“There is a market that is not working properly,” says Martijn Snoep, chairman of the Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM). The regulator is now calling on schoolbook publishers to stop forcing schools to buy digital and paper versions together and to provide greater transparency regarding the price and quality of educational materials.
ACM warns educational publishers over rising book prices
The Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) has issued a warning to the dominant players in the educational publishing sector following an investigation into high costs and poor sustainability. According to NOS, the regulator found that prices for schoolbooks have risen faster over the last seven years than prices for comparable products.
The market is largely controlled by three publishers: ThiemeMeulenhoff, Malmberg, and Noordhoff. ACM research indicates these three firms maintain large, stable market shares across most subjects. Snoep noted that schools rarely switch teaching methods even when prices increase, contributing to the market failure.
Regulator criticizes mandatory software licenses and textbook waste
A primary target of the ACM’s criticism is “tying,” the practice of making a digital software license mandatory when purchasing physical books. The regulator described these as “socially undesirable sales strategies.” This practice has already drawn internal industry scrutiny; the Association of Educational Publishers (MEVW) recommended that its members stop bundling earlier this year, according to reports from NOS and radios.nl.
The ACM also highlighted a decline in the availability of reusable textbooks, which has dropped to nearly zero in recent years. This shift has led to an increase in disposable workbooks that students discard after a single year, increasing paper waste.
Schools urged to collaborate on procurement
The ACM suggests that schools must change their purchasing behavior to force market corrections. Snoep stated that schools should more closely examine the relationship between price and quality and prioritize sustainable, reusable materials. He also questioned whether it is always necessary for books to be delivered directly to students’ homes.
The regulator pointed to SIVON, a cooperative of school boards, as a positive example of collaboration. SIVON translates the needs of school boards into formal requests for quotes and handles tenders on behalf of multiple boards. However, Snoep noted that SIVON and individual schools can still take further steps to increase pressure on publishers.
Potential for future enforcement
While the current ACM report contains recommendations rather than formal sanctions, the regulator warned that legal action remains an option. According to radios.nl, the ACM stated that while bundling is not always illegal, it can be for publishers holding a dominant market position.
The regulator indicated that a follow-up investigation could be launched if dominant publishers do not cease the practice of tying digital and physical products.
Schoolbook Market Quick Facts
- Annual Spend: Secondary schools spend approximately 280 million euros annually on digital and paper books.
- Dominant Firms: ThiemeMeulenhoff, Malmberg, and Noordhoff.
- Primary Grievances: Mandatory bundling (tying), rising prices, and lack of reusable materials.
Questions regarding schoolbook costs
Which publishers are most affected by the ACM’s findings?
The report specifically names ThiemeMeulenhoff, Malmberg, and Noordhoff as the three publishers holding the largest and most stable shares of the market across most subjects.
Is the practice of bundling digital and paper books illegal?
The ACM stated that bundling is not always punishable by law, but it becomes a legal issue when practiced by publishers with a dominant market position.
How can schools lower their material costs?
The ACM recommends that schools collaborate on procurement, increase their willingness to switch teaching methods, and prioritize the purchase of sustainable, reusable materials.
“Pressure on publishers starts with the willingness of schools to switch to other learning materials.”
Keep reading