CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 3Library Science and AdministrationPolitical Theory and DemocracyInformation Science and Libraries

Consensus, conflict and social capital: the conceptualisation of democracy in recent public library research

Open access
Hanell, Fredrik·2026·Journal of Documentation
DOI 10.1108/jd-07-2025-0187
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose: How democracy is understood depends on the theoretical perspective applied. Even so, public library research often takes the concept of democracy for granted. This article explores how democracy is theoretically understood in recent research on public libraries and their role in democracy, including the focus and design of this research, and the key contributions made. Design/methodology/approach: In a comprehensive review of scholarly literature published between 2010 and 2024 and focusing on public libraries and their importance for democracy, 85 articles were selected and included in a conceptual analysis. Findings: The analysis shows that three groups of theoretical perspectives on democracy are commonly represented in public library research: Habermasian consensus-oriented views on democracy, a Mouffean conflict-oriented view of democracy, and democracy understood in relation to social capital. The Habermasian and Mouffean views on democracy are the most widely used, indicating an Apollonian and Dionysian duality in recent public library research. Originality/value: This study is the first large-scale systematic review explicitly categorising and analysing perspectives on democracy in public library research. Implications for library practice and suggestions for future research are presented.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/jd-07-2025-0187

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The literature on the community roles of public libraries remains fragmented across thematic domains and often under-specifies the mechanisms through which libraries generate community effects.

    “The review argues that the literature has moved decisively beyond narrow service-centred conceptions of the public library, yet remains fragmented across thematic domains and often under-specifies the mechanisms through which libraries generate community effects.”

    From Public libraries as social infrastructure: An integrative review of community roles (2026) · cites this paper as Hanell, 2026

  • Hanell (2026) demonstrates that recent public library scholarship invokes democracy through at least three distinct lenses: Habermasian consensus-oriented views, Mouffean conflict-oriented views and social-capital-oriented approaches.

    “Hanell (2026) demonstrates that recent public library scholarship invokes democracy through at least three distinct lenses: Habermasian consensus-oriented views, Mouffean conflict-oriented views and social-capital-oriented approaches.”

    From Public libraries as social infrastructure: An integrative review of community roles (2026) · cites this paper as Hanell, 2026

  • Hanell (2026) shows that even when democracy is central to the argument, it is not always clearly theorised.

    “More recent work has also shown that even when democracy is central to the argument, it is not always clearly theorised (Hanell, 2026).”

    From Public libraries as social infrastructure: An integrative review of community roles (2026) · cites this paper as Hanell, 2026

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hanell, F.
Affiliations
Linnaeus University (SE)
Corresponding author
Hanell, Fredrik
ORCID
Hanell, Fredrik
Venue
Journal of Documentation
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2025-12-15
Volume
82
Issue
7
Pages
19-37
ISSN
  • 0022-0418 (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-7379
DOI
10.1108/jd-07-2025-0187
OpenAlex
W7116877669
Cited by
3
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 3
FWCI
8.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Documentation (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Library Science and Administration
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Science and Libraries
Keywords
democracy, public libraries, social capital, Jürgen Habermas, Chantal Mouffe, consensus, conflict, theoretical approaches, library research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review