Ethical Dilemmas in Collection Development of Open Access Electronic Resources

Abstract

All across the United States universities are being called into critical conversations about social justice. The American Library Association Code of Ethics calls on librarians to "uphold the principles of intellectual freedom" and "distinguish between our personal convictions and professional duties." Our ethics shape our engagement in these critical conversations. This article presents two ethical dilemmas experienced in Open Access electronic resource collection development and acquisition. Discussed first is the discovery and remediation of sharp practice in article processing charges. Second is the challenge of commercial Open Access projects and the role of libraries as investors of production. The author discusses how library professional ethics are applicable to and stretched by the goals of Open Access.

Ethical acquisitions in academic libraries: a simple idea without a simple solution

“…Or, as Amanda Echterling puts it, 'Delegation to one voice … is not a scholarly conversation'. 5 I do not believe that we should begin from the position that being a 'professional' makes our actions ethical. Especially, when you consider the profound problems with representation in the profession outlined by Ettarh.…”

An examination of information ethics standards in the management of open access electronic information resources (OAEIR) by Zimbabwean university libraries.

“…Additionally, unlike online articles in most conventional databases, academic libraries created their OA resources through local digital copies built in IRs, such as staff research articles and student thesis (Bawack & Nkolo, 2018, p. 3). The information distribution model of OA was the timely answer to communicating research output in which anyone could contribute to research without many intellectual restrictions (Echterling, 2019).…”

“…However, though OA was an important creation and objective for libraries, it has raised many ethical dilemmas associated with library cataloguing standards, lack of additional funding and skills for LIS professionals to cope with the collection and organisation of this emerging format (Echterling, 2019). Additionally, this was also highlighted by Young (2009), who noted that the dissemination of OAEIR had presented LIS professionals with the most difficult challenge in the concept of the OA movement.…”

“…Additionally, this was also highlighted by Young (2009), who noted that the dissemination of OAEIR had presented LIS professionals with the most difficult challenge in the concept of the OA movement. Echterling (2019) stated that the OA publishing model had presented enormously different membership requirements on behalf of libraries compared with its predecessor model, the conventional (print and proprietary electronic resources) publishing model. This has created ethical dilemmas for LIS professionals as they try to balance relationships with publishers, collection development and associated ethical standards, and library clients.…”

“…Thus, OA resources were not yet integrated into the norms, functions and roles of the LIS professionals and professions, including in mainstream workflow processes such as cataloguing and indexing services. Echterling (2019) noted that though the OA movement had been embraced in the LIS profession, library collection development policies were still driven by the 'print revolution' ideologies and were general or even silent regarding OA acquisitions. Nevertheless, the new mode of scholarly communication required LIS professionals to revisit all practices and workflows to incorporate OA developments and their integral variances with conventionally published content.…”