A mapping review of literature on Blockchain usage by libraries: Challenges and opportunities – Muhammad Safdar, Saima Qutab, Farasat Shafi Ullah, Nadeem Siddique, Muhammad Ajmal Khan, 2022

Abstract:  The Library and Information Science (LIS) community has started discussing some possible uses of Blockchain (BC) technologies in solving library-related problems and increasing the overall efficiency of libraries. This study aimed to systematically collect and review the relevant literature to comprehend the scope of BC for libraries, its benefits, as well as the challenges, and implications related to its use. The authors explored six reputed databases (Web of Science, Scopus, LISTA (Library, Information Science and Technology Abstracts), LISA (Library and Information Science Abstracts), IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers), and Google Scholar) to conduct this review. This study was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. After the final data extraction, 21 documents were considered eligible for the systematic review. A systematic review of the selected works indicated that the usage of BC in libraries ranged from record-keeping to processing payments and ensuring security and transparency. Some of the opportunities that can be hunted from BC were the elimination of corruption, enhanced security, improved efficiency of services, and better time management. Literature also indicated that a lack of awareness of technology, unskilled staff, and financial constraints could impede the adoption of BC by libraries. It is hoped that this study would provide a holistic overview of BC technologies for libraries, thus improving the effectiveness of the decision-makers. This study is first that collected (systematically) and reviewed the literature on BC usage in libraries. The review will help educational institutions and library professionals understand the usage, challenges, and benefits of BC for libraries.


India and a historical perspective of open access | Emerald Insight

Abstract:  Purpose

The environments of the library under open access (OA) are distinctively found as less expensive which ultimately reciprocates better services and technological support for the users as well. Focussing on the Librarians’ perspective, the purpose of the study is to highlight and establish a balance between the vision of OA initiatives and the support of Librarians in India. The principal and philosophy of the study are based upon the exploration of open source initiatives and their significance among the Library & Information Science community.


The study reflects the historical perspective of OA in India and around the world. The study further focusses on how the OA movement has taken a leap in adaptability by the librarians on the basis of acceptance model given. Considering the reviews of the librarians, the study reflects the librarians support OA initiatives in India. OA is a “provocation to thought”, it is a “social contract”.


Exploring beyond the researchers have come across that OA is a belief where knowledge evolves best when shared. Based on the acceptance the study given significant. It describes the librarian’s attitude while embracing the OA model with an increased acceptance towards OA, which supports in building Institutional Repositories and broadening the research horizons based on budgetary implications. The librarians and libraries adopt and work to build up a resilient model for OA to bring out awareness among the users.

Research limitations/implications

The scope of the study is limited to Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Haryana. The focus of the study is purposely laid down on the three given states of India keeping in mind Delhi being a capital city of India, Uttar Pradesh being the largest state of India (area wise) and Haryana state, which opened up multiple educational opportunities for the students and researchers Rajiv Gandhi Educational city plans to host many educational institutions including medical and engineering institutions.

Practical implications

The study describes the librarian’s attitude while embracing the OA model with an increased acceptance towards the OA, which supports in building Institutional Repositories and broadening the research horizons based on budgetary implications. The librarians and libraries adopt and work to build up a resilient model for OA to bring out awareness among the users.

Social implications

The present study brings out the need of different policies and mandates by Government of India for OA along with University Grants Commission, National Knowledge Commission and Research Organisation to promote the culture of OA. The study further recommends that LIS communities come together and build the learning culture to promote limitless sharing of information and knowledge for scholarly society.


This research work aims to make a difference in highlighting the librarians’ support on OA initiatives in India due to the role of librarians on transitional point. Dissemination and management of information using digital technology during pandemic have had a significant impact on divided environment. With this paradigm shift, the world struggles with the pandemic. The librarians try to keep themselves in pace by embracing the technology and LIS professionals do adopt the radical reventure the info technology.

Knowledge Equity and Justice Spring Seminar – Faculty of Information (iSchool) | University of Toronto

“The transmission and circulation of knowledge within information systems is not equitable. Certain kinds of knowledge, such as oral knowledge, or knowledge from certain peoples, such as Black or Indigenous peoples, are subject to forces of oppression. Furthermore, people can be treated unjustly for their inability to access knowledge. Theorist Miranda Fricker has described epistemic injustice as “wrong done to someone specifically in their capacity as a knower.” In contemporary information work, it is vital to understand the structural nature of epistemic injustice and move beyond surface-level work that aligns with many diversity and inclusion efforts to focus on knowledge justice.  

The Knowledge Equity and Justice Spring Seminar (KEJSS) is an intensive learning opportunity open to graduate students in Information Studies programs focusing on critical issues in epistemic justice relevant to Library and Information Sciences (LIS). Alongside guest speakers, participants will explore a series of topics that consider knowledge in relation to systems of power and race and the ways dominant culture systems oppress knowledge. Topics include scholarly communication, language and marginalization; Indigenous knowledge; and issues related to knowledge, citation and the Global South. This seminar invites participants to recognize knowledge as a site for justice and consider how to put knowledge justice into practice as future information professionals.

Sponsored by SPARC (the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition) and the Faculty of Information at the University of Toronto, and convened by Professor Stacy Allison-Cassin, the seminar will take place online over three weeks. Through the workshop, students will have an opportunity to listen and be in dialogue with speakers and engage with critical readings and materials. The Seminar consists of five two-hour talks by guest speakers and two-hour introductory and closing sessions. Guest talks will be open to the public, with additional time reserved for seminar participants. Speakers include Leslie Chan (University of Toronto Scarborough); Priyank Chandra & Adrian Petterson (Faculty of Information, University of Toronto); Alan Corbiere (York University); Stefanie Haustein (uOttawa); and Anasuya Sengupta and Adele Vrana (Whose Knowledge?)….”

A survey of researchers’ code sharing and code reuse practices, and assessment of interactive notebook prototypes | OSF Preprints

Cadwallader, L., & Hrynaszkiewicz, I. (2022, March 2). A survey of researchers’ code sharing and code reuse practices, and assessment of interactive notebook prototypes. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/tys8p

Abstract: This research aimed to understand the needs and habits of researchers in relation to code sharing and reuse; gather feedback on prototype code notebooks created by Neurolibre; and help determine strategies that publishers could use to increase code sharing. We surveyed 188 researchers in computational biology. Respondents were asked about how often and why they look at code, which methods of accessing code they find useful and why and what aspects of code sharing are important to them, and how satisfied they are with their ability to complete these. Respondents were asked to look at a prototype code notebook and give feedback on its features. Respondents were also asked how much time they spent preparing code and if they would be willing to increase this to use a code sharing tool, such as a notebook. As a reader of research articles the most common reason (70%) for looking at code was to gain a better understanding of the article. The most commonly encountered method for code sharing – linking articles to a code repository — was also the most useful method of accessing code from the reader’s perspective. As authors, the respondents were largely satisfied with their ability to carry out tasks related to code sharing. The most important of these tasks were ensuring that the code was running in the correct environment, and sharing code with good documentation. The average researcher, according to our results, is unwilling to incur additional costs (in time, effort or expenditure) that are currently needed to use code sharing tools alongside a publication. We infer this means we need different models for funding and producing interactive or executable research outputs if they are to reach a large number of researchers. For the purpose of increasing the amount of code shared by authors, PLOS Computational Biology is, as a result, focusing on policy rather than tools.

SPARC Announces Knowledge Equity Seminar for LIS Students – SPARC

“In cooperation with the Faculty of Information at the University of Toronto, SPARC is sponsoring the Knowledge Equity and Justice Spring Seminar (KEJSS), an intensive learning opportunity open to graduate students in Information Studies programs that will focus on critical issues in epistemic justice relevant to Library and Information Studies.

Convened by Dr. Stacy Allison-Cassin, the seminar will take place online over three weeks from May 9-26, 2022 and will cover topics including scholarly communication, language and marginalization, Indigenous knowledge, and issues related to knowledge, citation and the Global South. The seminar will invite participants to recognize knowledge as a site for justice and consider how to put knowledge justice into practice as future information professionals. 

Seminar guest speakers will include Leslie Chan (University of Toronto Scarborough); Priyank Chandra (Faculty of Information, University of Toronto); Alan Corbiere (York University); Stefanie Haustein (uOttawa); and, Anasuya Sengupta & Adele Vrana (Whose Knowledge?). These guest lectures will be open to the community, and SPARC will provide additional information about joining each in the next month….”

Survey for LIS dissertation

“I’m a Ph.D. candidate of library & information science. The topic of my thesis is “Recognition and comparison of knowledge sharing models in library and information science discussion groups and qualitative analysis of motivations”

  Considering the topic would you please kindly answer the following questions in detail If you are an active person in electronic discussion groups.”

Citing Indigenous Elders and Knowledge Keepers | news.library.ualberta.ca

By Kelsey Kropiniski

One of the most common ways that we support students in their writing here at UAlberta Library is by offering citation advice. Citation questions come up frequently, and usually when they occur we direct students to the citation guides on our website. From there, we try to find the correct style and format to help students properly cite the source material they’re working with. Sometimes citation isn’t simple. As with most things that have strict rules and regulations, citation styles like APA, MLA, and Chicago can be highly exclusionary to different forms of information – especially when it comes to Indigenous oral teachings.


Frontiers | The Scholarly Knowledge Ecosystem: Challenges and Opportunities for the Field of Information | Research Metrics and Analytics

Abstract:  The scholarly knowledge ecosystem presents an outstanding exemplar of the challenges of understanding, improving, and governing information ecosystems at scale. This article draws upon significant reports on aspects of the ecosystem to characterize the most important research challenges and promising potential approaches. The focus of this review article is the fundamental scientific research challenges related to developing a better understanding of the scholarly knowledge ecosystem. Across a range of disciplines, we identify reports that are conceived broadly, published recently, and written collectively. We extract the critical research questions, summarize these using quantitative text analysis, and use this quantitative analysis to inform a qualitative synthesis. Three broad themes emerge from this analysis: the need for multi-sectoral cooperation and coordination, for mixed methods analysis at multiple levels, and interdisciplinary collaboration. Further, we draw attention to an emerging consensus that scientific research in this area should by a set of core human values.

From the body of the paper: 

“Consider the Grand Challenge’s call for research into the determinants of engagement and participation in the scholarly knowledge ecosystem. Understanding those drivers requires consideration of a question raised by Maron et al. (2019) regarding the costs of labor required for open-source infrastructure projects, including the potentially inequitable distribution of unpaid labor in distributed collaborations. Similarly, NASEM–BRDI (2018) and NDSA (2020) delineate the basic and applied research necessary to develop both the institutional and technical infrastructure of stewardship, which would enable the goal of long-term durability of open access to knowledge. Finally, NASEM-BCBSS (2019) and Hardwicke et al. (2020) together characterize the range of research needed to systematically evaluate and improve the trustworthiness of scholarly and scientific communications. …”


Bradley | Academic Librarians, Open Access, and the Ethics of Care | Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication

Abstract:  This paper explores the value of applying the ethics of care to scholarly communications work, particularly that of open-access (OA) librarians. The ethics of care is a feminist philosophical perspective that sees in the personal a new way to approach other facets of life, including the political and the professional. Care, in this context, is broadly construed as “a species of activity that includes everything we do to maintain, contain, and repair our ‘world’ so that we can live in it as well as possible” (Fisher & Tronto, 1990, p. 40). Joan Tronto outlined four elements of care: attentiveness, responsibility, competence, and responsiveness, and highlighted the value of care beyond the domestic sphere (1993). The ethics of care values care and relationships as instructive ways of framing and examining work, and has been applied in diverse disciplines, including education, nursing, social work, and even business. Several LIS professionals have considered the ethics of care in the context of library technologies (Henry, 2016) and digital humanities (Dohe, 2019), among others. The ethics of care can also provide inspiration for OA librarians as we think about the scope and nature of our work. What could open access librarians learn from the ethics of care? How might our practice change or evolve with the ethics of care as an underpinning philosophy? Who do we include in our circle of care while we undertake our work? The ethics of care provides a more expansive way to think about OA librarianship.


Publisher Transparency among Communications and Library and Information Science Journals: Analysis and Recommendations

Abstract:  The principal goal of the research study is to analyze the transparency of a selection of academic journals based on an analysis model with 20 indicators grouped into 6 parameters. Given the evident interest in and commitment to transparency among quality academic journals and researchers’ difficulties in choosing journals that meet a set of criteria, we present indicators that may help researchers choose journals while also helping journals to consider what information from the editorial process to publish, or not, on their websites to attract authors in the highly competitive environment of today’s scholarly communication. To test the validity of the indicators, we analyze a small sample: the Spanish Communications and Library and Information Science journals listed in the Scimago Journal Rank. The results confirm that our analysis model is valid and can be extrapolated to other disciplines and journals.

Developing scholarly communication competencies: How a post-master’s degree residency program can provide career preparation | Tavernier | College & Research Libraries News

Developing scholarly communication competencies: How a post-master’s degree residency program can provide career preparation

by Willa Tavernier

Vol 82, No 4 (2021) April

“…During the final semester of my MLIS, IU-Bloomington advertised its inaugural diversity residency for an open scholarship librarian—the position which I now hold. This three-year residency based in the Scholarly Communication Department, is collaboratively funded by the library and the university. Over the first two years of my residency, I have developed competency in institutional repository management and publishing services, assessment and impact metrics, and outreach and instruction. A high level of institutional support, the length of the residency, and the agency I had in developing projects, together with substantial professional development funding and mentorship, were key contributors to developing these competencies….”

Leveraging Wikipedia: Connecting Communities of Knowledge – open access version now available

Open Access version available as PDF

The vision statement of the Wikimedia Foundation states, “Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge.” Libraries need not see Wikipedia as competition; rather, failing to leverage its omnipresence in the online world constitutes a missed opportunity. As a senior program officer at OCLC, Proffitt has encouraged collaboration between Wikipedia and cultural heritage institutions, leading to increased visibility and user engagement at participating organizations. Here, she brings onboard a raft of contributors from the worlds of academia, archives, libraries, and members of the volunteer Wikipedia community who together point towards connecting these various communities of knowledge. This book will inspire libraries to get involved in the Wikipedia community through programs and activities such as  

hosting editathons;
contributing content and helping to bridge important gaps in Wikipedia;
ensuring that library content is connected through the world’s biggest encyclopedia;
working with the Wikipedia education community; and
engaging with Wikipedians as allies in a quest to expand access to knowledge.  

Speaking directly to librarians, this book shows how libraries can partner with Wikipedia to improve content quality while simultaneously ensuring that library services and collections are more visible on the open web.

Leveraging Wikipedia: Connecting Communities of Knowledge edited by Merrilee Proffitt (Chicago: American Library Association, 2018). © 2018 American Library Association. Licensed under an Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license.

Call for Papers: The Global Transition to Open: Structuring Library Sustainability Toward a More Equitable Knowledge Ecosystem | Commonplace

We invite contributions to a series that explores how libraries are realigning their collections spending with their values around Open. We ask that abstracts of 300 words or fewer be submitted by Monday, September 13, 2021 (please see key details below). 

Libraries face a dizzying and growing array of open access investment opportunities. These range from open infrastructure to new open access publisher agreements. Although libraries can be motivated by altruism when investing in open initiatives, many are trying to embed “openness” into their collections strategies. This is much easier said than done when emerging open access models rarely mimic the legacy subscription or one-time purchase models upon which the library community has grown accustomed. This series seeks to examine the challenges and efforts underway at academic libraries as they make their way forward in this new environment. 

An article published in the Commonplace in June 2021 titled “Balancing Investments in Open Access: Sustainability and Innovation” inspired this upcoming series. In this article, Annie Johnson raises questions that many in the library community are starting to ask: 

“So how can we ensure that our support for open does not become unsustainable in the face of continued cuts to our collections budget? And perhaps more importantly, how can we make informed, strategic decisions about which initiatives to support (and which not to support) when each agreement takes so much time to evaluate, and staff are already spread so thin?”[undefined]

These are critical questions that all academic libraries are facing. We believe sharing our stories and learnings at this important juncture will help us to collectively navigate the challenges ahead and, critically, to create a more equitable and just scholarly communication system.

We seek proposals that will address topics or questions, such as:

What guiding goals and principles can help libraries make decisions and measure the efficacy of their spending?

How is “transformative” defined? What are we transforming?

How are libraries balancing local reading and publishing needs with the desire to transform global scholarly communications?

How do we bridge the organizational divide between collections and scholarly communications?

Who are the key stakeholders and how do we secure their buy-in?

When should we go it alone and when do we partner?

How do we align open knowledge practices and spending with issues of diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice?

How can libraries talk to each other and/or across campus about these topics? 

What new top-down models encourage new, sustainable, and open frameworks (rather than just operate within the existing, legacy structure)? Who has implemented them, and how?

Describe strategies for libraries that do not have a Press at their university, that can still support local open scholarly publishing efforts.

Anything you think we’ve missed!