing inflation, rising production costs, or any other factor, and contributing to what was in 2013 a $14 billion industry, it’s tempting to read this as a story of corporate greed preying upon our need for an education. But the real cause today for the meteoric rise in new book prices is a little more complex than greed alone.

The most common narrative for rising textbook costs credits them to a dysfunctional market. Whereas consumers usually have the direct ability to choose which books they buy, balancing content and affordability, publishers have traditionally marketed directly to professors setting the syllabi for their classes. Once selected, certain books—usually new or recent editions—become necessary to students’ success in the course. Recent legislation has worked to make staff and students more aware of the comparative costs of different books. But professors have told government researchers that even with more awareness of pricing issues, they still prioritize a textbook’s content over price. This hierarchy leaves a captive market to deal with prices dictated by producers who are part of corporate behemoths out for (so the narrative runs) reckless, self-serving profits.

Yet digging deeper, it appears that rising prices might not correlate to absurd profits. According to studies of student buying habits, overall spending on textbooks has remained fairly steady—or even fallen slightly—in recent years. And despite the absurdity of costs, publishers don’t see a whole lot of that income as profit. In fact, a number of publishers have been in financial trouble in recent years. Most notoriously, Cengage Learning had to file for bankruptcy in 2013.

Image by the University of Illinois Library via Flickr

This paradox of rising prices, stagnant spending, and questionable profits comes down to massive shifts in the way students have accessed textbooks over the past couple of decades. First, with the rise of large retail chains and, later, with the advent of the internet, it became much easier for students to find cheap used books or ones available for rent. And initiatives to create open textbooks and a push toward digital resources with lower price points have further deflated sales of new textbooks. The recognition that they can only make a profit in the first year after a new print edition is released—and the frailty of even those sales—has led publishers to jack up prices and crank out a needless quantity of new editions to secure a steady flow of income. This reactionary cycle has created a system that is far from sustainable.

There is likely a point of inflection beyond which people will just not shell out for a new book. And, to an extent, the price of new textbooks sets the price of used books and rentals as well (at least according to analyses by the U.S. Government Accountability Office). Ultimately this spiral of rising costs in a changing, broken market has to be addressed. Fortunately, a number of organizations are on the case—chief amongst them educational publishers who are desperately trying to replace books with digital services like dynamic subscriptions to texts.

Digital resources require less overhead to produce and can’t be resold (much to the joy of publishers). Ideally, they’re highly adaptable systems—updated as necessary and subscribed to or purchased on a regular basis—that could in theory enhance the ability to teach and learn. And many companies are now trying to market at least some of their new services directly to students, which may help to offset the problems of a professor-driven market. How this will reflect in course syllabi remains to be seen. But ideally, professors will find a way to accommodate open-source options, digital offerings, and other diverse materials in their classes in a way that both covers coursework and honors students’ need to make prudent financial decisions as education consumers—and our collective need to break the death spiral of educational publishing.


The global climate change strikes on Friday are said to have been the largest protest for climate change in history. An estimated four million people participated in 2,500 events across 163 countries on all seven continents. That included an estimated 300,000 Australians, but a total of zero were in Hyde Park in Sydney, despite a viral photo that claims otherwise.

Australian Youth Coal Coalition, a pro-coal Facebook page, posted a photo showing trash strewn across a park after what appears to have been a large event. "Look at the mess today's climate protesters left behind in beautiful Hyde Park," the photo was captioned. "So much plastic. So much landfill. So sad." The only problem is, the photo wasn't taken after a climate change protest. It wasn't even taken in Australia.

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet
via GOOD / YouTube

Last Friday, millions of people in 150 countries across the globe took to the streets to urge world leaders to enact dramatic solutions to combat climate change.

The Climate Strike was inspired, in part, by Greta Thunberg, a 16-year-old girl from Sweden who has captured worldwide attention for her tireless work to hold lawmakers responsible for the climate crisis.

The strike gave people across the planet the opportunity to make their voices heard before the U.N. General Assembly Climate Summit in New York City on Monday.

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet
Photo by Casey Horner on Unsplash

As world leaders meet to discuss new ways to tackle climate change at the U.N. Climate Action Summit, they might miss one very big part of healing nature – nature. In a new short film, youth climate change activist Greta Thunberg and George Monbiot, a writer for the Guardian, talked about how we need to use nature as a solution to climate change.

There's a huge push to curb emissions, but it's not the be all end all of handling climate change; we also need to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. While we don't have technology to do that for us, there is another solution. "There is a magic machine that sucks carbon out of the air, costs very little, and builds itself. It's called a tree," Monboit says in the film. Researchers found that we could get rid of two-thirds of the carbon dioxide that we've emitted during the industrial era just by growing trees. That amounts to 205 billion tons of carbon. Right now, deforestation of tropical forests is responsible for 20% of current greenhouse emissions.

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet
Climate Action Tracker

In 2016, 196 countries signed the Paris Agreement, pledging to combat climate change by taking action to curb the increase in global temperatures. The Paris Agreement requires countries to report on their emissions and what steps they're taking to implement those plans. Now that the countries are coming together again for the U.N. Climate Action Summit in New York City, it's worth taking a look at what kind of progress they've made.

The Climate Action Trackerkeeps tabs on what each country is doing to limit warming, and if they're meeting their self-set goals. Countries are graded based on whether or not their actions would help limit warming to 1.5 degrees C.

According to a recent article from National Geographic, The Gambia, Morocco, and India are at the head of the class. "Even though carbon emissions in The Gambia, Morocco, and India are expected to rise, they'll fall short of exceeding the 1.5-degree Celsius limit," the article reads. Saudi Arabia, Russia and the United States, on the other hand, get a big fat F. "Projected emissions in Saudi Arabia, Russia, and the United States are far greater than what it would take to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius."

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet
Screenshot via (left) Wikimedia Commons (right)

Greta Thunberg has been dubbed the "Joan of Arc of climate change" for good reason. The 16-year-old activist embodies the courage and conviction of the unlikely underdog heroine, as well as the seemingly innate ability to lead a movement.

Thunberg has dedicated her young life to waking up the world to the climate crisis we face and cutting the crap that gets in the way of fixing it. Her speeches are a unique blend of calm rationality and no-holds-barred bluntness. She speaks truth to power, dispassionately and unflinchingly, and it is glorious.

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet