Search results

There is no proposed solution to address the unresolved issues of constructing the Chinese university intellectual property information service system (IPISS) to promote the whole process service efficiency of IP creation, utilization, protection and management. The purpose of this paper is to propose a complete system, including theoretical framework and system development which addresses the existing difficulties to IP create, protect and transfer for researchers in universities. The paper shares the practice of utilizing the system developed by Wuhan University IP research team known as Wuhan University Intellectual Property Information Service System (WHU-IPISS).

First, the IPISS of 23 universities in China was investigated on the internet. Aiming at the deficiencies of the system, such as single service type, lack of patent display window, low management efficiency. This paper constructs the theoretical framework, proposes the IP ecological chain model, divides it into four sub-chains and carries on the functional design. Further, under the theoretical framework, the IPISS was developed, including the resource supply management system, user demand matching system, resource assessment system and expert support system. Finally, the system was applied to Wuhan University to provide IP services in the whole process for university researchers.

WHU-IPISS realizes the functions of IP resource supply, demand matching, value evaluation and expert support. It solves the IP needs of university researchers and provides a guarantee for their technology research, patent portfolio, patent transfer and patent rights protection. It also improves the efficiency of IP service and can construct the IP ecosphere in universities.

The WHU-IPISS solution resolves issues of “How to develop the university IP whole process service model, fulfilling the IP service needs for universities' researchers”. The software will be released as open-source for other universities' use. The publishing model is also useful for those universities that intend to implement the IPISS.

In Virginia, former Gov. L. Douglas Wilder accused the state’s library agency of racism for “its slow pace in processing and publicly presenting records from his tenure as the nation’s first elected Black governor” (Associated Press, 2020). The State Librarian responded that this was just a lapse in protocols and framed it as a budget issue and staff turnover. However, “Library of Virginia has been processing papers from his gubernatorial successors before finishing work on his” (Associated Press, 2020). Recently, the Alabama State Department of Archives and History acknowledged their participation in systemic racism, epistemicide, and their history of privileging White voices over those of Alabama African-Americans.

Epistemicide is the killing, silencing, annihilation, or devaluing of a way of knowing (Patin, Sebastian, Yeon, & Bertolini, 2020). Conceptualization and analytic application of epistemicide has an established tradition in a number of social science fields, but information scientists have only recently acknowledged epistemicide (Oliphant, 2021; Patin et al., 2020; Patin, Sebastian, Yeon, Bertolini, & Grimm, 2021). Building from our recent identification of the existence of epistemicide within the IS field (Patin et al., 2020), this work challenges the information field to become an epistemologically just space working to correct the systemic silencing of certain ways of knowing.

This chapter examines the four types of epistemic injustices—testimonial, hermeneutical, participatory, and curricular—occurring within libraries and archives and argues for a path forward to address these injustices within our programs, services, and curricula. It looks to digital humanities and to reevaluations of professional standards and LIS education to stop epistemicide and its harms. This chapter demonstrates how to affirm the power and experience of Black lives and highlight their experiences through the careful acquisition, collection, documentation, and publishing of relevant historical materials. Addressing epistemicide is critical for information professionals because we task ourselves with handling knowledge from every field. There has to be a reckoning before the paradigm can truly shift; if there is no acknowledgment of injustice, there is no room for justice.

This study aims to examine the use of social media by academic librarians at universities in Zimbabwe with particular focus on the application of the four key constructs of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology model. This study assesses the degree to which academic librarians in Zimbabwe believe that using social media enhances service delivery, the extent to which academic librarians perceive social media as easy to use, the influence of peers on social media use among academic librarians and the extent to which facilitating conditions influence social media use.

A pragmatist worldview in which both quantitative and qualitative methods were adopted, this multiple case study used face-to-face interviews, self-administered questionnaires and content analysis for collecting data.

Academic librarians in Zimbabwe perceive social media tools to be useful and easy to use in the provision of services. Social influence had a moderate effect on academic librarians’ use of social media for service delivery at universities in Zimbabwe, but they feel that their supervisors do not provide enough help for them to use social media.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no similar study has been done previously in Zimbabwe. This multiple case study presents useful findings on the acceptance and use of social media by academic librarians in Zimbabwe.