LISU Annual Library Statistics 2005: Featuring Trend Analysis of UK Public and Academic Libraries 1994‐2004

Citation

Ole Pors, N. (2006), "LISU Annual Library Statistics 2005: Featuring Trend Analysis of UK Public and Academic Libraries 1994‐2004", New Library World, Vol. 107 No. 7/8, pp. 359-360. https://doi.org/10.1108/03074800610677344

Each year LISU publishes a book on statistics on library issues in the UK. The book also includes a trend analysis of the development for the last 10 years. The book is stuffed with tables and charts or figures together with informed, and sometimes thought provoking, comments. The book contains statistics on both public and academic libraries.

Earlier reviews of the publication stressed the quality of the publication and the quality of the text interpreting many tables. This has not changed. The publication is still one of the best statistical yearbooks on library statistics on the market. Earlier reviews have also stressed the comprehensiveness of the publication, for example, its inclusion of relevant statistical data concerning book prices and the development of important trends in the information market. The publication still has all these qualities and it is still a pleasure to read.

However, the publication – together with other publications on library statistics – raises pertinent questions. This reviewer will consider two of these. The first concerns our conceptualisation of user groups. The second concerns the use of digital services.

There is no doubt that conceptualisations are important. To a certain degree, they shape perceptions interpretations and evaluations of activities. Conceptualisations about users and non‐users have become increasingly complex due to changes in service provision and information behaviour.

A user today can be defined in many ways. Some users are also borrowers, but not all. Others are also remote users, but not all of them. Libraries also have virtual visitors scanning and using the library's web pages without downloading materials. They have physical visitors and they can be borrowers, users, remote users and virtual visitors. Further, they probably have borrowers without a library card. It simply means that they read or borrow what others have taken out of the library. It will be a serious consideration for future statistics on libraries to sort out these kind of definition problems to make a statistic that grasp the fast changing user environment.

It is fair to state that the LISU – statistics needs development on the use of digital resources in relation to both public and higher education (HE) libraries. We still miss figures concerning the amount of downloads and other uses of digital information that students and staff conduct. This would be an interesting figure to compare with the decreasing ILL. On the other hand, we do get very detailed information about the huge changes in spending on different types of information provision expenditures and the expenditure related to electronic resources increases yearly. It would also have been beneficial to get statistical information about a number of other activities we know that the HE libraries are involved in, such as liaison with the teaching institutions and activities concerning information literacy activities.

The public libraries also spend an increasing amount of the budget on electronic resources and it would have been nice to have some indicators on the use of these resources.

Apart from these minor complaints, it is a very stimulating publication. Like all good collection of numbers it raises a wide range of interesting questions.