Monthly Archives: March 2020

Advoc8: Library Advocacy in March

As much as anyone else, libraries work across a wide range of policy areas. Our institutions are engaged daily in work to promote research, support education, facilitate free access to information and expression, and deliver social inclusion. Library values and experience give us a unique voice in these debates, helping to support fairer, stronger and more sustainable development for all.

This breadth of activity can also be a challenge. No-one has infinite time to put into advocacy, and in any case, there is limited capacity amongst decision-makers, influencers and library-supporters. As a result, it is important to prioritise.

Therefore, in the first of what we hope to make a monthly series of blogs, we will be defining our ‘Advoc8’ – a set of 8 key messages that you can draw on in your library advocacy, from formal speeches to informal consultation, from letters to newspapers to social media posts. Where we can, in each post we’ll be providing links to further materials. From one month to the next, some of the content will change according to available opportunities for advocacy, while some will stay constant.

Let us know how useful this is (and we’re sorry about the cheesy title)!

1. We have a long way to until we achieve gender equality. Success requires addressing the information dimension of development, in particular through libraries

With 2020 representing 25 years since the Beijing Declaration and Plan of Action, there is global attention to what has been done, and what we still need to do, in order to ensure full gender equality. The Declaration itself highlights key areas related to information, including skills and lifelong learning, access top health and legal information, digital inclusion and broader awareness-raising, where libraries make a difference. IFLA’s analysis shows how many countries have recognised this, and in doing so, provide an example for others. See our briefing on the Declaration and our analysis of the national reports.

2. Our documentary heritage is both precious and at risk. Governments need to act – through law, policy and funding – to support its preservation.

The documentary heritage held in the collections of libraries and other institutions represents the memory of the world – the ideas, innovations and expressions that make us what we are today. Yet too often, this documentary heritage is overlooked in cultural and other policies. A lack of investment in its preservation, inadequate policies, and incomplete legal frameworks can lead to irretrievable loss. UNESCO’s 2015 Recommendation provides a valuable reference point, but uptake and implementation needs to be strengthened. See our briefing on the Recommendation, and new checklist allowing libraries and library associations to assess how well it is being put into action.

3. Meaningful access to the internet is a driver of development. Public access in libraries plays a key part in delivering it, affordably.

Over half of the world’s population now enjoys internet access, a major achievement. As we approach the 31st anniversary of the World Wide Web, it is worth remembering that this still means that billions of people remain offline. Furthermore, there is a growing awareness that simply having the physical possibility to access to the internet does not always mean people are getting the most out of it. Institutions such as libraries, offering good connections, necessary hardware, relevant skills and support, and simply a space for internet use have a well-established role in promoting digital inclusion, affordably. Look out for our communications on 12 March about the anniversary of the World Wide Web, and see our analysis of how libraries are already included in national broadband strategies.

4. Libraries are essential partners for local government in delivering the SDGs locally. We are ready to help: there are almost 430 000 public and community libraries around the world, strongly focused on meeting the information needs of the local areas they serve. They have much to contribute to wider efforts by local government to deliver on the Sustainable Development Goals, in many different ways, from supporting skills development and internet access to providing an information point and portal to local open government data. When fully integrated into local government planning, they can not only support cultural development, but support the success of a wide range of policies. See our list of ten roles libraries play in supporting effective local government, and our briefing on what the New Urban Agenda means for libraries.

5. The skills to find, analyse and evaluate information are vital. Libraries are ideal places to develop these: we have never had access to so much information! There is a greater possibility to find and use more content than ever before at any time, anywhere, creating exciting new possibilities for free expression, innovation, and forming communities. To do this, people need to be able to navigate through all the information available, and for this, information skills are essential. Faced with unreliable or deliberately false information online, our best hope in building a sustainable and equitable information society is to promote media and information literacy skills for all. Look out for communications later this month about IFLA’s engagement in a project to boost media literacy skills in a number of European countries.

6. Everyone – and in particular children – has the right to engage in cultural life and access materials reflecting their experience.

The right to participate in the cultural life of the community is a fundamental right, set out in Article 27a of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. When this right is denied, quality of life is diminished, and risks of alienation and lack of resilience rise, making the achievement of broader development goals more complex. In education in particular, better results can be achieved when students are able to engage fully by having access to materials that reflect their cultures and use their language. Libraries bring a unique expertise and possibility to do this. See our submission to the UN Human Rights Council’s Special Rapporteur on Cultural Rights for more.

7. Gathering, organising and giving access to data and information is at the heart of successful open government policies. Libraries make this happen: the role of good governance is highlighted by SDG16, with transparency at its heart. When citizens can find out about what those in power are doing, and use this information in order to hold them to account, there is greater pressure to take decisions that are in the public interest. Achieving this is about more than just online portals – not only does the information need to be structured properly, but citizens often need help to understand what is there and use it to draw their own conclusions. Libraries are ideally placed to do this, with many great examples already out there. For more, see our blog on libraries and open data.

8. New protections for privacy are welcome, but cannot lead to the destruction of library and archive holdings: a new generation of data protection laws are giving citizens new power to understand, control and even delete information held about them by others. This is potentially a major breakthrough in efforts to make a reality of privacy in the digital age. At the same time, concepts such as the ‘right to erasure’ bring the possibility of efforts to remove references to individuals and their actions held in archival collections. This can lead to holes appearing the historical record, as well as making it more difficult for future researchers to understand the world of today, or to ensure transparency of decision-making. New laws should therefore protect archiving rights as part of the balance between freedom of access to information and expression, and the right to a private life. See the new IFLA-ICA Statement on Privacy Legislation and Archiving for more.

In the Crosshairs? Libraries as Intermediaries at a time of Intermediary Regulation

Major internet platforms are attracting more and more attention from policy makers.

With techno-optimism increasingly out-of-fashion, they are increasingly seen as a source of a range of evils in their own right, or at least far too complicit in the negative actions of others. In response, calls are growing for regulation by government.

Indeed, controlling the actions of such companies can often be tempting for individuals or authorities keen to pursue wider agendas or to promote a particular world view.

Yet efforts to regulate the activities of internet platforms, when not targeting any single company (as competition interventions might do), can easily impact on others whose mission is to act as intermediaries – to connect people through information. Libraries can end up in this category, alongside others such as publishers, or simple services such as file-storage sites like Dropbox or website hosting services.

Clearly libraries already operate with a strong public interest mission, and staff trained in acquiring and giving access to information according to high professional and ethical standards. This – rather than external regulation – has been the basis of their activity, generally carried out with a strong degree of independence.

Indeed, in order to continue to fulfil their role of supporting access to diverse content, and responding to the needs of all of their communities, this is worth defending whenever there are discussions about regulation of information intermediaries in general.

To do this, it is useful to think in more depth about how libraries fit into the debate, and in particular the details of the intermediation role that they play compared to others. One way of doing this is by breaking down the different characteristics of various types of intermediary. These could include the following:

Is there profit from acting as an intermediary?: some intermediaries claim money directly from customers for giving access to materials. This is the case for publishers and bookshops (who sell books), as well as platforms like Netflix. Alternatively, an intermediary can make money indirectly, through advertising, with content acting simply to draw people in. There is nothing inherently wrong with making money as an intermediary – costs need to be covered, and the act of providing easier access is, in itself, valuable. However, there is an argument that those who profit should also cover the costs of their actions (both in terms of the potential harm they create, or the price of generating content).

Are there payments to content creators?: linked to the above is the question of whether intermediaries support the creators of the content they give access to. This was very much the criticism of the major internet platforms, accused of not paying artists (enough) while profiting from their work. The major platforms of course do pay, although usually small sums per use, which provide far from enough to live on. Other intermediaries, such as publishers, have a more traditional relationship with larger lump sums paid out as advances.

Is there control over content? Finally, there is the issue of whether intermediaries have any influence over the content to which they give access. This can range from checking (and even correcting) every word, in the case of publishers, to being effectively unaware of all that is posted (for example file storage services).

Between these two extremes, things are more complicated. In the case of internet platforms, there can be ordering or promotion of content (even if this can be done automatically). Increasingly, too, they have been pressured to identify particular types of content and remove it, taking a more editorial role. A key question now is whether this role is completed by automatic filters or humans.

Where do libraries stand in this?

Clearly they do not profit, either directly or indirectly, from their work as intermediaries. Supported either by governments or host institutions, they are spared the need to earn a return in general, although it is true that some libraries do seek sponsorship. Nonetheless, they are still some way away from the situation of internet platforms or publishers. This would represent a case for libraries being subject to less tough regulation than others.

Libraries do pay for the content to which they give access. Clearly, they do not contribute as much financially to authors as publishers do, they help in other ways, through helping discovery and promoting reading in general. In countries where there is public lending right, library lending leads to further payment to authors, although this may not be the most efficient way of supporting writers. Given the legal acquisition of content in the first place, again, libraries could argue that they deserve the benefit of the doubt in any discussion about regulation.

Finally, libraries also sit somewhere in the middle when it comes to influence over content. They do make choices in the acquisition of content, although may also be dependent on donations. They cannot be expected to read every line of every book of course and are expected to provide access to content from a variety of viewpoints and experiences, although through this should exercise judgement. This places libraries somewhere in the middle, with greater scope to influence content (realistically) than internet platforms or storage services (where uploads are made by users), but less than publishers for example.

This does not mean, however, that they should face a level of regulation halfway between the two. Indeed, this is where the uniqueness of libraries comes in. Fundamentally, they are not acting for profit, but for the public interest. While librarians may not agree on a personal basis with all of what is said in the works held in their collections, there is an understanding that access to a variety of views is important if people are to form their own.

As a result, it is vital to ensure that – as actions advance on regulating internet intermediaries – that the specific nature of libraries is recognised, understood and protected.

This uniqueness of libraries is worth underlining, as it is too often forgotten when all intermediaries are bundled together as the subjects of new laws.

Open Education Week 2020

This week, IFLA celebrates Open Education Week 2020 alongside many other educational and cultural stakeholders.

What is Open Education?

Open Education is a global movement that aims to facilitate the dissemination of knowledge to citizens around the world through open educational resources, tools and best practices.

But what does ‘open’ mean? It refers to resources which are in the public domain or which were created with an open license to allow them to be shared and reused for free by others around the world.

Why is this important?

Every individual in the world has a right to access to education and knowledge. These in turn are key to global development.

Providing access to education through resources and tools means giving everyone the opportunity to learn and develop.

It is also an opportunity to conceive of education as a lever to fight against poverty in the world (SDG1), to allow access to better jobs (SDG8), and to reduce inequalities between men and women (SDG5), and between countries (SDG10).

Latest update

UNESCO adopted a recommendation in November 2019 on Open Educational Resources (OER), promoting the development of five strategic objectives:

  • Building the capacity of stakeholders to create access, use, adapt and redistribute OER;
  • Developing supportive policy;
  • Encouraging inclusive and equitable quality OER;
  • Nurturing the creation of sustainability models for OER;
  • Facilitating international cooperation.

IFLA has been involved in this process for many years, and welcomes this work, which in particular stresses the importance of the role of librarians in the creation of educational content and the place of access to these resources.

How can libraries support this global objective?

Clarify the status of your resource:

If your library creates educational content, it is crucial to be transparent about how your audience can use it (e.g. sharing, reusing, modifying). It is therefore important to carefully choose the licence you wish to use (see creative commons licences) or specify it with public domain mark.

The slightest doubt about the possibility of use can discourage public sharing.

Enhance your resources via your institutional channels

Does your library have (open) educational resources to share? Feel free to highlight them on your website or through your social networks to reach out teachers or educational networks.

Share these resources via an external site

There are also sites that promote free educational resources in several languages, such as the Open Education Week site.

Library Stat of the Week #8: The Oceania region has the highest number of library staff per 100 000 people – over 84 – but Belarus has the highest for a single country at 227!

One of the key attractions of libraries as places to deliver public policy goals are librarians and other library staff – professional and qualified staff, plus project staff and assistants.

With either specific library qualifications or bringing other skills, they are vital for ensuring that users receive the support they need, and keeping spaces welcoming and friendly. Through their initiatives, libraries can become skills hubs, cultural centres, and portals to open government information, to give just a few examples.

While there is a growing reliance on volunteers, and even experimentation with staff-less libraries, in some countries, none of this lessens the value of professional staff.

Library Map of the World Data already gives an idea of how many library staff there are globally – over 1.5 million!

Comparing this with population data from the World Bank allows us to go further and understand how many librarians and other library staff are at work for every 100 000 people – the size of a large town or small city.

Graph showing number of library staff per 100 000 people in different world regions

Looking across regions, and countries for which data is available, it is possible to show that Oceania has the highest number of library staff per 100 000 people – 84.4, with North America close behind at 83.3. Globally, the figure is 26.3 – roughly one librarian for every 3 800 people.

Nationally, the variation is much stronger – Belarus has the highest number of librarians per 100 000 people at 226.8, with Estonia not far behind at 221.

In other regions, Macao China has the most in Asia (121.4), Cuba in Latin America (119.9), Australia in Oceania (89.8), the United States in North America (86.1), Qatar the most in the Middle East and North Africa (24.5) and Namibia the most in Africa (10).

 

Find out more on the Library Map of the World, where you can download key library data in order to carry out your own analysis! See our other Library Stats of the Week! We are happy to share the data that supported this analysis on request.