The Internet, and information technology in general, has challenged the way we think about publishing and libraries. No longer is the transmission of information tied to physical objects. In a sense, we have been forced to deal with what we always knew: information can always be widely disseminated, it is simply the cost of its transmission that is a constraint.
In an important sense, this is a boon not a problem. Information is the type of good that economists term a 'public good.' It is possible that anyone can utilise it without making it unattractive for others to do so. This is in contrast to private goods such as apples. When I eat an apple it prevents others from enjoying that apple. While the social issue for apples is ensuring that the person who values it the most consumes it, the issue for information is different. To the extent that everyone can "consume" information, from a social point of view we want everyone to have access to it.
The very existence of libraries is based on the idea that information is such a public good. In a sense, a library is a critical nexus for what you want in information transmission: it is a provider of liquidity in much the same way a bank is a provider of monetary liquidity. Banks ensure that people who want to save can find matches with those who want to invest. Libraries ensure that people who want to say something can be heard by many without having to identify and market to individuals. Libraries, as repositories of information, allow people to sort it out among themselves. Libraries that have wider catalogues attract those who want information but cannot specify it precisely.
The Wallis Inquiry into the Financial Sector in Australia identified the Internet as a reason why banks might no longer perform their traditional role of seeking out matches between savers and borrowers. Why? Because, using the Internet, it is easier for savers to seek out borrowers. The information is out there and freely available. In effect, the information transmission constraint that banks existed to alleviate has been itself alleviated, mitigating the very need for a banker.
The same challenge seems to face both publishers and libraries alike. Will information consumers bypass traditional libraries by seeking out information themselves over the Internet? In part this has already happened. As an academic, I receive working papers and timely research news over the Internet. This has greatly improved my research productivity, especially in working from Australia.
But perhaps the example of banking should also give us pause about potential removal of the role of libraries. While the Internet might make it easier for savers to find borrowers in the absence of banks, it does not solve a key problem of information transmission: how do you trust it? Suppose I find a web site that has a lucrative proposal for an investment fund. It might be a foreign investment. How can I evaluate the quality of that proposal? I can research it myself and that might be alright for one or two projects. But for the vast majority of opportunities I will never be able to distinguish the good from the bad. I will need an agent to work full-time on this. And this is what banks do. Not only do they provide liquidity, they provide monitoring. This sorts the good from the bad and so it is a reason I will still go to banks with my savings.
For libraries the same role exists. Consider my search for working papers. While it helps me gather research from a few top universities, for the vast majority of useful information I still must wait on journals. Moreover, publishers well aware that individual academics never pay enough for journals still, in the main, only offer physical and electronic services at a price affordable by a library. The publishers help evaluate the good from the bad research while the libraries provide a check on the good versus bad publishers.
The role of the librarian is to provide monitoring of new publications
for information users such as myself. The Internet may raise the importance
of this role relative to "liquidity" services but it will not
be able substitute for it. For individual libraries the challenge will be
to modify this monitoring role and develop a reputation for gathering quality
information. As such, it is likely that librarians will be integrated more
closely with the professions they service. In a sense, therefore, the Internet
will redefine the role of the library as a provider of useful information
more than a place for users to sort it out for themselves.
This article appeared in Issues, Vol.30, September 1998, p.2.