Journal of the Korean BIBLIA Society for library and Information Science (한국비블리아학회지)

Korean Biblia Society for Library and Information Science (한국비블리아학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on Inequality Analysis of Academic Information Sharing in University Libraries using Gini's Coefficient and Pareto Ratio

지니계수와 파레토 비율을 활용한 학술정보공유 기여에 대한 대학도서관 격차 분석

  • 조재인 (인천학교 문헌정보학과)
  • Received : 2020.02.20
  • Accepted : 2020.03.20
  • Published : 2020.03.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Pareto principle states that, for many events, roughly 80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes. This study clarified if there is Pareto principle in Korean universities' academic information resource sharing network and calculates the Gini efficient about inequality in sharing academic resources. As a result, top 20% libraries led 80% of performance and inequality degree showed 0.8 as very serious condition. Relative Gini efficient which is recalculated considering scale of each libraries stay 0.7 that is adjusted slightly down. It means that such phenomenon is not caused by the difference of each universities scale with high contribution of big university and low contribution of small university. And in comparison of inequality between university's types, inequality between community colleges and private universities is more serious than four-year-course college and national university respectfully. Finally, as a result of visualizing the distribution of participating libraries, there were libraries with overwhelming contributions, and libraries with small but relatively high contribution levels were also distributed.

사회 현상 곳곳에서 나타나고 있는 파레토 법칙(Pareto principle)은 상위 20%가 전체 성과의 80%를 차지한다는 법칙이다. 본 연구에서는 대학도서관 학술정보 공유 협력체에서도 파레토 법칙이 발견되고 있는지 확인하였으며, 더불어 지니계수(Gini coefficient)를 통해 대학 간에 나타나는 학술정보 공유 기여 정도에 대한 격차를 수치로 산출하였다. 그 결과 학술정보 공유 협력 사업에서 상위 20%의 대학도서관이 81.2% 이상의 실적을 주도하고 있었으며, 정보 기여에 대한 격차는 평균 0.78로 매우 심각한 상태를 나타냈다. 대학도서관의 규모를 감안하여 재계산한 지니계수도 일부 사업에서만 균등한 쪽으로 조금 조정되는 양상을 나타냈다. 대학의 형태에 따라서는 전문대학도서관 간의 격차가 4년제 대학도서관보다 극심하였으며, 국립대학도서관보다는 사립대학도서관간의 격차가 더욱 심각한 것으로 나타났다. 마지막으로 도서관의 규모와 학술정보 기여 정도에 따라 참여도서관의 분포를 시각화한 결과, 압도적인 기여 수준을 보이는 대규모 도서관이 존재하였으며, 도서관의 규모는 작지만 상대적으로 높은 기여 수준을 보이는 도서관도 분포하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Kwan, S. and S. Hyun. 2019. "Analysis of the Relationship between House Price, Income Inequality and Macroeconomic Variables." Journal of Digital Convergence, 17(1): 55-62. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2019.17.1.055
  2. Kim, S. and K. Yang. 2013. "Analysis on Performance of the Protection and Promotion Policy for Small and Midsize Construction Companies Using Gini Coefficient." Journal of The Korean Urban Management Association, 26(2): 119-131.
  3. 'What is the Sales Rate of 2,000 Korean Companies?'. 2015. Dailyhankooki, July 25. [online]. [cited 2019.12.26]. .
  4. Park, H. and K. Shin. 2014. "Pareto Ratio and Inequality Level of Knowledge Sharing in Virtual Knowledge Collaboration: Analysis of Behaviors on Wikipedia." Korea Intelligent Information Systems Society, 20(3): 19-43. https://doi.org/10.13088/jiis.2014.20.3.019
  5. Cho, K. 2018. "A Study on the SGA Grant Using Gini Coefficient Decomposition Method: Focusing on Abolition of Priority Distribution System and Change of Allocation Standard." The Korea Journal of Local Public Finance, 23(2): 179-206.
  6. Cho, J. 2012. "A Comparative Study of Academic Resource Sharing and Service System Between Korea and Japan." Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, 43(4): 23-45. https://doi.org/10.16981/kliss.43.4.201212.23
  7. Cho, J. 2015. "Exploratory Study on the Activity about Utilization and Contribution to the Union Catalog." Journal of the Korean Biblia Society for Library and Information Science, 26(1): 35-50. https://doi.org/10.14699/kbiblia.2015.26.1.035
  8. Cho, J. 2007. "Analysis of the Effects of the High School Equalization Policy on Student Achievement Based upon the Gini Index." Journal of Economics Studies, 25(2): 1-19.
  9. Yoshinori, S, 2011. About the Future Operation System of NACSIS-CAT / ILL. [online]. [cited 2019.12.26]. .
  10. Korea Education & Research Information Service. 2018. 2018 Educational Informatization White Paper. Daegu: Korea Education & Research Information Service.
  11. Chatterjee A., A. Ghosh, and B. K. Chakrabarti. 2016. "Universality of Citation Distributions for Academic Institutions and Journals." PLoS ONE, 11(1). .
  12. Evans, P. and J. Peters. 2005. "Analysis of the Dispersal of Use for Journals in Emerald Management Xtra (EMX)." Interlending & Document Supply, 33(3): 155-157. https://doi.org/10.1108/02641610510618054
  13. Nuti, S.V., I. Ranasinghe, K. Murugiah, A. Shojaee, S.-X. Li, and H. M. Krumholz. 2015. "Association between Journal Citation Distribution and Impact Factor: A Novel Application of the Gini Coefficient." Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 65(16): 1711-1712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2014.12.071
  14. OECD. 2019. Income Distribution Database. [online]. [cited 2020.2.6]. .
  15. Schopfel, J. and C. Leduc. 2012. "Big Deal and Long Tail: e-Journal Usage and Subscriptions." Library Review, 61(7): 497-510. https://doi.org/10.1108/00242531211288245
  16. Sin, S. 2006. "Are Library and Information Science Journals Becoming More Internationalized? - A Longitudinal Study of Authors' Geographical Affiliations in 20 LIS Journals from 1981 to 2003." Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 42(1). .
  17. Singson, M. and P. Hangsing. 2015. "Implication of 80/20 Rule in Electronic Journal Usage of UGC-Infonet Consortia." Journal Of Academic Librarianship, 41(2): 207-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2014.12.002
  18. Yoon, S., D. Yoon, H. Lee, S. Baek, K. Baek, Y. Seo, and E. Yun. 2017. "Distribution of Citations Received by Scientific Papers Published in the Imaging Literature From 2001 to 2010: Decreasing Inequality and Polarization." American Journal of Roentgenology, 209: 248-254. .
  19. Yun, J., S. Lee, and H. Jeong. 2019. "Early Onset of Structural Inequality in the Formation of Collaborative Knowledge in All Wikimedia Projects." Nature Human Behaviour, 3: 155-163. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0488-z