Hi Hannah, all,
I am getting lost here: by donors, I meant people donating money as a
form of philanthropy, often as a unique contribution. What do you mean
by funders? In my vocabulary, I tend to use the word "funding agency" or
"funder" as organizations giving money to support research inside a
regular programme of subsidies - think NSF or NIH in the US. Charities
can be considered funders as they provide money on a fairly regular
basis and within generally well-defined programmes - think Wellcome or
Gates.
Can you clarify?
Thank you in advance.
Jean-Claude
> *From:*OpenCafe-l <[log in to unmask]> *On Behalf Of
> *Jean-Claude Guédon
> *Sent:* 08 March 2024 16:34
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: [OPENCAFE-L] The source of money (Re: [OPENCAFE-L]
> European Policy Shifts)
>
> The donor restrictions are also negotiable. The degree of restriction
> is not relevant to this discussion.
>
> As for "conduit", I wonder how many librarians feel they are money
> pipes between their institution and the publishers.
>
> Jean-Claude
>
> On 2024-03-08 08:56, Rick Anderson wrote:
>
> At the risk of being drafted into the monastic orders, I’ll
> respond once more on this thread and then stop.
>
> Donor funds are actually a very interesting case in the context of
> this discussion – because they’re usually far more restrictive
> than institutionally-allocated funds are. Whereas a university
> typically says to its library each year “Here’s $X for
> collections, and $X for personnel, and $X for operations (etc.)”,
> a donor is much more likely to say “Here’s $X which, in honor of
> my late father, you may use to purchase 15^th -century Persian
> texts in Greek translation.” (And if that sounds like an
> exaggeration, I would suggest that you haven’t spent much time
> raising money for libraries.)
>
> It's not unheard of, but relatively rare, for a donor (or a host
> institution) to give money to a library and say “Do whatever you
> want with this money.” Generally, both donors and host
> institutions provide funds to libraries so that the library will
> do things that the donors and the institutions want done. For the
> library to accept those funds and then use them to pursue a
> different agenda isn’t “courageous”; it’s dishonest and unethical.
>
> (In case anyone might find it interesting and/or amusing, I wrote
> a brief piece in /Library Journal/ ten years ago on the vagaries
> of gifts in libraries, called “Kitten in a Beer Mug: The Myth of
> the Free Gift”:
> https://www.libraryjournal.com/story/kitten-in-a-beer-mug-the-myth-of-the-free-gift-peer-to-peer-review
> <https://www.libraryjournal.com/story/kitten-in-a-beer-mug-the-myth-of-the-free-gift-peer-to-peer-review>.)
>
> ---
>
> Rick Anderson
>
> University Librarian
>
> Brigham Young University
>
> (801) 422-4301
>
> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>
> *From: *Jean-Claude Guédon <[log in to unmask]>
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> *Date: *Friday, March 8, 2024 at 1:50 AM
> *To: *Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>, "[log in to unmask]"
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]><[log in to unmask]>
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> *Subject: *Re: [OPENCAFE-L] The source of money (Re: [OPENCAFE-L]
> European Policy Shifts)
>
> I have been involved closely enough with libraries and consortia
> (CRKN in this case) to know the degrees of freedom libraries have
> once they take hold of their budget from their overarching
> institution. Arguing that libraries are not the source of their
> money is Jesuitical at best. Yes, the money is allocated by
> someone else - a university, whatever - and yes they have to
> report to someone in the administration, once the money is spent.
> But they can also raise money - my wife was doing that brilliantly
> at McGill - and they are not just conduits.
>
> That is what lucidity (and courage) mean,
>
> Jean-Claude
>
> On 2024-03-07 08:51, Rick Anderson wrote:
>
> I realize that the differences between this odd caricature of
> my previous message and what I actually said are obvious and
> don’t require a detailed rebuttal.
>
> But I do want to emphasize that by pointing out the fact that
> libraries are not the source of the funds that they inject
> into the scholcomm system, I neither said nor implied that
> librarians are either “powerless” or not “strong.” Nor did I
> characterize examples of libraries “successfully redirecting
> money towards various openness initiatives” as “marginal”; I
> actually called them “very impressive.”
>
> Yrs. in lucid thinking,
>
> Rick
>
> ---
>
> Rick Anderson
>
> University Librarian
>
> Brigham Young University
>
> (801) 422-4301
>
> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>
> *From: *Jean-Claude Guédon <[log in to unmask]>
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> *Date: *Thursday, March 7, 2024 at 2:48 AM
> *To: *Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>, "[log in to unmask]"
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]><[log in to unmask]>
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> *Subject: *Re: [OPENCAFE-L] The source of money (Re:
> [OPENCAFE-L] European Policy Shifts)
>
> On 2024-03-06 16:32, Rick Anderson wrote:
>
> /This is a very common misconception among people who
> don’t work in libraries, and for some reason it’s proven
> very difficult to dislodge. The actual reality is that
> libraries are not sources of money at all; they’re
> conduits through which money flows. The source of that
> money is the libraries’ host institutions./
>
> Rick makes a gallant attempt to demonstrate the powerlessness
> of librarians within their institutions. What he is really
> referring to is an instance of institutional politics where
> librarians, while not in a dominant position, nonetheless
> enjoy a degree of power and some ability to negotiate. What I
> am referring to is that when librarians become aware of their
> real power (which is not all that great, but, once again, is
> not zero), they have to think lucidly on how they can put some
> direction and coherence on their conduits.
>
> If I were to believe that librarians are truly passive
> conduits, I would pity them deeply. I have too much knowledge
> about, admiration for and faith in that profession to know
> that librarians can do more than what Rick states. He himself
> admits that it exists. He tries to reduce this to marginal
> exceptions, but that is another question that some
> evidence-based scholars can solve, I believe. One only has to
> think about the book-banning efforts in the US and how
> librarians react. This is a strong and generally courageous
> profession.
>
> Jean-Claude
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives
> <https://listserv.byu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=OPENCAFE-L>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to:
> [log in to unmask]
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives
> <https://listserv.byu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=OPENCAFE-L>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to:
> [log in to unmask]
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives
> <https://listserv.byu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=OPENCAFE-L>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to:
> [log in to unmask]
>
########################################################################
Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives:
https://listserv.byu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=OPENCAFE-L
To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to:
[log in to unmask]
########################################################################
|
