A Study of Collection Development Policy to Strengthen South Korea’s Library Services for Persons with Disabilities / Une étude des politiques de développement des collections pour renforcer les services en bibliothèque pour personnes handicapées en Corée du Sud

Abstract

Libraries must provide persons with disabilities with support in text interpretation, enjoyment of knowledge culture, and access to and utilization of information so as to narrow the knowledge gap, facilitate the participation of persons with disabilities in society, and ensure their full enjoyment of human rights. The South Korean government amended the Libraries Act in 2006, adding a clause on the “narrowing of the gap in knowledge and information.” The National Library Assistance Center for the Disabled was founded in 2007 and was upgraded in August 2012 to become the National Library for Individuals with Disabilities (NLID). Accordingly, the NLID must enact policies and develop strategies to carry out its responsibilities. Under these circumstances, one of the most urgent policy tasks is to establish a collection development policy for alternative-format materials to bridge the knowledge gap for people with disabilities. This study aims to develop a collection development policy for the NLID. The results of this study can be used as a policy document and logical basis of argument in discussing the NLID’s legal obligations and responsibilities and library services for persons with disabilities.

Résumé

Les bibliothèques doivent offrir aux personnes handicapées un soutien dans l’interprétation textuelle, le plaisir de la connaissance culturelle, de même que dans l’accès et l’utilisation de l’information, afin de réduire l’écart dans les connaissances, de faciliter la participation des personnes handicapées au sein de la société et d’assurer la pleine jouissance des droits de l’homme. En 2006, le gouvernement sud-coréen a modifié la Loi sur les bibliothèques, en y ajoutant une clause sur la « diminution de l’écart dans les connaissances et l’information ». Le Centre d’assistance de la bibliothèque nationale pour personnes handicapées a été fondé en 2007 et renouvelé en août 2012 en tant que Bibliothèque nationale pour les personnes handicapées (BNPH). En conséquence, la BNPH doit adopter des politiques et élaborer des stratégies pour mener à bien ses responsabilités. Dans ce contexte, l’une des tâches les plus urgentes est de mettre en place une politique de développement des collections (PDC) axée sur des alternatives documentaires pouvant combler l’écart de connaissances pour les personnes handicapées. Cette étude vise à développer et à proposer une PDC pour la BNPH. Les résultats de cette étude peuvent être utilisés comme document de politiques et peut servir de base de discussion au sujet des obligations et responsabilités légales de la BNHP et des services en bibliothèque qui sont offerts aux personnes handicapées.

Introduction

Persons with disabilities represent over 10% of the global population (Disabled World 2014). Libraries must provide persons with disabilities with support in text interpretation, enjoyment of knowledge culture, and access to and utilization of information so as to narrow the knowledge gap, facilitate the participation of persons with disabilities in society, and ensure their full enjoyment of human rights. To this end, the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions has established guidelines for library services by disability type and has been encouraging each nation’s libraries to adopt the guidelines and strengthen their library services.

Consequently, the South Korean government amended the Libraries Act in 2006, adding a clause on the “narrowing of the gap in knowledge and information.”¹ The National Library Assistance Center for the Disabled was founded in 2007 and was upgraded in August 2012 to become the National Library for Individuals with Disabilities (NLID). Accordingly, the NLID must enact policies and develop strategies to carry out its 10 responsibilities, which are stipulated under article 45, clause 2, or the Libraries Act in 2006.² Under these circumstances, one of the most urgent policy tasks is to establish a collection development policy (CDP) of the NLID for alternative-format materials to bridge the knowledge gap between people with disabilities and those without disabilities. Libraries must first be outfitted with sufficient alternative-format materials in order for various other services to be provided (face-to-face reading, ink print–to–Braille translation, post or parcel service, instruction and support for library use and reading, provision of accessible online and digital information, and equipment checkout and utilization).

The study described here included literature reviews (including online literature), examination of case studies, and elicitation of expert opinions. First, scholarly journals, theses, research reports, policy documents, online resources, and statistical data on national libraries for persons with disabilities and national-level private providers of services for persons with disabilities in major advanced nations, as well as South Korea’s NLID and public libraries, were consulted to analyse and delineate the current status of the development and supply of alternative-format materials. The websites of various institutions (the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions, UNESCO, and others) were analysed to provide missing information.

In addition, the policies for the development of alternative-format materials of major libraries for persons with disabilities, public libraries, and private service providers in Korea and abroad were analysed and compared to deduce and describe their structural characteristics, strengths and weaknesses, and implications (basic principles and purposes of alternative-format materials collection, definition of terms, format and scope of materials, material selection and management standards, detailed guidelines). Finally, practical expert opinions on operation and management were elicited from the administrators and staff of the National Library of Korea, libraries for persons with disabilities, and public libraries that provide services for persons with disabilities. These opinions were considered to supplement the basic model and the detailed guidelines of the NLID’s CDP so as to codify policy, ensure the feasibility of the detailed guidelines, and increase their practical utilization. The results of this study can be used as a policy document and logical basis of argument in discussing the NLID’s legal obligations and responsibilities and library services for persons with disabilities.

Literature review

The literature on collection and development of alternative-format materials for persons with disabilities is rather slim. To lay the foundation for the model proposed in this article, this section provides an analysis of development policies and service trends related to alternative-format materials at national libraries and/or private organizations in major advanced nations.

Many organizations outside of South Korea collect, develop, and provide alternative-format materials for persons with disabilities. Prominent national libraries and national-level systems of services for persons with disabilities in major advanced nations on each continent, except for Africa, were examined. The National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped (NLS), Bookshare, and Learning Ally in the United States and the Canadian National Institute for the Blind (CNIB) are representative of systems in North America, and the Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB) of Great Britain is representative of systems in Europe. The following is an analysis of these organizations in terms of their current collection of alternative-format materials (including production) and their development policies (or guidelines).

In the United States, policies on the collection and development of alternativeformat materials for persons with disabilities are regulated by the federal government. The NLS, under the Library of Congress, plays a pivotal role. The US Library of Congress has established the “Collections Policy Statements,” a CDP that applies to all national libraries, including specialized libraries (in medicine, agriculture, and education). The system describes 65 guidelines by subject and media (Yoon 2012, 9–12). However, considering the special characteristics of alternative-format materials for persons with disabilities, the NLS has established an independent policy that provides guidelines for the production and development of alternative-format materials. The NLS “Collection Building Policy,” last revised on December 31, 2009, is composed of eight sections and an appendix. The NLS categorizes collection development for various subject areas into minimal, basic, and support levels, based on the classes and subdivisions of the Dewey Decimal Classification (Library of Congress, NLS 2009).

In Canada the Library and Archives Canada, founded in 1953, is partly responsible for the establishment of policies on information access and utilization for persons with disabilities, formation of infrastructure, and support activities. However, the majority of services for persons with disabilities are provided by private institutions and public libraries. A primary private institution is the CNIB. The CNIB Digital Library offers complete access to its collection and provides the same services for persons with disabilities that public libraries provide for others in Canada and overseas. Major types of alternative-format materials include digital Braille books and text, DAISY (digital accessible information system) books, and recorded (audio) books. But the CNIB lacks a codified development policy for alternative-format materials.

Great Britain, like Canada, lacks a policy on services for persons with disabilities governed by its national library. The British Library’s regulatory function is significantly weaker than those of national libraries in other advanced nations (McDonald 2002). Instead, the government’s Department of Culture, Media and Sport funds the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council to induce privatesector and commercial organizations to develop materials and improve services for persons with disabilities. One representative volunteer organization in the private sector is the RNIB. While the private sector mostly focuses on developing materials and services for people who are blind or visually impaired, commercial organizations are divided by the types of alternative-format materials they develop. For example, a commercial organization might focus on materials for people with low vision, producing and releasing large-print materials, audiobooks, cassette tapes, CDs, and so forth.

The RNIB’s alternative-format services for the visually impaired were started by the National Library for the Blind, which was founded in 1882 and operated for 125 years until it merged with the RNIB in 2007, becoming what is now the RNIB Research Library. The RNIB Research Library, operated and maintained largely by unpaid volunteers, boasts the largest collection of alternativeformat materials in Europe (RNIB 2013). The visually impaired in Great Britain depend heavily on the RNIB for reading materials. According to research by Claire Greaser, Rachel Spacey, and Debbie Hicks (2012), 80% of the visually impaired persons who participated in a survey answered that they obtained reading materials from the RNIB. Other popular sources of reading materials were public libraries (45%), Calibre Audio Library (30%), downloads (26%), and gifts (25%). Each year, the RNIB converts over 6,000 titles into DAISY format and adds 14,500 audiobook titles to its collection. As of the end of 2012, the RNIB had over 350,000 titles in its collection (RNIB 2013). Nevertheless, the RNIB did not have a codified policy or guidelines for collection development at the time of this research.

Last, in Europe, Braille books had the highest share among the various types of alternative-format materials, followed in order by DAISY audiobooks, other MP3 files, cassette tapes, musical scores, tactile and digital books, and large-print materials. Table 1 shows the results of the analysis and comparison of the current status of alternative-format materials collections and services in 21 European nations.

Analysis of the current status of library collections of alternative-format materials and CDPs in South Korea

In South Korea, agents that collect and provide alternative-format materials for persons with disabilities include the NLID, libraries for persons with disabilities, public libraries, university libraries, and other private services. The following is an analysis of the library collections of alternative-format materials and the CDPs of the NLID, libraries for persons with disabilities, and public libraries.

NLID

The NLID must establish a development policy for alternative-format materials for all persons with disabilities. While it collects and produces alternative-format materials, it is also the NLID’s responsibility to support the collection development of other libraries. The NLID has been contributing to narrowing the gap in knowledge and information by producing and distributing materials in formats such as DAISY, electronic Braille (e-Braille), video description, and sign language videobooks. Table 2 shows a breakdown of the production and purchase of alternative-format materials in 2003–12. A total of 14,239 titles were produced or purchased in alternative formats by the end of 2012 (National Library of Korea 2012, 222; 2013, 1–5). The share of alternative-format material production grew substantially between 2010 and 2012. Calculated totals by format of material are shown in figure 1.

The number of DAISY materials produced, which had the highest share among all alternative-format materials produced in 2011–12 was broken down by subject and by target audience. The subject with the highest share was social science (32.7%), followed by literary works (23.0%). Materials for adults made up a higher share than those for children and youth.

The basis for the NLID’s collection policy relating to alternative-format materials is the CDP of the National Library of Korea (NLK), enacted in 2011. Table 3 shows a summary of the NLK’s CDP (Planning Division of the National Library of Korea 2011, 26–36).

Based on the above analysis, a summary of key characteristics of collection development at the NLID is shown in table 4, centering on the current status of the library’s collection of alternative-format materials.

Table 1.

Current status of alternative-format materials collections and services in 21 European nations

Note: *DAISY refers to digital accessible information system.

Table 2.

Production and purchase of alternative-format materials in 2003–12

*VBF stands for voice Braille format.

†DAISY stands for digital accessible information system.

Figure 1.

Accumulative totals by format of material (2010–13)

Libraries for persons with disabilities

As of the end of 2011, there were 36 libraries in South Korea that were completely dedicated to materials and space for persons with disabilities. As shown in table 5, the collections of these libraries included a total of 266,669 alternative-format titles (791,453 items) for persons with disabilities. In terms of format, audio materials (cassettes and CDs) form the majority, accounting for 43.1% of all alternative-format titles, followed by electronic materials (33.9%), Braille materials (21.7%), and video materials (0.8%) (National Library of Korea 2011).

Table 3.

The National Library of Korea’s collection development policy for alternative-format materials

Note: *DAISY refers to digital accessible information system.

To understand the principles and standards applied to libraries’ collection or production of alternative-format materials, one must examine their policies. Or the 36 libraries for persons with disabilities, the Korean Braille Library, Siloam Braille Library, and Hasang Library for the Blind were chosen based on their relatively large collections and number of registered users and specialized personnel. The analysis of their development policies (or guidelines) for alternative-format materials is shown in the appendix.

Table 4.

The alternative-format collection development policy of the National Library for Individuals with Disabilities

Note: *DAISY stands for digital accessible information system.

Table 5.

Alternative-format materials collections of libraries for disabled people in South Korea (2011)

Note: *DAISY stands for digital accessible information system.

Public libraries

All public libraries must place import on providing materials and information services that narrow the gap in knowledge and information between persons with and without various disabilities within their service areas by the Libraries Act in 2006 (no. 8029) and governmental policies. The following is an analysis of the current status of public libraries, centering on alternative-format materials.

As of the end of 2011, public library collections included a total of 321,596 alternative-format titles (559,408 items), as shown in table 6. In terms of method of collection, 36,855 titles were purchased, 6,302 titles were received as gifts, and 1,600 titles were produced. In terms of format. Braille books had the largest share of the collections, at 30.9% (99,256 titles), followed by videos (video description, sign language, etc.), at 28.8% (92,712 titles); audiobooks on CDs, at 14.8% (47,618 titles); and audiobooks on cassettes, at 14.5% (46,701 titles). DAISY materials had a meagre share, with DAISY books accounting for 3.4% (10,903 titles) and e-Braille books 3.1% (10,009 titles).

If one looks at the production of alternative-format materials by major public libraries in 2011, 13 libraries, or only 1.69% of the 768 public libraries, produced a total of 1,692 titles (2,711 items) (these 13 libraries include the Busan Metropolitan Namgu Library, Mapo Lifelong Learning Center, DaejeonHanbat Library, GyeonggiHaemil Library, Busan Metropolitan Myungjang Municipal Library, Chungcheongbuk-do Jungang Library, Suwon Sarangsaem Library, Incheon Hwadojin Library, and DaeguSuseong Public Library). This figure is extremely low considering that over 50,000 new titles are published each year.

Table 6.

Alternative-format materials collections of public libraries in South Korea (2011)

Note: *DAISY stands for digital accessible information system.

Table 7.

Key characteristics of public libraries’ development for alternative-format materials in South Korea

Note: *DAISY stands for digital accessible information system.

Production of alternative-format materials, a key element of services for persons with disabilities, is in urgent need of expansion.

Key characteristics of public libraries’ development policies for alternative-format materials are summarized in table 7, with a focus on collection and production.

Developing the basic model for the NLID’s CDP

Backdrop and grounds for the establishment of the CDP

Article 45, clause 2, of the Libraries Act stipulates 10 legal responsibilities of the NLID, opened on September 24, 2012. Of these responsibilities, the most important is the “establishment and administration of national measures for library services for persons with disabilities,” which principally entails the establishment of a CDP focusing on persons with disabilities. The backdrop and grounds for the establishment of the NLID’s CDP are explained below, from various perspectives shown in figure 2: compliance with international declarations and conventions, adherence to the prescription of the positive law, establishment of the library’s identity and its raison d’être, nationwide expansion of production and distribution of alternative-format materials, strategic collection development for persons with reading disabilities, and support for various libraries in developing guidelines and standards for collection development.

Figure 2.

The backdrop and grounds for the establishment of the collection development policy of the National Library for Individuals with Disabilities

• • The CDP is a starting place from which the NLID can guarantee persons with disabilities the right to access and utilize information, as elucidated in various international declarations and conventions. Development of a collection centering on alternative-format materials is a prerequisite to guaranteeing persons with disabilities the rights to cultural enjoyment and access to information, as prescribed by various declarations of the United Nations from the 1940s on (e.g., the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, the Declaration on the Rights of Mentally Retarded Persons in 1971, and the Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons in 1975), the specific agenda to put those declarations into action (the Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities in 1993), the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2006, and the Declaration on the Human Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2008. The CDP ensures such a collection.

• • The CDP serves as the policy basis of the NLID and other libraries for the collection and production of alternative-format materials and provision of services, as stipulated in various laws (e.g., the Libraries Act; the Act on the Promotion and Guarantee of Access for the Disabled, the Aged, and Pregnant Women to Facilities and Information³; the Copyright Act⁴; and the Postal Service Act⁵). The CDP also serves as the policy basis for the NLID’s adherence to its legal responsibilities (collection, production, production support, and provision of alternative-format materials; standardization, evaluation, testing, and distribution; construction and co-utilization of a system for sharing; development and distribution of library services and special equipment), and determines the fidelity of services provided by other libraries to persons with disabilities and patrons’ satisfaction levels.

• • The CDP establishes the purpose, legal status, identity, and raison d’être of the NLID, which represents the nation. The Blueprint and Development Measures for the NLID, proposed at the Second National Library of Korea Development Forum, held in May 2012, laid out the NLID’s vision: realizing a knowledge and information society without walk through library services; its goal: increasing its status as the nation’s main library; and its four key tasks: collecting and producing alternative-format materials for persons with disabilities, improving accessibility of library materials for persons with disabilities and enhancing the service environment, enacting policy on library services for persons with disabilities and constructing cooperation networks, and promoting a reading culture among persons with disabilities and providing relevant education. Attached to the first of the four tasks, that is, collecting and producing alternative-format materials for persons with disabilities, are detailed strategies: enforcing compulsory collection and deposit of specimen copies of alternative-format materials, producing and inspecting alternative-format materials and developing guidelines, and reinforcing the organization, utilization, and preservation of alternative-format materials. The CDP is the necessary policy basis of these strategies.

• • The CDP not only proposes a scenario of nationwide development of alternative-format materials for persons with disabilities but also promotes an increase in the number of alternative-format materials produced and circulated. At present, approximately 10% of the population of advanced nations, and nearly 15% of the population of developing nations, have disabilities that prevent them from reading printed materials (Hilderley 2011, 5). Although key advanced nations are leading the way in increasing the number of alternative-format materials produced, so as to guarantee the basic information rights of persons with disabilities and their right to read, the number of internationally circulated DAISY books is a little over 250,000 (Leas, Persoon, Soiffer and Zacherle 2008, 35). In other words, alternative-format materials that persons with disabilities can access and utilize account for only 5%–7% of materials published yearly (Bookshare 2011; CNIB 2012, 3). If adopted as an official document, the NLID’s CDP will contribute to increasing the number of alternative-format materials produced and their diversity.

• • The CDP supports the strategic collection development of NLID, which considers all persons with disabilities. In Korea as well as in other countries, selection criteria, preferred reading medium, rate of usage, and dependability vary greatly by the type of disability and the format of alternative materials. In addition, there exists a growing gap between the rich and the poor in access to the alternative-format materials produced and circulated. NLID’s establishment of and adherence to the CDP will allow strategic approaches in matching disability type with alternative format, narrowing gaps in access to alternative-format materials among people with different types of disabilities, and producing and developing materials according to the priority level assigned to each alternative format.

• • Not only can the CDP be used as the basis for the CDPs of various libraries that provide services to persons with disabilities (e.g., public libraries, libraries for persons with disabilities, university and other school libraries), but it can also lead other libraries to devise their own detailed guidelines and standards. As the majority of the libraries in South Korea have no prevailing rules and guidelines for collection and production of alternative-format materials, a nationwide CDP not only has effective political value as the medium- to long-term road map for the NLID but also provides practical guidelines for other libraries.

Basic principles and aims for the establishment of a CDP

All persons with disabilities must have rights to access and utilize knowledge and information equal to those of persons without disabilities. To support these rights, libraries must prioritize the task of developing and providing optimal alternative-format materials. However, few independent libraries have the human resources or the financial means to establish policies to develop or secure alternative-format materials in Korea. Therefore, the desirable solution is for the NLID, a national institution with legal responsibilities, to establish an integrative and strategic CDP that embraces all persons with disabilities and to act as the control tower for the development of alternative-format materials. Basic principles and aims of the CDP are presented in figure 3.

Figure 3.

Basic principles and aims of the proposed collection development policy of the National Library for Individuals with Disabilities

• • The principle of infinite responsibility must be considered in setting the identity of the NLID. A profit model can hardly be applied to the supply and demand of alternative-format materials, and monopoly or oligopoly is inevitable owing to the lack of a competitive market. Therefore, unless dictated by the legal responsibilities stipulated under article 45, clause 2, of the Libraries Act, systematic collection development cannot be expected, and the accessibility gap between well-funded and poorly funded disabilities is sure to widen. By making this principle the ideological or philosophical basis of establishing the CDP, the NLID can aim to become the national representative library for persons with disabilities,serving all of the nation’s libraries.

• • The principle of focus on usage must come first in prioritizing the functional aspects of the NLID. As CDPs cover all stages of materials from cradle (selection, acquisition, and production) to grave (deselection), collection development for persons with disabilities must expand to manage all stages of alternative-format materials, from selection to deselection. However, in narrowing the knowledge and information gap between persons with and without disabilities, access and utilization by current users are more urgent than preservation and management of materials for the next generation of users. Libraries must enable persons with disabilities to utilize alternative-format materials, download information from the Internet, and access a range of useful information by visiting websites, using mobile devices and computers, and visiting libraries in person. Thus, the CDP should aim to create a “one-stop service center,” with an emphasis on usage by persons with disabilities.

• • In selecting target groups, the CDP should apply the principle of selection and concentration, considering the proportion of registered users with each disability type, the difficulty in accessing and using alternative-format materials, and the urgency of service. South Korea had 2,519,241 registered persons with disabilities as of the end of 2011. Visually impaired and hearing-impaired persons are classified as persons with disability types that prohibit them from using general materials made for persons without disabilities. Thus, visually impaired and hearing-impaired persons must be considered the key target groups when developing alternative-format materials. With an emphasis on these groups, the CDP must focus on Braille materials (Braille books, e-Braille books, tactile picture books), audio materials (cassette tapes, CDs, MP3s, audiobooks), DAISY books, large-print materials, and integrative books (print-and-Braille books, Voiceye code books) for the visually impaired, videos with sign language interpretation or captions, and video descriptions (e.g., CDs, DVDs) for the hearing impaired. The CDP must aim to create a national library for the blind and physically disabled.

• • The principle of all-inclusiveness must be applied to target materials. Hybrids of alternative-format materials, which embrace all analog formats (e.g., Braille books, tactile picture books, large-print materials, video description, videos with sign language interpretation or captions) and digital formats (e.g., DAISY audiobooks, e-Braille books, digital files) should become the target of collection and production. Considering the access and usage of digital information in the digital environment, alternative-format materials are classified into those that require computers and those that do not. Applying the principle of all-inclusiveness, the CDP should aim to make the NLID a legal deposit library and a national archive where extensive physical materials and digital files are produced or collected through deposit of sample specimens of materials produced at home and abroad, and where these materials are preserved and managed.

• • To increase the collection’s appropriateness and usefulness to users with various types of disabilities, the principle of optimality must be adopted, placing emphasis on preferences, usage patterns, and the convenience of access and utilization. As of the end of 2011, of the estimated 281,278 visually impaired persons in South Korea, 93.9% could not read Braille (94.6% of men and 92.8% of women). Of the estimated 294,330 hearing-impaired persons in South Korea, 98.9% could not use sign language (99.4% of men, 98.3% of women). In Japan 76.1% of 301,000 visually impaired persons could not read Braille, and 68.8% of 304,000 hearing impaired persons could not use sign language (Kim et al. 2011, 144–52). This suggests that developing Braille books for the visually impaired and videos with sign language interpretation or captions for the hearing impaired does not guarantee access to and utilization of information for all visually impaired and hearing-impaired persons. Totally blind persons cannot read large-print or enlarged materials, and hearing-impaired persons cannot use DVDs and other materials without sign language interpretation or captions. Most visually impaired persons can hear DVDs but not watch them, but people with low vision can read largeprint materials. Table 8 shows the results of a survey conducted in South Korea in 2007 on preferences for alternative-format materials by disability type (Lee and Cho 2007, 57). Overall, the greatest preference was for regular books, followed by e-books, audiobooks, videos with sign language interpretation or captions, Braille books, and DAISY materials. However, the order of preference differed greatly by disability type. The greatest preference of visually impaired persons was for audiobooks, followed by e-books, Braille books, enlarged books, and DAISY materials, while hearing-impaired persons most preferred videos with sign language interpretation or captions, followed by regular books, e-books, and enlarged books. We live in a media-centric digital global society. Therefore, applying the principle of optimality, the CDP must aim to create a customized development center that links and combines materials based on preferences for alternative-format materials, which vary by disability type.

Table 8.

Preferred alternative formats by disability type in South Korea

Note: *DAISY stands for digital accessible information system.

• • To meet the demands of the digital paradigm, the principle of priority on development of DAISY materials must be applied when considering the format of alternative materials. As the Internet and circulation of digital information become ubiquitous, the demands of persons with disabilities and their usage patterns are shifting from static media to dynamic media, from regular printed copies and large-print materials to electronic text. Existing analog materials should be supplemented with digital materials, with a focus on DAISY-format materials. The NLID must collect and produce alternative-format materials for the visually disabled and persons with other types of disabilities. As shown in Klein’s research (2007), when materials can be produced in multiple formats from a single master file, the CDP can aim to create a digital information commons and promote access to and utilization of alternative-format materials using the Internet and mobile devices.

• • The principle of the division of functions should necessarily be applied to production of alternative-format materials, eliciting participation of various agents in the production process. Even if the NLID leads a nationwide policy on the development of alternative-format materials, outsourcing is inevitable owing to the burdens of in-house production: the high cost of recording facilities and production equipment and the need to hire Braille translators, proofreaders, and professional readers. On the other hand, institutions with existing production facilities for Braille books and audiobooks (e.g., Braille libraries, rehabilitation centers for persons with disabilities, and schools for the blind) are already producing alternative-format materials and possess accumulated know-how and technology. Adhering to the principle of the division of functions, the CDP can form partnerships among the government, libraries for persons with disabilities, private publishers, producers, and other enterprises. The NLID’s focus should remain on the production of DAISY materials, since other institutions, such as libraries for persons with disabilities, are producing audiobooks and e-Braille books. The CDP should aim to create a control tower for production policy that oversees the division of functions among organizations in producing alternative materials in different formats.

• • To honour the rights of persons with disabilities to access information, the CDP should place the greatest import on the principle of non-discrimination so as to include in collections for persons with disabilities the same categories and subjects included in collections available for access and utilization by persons without disabilities. This principle does not specify that the over 50,000 materials released each year for persons without disabilities be reproduced and collected in the form of alternative-format materials for persons with disabilities. Rather, the principle suggests that materials should be selected carefully by category and subject so as to guarantee maximum accessibility. To this end, the NLID’s CDP must aim to create an unlimited access center.

Proposal of the basic model for the CDP

The CDP established by the NLID must be a nationwide policy for the development of useful alternative-format materials for all persons with disabilities. Figure 4 shows the relationship between the systems and content of the NLID’s CDP and those of its superordinate policy, the NLK’s CDP. Preconditions and keypoints of this relationship must be clarified to prevent confusion and distortion in establishing the basic model for the NLID’s CDP.

Figure 4.

Relationship between the proposed collection development policies of the National Library of Korea and the National Library for Individuals with Disabilities

First, the basic model of the NLID’s CDP cannot override that of the NLK’s CDP. As the NLID is a subordinate organization of the NLK, the development of the NLID’s alternative collection will naturally follow the development of the NLK’s collection. The significance of the NLID’s CDP lies merely in narrowing its target group to persons with disabilities and supplementing the NLK’s CDP with policies that focus on carefully selecting materials from the collection of the NLK that are useful to or are requested by persons with disabilities, to produce (or transform them into) alternative-format materials.

Second, the national alternative-materials collection, developed and produced based on the basic model of the NLID’s CDP, exists as a sub-set of the national collection of the NLK. In other words, all alternative-format materials developed by the NLID based on the CDP fall under the national alternative-materials collection. The relationship between the national alterative-materials collection and the national collection can be expressed as follows: national collection > national alternative-materials collection.

Third, the basic model of the NLID’s CDP must include alternative-format materials for all types of disabilities. While placing import on the development and provision of alternative-format materials for the visually impaired and the hearing impaired, the NLID must not neglect alternative-format materials for persons with other types of disabilities. Therefore, development of alternative-format materials useful to persons with other types of disabilities, including intellectual and developmental disabilities, must be included in the CDP.

Fourth, the basic model of the NLID’s CDP must include old materials as well as new materials from at home and abroad. In other words, the NLID must target not only new domestic and international materials being circulated in the publication market but also dated materials in its collection development.

Figure 5.

Basic model of the proposed collection development policy of the National Library for Individuals with Disabilities

Fifth, the development methods of the NLID’s CDP for alternative-format materials are identical to the methods the NLK has applied to building the national collection, including deposit (submission) of domestic materials as well as purchases, exchanges, gifts, and donations of materials produced at home and abroad. In the production of alternative-format materials, which is one of the NLID’s most important responsibilities, target materials for development must be selected from the national collection using strict criteria, including the demands and interests of persons with disabilities, as well as the current and potential utility value. The NLID’s CDP must be developed based on the preconditions and keypoints explained above, reflecting the basic principles and aims as closely as possible. Figure 5 outlines the basic model of the NLID’s CDP.

Conclusion

The NLID must not only carry out its legal responsibilities as a special library so as to guarantee all persons with disabilities their rights to access and utilize knowledge and information but also be the vanguard of all libraries in strengthening services for persons with disabilities. To this end, one of the NLID’s most important responsibilities and policy tasks should be to develop alternative-format materials. To ensure this development, the NLID must establish a CDP.

The basic principles and aims of the NLID’s CDP were presented in this study: the CDP’s legal basis is founded on the NLID’s legal responsibility to “collect and produce alternative format materials,” as stipulated in article 45, clause 2, of the Libraries Act; its policy basis on the collection development of its superordinate organization, the NLK; and its practical basis on the urgency of building a national alternative-materials collection. Based on these principles and aims, a basic model of the NLID’s CDP was proposed, which is summarized below.

First, eight basic principles and aims of the NLID’s CDP were established in consideration of the following aspects: identity, functions, target groups, target materials, appropriateness and usefulness to users with various types of disabilities, format of alternative materials, production, and rights of persons with disabilities to access information).

Second, the basic model for the NLID’s CDP was proposed following a basic structure with nine parts: preface; targets, agents, and methods of collection development; basic guidelines for collection development; development guidelines for alternative-format materials by medium; development guidelines by material format; development guidelines by subject; guidelines for preservation and deselection; development plans and roles at the national level; and the managing party and the amendment cycle of the CDP.

Finally, the most important national responsibility of the NLID is to narrow the knowledge and information gap between people with disabilities and those without, while at the same time developing a national alternative-materials collection so as to guarantee basic rights to information for persons with disabilities. To this end, the NLID must concentrate on developing alternative-format materials that are preferred by, or expected to be useful to, the visually impaired and the hearing impaired. In doing so, the NLID must pay heed to the fact that neglecting persons with other types of disabilities encourages another type of discrimination. In building the national alternative collection, the NLID must collect domestic materials useful to all persons with disabilities through the method of deposits (submissions), while at the same time building a collection of purchased (or received) foreign materials with cultural value through careful selection and production (transformation). Speedy legalization of the CDP is highly desirable so that the CDP can serve as the NLID’s policy basis for collection development for persons with disabilities.