In our Climate Crisis series, rolling out over the next two weeks, LJ writers examine climate chaos from multiple perspectives and offer their thoughts on ways to address climate impact.
Library Journal has long highlighted and celebrated the resiliency libraries show in the face of hardship. Whether through our annual awards for those that have stepped forward after an unanticipated crisis, or Movers & Shakers profiles of library workers who go above and beyond to meet their community’s immediate needs, we have always recognized that libraries have a role to play in the worst of times.
What has changed, however, is the way we have come to view catastrophic events. The consensus among the scientific community, from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to the Environmental Protection Agency, is that climate change is driven by human activity and that extreme weather events—wildfires, floods, drought, and storms—will intensify with a warming planet. That trajectory will give libraries more critical roles to play, even as it leaves them as vulnerable to damage—physical, psychological, and financial—as the rest of their communities. How can library leaders, staff, funders, and advocates prepare for this uncertain, unsettling future? There is no playbook for libraries to navigate the impacts of climate change. Severe weather risks differ widely from region to region, revealing multiple vulnerabilities across communities.
But this is where libraries excel: planning, preserving, connecting, facilitating, prioritizing. In our Climate Crisis series, rolling out over the next two weeks, LJ writers examine climate chaos from multiple perspectives and offer their thoughts on ways to address climate impact.
Their reports touch on only a few of the myriad questions and concerns libraries have—and should have—about the impact of climate change on their facilities and communities. But we hope they will start or build on conversations and inspire some thoughts about next steps. Stay safe, everyone.
|
This article is a bit misleading, with the information that IMLS will be "eliminated." The order actually states that non-statutory components and functions of this and other agencies shall be eliminated.
Please think about the harm that this will do to our very important libraries and all the people it helps. It's not just book lending but so much more.
So what does that mean? I am not disagreeing with you, but what does it mean for the 'non-statutory components and functions" to be eliminated?
"First Last" It is not misleading, it quotes the actual wording: "the Executive Order calls for the “non-statutory components and functions” of the affected agencies to “be eliminated to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law.”"
Very informative. Thank you. I do agree that it is a bit misleading. Though some factual details of the order are laid out, the first sentence of the article itself implies IMLS is being cut in its entirety.
Thank you so much for writing this. IMLS is a treasure. I think one of your stats got a little garbled in translation. You said "used by more than 1.2 billion people each year." and the ALA's statement says "more than 1.2 billion in-person patron visits every year" which I think means some of those are one patron visiting multiple times. As popular as libraries are in the US, and they are VERY popular, I don't think they attract 3x the population of the country. Thanks again.
We are currently offering this content for free. Sign up now to activate your personal profile, where you can save articles for future viewing