No More Library Fines Because – Of Course – Social Inequality

There are indeed reasons why library fines might not be the most sensible things to be charging. But that’s different from whether they’re the optimal thing to be doing.

The American librarians, that hotbed of conservative and thus logical thought, have decided that library fines should go because, you know, poor people:

Resolved, that the American Library Association (ALA), on behalf of its members
1. adds a statement to the Policy Manual that establishes that “The American Library
Association asserts that imposition of monetary library fines creates a barrier to the
provision of library and information services.”;
2. urges libraries to scrutinize their practices of imposing fines on library patrons and
actively move towards eliminating them; and
3. urges governing bodies of libraries to strengthen funding support for libraries so they
are not dependent on monetary fines as a necessary source of revenue.

What would a resolution from public servants be if it didn’t include the ritual call for more resources for public servants?

The actual insistence being:

An increasing number of libraries are dropping their late fees because the policies deter and bar low-income residents.

Yes, poor people exist therefore there should be no late fees on borrowings.

That fines shouldn’t a be a source of revenue is true. Even, that the fine system might cost more to run than it collects – true for some systems at least.

But the reason for the fines is the same reason parking meters were first introduced – in order to gain optimal turnover of the asset.

With parking spaces there’s some obvious limit to the number of them nice and close to the stores downtown. Streets are only so wide, so long, etc. If there is no charge for that space and time then there’s a temptation for people to just park there all day. The origin of parking meters was so that the spaces would turn over. That meaning more traffic to the stores near where the spaces were charged for – yes, more, not less. A greater use of that scarce asset, space near the shops by people who were going shopping.

Libraries face the same problem. A book costs x. If it can be lent out 4 times a month then the capital cost of that book per loan is lower than if it can be lent out once a month. Given that we want to optimise – maximise – the benefit we gain from that capital expenditure we desire to speed up the turnover of the books.

The origin is not to do with gaining the book back, it’s to do with speeding up the return of a loan so that it can be lent again – as with the parking spaces.

Which brings us to the correct question to ask about fines. Are they the optimal method of gaining the desired turnover of the library stock? And what’s the one question that we didn’t see the librarians’ association asking? Correct, they didn’t actually ask the only pertinent one therefore we know the answer they’ve come up with is wrong.

But then librarians’ association – we knew they were going to be wrong anyway.

11
Leave a Reply

avatar
6 Comment threads
5 Thread replies
8 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
8 Comment authors
Mark TQuentin VolejghBoganboySpike Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Spike
Guest
Spike

Meanwhile, tax funding of these public reading houses doesn’t impose a “barrier” on anyone, right? What’s objectionable is not this policy resolution but the underlying feeling that we know so well what you should do (though you don’t) that we are justified in setting the price to zero.

Quentin Vole
Guest
Quentin Vole

Libraries used to be a wonderful facility for those who could not afford books. Today, when a £100 landfill Android gives you access to nearly all the world’s knowledge (and you can register with your library to get at those resources that might otherwise cost), what’s the point of a physical library?

View from the Solent
Guest
View from the Solent

For me, the serendipitous discovery of books and authors that I would not otherwise have read.

TD
Guest
TD

My local library is pretty busy when I go in there. Also, not all libraries have digital copies of all books available for borrowing. I’ll also say that I prefer to read a physical book, but I do have a kindle and I do use it. It’s certainly convenient on a trip. I don’t think libraries have passed their bye date yet, though you may be right in that it will happen.

Bloke on M4
Guest
Bloke on M4

keeping librarians in jobs?

jgh
Guest
jgh

An Android does *not* give you access to nearly all the world’s knowledge. Recent estimates are that about 5% of all the world’s knowledge is online, *I’M* one of the people slogging away digitising stuff to *get* it online.

Quentin Vole
Guest
Quentin Vole

How much of the missing 95% is to be found at a local library?

Spike
Guest
Spike

Now move beyond the fact that the policy proves how we all feel about The Poor and consider the effect: no cost to not returning books promptly, which is inconsideration. If it’s anything like crosswalks, which seem to make pedestrians indifferent to drivers even when outside the crosswalk, it may lead to misbehavior away from the library. Even in the cases where poverty is not caused by one’s own misbehavior, poverty may become intractable by new misbehavior.

Boganboy
Guest
Boganboy

As an avid bookworm, who loves to rummage through the local library, I’d naturally rather not have to pay anything. But of course I’ve no idea what the late fee is, because I haven’t had an overdue book for so long.

I must agree with Tim though that I get pissed off if I can’t get the book I want in a reasonable time. So I suppose I’ve got to reluctantly support the fines after all.

Mark T
Guest
Mark T

At the other end of the tech scale, Tesla superchargers give you a ‘nearly charged’ alert so you can get back to your vehicle and free it up for the next guy. If you don’t, some pretty big fines by the minute kick in. Optimising resources and all that.