Abstract
This research was designed to measure the level of contribution public libraries in Korea have made to digital inclusion in their communities. To that end, the study compared the degree of contribution to digital inclusion by Korean libraries with that by US libraries. Specifically, the following domains of digital inclusion were assessed: (1) information technologies and infrastructures that can be utilized by the users, as well as (2) digital literacy campaigns and programs that promoted digital integration (helping people to use technologies and library programs and know about other resources and events provided by libraries). Public libraries in Korea were surveyed using a questionnaire developed by the Institute of Museum and Library Service in the United States – FY2011 Public Library Survey, revised for the Korean context. From a systems perspective, Korean public library computers and Internet infrastructure surpassed those of their counterparts in the United States in terms of quality but the diversity of technologies, equipment, and technology-related services and the proportion of technology-related services provided were higher in the United States. In terms of educational content, libraries in both countries informed the public about diverse subjects but US libraries offered more, and more diverse, services than Korean. Library staff were responsible for running programs in the United States, whereas these were provided through collaboration with external organizations in Korea.
Introduction
Digital inclusion means using information and communication technology (ICT) in a comprehensive way that promotes employment, a better quality of life, social participation, and social integration. It encompasses many types of integration within the digital society, including digital social inclusion, digital citizenship, and digital social fusion (Lee et al., 2010).
Digital inclusion may provide a wide range of benefits including cost saving in public service provision, and securing more complex measures for social advancement (FreshMinds, 2008). It also improves the opportunities of individuals and groups, thus, studies examining ICT frequently address increases in the achievement levels of individuals, corporations, and communities. At the individual level, students are likely to benefit from using ICT in learning and academic achievement. At the corporate level, businesses and organizations may help clients by reducing the costs of providing public services. In the public sector, digital inclusion is not only potentially cost-saving but also applicable to the digitization of health services. On the social level, digital inclusion may improve community engagement and integration as it enables people to express themselves and communicate with one another.
Digital inclusion does not simply entail improving access to information and communications through infrastructure and technology innovations; rather, it addresses the full spectrum of human experience. Differences in income, region educational level, country, gender, and age affect ICT utilization, but those gaps are not the sole focus of digital inclusion (addressed by the 2009 enforcement of the Framework Act on National Information). Whereas information-related policies relate to apparatus and education, digital inclusion policies relate to social welfare, including job creation and social participation. Digital inclusion policies try to create digital citizens who are healthy and socially integrated, not just well informed. The goal of enhancing ICT utilization capabilities is to create digital citizens who can pursue healthy and fulfilling lives. This social integration orientation is beginning to shape our approach to technology.
The library is the most general and representative organization that can promote digital inclusion. The public library, in particular, is one of the few organizations in the public domain that all citizens can use free of charge. Public libraries are accessible to citizens throughout the nation from all walks of life. As such, they are the ideal environment for studying varying digital levels of ordinary citizens. Public library staff have a unique opportunity to understand and meet the needs of underserved residents who are socially vulnerable, such as those who are from multicultural families, are disabled, or reside in farming and fishing villages. They can provide digital technologies, information, and services to fit each group. In so doing, libraries can be models for other organizations; they can achieve digital inclusion, helping nearby citizens to be socially integrated.
In this study, we used a questionnaire to measure the degree to which public libraries in Korea contributed to citizens becoming digitally integrated. The questionnaire focused on the following areas: (1) programs that may improve the accessibility of digital technologies, the range of available digital content, and digital literacy, (2) programs that may meet the major needs of the community (including health, wellness, and education), and (3) programs that promote workforce development and public participation. The results of this study were compared with the results of a US study conducted in 2013 by IMLS (Institute of Museum and Library Service), ICMA (International City/County Management Association), and the University of Washington to investigate the extent to which public libraries in the US have been advancing digital inclusion (Information Policy and Access Center, 2014). Having compared their results with the results of the present study, this study is able to discuss the differences between Korea and the US in public libraries’ efforts to promote digital inclusion. Findings from the present study can serve as the basis for proposing a plan to strengthen the roles of Korean public libraries in the digital inclusion field.
This study evaluated the digital integration of South Korea using digital integration assessment indicators developed by the Information Policy and Access Center. The reason for this is that this center is the only one in the world to have developed indicators for evaluating digital integration, working with IMLS, ICMA, and the University of Washington on this assessment, and has had credibility around the world for a considerable period of time.
Further reasons for comparing the digital integration of the United States and South Korea are as follows. First, South Korea is a fairly developed country in terms of ICT skills, and has an information technology environment similar to the United States. Second, the US is the only country in the world that has conducted an evaluation study using the indicators of digital inclusion efforts developed by Information Policy and Access Center, and published the study results. It would be a worthwhile endeavor for various countries to develop such evaluative indicators, evaluate the level of digital inclusion, and conduct comparative studies among countries, under the leadership of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). The present study aspires to serve as a jumpstart for global efforts.
Literature review
Digital inclusion, according to an analysis by OCLC Webjunction (2014), is important for the development of the economy and workforce, citizen participation, education, medicine, and public safety. To establish a digitally inclusive community, all of the stakeholders – including libraries, community groups, corporations, the government, and policy makers – must participate and support the venture (OCLC Webjunction, 2014). However, the following barriers to digital inclusion may continue to cause problems in the future: the cost of technology and internet connection, as well as the insufficiency of knowledge of the digital technology. This study was conducted to improve the level of digital integration measures and reduce the digital divide and information poverty. Pertinent previous studies related to information gap and poverty are discussed here. First, Chang (2005) intended to shed light on the everyday lives of the urban poor in four metro areas in Korea, viewed especially from the information perspective. Employing in-depth interviews and participant observation interchangeably, the study attempted to illustrate such phenomena as information poverty, and to scrutinize the reasons for passive behaviors in information seeking. This paper, specifically, focused on the following characteristics of information need and information related behaviors of the urban poor: types of everyday concerns and ways to deal with them; characteristics of the help provided; types of information sources consulted; and, barriers and limitation of everyday information seeking and information use. Additionally, Lee (2012) statistically analyzed correlations between the factors of digital divide and the possession of smart devices based on the survey results conducted by the Pew Research Center. It was also statistically demonstrated that digital literacy in using smartphones affects the generation of smart divide.
Previous Korean research studies have introduced the basic concepts of digital inclusion and have analyzed some key trends. Lee et al. (2010) conducted a study of strategies for social integration in the digital era, and considered their implications. One of the major findings was that digital inclusion has been a major agenda of the ICT policy in many leading countries around the world. Deemed a proactive and preventive measure, digital inclusion has been advanced vigorously using ex post facto measures to alleviate information gaps. Another major finding of the study was that European countries have clarified basic information rights, potentially providing a legal basis for social integration initiatives. In Finland, for example, high-speed Internet has been designated a universal service by law, and that act, in turn, has enhanced information accessibility. Thirdly, Lee et al. (2010) reported that key countries had the same objectives for invigorating ICT and digital inclusion: (1) spurring economic revival to overcome the global economic recession and (2) integrating society. In 2014, the National Information Planning Agency of Korea published a special report on the UK’s latest strategies for digital inclusion. It was reported that the UK Government would be collaborating with public, private, and civic groups over the next two years to help its digitally alienated class made up of 2.7 million people to utilize the Internet. These provide some evidence that western countries are making digital inclusion a policy priority; there is no evidence, however, that Korea is seeking to become more digitally inclusive. Our search of Korean research distributed by the Korean Government, Korean organizations, and individual Korean researchers uncovered no investigations of Korea’s level of digital inclusion. It is also significant that there have been no research studies evaluating the digital inclusion levels of libraries in Korea.
In America in 2013, the University of Maryland’s Information Policy and Access Center cooperated with the Library Association of the United States, ICMA, and Community Attributes International (CAI) to survey libraries on digital inclusion (Bertot et al., 2011). They found that 100% of the public libraries provided Internet access, 97.5% provided Wi-Fi, 98.0% had provided technological education in some form, 53.3% provided space for mobile workers, and 95.6% provided online employment information. They also identified the obstacles that prevented public libraries from providing broadband Internet service: cost (58.8%), lack of a faster communications network option (30.6%), lack of control (by the library) over the speed of the communications network (30.5%), and lack of technological knowledge (12.5%). Real et al. (2014) evaluated the differences between the technologies and Internet connections available in US rural village libraries compared with those not in rural villages. They found that rural libraries struggled to meet residents’ demands because of insufficient staff and financing methods as well as other problems. Their study filtered the data from several studies using the framework of digital inclusion. It is worth noting that the data drawn from small and large studies were alike; for instance, Real et al.’s (2014) study of rural public libraries was relatively smaller than the study by Bertot et al. (2011) of all public libraries and the study by the others of public libraries in urban areas.
Overall, little advanced research was found, both domestically and overseas, related to digital inclusion. Based solely on the results of the analyses of the few advanced studies presented above, we infer the following. First, in Korea, there is little research conducted on digital inclusion. There were almost no studies linking the libraries with digital inclusion. Outside of Korea, research on digital inclusion is conducted by organizations rather than individual researchers. In the US and the UK, organizations have conducted surveys on performance of libraries in digital inclusion. The results of the surveys showed the level of contribution of public libraries to digital inclusion, and have drawn attention to the issue of the role and the status of libraries in digital inclusion.
Research questions
We designed this study to measure the levels at which public libraries contributed to the digital inclusion of citizens. Those measures were taken through questionnaires that covered the following domains of digital inclusion by libraries: accessibility of digital technologies, the range of available digital content, the amount of staff support, digital literacy programs designed to meet the needs of patrons for education, community, civic participation, e-government, employment development, new business development, health, and wellness. The digital divide is the most basic domain of digital inclusion. To study this variable, we asked about the computers and the infrastructure that can be used by the public at each library. To examine digital literacy and training, we asked about the kinds of programs provided by each library, including programs covering ICT skills.
In this study, Korean public libraries served as the subjects, and the variables mentioned above were investigated through a survey designed to produce evidence that would answer the following research questions:
RQ 1: What levels of information technologies and infrastructure can be used by library patrons? What differences are there between levels in the United States and Korea?
RQ 2: To what extent is technology-related training provided? What differences are there between training offered in the United States and Korea?
RQ3: What library programs (including information briefing sessions and events) are provided? What differences are there between programs offered in the United States and Korea?
RQ4: To what extent do libraries in the United States and Korea differ in their total digital inclusion levels and their capacity to promote digital inclusion?
The analyses involved comparing the results of the Korean survey with the results of the similar American research studies on the levels of digital inclusion in the American public libraries.
Research design and methodology
To measure the levels at which Korean public libraries helped to establish digitally integrated communities, we used a revised version of the FY2011 Public Library Survey that was originally developed and distributed by the United States IMLS. We revised the original questionnaire to fit the Korean situation, but the present state of digital integration in the two countries was accurately compared without modifying the data from the US survey.
The original and modified FY2011 Public Library Survey is largely related to: (1) information technologies and infrastructure that can be utilized by the users, as well as (2) digital literacy and programs that promoted digital integration (helping people to use technologies and library programs and raise awareness of other resources and events provided by libraries). The questionnaire also included open-ended questions about both the future and general topics relating to libraries. The questionnaire asked for details that will prove to be helpful in better understanding the role of the library in establishing an inclusive digital community, including the biggest challenges and opportunities faced by libraries trying to promote digital inclusion (see Table 1).
Korean survey questionnaire details and questions.
The survey was distributed to the 935 public libraries throughout Korea registered in Korea’s national library statistics system. A total of 318 copies of the questionnaire were collected, so the return rate was 34.0%. The survey took place over the course of about 2 months: from 30 May 2015, until 30 July 2015. Although the survey was conducted offline, it was also available online for user convenience. Among the surveys collected, a total of 313 were included in the final analysis; some were excluded because the responses did not meet the standard required. For the statistical analysis of this study, the SPSS program was used. Statistical analyses were mainly descriptive. Cross-tabulation was carried out according to the size and location of the library. The US survey was open to all public libraries in the US. However, the national analysis conducted and presented in the report only used data from the sampled libraries. The US survey received 3392 responses from the sampled libraries, a 70.1% response rate.
Results
Public access to technologies and infrastructures
There were a total of 17 items regarding either patron access to information technologies or information infrastructures in general; topics included the years that the library has been open, the present situation of computers and notebooks provided for patrons, and infrastructure related to networks, staff, and building.
The number of public access computers per public library
On average, 27.83 units (computer or notebooks) were made available to patrons in each Korean library, a higher number than the 19.8 units available to patrons in an average library in the US. Regarding the number of computers or notebooks that were less than four years old, an average of 16.43 units was available in Korean libraries – more than the 14.0 units available in an average US library (see Table 2).
The number of new public access computers and notebooks in US and Korean libraries.
Public libraries reporting daily wait times for public access computers
Comparing the wait time for public access computers and notebooks in Korean libraries to the wait time in American libraries, approximately 35.9% of US respondents indicated that patrons waited for computers or notebooks, whereas only 16.9% of Korean respondents indicated that they must wait to use computers or notebooks – a difference of 19.0% in computer infrastructure (see Table 3).
Whether library patrons waited for access to public computers and notebooks.
Public libraries offering public wireless Internet access (Wi-Fi)
With regard to whether libraries offered Wi-Fi for patrons using wireless devices, 97.5% of US libraries responded that they provided that service whereas 87.9% of Korean libraries responded that they supported Wi-Fi for wireless equipment – a difference of 9.6% (see Table 4).
Whether Wi-Fi was available in US and Korean libraries.
Internet infrastructures of libraries for users
Regarding the speed of Internet uploads and downloads for patrons while in the library, the average upload speed in American libraries was 58,754 kbps, whereas the average upload speed was 103,102 kbps in Korean libraries. The average American library download speed was 51,559 kbps; however, the average download speed was 101,000 kbps in Korean libraries (see Table 5).
Upload and download speeds for US and Korean libraries.
Public libraries with fiber optic Internet connections
The questionnaire asked if the library had an optical fiber connection and whether the library sought to improve broadband connections. Of the libraries in the United States 39.0% confirmed they had optical fiber connections, but only 35.8% of the surveyed libraries in Korea did. As for broadband connections, the survey results showed that 66.1% of surveyed US libraries sought improvement in that area, but only 35.1% of surveyed Korean libraries had that goal – a difference of 31% between the countries. This finding implies that there may be national differences in the patrons’ levels of satisfaction with the current internet speeds (see Table 6).
Whether US and Korean libraries reported fiber optic Internet connections.
Factors that affect public libraries’ ability to increase broadband connectivity
One survey question asked respondents to identify factors that influenced libraries’ improvements of broadband connectivity in libraries. Affordability emerged as a major factor; 58.8% of responding libraries in the US and 55.4% in Korea confirmed that they did not have funds to cover the increased cost of such an improvement. When asked if a city or a different organization possessed the right to make decisions affecting broadband connections in libraries, 30.5% of US libraries said yes, and 52.1% of Korean libraries responded affirmatively. Concerning the technological knowledge required for broadband improvements, 9.5% of respondents in the US and 40.2% in Korea indicated they lacked such knowledge. Due to the large disparity between the nations in technological competence or confidence, the overall difference in the countries’ broadband issues was 32.5% (see Table 7).
Factors that affect US and Korean libraries’ ability to increase broadband connectivity.
Technologies that public libraries make available to patrons
Regarding the technologies (including equipment) made available to library patrons, the surveys revealed that most US public libraries provided color printers (91.1%), but only 13.4% of Korean libraries did so (a difference of 77.7%). A majority of US libraries (73.5%) also provided access to books via cross-platform applications (e.g., 3M Cloud Library, OverDrive), but that service was very rare (1.0%) in Korea. For most of the items, access numbers appeared to be higher in the US than in Korea. However, Korean libraries offered more large-format printer(s), scanner(s), and tablet computer(s) (e.g. iPads, Chromebooks) than US libraries (see Table 8).
Technologies that US and Korean libraries make available to patrons.
Public libraries’ technological services and resources for patrons
US public libraries differed from Korean ones in the types of technological services and resources they most frequently offered patrons. In the United States, all participating libraries (100%) provided access to licensed databases, and most (96.5%) supported both online homework assistance and online employment resources. In contrast, a majority of Korean libraries reported e-book access (79.9%), digital/virtual reference services (reference services offered by the library staff, such as QuestionPoint and Ask the Librarian) (62.6%), and mobile apps for remote access to library services and resources (57.2%). The items that differed the most in respect to national access were online homework assistance (93.9% access gap between the two countries), online employment resources (82.5% access gap between the two countries), and licensed databases (69.3% access gap between the two countries). Libraries in Korea may not offer the services that are most common in US libraries because libraries have limited roles in some respects in Korea. There are many private educational institutes in Korea, and they help their students with assignments, so public libraries do not need to do so. Also, because Korea has many employment support organizations, offering employment-related services at libraries is unnecessary. However, as the roles of public libraries change in Korea (with Korean libraries and library patrons demanding recognition), the services they offer may also change (see Table 9).
US and Korean libraries’ technological services and resources.
Public library technologies and resources made available to disabled patrons
The next area of inquiry was technologies and resources made available to library patrons with disabilities. Items that were disability accessible, which appeared more frequently in Korea than in the United States, were computers (77.3%) as well as printers, scanners, photocopiers (63.9%). All of the remaining items appeared more frequently in US libraries (a difference of 31.8%), especially accessible library websites for people with disabilities. A related question was whether DAISYs and reading aids were made available to disabled patrons. In the US, 55% of responding libraries possessed reading aids (see Table 10).
US and Korean libraries’ technological services and resources for patrons with disabilities.
Access to information technology support staff at public libraries
The questionnaire asked whether their library assigned or provided staff members (regular employees, contract-based employees, adjunct employees, etc.) to support the use of information technologies. In the United States, 76.9% of reporting libraries affirmed that they did provide technology support staff, but only 46.3% of reporting Korean libraries indicated that they had such staff – a difference of 30.6%. When libraries possess considerable information technology infrastructure but lack staff members to manage these resources and provide appropriate services to patrons, it can be problematic. To manage patrons’ Internet needs, libraries really need a staff member with expertise in that area. They need a staff member who can help patrons quickly understand information technology and who can help the library more generally to stay abreast of developments in information technologies. Thus, measures to remedy this staff deficit are urgently needed (see Table 11).
Whether US and Korean libraries offer access to information technology support staff.
Infrastructure of library buildings
When asked to rate their building infrastructure in terms of its ability to provide technology-related services, US libraries responded that their infrastructures were (at least) good in all related domains, a positive response that was higher than the responses given by Korean libraries. With regard to the availability of general use spaces, 23.3% of US libraries rated their infrastructure excellent, but only 10.9% of Korean libraries felt positively about their general use spaces. The availability of public engagement spaces was considered excellent by 12.9% of US libraries but only 2.6% of Korean ones, thereby showing a big difference in libraries’ abilities to promote a sense of community. As for group work spaces, 12.4% of US libraries considered their infrastructure excellent but only 2.6% of Korean libraries felt confidently about their group work spaces (see Table 12).
Adequacy of US and Korean libraries’ buildings for promoting digital inclusion.
Whether technology-related infrastructures had improved
The questionnaire asked whether infrastructures had been improved in the past 24 months to make technology more accessible to patrons. In the United States, 66.5% of libraries affirmed that they had made improvements of that kind, whereas 41.5% of Korean libraries had improved technology-related infrastructures – a difference of 25% (see Table 13).
Whether US and Korean libraries had improved their technology-related infrastructures.
Methods of improving infrastructure related to library technologies
The questionnaire asked how each library had improved technology-related infrastructures for patrons in the past 24 months. In the US and Korea alike, the most common improvement was replacing public access computers/laptops/tablets (76.8% for US libraries and 64.7% for Korean libraries). The difference between the two countries was 24.3% (see Table 14).
Public access technology infrastructure upgraded by US and Korean libraries.
The effects of improving technology-related infrastructure
When asked about the effects of improving technology-related infrastructure for library patrons, libraries in both countries (53.9% in the US and 66.7% in Korea) indicated that they were able to reduce the time that patrons spent waiting to use the computers, notebooks, and tablets. Note that more Korean libraries (12.8% more) reported reductions in wait time than did US libraries. Overall, Korean libraries reported more positive effects from improving their technology infrastructure than US libraries (see Table 15.)
The effects of upgrading public access technology infrastructure in US and Korean libraries.
Digital literacy and technology training
Seven questions were used to investigate digital literacy and related technology training. The questions specifically covered how libraries provided technology-related training, such as what content sessions covered and what organizations cooperated with the libraries to support the sessions.
Formal or informal technology training offered by public libraries
When asked whether they had provided patrons with formal or informal technology-related training in the past 12 months, 98.0% of US libraries said that they had offered related education whereas only 22.4% of Korean libraries reported offering that kind of educational programming. The countries differed in this respect by 75.6%.
In response to a question about whether they had provided technology-related training or education to a patron in a language other than the mother tongue in the past 12 months, the percentage of Korean and US libraries reporting that they had encouraged digital literacy for non-native speakers was approximately the same, 7.9% in the U.S. and 7.1% in Korea (see Table 16).
US and Korean libraries’ formal or informal technology training.
The topics of technology training sessions
When asked to name the topics of training sessions offered in the past 12 months, US libraries reported sessions on online services and databases most frequently (98.3%); general Internet use sessions and general computer skills sessions were also common (at 93.8% and 91.3%, respectively). In the case of Korean libraries, classes on the methods of using online services and databases were reported by 73.5% of the libraries, techniques for using the Internet appeared in 68.1% of the questionnaire responses, and general computer technologies were indicated 67.1% of the time. According to the results, the two countries differed most (36.9%) in how frequently patrons were trained on safe online practices. With regard to most of the items, libraries in the US appeared to implement more patron education than those in Korea. The education topics that occurred more frequently in Korea than the US were digital photography, software, hardware, and online applications; the results showed a national difference of 10.9%. Notably, Korean libraries reported no education in relation to new assistive technologies (e.g. JAWS, Fire Vox, Click-n-Type), video conferencing technologies, and cloud computing applications. The contents of Korean technological education seems to remain very traditional (see Table 17).
Topics of technology training sessions at US and Korean libraries.
Methods of educating patrons
Answers to questions on how libraries educated patrons suggest that the two countries utilized the informal point-of-use method a lot but differed in how much individual help by appointment was offered. Individual help by appointment was offered in 34% of US libraries; in contrast, that service was very rare in Korea with only 2.3% of libraries reporting its use. Cultural differences may explain the discrepancy because Korean patrons are not yet familiar with the concept of reserving instructions at libraries. In Korea, most library staff attempt to educate patrons in groups instead of one on one (see Table 18).
Types of technology training offered in US and Korean libraries.
Education providers
When asked to identify who educated patrons, the library staff on average appeared to be the most frequent source of education in both countries. Further, when asked whether another organization cooperated with the educator to offer the training, 11.9% of participating US libraries and 26.3% of participating Korea libraries reported outside collaboration – a difference of 14.3% in Korea’s favor (see Table 19). ‘Partner organization’ here and in the following refers to government agencies, non-profit organizations, NGOs, companies, universities (4-year colleges or professional schools), public schools (elementary, middle, and high schools), school libraries, Library Friends, Library Foundations, etc. (see Table 19).
Who conducted technology training in US and Korean libraries.
Library programs
One purpose of the study was to consider how libraries promoted education, employment, business development, community, civic engagement, e-government, health, and wellness. To that end, the questionnaire asked how frequently library programs (including training, information sessions, and events) addressed these general topics.
Library programs related to education
When asked whether the library had provided patrons with educational programs in the past 12 months, 99.5% of participating US libraries indicated that they had provided that service in some form, whereas 58.5% of Korean libraries reported that kind of service. The difference between the two countries in this respect was 41% (see Table 20).
Whether US and Korean libraries recently offered educational programs.
When libraries indicated that they had provided educational programs of some sort, they were asked to identify the specific subjects covered. Programs intended to promote summer reading were reported most frequently – by 98.4% of US libraries and 86.3% of Korean ones. Although libraries in both countries focused on summer reading programs, the countries differed by over 20% in how frequently they focused on three other topics: literacy, foreign languages, and the GED or equivalent education. The results showed that Korean libraries promoted basic literacy (66.9%) and foreign language acquisition (27.9%) more frequently than US libraries. However, libraries in the United States provided GED or equivalent education-related instruction more often (27.1%) than Korean libraries by a difference of 22.1% (see Table 21).
Types of educational programs offered by US and Korean libraries.
The affiliations of the educators leading the programs listed above varied, but libraries in both countries reported that library staff most frequently educated patrons. In the US, the frequency with which library staff served as library program educators appeared high at 73.2%. In Korea, the educational programs were frequently led by volunteers who cooperated with outside organizations more often than library staff (or others) did in the US (see Table 22).
Who conducted the educational programs offered in US and Korean libraries.
Library programs related to employment and business development
On the question of whether libraries offered patrons employment and business-development programs (e.g. training sessions, information briefing session, events) in the past 12 months, the results were significant; a large difference of 86.7% was found. Although 95.0% of US libraries indicated that they had provided employment and business-development programs, only 8.3% of Korean libraries reported having provided such programs. In fact, until now, programs within Korea related to workforce and business have not been in the domain of libraries. Instead, such programs were offered by private businesses and institutions that specialized in human resources and economic development. The results suggest that education related to employment and business development could be strengthened in the public libraries of Korea (see Table 23).
Whether US and Korean libraries recently offered employment and business-development programs.
Libraries were asked to list the specific topics that were covered in programs related to employment and business development. In both countries, programs related to applying for jobs were most common; they were offered in 78.0% of US libraries and 45.8% of Korean ones. Programs on accessing and using employment databases and other job opportunity resources appeared frequently in the results – with 72.2% of US libraries and 39.1% of Korean libraries offering them. Notably, in Korea, online education for applying for unemployment benefits was not offered in any of the reporting libraries (0.0%). Also worth mentioning, Korean libraries appeared to provide co-work spaces/cubicles more often than US libraries (see Table 24).
Employment and business-development programs offered in US and Korean libraries.
The researchers investigated the affiliations of economic and workforce-development program educators. In the case of the US, education by the staff appeared most frequently at 73.7% and education by volunteers appeared very infrequently at 5.3%. In contrast, in the case of Korea, education by cooperating organizations appeared most often (at 57.5%), and education by members of the staff appeared rarely (at 6.74%). Based on these data, Korean libraries seem much more dependent on external sources for economic and workforce development than those in the US (see Table 25).
Who conducted employment and business-development programs in US and Korean libraries.
Library programs related to community, civic engagement, and e-government
The questionnaire asked whether the library had provided patrons with a program of some kind related to building community (especially locally), civic engagement, and e-government. In the US, 74.1% of the public libraries responded that they had provided lectures on such topics; however, in Korea, only 6.7% responded that they had educated the public on related topics (see Table 26).
Whether US and Korean libraries recently offered community, civic engagement, and e-government programs.
Considered together, the results suggest that US libraries have offered related programming twice as frequently as Korean libraries; the average US library program rate on these topics was 48.4% compared to an average of 22.7% for Korean libraries. However, Korean libraries were more likely to host community engagement events as well as events to promote creative collaboration (e.g. maker spaces) (see Table 27).
Community, civic engagement, and e-government programs offered in US and Korean libraries.
The researchers investigated the affiliations of educators leading programs related to community, civic engagement, and e-government. In the US, library staff most frequently led these programs (in 83.5% of US libraries); education by volunteers appeared infrequently in the results (at 12.6%). In contrast, in the case of Korea, education by cooperating organizations appeared most often (at 71.4%), and education by volunteers appeared infrequently (at 4.76%). Overall, with regard to programs related to local communities, civic engagement, and e-government, Korean libraries depended more heavily on external workforce than did libraries in the US (see Table 28).
Who conducted library programs in the US and Korea on community, civic engagement, and e-government.
Library programs related to health and wellness
The researchers asked whether a program of some kind related to health and wellness had been offered in the past 12 months to library patrons. In the case of the US, 57.9% of libraries indicated that they had offered programs of that kind; in the case of Korea, 11.5% of libraries reported that they provided educational programs related to health and wellness. A gap of 46.4% was found (see Table 29).
Whether US and Korean libraries recently offered health and wellness programs.
The researchers asked libraries to list the subjects of their recent health and wellness programs for patrons. The results showed that libraries in both Korea and the United States most frequently educated the public on how to develop healthy lifestyles. By contrast, the results showed a big difference between the two groups in how frequently they offered programs on (1) finding and assessing health insurance information (a difference of 34.0%) and (2) accessing, assessing, and using online health information (a difference of 31.0%). The results suggest that US libraries have been engaging in more education in relation to these topics. The topics on which more education was provided by Korean libraries than those in the US were developing healthy lifestyles and managing a chronic health condition or a disease; in these instances, a small difference was found. Significantly, Korean libraries did not offer education on how to approach, evaluate, or use online health information resources (0% of Korean libraries reported education of that kind). At present, there are a considerable number of information sources related to health online, and patrons may be eager to acquire that health-related information; thus, Korean libraries need to offer this kind of education (see Table 30).
Health and wellness programs offered in US and Korean libraries.
When libraries indicated that they had been educating patrons on health and wellbeing topics, they were asked to identify who led those educational sessions and whether they received help from outside organizations. The results suggest that, with regard to health and wellness, the collaborating organizations in both countries had been providing – or working with others to provide – most of the education; they were involved in 58.0% of US health and wellness instruction at the public libraries and 53.9% of all the related Korean institutions. After partner organizations, most library health and wellness instruction in America was led by library staff, and most in Korea was led by volunteers (see Table 31).
Who conducted health and wellness programs in US and Korean libraries.
Discussion and future research
Discussion
This research is based on a survey of public libraries in Korea and an analysis of how results from that survey on digital inclusion compared with the results of a US survey on levels of the digital inclusion in US public libraries. Differences between the two countries’ levels of digital inclusion were investigated. This section will discuss those findings in relation to the research questions.
Regarding the relative levels of the information technology and related infrastructures available to library patrons, Korean public libraries offered more public access computers and better Internet infrastructures than public libraries in the US, but US libraries had a more diverse selection of equipment, services, and infrastructure. In particular, library patrons in the US had to wait longer to use computers or notebooks than Korean patrons did. US libraries, however, were more eager than their Korean counterparts to enhance the speed of their Internet connection by upgrading to a broadband connection, even though Korean libraries reported greater knowledge of broadband connectivity. Cost appeared to be the factor that most influenced whether broadband improvements were made. The greatest difference (77.7%) between technological equipment in public libraries in Korea and the US was in the availability of color printers. The availability of cross-platform e-book access platforms also differed significantly (72.5%), with more platforms available in the US than in Korea. Regarding the services and resources provided in each country, the availability of online homework assistance differed the most (by 93.9%). The levels of online employment resources varied by 82.5%, and the number of licensed databases differed by 69.3%. Levels of related staff support available in each country also varied, with US libraries tending to offer more staff support for patrons than did Korean libraries. In relation to nearly all the items related to library building infrastructure, a higher ratio of public libraries in the United States than in Korea answered that they were at least good. The availability of general use spaces, for instance, was considered excellent by 23.3% of US public libraries but only 10.9% of Korean public libraries. The availability of group work spaces was deemed excellent by more public libraries in the US (12.4%) than in Korea (2.6%); note the very low rate for Korean libraries. Similarly, a large difference was found in how frequently public engagement spaces were rated excellent: 12.9% of sampled US libraries versus 2.6% of sampled Korean libraries.
Next, the investigation of digital literacy and technology training revealed that the US surpassed Korea significantly in these domains and that Korean libraries have prioritized traditional technological education over new technological education. There was a difference of 75.6% (favoring the US) in how frequently public libraries in each country offered formal or informal technology training and an average gap of 12.6% in particular types of training. Regarding specific topics of technology training, the US educated its public library patrons in safe online practices more frequently than Korea did (by 36.9%). Education on how to use new technologies, such as assistive technology, video conferencing technologies, and cloud computing applications, was nonexistent in Korean libraries (0% of Korean libraries claimed to educate patrons in new technologies). In terms of the method of teaching digital literacy and training patrons in technology, the item that showed the biggest gap between the two countries was ‘individual help by appointment’; 33.96% of US libraries offered it, but only 2.31% of Korean libraries did. In both countries, however, library staff offered most of the technology training although Korean libraries reported higher rates of collaboration with external organizations (by 14.3%).
On the topic of library programs (including information briefing sessions and events) provided by the libraries, researchers were particularly interested in how frequently programs addressed (1) education; (2) employment and new business development; (3) community, civic engagement, e-government; and (4) health and wellness. Firstly, with regard to all four topics, the results suggest that public libraries in the US have been providing more programs than Korean public libraries. Secondly, Korean libraries tend to depend more on cooperating organizations and volunteers to educate patrons, whereas US libraries tend to have library staff lead programs. It has been evaluated that, in the case of Korea, the rate of reinforcement was considerably low. Additionally, it appears as though this is because there are not a lot of opportunities for the re-education of the staff. Thirdly, the diversity of the program topics appeared to be higher in the US than in Korea,
Based on the above analysis, many differences emerged in digital inclusion levels in public libraries in the US and Korea. Regarding computers and Internet infrastructure, Korea appeared superior; however, libraries in the United States offered more – and more diverse – technology, equipment, related services, and programs. Korean libraries depended on cooperation from external organizations and volunteers unlike US libraries, which depended on staff. Because the US seemed to surpass Korea in various domains, countermeasures must be urgently deliberated.
In the efforts to enhance the digital integration level of the local population, by providing various services and information resources in libraries, librarians take the central role. However, only 46.3% of libraries have librarians in Korea, whereas 76.9% of libraries have librarians in the US. As we have seen above, librarians have offered formal or informal technology training, and have led the educational programs, information briefing sessions, and events, including those related to personal finance and workforce development, as well as those related to the communities, citizen participation, e-government, and health and wellness. Therefore, in order to increase the level of digital integration of the local population, securing qualified librarians should be considered in depth.
Finally, improving digital inclusion means improving the infrastructure to reduce the digital divide and information poverty of local residents and citizens. A national policy for increasing digital inclusion should be established such as: EU 2020, several UK policies including PwC’s (PricewaterhoaouseCoopers LLP) Digital Britain, Digital Inclusion Champion, Home Access, and Get Digital, the United States’ Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan. According to the report from the Pew Research Center published on 28 February 2016, regarding their survey results from 45,435 people in 40 countries including USA, Germany, Russia and China, in Korea, the ratio of those who use wired or wireless Internet was 100% in 18–34 years old people, and 92% in older generations. As a result, the Internet usage gap between the older generation and the younger generation in South Korea was smallest among the 40 countries at just 8%, whereas the Internet gap between the older and younger generations in the US was 14% (99% vs. 85%), the gap was 19% (99% vs. 80%) in Germany, 33% (97% vs. 64%) in Japan, and 35% (100% vs. 65%) in Italy. The gap in Internet use by education level was 9% in Korea, 11% in Australia, 15% in the US, 30% in France, 43% in China, 53% in Malaysia, and 61% in Chile (http://www.pewresearch.org/). Overall, the difference in digital divide between Korea and the US was smaller than the differences between Korea and other countries. However, the libraries’ contribution to digital inclusion was found to be higher in the US than in Korea.
Future research
In this study, public libraries’ efforts to promote digital (and social) inclusion have been evaluated by considering the kinds and quantities of equipment and services the libraries provided to the regional communities. By surveying Korean libraries and comparing the survey results with the results of a previously conducted survey of American public libraries, the relative levels of digital inclusion in Korea and the US were investigated and analyzed. For future research, a standardized survey should be developed by IFLA, not only in Korea but also in the US and elsewhere. How (and how much) public libraries throughout the world are contributing to digital inclusion could thus be determined and reported. Worldwide comparisons could then prompt each country to reconsider its plan for improving its public libraries. The ultimate goal would be to improve the status of public libraries. Meanwhile, libraries are not the only organizations influencing digital inclusion; there are also government bodies and public organizations that can promote digital inclusion. Research that identifies such organizations and their contributions to digital inclusion must be conducted; in particular, it is important to identify the group that is contributing most. To that end, researchers recommend that a study be conducted with ordinary citizens regarding their perceptions related to digital literacy; in this study, researchers could identify how – and how much – various organizations promote digital inclusion.
Conclusion
In the digital environment, there are digital technology gaps – gaps in the access to information and equipment – that are causing problems as serious as those caused by the economic gaps in the industrialized societies. There is a real possibility that these gaps in digital technology may give rise to social conflicts or amplify existing ones. The Internet promotes anonymous sharing and participation, so social conflicts may emerge between countries, groups, or individuals who disagree. In the digital era, even the private opinions of individuals regarding politics, economy, and society may become public. As a result, mature, engaged citizens and a strong democracy are needed, and digital inclusion is an indispensable element in facilitating those goals. Digital inclusion can have big ripple effects in a digital society, including economic effects like solving employment problems. As a result, digital inclusion is absolutely important in current society (Lee et al., 2010).
Recognizing the importance of digital inclusion, many countries have made it the main agenda of their ICT policies and policies related to it have been pursued vigorously. For example, European countries such as Finland have specified basic information rights and designated high-speed Internet as a universal service that should be guaranteed. The ultimate goals of ICT invigoration in general and digital inclusion policies in particular are economic revival, overcoming economic crises, and social inclusion.
Digital societies need to formulate a digital inclusion policy to increase citizens’ access to information and other basic rights. New digital inclusion policies need to be implemented as part of more general national information policies. Digital inclusion should not be limited to ICT; it should also promote social inclusion. ICT may serve as the means of promoting social inclusion because it is linked with policies related to other fields, including medicine, education, and welfare. Organizations in many domains of society need to consider digital inclusion as a social responsibility, and have digital inclusion policies in place. In other words, digital inclusion needs to be a primary policy for not only the government but also relevant organizations. It is those organizations that may help individual citizens to have more digital power.
The results of this study quantify American and Korean libraries’ digital inclusion initiatives, which are designed to improve the level of digital inclusion in those countries. Future research should focus on organizations that are currently making efforts in digital inclusion, especially the organizations that collaborate with public libraries. The study should identify and celebrate the organizations that currently contribute most to digital inclusion so other organizations may emulate its success.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The authors want to thank anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful and constructive comments that helped to improve this paper. The author would also like to thank Patricia Ladd for editing this article into fluent American English.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.