Author Archives: library-policy

The 10-Minute International Librarian #95, think how you can engage your community around climate change

By providing access to information, libraries play a key role in supporting citizenship.

They help expose people to ideas and information, encourage curiosity about the world, and provide space for civic activities, such as meetings and debates.

Through this, they give people the tools for getting more effectively involved in the life of the community, and contributing to responses to the challenges that communities face.

There aren’t many bigger challenges in the long-term than climate change.

Tackling it will require changes in mindsets and behaviours at the individual level, alongside major investments at the government level.

This is somewhere where libraries can make a difference!

So for our 95th 10-Minute International Librarian #95 exercise, think how you can engage your community around climate change.

How can you, in your library, help share information that will build understanding of the situation facing the planet, and what people can do?

How can you act as a catalyst for climate action, and empower your community to do so also?

Share your ideas in the comments box below!

Good luck!

 

This idea relates to the IFLA Strategy! Key Initiative 1.4: Shape public opinion and debate around open access and library values, including intellectual freedom and human rights. 

You can view our other posts in this series using the #10MinuteInternationalLibrarian tag on this blog, and of course on IFLA’s Ideas Store! Do also share your ideas in the comments box below!

Beneath the surface: reflections on some of the themes underpinning debate at SCCR42

Last month’s 42nd meeting of the World Intellectual Property Organisation’s (WIPO) Standing Committee on Copyright and Related rights (SCCR) was, at the same time, a breath of fresh air, and a return to the norm.

It was certainly welcome to be able to engage, once again, with delegates in person. Fora like WIPO offer great opportunities to interact with government representatives in order to understand more clearly their priorities and concerns, and to share the experiences of libraries.

There was also, thanks to the initiative of the African Group, the first Member State-led effort in many years to define and drive forwards the agenda on exceptions and limitations to copyright for libraries, archives, museums, education and research.

While only a part of the proposals made it through this time around, it is very positive news that libraries and their users can count on some governments at least to defend their interests.

This same point is, at the same time, also a reason for some disappointment. Despite the extreme caution in the proposals to adhere to consensus positions previously stated in the Committee, some groups – notably richer countries, continued to look to emaciate any effort to move SCCR in the direction of work that would bring benefits to libraries and their users.

While the rest of the African group proposal remains on the table for the next meeting, it was only a proposed information session on cross-border working, as well as a toolkit on preservation that had already been in the works, and a scoping study on a research toolkit that made it through this time around.

In their resistance to progress, developed countries could cite the support of rightholder organisations that looked both to warn against any extension of limitations and exceptions (L&Es), and which suggested that the status quo – at least as concerns L&Es – is adequate.

So why was this the case? This blog looks to explore some of the underlying themes which can help explain this situation.

We are not always talking about the same thing when we are talking about copyright: during exchanges between Member States, observers and experts, it became clear that two definitions of copyright were in use.

The narrower one sees copyright as being only about the exclusive rights given to rightholders, for example to reproduce, translate, or use works. The wider one – used for example by Professor Raquel Xalabarder – looks at copyright as a wider system, incorporating both rights and exceptions and limitations to them.

The argument for a latter approach is based on the core goals set out in texts such as the Berne Convention and beyond – i.e. that copyright should serve to support the production and dissemination of new ideas. Given how important access to and use of existing works is to the production of new ones, it makes sense that copyright needs to be seen as including the L&Es that allow this.

This wider approach is welcome, representing a more enlightened and constructive approach that of course takes account of the contribution of libraries. It also helps us get beyond the tired and blinkered cliché that any non-remunerated use of works is tantamount to stealing.

There remains, in some quarters, a refusal to accept that the public interest should be considered: a revealing statement was made by one observer from a rightholder lobby during discussions, when he argued that the public interest should never come at the expense of that of rightholders. This explicit argument for an unbalanced copyright system is something that you rarely hear spoken out loud.

This highlights the need for spaces like WIPO where governments can indeed take into account arguments from different perspectives on the way in which copyright systems should be designed, if they are to achieve their goal of delivering the best outcomes for societies as a whole.

This is not of course to say that protection of the interests of rightholders is not in the wider public interest. It is, up to a point. However, when the marginal benefits of protecting these private interests are outweighed by the costs to society of denying access and usage possibilities, governments need to act.

There is an assumption that while access concerns should be balanced by rightholder concerns, rightholder concerns should not be balanced by access concerns: closely linked to the previous point, the structure of the research report presented during the information session on the first day of SCCR is telling.

The first half of the report focused on the experience of rightholders during the pandemic, and how in particular the shift to digital had impacted the revenues of different categories of creator and intermediary. This underlined the hardship that many in the book sector had studied, but then presented, uncritically, the steps taken by some publishers at least to facilitate access.

The second half talked about libraries, archives, museums, educators and researchers. Beyond a tendency to indicate that the real problems lay outside of copyright, for example in funding (a point which is partially true, but does not take away from the need for copyright reform), the report felt the need to suggest that enabling libraries to do their jobs better in a digital world nonetheless should not come at the expense of rightholder interests.

This is revealing, sadly underlining a presumption – a prejudice even – that somehow the interests of libraries and their users need to be balanced, but those of rightholders do not.

There is a challenge around the supply of digital content, but is freezing work on L&Es the answer?: a fundamental question raised by both ‘sides’  of the debate – and which the WIPO Secretariat to their credit has certainly recognised – is that an key underpinning issue is the fact that there simply isn’t enough affordable, accessible, digital content out there.

Given the size of the internet, this may seem like an odd claim, but for many in schools and research centres, it is the case, with materials either stuck behind unscalable paywalls, not available in relevant languages, or simply not existing on topics and contexts that matter.

Advocates for rightholder organisations suggest that a key factor in this undersupply is a fear that if works are made available in digital format, they will be pirated, and demand for them will evaporate. As a secondary argument, they also claim that digital-adapted L&Es will also suppress the market.

Of course, the first question is one of enforcement, not basic copyright laws, while the second goes back to the arguments above about the degree to which the work of libraries strengthens or weakens markets for books and other materials.

The counter-argument here of course is that libraries offer an excellent means of providing access to digital content in a way that can be better controlled, using effective tools, and of course that the work of libraries represents a guarantee of research, innovation and creativity in the future, not a threat to it.

Indeed, we can argue that this is rather a failure of the market to respond to demand, driven perhaps by a lack of capacity, but also perhaps by fear and uncertainty among actors who more or less control the market.

This is not the first time that WIPO has addressed the issue of the under-supply of content in formats that work for readers. It’s exactly the challenge that the Marrakesh Treaty looked to overcome.

While international legal action around L&Es remains only one of the options on the table for now to resolve this failure (although arguably, there’s no other way of dealing definitively with challenges around cross-border working), it would undoubtedly have a strong triggering effect on national legislation.

 

This blog has looked to provide insight into some of the assumptions and understandings that explain position taken, and outcomes achieved, at SCCR. Addressing them, and finding solutions, will need to be part of any ongoing strategy to achieve progress.

As a final point, of course, it is worth noting that copyright can of course tend to polarise, whereas on most issues, the interests of rightholders, libraries and their users converge. Setting aside pure profit motives, we all, deep down, work towards a situation where there is a rich production of relevant materials, and literate, curious populations that are eager to read and apply knowledge. Despite the various points of disagreement in fora like WIPO, it is good to remember that we are all there for the same ultimate purpose.

The 10-Minute International Librarian #94: Explain how you support research and innovation

An over-used phrase about the nature of innovation is that we can see so far today because we are standing on the shoulders of giants.

These giants are the thinkers and innovators of the past, who have written down their ideas and insights in books, articles and other documents.

It follows that libraries, with their role in bringing together these ideas and insights, are key to enabling further research and innovation.

Of course, the ways that libraries support these are far more diverse now than simply safeguarding existing texts. Libraries are innovating themselves in how they enable innovation!

But too often, people’s stereotypes of libraries means that we are seen as being far from high-technology. We need to combat this, in order to ensure that we can continue to benefit from support.

This is a valuable area of focus – research and innovation represent a major and ongoing policy priority.

So for our 94th 10-Minute International Librarian #94: Explain how you support research and innovation.

There are lots of arguments, but it’s important to be able to think about how to condense these down into just a couple of sentences.

Think too about how you can present these arguments in a way that will convince a researcher, or someone responsible for research policy.

How can you convince them that they will be far less able to achieve their goals if they don’t bring libraries with them?

Share your ideas in the comments below!

Good luck!

 

This idea relates to the IFLA Strategy! Key Initiative 1.1: Show the power of libraries in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. 

As we publish more ideas, you will be able to view these using the #10MinuteInternationalLibrarian tag on this blog, and of course on IFLA’s Ideas Store! Do also share your ideas in the comments box below!

Five information disorders that could sink the SDGs, and how to prevent this

In IFLA’s work around the SDGs, our core theme is the importance of meaningful access to information as a key driver for development.

This access, to our understanding, consists of a combination of the practical possibility of access (accessibility), a favourable socioeconomic situation (affordability), the presence of relevant information and the possibility to use it (availability) and the skills to make the most of it (capacity).

This can, however, risk being a difficult sell when working with policy makers who either take information for granted (policy-makers themselves will tend to come from more favoured, educated backgrounds), or are not in the habit of thinking about information in a holistic way (as of course we do in the library field!).

So what other options are available to us when trying to make the case for information as a key area of focus for work on the Sustainable Development Goals?

One option – admittedly a potentially alarmist one – is to look rather at what the costs of inaction in the face of information disorders can be.

The term information disorders, taken from the work of Divina Frau-Meigs (but then very loosely applied), refers to situations where the way in which information is created, shared, internalised and applied somehow goes wrong, leading to negative consequences.

This can be powerful. Given that we tend to be more concerned about what we might lose than what we might gain, it can be a good way of focusing minds.

And by bringing together arguments about what there is to lose by a failure to address information disorders, we can, perhaps get closer to building the case for a comprehensive approach to information (and libraries as essential information institutions) in SDG implementation.

This blog lists five such disorders that we face today, and what they mean for the chances of success in the 2030 Agenda.

1) Illiteracy: the inability of millions around the world still to engage with the written word has to represent one of the ongoing challenges of our time. Next week, the International Conference on Adult Education (CONFINTEA) will meet, with the ongoing need to ensure universal adult literacy likely to be high on the agenda.

Literacy of course is already highlighted in the Sustainable Development Goals, as well as in many other key reference texts, as a pressing goal. It should be. For as long as people cannot read, they will struggle to seize so many other opportunities linked to aspects of the wider development agenda – finding work or launching a business, learning more generally, engaging in democratic life. Continued investment in universal literacy needs to be a priority.

Libraries of course have an established and recognised role, both as a venue for basic literacy training, and a key resource to help those with fundamental skills consolidate and build on them. As highlighted in our review of LitBase last year, libraries can be providers, promoters and partners in this mission.

2) Mis and Disinformation: a serious and growing concern, in the light both of the polarisation of the political debate in many countries, and the fight against the COVID-19 Pandemic, has been the rise of mis- and dis-information as a phenomenon.

Clearly, lying is not a new thing, and people and governments have been doing this forever. However, it does feel that recent years have seen a greater brazenness in dismissing scientific advice, and the internet has created possibilities for mis- and disinformation to spread more quickly than before. This may well be accelerated too by business models that promote the controversial or shocking. As such, and as set out in the UN Secretary-General’s Our Common Agenda, there is a need to take stronger action to call out lies, and to combat the means by which they are spread.

Without this, there are risks to policy effectiveness in key areas of the SDGs – not least health – as well as more broadly to the ability of democratic systems to work in a way that best serves people. This is also an area where libraires have an obvious and existing role to play, both in building up the skills to recognise mis- and disinformation, and in parallel, to promote a sense of openness and curiosity about the world that doesn’t just focus on simple and lazy responses.

3) Information Poverty: information and knowledge have an immense role to play in achieving the SDGs. While often taken for granted, they are essential if we want people to be able to take optimal decisions about themselves and those around them, to innovate, to learn, to participate in democracy, and in broader social and cultural life.

Yet for too many people, this isn’t a reality. For some, it will be an economic question – more on this below. But for others, it is simply because the information isn’t there, or at least not in a form that they can access. A lack of materials in relevant languages or accessible formats – both as concerns persons with disabilities, and simply written or presented in a way that can be used – can also mean that people end up suffering from information poverty.

There is of course action on this point already, for example the Marrakesh Treaty (which addresses the book famine), and many initiatives to promote multilingualism. Technology of course offers possibilities here, but in turn needs to be affordable and accessible.

Libraries have always acted as an antidote to information poverty, a way of working around the fact that it is only by pooling resources that it can become feasible to acquire and give access to information and the tools for this. They continue to do this, in ways that suit the needs of the communities they serve.

4) The Privatisation of Information: highlighted above was the risk that economics could get in the way of the access to information needed to enable development. While of course there need to be means of paying correctly for the production of information, these become problematic when they leave the less wealthy empty handed.

However, with the shift to digital, we have seen a deregulation by stealth of the market for information and knowledge. Going from selling books and other materials to licensing access gives rightholders huge powers over who can access works, how, and what they can do with them. Unless there is action to ensure that licenses cannot take away core knowledge rights, protections for core public interest uses risk being undermined.

Linked to this is the way that data and information itself has become a market, with companies realising how powerful control over, and exploitation of, data about users and their behaviour can be. Possibilities to track what people are doing not only raise questions about privacy, but also the potential distortion of behaviours as platforms and others seek to maximise attention.

The risk here is that people are unable to access the information that they need to improve their situation, because of their situation – i.e. they are not of interest to profit-orientated players. Furthermore, they risk being manipulated, or having to trade in their rights to be able to access information, or are pushed in sub-optimal directions, all of which can hold them back from doing what they need to do.

There are clear and welcome calls for a digital commons at the UN level in Our Common Agenda, and for a knowledge commons in UNESCO’s Futures of Education report – these both imply putting the interest of the community above those of individual private actors.

Again, this is an area of library strength traditionally. By pooling resources, libraries help overcome the economic barriers to copyright, although certainly require the protections from the hollowing out of protections for public interest uses mentioned above. They can also bring insights and values to discussions about how information and data should be regulated, in the interests of all.

5) Lack of connectivity: finally, there is the ongoing challenge faced by those who cannot yet access the internet reliably, and quickly. This is of course a point closely related to that about information poverty above, given the increasingly important role of the internet as a means of accessing information. As print-runs of books, journals and newspapers disappear, those without digital access are cut off, and of course cannot take advantage of all the new possibilities created.

An obvious example here is open access – this has been a transformative movement, bypassing cost-barriers to access to knowledge, and so allowing researchers around the world to draw on materials that would previously have been out of reach… If they have an internet connection.

The costs of leaving people unconnected are similar to those of other disorders set out above – the lack of possibility to access information to take decisions, and to participate in social, economic, political and cultural life. It can leave people isolated, unable to realise the potential to build connections with others. It can also of course reduce the effectiveness of government efforts, especially those that rely on eGovernment tools.

Again, libraries are key players here, providing public internet access both as a last recourse for those who cannot access in other ways, and as a complement to home connectivity, or via a mobile device. They can even be hubs for local connectivity as anchor institutions.

 

Across these areas, there is a risk that inaction, or inadequate action, will leave the world less able to deliver on the SDGs. They underline that there is a need for information to be taken seriously as a policy issue, in order to avoid this. More positively, they also represent a call for a more proactive approach to ensuring that everyone benefits from access to knowledge. Any such effort will need to have libraries at its heart.

The 10-Minute International Librarian #93: Raise your ambitions

The way we think about our actions is often determined by the way we see the world.

This makes sense – it is important to think about the environment in which we are working when planning how we are going to operate.

However, this can also limit us. We can make assumptions about how things are going to be, and what is going to be possible or not, that may not always be right.

Critically, a pessimistic view of the world can risk us to lower our hopes, and not try things that could actually be beneficial.

So for our 93rd 10-Minute International Librarian exercise, raise your ambitions.

Think about your own plans for the coming year and what you think you can achieve, and challenge yourself.

Can you think of an assumption you are making, or a target that you have, and think about whether you can’t stretch yourself?

Obviously don’t go crazy! But it can be a healthy way of breaking out of the same old way of doing things.

Let us know about times when you have raised your ambitions in the comments below.

Good luck!

 

This idea relates to the IFLA Strategy! Key Initiative 2.2: Deliver high quality campaigns, information and other communications products on a regular basis to engage and energise libraries 

As we publish more ideas, you will be able to view these using the #10MinuteInternationalLibrarian tag on this blog, and of course on IFLA’s Ideas Store! Do also share your ideas in the comments box below!

 

The 10-Minute International Librarian #92: Document your work

A lot of the posts in this series so far have focused on thinking of times when you have done something.

Innovated, included, taught, learned, and more.

These examples are powerful, as a means of reminding yourself of your progress, and of telling others about how great libraries are!

Having a series of anecdotes at the ready can mean you’re a lot more ready to face new situations, and explain what you’re doing in terms that people will understand.

Yet often, in the middle of busy jobs, we can easily forget to take notes in the first place, meaning that we may risk forgetting all the great things you’re doing!

So for our 92nd 10-Minute International Librarian exercise, document your work.

This doesn’t need to be exhaustive (after all, this is the 10-Minute International Librarian), but rather you could create a file, or even have a note pad, where you write down the most interesting and important things you’ve done or experienced.

It doesn’t need to be long – just enough to help you remember.

This can also be a good way of encouraging more reflective practice – going about your job with an awareness of what may be significant, and where you are (or could be) learning.

Through this, you’ll not only have a source of examples you can give in future, but also even perhaps see new dimensions to your work now.

Let us know your experiences of recording and reflecting on your work in the comments below.

Good luck!

 

This idea relates to the IFLA Strategy! Key Initiative 3.4: Provide targeted learning and professional development 

As we publish more ideas, you will be able to view these using the #10MinuteInternationalLibrarian tag on this blog, and of course on IFLA’s Ideas Store! Do also share your ideas in the comments box below!

The 10-Minute Digital Librarian #13: Explore digital work management tools

This third series of posts covers tools available to support productivity and effectiveness, with today’s edition looking at how you can manage your own work, as well as collaborative projects.

This can be particularly important when you are managing a complex or varied workload, or one with lots of dependencies (i.e. one thing needs to happen in order for other things to happen).

In such situations, it can be all too easy to rely on a sea of post-it notes, or simply to focus on the issues that seem most urgent, rather than stepping back and taking a wider perspective. However, this can lead to things being forgotten, in particular longer-term, more strategic activities.

It therefore helps when you can get a better overview of the tasks you have, and so understand better how you may need to sequence activities, or how to prioritise better.

Many of the tools in this space come from the world of project management, where there are deadlines and obligations to deliver. Others originate from programmers, who need to be able to keep a strong overview of development in order to finalise a product on time.

A well-known example is Trello, used by a wide variety of companies and public bodies in order to support team-working. It can serve both as a one-stop-shop for different information needed by everyone involved, or for task-management. For example, you can establish tasks to be done, those underway, and those which are completed, and assign responsibility, through a tool known as a Kanban board.

However, there are other tools out there of course!

Other free options include Notion, which provides lots of opportunities for organising your work, from keeping track of meetings and action points, Kanban boards, contact lists and others. This has been used effectively by teams working on advocacy for example.

Asana and Airtable also have free options, and there is a fuller list available on this blog.

Let us know which tools you prefer to use in the comments below!

 

If you are interested in issues around digital tools in libraries in general, you should take a look at the work of IFLA’s Information Technology Section.

Discover our full series of 10-Minute Digital Librarian posts, as well as our infographics.