Not so long ago public libraries seemed to have the fate of paper cemeteries, dusty memories of book collections of ancient times. Due to continued reading, competition from image culture, austerity and the closure of branches, the once proud reading rooms gradually lost their social presence. All the more impressive is the enormous transformation that the library landscape has undergone over the past twenty years. Volunteers and paid forces invest enthusiastically in vibrant meeting places where everyone, regardless of age, education or philosophy, is welcome. In addition to paying visitors with a pass for the book lending, it is also possible to read the newspaper for free, do homework, relax or surf the digital highway.

This public function of libraries has existed since the end of the nineteenth century, but has certainly taken a high turn since 2005 by establishing five core functions, which give substance and direction to the renewed élan. The functions include promoting reading, enabling learning, providing information, organizing meeting and getting to know art and culture. On 1 January 2025, the above-mentioned core functions were formally laid down in the Library Act, in full Public Library Facilities Act (Wsob). With the law, public libraries have been firmly anchored, which legitimizes many longer-term activities. Suggestions for activities emerging from the explanatory memorandum of the law include film screenings, workshops, lunches, quizzes and markets.

As of 1 January 2026, these are no longer non-binding suggestions, but according to the government there is a duty of care. Each Dutch municipality will soon have to have a full library that performs five core functions, has a physical location and is run professionally for at least fifteen hours a week. Looking at the current library landscape, there is a huge diversity of tasks and activities. Public libraries act as information points for people with questions about the digital government, stimulate reading skills through book clubs or partnerships with primary schools, distribute soup to local residents, organise debates, language classes, concerts and city walks, give room to meet, debate and (citizen) consultation, etc. An unsuspecting visitor would almost forget that libraries also lend books!

Public added value

American Harvard professor Mark Moore calls libraries a textbook example of public organisations, which successfully add public value to society. His theory in a nutshell is that achieving public added value succeeds if an organisation meets the following conditions: be clear about what you are on earth, mobilise social support from policies and legislation, and have sufficient capacity to deliver on all plans. This sounds simple, but it's not, argues Moore. Yet libraries succeed in creating public added value by providing people with opportunities to gather knowledge and information, to stimulate literacy and love of literature, and to provide physical spaces for gathering and conversation.

An essential part of Moore's argument is that he is opposed to so-called New Public Management-currents which, briefly formulated, make the government a kind of company for the highest purpose serving customers. Moore warns that it is a misconception to allow public services primarily to meet individual needs. It's not about customers, it's about citizens. Above all, citizens deserve fair treatment and access to services that serve the general interest. This also includes the public added value of libraries. They contribute to democratic skills and processes that enable people to contribute to society. Therefore, it is not surprising that the library agreement of 2024 explicitly includes the strengthening of democracy and citizenship.

This task deserves praise at the present time. According to the Social and Cultural Planning Bureau, a large majority of the Dutch population are deeply concerned about polarisation and hardening in society. Groups of citizens are hostile to each other, as populist politicians stir up contradictions between the people and the elite. The popular philosopher Michael Sandel, also associated with Harvard University, points out that people always remain fellow human beings. They are mutually committed to maintaining a democratic society in which everyone has their own responsibility. The concrete design and maintenance of that responsibility requires places in which a shared life can flourish, where people of all kinds of plumage spontaneously run into each other. Also in Sandel's line, libraries are ideal breeding places of citizenship. They contribute to the cultivation of habits and virtues, think of modesty or prosperity in the service of a greater idea of commonness.

Thread wipes

The fact that the public library is doing well is a huge social gain. The Netherlands has long ceased to be a country with a vibrating local network of churches, trade unions, associations and other social structures. If people already encounter each other at the gym, it is panting and sweating on fitness equipment, which severely hinders a pleasant exchange of views. Libraries are one of the few remaining public meeting places within villages and cities. Let us be careful, precisely because of a government that puts solutions to a multitude of social problems on the shelf. Whether it's low literacy, speaking skills, struggles with life questions or gnawing loneliness: the library is raised on a pedestal to meet such challenges. That is hopeful, but it also makes it vulnerable, because can the many passionate professionals and volunteers live up to those high expectations? Don't public libraries become too much of a thousand things?

These are critical questions which call for a broad dialogue on the future of the library system. For example, the current concept of citizenship is multi-interpretable and therefore ambiguous. Is libraries primarily about enhancing reading skills, so that people can participate in society or is much more: from cooking soup to facilitating civic counseling? With Mark Moore in mind, it is crucial that public organisations continue to reflect on exactly what social added value they want.

Another point is that tensions will occur between government and libraries as local establishments do not match what the Wsob has foreseen. The demand of a stone building that has a minimum number of hours open and has professional professionals in service soon sounds very "manageable', when too little or no account is taken of local needs and the wider social tasks of libraries. They are primarily educational and binding institutions that contribute to a vital society.

The expected tensions between government and library emerged clearly in a recent NRC report (3 January 2019) about a national official who, in a tight suit, visited the Limburg Roerdalen. There the municipality does not want a subsidy for a new location according to the Wsob. It is preferable to devote the available financial resources to strengthening existing library facilities, which are largely run by volunteers, together with schools and the community center. That fits better with the community of villages that Roerdalen is. The policy officer doesn't like it: what the municipality wants is not a library as envisaged in the new law.

Now this case can be an exception, but it is one that gives thought. Spuk funds (the one-time specific distribution scheme for local library facilities) enabled libraries to spend a total of €57.4 million on making their local establishments future-proof from 2023 onwards. This money has taken place in new or renovated buildings, extended opening hours and cooperation relations with museums, schools and childcare. Sometimes all these functions are united in one building. So people come to the library almost by the way and maybe sniff on the floor. But what if that generous government shuts down the money later? The history of libraries shows a constant struggle for subsidies. In the worst case scenario, all these intertwined public services are collectively affected by co-operative libraries, community centers, schools and cultural centres. For who will take over the reading lessons or the cultural program when the paid power is gone? In particular, let libraries retain their own autonomy. Too much dependence on central control by the government inevitably risks further weakening the social fabric of society.

This essay was published on March 3, 2025.