Content area
Purpose
This study aims to examine the status, explores the hurdles and identifies the prospects for developing a union catalogue of university libraries in Lahore, Pakistan.
Design/methodology/approach
Following a quantitative research approach, a questionnaire was developed from literature and authors’ experience. After ensuring its validity and reliability, data were collected from librarians after the census. A total of 105 librarians were approached, of whom 73 (71%) responded to the survey.
Findings
University libraries in Lahore are well organized, have adequate collections and information technology-literate staff, are well automated, have good internet connections, are equipped with integrated software, follow cataloguing rules and MARC standards; however, the absence of standardized software, lack of funds, absence of uniform policy, professional workload and absence of standardized vocabulary are significant challenges. Private-sector librarians reported facing more challenges. Librarians consider all prospects vital for developing a union catalogue. These prospects include the availability of relevant information, incentives to librarians, coordination with librarians, a realization that sharing is caring, the Higher Education Commission of Pakistan taking initiative and librarians’ training.
Research limitations/implications
University librarians in Lahore are ready to cooperate with the development of a union catalogue; however, they seek support from higher authorities, professional library associations and the Higher Education Commission of Pakistan.
Originality/value
To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research is the first of its kind that examines the status, explores the hurdles and identifies the prospects for developing a union catalogue of university libraries in Lahore. It would lead to the development of a union catalogue of university libraries in Pakistan.
Introduction
Smith (2003) defines a union catalogue as “a catalogue that contains not only a listing of bibliographic records from more than one library but also locations to identify the holdings of the contributing libraries.” A union catalogue helps users identify relevant resources from more than one library or library collection (Lynch, 1997). Okiy (2005) believes that the role of libraries is critical in attaining the objectives of teaching and learning for research productivity and community services. A library provides all necessary information regarding resources and services to users; however, due to a lack of funds, libraries cannot offer all the necessary resources and services. Therefore, the concept of resource sharing emerged, and it was needed to provide a platform for exploring library resources. Thus, the need for a union catalogue is realized. The technology and information revolution, specifically the internet, has emphasized the importance of a union catalogue for offering reliable information to library users. Chand and Chauhan (2008) highlight that developing a union catalogue is an ongoing process that requires consistent collaboration and participation from member libraries.
Universities are central to higher education, research and innovation. Being the heart of a university, the library helps achieve its mission and goals. University libraries in advanced countries have union catalogues. They are linked to each other to find the resources of consortium libraries, such as the Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) Inc., which has a union catalogue of MARC records. WorldCat has about 550 million records as of July 2023, and two million are added every year (OCLC, 2023a, 2023b). Systeme Universtaire du Documentation, the union catalogue of French universities provides access to resources of universities and research organizations with an interlibrary loan (ILL) facility. It includes more than 15 million bibliographic records (Mairaj, 2013; Catalogue-SUDOC, 2023). K10Plus is the union catalogue of Germany having more than 200 million bibliographical records of the majority of academic libraries (BSZGBV, 2023). Library consortia in Wuhan, China are also worth mentioning for union catalogues. It consists of two types: national consortia launched by the Education Ministry and regional consortia, which provide union catalog services and coordinate work. It also offers collaboration, a joint catalog and resource sharing within the province. These consortia have led to the development of various types of other consortia in China such as academic, special, public and multi-type library consortia at the regional and national level (Visakhi and Hasan, 2013; Zhu and Li, 2015).
In developing countries, agricultural libraries are working toward union catalogue development in India with OCLC Inc. partnership. These libraries were designed to integrate the bibliographic records of 12 libraries with WorldCat. They used the computerized services of OCLC Inc. for uploading the batches; however, during the preparation of the union catalogue, problems occurred from technical aspects, such as the usage of a variety of library software in libraries, absence of proper standards, lack of management issues like unwillingness of staff and lack of trained and professional staff (Visakhi and Hasan, 2013).
In contrast, Pakistan has no union catalogue for libraries. Even university libraries with better economic conditions lack a union catalogue to connect with each other in terms of resources and services (Haider and Mahmood, 2007; Mairaj, 2019). This is possible only if university libraries revise their collection development policies in coordination and become aware of each other’s resources. As a result, the need for a union catalogue of university libraries has been identified.
The Government of Pakistan in 2002 provided sufficient funds to the Higher Education Commission of Pakistan (HEC) for research and higher education, and HEC initiated the national digital library program. Since then, this program has contributed to research and innovation in Pakistan by providing the latest research to university libraries. The digital library has made significant contributions to research and innovation (HEC, 2023; Mairaj, 2019). In the past few years, these digital library resources have been offered to public-sector universities free of cost and to private-sector universities at subsidized rates. Under the 18th amendment to the constitution in 2010, education became a provincial matter and provincial chapters of the HEC were constituted. In the results, the government started reducing HEC grants to a significant extent from 2011. University libraries, which are already facing funding shortages, have contributed to subscribing to HEC digital library databases for users. The need for cooperative collection development, ILL/resource sharing and a union catalogue has been further felt. This study investigates the status, issues and prospects of union catalogue development in university libraries in Lahore.
Lahore is the second largest and oldest capital city of the Punjab province of Pakistan. It has renowned universities and rich libraries. The HEC of Pakistan requires libraries to cooperate with each other to provide a platform to find out the resources each library has and facilitate users in their information needs. Therefore, a union catalogue of university libraries in the city of Lahore is needed. This study examines the libraries’ current status for union catalogue development. It explores the challenges in development, and finds out the prospects that would help librarians in developing a union catalogue in university libraries in Lahore.
Problem statement
Pakistan is a developing country, and university libraries often face budget cuts and difficulties in fulfilling users’ information needs. Therefore, university libraries must coordinate collection development and develop a union catalogue. Efforts have been made and reported in the past for this purpose but have remained fruitless for various reasons (Haider and Mahmood, 2007; Jaswal, 1990, 2005; Mairaj, 2019). Therefore, it is necessary to know the present status of the university libraries in Lahore regarding union catalogue development. It is also required to determine the challenges university libraries face in developing a union catalogue. In addition, it is needed to explore the prospects of developing a union catalogue.
Objectives of the study
To examine the contemporary status of the university libraries of Lahore for a union catalogue development.
To explore the challenges university libraries face in developing a union catalogue.
To identify the prospects of developing a union catalogue of university libraries in Lahore.
Significance of the study
Union catalogues play a pivotal role in providing librarians with vital bibliographical data, facilitating the location and acquisition of material through ILL services. These catalogues are equally valuable for library users, helping them locate and efficiently access materials that meet their specific needs. In developed countries, librarians have established and maintained union catalogues, fostering resource sharing through both formal and informal collaborations. However, the situation in developing countries, such as Pakistan, presents unique challenges. Pakistani libraries often grapple with limited financial resources, inadequate infrastructure, and a shortage of skilled personnel capable of developing a union catalogue. Consequently, the imperative to create a union catalogue and foster cooperative collection development has never been more critical.
Remarkably, no prior study has been conducted in Pakistan to assess the current state of union catalogues, identify the obstacles hindering their development and explore the prospects for developing a union catalogue. This research represents a pioneering effort, being the first of its kind to address these critical questions. The insights gained from this research can serve as a valuable guide for practitioners involved in future union catalogue projects within university libraries.
Literature review
Unfortunately, many libraries’ budget is decreasing gradually. Libraries cannot purchase everything needed with limited financial resources. Development of a union catalogue, cooperative collection development and ILL/resource sharing are suitable options to catalogue and get the desired material. In the past, the traditional way of document delivery through mail took days and weeks, but now technology has made it more convenient. The internet allows libraries to share requested items quickly (Mairaj, 2019; Qutab, 2004; Siddiqui, 2003).
Using a single online public access catalogue (OPAC) to search for the resources of a single library seems insufficient. Therefore, multiple libraries must cooperate and take initiative to offer quality information on the internet. They should establish a user-centered union catalogue so users can benefit from this service. They should provide reliable and updated information in online catalogues with an ease-of-use interface like Google and Yahoo, and try to engage with other libraries for this purpose. Therefore, a union catalogue should be easy to access and use. Damaged and withdrawn books should be notified in the union catalogue, regular material coverage should be maintained and holding information must be notified (Line and Bennett, 1985). A union catalogue having functionalities similar to Google and Yahoo is a very critical part of a modern library (Boberic-Krsticev and Tesendic, 2015).
Muthanna and Sang (2019) highlight that the staff’s negative attitude toward technology is a significant hurdle to creating creative things in libraries. Madge and Robu (2019) believe that facing financial issues creates another problem with developing union catalogues and maintaining resource sharing. Furthermore, librarians do not want to disclose all their materials in the union catalogue. Instead, they try to keep them on their own library property. Therefore, if someone needs them, he/she is asked to visit the library. Likewise, many librarians believe that it is difficult to use a union catalogue due to the duplication of material and editions. Some librarians are reluctant to show the latest book collections, which creates a negative impact on users. Most libraries restrict sending some materials (Petersen et al., 2009).
The importance of a union catalogue is enhanced if libraries promote resource sharing/ILL services. The concept of resource sharing emerged in the USA in the late 18th century. The American Library Association founded resource sharing among libraries. Later on, the rate of sharing resources gradually increased in libraries all over the world. The Ohio Computer Library Center (OCLC), renamed Online Computer Library Center, and finally became Online Computer Library Center, Inc. in 2017, was the first organization that started locating, acquiring, cataloguing, lending and preserving library materials. The OCLC catalogue was first shared in 1967 (Jaswal, 1990, 2005). The ILL/resource sharing services by OCLC Inc. at various levels, like discovery to delivery, ILLiad, Relais, Tipasa, UnityUK, Worldshare and ZFL-Server have significantly contributed to providing information resources all over the world (OCLC, 2023a, 2023b).
The Development Information Network for South Asia (DEVINSA), established in 1985, was the first initiative toward developing a union catalogue in South Asia. This network was designed to establish a large database of development literature and a catalogue of published and semipublished material. This project aimed at strengthening all South Asian regions, including Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, India, Maldives and Nepal by providing computerized data to all South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) countries (DEVINSA: Development Information Network for South Asia, 1994; Jaswal, 2005). However, this initiative could no longer be operated and ceased due to the inactive role of SAARC.
The University Grants Commission started the program “Information and Library Network” in India in April 1991. It is a cooperative network for pooling, sharing and optimizing library resources. It aims at offering a channel for researchers and academicians for information exchange from sources within and outside the country (Adkins and Budd, 2006; University Grant Commission, 2023). Before the arrival of WWW, the Library of Congress and many other university libraries started using gopher sites to organize their internet collections by subjects. Later on, these sites were replaced by websites. Library websites are significant platforms for providing links to union catalogues of consortia libraries (Mairaj, 2019; McGlamery and Coffman, 2000; Usun, 2003). Developing Library Network is an active resource sharing network in India located at Jawaharlal Lal Nehru University, New Delhi. More than 8,100 institutions in 33 states are connected with this network (DELNET, 2023).
Union catalogue development in Pakistan
Libraries in developing countries are facing problems with developing union catalogues due to poor planning, limited ICT applications, lack of trained human resources, absence of well-equipped technical devices and bibliographical tools, inadequate funds, nonavailability of cataloguing standards and lack of dedicated leadership. These issues require the attention of concerned stakeholders; however, no one is ready to take serious action in this regard. If these problems are sorted out, the chances of developing a union catalogue will increase (Haider and Mahmood, 2007; Begg, 1979).
The fruitfulness of a union catalogue is enhanced if a resource sharing culture is developed equally. The decade of the 1980s was the beginning of resource sharing in Pakistan. Begg (1979) describes the concept and importance of union catalogues at all levels and urges resource sharing. He demanded international assistance from the Pakistan Government to develop a union catalogue and resource sharing in existing libraries at the regional and national levels. Unfortunately, his request could not be fulfilled due to the government’s other priorities.
Anis Khurshid, a renowned library professional, stresses resource sharing should be part of university libraries. He indicated many areas for possible cooperation, such as the cooperative acquisition of foreign journals (Haider, 2003). According to Khalid (1988), library professionals like Anis Khurshid, S.J. Haider and A. Rehman struggled to create a union catalog and resource sharing. He urges the dire need for a union catalogue and resource sharing in Pakistan due to economic issues with libraries. Moreover, some major issues like lack of funds, lack of current resources, lack of clarity in the bibliography, inadequate physical accessibility of the present resources and nonexistence of a resource sharing press for developing a union catalogue for university libraries (Haider, 2003, 2007; Mairaj and El-Hadi, 2012). Diversity of collections is also a hindrance to developing cooperative collection development, resource sharing and a union catalogue among Pakistani libraries (Mairaj and Mahmood, 2011; Zuberi and Karim, 1999). Lack of will is another serious challenge that hinders the development of a union catalogue, cooperative collection development and resource sharing (Mairaj, 2019).
Resource sharing efforts were initiated in the 1980s in libraries in Pakistan when projects like Lahore Business and Economics Libraries Network (LABELNET), Management and Agriculture Research and Technology and Pakistan Parliamentary Libraries Project started for resource sharing. LABELNET was set up in January 1990. This network was the first listing and sharing initiative in Pakistan. Nine libraries in Lahore were part of LABELNET (Jaswal, 1990). Unfortunately, these projects could not sustain themselves for a longer period and failed to meet their purpose. This was due to various reasons such as finance, poor planning and limited ICT applications. In 1986, the National Documentation Center Library and Information Network (NADLIN) was established. The Pakistan Council of Research in Water Resources, Ministry of Science and Technology initiated this project. Its purpose was to catalogue and disseminate all water resources information. The setup of NADLIN was totally based on their own personnel (Haider and Mahmood, 2007; Jaswal, 1990, 2005).
Libraries in Pakistan face difficult economic conditions, and their resources do not meet users’ demands. They need a union catalogue to fulfill users’ information needs. Therefore, mutual cooperation between libraries is necessary to overcome this issue (Hanif, 1988; Sharif, 2006). Union catalogue development started in 1968 in Pakistan. Pakistan National Scientific Documentation Center, Islamabad, now known as Pakistan Scientific and Technological Information Center (PASTIC), was the first resource center that took initiative in developing a union catalogue of scientific periodicals. It is known as the first union catalogue of scientific periodicals in Pakistan. Later, in 1987, PASTIC collected data from 19 other libraries in Islamabad and Rawalpindi for the union catalogue. The libraries of Lahore University of Management Sciences and Pakistan Institute of Development Economics also collected and compiled bibliographic records. Later, in 1989, PASTIC compiled and published a union list of medical journals from 18 libraries (Haider, 1998; Jaswal, 1990, 2005; Mairaj, 2019).
Recently, PASTIC under the development project “Modernization of PASTIC National Science Reference Library for effective resource sharing among S and T libraries” a Consortium of Science and Technology and Research and Development Libraries of Pakistan was developed after a series of meetings with senior library professionals. It provides resource sharing among science and technology libraries in Pakistan. Universities and research organizations have joined this consortium. PakCat is a recently developed union catalogue by PASTIC. The catalogue has bibliographical records from more than 200 Pakistani libraries. This catalogue helps researchers locate their required material in Pakistani libraries (Pakistan Science Foundation, 2020; PASTIC, 2017, 2020; 2023). This catalogue may help librarians know the resources in the nearest science and technology libraries. Librarians may access this catalogue before acquiring material. It may also avoid duplication and use library funds to get the needed material.
Punjab Information Technology Board (PITB), Lahore, initiated the project of developing an e-catalogue of library holdings in 2017. Under this project, libraries in Punjab have been invited to share their e-catalogues to develop a union catalogue of their holdings. Libraries have a dedicated link to update their catalogues regularly. In addition, PITB provides secure accounts for libraries for updating their bibliographical records and offers e-circulation services at nominal charges. Only 65 libraries out of hundreds of public, academic and special libraries in Punjab share their catalogues (PITB, 2021, 2023).
It is pertinent to mention that LABELNET, DEVINSA and NADLIN were semiautomated projects. They were based on paper documentation, which sometimes created hurdles in document delivery because of distances. These projects had to face many problems with developing a union catalogue and could not achieve their goals (Jaswal, 2005; Mairaj, 2019).
Integrated library software cannot be overlooked in union catalogue development. Pakistani libraries have used a variety of in-house, proprietary and open-source software for digitization, such as Library Automation and Management Program, CDS/ISIS, MINISIS, KITABDAR, LIMS, MLIMS, SLIMS, IMAGIC, KOHA, VIRTUA and INSIGNIA. The KOHA integrated library management system is one of the most commonly used software in university libraries in Pakistan (Asim and Mairaj, 2019).
Leadership is very important, especially when a library wants to implement a new policy or program. The library needs competent leadership so that all library tasks go uniformly. A leader knows how to spread knowledge and fulfill library requirements (Haider, 2004). Ameen (2006) believes that leadership is a very significant factor in library improvement because it deals with all key decisions. It is commonly observed that libraries need a good leader for the development of a union catalog in Pakistani libraries.
Haider (2003) suggests that the Pakistan Library Association (PLA) and the National Library of Pakistan must play their role and extend their services for union catalogue development and library cooperation. Librarians in Pakistan are generally not computer trained. There is a dire need to build such activities that could enhance their computer skills to prepare them to meet the coming challenges to libraries. Standardization programs should be launched to provide a standardized catalogue, classification, subject headings and bibliography. Proper planning and networking deserve special consideration for offering resource sharing facilities to users.
Sharif (2006) urges the need for resource sharing among Pakistani libraries to address issues like the information explosion, ever-changing users’ needs, inflation, shrinking library budgets and currency devaluation. He proposed some potential library networks for universities, colleges, public and special libraries, including intertype (resource sharing within a city), intratype (resource sharing among libraries of a similar nature) and resource sharing through consortia (housing resources in a central place and sharing with organizations under consortium) like HEC digital library. He further added establishing a consortium of public libraries under the Directorate of Public Libraries for resource sharing.
Ameen (2008) demonstrates certain procedural, technical, behavioral and psychological issues hindering formal resource sharing in university libraries in Pakistan. Lack of realization among librarians about the significance of resource sharing, absence of automated lists of collections, Web OPAC, union catalogue and lack of initiative are the key challenges. She believes that emerging technologies and facilities have made it convenient for librarians to bring positive results. However, she urges them to motivate and train librarians for this purpose. She added that a protocol is needed at the local and national levels for resource sharing. She hoped that the situation could change if librarians took the initiative in this regard.
Sadiq et al. (2021) conducted a survey in Lahore to identify resource sharing opportunities in 26 public and private medical teaching libraries. Librarians believe resource sharing is important for library resources and user satisfaction. Medical librarians are willing to share resources by developing a union catalogue. Due to limited financial resources, this study recommends developing a formal resource sharing network for all medical libraries.
Pakistani libraries recognize the importance of union catalogs in reviewing literature. The developed countries have established their union catalogue and are still working to find out the problems to improve them. Contrary to this, in developing countries like Pakistan, the status of developing a union catalogue is not good. The libraries have taken initiatives for union catalogue development; however, the situation is not satisfactory and issues like lack of ICT resources and competency, professional skills, budget and funding issues, lack of motivation among librarians, lack of coordination and support from the professional associations and absence of leadership are still there. The scarcity of literature has also been observed on the topic of knowing the prevailing scenario. This study is an effort to bridge the gap on the topic and delves into the existing status, identifies the challenges that need to be addressed and offers prospects that can pave the way for the successful creation of a union catalogue in the university libraries of Pakistan.
Research methodology
This study used a quantitative research design. The sampling frame included all recognized universities at HEC in Lahore. The target population consisted of librarians serving in central university libraries. A questionnaire was developed from the literature and the authors’ own experience. A five-point Likert scale having utmost poles from strongly agree (5) to strongly disagree (1) was used to assess the key factors such as status, problems and prospects. Expert opinion was sought to ensure the logical validity of the questionnaire, followed by pretesting through e-mail. Questionnaires were sent online, delivered in person or collected by hired staff. Respondents were informed of the research purpose and anonymity before data collection. A total of 105 librarians were approached after the census for data collection, of whom 73 responded willingly to the survey. Therefore, the response rate was 71%. The values of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient ensured the questionnaire’s reliability in all respects (Table 1). This is sufficiently higher than the general 0.70 standard proposed by Nunnally and Bernstein (1994). The data were analyzed using SPSS version 23.
Data analysis
Demographics
The demographic data (Table 2) shows that out of 73 respondents, 41 (56.2%) were male librarians and 32 (43.8%) were females. Regarding age group, the data showed that the majority of the respondents, 39 (53.4%) were from the age group of 31–40 followed by 23 (31.5%) were from the age group of 41–50 years. The data was collected from 23 universities, 12 public and 11 private universities. Out of 73 respondents, 43 librarians belonged to public universities and 30 librarians belonged to private universities. The respondents were divided into three categories, including Assistant Librarians/Librarians, Senior Librarians and Chief/Head Librarians. Frequency distribution of respondents’ status highlights that 34 (46.6%) were Assistant Librarians/Librarians, followed by 20 (27.4%) were Chief/Head Librarians and 16 (21.9%) were Senior Librarians.
Status of union catalogue development
Eleven statements were presented before the respondents to find out the status/prerequisites of university libraries in Lahore city for union catalogue development. The results (Table 3) show that the librarians agreed with all 11 statements, which reflects that the libraries are in a position to develop a union catalogue. Internet connectivity (m = 4.32), integrated library software (m = 4.23), relevant information/literature to share (m = 4.19), cataloguing rules (m = 4.19), IT literate staff (m = 4.15) and well-automated (m = 4.12) are the key features that university libraries of Lahore have for developing a union catalogue.
The status of the libraries was specifically determined on the basis of gender and university sector for a more specific outcome of the research while using the t-test. The findings on the basis of gender (t = −1.462, Sig. = 0.148) and university sector (t = 0.988, Sig. = 0.329) demonstrate no significant statistical variance. Therefore, it is concluded that regardless of gender and university sector, the librarians of Lahore have needed prerequisites for developing a union catalogue.
Problems/challenges in developing a union catalogue
According to the results (Table 4), the librarians believe that the absence of using standardized software (m = 3.64), inadequate/shortage of staff (m = 3.29), lack of funds (m = 3.19), absence of uniform policy (3.18), professional workload (m = 3.12) and absence of using standardized vocabulary/subject headings (m = 3.00) are the significant challenges on the way of developing a union catalogue of university libraries of Lahore.
The results on the basis of librarians’ gender (t = 1.047; Sig = 0.299) highlight no significant influence in terms of problems in developing the union catalogue; however, there is a group difference on the basis of the university sector (t = −2.000; Sig. = 0.046). The librarians of public-sector universities were neutral (m = 2.77) as compared to private-sector universities (m = 3.23) in terms of facing problems with developing a union catalogue. The results demonstrate that both male and female librarians are equally facing the highlighted problems; however, in terms of the university sector, private-sector university librarians have to face more problems than public-sector university librarians.
Prospects of developing a union catalogue
Twelve statements were made to measure the prospects of developing a union catalogue of university libraries in Lahore city. According to data (Table 5), librarians consider all prospects important for developing a union catalogue. More significant factors are the availability of relevant information to share (m = 4.47), incentives to librarians for encouragement (m = 4.45), coordination among university librarians (m = 4.30), a realization about sharing is caring (m = 4.25), HEC to take initiative (m = 4.25) and training of librarians (m = 4.25).
The findings on the basis of gender (t = 0.188; Sig. = 0.109) and university sector (t = 0.016; Sig. = 0.988) reflect no group variance. The results highlight that all university librarians, irrespective of gender and university sector, consider the mentioned prospects important for developing a union catalogue of university libraries in Lahore.
Discussion
This study is an assessment of the status, issues and prospects of developing a union catalogue in Lahore university libraries. The literature review established the importance of a union catalogue for Pakistani libraries. The situation in developing countries like Pakistan is not good. The libraries took initiatives for union catalogue development; however, they failed due to lack of ICT resources, negative attitude toward advanced technology, professional competency, funds, reluctance to share, motivation and coordination. Lack of support from professional associations and the absence of leadership remain key issues as well. Studies such as Begg (1979), Haider (1998, 2003), Haider and Mahmood (2007), Jaswal (1990, Jaswal, 2005), Madge and Robu (2019), Mairaj and El-Hadi (2012), Mairaj (2019), Muthanna and Sang (2019), Petersen et al. (2009) and Visakhi and Hasan (2013) reported similar results. The scarcity of literature on the topic has also been observed in Pakistan to find out the prevailing scenario.
The findings reveal that Lahore city librarians believe their libraries are capable of developing a union catalogue. They have internet connectivity, integrated library software, adequate collections and IT-literate professional staff. Moreover, the libraries follow cataloguing rules and MARC standards and are better automated. No significant influence has been observed on librarians regarding gender and the university sector. The absence of standardized software, inadequate staff, lack of funds, absence of uniform policy and professional workload are significant challenges to developing a union catalogue of university libraries in Lahore. The findings of this study are inclined to studies such as Begg (1979), Haider (2003, 2007), Haider and Mahmood (2007), Madge and Robu (2019) and Mairaj and El-Hadi (2012). Both male and female librarians face the same challenges in developing a union catalogue. However, private-sector university librarians face more challenges than public-sector universities. Moreover, librarians consider all the prospects important for developing a union catalogue, particularly, the availability of relevant information to share, incentives to librarians for encouragement, coordination among university librarians and the realization that sharing is caring. No significant variance has been found on the basis of gender and university sector in terms of prospects for developing a union catalogue. The librarians, irrespective of their gender and university domain, equally believe all prospects are significant in developing a union catalogue of university libraries in Lahore.
The results demonstrate that Lahore city librarians are ready to cooperate with each other for the development of a union catalogue of university libraries, and they seek support from higher authorities, professional library associations, and especially from HEC of Pakistan to take the initiative and train librarians for this purpose. Studies such as Sadiq et al. (2021) and Haider (2004) highlighted similar results.
The recent financial crisis in Pakistan has heightened the importance of union catalogues, cooperative collection development and ILL/resource sharing in university libraries to face the challenges of expected budget cuts in the near future. This research is an effort to draw the attention of library professionals, higher authorities and policymakers like HEC in this regard. They should move forward with concrete steps for developing a union catalogue, a culture of cooperative collection development and resource sharing in university libraries for users. The findings of this research are integrated with the results of studies such as Hanif (1988), Jaswal (1990, 2005) and Sharif (2006) urging resource sharing in Pakistan. Proactive leadership plays a crucial role in the creation of a union catalogue of university libraries. Ameen (2006) in her study reported that the leadership role is vital for the creation of a union catalogue. However, Haider (2004) considers the role of professional library associations and the National Library of Pakistan for this purpose. This achievement would ultimately lead to the development of a union catalogue of university libraries in Pakistan.
Recommendations
The following recommendations in terms of implications for policy and practice in light of the findings of the study may be considered for developing and effective utilization of a union catalogue of university libraries.
Implications for policy
HEC initiative. Being a supervisory body of universities, the HEC is required to take initiative. It should work with library professionals, university authorities and other stakeholders to develop a clear roadmap for implementation. However, it might be useful to specify a timeline for developing a roadmap for a positive outcome.
Coordination and funding. Coordination of HEC with universities for funding and infrastructure development is crucial. Mechanisms for coordination and funding can help in producing positive results. For instance, the creation of a joint committee with representatives from HEC and universities to oversee this process.
Cooperative collection development. Designing a uniform policy for cooperative collection development is critical. It should involve active participation and feedback from librarians and university heads, ensuring it aligns with the diverse needs of different universities.
Oversight body. Establishing a body for project oversight is important for standardization. It should also include experts from different universities under the auspices of HEC to ensure diverse perspectives. The composition, responsibilities and authority of this body should be defined in detail.
Librarian training. Workshops and training programs for librarians are essential, such as training on MARC standards and cataloguing rules, database management and data sharing protocols. These training and workshops should be conducted periodically to keep librarians up-to-date with the latest developments in technology. Moreover, participation in such programs should be mandatory. Library schools, the National Library of Pakistan and professional library associations can organize such training programs regularly.
Incentives for librarians. Incentives are important for the encouragement of librarians. These incentives might entail financial rewards, professional development opportunities, promotions and/or recognition.
Library school curriculum. Expanding and rationalizing the curriculum of library schools is important to inculcate advancement. Related specific topics and competencies should be identified, and library schools should be encouraged to integrate them into their academic programs and curriculum. Faculty should also be provided with necessary training opportunities for the enhancement of their professional skills and competencies.
Implications for practice
Librarians’ participation. Active participation by librarians in workshops and training programs is crucial. However, these programs should be rationalized, well-structured and their effectiveness should be assessed on a regular basis.
International rules and standards. Following international cataloguing rules and MARC standards is vital for librarians to ensure uniformity and possible integration with national and international union catalogues. Additionally, a mechanism for periodic review and update of these rules and standards to keep them current should be provided.
Resource accessibility and currency. Besides making resources easily accessible, librarians should make sure that the library resources and related bibliographical data are kept up-to-date and relevant to the needs of users.
Marketing OPACs and union catalogues. The OPACs and union catalogues should be promoted for users’ awareness. Specific strategies for promotion might be adopted for this purpose, such as targeted marketing, user training and outreach efforts.
Multilingual catalogue. Libraries have collections in a variety of languages. Therefore, the provision of catalogue data in multiple languages is excellent. However, a plan for maintaining a multilingual catalogue should be included. Moreover, it is important to address the issues of quality control in different languages.
Accessibility on smart devices. Ensuring compatibility of the union catalogue with various devices is crucial, such as smartphones, smart watches, tablets, laptops and e-readers. Library professionals, with the help of IT staff, can make sure that the union catalogue is developed following international standards and protocols, and it should be accessible on various devices.
User training programs. Detailed plans for users’ training programs should be developed, including content, delivery methods and assessment mechanisms.
Limitations of the study
This study primarily used a quantitative research approach to collect and analyze data. While this research approach provided valuable insights, it may be beneficial to complement it with a qualitative research method. Conducting qualitative research could offer a deeper understanding of the perspectives and experiences of head librarians involved in union catalogue development.
This research conducted a comprehensive examination of the current status, problems and prospects of union catalogue development specifically in university libraries in Lahore. The findings from this study may have broader relevance and applicability to university libraries in Pakistan and other developing countries with similar socioeconomic conditions. However, caution should be exercised when generalizing the results to different contexts and regions, as variations in infrastructure, resources and cultural factors could impact the applicability of the findings.
Conclusion
This research highlights the current status of union catalogue development in university libraries in Lahore. It also explores the challenges that hinder this development, and prospects that could propel the development of a union catalogue for these libraries.
The findings indicate that the libraries in Lahore are capable of developing a union catalogue. They possess the necessary infrastructure, including an internet connection, integrated library software, comprehensive collections and possess IT-literate professional staff. They follow cataloguing rules and MARC standards for developing their OPACs. The cooperation and consideration from higher authorities further demonstrate their potential for union catalogue development. However, several challenges, such as the absence of standardized software, staff shortages, funding constraints, lack of a uniform policy, professional workloads and nonstandardized vocabulary/subject headings hinder developing the union catalogue. Private-sector university librarians face more barriers compared to their public-sector counterparts.
Looking ahead, librarians should consider several prospects critical for developing a union catalogue, particularly, the availability of relevant information to share, incentivizing librarians, fostering cooperation and the realization that sharing is caring. The involvement of the HEC is crucial in taking the initiative, and training programs for librarians can enhance their capabilities.
Lahore city librarians are ready to cooperate with the development of the union catalogue; however, they seek support from higher authorities, professional library associations and HEC for this purpose. The implications of the findings are significant for policymakers and practitioners and can help them achieve the goal of developing a union catalogue. The successful development of such a catalogue in Lahore could serve as a model for libraries across Pakistan, promoting collaboration and resource sharing.
This research also holds relevance beyond Pakistan, as its findings can inform efforts in developing countries with similar socioeconomic and cultural conditions. By addressing the challenges and leveraging the outlined prospects, libraries in such regions can develop union catalogues, enhance their resource sharing capabilities and ultimately benefit the academic community and society at large.
Reliability statistics
| Variables | Cronbach’s alpha | No. of statements |
|---|---|---|
| All statements | 0.857 | 37 |
| Status | 0.962 | 11 |
| Problems | 0.760 | 14 |
| Prospects | 0.910 | 12 |
Source: Table by authors
Demographics
| Particular | Frequency | % |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||
| Male | 41 | 56.2 |
| Female | 32 | 43.8 |
| Age group | ||
| 20–30 | 7 | 09.6 |
| 31–40 | 39 | 53.4 |
| 41–50 | 23 | 31.5 |
| 51+ | 4 | 05.5 |
| Rank | ||
| Assistant Librarian/Librarian | 34 | 46.6 |
| Senior Librarian | 16 | 21.9 |
| Chief/Head Librarian | 20 | 27.4 |
| Others | 3 | 04.1 |
| Experience | ||
| Less than three years | 7 | 9.6 |
| 4–6 years | 16 | 21.9 |
| 7–9 years | 17 | 23.3 |
| 10 years or more | 33 | 45.2 |
| Sector | ||
| Public | 44 | 60.3 |
| Private | 29 | 39.7 |
Source: Table by authors
Status/prerequisites of union catalogue development
| Sr. | Statements | Mean | S.D. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Library has needed IT infrastructure | 4.07 | 1.194 |
| 2 | Library is automated | 4.12 | 1.201 |
| 3 | Library has IT-literate professional staff | 4.15 | 1.050 |
| 4 | Library is using an integrated library software | 4.23 | 1.161 |
| 5 | Library follows cataloguing rules, AACR2/RDA, etc. | 4.19 | 1.186 |
| 6 | Library follows international/MARC standards | 4.05 | 1.165 |
| 7 | Library uses controlled vocabulary/subject headings, LC/Sears list/Macrothesaurus, etc. | 4.00 | 1.202 |
| 8 | Online catalogue/OPAC is complete | 4.10 | 1.293 |
| 9 | Library has internet connectivity | 4.36 | 1.110 |
| 10 | Library has relevant information/literature to share | 4.19 | 1.089 |
| 11 | Higher authority shows their consideration | 4.07 | 0.855 |
Source: Table by authors
Problems/challenges of union catalogue development
| Sr. | Problems | Mean | S.D. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lack of clarity | 2.58 | 1.105 |
| 2 | Lack of managerial skills | 2.51 | 1.094 |
| 3 | Lack of support from staff | 2.56 | 1.167 |
| 4 | Lack of funds | 3.19 | 1.243 |
| 5 | Lack of IT competency (data transfer and sharing, format conversion, etc.) | 2.90 | 1.192 |
| 6 | Lack of interest by university authorities | 2.88 | 1.201 |
| 7 | Difficult to convince authorities | 2.73 | 1.109 |
| 8 | Online catalogue/OPAC is complete | 2.81 | 1.209 |
| 9 | Already professional workload/occupied | 3.12 | 1.117 |
| 10 | Inadequate/shortage of staff | 3.29 | 1.172 |
| 11 | Absence of uniform policy | 3.18 | 1.183 |
| 12 | Absence of using standardized software | 3.64 | 5.957 |
| 13 | Absence of using a standardized-format | 2.95 | 1.189 |
| 14 | Absence of using standardized vocabulary/subject headings | 3.00 | 1.106 |
Source: Table by authors
Prospects of union catalogue development
| Sr. | Prospects | Mean | S.D. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Creating awareness of its importance | 4.16 | 0.746 |
| 2 | Training of librarians (a workshop, seminars, lectures, etc.) | 4.25 | 0.894 |
| 3 | Active role of library associations/PLA | 4.10 | 1.002 |
| 4 | HEC should take initiative | 4.25 | 1.011 |
| 5 | Inclusion of the relevant course into the LIS/IM curriculum | 3.97 | 1.054 |
| 6 | Higher authorities need to realize the importance | 4.08 | 1.038 |
| 7 | Coordination among university librarians | 4.30 | 1.009 |
| 8 | Realization about “sharing is caring” | 4.27 | 0.947 |
| 9 | Availability of relevant information/literature to share | 4.47 | 0.747 |
| 10 | Incentive to librarians for encouragement | 4.37 | 0.936 |
| 11 | Provisional of additional funds | 4.25 | 0.997 |
| 12 | Willingness to participate in a joint union catalogue | 4.21 | 0.971 |
Source: Table by authors
© Emerald Publishing Limited.