I think the major factors are: * the scheme is not widely known/advertised among the student body, so it's closer to word-of-mouth recommendations than mass an

I think the major factors are: * the scheme is not widely known/advertised among the student body, so it's closer to word-of-mouth recommendations than mass anonymous access. (Note that there are over 12,000 undergrads but they only lend out 100 or so pieces -- it's a self-selected 1% or so of students) * there is a deposit plus the hassle factor of actually going to collect the piece, so you're not going to do it unless you actually wanted to display the art; this is a minor barrier to entry but it makes a difference I think * students are easy to find and easy to impose penalties on in the event of actual malice, because you can just ask their college to intervene * they take some obvious precautions to avoid major risk -- no lending of very valuable pieces, no lending of sculptures (which I guess to be at higher risk of being knocked over and accidentally damaged compared to pictures hung on a wall)