Articles in the Forum draw from the varied personal experiences and academic backgrounds of key faculty and staff to provide a diverse and textured image of the present and future of our university libraries, including those in law and health sciences. The rising stature of the University offers an excellent window of opportunity to reposition these facilities to deliver a better service to all library users. Administrators, faculty and students can accomplish this only by rejecting oversimplified and often inaccurate conceptions of the university libraries.

Despite the diversity of perspectives among Forum contributors, there is agreement on the need for new resources to be directed at maintaining and enhancing the libraries. If there is one major obstacle to the infusion of resources, it may be the lack of a shared vision of the future - one that can generate the enthusiasm and political will necessary to raise and direct more resources to this university-wide endeavor. 

Today's Libraries

Articles in this issue demonstrate that our libraries are led by dedicated individuals with a well-grounded understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of our facilities and services. This is shown, for example, in the contributions by the Dean of the University Libraries, Jerry D. Campbell; Associate Dean and head of the Law Library, Albert Brecht; and Associate Director of Information Services for the Health Sciences Libraries, William Clintworth.

They have well-informed and critical perspectives on their own operations and have a strong sense of their users (audiences, readers and other beneficiaries). They are also aware of the difficulties generated by limits on facilities and funding over decades of increasing costs and escalating demands, such as in the expanding number of book and journal titles. But they exhibit a creative can-do approach to accomplishing more without major new funding. Together, these key faculty administrators make a convincing case that our libraries are better than many of us might imagine. 

As Dean Campbell notes in the first article, USC's library ranks very well among private research universities. However, a competitive ranking is not an argument for the status quo, nor a denial of real problems that faculty and staff have experienced with library services. It does suggest that the rising demands being placed on libraries are not unique to our university. Since libraries round the world are in the midst of a major transformation tied to the revolution in information and communication technologies (ICTs), they may require even greater attention and resources than in past decades.

New ICTs are enabling library institutions and practices to be restructured. You can see elements of this in the degree to which the libraries are being wired for new ICTs. At the same time, they have become more geographically distributed, more organizationally specialized and networked, more technologically dependent on electronic media in all aspects of their administration and service delivery, and more uncertain about their future role.

Libraries for the Future

In response to this transformation, two countervailing visions of the future of the library have emerged. One is overly enamored with the promise of new ICTs and sees the physical library being replaced by digital media - networks distributing 'bits' rather than buildings dispensing books. This virtual library vision of the New Media Enthusiasts is often countered by an equally certain Romantic view, that dismisses the revolution in ICTs as largely irrelevant to our print culture. The Romantics look backwards for their visions of what the library could become. If we go back to buying more books, building more shelves, and erecting more libraries, according to this view, the vitality of this institution will be regenerated. 

A third view, more characteristic of the contributors to this Forum, assumes that ICTs are primarily an enhancement rather than a substitute for print media. A multimedia network for libraries of the future will benefit from digital convergence in some areas, such as in electronic access to out-of-print books or rare manuscripts and paintings. In other activities, advantages will be gained through divergence, for example in electronic location and physical delivery, as illustrated by Amazon.com. This could allow rapid access to print volumes stored in Doheny, other university libraries, or remote warehouses.

While these views on new media as a substitute, enhancement or irrelevancy provoke debate, they do not give clear and precise guidance to strategic and many day-to-day decisions facing the libraries. In fact, the vitality of the debate validates the tremendous range of uncertainty over the library's future. How, then, can we move beyond these competing views to grapple with the many specific issues that concern the restructuring of the practices and institutions of our libraries?

 

Planning for an Uncertain Future

 

Despite the likelihood of uncertainty, as least in the near-term, I believe we can invest with confidence in our libraries' future by focusing on the following key strategic principles.