‘But you’re restricting access to information!’ The ethical and cultural dimensions of installing access gates in the U

1. ‘But you’re restricting access to information!’ The ethical and cultural dimensions of installing access gates in the UTS City Campus Library (Blake Library) Pamela Leuzinger and Beth Marnane 22 September 2004

2. A RELUCTANT FIRST • In April 2003 UTS Library installed access gates in Blake Library, our City Campus Library, i.e. gates which required Library users to use swipe cards to enter the library • At that time a number of university libraries world-wide had installed such gates but it was a first for Australia and the decision was not taken lightly

3. OUTLINE • Motivating factors and goals • Cultural and ethical dimensions of installing access gates - not an in-depth discussion of ethical theory • Access policies developed to protect the interests of personal researchers • Summary of our experience – see the paper for detail • Outcomes for UTS - did we achieve our goals?

4. CHALLENGING PERCEPTIONS • That filtering access to a university library must inevitably result in a restriction of access to information for community members • That ‘the community’ has inalienable rights of unfettered access to university libraries i.e. what do we mean by ‘free’ or ‘open’ access • That the electronic management of access will of itself result in an unjustifiable invasion of client privacy

5. AFFIRMATION ‘Libraries play a vital role ‘as gateways to knowledge, thought and culture, [which] contribute to the development and maintenance of intellectual freedom and help safeguard democratic values and universal civil rights’ Glasgow Declaration (IFLA 2002) …. ‘We cannot have a commitment to supporting an informed community and to empowering individuals without asserting the need for unrestricted access to information’ (Byrne 2004).

6. SETTING THE SCENE • UTS: Library’s Blake Library is located in the Sydney CBD, on the edge of Chinatown opposite Paddy’s market • It is one of very few Australian university libraries with an entrance opening directly onto a busy city street

7. LIBRARY ENTRANCE WITH PADDY’S MARKET

8. MOTIVATING FACTORS • Primary motivation: High level of theft of personal property • Target for ‘professional’ thieves for many years • None of the measures previously applied mitigated the problem • Secondary motivation: Need to improve materials availability and environment • Clients report high numbers of missing items • CAUL Materials Availability Surveys indicate books held but not on shelf • Overcrowded library building – private college students

9. GOALS Primary goal: • To improve security and safety for Library clients while enabling access for personal researchers with a need to use UTS Library Secondary goal: • To improve access to library resources for the Library’s primary clients

10. STEPPING STONES • Olympics experience • Client feedback indicated that a safe environment was a high priority (2000) • Working group to consider operational issues relating to managed access (2001) • Consultation • Library staff, University community (2000-2002) • Operational requirements addressed • Gates available • Security staff available • Cultural and ethical issues considered

11. OBLIGATIONS OF A UNIVERSITY LIBRARY • Allocate resources in support of the ‘educational profile’ of their institution • Support core clients – university community - students and staff – ‘primary clientele’ • Support core activities – teaching, learning and research of the university • Nancy Courtney – survey of US libraries ‘5.1% of [academic] libraries surveyed indicated it was not part of their mission to serve unaffiliated users, but most did, on some basis, including fee paying…’ (Courtney 2003)

12. CULTURAL NORMS Societal expectation - public right of access to university libraries University library = Public library? Legal standing? Tax basis? Significant state or national resources? ‘Serious’/personal/unaffiliated researchers?

13. Fostering good community relations Honouring public obligations of tax-supported institutions Providing service to the local community Honouring obligations of a legal deposit library Fulfilling reciprocal agreements with other institutions Offering a welcoming image to aid recruitment of new students Enabling access to unique collections Mitigating inadequacy of public libraries (Nancy Courtney 2001, 2003) CULTURAL DIMENSIONS The principal reasons given for allowing access by the community can be summarised as follows:

14. COMMUNITY DEMAND FOR SERVICES • Physical access to facilities and print collections • Reference assistance • Borrowing • Computer access • Access to online databases (licence implications) • Associated computer literacy training • Absorbed for good-will as long as low impact

15. CHANGING TRENDS High impact • Information explosion -> greater demand • Changes in school curriculum design • Evening and weekend access • Lifelong learning Combined with: • Decreases in higher education funding Insufficient facilities Insufficient resources for primary clientele

16. CHANGING CULTURAL NORMS • Managed access • Not a new concept – the Readers’ ticket • Increasingly common since the late 1990’s: US, Europe • 2004 UK tour: 4/4 newly refurbished university libraries - managed entry • Is access to public libraries and Google enough? • Fee for service OK?

17. RISKS FOR UNAFFILIATED RESEARCHERS • Move from print to digital resources – renders much information potentially inaccessible because of licence restrictions and/or authentication policies • Exclusion from university libraries for all but primary clientele or those who can afford access • Cultural norms are not the only basis for decision making - ethical considerations

18. DEFINITION OF ETHICS ‘The study of the principles of human conduct or human actions. These actions must serve a purpose which constitutes part of the whole of a moral agent’s intention in doing what he or she does … Thus ethics are not just how we ‘feel’ about something; it is a reasoned process’ ‘Ethical principles enable us to reach normative judgements. They guide our thinking by providing us with a basis for determining how we should act when an ethical issue arises. They do not provide answers; only answers that can be justified by way of argument depending on the ethical viewpoints adopted …’ (Iacovino 2002)

19. OPEN ACCESS ‘IFLA affirms that comprehensive open access to scholarly literature and research documentation is vital to the understanding of our world and to the identification of solutions to global challenges and particularly the reduction of information inequality…’ IFLA Statement on Open Access to Scholarly Literature and Research Documentation (2004)

20. ROLE OF ACADEMIC LIBRARIES We believe that all academic libraries have an ethical obligation to make the scholarly information they hold accessible to those requiring access. Further we believe that libraries fulfil a ‘vital function in a democratic society’ (Byrne 2004).

21. CONFLICT? Commitment to social and ethical values Filtering access to the Library building V

22. PROFESSIONAL ETHICAL JUDGEMENT ‘Conflicting imperatives, particularly the expectation to serve the client versus the expectation to serve the community, must be resolved against an ethical framework in which the general good is a priority and disinterested practice is essential. …As with all sets of principles, the challenge lies in putting them into action. … Management can entail hard and sometimes unpopular decisions but they should be based on an ethical foundation of honesty and fairness’ (Byrne 2004)

23. ACHIEVING A BALANCE • Find ways to provide access to those requiring it even if this means imposing fees for some service for those who can afford to pay • Argue for the widest possible access by the community to digital resources in licence contract negotiations • Find alternative means of authenticating those who would otherwise be blocked

24. OPEN V. FREE ACCESS • Original concept of ‘free’ public libraries • English – ‘open to all’ v. ‘gratis’ • French – ‘libre’ v. ‘gratuit’ (Bryne 2004)

25. ‘FREE’ ACCESS ‘...that the attitude that libraries should be open to everyone is a fallacy, that services are not free but incur costs somewhere … that access is a courtesy, not a right, and that charging fees is acceptable since students have to pay a fee through tuition…’ (Bailey 1961) Librarians castigated for ‘woolly thinking in regarding information as a free good because its real cost is obscured through access without charge or subsidy’(Fielding as quoted in Byrne 2001)

26. DECISION TO GO AHEAD • Aim to ‘manage’ access, not ‘restrict’ • Free - Fee schedule • Students from private colleges excluded unless service level agreements negotiated with UTS Library

27. CONCERNS AND OBJECTIONS • Initial objections and concerns: • Restricting information for unaffiliated persons • Tax-payers rights • University’s reputation as a civic citizen would be tarnished • Access decisions relating to individuals may be made on spurious grounds e.g. appearance

28. $5 charge for access card (after 5 free visits) may be the ‘thin edge of the wedge’ • Uniformed security personnel • Interest from neighbouring university libraries – displaced security problems and demand from unaffiliated users • No concern expressed about potential surveillance implications of electronically managed access

29. PRIVACY IMPLICATIONS Data collected on databases? • Security – egress/cctv surveillance, now monitoring access – date and times into the Library • Circulation - borrowing history • Internet sites accessed Obligations and commitments to the client • Patron transaction data records kept for minimum periods and then stripped on identifying data • UTS Privacy Management Policy • Library privacy statement to clients

30. HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS Managing access • UTS staff and students – automatic access with ID • Others: Visit Security desk at the Library entrance • Backup from Library Enquiries desk staff • All applicants are permitted access on the first visit provided they register online and provide adequate ID

31. SWIPE CARD ACCESS

32. SECURITY DESK

33. LIBRARY ENQUIRIES DESK

34. REGISTRATION DESKS

35. REGISTRATION DATABASE Registration • Web form – remote and on site • Asks for identifying information • If enrolled in an award course and if so which • Personal research need Day Passes • Available to all who apply for one visit except college students • Maximum of 5 visits before $5 card is purchased Administration of Authorisation • Guidelines for staff • Supervisor judgement • Some from private colleges rejected automatically • Informed next working day Reporting • Which cards are out? • Which cards are overdue? • Assoc member statistics • More detailed statistics required

36. Known institution Confirm Access  Register online Confirm denied  Unknown institution Allow one visit Research & add information to database

37. Confirm Access  Register online Confirm denied  Community borrower Allow one visit Confirm Research needs

38. COMMUNITY BORROWER

39. OUTCOMES Primary goal: 1) A safer and more secure environment • Personal property theft - immediate 71% decrease May/June 2003 cf May/June 2002 • July/December 2003: 1/9th of same period previous year • Survey feedback 2003/2004 ‘The Library is a safe and secure place to study” - one of our top ten performing factors (Rodski) • 2004 - overwhelming importance to our clients (LibQual+)

40. OUTCOMES 2) Continued access for personal researchers  • All allowed entry on first visit if ID supplied. • 17,793 applications for access – 16,038 approvals. Those approved visited the library 24,052 times. • 1,755 denied ongoing access on first application but some may have been successful on their second attempt - anecdotal evidence

41. OUTCOMES Secondary goal: Improved access to resources  ? • 73 local colleges identified as referring students to UTS Library – letters sent offering agreements • Missing books stats: ↓ 50% • Reduction in in-house shelving: ↓ 79.076 (2002) - 58,660 (2003) • Door count: May 2003 v. May 2002 ↓30% • Door count stats: May 2004 – steady state • Materials Availability: – steady state

42. OUTCOMES New goals: 1) Evidence based decision making • Foundations laid to inform decision making in relation to resource planning and service alignment • Which faculties make most use of the Library’s physical facilities and electronic resources? • How often do research students and staff use our Library compared to undergraduates and when? • How often do community members make use of our facilities and when? • Which web pages register most hits and how do clients search for information on the web?

43. OUTCOMES 2)Basis for authenticating walk-in users to access online resources (licenses permitting) established

44. CLIENT FEEDBACK Complaints and problems are mainly operational • Early teething problems e.g. manual registration system, communication issues • Appearance of the gates • Inconvenience of current swipe card system • Frustration at card/gates interface problems • Security staff knowledge and training issues No complaints received expressing privacy concerns • Access Gates Review currently in train

45. CONCLUSION • We have created a safer environment where our primary clients have better access to facilities and services while providing open access to information for the personal researcher requiring access to our library • Not a simple ‘open door’ approach but tailored and may entail the payment of fees • We are endeavouring to make information accessible irrespective of format whilst respecting licensing agreements

46. Building on track record of trust and committed to privacy policies • Datamining will lead to better service alignment • Client feedback has related primarily to inconvenience rather than cultural and ethical issues • This leads us to believe that we have achieved the balance we sought

47. Thank you!