(Purpose) This study examines artificial intelligence (AI) policy guidelines established by U.S. public libraries, focusing on their structural components and whether AI technologies are framed as risk-control–oriented or utilization-oriented. Throu...
(Purpose) This study examines artificial intelligence (AI) policy guidelines established by U.S. public libraries, focusing on their structural components and whether AI technologies are framed as risk-control–oriented or utilization-oriented. Through qualitative content analysis, it explores how public libraries perceive and institutionalize AI within their policy frameworks.
(Design/methodology/approach) Five AI policy documents publicly available on the official websites of U.S. public libraries (Crandall, Hinsdale, Kaukauna, Kenosha, and Wolfeboro) were selected through purposive sampling. The analytical framework comprised two dimensions: (1) structural policy components—definition and background, scope and applicability, implementation and oversight structure, principles governing AI use, and risk management provisions—and (2) technological orientation (risk-control–oriented vs. utilization-oriented). Meaning units were coded and comparatively analyzed to identify the distribution of structural components and dominant policy orientations.
(Findings) All documents include principles governing AI use and risk management provisions, while some provide more explicit implementation and oversight mechanisms. Although utilization- and risk-control–oriented elements coexist, risk-control provisions are more strongly emphasized overall. This suggests that U.S. public libraries recognize AI’s potential benefits but prioritize risk prevention and accountability in policy design.
(Research implications or Originality) This study contributes to the literature by systematically analyzing public library AI guidelines from the perspectives of structural design and technological orientation. It empirically demonstrates how global AI ethics discourse is operationalized at the institutional level and offers policy implications for balancing innovation and risk management in public libraries.