How do libraries manage the ethical and privacy issues of RFID implementation? A qualitative investigation into the decision-making processes of ten libraries

Abstract

This paper explores how library managers go about implementing RFID (radio frequency identification) technology and particularly how associated privacy issues have been managed. The research methodology consisted of a literature review, theme identification, interview scheduling, interviews and interview analysis. The sample was 10 libraries or library networks and 18 participants. Findings covered the main drivers of RFID development, perceived benefits, tag data, data security, levels of ethical concern, public consultation, potential impact of technological developments on ethical issues, and managers’ sources of ethical decision making. Analysis of potential ethical issues was not found to be a central part of the process of implementing RFID technology in the libraries. The study sees RFID implementation as an informative example of current practice in the implementation of new technologies in libraries and suggests that we look at management structures and decision-making processes to clarify where responsibility for ethical considerations should lie.

Keywords

Ethics library technology privacy RFID radio frequency identification technologies

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Library Association (2002) Library Bill of Rights: Interpretations of the Library Bill of Rights: Privacy. Available at: http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpretations/privacy (accessed 22 March 2013).

American Library Association (2006) RFID in Libraries: Privacy and Confidentiality Guidelines. Chicago, IL: American Library Association. Available at: http://www.ala.org/offices/oif/statementspols/otherpolicies/rfidguidelines (accessed 26 March 2013).

ANEC and BEUC (2007) Consumers’ Scenarios for a RFID policy. Joint ANEC/BEUC Comments on the Communication on Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) in Europe: Steps towards a Policy Framework. Brussels: ANEC(ICT-2007-G-059). Available at: www.anec.org/attachments/ANEC-ICT-2007-G-059.pdf (accessed 2 December 2012).

Angwin

Valentino-Devries

(2012) Google’s iPhone tracking. Wall Street Journal, 17 February. Available at: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204880404577225380456599176.html (accessed 3 December 2012).

Archer

(2007) An RFID primer and intellectual freedom catution [sic]. Indiana Libraries 26: 21–26.

Arthur

(2012) Google’s privacy policy: EU data chiefs ‘to act within days’. Guardian, 8 October. Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/oct/08/google-privacy-policy-data-protection (accessed 3 December 2012).

Australian Government. Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (2010) Privacy Impact Assessment Guide. Revised May 2010. Available at: http://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/privacy-resources/privacy-guides/privacy-impact-assessment-guide (accessed 14 August 2013).

Ayre

(2004) Position paper: RFID and libraries. Draft chapter to be published in: Garfinkel

Rosenberg

(2005) Wireless Privacy: RFID, Bluetooth and 802.11. New York: Addison-Wesley/Prentice Hall. Available at: http://www.fatburen.org/wpbagen/bagenmappar/dokument/arx/rfid-permission.pdf (accessed 22 March 2013).

Ayre

(2012) The RFID opportunity: Use tags to deliver new services to your patrons. American Libraries 43(9/10): 17.

10.

Blansit

(2010) RFID terminology and technology: Preparing to evaluate RFID for your library. Journal of Electronic Resources in Medical Libraries 7(4): 344–354.

11.

Braun

Clarke

(2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2): 77–101.

12.

Butters

(2007) RFID systems, standards and privacy within libraries. The Electronic Library 25(4): 430–439.

13.

Butters

(2008) RFID for libraries: A comparison of high frequency and ultra high frequency options. Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services 21(3): 120–134.

14.

Cadoo

(2004) RFID use within libraries: An Australian perspective. In: New librarians’ symposium 2, Adelaide, Australia, 3–4 December 2004. Available at: http://conferences.alia.org.au/newlibrarian2004/zobjects/presymppapers/Cadoowebsitepaperfinal.pdf (accessed 7 May 2012).

15.

Cai

. (2009) Attacks and improvements to an RFID mutual authentication protocol and its extensions. In: 2nd ACM conference on wireless network security (WiSec ’09), Zurich, Switzerland, 16–18 March 2009. Available at: http://www.mysmu.edu/phdis2009/shaoyingcai.2009/WISEC.pdf (accessed 7 May 2012).

16.

Cavoukian

(2004) Tag, You’re It: Privacy Implications of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Technology. Toronto: Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. Available at: http://www.ipc.on.ca/images/resources/up-rfid.pdf (accessed 7 May 2012).

17.

Coombs

(2004) Walking a tightrope: Academic libraries and privacy. Journal of Academic Librarianship 30(6): 493–498.

18.

Coyle

(2005) Management of RFID in libraries. Journal of Academic Librarianship 31(5): 486–489.

19.

Engels

(2006) RFID Implementation in California Libraries: Costs and Benefits. Sacramento, CA: California Library Association. Available at: http://www.clanet.org/included/docs/IT3.pdf (accessed 3 December 2012).

20.

European Commission (2011) Privacy and Data Protection Impact Assessment Framework for RFID Applications, 12 January 2011. Available at: http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/enet/documents/rfid-pia-framework-final.pdf (accessed 22 March 2013).

21.

Garofoli

Podger

(2003) Ethics of library tag plan doubted. San Francisco Chronicle, 6 October. Available at: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Ethics-of-library-tag-plan-doubted-Privacy-2583912.php (accessed 12 December 2013).

22.

Gibb

. (2011) The application of RFIDs in libraries: An assessment of technological, management and professional issues. International Journal of Information Management 31(3): 244–251.

23.

Hall

(2012) Google accused of invading privacy with pictures of house numbers. Telegraph, 15 April. Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/9205486/Google-accused-of-invading-privacy-with-pictures-of-house-numbers.html (accessed 3 December 2012).

24.

Information Commissioner’s Office (UK) (n.d.) Privacy Impact Assessment. Available at: http://www.ico.org.uk/for_organisations/data_protection/topic_guides/privacy_impact_assessment (accessed 14 August 2013).

25.

International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (2012) IFLA Code of Ethics for Librarians and other Information Workers (full version). Available at: http://www.ifla.org/news/ifla-code-of-ethics-for-librarians-and-other-information-workers-full-version (accessed 13 August 2013).

26.

Ionescu

(2010) Google resumes street view driving: More trouble looming? PC World, 9 July. Available at: http://www.pcworld.com/article/200753/googleresumesstreetviewdrivingmoretroublelooming.html (accessed 3 December 2012).

27.

Lockton

Rosenberg

(2005) RFID: The next serious threat to privacy. Ethics and Information Technology 7(4): 221–231.

28.

Mehrjerdi

(2011) RFID: The big player in the libraries of the future. The Electronic Library 29(1): 36–51.

29.

Moessner

Khan

(2012) Secure authentication scheme for passive C1G2 RFID tags. Computer Networks 56(1): 273–286.

30.

Molnar

Wagner

(2004) Privacy and security in library RFID issues, practices, and architectures. In: CCS ’04: Proceedings of the 11th ACM conference on computer and communications security. Available at: http://delivery.acm.org/10.1145/1040000/1030112/p210-molnar.pdf?ip=149.157.1.188&id=1030112&acc=ACTIVE%20SERVICE&key=C2716FEBFA981EF1C517B38E12D13249503B474E5DC23DD5&CFID=359794273&CFTOKEN=36463715&__acm__=1378812800_434aac65f4f13de591ae8aa6da0b24a2 (accessed 10 September 2013).

31.

Mostyn

(1985) The content analysis of qualitative research data: A dynamic approach. In: Brenner

Brown

Cauter

(eds) The Research Interview. London: Academic Press, pp.115–145.

32.

Muir

(2007) RFID security concerns. Library Hi Tech 25(1): 95–107.

33.

National Information Standards Organization (2007) RFID in US Libraries: A Recommended Practice of the National Information Standards Organization. NISO RP-6-2008. Baltimore, MD: National Information Standards Organization. Available at: http://www.niso.org/publications/rp/RP-6-2008.pdf (accessed 01 March 2010; inactive and replaced by NISO RP-6-2012).

34.

National Information Standards Organization (2012) RFID in US Libraries: A Recommended Practice of the National Information Standards Organization, prepared by the NISO RFID Revision Working Group. NISO RP-6-2012. Baltimore, MD: National Information Standards Organization. Available at: http://www.niso.org/apps/group_public/download.php/8269/RP-6-2012_RFID-in_US_Libraries.pdf (accessed 22 March 2013).

35.

Palmer

(2009) Making the Most of RFIDs in Libraries. London: Facet.

36.

Preer

(2008) Library Ethics. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.

37.

Rogers

(2012) Facebook users raise privacy concerns as company tweaks security settings. Guardian, 15 October. Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/oct/15/facebook-users-privacy-concerns-security (accessed 3 December 2012).

38.

San Francisco Public Library Technology and Privacy Advisory Committee (2005) Radio Frequency Identification and the San Francisco Public Library: Summary Report. San Francisco, CA: LTPAC. Available at: http://sfpl.org/pdf/about/commission/RFID-and-SFPL-summary-report-oct2005.pdf (accessed 22 March 2013).

39.

Sarhan

(2009) Telemedicine in healthcare 2: The legal and ethical aspects of using new technology. Nursing Times 105(43): 18–20.

40.

Standards Australia Working Party (2006) RFID for Libraries. Standards Australia Working Group IT-019-01-02. Sydney: Standards Australia. Available at: http://www.sybis.com.au/IT-019-01-02%20minutes%2012-1-06.pdf (accessed 7 May 2012).

41.

Strickland

Hunt

(2005) Technology, security, and individual privacy: New tools, new threats, and new public perceptions. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 56(3): 221–234.

42.

Thornley

. (2011) Do RFIDs (radio frequency identifier devices) provide new ethical dilemmas for librarians and information professionals? International Journal for Information Management 31(6): 546–555.

43.

United States, Department of Homeland Security, The Privacy Office (2007) Privacy Impact Assessments: Official Guidance. Available at: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/privacy/privacy_pia_guidance_may2007.pdf (accessed 14 August 2013).

44.

Van Grove

(2012) Your address book is mine: Many iPhone apps take your data. VB Mobile, 14 February. Available at: http://venturebeat.com/2012/02/14/iphone-address-book/(accessed 3 December2012).

45.

Webinar (2010) The Power and Pitfalls of RFID: Questions, Comments, and Responses, hosted by Library Journal on 16 March, 2010. Available at: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A3=ind1005&L=LIB-RFID-UK&E=base64&P=205642&B=—%3D_NextPart_000_003F_01CAF763.AB55CB70&T=application%2Foctet-stream;%20name=%22Webinar%20Questions%20final.pdf%22&N=Webinar%20Questions%20final.pdf&attachment=q&XSS=3 (accessed 7 May 2012).

46.

Zanetti

Sachs

Capkun

(2011) On the practicality of UHF RFID finger printing: How real is the RFID tracking problem? In: Fischer-Hübner

Hopper

(eds) Privacy Enhancing Technologies. Berlin: Springer, pp.97–116. (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 6794).

47.

Zimerman

(2011) Radio frequency identification (RFID): Time to take another look. OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives 27(2): 146–154.