Libraries as democratic infrastructure

for education and public life


Editorial Team SDG4
 Jul 16
 7 min read

Libraries as democratic infrastructure for education and public life | Photo: Matthew
Feeney

Published on 16 July 2026 at 05:42 GMT

By Editorial Team SDG4
Libraries are often treated as cultural amenities whose importance has
diminished in the digital age. That view misunderstands both their purpose
and the conditions of modern public life. Libraries as democratic infrastructure
provide books, internet access, reliable information, language learning, study
facilities and community space without requiring users to prove their income,
status or purchasing power. At a time of educational inequality, costly
connectivity and growing distrust in information, their public role has become
more urgent rather than less relevant.

The International Federation of Library Associations and

Institutions (IFLA) represents libraries and information professionals
internationally. Its work, including cooperation with the United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), places
libraries within wider debates about education, cultural participation, freedom
of expression and access to information. The 2022 IFLA-UNESCO Public
Library Manifesto describes the public library as a living force for education,
culture, inclusion and information.

That description points to a broader political reality. Democracies depend not

only on elections, legislatures and courts, but also on institutions that allow
people to understand the society in which they live. Citizens need spaces
where they can obtain information, compare sources, study public policy and
encounter perspectives beyond their immediate social circles. When access to
these resources depends entirely on household income or commercial
platforms, participation becomes unequal.

A public library is therefore more than a building containing books. It is part of

a society’s public knowledge infrastructure, alongside schools, archives,
universities, public broadcasters and statistical institutions. Its distinctive
contribution is accessibility. Public libraries generally serve people across age
groups and educational levels, including children learning to read, students
seeking quiet study space, adults developing new skills, migrants learning a
local language and older people navigating increasingly digital services.

This broad public mandate connects directly with SDG 4 (quality education),
which calls for inclusive and equitable education and lifelong learning
opportunities for all. Education does not begin and end in the classroom.
Learning continues through reading, independent research, professional
development, cultural participation and access to digital resources. Libraries
support these activities without limiting them to people enrolled in formal
institutions.

Their role is particularly important where educational resources are unevenly

distributed. A student with a private room, a laptop, stable broadband and
access to paid databases begins from a different position from one living in
crowded housing without reliable connectivity. A library cannot eliminate the
economic inequality behind that difference, but it can reduce some of its
educational consequences by offering free access to knowledge, equipment
and a place to concentrate.

The same principle applies to adult education. Changes in labour markets

require many people to update their skills, search for work or complete online
applications. Public agencies and employers increasingly assume that citizens
have digital devices, internet connections and the confidence to use them.
That assumption excludes people who lack equipment, experience or secure
access. Through computers, connectivity and staff assistance, libraries can
provide a practical bridge between digital systems and the people expected to
use them.

This function has become more significant as government services move

online. Applications for benefits, housing, identification documents, education
and employment may now depend on digital forms and accounts. For citizens
who cannot complete these processes independently, a librarian may become
an informal guide to public administration. Yet this raises an important tension.
Libraries are frequently asked to compensate for inaccessible government
systems without receiving the staffing, training or funding needed to perform
that role.

Digital inclusion is not achieved merely by installing computers. Meaningful

access also requires affordable connectivity, accessible software, relevant
content, language support and the ability to judge whether information is
reliable. Libraries can contribute to digital and media literacy by helping users
search effectively, understand sources and recognise misleading material.
These are educational skills, but they also affect public health, civic
participation and social cohesion.

The democratic value of libraries lies partly in their commitment to intellectual

freedom. A functioning library should make diverse materials available rather
than directing readers towards a single approved account of history, politics or
society. Through its Advisory Committee on Freedom of Access to Information
and Freedom of Expression, IFLA links librarianship with the defence of
freedom of access to information.

That responsibility is increasingly contested. Libraries in different political

systems face censorship, pressure over collections, restrictions on public
discussion and disputes about which communities should be represented.
Decisions about acquiring or removing books can become symbolic battles
within wider cultural conflicts. Libraries cannot avoid all disagreement, nor
should they be treated as politically neutral in the sense of being detached
from rights. Their task is to apply transparent professional standards while
protecting lawful inquiry, pluralism and equitable access.

Libraries also perform a social function that is difficult to reproduce online.

They are among the remaining shared public spaces where entry is not
normally dependent on consumption. People can read, work, attend an event
or spend time indoors without being expected to buy something. In cities
shaped by commercial development and shrinking public space, this
openness has civic value.

The description of libraries as safe spaces requires some qualification. Safety

depends on staffing, accessibility, building design and relationships with local
communities. Libraries may struggle to respond to homelessness, mental
distress, discrimination or conflict among users, especially where other social
services are inadequate. Staff members cannot replace trained health,
housing or welfare professionals. Expectations placed upon libraries must
therefore be matched by cooperation with relevant public agencies.

Libraries can also strengthen social connection through reading groups,

exhibitions, children’s activities, language classes and local history projects.
Such programmes may bring together residents who would otherwise have
little contact. This does not automatically create social cohesion, but it can
provide the conditions for participation by making public space available to
different groups.

Their local role is complemented by the preservation of collective memory.

Libraries and archives maintain documents, publications and cultural records
that allow societies to examine their past. Preservation is not merely a
technical activity. Decisions about what is collected, catalogued and made
visible influence whose experiences become part of the historical record.
More representative collections can help communities understand both shared
histories and unresolved inequalities.

However, the public value of libraries cannot be separated from their material
conditions. Sustainable public funding is essential because the core service is
designed to remain accessible regardless of an individual’s ability to pay.
Funding reductions can produce shorter opening hours, fewer trained staff,
outdated technology and declining collections. Once services weaken,
reduced use may then be cited as justification for further cuts, creating a cycle
of managed decline.

Measurement presents another difficulty. Library success is sometimes

assessed primarily through visitor numbers, loans or event attendance. These
indicators are useful but incomplete. They do not fully capture the significance
of a person gaining internet access for a job application, finding trusted health
information, learning to read in a new language or studying in a stable
environment. Public institutions should be accountable, but evaluation must
recognise both measurable outputs and less visible social value.

New technologies create opportunities as well as pressures. Digital lending

and online catalogues can extend access beyond opening hours and serve
people unable to travel. At the same time, electronic publishing often operates
through licensing arrangements rather than permanent ownership. Libraries
may face high costs, lending restrictions and dependence on private
technology providers. Digital access can therefore expand the reach of
libraries while reducing their control over collections and preservation.

Artificial intelligence adds another layer to the issue. Generative systems can
produce plausible but inaccurate information, increasing the importance of
source evaluation and verifiable records. Libraries may assist users in
understanding these tools, but they must also consider privacy, copyright, bias
and the commercial use of personal data. Media and information literacy will
become more important as the distinction between authentic, manipulated and
automatically generated content becomes harder to recognise.

The international library sector cannot rely on a single model. A well-funded

urban library network operates under different conditions from a rural library
with limited electricity or connectivity. Mobile libraries, community information
centres and partnerships with schools may be more appropriate in sparsely
populated or under-resourced areas. Local language materials and accessible
formats are also essential if services are to reach linguistic minorities and
people with disabilities.

The United Nations has recognised that libraries can support sustainable
development through literacy, information access, digital skills and community
space. Although their most direct connection is with SDG 4, libraries may also
contribute to SDG 10 (reduced inequalities) by lowering barriers to
information, and SDG 16 (peace, justice and strong institutions) by supporting
access to public information and informed participation. These contributions
should not be overstated, but they show why library policy belongs within
broader development planning.

The case for libraries is not based on nostalgia for printed books. Books
remain central, but the institution’s deeper purpose is to organise knowledge
and make it publicly accessible. That purpose applies equally to digital
resources, public records, educational programmes and community learning.
Libraries matter because information abundance has not produced equal
understanding. Greater quantities of content can coexist with exclusion,
misinformation and a lack of trusted guidance.

Treating libraries as democratic infrastructure changes the policy question.

Instead of asking whether libraries remain popular enough to justify support,
governments should ask what level of access to knowledge a fair and
functioning society requires. Roads allow physical movement, schools support
formal education and communications networks carry data. Libraries help
people convert information into learning, agency and participation.

Their future depends on political choices about funding, professional

independence and the meaning of public provision. Libraries cannot solve
educational inequality, digital exclusion or democratic distrust alone. They
can, however, provide lifelong learning opportunities and an accessible civic
foundation from which people can respond to those challenges. A society that
weakens its libraries may save money in the short term, but it also narrows
the spaces in which knowledge remains a public good.