Culture, politics and university library consortia in China and the US. A comparative introduction to CALIS, GWLA and JULAC
| Date | 10 November 2014 |
| Published date | 10 November 2014 |
| Pages | 594-606 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-03-2014-0039 |
| Author | D. E. Perushek,Anne Douglas |
| Subject Matter | Library & information science,Librarianship/library management,HR in libraries |
Culture, politics and
university library consortia
in China and the US
A comparative introduction to
CALIS, GWLA and JULAC
D. E. Perushek
International and Exchange Programs, University of Hawaii at Manoa,
Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, and
Anne Douglas
Independent scholar, Melbourne, Australia
Abstract
Purpose – Using three university library consortia China Academic Library and Information System
(CALIS) (China), Greater Western Library Alliance (GWLA) (USA) and Joint University Librarians
Advisory Committee ( JULAC)(Hong Kong) as examples, the pu rpose of this paper is to compare the
administration of three university consortia and to explore the cultural, educational and geopolitical
forces that produce and shape university library consortia.
Design/methodology/approach – The methodology used reviewed published and proprietary
documents, interviews and observation.
Findings – While the stated objectives are similar, the three vary markedly in size, funding source,
and whether programming is a bottom-up decision or emanates from the central government. CALIS
was started by China’s Ministry of Education, who also helps in setting programmatic agendas and
appointing managers; GWLA came into existence through the efforts of a small group of university
librarians, elect their own board and set programming in response to member needs and suggestions;
JULAC, initiated by the university librarians in Hong Kong has some support from the government
through bodies charged with the oversight of the universities. The differing educational systems also
influence programming, for example in the relative imp ortance member libraries place on preferential
inter-library loan.
Originality/value – There are fewcomparative studies of library consortia found in Asiaand the US
comparativestudies ofconsortia encourage anunderstandingof the benefits of different consortiamodels.
Keywords China university libraries, Comparison of consortia, Hong Kong university libraries,
Library consortia, Library consortia governance , Resource sharing
Paper type Research pap er
Introduction
This study, a comparative analysis, explores how the establishment, governance and
administration of threeuniversity consortia(one each in China, the USA and HongKong)
are affected by cultural, educational and geop olitical influences – in par ticular how
these influences shape a consortium’s service orientation and its programs
and decision making. Although much has been written about consortia, their history
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-5124.htm
Received 13 March 2014
Revised 12 May 2014
Accepted 18 May 2014
Library Management
Vol. 35 No. 8/9, 2014
pp. 594-606
rEmeraldGroup PublishingLimited
0143-5124
DOI 10.1108/LM-03-2014-0039
The authors wish to thank the staff and directors of CALIS, JULAC and GWLA who so
generously gave us their time, information and opinions. The authors also thank the Fulbright
Commission for supporting the research of D.E. Perushek through a Fulbright Senior Fellow
grant 2011-12.
594
LM
35,8/9
To continue reading
Request your trial