Metaverse technologies in public libraries: A PRISMA-guided systematic review of barriers,opportunities,and future directions

Benefits of metaverse technologies for enhancing public library services

Public libraries have a revolutionary opportunity to improve their services by offering immersive, interactive experiences in the metaverse. The capacity of metaverse technologies, such as virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR), to create captivating, immersive learning environments is one of their main advantages. ¹⁵ These technologies make information more accessible and interesting for a variety of library users by enabling them to explore digital archives, historical reconstructions, and interactive storytelling. ¹⁶ According to Eneh et al., ¹⁷ the metaverse can also enhance remote access to library services, especially for people living in underprivileged areas or with mobility issues. The potential to improve digital literacy and technological skills is another important benefit. Public libraries can serve as centres for digital skills training, offering courses on metaverse navigation, cybersecurity, and content creation. By incorporating the metaverse technologies into educational programs, libraries can equip users with competencies relevant to the changing digital landscape.^18,19 Virtual library spaces allow users to attend workshops, participate in book clubs, and conduct collaborative research from anywhere in the world. Libraries can also use blockchain technology to provide safe, decentralised access to digital collections, ensuring data integrity and protection against unauthorised modifications. ²⁰

Initiatives, policies, and best practices for metaverse integration in public libraries

Projects to incorporate metaverse technologies into their service models have been started by a number of public libraries and institutions. To increase user engagement outside of physical library facilities, the British Library and the New York Public Library, for instance, have investigated virtual displays and VR-enhanced learning experiences. ²¹ These programs make rare manuscripts and historical artefacts more widely available to audiences worldwide by presenting them in an interactive, three-dimensional format. Policies to direct the adoption of the metaverse are being developed by governments and library associations. The significance of user privacy, data security, and ethical issues in metaverse-enabled services has been underlined by the American Library Association (ALA). ⁴ The potential of extended reality (XR) technologies, such as the metaverse, in lifelong learning and digital inclusion initiatives is also highlighted in the European Union’s Digital Education Action Plan. ¹⁴ Working together with tech businesses and academic institutions is one of the best approaches for incorporating metaverse technologies. Libraries have successfully carried up pilot projects centred on VR-based learning and interactive storytelling in collaboration with businesses such as Meta, Google, and Microsoft. ²² In addition, creating uniform standards for user interaction, accessibility, and content moderation is essential to guaranteeing inclusivity in metaverse-enhanced library services. ²³

Strategies for maximising the potential of metaverse technologies in public libraries

Public libraries need to implement comprehensive digital transformation strategies to fully realise the metaverse’s promise. One strategy is the progressive adoption of metaverse technology, beginning with inexpensive augmented reality apps and adding VR and blockchain components when funding allows. ²⁴ Another important tactic is to train librarians to become experts in managing and curating metaverse information. Librarians’ capacity to promote user engagement can be improved by providing professional development courses and certificates in immersive technology management and digital literacy. ²⁵ It’s also critical to support community-driven innovation. Libraries can set up metaverse labs where patrons can help create material, such gamified educational experiences, virtual displays, or digital archives. ²⁶ These programs ensure the adoption of the metaverse is inclusive and aligned with community needs. Another important factor is ensuring equal and affordable access. The cost of VR gear and high-speed internet connectivity can be partially covered by public–private partnerships, which lowers financial barriers for marginalised groups. ²⁷ Additionally, creating open-source metaverse apps specifically for library use can reduce reliance on proprietary software and encourage inclusivity.^28,29

Barriers hindering the adoption and implementation of metaverse technologies in public libraries

The broad adoption of metaverse technology in public libraries is hampered by several obstacles, despite its potential. The cost of VR headsets, AR apps, and blockchain infrastructures can be exorbitant for many libraries, especially in developing nations, making financial limitations one of the biggest obstacles. ²⁴ The digital divide is another significant obstacle that impacts both library employees and patrons. Effective metaverse deployment is hampered by users’ lack of digital literacy, librarians’ lack of training, and restricted access to high-speed internet.^19,30 Additionally, when interacting with immersive digital worlds, some consumers may feel anxious about technology, which lowers adoption rates. ³¹

Significant obstacles are also presented by privacy, security, and ethical issues. Concerns regarding surveillance, the security of personal data, and possible exploitation are raised by the metaverse’s collection and processing of vast volumes of user data. ³² By creating strong data protection policies and ensuring compliance with digital rights laws, public libraries can mitigate these dangers. Finally, scalability and consistency in implementation are restricted by the lack of standardised frameworks for metaverse integration in libraries. ³³ Libraries find it difficult to develop viable strategies for integrating metaverse technologies into their service offerings in the absence of clear guidelines.

Public library services could be greatly enhanced by the metaverse, but successful integration will require addressing ethical, practical, and budgetary issues. Future studies should focus on developing inclusive models for metaverse adoption that prioritise user involvement, affordability, and accessibility. Public libraries can use the transformative potential of metaverse technology to develop creative and inclusive digital learning environments by implementing well-thought-out strategies and policy frameworks.

Analytical framework for synthesising metaverse research in public libraries

Geographic distribution and evidence typology

A geographic analysis of the reviewed studies reveals a concentration of research within North America, Europe, and parts of East Asia, with limited empirical evidence emerging from Africa, Latin America, and South Asia. This imbalance suggests that current conclusions regarding feasibility and impact may reflect resource-rich contexts and may not be generalisable globally. In terms of evidence typology, the literature comprises predominantly conceptual analyses and exploratory pilot implementations, with relatively few rigorous empirical evaluations using experimental or longitudinal designs. Quality appraisal indicates that many studies rely on small samples, short-term engagement metrics, or speculative modelling rather than measurable service impact indicators.

Maturity levels of metaverse technologies

The literature suggests that metaverse technologies in public libraries remain at an emergent or experimental maturity stage. While proof-of-concept implementations demonstrate potential, large-scale institutional integration is rare. Adoption is characterised more by innovation pilots than by systemic embedding into service frameworks. This aligns with early diffusion phases and indicates that public libraries are primarily in the experimentation or early adopter stage rather than mainstream adoption.

Methodological patterns and gaps

Comparative analysis across studies reveals methodological heterogeneity. While qualitative case studies dominate, few studies employ mixed-methods or quantitative impact assessments. Contradictions emerge regarding user engagement outcomes: some pilot studies report high novelty-driven participation but limited sustained engagement. The absence of standardised evaluation metrics limits cross-study comparability. These methodological limitations highlight the need for more rigorous empirical assessment and longitudinal monitoring frameworks.

Research design

To examine the body of research on the use of metaverse technologies in public libraries, this study employed a systematic review methodology, focusing on potential obstacles, opportunities, and future directions. Because of its ability to effectively synthesise vast amounts of literature, uncover gaps, and provide insights from current scholarly works, the systematic review approach was selected. ³⁴ To ensure rigour and transparency in the selection, assessment, and synthesis of the literature, the study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standards. ³⁵ To guarantee a thorough analysis of pertinent literature, the data for this study was collected from several reliable academic databases. The following databases were searched: ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Library, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus, and Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts (LISTA). The period from January 5 to February 10, 2025, was used to seek pertinent material. “It is important to distinguish between the publication coverage period and the database search execution period. While the database searches and screening procedures were conducted between January 5 and February 10, 2025, the review itself targeted literature published over a ten-year period (2015–2025). The six-week search window reflects the operational period during which records were retrieved, screened, and evaluated across the selected databases rather than the temporal scope of the reviewed literature. To enhance comprehensiveness, multiple multidisciplinary databases were searched using broad Boolean search strings, controlled vocabulary, backward reference tracking, and iterative refinement of keywords related to metaverse technologies, immersive environments, VR/AR/XR applications, and public libraries.”

Although the initial retrieval yielded 423 records, this reflects the application of highly specific inclusion criteria focused exclusively on public libraries and metaverse-related technologies. Studies addressing only academic libraries, general digital transformation without metaverse relevance, or non-library immersive technology applications were excluded during screening. Consequently, the final dataset prioritised methodological relevance and thematic specificity over volume alone.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria: The purpose of the inclusion and exclusion criteria was to improve the calibre and applicability of the chosen research. Studies that addressed metaverse technologies in public libraries, such as VR, AR, XR, blockchain, or immersive digital services, were taken into consideration for the inclusion requirements. The study also considered studies examining best practices, policies, opportunities, and obstacles to implementing the metaverse in libraries.

In a similar vein, comprehensive literature reviews, empirical research published in reputable peer-reviewed journals, conference proceedings, or edited volumes, as well as studies using quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods approaches, were all considered. According to the exclusion criteria, studies that had no bearing on public libraries and only addressed academic or special libraries were disqualified. The analysis eliminated non-peer-reviewed materials, such as editorials, opinion pieces, and blog posts, as well as studies that addressed the digital transformation of libraries in general without specifically mentioning metaverse technologies.

Following final quality appraisal and editorial review, all non-peer-reviewed web sources, blog materials, and industry commentary articles were removed to ensure full consistency with the stated inclusion criteria and PRISMA-guided methodological standards.

Data extraction and analysis

Following the initial database search, 423 articles were retrieved to extract data for the research. 157 articles remained for full-text screening after duplicates were removed and the inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied. 62 extremely pertinent studies were chosen for the final assessment after additional research. The PRISMA flowchart was used in the selection procedure. ³⁵ The author(s) and year of publication, research objectives and questions, methodological approach (qualitative, quantitative, mixed-methods), key findings on the adoption of the metaverse in public libraries, identified barriers and challenges, opportunities, and implementation recommendations were all systematically gathered and analysed using a data extraction sheet.

Two reviewers independently reviewed and coded the articles to ensure inter-coder reliability, achieving a high degree of agreement (Cohen’s Kappa = 0.87). By accurately citing all sources and being transparent in data collection and reporting, this study complied with ethical research standards. The study did not need ethical approval because it did not include human subjects.

The complete PRISMA 2020 flow diagram illustrating the identification, screening, eligibility assessment, and final inclusion of studies has now been inserted as Figure 1 in the methodology section.OPEN IN VIEWER

Multi-label thematic coding approach

To capture the multidimensional nature of findings in the included studies, a multi-label thematic coding approach was adopted. This means that a single study could be assigned to more than one thematic category when its findings addressed multiple constructs (e.g., user engagement, usability, adoption behaviour, and technological perception). As a result, the cumulative percentages across themes may exceed 100%, reflecting overlapping contributions rather than mutually exclusive classifications. This approach is consistent with systematic review synthesis practices where studies often report multiple interconnected outcomes.

Benefits of metaverse technologies for enhancing public library services

Public libraries leveraging metaverse technologies have experienced notable improvements in user engagement, digital access, and service delivery. The findings highlight various advantages:

(1) Higher User Engagement and Digital Inclusion: According to public libraries, user engagement increased by 40–60% after implementing metaverse technology, especially VR (Virtual Reality) and AR (Augmented Reality) applications. Immersion storytelling sessions, interactive learning opportunities, and virtual exhibitions drew visitors, particularly younger audiences and tech-savvy users. According to studies, public libraries that offer metaverse-based services attract more patrons and keep them longer than those with more conventional layouts. ²⁴

The reviewed studies generally report positive trends in user engagement with metaverse-related technologies; however, the magnitude of these effects varies across contexts and platforms. Rather than aggregating effect sizes, this review presents engagement outcomes descriptively, noting improvements reported in individual empirical studies that were explicitly measured and statistically validated. However, evidence strength remains moderate due to reliance on pilot and conceptual studies. Space optimisation appears least examined, indicating an emerging but under-evaluated benefit area. Research is heavily concentrated in resource-rich regions. Global South contexts remain underrepresented, and most African studies are conceptual rather than empirical (Table 1).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Frequency distribution of identified opportunity themes (N = 62).

Opportunity theme	Number of studies (n)	Percentage (%)	Dominant regions	Evidence type (Empirical/Pilot/Conceptual)	Evidence strength
Higher User Engagement & Digital Inclusion	26	61.9	North America, East Asia	10 Empirical, 8 Pilot, 8 Conceptual	Moderate
Increased Access to Resources (VR Twins, Blockchain Archives)	21	50.0	Europe, East Asia	7 Empirical, 6 Pilot, 8 Conceptual	Moderate
Improved Digital Literacy & Research Skills	18	42.9	North America, Europe	6 Empirical, 5 Pilot, 7 Conceptual	Moderate–weak
Cultural & Heritage Virtual Exhibitions	17	40.5	Southeast Asia, Europe	5 Empirical, 6 Pilot, 6 Conceptual	Moderate
Space Optimization & Cost Efficiency	12	28.6	North America	3 Empirical, 4 Pilot, 5 Conceptual	Weak–moderate

It is important to note that percentages reported across thematic categories represent overlapping contributions of individual studies rather than mutually exclusive classifications. Therefore, totals may exceed 100% due to the multidimensional nature of coded outcomes, in which a single study may address more than one thematic construct.

Table 2 indicates strong geographic concentration in North America and Europe, together accounting for over half of the studies. African and Latin American contributions remain minimal and largely conceptual. This imbalance suggests contextual bias and limits global generalisability, particularly for public libraries operating in resource-constrained environments. The field is dominated by exploratory and conceptual work. Rigorous longitudinal evidence remains scarce.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

Geographic distribution of evidence (N = 62).

Region	Number of studies	Percentage (%)	Dominant focus	Maturity stage
North America	14	33.3	User engagement, VR programming	Early adoption
Europe	9	21.4	Digital twins, heritage exhibitions	Early–experimental
East Asia	8	19.0	AI integration, immersive learning	Early adoption
Southeast Asia	5	11.9	Cultural exhibitions	Experimental
Africa	3	7.1	Conceptual discussions	Conceptual stage
Latin America	2	4.8	Pilot exploration	Experimental
Middle East	1	2.4	Policy discourse	Conceptual

Table 3 reveals that the field is dominated by conceptual (35.7%) and pilot studies (33.3%), while rigorous empirical and longitudinal research remains limited. Only a small fraction provides strong evidence. This suggests that metaverse adoption in public libraries remains exploratory, with insufficient long-term validation of impact claims.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 3.

Evidence typology and methodological strength (N = 62).

Study type	Number of studies	Percentage (%)	Methodological characteristics	Evidence robustness
Conceptual/Theoretical papers	15	35.7	Framework proposals, speculative modelling	Weak
Pilot implementation studies	14	33.3	Small-scale VR/AR trials, short-term metrics	Moderate
Empirical evaluations (Quantitative/Qualitative)	13	31.0	Surveys, case studies, user analytics	Moderate
Longitudinal studies	2	4.8	Multi-year tracking	Strong but limited in number

Table 4 demonstrates a developmental progression from conceptual exploration (2018–2019) to pandemic-driven experimentation (2020–2021), followed by AI integration and policy discourse (2022–present). The trajectory indicates technological maturation but limited systemic institutionalisation, positioning public libraries within early adoption rather than full-scale integration stages. The maturity trajectory suggests a transition from conceptualisation to experimentation, but not yet to systemic integration.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 4.

Emerging trends over time (N = 62).

Time period	Dominant focus	Observed trend
2018–2019	Conceptual framing of virtual libraries	Early theoretical exploration
2020–2021	VR/AR pilot projects during COVID-19	Acceleration of experimentation
2022–2023	AI-enhanced immersive services	Expansion of technological scope
2024–present	Policy and governance discussions	Movement toward institutional integration

Table 5 highlights inconsistencies within the evidence base. While short-term engagement improvements are widely reported, sustained impact remains underexplored. Claims of cost efficiency and digital inclusion are often conceptual rather than empirically verified. Overall, the literature exhibits moderate optimism but limited robust comparative or longitudinal evaluation.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 5.

Identified contradictions and evidence gaps (N = 62).

Issue	Supporting evidence	Contradictory evidence	Strength of evidence
Increased user engagement	60%+ of empirical studies report short-term engagement growth	Few studies assess sustained long-term usage	Moderate
Cost efficiency	Conceptual studies argue reduced physical space costs	Empirical pilots show high initial hardware investment	Weak–moderate
Digital inclusion	Claims of accessibility expansion	Limited studies address users with disabilities or low connectivity	Weak
Cultural preservation	Positive learning outcomes reported	No comparative learning outcome benchmarks	Weak

The quantitative synthesis indicates that user engagement and immersive access represent the most dominant opportunity themes, appearing in over 60% of reviewed studies. However, the evidence base is largely exploratory, with only 31% of studies employing rigorous empirical evaluation. Geographic concentration in North America and Europe suggests contextual bias, limiting generalisability to resource-constrained environments. Furthermore, while short-term engagement gains are consistently reported, longitudinal evidence of sustained impact remains weak. The maturity analysis demonstrates that public libraries are primarily in early adoption or experimental stages, with systemic institutional integration yet to be widely achieved.

Initiatives, policies, and best practices for metaverse integration in public libraries

Important national and institutional efforts have emerged despite the lack of formal policies and large-scale initiatives despite the potential of metaverse technologies in public libraries.

(1) Global and National Initiatives: Public metaverse library networks have been introduced in countries such as South Korea, the United States, and Germany, allowing multiple libraries to collaborate within virtual environments. ³⁹ These initiatives help reduce costs and promote standardised best practices for digital collections.

Table 6 demonstrates that public–private partnerships (47.6%) represent the most dominant implementation strategy, suggesting financial and technical dependency on technology firms. Formal policy frameworks remain limited (35% adoption rate), confirming regulatory immaturity despite technological experimentation. National-level initiatives (21.4%) are geographically concentrated in technologically advanced economies, indicating uneven global development. Although digital inclusion practices (33.3%) are frequently highlighted, most evidence remains pilot-based rather than longitudinal, suggesting aspirational rather than fully institutionalised accessibility models.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 6.

Quantified representation of initiatives, policies, and best practices (N = 62 studies).

Theme	Sub-category	Frequency (n)	% of studies	Dominant region (s)	Type of library	Evidence strength	Key pattern identified
National & Global Initiatives	Public metaverse library networks	9	21.4	South Korea, USA, Germany	Large urban public libraries	Moderate (case studies/pilots)	Emerging collaborative ecosystem model; cost-sharing orientation
Institutional Policy Frameworks	Data privacy, AI ethics, IP policies	15	35	USA, Europe	Public libraries with digital units	Moderate (empirical surveys)	Governance gap persists; only 35% report formal policy structures
Public–Private Partnerships (PPP)	Collaboration with Meta, Google, Microsoft	20	47.6	USA, Europe	Medium–large public libraries	Moderate	Partnerships compensate for funding and skills deficits
Digital Inclusion & Accessibility Practices	Adaptive VR, haptic systems, text-to-speech AI	14	33.3	Europe, Asia	Innovation-driven urban libraries	Emerging (pilot/experimental)	Inclusivity emphasised but limited scalability evidence

Strategies for maximising the potential of metaverse technologies in public libraries

(1) Employee Education and Digital Capacity Development: Libraries that successfully incorporate metaverse technologies make training investments for their employees. Research shows that libraries with formal librarian training programs have twice the likelihood of maintaining metaverse services. ²⁴

The results in Table 7 indicate that hybrid service models (47.6%) and institutional partnerships (45.2%) are the most dominant strategic approaches, suggesting that sustainability relies on integration rather than full virtualization. Employee training (42.8%) emerges as a critical enabling factor, with evidence showing higher continuation rates among trained institutions. User co-creation (33.3%), while promising for engagement, remains less empirically mature and largely pilot-based. Generally, strategies are concentrated in technologically advanced urban libraries, with limited evidence from rural or under-resourced contexts. The field reflects a growth-stage maturity, but long-term impact assessment remains weak.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 7.

Quantified representation of strategic implementation approaches (N = 62 studies).

Strategic theme	Specific focus	Frequency (n)	% of studies	Dominant region (s)	Type of library	Evidence strength	Maturity level	Key synthesis pattern
Employee Education & Digital Capacity Development	Formal librarian training; XR/AI skills development	18	42.8	USA, Europe	Medium–large urban public libraries	Moderate (empirical & case studies)	Growth	Training strongly correlates with sustainability; trained libraries twice as likely to maintain services
Hybrid Service Models	VR history tours, AR scavenger hunts, metaverse book clubs	20	47.6	USA, Europe, South Korea	Urban and innovation-oriented libraries	Moderate	Growth	Most widely adopted strategy; blends physical and virtual engagement
User Co-Creation & Community Involvement	Patron-designed virtual spaces; collaborative VR learning	14	33.3	Europe, Asia	Community-centred public libraries	Emerging (pilot studies)	Early–Growth	Participation increases engagement but lacks long-term validation
Institutional Partnerships & Funding Models	Collaboration with universities, research institutes, IT firms	19	45.2	USA, Europe	Large metropolitan libraries	Moderate	Growth	Partnerships mitigate funding and expertise gaps

Barriers hindering the adoption and implementation of metaverse technologies in public libraries

Despite the benefits, several obstacles prevent libraries from fully implementing metaverse technology.

(1) Expensive XR Equipment and Software: Research shows that 74% of libraries polled say that money is a big obstacle. ⁷ High-performance computer systems, VR headsets, AR development software, and AI-powered immersive tools are still too expensive.

The results show that although metaverse technologies have the potential to revolutionise public libraries, impediments to their widespread adoption include lack of funding, gaps in legislation, lack of digital literacy, and ethical issues. Training, strategic alliances, and hybrid service models are common practices of libraries that successfully incorporate metaverse technologies. Future studies should examine long-term patterns of user uptake and evaluate the socioeconomic effects of library services powered by the metaverse.

The analysis in Table 8 demonstrates that financial constraints (73.8%) overwhelmingly dominate the discourse, making cost the most critical impediment to widespread metaverse implementation. Infrastructure limitations (45.2%) and the digital divide (40.5%) reflect structural inequalities that particularly affect rural and under-resourced libraries. Ethical and security concerns (38.1%) are frequently discussed but are often conceptual rather than empirically measured. Institutional resistance (33.3%) reveals sociocultural constraints, indicating that adoption challenges are not purely technological but also behavioural and organisational. In general, while technological potential is acknowledged, structural, financial, and governance-related barriers significantly constrain scalability and long-term sustainability.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 8.

Quantified representation of barriers to metaverse adoption in public libraries (N = 62 studies).

Barrier category	Specific constraint	Frequency (n)	% of studies	Dominant region(s)	Most affected library type	Evidence strength	Severity level	Key synthesis pattern
Financial Constraints	High cost of XR hardware, AI tools, software licenses	31	73.8	Global (Africa, Asia, Latin America most cited)	Small & rural public libraries	Strong (empirical surveys)	Critical	Most dominant and consistently quantified barrier
Infrastructure & Connectivity Limitations	Low bandwidth, outdated systems, weak IT support	19	45.2	Rural regions globally	Rural & under-resourced libraries	Moderate	High	Strongly linked to regional inequality
Policy, Ethical & Security Risks	Data breaches, biometric tracking, AI misinformation	16	38.1	US & Europe	Digitally advanced urban libraries	Conceptual–Moderate	Moderate	Governance frameworks lag behind implementation
Digital Divide & User Exclusion	Low digital literacy, elderly user reluctance	17	40.5	Developing regions & ageing populations	Community libraries serving elderly populations	Moderate	High	Contradiction between inclusion goals and usability barriers
Institutional & Cultural Resistance	Librarian scepticism, patron conservatism	14	33.3	Global	Traditional public libraries	Emerging (case-based evidence)	Moderate	Attitudinal resistance slows adoption pace

Theoretical interpretation of findings

The findings of this review can be further interpreted through the lens of Diffusion of Innovation Theory (DOI), the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), and Socio-technical Systems Theory. Collectively, these frameworks help explain the uneven adoption patterns, institutional readiness levels, and user acceptance dynamics identified across the reviewed studies.

From a Diffusion of Innovation perspective, the evidence suggests that metaverse technologies in public libraries remain largely within the innovation and early adoption stages rather than reaching widespread institutionalisation. The dominance of pilot projects, conceptual studies, and experimental implementations indicates that many public libraries are still evaluating the relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, and observability of immersive technologies before committing to full-scale integration. Libraries in technologically advanced regions such as North America and East Asia appear closer to the early majority phase due to stronger digital infrastructure, policy support, and innovation ecosystems, whereas many libraries in developing regions remain at the awareness or experimentation stage.

The Technology Acceptance Model also provides insight into user and institutional responses to metaverse technologies. Several reviewed studies highlighted perceived usefulness through improved user engagement, immersive learning, remote access, and enhanced digital services. At the same time, barriers such as technological complexity, limited digital literacy, difficult VR navigation systems, and librarian resistance reflect concerns related to perceived ease of use. The findings therefore suggest that sustained adoption depends not only on technological availability but also on users’ confidence, digital competence, and perceptions of practical value.

Furthermore, Socio-technical Systems Theory helps explain why metaverse adoption cannot be understood as a purely technological process. The review demonstrates that successful implementation depends on the interaction between infrastructure, institutional governance, funding mechanisms, professional competencies, ethical regulations, and community readiness. Financial limitations, policy gaps, organisational resistance, and digital inequalities collectively shape adoption outcomes. This indicates that public libraries require integrated socio-technical strategies that align technological innovation with organisational capacity, ethical governance, and community needs.

The transformative potential of metaverse technologies in public libraries

The results confirm that, by encouraging immersive learning, remote access, and creative engagement, metaverse technology can greatly improve public library services. According to studies by Meng et al. ⁴⁷ and Abukarki, ⁴⁸ people can encounter knowledge in previously unheard-of ways thanks to VR, AR, and blockchain-backed digital archives. Libraries that used VR-based cultural heritage displays and AI-powered digital storytelling, for example, reported increased user engagement and longer user retention times. These findings support the claims of Wang et al. ⁴⁹ that immersive technologies preserve historical and cultural information while also attracting younger audiences.

Furthermore, according to Onwubiko, ²⁰ blockchain technology has enhanced the accessibility and legitimacy of digital resources in libraries. The integrity of digital collections is guaranteed by blockchain’s capacity to confirm provenance and stop unwanted changes, supporting ⁵⁰ earlier assertions regarding the technology’s possible application in library security frameworks. Notwithstanding these benefits, the metaverse is still a developing idea in the library industry that needs more study and advancements in technology. According to Lu and Lin, ⁵¹ institutional readiness, user receptivity, and ongoing funding will determine how well public libraries are able to use these technologies.

Policy and best practices for metaverse integration

The absence of official guidelines and best practices controlling the use of the metaverse in public libraries is one of the main gaps found in the study. According to the report, only 35% of libraries using metaverse services have explicit policies in place regarding digital property ownership, AI ethics, and data protection. ⁵² Reports, which emphasise that public libraries frequently lack standardised frameworks for incorporating emerging technology, are supported by this. In addition, tackling these issues has been greatly aided by public–private collaborations. Research indicates that libraries that collaborate with tech firms (such Meta, Google, and Microsoft) have access to financing, software support, and training. According to Ref. 53, these partnerships enable public libraries to purchase the infrastructure they require without having to shoulder the entire cost.

On a larger scale, government backing can speed up adoption, as seen by national and international projects like South Korea’s public metaverse library networks. ⁵⁴ However, many public libraries are still reluctant to fully embrace metaverse integration in the absence of clear legal and ethical frameworks. This is in line with Caramancion et al., ⁵⁵ who contend that libraries run the danger of exposing patrons to false information, cybersecurity risks, and privacy violations in the absence of policy coherence.

Strategies for maximising metaverse potential in public libraries

The results of the study highlight how crucial employee training and the development of digital competence are to the success of the metaverse. According to Guo et al., ²⁴ public libraries that made investments in organised training programs for their librarians had double the likelihood of continuing to offer metaverse services. The use of AI-based cataloguing systems, AR-assisted navigation, and VR-enhanced research tools is useless if library staff lack sufficient digital literacy. The hybrid service model, which blends virtual and in-person interaction, is another crucial tactic that has been identified. Libraries that used AR storytelling, VR-assisted reference services, and metaverse-based book clubs reported increased patron engagement and better service. This is in line with Al-kfairy et al., ¹⁰ who stress that combining digital and physical experiences promotes diversity and increases user participation.

Also, community-driven innovation was found to be a crucial component of success. Acceptance rates were greater for libraries that let users personalise metaverse interactions and co-create virtual material. According to Stamate et al., ⁵⁶ participative methods and user-centred design result in higher long-term adoption. The absence of institutional collaborations and long-term financing schemes, however, continues to be a constraint. In order to close financial gaps and provide fair access to metaverse-based library services, ⁵⁷ call for greater cooperation between public libraries, government organisations, and universities.

The theoretical frameworks employed in this study further reinforce the interpretation of these strategic findings. From the perspective of Diffusion of Innovation Theory, staff training programs, hybrid service models, and institutional partnerships function as mechanisms that reduce innovation complexity and increase trialability and observability, thereby encouraging broader adoption. Similarly, the Technology Acceptance Model suggests that librarians and users are more likely to embrace metaverse services when they perceive them as useful, accessible, and easy to navigate. In addition, Socio-technical Systems Theory emphasises that technological innovation alone is insufficient; long-term sustainability depends on aligning technological systems with institutional structures, policy environments, professional competencies, and user expectations. The findings therefore suggest that successful metaverse integration requires a balanced socio-technical ecosystem rather than isolated technological investment.

Barriers hindering metaverse adoption in public libraries

The results demonstrate the revolutionary potential of metaverse technologies, but they also point to important obstacles, including high implementation costs, deficiencies in digital infrastructure, and ethical issues. According to the study, 74% of libraries polled say the biggest obstacle to adopting the metaverse is cost. Many institutions are discouraged from investing in VR headsets, AR software, and AI-powered immersive solutions due to their exorbitant costs. This result supports the findings of Wolniak and Stecuła, ⁵⁸ who contend that public entities with tight resources frequently cannot afford the initial investment needed for metaverse infrastructure.

Limitations in connectivity were also noted as a significant problem, especially for neglected and rural libraries. According to the report, obsolete gear, slow internet speeds, and a lack of IT know-how are problems for libraries in low-resource settings. Similar issues are raised by Alam et al., ⁵⁹ who stress that a significant portion of library patrons cannot use metaverse apps in the absence of a strong digital infrastructure. The digital gap and technical exclusion represent yet another major obstacle. According to the study, using metaverse services is difficult for older users and those with poor levels of computer literacy. According to Alam et al., ⁵⁹ elderly users are frequently turned off by complicated VR interfaces and navigation systems, which lowers adoption rates.

Lastly, security, privacy, and ethical issues became a major worry. Cybersecurity flaws, AI-generated disinformation, and biometric data gathering are issues that libraries must deal with. According to Al-Kfairy et al., ¹⁰ libraries run the risk of exposing patrons to possible security lapses and disinformation threats in the absence of well-defined data governance procedures. Institutional resistance is still a problem, too. The results demonstrate that traditional library users and elderly librarians are still dubious about the need for metaverse integration. This backs up the claim made by Rahman et al. ⁶⁰ that library stakeholders’ attitudinal resistance impedes efforts at innovation and digital transformation.

Recommendations

The following suggestions are put forth in light of the study’s findings to help public libraries successfully incorporate metaverse technologies.

Comprehensive policies and guidelines must be developed. Clear rules and moral standards for the use of the metaverse in public libraries should be established by governments, legislators, and library associations. To guarantee that metaverse-based services adhere to moral and professional norms, these should cover data protection, security, fair access, and content moderation.

Public libraries should prioritise increasing funding and infrastructure investment. Network expansion, software development, and hardware procurement should all be supported by sufficient financial resources. To close the financial gap, especially in settings with limited resources, public–private partnerships and foreign financing alternatives should be investigated.

There is a need to consider improving staff training and digital literacy. To successfully explore the metaverse, library staff and users need to possess the requisite technological abilities. Building proficiency in blockchain, augmented reality, virtual reality, and AI-driven library services should be accomplished through regular seminars, training sessions, and professional development courses.

Partnerships and cooperative projects ought to be encouraged. To create personalised virtual experiences, public libraries should work with technological companies, educational institutions, governmental organisations, and cultural institutions. These collaborations can help with content creation, technical assistance, and knowledge sharing for immersive learning environments and digital archives.

To ensure inclusivity, public libraries should explore cost-effective and scalable metaverse solutions; they should also look into open-source metaverse platforms, shared technology hubs, and grant-based funding models to lower adoption barriers; they should also think about addressing privacy and ethical issues; they should prioritise ethical considerations in AI-driven services, ensuring transparent algorithms, user consent protocols, and non-discriminatory access to metaverse content; and they should implement strong cybersecurity measures to protect user data and prevent unauthorised access.

Public libraries ought to think about supporting initiatives that raise awareness and engage users. To inform the public about the advantages and appropriate usage of metaverse technology in library services, awareness campaigns ought to be started. Initiatives for community participation, such interactive exhibitions and metaverse literacy programs, can aid in closing the digital divide.

Adopting a hybrid model of library services is something that public libraries should think about. Metaverse technology ought to be included into public libraries as an addition to, not a substitute for, conventional services. Digital advances will improve the physical library experience while remaining accessible to all users, including those with limited digital access, thanks to a hybrid approach.

Public libraries must also monitor and assess the use of the metaverse.

Mechanisms for ongoing evaluation and feedback should be put in place to analyse how metaverse technologies affect information accessibility, user experience, and library services. To improve their strategies, libraries should regularly carry out case studies, performance reviews, and user surveys. In a similar vein, public libraries must support more research on incorporating the metaverse into libraries. Finally, more study is advised to examine sustainability issues, long-term adoption patterns, and the sociocultural effects of metaverse technologies on public libraries. Research projects exploring creative ways to improve library engagement in virtual environments should be supported by academic institutions and policymakers.

Implications of the study for research, practice, and society

Limitations of the study

The study primarily used published material from a few academic databases, potentially omitting industry reports, conference proceedings, and pertinent grey literature. Given how quickly the area is developing, certain new trends in metaverse technology may have gone unnoticed. The results regarding the obstacles to the adoption of the metaverse in public libraries might not be generally applicable to other geographic areas. The results’ generalisability is limited by the ways in which metaverse technologies are incorporated into library services, which are influenced by socioeconomic, infrastructure, and regulatory variations. Direct observations or empirical evaluations of metaverse usage in libraries were not included in the study because it was carried out as a systematic literature review without primary data collecting.

To validate the results, more empirical research is required, such as case studies, user experience analyses, and pilot projects. Since metaverse technologies are always changing, some of the platforms or tools that have been presented may become outdated or be replaced by more sophisticated options. This restriction underscores the need for ongoing research and real-time tracking of advancements in public library metaverse applications.

In terms of methodological limitations, this systematic review offers comprehensive insights into the subject matter; several methodological limitations should be acknowledged. First, there is a potential language bias, as only studies published in English were included in the review. This approach may have inadvertently excluded valuable research and perspectives presented in other languages, particularly from non-English-speaking regions with rich experiences in the use of immersive technologies. Secondly, publication bias is a notable limitation. The review primarily focused on studies published in indexed academic journals, thereby overlooking grey literature such as dissertations, conference proceedings, technical reports, and unpublished research. These sources may contain relevant data or emerging insights that are not yet part of the formal academic discourse. Lastly, a time constraint was imposed by limiting the scope to literature published within the last 10 years. While this helped maintain relevance to current trends and technological advancements, it may have excluded earlier studies that offer foundational or historical perspectives on immersive technologies in library settings. Together, these limitations suggest that while the review provides a robust overview, its findings should be interpreted with caution, and future research may benefit from a broader and more inclusive scope.

Future research directions

Future studies should focus on user-centred research examining the preferences, challenges, and levels of digital literacy of library users as they interact with metaverse technologies. Research using qualitative interviews, behavioural analytics, and eye tracking can provide more in-depth understanding of how consumers interact with virtual library services.

A comparison of established and developing nations can provide insight into how infrastructure and economic factors shape the adoption of the metaverse. The ways in which specialised information centres, public libraries, and academic libraries implement metaverse solutions differently can be evaluated through cross-institutional research.

The financial effects of deploying metaverse technologies in libraries should be investigated in future studies. This involves evaluating long-term sustainability models, return on investment (ROI), and financial viability for library services afforded by the metaverse.

To use the metaverse in public libraries, further research is needed to develop ethical standards and policy frameworks, particularly regarding user privacy, data security, and intellectual property rights. Examining institutional tactics, governmental regulations, and legal ramifications will provide libraries with a systematic way to integrate the metaverse ethically.

Research opportunities are abundant at the nexus of AI-powered technology and the library metaverse. Future research can examine how metaverse-driven public library services can be improved by AI-powered chatbots, virtual assistants, and automated knowledge retrieval systems.

Making metaverse technologies more accessible to people with disabilities and those living in underprivileged communities should be the main focus of future research. To guarantee fair access, this entails looking into assistive technology, adaptable user interfaces, and multilingual virtual library experiences.