Submission
NLA Submission to the Review of Higher Education Financing & Policy
1. Introduction
The National Library of Australia welcomes the establishment of the Review of Higher Education Financing and Policy and endorses the need to review the state of Australia's higher education sector, the effectiveness of the sector in meeting Australia's social, economic, scientific and cultural needs; and the developments that are likely to shape the provision of higher education in the next two decades.
The National Library sees the emerging networked environment as the major driver of change in both the library and higher education sectors. It will create the opportunities to develop new types of services as well as ways of improving the quality of present services for current and new markets. It will also increase the level of competition between existing Australian higher education organisations and between these and others operating outside of Australia. This environment of competition will also have a major effect on the content and shape of higher education library provision in Australia. The Library strongly supports the use of market based reforms as a mechanism to increase the quality of Australian higher education services, but believes the effectiveness of this reform process can only be realised though the building of a national infrastructure of information support for teaching and research as a key foundation to underpin the higher education system.
The National Library believes that failure to invest in this infrastructure will seriously disadvantage Australian universities in both maintaining their existing services and successfully competing in the new global education markets. The Library is also concerned that while other countries have been actively developing infrastructure to position their higher education sectors to take advantage of new markets, Commonwealth higher education policy and funding processes have been of limited value in ensuring that Australia is also positioned for maximum international advantage in this highly competitive environment.
Through its legislative and strategic frameworks the National Library is committed to the further development of a cooperative Australian library system. Our objective is to continue to build an efficient national system that links together different library sectors such as State, university, Government and special libraries.
The opportunities provided by the emerging networked environment have the potential to increase the quality of access to print and electronic documents held in Australia and overseas. The Library firmly believes that one of the keys to realising these opportunities will be the development of an efficient national network-based library infrastructure that includes the higher education and other library sectors.
Recommendations
The National Library makes the following recommendations in this submission:
Recommendation 1
That the Commonwealth accepts the need for it to play a key policy and funding role in leading the development of a national information infrastructure supporting higher education teaching and research.
Recommendation 2
That the Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs establish a program to support the collaborative development of a national information/library infrastructure for the higher education system. This program would replace existing central funding mechanisms.
Recommendation 3
That funding for this Program come from top-slicing existing funding for the higher education sector in support of sector wide objectives.
Recommendation 4
That the Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs established a National Information Steering Committee (NISC) to provide policy and funding advice to the Commonwealth on national information/library infrastructure development for the higher education system.
Recommendation 5
That NISC be formally established by the Minister for Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs with the following terms of reference:
- to provide advice to the Minister on the strategic development of national information/library infrastructure for the higher education system.
- to provide advice on priorities for funding under a central funding program for national infrastructure development.
- to evaluate the effectiveness of any national infrastructure funding program.
Recommendation 6
That membership of NISC include representation from the following the key stakeholder groups:
- the Australian Vice-Chancellors Committee;
- the Australian Research Council;
- Council of Australian University Librarians;
- Committee of Australian University Directors of Information Technology;
- National Library of Australia;
- CSIRO; and
- the Academies.
Recommendation 7
That NISC be mandated to provide the strategic framework, priorities for funding, and any other advice to the Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs for any central funding program for information/library infrastructure development.
2. Existing Library Cooperation
The Distributed National Collection (DNC) concept provides the overarching framework for cooperation by the Australian library system. It was developed at the Australian Libraries Summit in 1988 and is defined as:
" the aggregation of all major library collections in Australia, the contents of which are recorded in a generally accessible catalogue and which are accessible to library users through an efficient and affordable interlibrary loan system". (National Library of Australia, 1988)
There has been broad support from a range of library and other stakeholder groups for the DNC and its implementation. Both the Australian Vice Chancellors' Committee (AVCC) and the Council of Australian University Librarians (CAUL) have endorsed the DNC model and the need for its implementation by university libraries.
It was also endorsed by both the 1990 Report on Library Provision in Higher Education Institutions (Ross Report) and the 1994 Senate Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training Inquiry into the Organisation and Funding of Research in Higher Education. It has been used as one of the criteria for the funding of library projects by the Commonwealth Department of Employment, Education and Training (Department of Employment, Education and Training, 1994).
The Australian library community particularly university libraries, have made a significant investment in building the elements that provide the underlying infrastructure for the DNC. National bibliographic structures and agreed document delivery mechanisms are in place and a broad understanding of national collection strengths is now available. In broad terms, the tools to underpin national collaboration in a largely print-based world have been realised by Australian libraries.
The emerging networked environment is creating a new set of drivers that is starting to reshape the dimensions of library cooperation. The agenda for Australian libraries and other key stakeholders such as Government and the higher education system, is how to build on the achievements of the DNC, and to fashion a new national library infrastructure able to deliver efficient cooperative benefits using the opportunities created by this new environment.
3. Reviews of Higher Education Libraries
In any analysis of the Australian higher education library system there is value in considering recent reviews that have focused on the library sector, their recommendations and the subsequent Government responses.
3.1 The Working Party on Library Provision in Higher Education Institutions (The Ross Review)
The Working Party on Library Provision in Higher Education Institutions was established by the National Board of Employment, Education and Training (NBEET) in January 1990.
In its Report Library Provision in Higher Education Institutions the Working Party made a wide range of recommendations directed at the Commonwealth, the AVCC, the National Library, higher education institutions and libraries and other organisations. In summary the Working Party recommended that:
- the primary source of recurrent funding for libraries should be their parent institutions;
- the resources the library receives should match the services its institution expects it to deliver for teaching support and as a research resource;
- the special needs of libraries should be recognised in all government funding mechanisms;
- the existing provision by the Australian Research Council for the funding of cooperative programs in support of research should be emulated to provide for cooperation between libraries, and that the Commonwealth earmark a proportion of funding for libraries;
- the principle of cooperative funding should be extended to a national approach to library issues such as storage, communications, and preservation of collections;
- higher education libraries collectively are inadequately linked to their collective institutional managements; and
- that Stage 2 of the Review be replaced by a program of investigations and library infrastructure development and an audit of progress in 1993 (Higher Education Council, 1990).
There was no formal response by the Commonwealth to the Report and its recommendations. While the Ross Review canvassed a number of significant issues it did not provide a national strategic framework for the further development of Australian higher education libraries. Through its non-response the Commonwealth failed to build a clear policy and funding framework for the coherent development of the higher education library sector.
3.2 The Senate Inquiry in the Organisation and Funding of Research in Higher Education
In 1993 the Senate Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training undertook a inquiry into the organisation and funding of research in higher education.
The Report of the Inquiry The Organisation and Funding of Research in Higher Education concluded that libraries were a crucial component of infrastructure for researchers, and that there was a need for urgent coordinated action at national level in relation to the further development of higher education libraries. The Committee made the following specific library recommendations:
- that all ARC funded research projects and CRC grants identify an appropriate proportion of project funds specifically for library support; and
- that the Government provide a fund of $10m over 3 years administered by the AVCC to set in place appropriate structures for a distributed national library collection with links to the broader national library system (Senate Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training, 1994).
In responding to the library specific recommendations of the Senate Inquiry, the Government:
- supported in principle the concept of the distributed national collection;
- indicated that the Government had earmarked $5m from the National Priority Reserve fund for the period 1994-6 for the funding of system wide library infrastructure, and that any request for additional funds would be assessed within the normal budget context; and
- rejected the Senate recommendation for the allocation of a proportion of research project funds be allocated for library infrastructure.
Neither the Ross Report nor the Senate Inquiry into the Funding of Research had any effect in changing Commonwealth policy, funding and mechanisms in relation to higher education library infrastructure. As a consequence the Commonwealth has played a minimal role in addressing the many critical information support issues emerging in the networked environment.
Recommendation 1
That the Commonwealth accepts the need for it to play a key policy and funding role in leading the development of a national information infrastructure supporting higher education teaching and research.
4. Libraries and the Emerging Networked Environment
The environment in which Australian higher education libraries are now operating has changed considerably since the DNC model of cooperation was developed in the 1980's. It is important to understand the new "drivers" now shaping individual library provision and the new issues that need to be addressed through collaborative actions.
4.1 The Impact of the Internet on National Systems
From a national systems perspective, the Internet reduces the national boundaries around information systems, by creating a world market for information products and their delivery. It has the potential to bring together and provide access to the individual catalogues of libraries or library systems, and commercial information suppliers operating outside the existing national library frameworks.
In this emerging environment, national library systems and individual libraries will be exposed to increased competition from a range of other suppliers from outside of Australia. This emerging competition will in a market sense, test the quality and the efficiency of the services from individual libraries and national delivery systems, that have historically operated in a monopoly environments with no real service contestability.
4.2 The Role of Libraries in a Networked Environment
The growth in both the number and range of documents and databases that can be accessed via the Internet, together with the exponential growth in the number of users has resulted in strong market pressures for network tools to more easily locate the particular information required. This has lead to a growing recognition that there is a "role" for libraries to design structures and provide services that enable efficient access to electronic resources.
The growth in the amount and quality of Internet based resources has also meant that the issue has moved from the level of locating a few electronic resources to supplement other materials, to helping the user locate and choose the most appropriate items in the wide range of materials in print and electronic formats.
The historical mission of libraries has been to provide intellectual and physical access and preservation of the record of the human experience. This mission will continue in the emerging networked environment, but the processes and structures through which libraries achieve this will be radically altered by the changes in the way information is being transmitted and stored.
The impact of these environmental drivers is that Australian libraries are now under strong pressure to:
- continue to develop their print-based collections, services and systems under strong pricing and budget pressures,
- develop the range of infrastructure, roles and agreed protocols to provide quality long term access to electronic resources, and to integrate these with their existing library systems; and
- build new forms of collaboration to address issues of common concern arising from the transition to the networked environment.
The emerging networked "transition" environment will require libraries to design systems for efficient access to both print and electronic resources as well as explore new forms of collaboration in collecting print and electronic materials. For many areas of research activity it will be critical for any new distributed network models to provide quality access to collections outside of Australia. A number of international collaborative developments in subject specific gateways are currently under development . They are demonstrating that both libraries and researchers are using the Internet to develop distributed international networks linked to but outside the collections of individual libraries and national library systems.
The question for Australia is how to build the strategic frameworks, the appropriate cross-sectoral collaborative structures and access appropriate funding mechanisms to enable libraries to respond in a cooperative way to the opportunities of this new environment.
5. Future Directions in Higher Education
While there are a range of drivers impacting on and shaping library services, to see higher education libraries as only being influenced by these would be to misread the impact of the wide range of influences shaping the higher education sector in general. Higher education libraries do not provide their services in isolation; their mission is to support the teaching and research activities of their institutions. This section specifically examines the impact of networking on the higher education sector
The networked environment is not only impacting on libraries; it is a major force reshaping the nature of higher education products and services. Higher education institutions world wide see networks as the way to respond to growing customer demands and budget pressures on fixed cost infrastructure. Massy and Zemsky note that in knowledge-based economies networking technologies provide an economical mechanism for the provision of continuous education as well as providing a more accessible form of post-secondary education (Massy and Zemsky, 1995).
The Committee of the Vice Chancellors and Principals of Universities in the United Kingdom in their submission to the Dearing Inquiry, indicate that interactive networked technologies offer enormous potential to liberate teaching and learning from the constraints of time and place, opening up opportunities for distance learning from home, at the workplace or at another university; as well as giving the student greater control over where, when and how they study (Committee of the Vice-Chancellors and Principals of Universities of the United Kingdom, 1997).
The networked environment has not only provided an international dimension to access; it has also created the opportunity for universities to develop and provide courses to a new global market. While higher education institutions in Australia have always had a strong focus on distance education, Universities in the United States, Europe and the United Kingdom now realise they can easily lever their courses into new markets using the Internet.
Peters argues that the key impact of networking will be to create a much more competitive global education market place than has been available in the past, and that not only will universities be competing with one another in this new global market, they will also have to contend with non-university providers able to offer advanced and authoritative educational programs directly to the public (Peters, 1994). The era of quasi-monopoly supply by higher education institutions in specific geographic regions, States or countries is over; and their market share will be under strong pressure from new global competitors who may not have to transform their existing campus-based infrastructure to compete.
In summing up the globalisation trend in higher education, Watts draws the following conclusions:
- that the transition from local to global education services is irreversible;
- that private investment and private suppliers will become more important in this global market; and
- that the resulting increased competition will:
- lead to the rationalisation of courses;
- increase in the value of the "brand name" as the key factor in choice by students;
- increase pressure to contest and outsource services;
- increase specialisation as institutions try to specialise in particular parts of the market;
- generate a need for substantial investment in the development of high quality multimedia learning tools.
- produce pressures for closures, mergers and alliances between both existing providers and new players (Watts, 1996).
The above trends can already be seen emerging on the Internet. For example the Jones Education Company, Open Learning Australia, and the Western Brokering Project are good examples of regional, national and transnational broker based services based on alliances between traditional universities and new providers.
The University of Phoenix Online Campus provides a good example of traditional university re-positioning itself to supply services into a global market. The announcement by Professor Peter Swannell that the University of Southern Queensland would be seeking alliances with software, hardware and media companies is an indication that the trend to building new alliances for networked delivery is also being considered by Australian higher education institutions (The Australian, 12 March 1997).
The emerging networked environment will substantially change the shape of the Australian higher education system. The opportunities of access to a global education market together with competition from a range of new competitors for new and existing markets, will exert significant pressure to restructure the activities of individual institutions and the system as a whole. The challenge for Australian universities will be how quickly and efficiently they can reposition themselves and their existing infrastructure to successfully compete in this new environment.
6. The Future of Libraries: Evolution or Transformation?
What will be the impact of these drivers on the shape and direction of higher education library services ? Clearly any redevelopment of universities to provide their services in a global networked market must have a flow-on effect on the shape and content of library services required to support this direction. There is no clear consensus on the model for libraries supporting an institution providing networked learning services. The views range from the continuation of libraries as we know them to the provision of no separate library service by the organisation. Where a higher education institution positions itself on this issue will be dependent on both the perceived value the library brings to the networked learning process and the level of need to restructure existing infrastructure. It is difficult to accurately predict how the range of influences will shape the Australian higher education library sector as a whole. The National Library believes that the sector will develop a "mix" of models covering the following spectrum of service options:
6.1 Distributed Network Research Library Model
There will be continued high level development of a small number of research level libraries in defined areas of research activity. These sites will develop strong formal relationships with other institutions (both in or outside of Australia) with the same research interests. These relationships could include collecting, indexing and preservation roles for both print and electronic resources, as well as agreed access arrangements. Libraries in these distributed networks, may take on roles and responsibilities to support the network as a whole. Depending on their collections and their service quality, these libraries could also provide outsourced library services to other higher education institutions. These institutions may also provide networked undergraduate and vocational learning, and the library support required could be provided from the library or integrated in the learning packages. One can assume that institutions that have the capacity to both maintain research activities and library services to support these, will also be under strong pressure to refocus their recurrent salary and other "fixed" costs. These pressures could accelerate the trend to outsource the significant technical processing operations of these sites.
6.2 Networked Learning Model using own library infrastructure
There will be a significant group of institutions that will focus primarily on networked learning, and make the decision to use their library infrastructure to support this direction. One can assume that these institutions would continue to operate site-based undergraduate learning as part of their transition strategy. They may support some limited postgraduate research. In these institutions the library would continue to operate campus based print and electronic collections as well as develop the information resources to support network learning. In any transition, these libraries would be under considerable cost pressures to both maintain existing services and develop new learning products. In response these libraries would need to make maximum use of services from commercial suppliers and document delivery from other libraries for non-core materials, as well as for outsourced technical services.
It is too early to assess the outcome and the length of the transition to networked learning, but one can assume that there will be pressures over time to reduce campus based learning and to shift the information investment mix away from the physical library and it local services.
6.3 Networked Learning without a library infrastructure
For organisations that primarily focus on providing their services through networked learning structures, there are a number of ways they could consider providing "library support" without necessarily investing in a traditional library infrastructure. For example:
- the learning packages could be designed to be self-contained with the mix of the different types of electronic resources required by the student to undertake the course integrated into the package;
- the total library service could be contracted out to another library or information supplier; or
- the library service could be constructed from a "mix" of services based on subscriptions to a number of commercial and other database suppliers, the provision of access to web-based resources and document delivery from other libraries. The University of Phoenix library service to support its online courses is a good example of this model.
Whatever the mix of responses taken by Australian higher education institutions to the further development of their library systems, the National Library believes the possible service options outlined above will reinforce the vital need for an efficient national library infrastructure to support and enhance the individual libraries services, as well as the system as a whole.
7. Policy and Funding Frameworks
This section considers the different Commonwealth funding mechanisms, their policy frameworks and their influence on the higher education library system.
There is no central mechanism for the funding of higher education libraries; although the issue of a separate funding mechanism was canvassed by the Higher Education Council in 1992. Action on this issue was postponed because of the then consideration of the specific library allocation under the National Priority Reserve Fund. The issue has not been canvassed since.
7.1 The Library; responsible to the University Organisation
It is the responsibility of individual higher education institutions to determine the role of their libraries and their level of resources. In addition to a proportion of operating grants university libraries have access to a number of other central Commonwealth funding sources. The key programs are:
7.2 National Priority (Reserve) Fund
This fund was established following the Higher Education Policy Statement released in 1988. The objective of the program is to assist the system and individual institutions to improve the quality of education provision through more effective management; and through specific initiatives in areas of identified national priorities. The program is submission based.
The key library initiative under this Program has been allocation of funding for system-wide library infrastructure. Announced in 1994, $5m was allocated over the period 1994-6 for the funding of projects with system-wide benefits, and in particular to advance the capacity of university libraries to provide high quality and more cost-effective services. The funding was allocated to the AVCC to manage and distribute and they were requested to develop a strategy for its allocation. The program and funding is being managed by the AVCC Standing Committee on Information Resources (SCIR).
In broad terms, SCIR has allocated the funding 3 broad sub-programs:
- system wide access to databases ($A2m);
- improving information infrastructure ($A2m); and
- electronic publishing ($A1m).
The National Library is a partner in a number of projects funded under this Program.
Projects approved for funding under the last year of the program have not yet been announced and there has been no indication from the Commonwealth that funding will continue after the existing three year program is completed.
This has been the only Program where a framework for the development of the library system from a national perspective has been developed as the context for funding. A number of the projects funded are directed towards building key elements of national infrastructure to benefit to the higher education library system. For example the JEDDS (Joint Electronic Document Delivery Software) and CILLA ( Coordinated Interlibrary Loan ) projects are building the technical frameworks and specifications for the development of a national electronic document delivery system. Other projects such as the National Data Sets Strategy have been instrumental in facilitating access to resources available from commercial database suppliers and not held in many university libraries, and the Electronic Publishing Program has "tested" a wide range of issues in relation to scholarly publishing.
While the above projects have been of significant national benefit, a number of the projects funded would appear to have limited national value and no "scaleability" to the national level. It would appear that the purpose of funding a number of projects has been simply to "reward" an existing activity. The Library also questions the efficiency of the application and assessment processes used by the SCIR in the administration of this program.
SCIR has not been requested by the AVCC or DEETYA to develop a national strategic framework for higher education information and library infrastructure. SCIR itself has raised this issue in its Report Exploiting Information Technology in Higher Education noting that:
"Serious consideration needs to be given at the highest level to establishing a coordinating and funding body under the joint auspices of DEETYA and the AVCC to coordinate all national [information technology and library] activities and initiatives in the sector. The issues are too important for the future welfare of the nation to be allowed to continue in a rather haphazard and hit and miss manner" (Australian Vice-Chancellors Committee, 1996).
There is no public information indicating the number, type of library projects and amount allocated under the National Priority (Reserve) Fund apart from the system-wide library infrastructure program mentioned above. Anecdotal evidence suggests that a number of libraries received funding under this Program in the period 1991-3 to catalogue their holdings onto ABN. There is no evidence of the setting of any strategic directions by the Commonwealth or any evaluation of the effectiveness of library funding under this Program.
7.3 Research Infrastructure (Equipment and Facilities) Program
The Research Infrastructure Cooperative Program (Mechanism C) was established in 1991 to fund the development of research infrastructure in higher education institutions. In 1995 this was replaced with the Equipment and Facilities Program which has the main objective of funding large scale initiatives to develop research infrastructure on a cooperative basis across groups of institutions or the higher education system as a whole. The program is submission-based and administered by DEETYA with the Australian Research Council evaluating and recommending projects for funding to the Minister.
As a result of concerns raised by the Council of Australian University Librarians (CAUL), a set of basic criteria were developed in 1994 for the assessment of library submissions under this program. The following year a library advisory body was established by DEETYA and this body has been used to provide advice to the ARC on projects that should be funded. The National Library is a member of this group. So far neither the ARC nor DEETYA have requested this body to develop either a strategic framework or national priorities to guide library infrastructure funding under this Program.
Based on the National Library's participation in the assessment process in recent years, it would appear that a number of the projects funded under this Program either duplicate existing library activities or are outside the national library system. For example, a number of funded projects have duplicated the functions of the National Bibliographic Database (NBD) maintained by the National Library. Given these outcomes, the Library has to question the effectiveness of the process used for the allocation of funds to library projects under this Program.
As with the National Priority (Reserve) Fund there is neither public information detailing library projects funded since these Programs were established nor any strategic or evaluation frameworks in place to assess the effectiveness of this funding.
Neither of the above central funding programs have developed any form
of strategic framework for the development of higher education libraries. The
absence of this framework has meant the submission based process has not been
able to ensure that projects funded have added in a coherent way to the
development of a national library infrastructure.
The Commonwealth has been unwilling to either reform or develop funding structures for the higher education library sector to ensure that funds are allocated in an efficient and effective manner in relation to clear strategic directions. Despite the in-principle support for the DNC model of cooperation, the primary funding and policy drivers from the Commonwealth have rewarded competition between institutions rather than building efficient system wide library infrastructure.
The absence of clear policy directions and related funding mechanisms has resulted in poor public sector investments to support development of the Australian higher education library system.
Recommendation 2
That the Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs establish a program to support the collaborative development of a national information/library infrastructure for the higher education system. This program would replace existing central funding mechanisms.
Recommendation 3
That funding for this Program come from top-slicing existing funding for the higher education sector in support of sector wide objectives.
8. The Role of Government in Shaping Higher Education Library Infrastructure
In canvassing possible models for Australian Government intervention
for the further development of the higher education library system, it maybe
useful to look at approaches taken by other countries to this key policy issue.
The United Kingdom has been a leader in the implementation of privatisation and market-based reforms across a wide range of sectors. However in relation to the higher education library/information areas there are high levels of Government intervention. The Follett Report of UK higher education libraries established both the policy and funding frameworks in place for the development of system from a national perspective (Joint Funding Council's Library Funding Review Group, 1995)
The establishment of the Joint Information Steering Committee (JISC) to provide network infrastructure and to be funding vehicle for the application of new technologies for the whole academic and research community has proved to be a successful mechanism for national development in the United Kingdom. JISC brings together library, information technology and other higher education stakeholders and has concentrated on four key areas:
- the provision of a national leading edge telecommunications network;
- the provision of centralised information services and the development of electronic libraries;
- the development of innovative applications made possible by information technology; and
- improving the level of awareness of the opportunities presented by information technology.
One of the key directions underlying JISC's activities is that competition between higher education institutions in the United Kingdom does not mean there is not a need for collaboration. On the contrary, the sector as a whole needs to maximise collaborative advantage, while individual institutions maximise their competitive advantage (JISC, 1995). In their submission to the Dearing Inquiry, JISC indicate that the UK system has developed the following strengths in the application of information technologies:
- the development of a quality broadband network;
- the ability to cooperate pre-competitively;
- a coherent central approach to electronic information; and
- the development of high levels of technical expertise (JISC, 1996).
There would appear to be strong support from the United Kingdom Government and a range of sectors for the continued development of pre-competitive information infrastructure. The Higher Education Council for England in their submission to the Dearing Inquiry indicated their belief that:
"market forces, student choice, and the self interest of individual institutions should continue to be the primary instrument of change, reinforced by financial and other inducements provided by the funding mechanism. Nevertheless, in the future more central intervention may be required to achieve diversity and differentiation between institutions and more cooperation" (Higher Education Council for England, 1996).
There is a clear recognition in the UK that global networking will inevitably bring aggressive competition for both their home and external markets, and that any lead (on other countries) that the higher education system has developed is based on the building of a suitable information infrastructure and a "healthy willingness to work collaboratively in developing pre-competitive applications" (JISC, 1996).
The trend in recent micro-economic reforms in Australia has been to rely strongly on market forces to achieve system efficiencies, with limited ongoing intervention by Government to achieve other national policy objectives. In any reform of the higher education sector, the National Library suggests that there is a vital need for active government policy and funding intervention to build the elements of a national library and information services infrastructure.
This is the trend in a number of other countries and government investment is seen as a key strategy for building "national comparative advantages" in relation to other national education and information systems. The United Kingdom experience indicates that there is no policy conflict between the objectives of increasing the level of competition between higher education institutions and active national investment in a "pre-competitive" information and library infrastructure for the education sector. Both policy elements can work together, and by doing so strengthen efforts to achieve national competitive advantage in the new global education markets. It is unfortunate that the Commonwealth has not provided coherent policy and funding frameworks for similar national infrastructure developments in Australia.
Recommendation 4
That the Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs established a National Information Steering Committee (NISC) to provide policy and funding advice to the Commonwealth on national information/library infrastructure development for the higher education system.
Recommendation 5
That NISC be formally established by the Minister for Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs with the following terms of reference:
- to provide advice to the Minister on the strategic development of national information/library infrastructure for the higher education system.
- to provide advice on priorities for funding under a central funding program for national infrastructure development.
- to evaluate the effectiveness of any national infrastructure funding program.
Recommendation 6
That membership of NISC include representation from the following the key stakeholder groups:
- the Australian Vice-Chancellors Committee;
- the Australian Research Council;
- Council of Australian University Librarians;
- Committee of Australian University Directors of Information Technology;
- National Library of Australia;
- CSIRO; and
- the Academies.
Recommendation 7
That NISC be mandated to provide the strategic framework, priorities for funding, and any other advice to the Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs for any central funding program for information/library infrastructure development.
9. Conclusion
The National Library is committed to developing a cooperative Australian library system, that links all sectors including higher education libraries, and believes the emerging networked environment provides new opportunities to increase the quality of access to both print and electronic resources. The Library recognises that this new environment will bring increased competition not only for Australian libraries but for the higher education sector in general; and acknowledges that competition will be a key factor in increasing the quality and efficiency of services from this sector.
However the Library strongly argues that the effectiveness of any market-based reform of the sector will only be fully realised through the building of a "pre-competitive" networked based national library infrastructure. The recent track record of Commonwealth intervention to support higher education library development has been a poor one. Continued failure to build this infrastructure through the development and application of coherent Commonwealth policy and funding mechanisms will ensure that the Australian higher education system will be seriously disadvantaged in competing in the new global education market.
