The Value of a Communitarian Approach to Public Library Board Governance: Rejecting Current Neoliberal Practice/La valeur d’une approche communautariste de la gouvernance du conseil d’administration d’une bibliothèque publique : Le rejet de la pratique néolibérale actuelle

IF 0.6 4区 管理学 Q3 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Bill Irwin
{"title":"The Value of a Communitarian Approach to Public Library Board Governance: Rejecting Current Neoliberal Practice/La valeur d’une approche communautariste de la gouvernance du conseil d’administration d’une bibliothèque publique : Le rejet de la pratique néolibérale actuelle","authors":"Bill Irwin","doi":"10.1353/ILS.2012.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over the last several years, public library boards in Canada, like most public bodies, have adopted a neoliberal marketization approach to their policy and decision-making processes. This approach is at odds with traditional professional practices of librarianship. This paper focuses on two competing approaches to public library board governance: neoliberalism and communitarianism. In the assessing of the discourse between these two models, it is contended that neoliberalism has instilled operational procedures and an organizational culture that are contrary to a spirit of positive public engagement, a spirit that should be the cornerstone of public library boards. In contrast, communitarianism, by providing a set of guiding principles, makes public library boards more accessible within their communities, and can therefore lead to the rediscovery of the public library board’s positive spirit of public engagement. Through a search for praxis, recommendations on how public library board trustees can maintain their dual responsibility of professional ethics of librarianship while remaining an integral part of their local community are proffered.","PeriodicalId":43727,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science-Revue Canadienne Des Sciences De L Information et De Bibliotheconomie","volume":"36 1","pages":"1 - 15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2012-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/ILS.2012.0002","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science-Revue Canadienne Des Sciences De L Information et De Bibliotheconomie","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ILS.2012.0002","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Over the last several years, public library boards in Canada, like most public bodies, have adopted a neoliberal marketization approach to their policy and decision-making processes. This approach is at odds with traditional professional practices of librarianship. This paper focuses on two competing approaches to public library board governance: neoliberalism and communitarianism. In the assessing of the discourse between these two models, it is contended that neoliberalism has instilled operational procedures and an organizational culture that are contrary to a spirit of positive public engagement, a spirit that should be the cornerstone of public library boards. In contrast, communitarianism, by providing a set of guiding principles, makes public library boards more accessible within their communities, and can therefore lead to the rediscovery of the public library board’s positive spirit of public engagement. Through a search for praxis, recommendations on how public library board trustees can maintain their dual responsibility of professional ethics of librarianship while remaining an integral part of their local community are proffered.
公共图书馆董事会治理的社区主义方法的价值:拒绝当前的新自由主义实践/公共图书馆董事会治理的社区主义方法的价值:拒绝当前的新自由主义实践
在过去的几年里,加拿大的公共图书馆委员会,像大多数公共机构一样,在他们的政策和决策过程中采用了新自由主义的市场化方法。这种方法与传统的图书馆专业实践不一致。本文关注公共图书馆董事会治理的两种竞争方法:新自由主义和社群主义。在评估这两种模式之间的话语时,有人认为,新自由主义灌输了与积极的公众参与精神相反的操作程序和组织文化,这种精神应该是公共图书馆董事会的基石。相比之下,社群主义通过提供一套指导原则,使公共图书馆董事会在其社区内更容易获得,因此可以重新发现公共图书馆董事会积极的公众参与精神。通过对实践的探索,对公共图书馆董事会如何在保持其当地社区不可分割的一部分的同时保持其图书馆职业道德的双重责任提出了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
25.00%
发文量
7
期刊介绍: The Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science is recognized internationally for its authoritative bilingual contributions to the field of information science. Established in 1976, the journal is dedicated to the publication of research findings, both in full-length and in brief format; reviews of books; software and technology; and letters to the editor. The editorial policy of the journal is to continue the advancement of information and library science in both English and French Canada by serving as a forum for discussion of theory and research. The journal is concerned with research findings, understanding the issues in the field, and understanding the history, economics, technology, and human behaviour of information library systems and services.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信