1. INTRODUCTION
Libraries are undergoing a profound shift from
traditional, passive service models to dynamic, participatory ecosystems. At
the heart of this transformation lies the strategic adoption of Web 2.0
technologies, which facilitate collaborative engagement, real-time interaction,
and user-generated content across digital platforms. These tools including
social media platforms, blogs, wikis, and interactive feedback channels not
only expand the reach of library services but also redefine user roles from consumers
to co-creators of knowledge.
This study examines the integration of Web 2.0 tools
within library websites, analyzing global trends in
technological uptake, variations in tool functionality, and institutional
readiness for participatory design. By employing a systematic content analysis
framework, the paper explores how libraries are reshaping digital engagement,
highlighting the implications for inclusivity, strategic planning, and
evidence-based evaluation mechanisms.
2. OBJECTIVES
1) To
identify and classify the range of Web 2.0 tools integrated into library
websites.
2) To
systematically examine the presence and functionality of Web 2.0 tools on
academic and public library websites.
3) To
identify global patterns and variations in tool adoption and participatory
features.
4) To
examine the challenges and barriers to adopting Web 2.0 tools in library
websites.
3. RESEARCH
QUESTIONS
·
What types of Web 2.0
tools are currently implemented across academic and public library websites?
·
How do these tools vary in terms of
functionality, user interactivity, and institutional adoption?
·
What strategies and design principles support
participatory engagement through these digital tools?
4. METHODOLOGY
4.1. REVIEW
FRAMEWORK
This systematic review adhered to the PRISMA-2020
protocol, ensuring transparency and reproducibility in study selection,
documentation, and reporting. The screening process ranging from initial
identification to full-text inclusion is visually represented in the
accompanying PRISMA flowchart, which outlines each decision point and exclusion
step Page et
al. (2021)
Recent PRISMA-guided reviews
emphasize the strategic role of Web 2.0 tools in enhancing academic library
services. Madhusudhan and Soni (2024)
analyzed 25 studies from 2018 to 2023, revealing that
platforms like Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram significantly improved
communication, outreach, and reference services, especially during the COVID-19
pandemic. Pasipamire (2025), using both PRISMA and PICO frameworks, reviewed 20
studies and found that while social media and AI-driven tools such as chatbots
enhanced personalization and engagement, adoption remains uneven due to
infrastructural, policy, and training challenges. Both studies advocate for
structured implementation, stakeholder collaboration, and robust evaluation
frameworks to ensure sustainable and inclusive integration of Web 2.0 services
in academic libraries.
4.2. DATABASES
SEARCHED
·
Scopus
·
LISTA (Library, Information Science &
Technology Abstracts)
·
Google Scholar
4.3. KEYWORDS
USED
Search queries are the combinations of the following
keywords:
·
Web 2.0
·
Library services
·
Social media libraries
·
Content analysis
·
Library websites
·
Academic libraries
·
Public libraries
Boolean operators (AND, OR) and truncation symbols were
used where applicable to maximize search efficiency.
4.4. INCLUSION
CRITERIA
Studies were included if they met the following criteria:
·
Published between 2010 and 2023.
·
Empirical and peer-reviewed.
·
Focused on Web 2.0 tools applied in academic or
public library environments.
4.5. EXCLUSION
CRITERIA
·
Editorials, or conference abstracts without full
text.
·
Grey literature without peer review.
|
Figure 1 Flow Diagram of PRISMA
*n = denotes
the number of articles
|
5. REVIEW OF
SELECTED LITERATURES
5.1. WEB 2.0
TOOLS USED IN LIBRARY WEBSITES
The evolution of library services through Web 2.0
technologies has significantly reshaped digital engagement and participatory
access. Singh
and Gill (2013)
conducted a bibliometric survey of 206 articles across 13 Emerald journals,
identifying blogs, wikis, RSS feeds, instant messaging (IM), podcasts, mashups,
and multimedia sharing tools as core components of Library 2.0. Mahmood and Richardson (2011)
found that over 80% of surveyed academic libraries in the U.S. had adopted RSS,
blogs, wikis, and social networking platforms, emphasizing institutional
support and staff training as key enablers. Shah (2017)
analyzed 12 national libraries and reported RSS as
the most widely used tool (83%), followed by blogs (66%) and podcasts (50%),
while IM lagged due to staffing constraints. Leblanc
and Kim (2014) highlighted the
strategic use of blogs, IM, and podcasts to support distance learners and
virtual outreach in academic settings. Boateng and Liu
(2014) provide a detailed examination of
how Web 2.0 applications were adopted across the top 100 academic library
websites in the United States. Their study revealed that social networking
platforms especially Facebook and Twitter were the most widely implemented
tools, serving as primary channels for marketing, outreach, and real-time user
engagement. Blogs emerged as the second most prevalent application, followed by
RSS feeds and instant messaging services. Wikis, however, were the least
utilized among the tools surveyed. Kumar
et al. (2019)
expanded the typology by including tools like LibraryThing,
Second Life, Technorati, and Ning, underscoring the shift toward user-generated
content, multimedia integration, and decentralized service models. Ranjan and
Bhatt (2021) surveyed three major Delhi libraries
and found Web 2.0 tools like blogs, wikis, RSS, IM, and social media are
widely used for services such as OPAC, announcements, and training.
Collectively, these studies affirm that Web 2.0 tools ranging from blogs and
wikis to mashups and social bookmarking are not merely technical add-ons but
strategic instruments for transforming libraries into dynamic, user-driven
ecosystems.
5.2. PRESENCE
AND FUNCTIONALITY OF WEB 2.0 TOOLS
From 2010 to 2023, the literature on Web 2.0 tools in
libraries reflects a dynamic evolution from early experimentation to strategic
integration. Tripathi
and Kumar (2010)
and Mahmood and Richardson (2011)
laid the groundwork by documenting widespread adoption of blogs, RSS feeds,
wikis, and instant messaging in academic libraries across North America,
Europe, and Asia, emphasizing their role in enhancing reference services and
user engagement. Imran (2011) studied
12 national libraries in developed countries and found RSS feeds were the most
used Web 2.0 tool, mainly for sharing updates on books and events. Blogs were
also common, while podcasts and instant messaging were less used due to
technical and staffing challenges. As a decade progressed, regional studies
such as Rakshikar (2015)
in Mumbai and Rahoo et al.
(2018)
in Sindh highlighted growing interest in social media platforms like Facebook
and WhatsApp for outreach and marketing, though infrastructural and training
barriers persisted. Sahoo and Panda
(2017) evaluated Web 2.0 tool usage across
16 IIT libraries in India, revealing that all libraries employed at least one
tool, with RSS feeds used by all 100% of institutions. Facebook (50%), Twitter
(43.75%), Blogs (37.5%), and Google + (37.5%) were moderately adopted, while
Live Chat and Google Maps were minimally utilized (6.25%). Patel
and Bhatt (2019)
offered a comprehensive analysis of Indian State University Libraries,
revealing that only 9.77% had implemented Web 2.0 tools, with OPAC 2.0,
mashups, and RSS being most prevalent, and Kerala leading in application index.
Bamidele et al. (2019)
in Nigeria and Buigues-Garcνa and Gimιnez-Chornet
(2012) globally echoed similar patterns
of uneven adoption, with Africa and Asia lagging behind
Oceania and the Americas. Conceptual contribution by Eraj (2020) reinforced the philosophical shift
toward participatory, user-centered service models,
while Leblanc
and Kim (2014) showcased practical
implementations in U.S. academic libraries. Kalra (2016) analyzed
websites of 46 central university libraries in India and found that only 50%
used at least one Web 2.0 tool. The authors argue that broader adoption of Web
2.0 tools would improve marketing, user engagement, and service accessibility
across university libraries. The study of Burhansab
et al. (2020) surveyed 1022 library users across
26 colleges affiliated to Solapur University. Web 2.0 tools like blogs, RSS
feeds, wikis, and mobile alerts were significantly underutilized largely due
to low awareness and insufficient training. The authors recommend targeted
interventions to enhance adoption and maximize the impact of Web 2.0
technologies in academic libraries.
5.3. GLOBAL
PATTERNS IN WEB 2.0 ADOPTION AND PARTICIPATORY FEATURES IN LIBRARIES
The adoption of Web 2.0 technologies in academic libraries
marks a significant evolution towards participatory, user-centered
service models. Globally, research into this transformation has shown both
enthusiasm and disparity. Poluru et al.
(2023)
examined 72 university libraries in Europe and the Americas, noting widespread
adoption of social media tools such as Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube to
enhance communication and engagement. Their Application Index revealed
strategic integration and strong digital presence among European institutions.
In contrast, studies from Africa, such as Williams (2020)
and Akwang (2021),
underscore challenges linked to infrastructure, restrictive ICT policies, and
limited budgets. While Belgian libraries showed strong planning and usage of
Web 2.0 tools, South African libraries were hindered by structural constraints.
Akwangs study of Nigerian librarians revealed
positive perceptions of Web 2.0s potential but low actual adoption, primarily
due to external barriers despite internal motivation. Punchihewa
(2018) found that Sri Lankan university
libraries have low adoption of Web 2.0 tools, with RSS and social media being
the most used. However, tools like Instant Messaging, wikis, blogs, podcasts,
and vodcasts are mostly underutilized. Libraries use Web 2.0 mainly for basic
functions like sharing new resources and announcements, but
lack strategic integration and training to fully leverage these technologies. Harinarayana and Raju (2010) explored how top global university
libraries adopted Web 2.0 features. They found RSS feeds and Instant Messaging
were the most common tools for sharing news and offering live reference help.
Other tools like blogs, podcasts, wikis, and social media were
underutilized. In India, Ali et al. (2020)
reported that 83% of university libraries used at least one Web 2.0 tool, with
Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube being dominant. However, blogs, wikis, and RSS
were underutilized due to lack of strategic planning and ICT infrastructure. Santosh (2017) studied how Indian academic
libraries use Web 2.0 tools like blogs, videos, and social media. Out of 58 top
institutions, only 34% used these tools, mostly blogs and video sharing. Tools
like instant messaging and RSS feeds were rarely used. Across regions, the
adoption of Web 2.0 tools in academic libraries reflects a complex interplay of
institutional readiness, infrastructure, policy, and user engagement. While
Western countries lead in strategic implementation, developing regions
demonstrate strong intent but face systemic barriers. The literature
underscores the need for inclusive planning, capacity building, and
cross-regional collaboration to ensure equitable digital transformation in
library services.
5.4. CHALLENGES
AND BARRIERS TO ADOPTING WEB 2.0 TOOLS IN LIBRARY WEBSITES
Adopting Web 2.0 technologies in university libraries
presents multifaceted challenges that span infrastructural, institutional, and
human factors. Ogbomo and Ijiekhuamhen (2020)
reveals in South-South Nigeria, despite the growing awareness of social medias
promotional potential, only 14 out of 25 institutions have implemented
promotional activities using these tools. While Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram,
and Twitter are widely embraced for outreach, more content-driven platforms
such as YouTube, LinkedIn, wikis, and blogs remain underutilized. Librarians
primarily use these tools to promote user education, reference services, and
selective dissemination of information, yet deeper engagement with resources
like academic databases and software remains limited. Critical barriers
including inadequate internet infrastructure, lack of training, absence of
policy frameworks, erratic electricity, and privacy concerns stifle comprehensive
implementation. These findings reflect broader systematic issues in developing
countries where digital innovation often clashes with infrastructural
limitations and policy vacuums, echoing similar patterns observed in Kenya, and
Tanzania Fred and Tom (2015), Lwoga (2012). Santosh (2017)
found that poor internet access, lack of support, and limited training were
major barriers towards adopting Web 2.0 technologies. Overall, the study showed
that while librarians are open to using new technology, more support and
training are needed to make it work well. Idiegbeyan-ose et al.
(2019) mentioned that in the adoption of Web 2.0
tools, faces barriers such as poor ICT infrastructure, digital divide, lack of
policies, skill gaps, and resistance to change. The authors advocate strategic
policies, government support, and training to enable meaningful Web 2.0
integration. Collectively, these insights illustrate that while enthusiasm
among library professionals remains strong, sustainable Web 2.0 integration
requires deliberate investment in capacity-building, institutional policy
reform, and robust infrastructural support.
6. CONCLUSION
The systematic review conducted from 2010 to 2023 reveals
that Web 2.0 technologies have played a transformative role in redefining
academic and public library websites. These tools ranging from blogs and
wikis to RSS feeds and social media platforms have significantly enhanced
digital engagement, fostering participatory services and two-way communication
between libraries and their users. Despite notable progress in adoption,
particularly in regions like India, Pakistan, and Nigeria, persistent challenges
remain. These include inadequate staff training, limited bandwidth,
insufficient funding, and the absence of formal institutional policies to guide
integration. Methodologically, most studies employed quantitative techniques
such as content analysis and user surveys, with an uptick in mixed-methods
research post-2015 reflecting a more nuanced exploration of user behaviour and
institutional responses. Overall, libraries demonstrate a growing readiness to
leverage Web 2.0 tools for deeper engagement, but sustained success depends on
strategic planning, capacity-building, and inclusive digital policies. This
review underscores the need of scalable frameworks that balance innovation with
accessibility and positions Web 2.0 not merely as a set of tools, but as a
catalyst for reimagining library services in the digital age.
CONFLICT OF INTERESTS
None.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
None.
REFERENCES
Akwang, N. E. (2021). A
Study of Librarians' Perceptions and Adoption of Web 2.0 Technologies in
Academic Libraries in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. Journal of Academic
Librarianship, 47(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2020.102299
Ali, A., Gul, S., Jan, M., & Jan, R. (2020). Web 2.0 Tools in Indian University
Libraries. Library Philosophy
and Practice (E-Journal).
Bamidele, O., Motunrayo, E., & Odunola, I. (2019). Utilisation
of Web 2.0 Tools for Effective Library Services by Librarians
in University Libraries in
Southwest Nigeria. International Journal of Library and Information Science Studies, 5(4), 3647.
Boateng, F., & Liu, Y. Q. (2014). Web
2.0 Applications' Usage and Trends in Top US Academic Libraries. Library Hi
Tech, 32(1), 120138. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-07-2013-0093
Buigues-Garcνa, M., & Gimιnez-Chornet, V. (2012). Impact of Web 2.0 on National Libraries. International Journal of
Information Management, 32(1), 310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2011.06.007
Burhansab, P. A., Batcha, M. S., & Ahmad, M.
(2020). Impact of Web 2.0 Technologies on Academic Libraries:
A Survey on Affiliated Colleges
of Solapur University.
Library Philosophy and Practice (e-Journal).
Eraj Azeeza,
S. (2020). Web 2.0 Technology
in Libraries. Knowledge Librarian:
An International Peer Reviewed Bilingual
E-Journal of Library and Information Science, 7(1), 17.
Fred, G. G., & Tom, K. (2015). The
Impact of Web 2.0 Tools on Academic Libraries in Kenya. International Journal
of Library and Information Science, 7(2), 2126. https://doi.org/10.5897/IJLIS2014.0518
Harinarayana, N. S., & Raju, N. V. (2010). Web 2.0 Features in University Library Websites. Electronic Library,
28(1), 6988. https://doi.org/10.1108/02640471011023388
Idiegbeyan-ose, J., Okocha, F., Aregbesola,
A., Owolabi, S., & Eyiolorunshe,
T. (2019). Application of Web 2.0 Technology in Library and Information Centres in Developing Countries: Challenges
and Way Forward. Library Philosophy and Practice (E-Journal).
Imran, S. M. (2011). Impact and Application of Web 2.0 in Libraries: A Case Study of 12
National Libraries of the Developed Nations. Brazilian Journal of Information
Science, 5(5), 4156. https://doi.org/10.36311/1981-1640.2011.v5n2.05.p47
Kalra, J. (2016). Use of Social Networking
Tools by the Libraries of Central Universities
of India: A study. SSARSC
International Journal of Library Information Network and Knowledge,
1(1), 113.
Kumar Bera, S., Modak, A., & Das, A. (2019). Library 2.0: The Application of Web 2.0 Technology to Library and
Information Services. International Journal of Advanced Research, 7(4),
454459. https://doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/8839
Leblanc, L., & Kim, K. (Kwahng). (2014).
Web 2.0 and Social Media: Applications for Academic Libraries. Information
Security and Computer Fraud, 2(2), 2832. https://doi.org/10.12691/iscf-2-2-2
Lwoga, E. (2012). Making
Learning and Web 2.0 Technologies Work for Higher Learning Institutions in
Africa. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 29(2), 90107. https://doi.org/10.1108/10650741211212359
Madhusudhan, M., & Soni, S. (2024). A Systematic Review of Application of Social Media in Libraries.
DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology, 44(1), 4549. https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.44.1.18935
Mahmood, K., & Richardson, J. V. (2011). Adoption of Web 2.0 in US Academic Libraries: A Survey of ARL Library
Websites. Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems, 45(4), 365375. https://doi.org/10.1108/00330331111182085
Ogbomo, M. O., & Ijiekhuamhen, O. P. (2020). Adoption of Web 2.0 Tools for the Promotion of Services and Resources
in University Libraries in South-South. Regional Journal of Information and
Knowledge Management, 5(2), 8597. https://doi.org/10.70759/myh7cx66
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T.
C., Mulrow, C. D.,
Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA
2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews. The BMJ,
372. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Pasipamire, E. (2025). Integrating Social
Media in Library Services Within Higher Education Institutions: A Systematic
Review. In Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Social Media, ECSM
2025 (pp. 196204). https://doi.org/10.34190/ecsm.12.1.3428
Patel, S. S., & Bhatt, A. (2019). The Application of Web 2.0 Tools in University
Libraries of India. Library Philosophy
and Practice (e-Journal).
Poluru,
L., Vaghora, P., Naveen Kantubhuktha,
S., & Surya Naveen, K. (2023). Trends in
application of Web 2.0 Tools and Social Networking Sites in Libraries
of Higher Education Institutes. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-Journal).
Punchihewa, C. N. D. (2018). How do Sri
Lankan University Libraries Employ Web 2.0 Tools in Providing Web-Based Library
Services? A Comparative Study. Journal of the University Librarians Association
of Sri Lanka, 21(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.4038/jula.v21i1.7909
Rahoo, L. A., Baladi, Z. H., Arshad, S., Nagar, M.
A. K., & Rustamani, S. (2018). 5th IEEE International Conference on Engineering Technologies and Applied
Sciences: 2223 November, Bangkok, Thailand
(p. 156).
Rakshikar, N. N. (2015). Application of Web 2.0 in Academic Libraries: A Study of College Libraries in Mumbai. International Journal of Advanced Research, 3(7).
Ranjan, J., & Kumar Bhatt, R. (2021). Application of Web 2.0 Tools and Technologies by Library Professionals in Select Libraries
in Delhi: A Study. Library Philosophy and Practice (E-Journal).
Sahoo, S., & Panda, K. C. (2017).
Applications of Web 2.0 Tools in IIT Libraries in India: A Study. International
Journal of Library Management and Services, 4(1), 915.
Santosh, S. (2017).
Adoption of Web 2.0 Applications in Academic Libraries in India. DESIDOC
Journal of Library and Information Technology, 37(3), 192198. https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.37.3.10918
Shah, M. (2017). Use of Web 2.0 tools in libraries: A Case Study. International Journal of Engineering, Science and Mathematics, 6(4), 158166.
Singh, K. P., & Gill, M. S. (2013). Web 2.0 Technologies in Libraries: A Survey of Periodical Literature
Published by Emerald. Library Review, 62(3), 177198. https://doi.org/10.1108/00242531311329491
Tripathi, M., & Kumar, S. (2010). Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Academic Libraries: A Reconnaissance of the
International Landscape. International Information and Library Review, 42(3),
195207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iilr.2010.07.005
Williams, M. L. (2020). The Adoption of Web
2.0 Technologies in Academic Libraries: A Comparative Exploration. Journal of
Librarianship and Information Science, 52(1), 137149.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000618788725
,
Dr. Dhrubajit Das 2
