Search

This article discusses the development of collaborative virtual reference service in China. It is natural for libraries to provide a virtual reference service (VRS) as information resources become more Web based and more actively used by patrons outside the walls of libraries. Virtual reference, also called digital reference and online reference, refers to delivering a library reference service by electronic means, from asynchronous via e-mail, Web form, to real-time via chat, Web push, co-browsing, Voice over and IP. In China, more and more libraries have realized the importance of offering a VRS, hence some local VRS systems have been developed to provide better responses to patrons' information needs. These local efforts have contributed a lot to the advance of VRS technologies, but as far as CVRS is concerned, only preliminary experiments have been conducted, such as those by the National Library of China and Shanghai Library. The aim of the DCVRS project is initially to provide Chinese academic library patrons with the best possible reference service, and then to gradually expand the service to public libraries, special libraries, and the information services community.

Information inequity is a central concern of the digital age. Many recognize the role of public libraries in bridging such inequities. Unfortunately, however, public libraries are often limited by the funding available to them. This study used a geographic information system (GIS), inequality measures, and multiple regressions to analyze statistics from the Public Libraries Survey (PLS) collected by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) and from census tract data. It evaluated the levels of public library funding and services and tested how these resources vary with neighborhood income and urbanization levels. This is one of the few nationwide multivariate studies of neighborhood-level variations. The study revealed significant funding and service variations across the nation's 9000 library systems. Distributions of digital materials, full-time staff with a master's degree in library and information science, and library programs were especially disparate. Library systems in lower-income or rural neighborhoods were relatively less funded and offered fewer information resources. Interestingly, the only variable that was not significantly associated with neighborhood income was the number of public Internet terminals. This suggests that recent funding and research efforts may have made a difference. Similar funding efforts are encouraged for other types of library resources such as staff education and training. In light of the prevalent disparities in resource levels across neighborhoods, the study calls for a fundamental evaluation of the funding mechanisms for libraries. Also, information behavior research should investigate how this structural information inequity affects individuals’ information use decisions. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]