Search

From the late 20th century, economic pressure on public library budgets rises as government funding has declined (Aabø, 2009; Child & Goulding, 2012). Under increasing financial pressure, creating a procedure for how public libraries can provide fulfilling services to residents is one of the essential issues in public library management. As a result, internationally, management models of public libraries have become more diverse in terms of dealing with financial problems. For example, there are management models such as the Designated Manager System (privatisation of public libraries) in Japan, the Community Libraries (managed by volunteers) in England, and the Combined Libraries (hybridisation of different types) in the Nordic Countries. All of these management models are a means to address the financial challenges of public libraries. In the same way in the United States, library districts are receiving much attention as a management model that responds to financial deterioration. Library districts are Special-Purpose Governments that have a tax levy and bond authority for library management. Also, library districts are formed through a referendum. Recent studies have demonstrated that library districts' revenues are more stable over the long term than those of other legal bases, such as General-Purpose Governments and Non-Profit Organisations (NPOs) in the United States (Elliott, 2013; Goldman, 2018). However, forming library districts are not simple, because it means a tax increase for residents. Nevertheless, the number of library districts has increased since the late 20th century. Why do voters allow a tax levy for library management? In this paper, we examined in detail the arguments regarding the formation of library districts through an in-depth case analysis. In this research, we analysed the “voters’ pamphlet” distributed to residents at the time of referendum for forming the Josephine Community library district in the state of Oregon. The “voters’ pamphlet” described detailed opinions of residents regarding formation of library districts. In the analysis, based on the constituents of library district management presented through a comprehensive literature review by Suzuki and Koizumi (2020), we analysed the opinions of the residents through a qualitative content analysis. Specifically, through the analysis of opinions in favour, we illustrated the factors that residents allow to form library districts. Second, through the analysis of opinions in opposition, we illustrated the factors that residents opposed to form library districts. As a result, we showed the following research results. Those in favour emphasised the significance of public libraries in the community. On top of that, they allowed the formation of the library district as a means to provide library services sustainably. In particular, they were satisfied with the current library service and hoped to enhance it further. On the other hand, many opponents opposed the formation of the library district, even though they recognised the value of public libraries. It was against the permanent taxation of the library district. Also, opponents called for donations to public libraries. In other words, the significance of public libraries in the community was a common understanding among residents. The argument is how much the residents are willing to accept the burden of providing library services., Bobcatsss, Bobcatsss 2021: Digital Transformation

Against a background of social fragmentation and isolation, modern public libraries are expected to facilitate multicultural exchange, guarantee equal access to information, and promote critical public debate. In the field of library and information science, based on Habermasian public sphere theory from the 1960s, there has been considerable research over the past 20 years that analyzed how public libraries fulfill these functions. Research on the public library as a public sphere is expected to continue actively in the future. It is therefore important to clarify the knowledge structure of existing research in this area. Studies that provide a comprehensive analysis of research on the public library as a public sphere include those by Vårheim et al. (2019) and Widdersheim and Koizumi (2016). However, previous reviews utilize qualitative methods. There is a need for a comprehensive review that more objectively analyzes the knowledge structure in this research field through quantitative methods. The purpose of this study is to conduct topic modeling of the field of research on public libraries and the public sphere using LDA (Latent Dirichlet Allocation). This is in order to elucidate the knowledge structure of this research area. The source material used for topic modeling in this paper is the English-language literature included in the “comprehensive literature list related to the public sphere and public libraries” identified by Widdersheim and Koizumi (2019). For books that consisted of more than one research article, each article was counted as a distinct source. The total number of references analyzed was 128. In addition to the titles and abstracts, the full texts of the documents were included in the LDA analysis. Following best practices for LDA analysis, the number of topics and the results of LDA analysis for each topic was reviewed and considered. The authors qualitatively examined the results of these analyses using two-dimensional maps made by LDAvis. In the end, an LDA topic model consisting of 30 topics was successfully obtained. Furthermore, in order to clarify the knowledge structure in this research area (public library as a public sphere), the 30 topics were classified into five groups according to their characteristics. The five topical groups are: 1) creation of social connections, 2) language and cultural exchange, 3) social inclusion and democracy, 4) sites of deliberative democracy, and 5) theories of publicness and library policy.

Libraries as “Places of Public”, where one can experience architectural expression and the legacy of the academic community, are not a new concept in Japan. Public libraries in Japan, have a long history and over the years they have uniquely evolved from “student study room style” (1950s) to “lending library style” (1960s and 1970s) to “network and multimedia style” (1980s to early 1990s), and then to “spatial and user-centered style” (late 1990s to 2000s). This paper would like to examine the characteristics and roles of ‘library as place’ in Japan. We would also like to use these factors to classify Japanese public libraries. By classifying them into types of libraries, we can elucidate the trends and features of the characteristics and roles of the places of public libraries in Japan. Our study used mixed methods of qualitative content analysis and cluster analysis. We targeted 487 Japanese public libraries that had been inaugurated or renovated since 2010. Among these we were able to collect documents from 128 libraries. Documents collected for the analysis included (1) strategic plans, (2) service plans, and (3) construction plans. Descriptions of the place and spaces were assigned codes using the qualitative analysis software MAXQDA. We then developed a typology of public libraries based on cluster analysis. We examined each cluster and classified them. As a result of the qualitative content analysis, 5,581 codes were derived and divided into 13 code groups. Most libraries had two major code groups, “contribution to community building” and “meeting user needs through space development”. In other words, both code groups typically represent the characteristics and roles of Japanese public libraries today. In addition, cluster analysis was conducted on the code groups, and the libraries were classified into six library types: (1) modern basic, (2) progressive, (3) community-development, (4) information-centered, (5) civic and social-centered, and (6) traditional service-oriented. Future research of each type could further clarify the actual role of library spaces for citizens and local communities.

PurposeThis article addresses a recent debate in this journal between Buschman and Widdersheim and Koizumi on public libraries and public sphere theory in library and information science (LIS). The article moves beyond the debate as the debate has been too focused on the theories of Jürgen Habermas. In order to really understand the democratic mission of public libraries and how it is related to the public sphere, the author argues that LIS scholars need to look beyond Habermas' theories of the public sphere.Design/methodology/approachThis is a theoretical article that discusses different theories of the public sphere, and how they have been and can be applied in library and information science.FindingsThe author finds that a main disagreement between Buschman and Widdersheim and Koizumi is whether one can use the concept of a public sphere without doing it in a “traditional” Habermasian way. The answers put forward in this article, is that we can and should look beyond Habermas' work when seeking to understand the role of public libraries as public spheres.Originality/valueThe article puts forward theories that are not commonly used in LIS, and advocates for broadening the theoretical scope of LIS scholars studying the relations between public libraries and public spheres.