Greening the Library

Ephraim, P. (2003).  The greening of libraries.  Library Management, 24(3), 160-163.

Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdwebindex=2&did=305802421&SrchMode=2&sid=2&Fmt=3&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1315533843&clientId=51710

Abstract of the Article:

 

Ephraim (2003) integrates the concept of sustainability in the library setting through Green Library Management.  This model works on the premise that “all human activities draw from, and impact on, the environment”.  Thus, it calls for the enactment of library policies and strategies which put prime emphasis on environmental conservation.  Among these are the maintenance of a well-arranged, illuminated, and dust-free work environment;    the incorporation of environmental education in library-use programs, the adoption of using and purchasing materials made out of re-cycled papers; and the replacement of paper-based storage media with electronic format for information preservation.  In the end, Ephraim (2003) is aware of the opposition to the Green Library Management Model as it demands abandoning traditional way of thinking; but he is also confident that libraries will eventually recognize the possibilities it offers.

3 Things I Learned:

1.       The term “sustainable development” is coined by Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland in the World Commission of Environment and Development in 1983.

2.       Through the concept of generational justice every decisions and actions of current library users and staff has its effect to the library and its future users.

3.        Digitization of materials for preservation is a key element in Green Library Management.

Application / Implication:

The possibilities and challenges it face albeit in another front is comparable to the open access movement.  Sustainable development offers an alternative to the traditional notion of development.  Its scope is more encompassing as it integrates the marginalized sectors on the forefront of debate.  Hence, advancing its cause is not at all a hare brained idea.  In fact, it proposes a more beautiful future for all of us.  Given equal footing, we all owe it Mother Earth.

Health Concerns

Uwaifo, S.O. (2007).  Nigerian library staff and their perceptions of health risks posed by using computer-based systems in university libraries.  Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems, 42(1), 68-75.

Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdwebindex=9&did=1440838991&SrchMode=1&sid=7&Fmt=6&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1315535308&clientId=51710

Abstract of the Article:

Uwaifo (2007) reveals that the benefits far outweigh the health risks of using computers in the performance of library-related tasks.  This is manifested in the low level of ergonomic programs of Nigerian university libraries.  Thus, Uwaifo (2007) argues that library management should not overlook health risks of library workers albeit the predominant perception and practice.  He calls for result-oriented ergonomic programs such as designing building and “putting in place IT equipment” and pieces of furniture which complies with ergonomics requirements.

3 Things I Learned:

1.       Etymology of Ergonomics: Greek words: “ergo” (work) and “nomos” (natural laws). Hence, it refers to “the study of how computers and machines” can be made to fit humans better” to ensure the safety, efficiency, and reliability of performance of workers.

2.       Ergonomic features include tiltable keyboard and monitor, suitable software, proper ventilation, adjustable chairs and tables, and spacious building.

3.       Common computer-related health hazards are categorized into two:  repetitive strain injury and cumulative trauma disorders.

Application / Implication:

Managing a library does not just involve building up and organizing one’s collection but also seeing to it that the place or structure itself is conducive for its users.  It must also lessen the health hazards of its workers and promote employees’ welfare.  In my work place however, advancing this cause entails significant budgetary allocation not to mention the long and winding bureaucratic process.  But even if the odds are against me, lobbying for it is my first step in producing desired results.  In this world of endless possibilities, who says that dreams do not come true?

Open Source Software

Krichel, T. (2009). From open source to open libraries.  Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 35(2), 39-46.

Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdwebindex=0&did=1624592501&SrchMode=2&sid=3&Fmt=6&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1315363632&clientId=51710

Abstract of the Article:

Theoretically, Krichel (2009) makes an analogy between library and open source software (OSS) as a form of service.  In terms of interface, software uses the mouse button and text field; whereas the library service has building and staff.  In terms of organization, software uses various source codes, while the library catalogs its collection.  Lastly, in terms of objects of interest, software works on files and the library works on books. 

On the practical level, Krichel (2009) discusses OSS from the social science perspective.  According to him, one key factor for the success of OSS is the sense of ownership it gives to the community.  Everyone may not just download or read the program but may re-write, re-pack, and re-develop it to serve one’s functional purpose.  Another factor pertains to the way it has valued time.  Developing OSS is tantamount to “making a huge piece (sic) of complex information available” by splitting “the task into small bits” and by assigning “a volunteer to each bit”.  In this way, any person involve in the process spends relatively a small amount of his time.  Another key factor is the way OSS may be reuse.  OSS such as the Perl and C code modules are being reuse in developing other OSS.  Thus, one need not start from scratch but rather builds on the knowledge of others.  For Krichel (2009), libraries should cope with the development in OSS.  However, technical incompetence of library staff, the myth of industry, and the myth of full text are just some of the challenges to achieving open libraries.

  

3 Things I Learned:

1.       Although theoretically neglected, OSS is in itself a form of service.

2.       Myth of industry refers to the tendency of people to apply rigid control over the usage of one’s work.

3.       The use of Perl and C codes in software programming.

Application / Implication:

Having learned about the nature and possible benefits of OSS, I am challenged to look for one that may facilitate a more efficient legal information service for my work place.

Open-Publishing

Hahn, T.B., Burright, M., and Duggan, H.N. (2011). Has the revolution in scholarly communication lived up its promise.  Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 37(5), 24-28.

Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=2369488191&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=6&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1315277280&clientId=51710

Abstract of the Article:

Hahn et al. (2011) propose the Open Access Institutional Repository Model for scholarly communication “where scholars (may) share their works with few or no legal and financial barriers” and where these scholarly materials may be disseminated to audience around the world.  In line with this, Hahn et al. (2011) explore the various roles librarians can play in scholarly communication. By supporting the Open Access Institutional Repository Model, librarians may help shrink the gap between dwindling library budget and increasing cost of library materials.  The professional expertise of librarians with respect to copyright and scholarly communication equips the former to lobby for better terms of agreement (e.g. opt-out clauses, less content bundling, and lower prices) with traditional publishing companies in favor of the scholar and the larger public. Lastly, librarians can contribute in raising the awareness of the community as to the availability of these open access mechanisms as an alternative to what Hahn et al. (2011) describe  as “prohibitively costly and restrictive” traditional model of publishing.

3 Things I Learned:

1.       Scholarly Communication is an umbrella term which encompasses “all activities and norms of scholars related to creating and disseminating new knowledge”.

2.       Impact Factor is based on the assumption that “the number of times articles are cited relates to their importance in the field”.  It is one of the tools used in open access publication; so much for its credit or discredit for that matter, such articles will then be considered the core collection of a particularly field.

3.       The Public Library of Science, which is launched in 2003, serves as the open access business model for open access publishing.

Application / Implication:

Utilizing the various mechanisms of the open access movement offers nothing but advantages to any library and information center.  But as a word of caution, we as librarians, as information professionals, and most importantly as end-users must critically assess the scholarly value and relevance of these open access publications since the quality of our output is to a certain extent dependent on the quality of information we feed upon ourselves.