From policy to practice: The contribution of library leadership in ensuring legal preparedness for managing digital content in pakistani university libraries

Abstract

The study investigates the role of university library leadership and legal preparedness for managing digital content in Pakistan. The present study successfully assessed the level of legal preparedness, knowledge and awareness, compliance with legal standards and frameworks, institutional support, and challenges university libraries face in managing digital content. The study employed a quantitative research approach and collected the data using a structured nationwide questionnaire. The questionnaire comprised six sections covering all aspects of legal preparedness for managing digital content in university libraries. The researchers collected the responses of 123 library leaders by adopting a purposive sampling technique. The findings revealed that there was limited awareness of legal requirements and a lack of training programs on legal frameworks among library professionals for digital content management. The study results indicate a partial adherence to copyright laws, and there are gaps in compliance with data protection standards. There were insufficient risk mitigation strategies and a lack of proactive measures for legal challenges in university libraries. There were no consistent practices for legal documentation and records. The findings revealed that inadequate IT infrastructure, compliance with legal frameworks, and budget limitations were the highest-rated challenges.

Keywords

digital content management academic libraries library leadership legal preparedness legal standards legal frameworks institutional support legal challenges Pakistani university libraries

Introduction

The management of digital content in libraries is a hot topic today, and it has become impossible to run a library efficiently without managing digital content. (Kocak, 2021). As with everyday life, technology has also affected production, distribution, ownership, control, and access to information (Schiller, 2024). Modern technology has revolutionized libraries, especially in higher education institutions, and transformed them from traditional to digital/electronic. Technology has become a crucial aspect of daily life, shaping how we talk and interact (Garvanova et al., 2022). Over the past two decades, blockchain, artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things, and many other technologies have developed rapidly, and these technologies have also taken over libraries. Content in libraries is now being preserved and accessible with the help of modern technology, moving away from traditional methods (Barsha and Munshi, 2024). As libraries transform from manual to digital, the growing reliance on digital resources has changed the pattern and practices of library structure and services. Access to digital/electronic resources like e-books, e-journals, databases, and online research repositories is only possible with the help of relevant technology. Information and Communication Technology has become important for libraries managing digital content. ICT has become an integral part of every sector's activity, and it is not just about technology itself, but also the broader impact of how information is shared, processed, and used across all areas of human activity (Rahman et al., 2023). Modern technological tools enable people to access, retrieve, and interact with information resources faster, allowing them to access diverse data with a single click (Szymkowiak et al., 2021). There is a shift in university libraries towards digital and electronic resources, online learning resources, and digital archives, which require strategic library leadership to ensure efficient digital content management by adopting international standards. E-resource management is a global trend that is changing patrons’ expectations (Bentil et al., 2022). Collecting digital resources and providing access to information resources fosters the culture of research and innovation. Research and innovation lead to the socio-economic development of the country. Research and innovation are primary objectives in higher education institutions, and libraries provide a ground for researchers and scholars to conduct research and innovation through access to quality information resources (Ochieng and Gyasi, 2021). Digital content management is a set of activities that involves creating, organizing, governing, and disseminating digital assets across various platforms. Efficient digital content management provides smooth access and retrieval of information resources. The right information for the right person at the right time is only possible due to efficient content management (Barker, 2018). In this regard, a mechanism should be developed to make access and retrieval possible.

Leadership in academic libraries

The leadership of academic libraries in managing digital content plays a key role in effectively organizing content and making effective decisions that positively impact the team. With the rapid development of information and communication technology, the methods of managing digital content have also changed (Rahman et al., 2023). Leaders in every walk of life must learn the necessary skills and pass them on to their team. Like every field, library leadership requires many skills to manage digital content. It is a combination of hard and soft skills that a leader must have to handle administrative, managerial, and legal tasks. Technological advances also affect leadership, and things are changing rapidly. Academic libraries are experiencing rapid change, and library leadership plays a critical role in the successful implementation of these changes (Butt et al., 2023). The leadership of academic libraries improves access to diverse information resources critical to research & innovation. They ensure the availability of information resources for academic research and their role in sustainable development (Weiner, 2017). In managing digital content in academic libraries, leadership requires a sound knowledge of legal complexities and skills (Deja et al., 2021). Some of the defined roles and responsibilities of library leadership are: the leaders are responsible for allocation and distribution of equitable financial resources, strategic planning, establishing mission and vision, formulation of goals and objectives, aligning the libraries with international standards, alignment with global agendas, articulation of future directions, policy formulation, policy implementation, technology adoption, digital and information literacy among faculty, staff, and students, acquisition of information resources to meet the needs of academic community. To perform these roles and responsibilities, significant skills and expertise are needed. Skills are crucial to managing high-performing teams, equitable resource allocation, fostering open communication, promoting diversity and inclusion, creating space for collaboration and teamwork, and aligning digital strategies with institutional goals.

Legal preparedness and compliance

The concept of legal preparedness for digital content management in academic libraries refers to well-defined, well-designed, well-understood, and well-implemented rules & regulations, laws, policies, and plans. In this modern technological era, library leadership needs to understand legal frameworks and governance strategies to manage digital content effectively. Implementation of copyright laws in libraries to protect the creative work of authors is critical (Crews, 2020). Sometimes, strict application of copyright laws inhibits the acquisition and dissemination of information and knowledge. Library professionals are required to handle such issues intelligently, where material should be disseminated under the jurisdiction of copyright (Adu et al., 2024). It is crucial to have a good understanding of licensing agreements and related matters, such as IP protection, digital rights management, confidentiality clauses, and technology transfer for handling legal matters (Hauck, 2021). Pakistan is a developing country where data and information governance patterns are still traditional in several higher educational institutions. It may be due to the lack of financial resources, lack of innovation and research, lack of capacity building of library leadership, lack of potential, and less legal awareness among library leadership. There are many challenges associated with digital content management in academic libraries, such as data protection, privacy, and compliance with international standards in digital content management. In the context of digital content management, the role of library leadership is to prepare for legal preparedness and to ensure legal compliance while making digital resources accessible to users.

Aim of the study

The study investigates the legal preparedness of academic library leadership for managing digital content. It examines the strategic measures taken by academic library leadership and institutional support that facilitate library leadership in managing digital content. The study also explores library leaders’ challenges while managing digital content. The aim is to provide solid recommendations to improve digital content management in university libraries and tackle the challenges and barriers.

Significance of study

The significance of this study can be gauged from the fact that this study provides an understanding of the intersection of library leadership and legal preparedness. The study focuses on the role of library leadership in digital content management and its associated legal complexities in university libraries. The study covered different aspects such as the legal awareness of library leadership, their consultation with legal information resources to stay informed about legal issues, compliance with the legal framework to manage digital content, institutional support, and challenges. The lack of research on this topic further enhances the importance of study. Such research on this topic, which discusses various aspects, is a pressing need of the hour. Because in this era of information technology, where things are transforming and the content in libraries is also transforming from physical to digital, such research will be helpful for librarians and policymakers. The study provides a road map to improve legal strategies, prepare legal frameworks, tackle challenges, and ensure compatibility with international standards. This study is the first of its kind in the region.

Research questions

The research questions of the current study are as follows:

RQ1: How much are university libraries legally prepared for digital content management in Pakistan?

RQ2: How do library professionals keep themselves informed about the current legal standards and regulations of digital content management?

RQ3: Are university libraries complying with the legal framework for digital content management?

RQ4: To what extent does university management support libraries in managing digital content?

RQ5: What challenges do university libraries face in digital content management?

Literature review

Academic libraries are a center for information and knowledge in educational institutions and play a critical role in innovation and research by providing access to diverse information resources. Academic libraries develop strategies to leverage modern technologies for curation and preservation. Implementing modern technology in libraries enables researchers and teachers to access educational materials quickly (Sandhu, 2018). In academic libraries, the role and responsibility of leadership is to make a strategy for digital content management, address legal issues, and facilitate the digitization process and administrative issues (Kehinde, 2018). The rapid technological advancement has made leadership more critical; self-development and disruptive thinking skills are essential for leadership. Visionary and strategic librarianship is more important for managing digital content in academic libraries (Osuigwe, 2020). Library leadership requires a global mindset and evidence-based decision-making in the digital age. Libraries must adopt technology-based services to meet the needs of their users. Leadership in academic libraries cultivates talent, fosters an entrepreneurial environment, and empowers their team to adapt to modern technology (Marcum, 2016). Library leaders’ analytical and quantitative skills significantly impact digital content management in university libraries. A cheerful outlook increases the performance of teams in managing digital content. Implementation of digital content management tools enhances discovery, accessibility, and user engagement with digital resources (Shah et al., 2025). The emergence of information and communication technologies facilitates digital content management in libraries, including online cataloging, library resource sharing and networking, and digital reference services (Thangiah et al., 2024). Digital content management in academic libraries involves utilizing the Content Management System. Utilizing CMS enhances the usability of information resources, organization, and distribution of digital content (He and Huang, 2023). Understanding legal complexities is an especially important skill that enables the librarian to oversee the legal issues related to intellectual property, e-licensing, agreements, copyright laws, and privacy protections. Legal awareness of library leadership is critical to dealing with information policies, rules & regulations, and information legislation at national and international levels (Hanumappa and Patel, 2019). Due to rapid technological advancement, library leadership faces many challenges. Le (2015) identified five major obstacles that library leadership faces in the digital age: the demonstration of library value, fiscal uncertainty, outdated infrastructure, balancing the digital vs print resources, and unskilled staff. Rahman and Islam (2020) identified issues like a lack of IT knowledge, slow bandwidth, and limited digital resources for Digital Content Management. The paper reviewed the earlier studies conducted on digital content management in libraries. University libraries in developing countries are facing many challenges, including a lack of training and skills among staff, policies, upgradation, and maintenance of digital content management tools (Tsekea and Chigwada, 2023). The challenges of digital library content management and its development are many. Nazim (2013) proposed two strategies to tackle these challenges: digitizing local materials first and then developing options for accessing external resources. Further, the author claimed that technology will not determine the future. Economics and behavioral support are equally important. Content management systems in libraries meet the growing needs of digital content management. Greenstone, Fedora, and DSpace are the key players in digital content management in libraries (Han, 2004). The works of Thanuskodi (2020) examined content management in information services and provided insights into knowledge and information management expertise. Ibba and Pani (2016) discussed two other challenges: interoperability and social implications in digital libraries and tried to find relationships between metadata schemas. The researchers organized and analyzed the existing body of literature on digital content management/electronic resources management, and a literature review matrix was developed, which provides an overview of key studies. The literature review matrix highlights intellectual responsibility, theoretical/conceptual frameworks, questions/hypotheses, methodology, analysis and results, conclusions, implications for future research, and implications for practice. Table 1 represents the literature review matrix that serves as a tool for gap identification. The researchers included only eight studies in the literature review matrix that were selected based on search results of strings used to search the existing literature on digital content management. The other aspect of considering these studies was their topical and direct relevance and practical aspects underpinning the research problem.

Table 1.

Literature review matrix.

Author/Date	Theoretical/Conceptual Framework	Question(s)/Hypotheses	Methodology	Analysis & Results	Conclusions	Implications for Future research	Implications For practice
Bentil and Liew (2024)	Electronic resource management	What are academic libraries in Ghana doing to manage the workload generated by ERs, with a focus on competencies and collaboration?	A multiple-case study approach	The study employed within-case, cross-case, and overall-case analysis techniques.	Efforts were made by both public and private academic libraries to develop adequate staff and competencies to manage electronic resources.	Study that covers Academic libraries and other types of libraries, including special libraries and research institutes, to gain a broader perspective.	Practical implications for academic librarians and LIS educators who are developing curricula in developing countries.
Bentil et al. (2022)	Management and Usage of Electronic Resources.	In what ways does the management of ERs affect their usage and vice versa?	Mixed methods design	NVivo and SPSS were used for data analysis. A bidirectional relationship was found between management and the usage of ERs.	Various ways influence on management and usage of electronic resources in the five selected universities of Ghana.	Further research should be conducted by expanding the cases to include more universities.	Practical implications for the universities of Ghana to manage and use electronic resources.
Emery and Stone (2021)	TERMS 2.0 (Techniques for Electronic Resources Management)	How open content management can dovetail into current e-resource management tactics across six TERMS	Design Science Research was adopted to develop a framework for electronic resource management	TERMS 2.0 A post-plan for the SE e-resources lifecycle blending e-resources and open access content management is presented.	Areas for reflection and resources for those seeking to streamline open-access management within their respective organizations.	The researcher has not provided the directions for further research.	Practical implications for information professionals seeking to streamline open access management.
Mukhtar and Maidabino (2021)	Collection development and management framework	How do university libraries in Nigeria manage electronic information resources?	A critical review of the literature was conducted.	Themes were identified using a thematic analysis approach.	Nigerian university libraries face significant challenges. Automation, training, and funds are essentials for effective EIR management.	The study has not provided directions for future research.	Guidelines for university libraries for the effective management of electronic information resources.
Bentil et al. (2021)	The study follows the TERMS framework	How academic libraries are aligned with TERMS to manage ER	Qualitative case study research design.	NVivo was used for data analysis. The electronic resources workflow is partially aligned with the TERMS framework.	Ghanaian academic libraries face financial, infrastructural, and institutional challenges. Librarians are less involved in ER acquisition.	Study on the participation of other stakeholders who are responsible for the acquisition of ER.	Guidelines for librarians in better ER workflow and documented policy making.
Balgeman and Colbert (2018)	Electronic resource management (ERM), workflow efficiency, and library management.	How can we maximize efficiency with a small staff in electronic resource management?	Qualitative research design	Assigning ERM tasks, centralized control, and regular evaluation of electronic resources improve efficiency.	Small library staff must strategically allocate ERM tasks to avoid inefficiencies. A specialized role in ERM leads to better service delivery.	Further research can explore the role of automation in electronic resource management.	Guidelines for libraries to create clear role definitions for electronic resource management.
Lo et al. (2017)	Electronic resource management in academic libraries.	What is the impact of e-resources and technical skills on library services and knowledge?	Qualitative research approach.	Three key trends: advantages of ER, challenges, and shifts in library practices were identified using Thematic analysis	Libraries face challenges in cost management and access restrictions. Academic libraries must enhance their collaboration.	Further research can be conducted to evaluate automation in electronic resource management for workflow efficiency.	Practical implications for libraries to develop digital acquisition policies and to increase collaboration.
Pinkas and Lin (2014)	Emery and Stone's Techniques for Electronic Resource Management (TERMS) framework	How can ERM principles, applied to digital repository management, address what challenges emerge and how standards improve digital repository management?	A case study of a digital archive of the University of Maryland.	Digital repository requires strategic content selection, Metadata standards, and monitoring tools.	The Study offers a framework for digital repositories, metadata practices, infrastructure planning, and user engagement strategies for long-term sustainability.	Further research can be conducted to re-evaluate preservation options, content management, technical directions, and its operational model.	By adopting ERM principles and TERMS, the libraries should structure the digital repository workflow.

Research gap

Identifying unanswered questions and unsolved issues in earlier literature is a driving force for conducting new research. The researchers reviewed the earlier studies critically to identify the unanswered questions and queries. It was observed that earlier literature discussed digital content management systems (Rahman and Islam, 2020) in libraries to improve access to digital resources (Shah et al., 2025) the organization of digital resources (He and Huang, 2023) and the challenges libraries are facing in the digital age (Le, 2015). The researchers identified a need for more literature on the legal issues of DCM. More research is needed on legal regulations, legal frameworks, legal preparedness of library leadership, and institutional support to manage digital content in academic libraries in Pakistan. These factors must be examined critically in managing digital content in university libraries. So, it was decided to address this gap. The study will help the academic library leadership to manage digital content, tackle the challenges, and enhance accessibility to digital resources.

Methodology

The researchers employed a quantitative research approach to carry out the study to its logical conclusion. This enabled the researchers to unfold and explain the phenomenon of legal preparedness for digital content management among library leadership in university libraries. The earlier studies of Khan and Bhatti (2017) and Zareef and Jabeen (2025) employed the same approach to investigate the phenomenon of digital content in different contexts. The study focused on the library professionals of university libraries in Pakistan as a research population. The researchers selected respondents from each library whose roles were as library director/chief librarian, library in charge, system librarian, policy and compliance officer, and information governance advisors. These respondents were selected purposively because they knew more about the legal issues of a library than the other library staff. The data were collected using a structured questionnaire. Google Forms (Online Survey Tool) was designed to be feasible and accessible for both researchers and respondents, and it is a reliable tool to collect data with high accuracy.

Sampling technique

The purposive sampling technique was adopted because the selected respondents were critical to the phenomenon (Campbell et al., 2020). The researchers considered these respondents to be research participants because they are experienced and have higher qualifications in the field. The technique enabled the researchers to collect data from research participants with specific consideration (Memon et al., 2024). The specific consideration is usually related to the respondents who expect to know the phenomenon best, which increases the credibility of the study's findings.

Instrument development

A structured questionnaire was developed to collect data from the library professionals of 266 university libraries nationwide (Higher Education Commission, Pakistan). The questionnaire comprises six sections. Section one contains questions about gender, job role, and institute type. Section two comprised questions about legal preparedness in which the statements regarding legal knowledge and awareness, legal risk management, legal documentation and records, and training and capacity building were constructed. Section three was presented with sources of legal information to which the library professional consulted to stay informed. Section four was dedicated to collecting information about compliance with legal frameworks, in which the statements about implementing compliance policies, regular compliance audits, audit thoroughness, record keeping, documentation accuracy, and use of compliance monitoring tools were constructed. Institutional support is critical to digital content management; section five of the instrument was built for this purpose. The last section was built to collect information about the challenges that library professionals face while managing digital content in libraries. To ensure construct validity, the items were developed based on research questions and earlier studies related to digital content management in academic libraries (Artino et al., 2014). The instrument was reviewed by three subject experts, and a pilot study was conducted with a small sample (n = 25) to assess item clarity, relevance, and internal consistency. A total of 19 responses were received and analyzed to refine the wording and structure of the items to improve clarity and relevance. After the revisions and refinement, the structured questionnaire contains 136 items grouped under specific constructs based on research questions.

Data collection procedure

The researchers designed a Google form to collect the data from nationwide because it was feasible and accessible to all respondents. The researchers planned to collect the data from all university libraries in Pakistan. Firstly, the researchers collected the email addresses of all 266 university library heads using different methods and techniques. Institutional directories, the friends-of-friends method, and the personal contact method were used to collect email addresses. Ethical protocols, including informed consent and voluntary participation, were followed during data collection. The researchers started data collection in November 2024 and shared the Google form via email. To meet the minimum requirements of the response rate the researchers sent reminders to respondents after two weeks. After several follow-ups, the researchers were able to collect 123 responses.

Validity and reliability of the instrument

To assess the content validity of the instrument an expert review was done by the three subject matter experts. The expert review ensured that the statements of the instrument comprehensively cover all aspects of the study. Cronbach's Alpha (for internal consistency) of 124 items was calculated to determine the instrument's reliability. The value of Cronbach's Alpha coefficient remains at .961, which shows the high internal consistency of the instrument.

Data analysis procedure

This section presents the data analysis procedure followed by the researchers. The researchers collected data using an online tool (Google Form). The researchers marked all questions as mandatory in the form so that no one went without an answer. But still, the data was double-checked to ensure there were no errors. All the responses were considered valid and included in the analysis. The responses were imported into SPSS v27 for data analysis and variables were codified. Considering the study objectives and the nature of the data, Descriptive Statistics, Correlation, Regression, and Factor analysis were performed to meet the study objectives.

Data analysis and findings

The section provides results and interpretations of collected data and presented in tabular form.

Demographics

Figure 1 presents the demographic information of respondents. The result indicates that 45.5% of respondents (56) were female and 54.5% of respondents (67) were male who participated in this research. The results of the professional role in the library indicated that most of the participants were Library Directors/Chief Librarians 38(30.9%). Digital Content Managers/System Librarians were 33(26.8%) and the fewest participants were Policy and Compliance Officers 04(3.30%). A high participation rate of Library Directors/Chief Librarians and Digital Content Managers/System Librarians increased the credibility of the study as their response were most valuable for this research. The results of the institutional affiliation of participants showed that most of the participants belong to the private sector 70(56.0%), and 53(43.1%) belong to public sector universities.

Figure 1.

Demographic information of the respondents.

Legal preparedness of libraries for digital content management

Legal preparedness for digital content management in university libraries involves awareness and knowledge about digital content management, compliance with legal standards, legal risk management, legal documentation and records management, and training and capacity building of library professionals. The data were collected from university library professionals in Pakistan. Library professionals from 93 university libraries participated in the survey. The following section is devoted to answering RQ1, “How much are university libraries legally prepared for digital content management in Pakistan?”.

Legal knowledge and awareness

The legal knowledge and awareness of university library professionals in terms of legal preparedness for digital content management were measured. A five-point scale (none to very high) was used to measure the awareness of legal issues of digital content management. Table 2 presents the awareness of library professionals regarding the legal aspects of digital content management. The overall mean value of the variables indicates a moderate to high level of awareness about the legal aspects of digital content management. Knowledge and awareness about intellectual property rights are relatively stronger among others, where 43.9% (M = 3.37, SD = 1.140) have high awareness. Similarly, the awareness about the confidentiality clause (M = 3.36, SD = 1.049), filtering and censorship (M = 3.35, SD = 1.123), and data protection laws (M = 3.34, SD = 1.179) remains higher. Creative Commons licensing receives the lowest mean score (M = 3.05, SD = 1.130) among all, where only 36% report high awareness. It was observed that the respondents have moderate to high awareness of the legal aspects of digital content management. Lowest awareness in some areas suggests areas that require attention to enhance awareness.

Table 2.

Legal knowledge and awareness.

Awareness in terms of legal issues of	n	None	Low	Moderate	High	V. High	Mean	St D
Awareness in terms of legal issues of	n	f/%	f/%	f/%	f/%	f/%	Mean	St D
Copyright Infringement Regulations	123	11(8.9)	20/16.3)	26(21.1)	53(43.1)	13(10.6)	3.30	1.138
Intellectual Property Rights	123	8(6.50)	25(20.3)	20(16.3)	54(43.9)	16(13.0)	3.37	1.140
Licensing Agreements	123	9(7.30)	33(26.8)	16(13.0)	48(39.0)	17(13.8)	3.25	1.205
Digital Rights Management	123	7(5.70)	30(24.4)	24(19.5)	48(39.0)	14(11.4)	3.26	1.122
Regulations of Technology Transfer	123	5(4.10)	28(22.8)	27(22.0)	49(39.8)	14(11.4)	3.32	1.074
Information Governance Standards	123	8(6.50)	31(25.2)	34(27.6)	40(32.5)	10(8.10)	3.11	1.077
Confidentiality Clauses in Agreements	123	4(3.30)	27(22.0)	27(22.0)	51(41.5)	14(11.4)	3.36	1.049
Data Protection Laws	123	6(4.90)	33(26.8)	17(13.8)	47(38.2)	20(16.3)	3.34	1.179
Cybersecurity Laws and Regulations	123	6(4.90)	22(17.9)	38(30.9)	50(40.7)	07(5.70)	3.24	0.978
Filtering and Censorship	123	6(4.90)	28(22.8)	23(18.7)	49(39.8)	17(13.8)	3.35	1.123
Digitization and Archival Practices	123	9(7.30)	29(23.6)	28(22.8)	48(39.0)	09(7.30)	3.15	1.094
Creative Commons Licensing	123	12(9.8)	31(25.2)	27(22.0)	45(36.6)	08(6.50)	3.05	1.130

Scale: None = 1, Low = 2, Moderate = 3, High = 4, Very High = 5.

Compliance with legal standards

Compliance with legal standards for digital content management in university libraries is presented in Table 3. The researchers aimed to examine the level of compliance with legal standards in the university libraries. Table 3 portrays a picture of compliance with legal standards. The results show that compliance with intellectual property rights (M = 3.41, SD = 1.063) and records and documentation (M = 3.37, SD = 1.081) were relatively high among others. 58(47.2%) respondents reported a high compliance with these standards which means the university libraries in Pakistan are efficiently managing IP rights and documentation related to digital content management. Copyright laws and monitoring legal compliance received the lowest mean score among others. Only 9(7.3%) respondents reported very high compliance. The results indicate that the overall situation of legal compliance in the university libraries of Pakistan is moderate to high. However, the lower compliance areas require improvements.

Table 3.

Compliance with legal standards.

Legal standards	N	None	Minimal	Partial	High	V. High	Mean	Std. D
Legal standards	N	f/%	f/%	f/%	f/%	f/%	Mean	Std. D
Data Privacy Protocols	123	8(6.5%)	25(20.3%)	27(22.0%)	54(43.9%)	09(7.3%)	3.25	1.068
Intellectual Property Rights	123	8(6.5%)	17(13.8%)	27(22.0%)	58(47.2%)	13(10.6%)	3.41	1.063
Copyright Laws	123	10(8.1%)	28(22.8%)	28(22.8%)	48(39.0%)	09(7.3%)	3.15	1.106
Monitoring Legal Compliance	123	8(6.5%)	28(22.8%)	34(27.6%)	44(35.8%)	09(7.3%)	3.15	1.106
User Access and Usage Policies	123	07(5.7%)	30(24.4%)	28(22.8%)	45(36.6%)	13(10.6%)	3.22	1.105
Records and Documentation	123	8(6.5%)	21(17.1%)	24(19.5%)	58(47.2%)	12(9.8%)	3.37	1.081

Scale: None = 1, Minimal = 2, Partial = 3, High = 4, Very High.

Legal risk management practices

Legal risk management in digital content management involves legal risk analysis, consultation with stakeholders to address the legal risk, monitoring legal development, evaluation of risk, adherence to regulations, scenario analysis, policies development and implementation, training on risk management, the establishment of risk mitigation, conducting audits and reviews, incident response plans, and monitoring and continuous improvement. Table 4 presents the results of legal risk management practices in the university libraries. The variables were measured on a five-point scale with 1 = Never, 2 = Rarely, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Frequently, and 5 = Always. The mean score of each item indicates how well the university libraries are managing legal risk for digital content management. A substantial portion of respondents 18(14.6%) reported never conducting legal risk analyses and only 5(4.1%) claimed they were conducting legal risk analyses. To address legal risks effectively in university libraries, consultation with stakeholders is relatively common. A considerable portion of respondents reported that they “never” or “rarely” consult the stakeholders for legal risk management, which highlights a gap in collaborative legal risk management. The results show that systematic risk evaluation is not fully embedded in risk management practices as 36(29.3%) reported that they do this practice “rarely” and 28(22.8%) “sometimes”. A notable portion reported that they are incorporating scenario analyses rarely 31(25.2%) in legal risk management practices. While 45(36.6%) are used frequently. The results suggest that there is room for strategic foresight in risk mitigation. The development and implementation of legal risk management policies in university libraries seems to be a strong area. The results show that 46(36.6%) frequently and 18(14.6%) always engage in developing and implementing policies. However, 30(24.4%) rarely engage in this practice causing a policy implementation gap. The results show that there is a lack of training and education of library staff for legal risk management. Inconsistent risk mitigation procedures are practiced. 22% rarely implemented them in their libraries. There is a need to improve the audit and review process. Only 7(5.7%) conduct legal risk audits and reviews always. Challenges can be faced without periodic reviews. The results indicate that some libraries established incident response plans but a notable portion 22.8% rarely engage in IRP establishment.

Table 4.

Legal risk management practices.

Legal Risk Management Practices	N	Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Frequently	Always	Mean	Std. D
Legal Risk Management Practices	N	f/%	f/%	f/%	f/%	f/%	Mean	Std. D
Legal Risk Analyses	123	18(14.6%)	32(26.0%)	32(26.0%)	36(29.3%)	5(4.1%)	2.82	1.131
Stakeholder Consultations	123	7(5.7%)	21(17.1%)	57(46.3%)	31(25.2%)	7(5.7%)	3.08	0.937
Systematic Risk Evaluation	123	8(6.5%)	36(29.3%)	28(22.8%)	39(31.7%)	12(9.8%)	3.09	1.124
Scenario Analyses	123	9(7.3%)	31(25.2%)	29(23.6%)	45(36.6%)	9(7.3%)	3.11	1.095
Policies Development	123	4(3.3%)	30(24.4%)	25(20.3%)	46(37.4%)	18(14.6%)	3.36	1.102
Staff Training and Education	123	6(4.9%)	42(34.1%)	33(26.8%)	34(27.6%)	8(6.5%)	2.97	1.040
Risk Mitigation Procedures	123	13(10.6%)	27(22.0%)	23(18.7%)	45(36.6%)	15(12.2%)	3.18	1.215
Regular Audits and Reviews	123	11(8.9%)	33(26.8%)	26(21.1%)	46(37.4%)	7(5.7%)	3.04	1.112
Incident Response Plan	123	13(10.6%)	28(22.8%)	27(22.0%)	44(35.8%)	11(8.9%)	3.10	1.169

Scale:1 = Never, 2 = Rarely, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Frequently, 5 = Always.

Legal documentation and records preparation

Frequency and maintaining legal documents related to digital content management in the university libraries are presented in Table 5. The results indicate that data privacy and protection documents with a (M = 3.25, SD = 1.157) were maintained moderately. A notable figure of respondents reported that they are rarely and sometimes 27(22%) engaged in this practice. Only 16(13%) claimed that they always maintained data privacy and protection documents in the library. It was found that university libraries are weaker in maintaining copyright and intellectual property documents (M = 3.11, SD = 1.137), with only 7.3% of respondents always maintaining them. Licensing documents are maintained frequently by 40.7% of respondents. However, 19(15.4%) rarely and 13(10.6%) of respondents never engaged in them. Policy documents are relatively well maintained (M = 3.29, SD = 1.122) because 39.0% are frequently updated and 12.2% always maintain them. Risk management and incident response documentation is one of the weakest areas among others, where only 3(3.4%) always maintain them. The lower SD = 0.995 suggests that university libraries are neglecting them. It was found that university libraries are moderately maintaining the contracts and agreements records. It was claimed by 32.5% that they are maintaining these documents frequently. However, 8.1% responded that they never engaged in this practice.

Table 5.

Legal documentation and records preparation.

Variables	N	Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Frequently	Always	Mean	Std. D
Variables	N	f/%	f/%	f/%	f/%	f/%	Mean	Std. D
Privacy and Protection Documents	123	9(7.3%)	27(22.0%)	27(22.0%)	44(35.8%)	16(13.0%)	3.25	1.157
Copyright and IP Documents	123	12(9.8%)	28(22.8%)	27(22.0%)	47(38.2%)	9(7.3%)	3.11	1.137
Licensing Documents	123	13(10.6%)	19(15.4%)	31(25.2%)	50(40.7%)	10(8.1%)	3.20	1.130
Policy Documents	123	7(5.7%)	28(22.8%)	25(20.3%)	48(39.0%)	15(12.2%)	3.29	1.122
RM and IR Documents	123	9(7.3%)	25(20.3%)	37(30.1%)	49(39.8%)	3(2.4%)	3.10	0.995
Contracts And Agreements	123	10(8.1%)	29(23.6%)	30(24.4%)	40(32.5%)	14(11.4%)	3.15	1.153

Scale: 1 = Never, 2 = Rarely, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Frequently, 5 = Always.

Training and capacity building

Table 6 presents descriptive statistics for how frequently library leadership conducts specific training and educational activities for staff. A five-point Likert scale was used to collect the data from the respondents (1 = Never, 2 = Rarely, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Frequently, 5 = Always). The results indicate that university libraries conduct moderately (M = 2.99, SD = 1.163) training in copyright and intellectual property issues. Only 8.1% of respondents always receive such training. A significant figure is claiming that they received such training rarely 34(27.6%). Results about data privacy and protection training (M = 3.11, SD = 0.870) show that 30.1% receive frequently and 3.3% always. Legal risk management and incident response training are significantly lacking. The results show that 64(52%) rarely receive this training. Digital content management training ensures the legal and ethical handling of digital assets. The results show that 45(36.6%) frequently and 15(12.2%) always receive training. However, 13(10.6%) never received such training. The data show that training in legal compliance is moderate but not consistent 22.8% rarely receive training, suggesting a lack of structured, recurring compliance programs.

Table 6.

Legal training and capacity building of staff.

Variables	N	Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Frequently	Always	Mean	Std. D
Variables	N	f/%	f/%	f/%	f/%	f/%	Mean	Std. D
Copyright and IP Training	123	13(10.6%)	34(27.6%)	27(22.0%)	39(31.7%)	10(8.1%)	2.99	1.163
Privacy and Protection Training	123	5(4.1%)	21(17.1%)	56(45.5%)	37(30.1%)	4(3.3%)	3.11	0.870
RM and IR Training	123	5(4.1%)	64(52.0%)	15(12.2%)	37(30.1%)	2(1.6%)	2.73	0.992
DCM Training	123	13(10.6%)	27(22.0%)	23(18.7%)	45(36.6%)	15(12.2%)	3.18	1.215
Legal Compliance Training	123	13(10.6%)	28(22.8%)	32(26.0%)	39(31.7%)	11(8.9%)	3.06	1.154

Scale: 1 = Never, 2 = Rarely, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Frequently, 5 = Always.

Sources of legal information

This section of the study answer to the RQ2 “How do library professionals stay informed about the legal requirements of digital content management?” Figure 2 portrays a visual representation of the mean and standard deviation of legal information sources. Each dot indicates the average usage of information sources to stay updated about digital content management's legal updates. The higher mean value of the professional organization & association (M = 3.45) and professional networks and peer groups (M = 3.29) indicated that library professionals are more dependent on these sources of legal information to stay informed about legal aspects of digital content management in the academic libraries. Court judgments (M = 2.94) and information ordinance (M = 2.96) were the least consulted information sources. The error bars portray a picture of standard deviation which represents the variability in the responses of respondents. The larger error bars suggest a higher variability in the responses of respondents like legal advisors and consultants (SD = 1.343) and Law Journals and Academic Publications (SD = 1.257) representing a variation in opinion. Some respondents rated them higher than others and some rated them lower than others. The smaller error bars suggest a more stable perception of information sources. The standard deviation of institutional policies (SD = 1.097) and regulatory bodies’ pages (SD = 1.133) showed a consistent perception. This means that most of the respondents consult these sources for legal information. The analysis revealed that library professionals heavily depend on professional organizations & associations and professional networks and peer groups. The higher standard deviation of the legal information sources, legal advisors and consultants (SD = 1.343) and law journals (SD = 1.257) indicated that library professionals don’t trust and access these information sources for legal information regularly.

Figure 2.

Sources of legal information.

Compliance with legal framework

This section involves the result of compliance with the legal framework for managing digital content in libraries. Compliance with the legal framework involves the implementation of policies, regular audits, audit thoroughness, record-keeping and documentation accuracy, and compliance monitoring tools. This section was designed to answer the RQ3 “Are university libraries complying with the legal framework for digital content management?”

Implementation of policies

Figure 3 provides an outlook on the implementation of policies in university libraries. The darker red shades of the heatmap indicate higher compliance with policies, while lighter shades indicate lower implementation. The respondents were asked about the implementation of legal policies in the library to manage digital content. Data was collected using a five-point scale (1 very limited to 5 highly comprehensive). The result indicates a strong implementation of library rules and regulations in the university libraries (M = 3.63). Implementation of institutional repository policy (M = 3.46) and digital content management policy (M = 3.39) seem at a moderate level. The results reveal that data privacy policy (M = 3.02) and copyright compliance policy (M = 2.95) are the least implemented policies. The lowest implementation of the data privacy policy and copyright compliance policy highlights a threat to digital assets and intellectual property laws. The standard deviation scores of reporting and resolution of issue policy (SD = 1.325) and audit policy (SD = 1.264) show a higher variation in the implementation across university libraries. Some libraries apply these policies rigorously and others are behind. The findings suggest that libraries should focus on data protection policies and copyright compliance policies to ensure consistent digital content management practices. The results indicate that the overall implementation of policies is relatively good. However, strategic interventions are required in some areas.

Figure 3.

Implementation of policies.

Regular compliance audit

Figure 4 presents a picture of internal and external compliance audits conducted in the university libraries. The data show that most of the libraries conduct internal and external compliance audits annually. Eight responses indicated that they conduct internal compliance audits quarterly, and six responses were about external compliance audits. Twenty-two responses indicate that they conduct the internal audit biannually, and twenty-four responses indicate they conduct external compliance audits biannually. The results indicate that most university libraries conduct internal and external audits annually, and a small number of university libraries do this practice quarterly or monthly. Absence of regular audit compliance in the university libraries of Pakistan indicates that there is a broader institutional gap in accountability and legal compliance.

Figure 4.

Frequency of internal and external audits.

Audit thoroughness

Figure 5 visualizes audit thoroughness in the university libraries in the context of digital content management. Audit involves the review of policies, procedures, and activities. The respondents were asked about the thoroughness of the audit conducted in the libraries. The data were collected on a five-point scale (1 = superficial, 2 = limited, 3 = moderate, 4 = thorough, and 5 = extensive). The results reveal that a notable portion of respondents fall into the 4 = Thorough category. This indicates that the audit team reviews all four activities thoroughly. The university libraries prioritize the review of policies and procedures (39.0%) and follow-up actions and monitoring (35.8%). However, a considerable portion of respondents highlighted that the thoroughness of the audit is limited in all four activities. The higher score of evaluation of staff adherence to legal compliance in the moderate and limited categories might be challenging due to professionals’ behavior. It was also noted that a small number of respondents reported the extensive thoroughness of the audit across all activities, indicating a lack of in-depth scrutiny. The findings highlight that there is a need for structured audit compliance and in-depth legal evaluation.

Figure 5.

Audit thoroughness.

Institutional support for digital content management

A research question was designed, RQ4 “To what extent does university management support libraries in managing digital content?” to know about how much universities support the libraries in managing digital content. This section provides the answer to RQ4. Universities support their libraries in several ways by providing financial, technological, and human resources to strengthen for better services. Digital content management requires specialized institutional support, which includes adequate funding, technological tools, library infrastructure, capacity building of staff, digital content management policies, IT support, and stakeholder collaboration. Figure 6 portrays a picture of the institutional support that universities provide to their libraries to manage digital content. The mean value of all variables remains between M = 3.02 to M = 3.33, which indicates a moderate level of institutional support. It was seen that there was an active collaboration with stakeholders (M = 3.33). This suggests that library leadership is aware of the importance of stakeholders’ collaboration for digital content management. The mean value of the training program of digital content management for staff (M = 2.23) indicates that the efforts are being made to train the library staff to manage digital content. Despite these, there are some areas of concern, like allocation of adequate funds (M = 3.20), dedicated staff role (M = 3.14), and library infrastructure (M = 3.07). Lack of adequate funds may hinder the successful implementation and adoption of advanced technology for digital content management. The existing infrastructure of university libraries may not fully support the complex needs of digital content management. The finding suggests that there is a need to adopt a technology-driven approach for digital content management in university libraries of Pakistan.

Figure 6.

Institutional support for digital content management.

Challenges in digital content management

Several challenges hinder digital content management in university libraries. The researchers designed a research question, RQ5 (What challenges do university libraries face in digital content management?) to explore the challenges and this section provides the answer to this question. Figure 7 presents the challenges faced by university libraries of Pakistan while managing digital content management. The horizontal bars visualize the mean score of different challenges and the error bars represent standard deviations. It was found that inadequate infrastructure (M = 3.50), technical issues (M = 3.41), ensuring legal compliance (M = 3.41), and budget limitations (M = 3.41) suggest a convergence of core administrative and operational constraints for digital content management in university libraries in Pakistan. The results show that some challenges received higher standard deviations showing a variability in the perceptions among respondents. The challenges such as insufficient institutional support (SD = 1.375) and lack of necessary tools and resources (SD = 1.358) indicate variation. Challenges like “difficult to achieve institutional support have the lowest mean score (M = 3.11) indicating a less perceived challenge. The findings reveal that challenges like “security concerns” and “difficulty protecting digital content from unauthorized access” (M = 3.33) show a threat for digital content management. The existence of a lack of skilled staff (M = 3.22) indicates a need for capacity building of library staff for digital content management. The universities are required to invest in technology, training, and a regulatory framework to handle the challenges of infrastructure, budget, and legal compliance.

Figure 7.

Challenges in digital content management.

Discussion

Digital content management in libraries refers to the process of managing digital resources and providing access to users. Technological tools and software ensure effective management and dissemination of this content across various platforms (Kim et al., 2023). The study findings revealed that there was limited awareness among library professionals of the legal requirements related to digital content management. The findings are consistent with the study by Nosheen and Sohail (2025) where there was a significant lack of resources and training for professionals to develop digital collections. The findings are also consistent with the work of Corrall and O’Brien (2011) who confirmed a wide range of competency requirements for legal information professionals. The results of awareness of legal requirements among library professionals are also consistent with the findings of the study conducted by Zareef and Jabeen (2025), where they confirmed that a small number of library professionals were aware of the legal framework of digital curation. The study results reveal partial enforcement of copyright laws and gaps in compliance with information governance standards. The findings of the study by Adu and Walt (2021) also highlighted low compliance with copyright laws and Creative Commons licensing in academic libraries. University libraries of Pakistan are suffering from insufficient risk mitigation strategies and a lack of proactive measures to deal with legal challenges. Khan et al. (2021) also stated that the current state of data security measures is alarming in the university libraries of Pakistan. Similar concern was highlighted by Briney (2019) and Yakubu (2023) in their studies on data management practices and collection development policy in academic libraries. Consistent record management practices for legal documentation are essential for creating and maintaining a standardized system for digital content management. Libraries should adopt consistent practices to record legal documents as suggested by Sundqvist (2011) to formalize procedures and measures. There is a lack of regular training sessions to enhance the skills and expertise among library professionals to handle the legal complexities, like licensing agreements and negotiations with vendors. Imran et al. (2022) pointed out that library professionals in academic libraries of Pakistan need proper training to manage the digital library and the related aspects. Pomerantz (2010) highlights the need for formal training on licensing and negotiation for acquisition librarians. Training and new skills enhance the collaborative effort of managing digital/online resources. Findings of the study indicate that university library professionals use different legal information resources to stay up to date. Among the other resources, professional organizations & associations, and professional networks & peer groups were the top consulted resources. Hanumappa and Patel (2019) also presented similar findings, where library professionals heavily relied on legal experts and colleagues. It was found that university libraries in Pakistan lack consistent compliance policies and monitoring mechanisms for digital content management, which aligns with the study of Khan and Bhatti (2017) and Pinfield et al. (2014). Most university libraries conduct audits annually to review their compliance with policies and procedures, and a small number of libraries do this practice biannually, quarterly, or monthly. Most common practice for the academic library audit is annually, but some libraries conduct audits frequently due to their complex and sensitive operations. The analysis of audit thoroughness revealed that a notable portion of university libraries conduct a thorough audit. This indicates that the audit team reviews policies and procedures, evaluates whether staff adhere, identifies gaps, and monitors follow-up actions thoroughly. The audit methodology was coherent with the audit guidelines of the Auditor General of Pakistan (AGP, 2010). It was seen that there was an active collaboration with stakeholders in the context of institutional support. This suggests that library leadership is aware of the importance of stakeholders’ collaboration for digital content management. University libraries have better institutional support for digital content management, which is contradictory to the findings of Ikonne et al. (2024). This study reported low institutional support for digitization in the libraries of federal universities in Northeastern Nigeria. University libraries in Pakistan are facing many challenges in digital content management, especially in the underdeveloped areas of Balochistan, KPK, and Sindh rural. Lack of technological infrastructure, budget limitations, lack of IT support, security concerns, and lack of expertise are the major challenges. Ullah et al. (2023) also highlighted these challenges in delivering modern library services in the twenty-first century. The challenges like budget limitations, lack of IT infrastructure, lack of skills and competencies, and limited institutional support were similar to the challenges found by Sheikh et al. (2023) in their study of the evaluation of RDM in academic libraries. The study significantly contributes to and fills a critical gap in the library and information science literature on legal preparedness for digital content management in developing countries. The study is the first of its kind in the region, focusing on leadership and legal preparedness for digital content management in the university libraries of Pakistan. The study will provide a roadmap to improve the strategies for digital content management in university libraries of developing countries, especially in Pakistan.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of the study, researchers recommend some recommendations for the effective and efficient management of digital content in the university libraries of Pakistan. Here are the recommendations of the study.

Legal framework development

The legal framework for digital content management provides rules on structuring digital content and how libraries acquire and manage the licenses. Universities must establish clear policies and legal guidelines in collaboration with policymakers and subject matter experts for digital content management in academic libraries. Efforts should be made by universities, professional associations, and the National Library of Pakistan to develop comprehensive legal frameworks to manage digital content in the libraries that deal with all legal aspects of information such as intellectual property rights, copyright laws, technical protection measures, online intermediary liability, data privacy and related rights.

Training and capacity building

Training and capacity building on legal matters are important for licensing and negotiation. Training and new skills enhance the role in a collaborative effort to manage digital/online resources. Library leadership must conduct regular training and workshops for library professionals on the legal aspects of digital content management. These trainings will boost the awareness level of library professionals about the legal complexities of digital content management.

Institutional support

To manage a large volume of digital content in the library, institutional support provides structured frameworks across an organization. It ensures consistency, accessibility, security, and compliance with legal standards. It also streamlines workflows and improves quality and effectiveness through standardized procedures and tools for acquisition, storage, and dissemination of digital content. Universities are required to provide human, financial, and technological resources for the effective and efficient management of digital content in academic libraries. There should be strong collaboration between universities, regulatory bodies, subject matter experts, and policymakers to ensure compliance with legislation on digital content.

Technology integration

Integration of modern technology in content management improves user access, and information retrieval and allows storage of information in multiple formats. It streamlines the management of library operations which saves the time and efforts of library staff. Academic libraries are required to integrate modern technologies such as digital content management systems, digital library platforms, metadata standards, blockchain technology, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence to overcome physical limitations and make library resources accessible on a large scale.

Monitoring tools in the library

Monitoring tools are crucial to adhere to compliance with standards. The academic libraries are required to implement monitoring tools such as LibInsight, Copyright Clearance Centre, NISO SERU, RightsCloud, Vera E-Resource Management, and Compliance 360. Monitoring tools track the system performance, usage analysis, cyber attacks, data integrity checks, usage and adherence to copyrights, and consistent access to digital content.

Regular compliance audit

A regular compliance audit is crucial to assess how well a library adheres to the legal framework and standards of digital content management. Universities are required to conduct internal and external audits to assess their adherence to legal frameworks and standards. Regular compliance audit allows for the identification of potential issues, operational efficiency, and risk management. It also strengthens internal control by highlighting inconsistencies in operations.

Conclusion

The present study was a successful attempt to investigate the legal preparedness of library leadership regarding digital content management in the university libraries of Pakistan. The findings of the study have provided valuable insights into legal knowledge and awareness, legal standards, legal risk management, legal documentation, legal training, and capacity building, legal information sources, legal frameworks, audits, audit thoroughness, record-keeping, compliance monitoring tools, institutional support, and challenges. The study highlights that university libraries are not legally well-prepared for digital content management and the librarians are less aware of the legal requirements. The findings revealed that university libraries are non-compliant with legal standards and frameworks. The libraries are facing many challenges in digital content management due to a lack of IT support and infrastructure, and a lack of adequate financial, human, and technological resources.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

I express my deepest gratitude to all those who contributed to the successful completion of this research article.

Data availability

The data generated and analyzed during this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethical approval and informed consent

This research was conducted in compliance with ethical standards. All necessary ethical approvals were obtained from the relevant institutional review board prior to the commencement of the study. Informed consent was obtained from all participants involved in the study. They were assured of confidentiality, and their participation was entirely voluntary.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Asghar Ali

Munazza Jabeen

Shafiq Ur Rehman

About the authors

Asghar Ali is perusing his PhD at Department of Library and Information Sciences, Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad and present work is based on his PhD research project as well. His primary research interests encompass information science, data science, and information management. He has contributed extensively to the field, with his research published in esteemed Library and Information Science (LIS) journals, including The Journal of Academic Librarianship, The Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, Global Knowledge, Memory, and Communication, and Libri.

Dr Munazza Jabeen is a distinguished academic and researcher, currently undertaking a postdoctoral fellowship as a recipient of the prestigious Alexander von Humboldt (AvH) Fellowship for Experienced Researchers (2024) at the Berlin School of Library and Information Science (IBI), Germany. She also serves as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Library and Information Sciences at Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad, Pakistan. Prior to her current roles, she served as an Associate Professor (2008–2021) in the Department of Library and Information Sciences at the University of Balochistan, Quetta, Pakistan. Dr Jabeen earned her PhD from Beijing Institute of Technology, China, on a fully funded scholarship. In recognition of her contributions to open education, she was awarded a fellowship by the Asian Association of Open Universities in 2023. With an extensive record of publications in high-impact journals, Dr Jabeen is widely recognized for her expertise across various domains of Library and Information Sciences. Her research interests include Digital Libraries, Data Curation, Digital Content and legal Framework, Information Literacy Programs, AI Literacy, Data Privacy, AI Anxiety, Data Mining, Social Networking, Scientometric Analysis, and E-Learning in Libraries. Her scholarly work continues to influence and shape the evolving landscape of information sciences, making significant contributions to the field.

Prof. Dr Shafiq Ur Rehman is a distinguished scholar and educator in the field of Library and Information Science (LIS) with over 27 years of teaching, research, and administrative experience across Pakistan, France, and Saudi Arabia. He earned his PhD from France with the highest academic distinction and is the first HEC-funded LIS scholar to achieve this honor abroad. Dr Rehman has authored over 100 research publications in high-impact journals, delivered 20 international conference presentations, and conducted more than 650 professional training sessions globally. He specializes in bibliometrics, information literacy, scholarly communication, and library leadership. A recipient of the ASIS&T Info-Share Award and the Pak-China Friendship Award, he continues to shape the LIS profession through teaching, research, and consultancy.

References

Adu

Arthur

Asare

CAB

(2024) Copyright administration in academic libraries: Challenges of library patrons. Information Development. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669241293097.

Adu

van der Walt

(2021) Effects of awareness of user rights on compliance with copyright laws and policies in academic libraries. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 47(4): 102359.

Artino

La Rochelle

Dezee

, et al. (2014) Developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE Guide No. 87. Medical Teacher 36(6): 463–474.

Auditor-General of Pakistan (2010) Audit Guidelines Revenue Receipt Audit. Available at: https://agp.gov.pk/PublicationDetail/YjkyZTllMDItZTQwZC00Zjc2LThjZWYtMTgwMTRiMmM0YmZi.

Balgeman

Colbert

(2018) Electronic resource management then and now: Maximizing efficiency with a small staff. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship 30(3): 158–161.

Barker

(2018) Getting the right information to the right person at the right time. EPRI Journal 2(2): 1–6. Available at: https://eprijournal.com/getting-the-right-information-to-the-right-person-at-the-right-time/.

Barsha

Munshi

(2024) Implementing artificial intelligence in library services: A review of current prospects and challenges of developing countries. Library Hi Tech News 41(1): 7–10.

Bentil

Liew

(2024) Electronic resource staffing trends in academic libraries: Competencies and collaboration. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship 36(3): 203–220.

Bentil

Liew

Chawner

(2021) An examination of electronic resource management in academic libraries in Ghana through the Techniques of Electronic Resource Management (TERMS) framework. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 47(1): 102265.

10.

Bentil

Liew

Chawner

(2022) The management and the usage of electronic resources in academic libraries: A bi-directional relationship. Information Development 38(1): 114–124.

11.

Briney

(2019) Data management practices in academic library learning analytics: A critical review. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication 7(1): 1–29.

12.

Butt

Jabeen

Zareef

(2023) What leadership qualities are necessary for productive librarianship? Explore coaxial traits of academic librarians in the twin cities of Pakistan. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 49(3): 102677.

13.

Campbell

Greenwood

Prior

, et al. (2020) Purposive sampling: Complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of Research in Nursing 25(8): 652–661.

14.

Corrall

O’Brien

(2011) Developing the legal information professional. Aslib Proceedings 63(2/3): 295–320.

15.

Crews

(2020) Copyright Law for Librarians and Educators: Creative Strategies and Practical Solutions. 4th ed. Chicago: ALA Editions.

16.

Deja

Rak

Bell

(2021) Digital transformation readiness: Perspectives on academia and library outcomes in information literacy. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 47(5): 102403.

17.

Emery

Stone

(2021) Electronic resource management in a post-Plan S world. Insights the UKSG Journal 34: 1–14.

18.

Garvanova

Tsvetkova

Zdravkova-Velichkova

(2022) The role of mobile digital libraries in the modern information society: empirical study among students and library specialists. In: EDULEARN22 Proceedings, 2022, pp. 5145–5152.

19.

Han

(2004) Digital content management: The search for a content management system. Library Hi Tech 22(4): 355–365.

20.

Hanumappa

Patel

(2019) Awareness of legal issues related to libraries among library professionals of Gujarat. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology 39(3): 89–95.

21.

Hauck

(2021) Blockchain, smart contracts and intellectual property. Using distributed ledger technology to protect, license and enforce intellectual property rights. Legal Issues in the Digital Age 1(1): 17–41.

22.

Huang

(2023) Web content management systems as a support service in academic library websites: An investigation of the world-class universities in 2012–2022. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 49(3): 102716.

23.

Ibba

Pani

(2016) Digital libraries: The challenge of integrating Instagram with a taxonomy for content management. Future Internet 8(2): 1–15.

24.

Ikonne

Unegbu

Sulaiman

(2024) Influence of institutional support on digitization practices of librarians in federal universities in Northeastern Nigeria. Journal of Library Services and Technologies 6(1): 107–119.

25.

Imran

Jan

(2022) Professional Activities and Training Needs of College Librarians in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) (7099). Epub ahead of print 2022. Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/7099/.

26.

Kehinde

(2018) Digital libraries and the role of digital librarians. In: Handbook of Research on Managing Intellectual Property in Digital Libraries. United States of America: IGI Global, pp. 98–119.

27.

Khan

Ibrahim

Hussain

(2021) An exploratory prioritization of factors affecting current state of information security in Pakistani university libraries. International Journal of Information Management Data Insights 1(2): 1–8.

28.

Khan

Bhatti

(2017) Digital competencies for developing and managing digital libraries. The Electronic Library 35(3): 573–597.

29.

Kim

Al-Hawamdeh

Wang

(2023) Digital content management. In: Foundations of the Information and Knowledge Professions. Texas: University of North Texas Press. Available at: https://openbooks.library.unt.edu/information-knowledge-professions/chapter/chapter-5-digital-content-management/.

30.

Kocak

(2021) Development and validation of a scale for assessing personal digital content management skills of higher education students. Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science 26(2): 69–87.

31.

(2015) Academic library leadership in the digital age. Library Management 36(4/5): 300–314.

32.

Cho

Law

BK-K

, et al. (2017) Progressive trends in electronic resources management among academic libraries in Hong Kong. Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services 40(1–2): 28–37.

33.

Marcum

(2016) Library leadership for the digital age. Information Services and Use 36(1/2): 105–111.

34.

Memon

Thurasamy

Ting

, et al. (2024) Purposive sampling: A review and guidelines for quantitative research. Journal of Applied Structural Equation Modeling 9(1): 1–23.

35.

Mukhtar

Maidabino

(2021) Management of electronic information resources in Nigerian university libraries: A critical review of literature. Journal of Library Services and Technologies 3(1): 72–83.

36.

Nazim

(2013) Managing digital library content: Issues and challenges. SRELS Journal of Information Management 117(24): 29–35.

37.

Nosheen

Sohail

(2025) An investigation on the digital collection development competency and training needs of library professionals in Pakistan. The International Information & Library Review 57(1): 25–34.

38.

Ochieng

Gyasi

(2021) Open educational resources and social justice: Potentials and implications for research productivity in higher educational institutions. E-Learning and Digital Media 18(2): 105–124.

39.

Osuigwe

(2020) Leading from the front. In: Managing and Adapting Library Information Services for Future Users. United States of America: IGI Global, pp. 1–21.

40.

Pinfield

Cox

Smith

(2014) Research data management and libraries: Relationships, activities, drivers and influences. PLoS ONE 9(12): e114734.

41.

Pinkas

Lin

(2014) ERM Ideas and innovations: Digital repository management as ERM. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship 26(1): 52–60.

42.

Pomerantz

(2010) The role of the acquisitions librarian in electronic resources management. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship 22(1–2): 40–48.

43.

Rahman

Ahmad

Zakaria

(2023) A literature review on digital content management: Trends and future challenges. Digital Library Perspectives 39(1): 97–110.

44.

Rahman

Islam

(2020) Building a model for digital content management in agricultural university libraries in Bangladesh. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal 12(3): 359–379.

45.

Sandhu

(2018) The role of academic libraries in the digital transformation of the universities. In: 2018 5th International Symposium on Emerging Trends and Technologies in Libraries and Information Services (ETTLIS), February 2018, pp. 292–296. IEEE. Available at: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8485258/.

46.

Schiller

(2024) How to Think about Information. Illinois: University of Illinois Press.

47.

Shah

Naeem

Bhatti

, et al. (2025) Performance based assessment of LIS professionals toward digital data sets management in university libraries: A TAM model approach. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 57(1): 90–104.

48.

Sheikh

Malik

Adnan

(2023) Evolution of research data management in academic libraries: A review of the literature. Information Development, 41(2). DOI: 10.1177/02666669231157405.

49.

Sundqvist

(2011) Documentation practices and recordkeeping: A matter of trust or distrust? Archival Science 11(3–4): 277–291.

50.

Szymkowiak

Melovic

Dabic

, et al. (2021) Information technology and Gen Z: The role of teachers, the internet, and technology in the education of young people. Technology in Society 65: 101565.

51.

Thangiah

Leo

Kumar

, et al. (2024) Digital transformation of academic libraries. In: AI-Assisted Library Reconstruction, pp. 307–328.

52.

Thanuskodi

(2020) Handbook of research on digital content management and development in modern libraries. advances in library and information science. IGI Global.

53.

Tsekea

Chigwada

(2023) Leveraging content strategy for library digital media platforms amongst selected university libraries in Zimbabwe. In: Academic Libraries in Africa. UJ Press, pp. 105–114. Available at: https://ujonlinepress.uj.ac.za/index.php/ujp/catalog/view/110/719/2532.

54.

Ullah

Usman

Kabir Khan

(2023) Challenges in delivering modern library services in the 21st century. International Journal of Social Science Exceptional Research 2(6): 146–151.

55.

Weiner

(2017) Leadership of academic libraries: A literature review. Education Libraries 26(2): 5–16.

56.

Yakubu

(2023) Collection development policy: A panacea for collection development challenges in university libraries in Africa. Ghana Library Journal 28(1): 15–25.

57.

Zareef

Jabeen

(2025) Awareness of digital curation policy and legal framework among university librarians of Pakistan. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006251318358.