Search results

LIBECON2000 is a project to collect and publish library statistics of 29 European countries on a Web‐site, (www.libecon2000.org). The LIBECON‐2000 survey area comprises: states in Central and Eastern Europe (CEEC): Bulgaria; Czech Republic; Estonia; Hungary; Latvia; Lithuania; Poland; Romania; Slovak Rep; Slovenia. Member states of the European Union (EU): Austria; Belgium; Denmark; Finland; France; Germany; Greece; Ireland; Italy; Luxembourg; The Netherlands; Portugal; Spain; Sweden; UK. Other states within the European Free Trade Agreement (EFTA): Iceland; Liechtenstein; Norway; Switzerland. The work is funded by DG13 of the European Commission within the Telematics Applications Programme and has been in progress since mid‐1998 and will continue until the end of 2000. The primary objective is to provide a position statement on the state of European libraries at the turn of the century. This paper gives some account of the project’s initial progress and speculates about the future of the collection and publication of library statistics at the international level.

[The following article is the first of a pair of articles on the activities recently undertaken by the Commission of the European Communities in the field of libraries. Readers will no doubt be aware that a Plan of Action for Libraries in Europe is proposed, aimed at stimulating cost‐effective cooperation between libraries in the EC to the benefit of users, through the appropriate and efficient application of new information technologies. The following article describes the published studies undertaken principally in the preparatory stages, prior to the definition of the Plan. A future article will describe briefly the Plan itself and give an overview of current actions and projects. These artices are the first of what will be a continuing ‘European’ focus in VINE, covering not only the activities arising out of the Plan of Action but relevant automation developments in libraries in Europe. Ed.]

The purpose of this paper is to present results of NUMERIC, a project of the European Commission that started out to define measures and methods for assessing the current state of digitisation in Europe's cultural institutions (archives, libraries and museums). The central task of the NUMERIC project was to develop a framework for the collection of statistical data that would be most suitable to give a national overview of digitisation.

The project developed definitions and data collection methods for the intended survey. After testing the survey in a number of archives, libraries and museums, the project team collaborated with nominated experts in each member country for choosing an adequate sample of cultural institutions throughout Europe.

In spite of all differences between countries and institutions, the project attempted an estimate of the present state of digitisation in Europe. According to the statements of the responding institutions in the sample, only about 19 per cent of the analogue collections in cultural institutions have as yet been digitised, for about 30 per cent the institutions do not plan digitisation, and at least 50 per cent of the analogue collections in cultural institutions are still waiting digitisation.

As many questions in the survey could only be answered by some of the institutions, some results – especially usage data – are not statistically valid. Different samples of cultural institutions in the countries, different completion rates of answers for each question and differing interpretations of “digitisation” have affected the results.

The paper acquaints professionals in culture statistics and in digitisation projects with the set of well‐defined statistical data that was tested in the NUMERIC project. It also shows the problems and limitations of these data.

While I agree with the broad theme of Jane Little's article in June NLW that there are not enough women in senior library posts, I feel that at least some of her points must be challenged.

In its passage through the Grand Committee the Food Bill is being amended in a number of important particulars, and it is in the highest degree satisfactory that so much interest has been taken in the measure by members on both sides of the House as to lead to full and free discussion. Sir Charles Cameron, Mr. Kearley, Mr. Strachey, and other members have rendered excellent service by the introduction of various amendments; and Sir Charles Cameron is especially to be congratulated upon the success which has attended his efforts to induce the Committee to accept a number of alterations the wisdom of which cannot be doubted. The provision whereby local authorities will be compelled to appoint Public Analysts, and compelled to put the Acts in force in a proper manner, and the requirement that analysts shall furnish proofs of competence of a satisfactory character to the Local Government Board, will, it cannot be doubted, be productive of good results. The fact that the Local Government Board is to be given joint authority with the Board of Agriculture in insuring that the Acts are enforced is also an amendment of considerable importance, while other amendments upon what may perhaps be regarded as secondary points unquestionably trend in the right direction. It is, however, a matter for regret that the Government have not seen their way to introduce a decisive provision with regard to the use of preservatives, or to accept an effective amendment on this point. Under existing circumstances it should be plain that the right course to follow in regard to preservatives is to insist on full and adequate disclosure of their presence and of the amounts in which they are present. It is also a matter for regret that the Government have declined to give effect to the recommendation of the Food Products Committee as to the formation of an independent and representative Court of Reference. It is true that the Board of Agriculture are to make regulations in reference to standards, after consultation with experts or such inquiry as they think fit, and that such inquiries as the Board may make will be in the nature of consultations of some kind with a committee to be appointed by the Board. There is little doubt, however, that such a committee would probably be controlled by the Somerset House Department; and as we have already pointed out, however conscientious the personnel of this Department may be—and its conscientiousness cannot be doubted—it is not desirable in the public interest that any single purely analytical institution should exercise a controlling influence in the administration of the Acts. What is required is a Court of Reference which shall be so constituted as to command the confidence of the traders who are affected by the law as well as of all those who are concerned in its application. Further comment upon the proposed legislation must be reserved until the amended Bill is laid before the House.

Aarhus Kommunes Biblioteker (Teknisk Bibliotek), Ingerslevs Plads 7, Aarhus, Denmark. Representative: V. NEDERGAARD PEDERSEN (Librarian).