Library and Information Science

Library and Information Science ISSN: 2435-8495
三田図書館・情報学会 Mita Society for Library and Information Science
〒108‒8345 東京都港区三田2‒15‒45 慶應義塾大学文学部図書館・情報学専攻内 c/o Keio University, 2-15-45 Mita, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-8345, Japan
Library and Information Science 75: 107-136 (2016)

原著論文Original Article

熟議民主主義論による「分析の視点」からみた図書館づくり住民団体の活動Analyzing the activities of resident groups in the public library movement according to the “viewpoints” derived from the deliberative democracy theory

専修大学Senshu University ◇ 〒214–8580 神奈川県川崎市多摩区東三田二丁目1番1号 ◇ 2–1–1 Higashimita, Tama-ku, Kawasaki-shi, Kanagawa 214–8580, Japan

受付日:2015年9月15日Received: September 15, 2015
受理日:2016年1月25日Accepted: January 25, 2016
発行日:2016年6月30日Published: June 30, 2016




Purpose: This study aimed to derive the necessary“ viewpoints” for monitoring the activities of resident groups in the public library movement. The resultant “viewpoints” are then to be applied in document research when inspecting the real activities of resident groups.

Methods: First, “viewpoints” necessary for monitoring the activities of resident groups were derived by organizing political science discussions on deliberative democracy to pinpoint its “requirements”. Subsequently, all content describing activities of resident groups from the 1990s in library-related journals were extracted and sorted according to previously derived “viewpoints” to examine their specific activities. Finally, these activities were compared with the aforementioned requirements of deliberative democracy.

Results: The following six “viewpoints” were derived: “constitution of participants”, “learning activities of participants”, “communication between participants”, “state of consensus”, “relationship with non-participants”, and “relationship with the political system”. When activities of resident groups since the 1990s were examined according to these “viewpoints”, it was found that the participants were a diverse group of residents, typically amateurs in library administration, who were actively involved in learning activities while achieving consensus through meetings and appealing to nonparticipants, local community leaders, or parliament representatives. Thus, these activities can be seen as satisfying the requirements of deliberative democracy because they correspond to viewpoints such as “constitution of participants”, “relationship with non-participants”, and “relationship with the political system”. However, the results indicate that additional research is needed to gain further understanding of these activities.

This page was created on 2021-01-05T16:01:39.366+09:00
This page was last modified on