Библиосфера (Dec 2017)
Local studies activity of the central libraries of the Russian Federation subjects on the All-Russian survey data
Abstract
The article represents the survey results of 68 central libraries, and reveals two key aspects of local studies: an attitude to norms formulated by the «Guidelines to Local Studies Activity of the Central Library of a Subject of the RF» (2003), and corresponding common library practices to the norms. Authors consider the role of libraries as the centers of local studies. The term ‘unrealistic’ describes the situation in most cases; despite low estimation, the librarians, nevertheless, are not ready to abandon the norms. As for using library’s sites to integrate local studies activities, the critical attitude affects to ways of their achievement. Activity of the regional book chambers and depositories of local studies and publications is complicated because of certain legal particularities and the absence of control. Problems of local study stocks storage and accessibility are concerned with unpublished documents: experts consider that requirements established for archives are inapplicable in libraries. Important changes take place in the local study reference-bibliographic apparatus, electronic catalogues of local publications and full-text databases leave it. Many libraries have not yet created their own factual database; the electronic catalogues of local studies are no longer the source of the most complete information about local documents. Problems of bibliographic co-processing of local documents are not resolved, and creating union catalogues is regarded as too difficult or outdated. Due to increasing access to electronic libraries, the system of local history bibliographic indexes is outdated. Links to local lore studies resources posted on partner sites are highly appreciated (but absent in many libraries) on the central libraries’ sites; as for resources of own generation, local study databases are considered to be necessary, while publishing bibliographic indexes is not appreciated. The results show that the proposal on norms changing is caused not by new opportunities in digitization, but by accumulated difficulties, legal or financial limitations. However, in many cases, colleagues consider it necessary to maintain the high level of «Guidelines…» requirements. Perception of the «norm» of local study activity is not directly related to its level at a particular library. The obvious gap between ‘how it should be’ and ‘what can be done’ causes persistent stress in local studies librarians.
Keywords
