ISSN: 2474-3542 Journal homepage: http://journal.calaijol.org 
 

Re-Looking at S. R. Ranganathan’s Five Laws of Library 
Science 
 
Sigy George  
 
Abstract: 
 
S. R. Ranganathan’s work Five Laws of Library Science published in 1931 shaped 
library science and has served as a foundation for the profession of librarianship. The 
five laws of librarianship need to be revised as technology progressed in society. With 
the rise of digital libraries, however, it is essential to take a second look at these laws 
and see how they've held up in the face of new technologies. This study tries to explain 
how the theory is put into practice and to identify areas where it needs to be 
reformulated for the benefit of libraries. The Five Laws of Library Science by S. R. 
Ranganathan was reviewed for this research's literature study, and the five rules were 
combined with the traits of Generation Z to create new laws that are appropriate for 
this period. The research’s primary conclusions are (1) Information: Emphasize 
Content Over Container; (2) User Engagement; (3) Quantitative Information Analysis; 
and (4) Common Learning (Online and Offline). 
 
To cite this article: 
 
George, S. (2022). Re-looking at S. R. Ranganathan’s five laws of library science. 
International Journal of Librarianship, 7(2), 155-161. 
https://doi.org/10.23974/ijol.2022.vol7.2.258  
 
To submit your article to this journal:  
Go to https://ojs.calaijol.org/index.php/ijol/about/submissions 

 

https://doi.org/10.23974/ijol.2022.vol7.2.258
https://ojs.calaijol.org/index.php/ijol/about/submissions


INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIBRARIANSHIP, 7(2), 155-161 

ISSN: 2474-3542 

 

Re-Looking at S. R. Ranganathan’s Five Laws of Library Science 

Sigy George 
 Delhi Public School, New Delhi, India 

ABSTRACT 

S. R. Ranganathan’s work Five Laws of Library Science published in 1931 shaped library 
science and has served as a foundation for the profession of librarianship. The five laws of 
librarianship need to be revised as technology progressed in society. With the rise of digital 
libraries, however, it is essential to take a second look at these laws and see how they've held 
up in the face of new technologies. This study tries to explain how the theory is put into practice 
and to identify areas where it needs to be reformulated for the benefit of libraries. The Five 
Laws of Library Science by S. R. Ranganathan was reviewed for this research's literature study, 
and the five rules were combined with the traits of Generation Z to create new laws that are 
appropriate for this period. The research’s primary conclusions are (1) Information: Emphasize 
Content Over Container; (2) User Engagement; (3) Quantitative Information Analysis; and (4) 
Common Learning (Online and Offline). 
Keywords: Information Science, Library Science, Librarianship, S. R. Ranganathan, Libraries, 
User Needs, Information  

INTRODUCTION 

The five rules of library science were first introduced by S. R. Ranganathan, also known as the 
father of library science in India. His contributions have had a global impact and are often 
covered at the beginning of the course in library and information science. The law was 
published in 1931 in The Five Laws of Library Science.  

S. R. Ranganathan was a librarian and mathematician who formulated the five laws of 
library science. These laws are still used today as a framework for thinking about library 
services and operations. Let’s take a closer look at each of these laws. 

The first law is “books are for use.” This means that the library should provide materials 
that meet the needs of its users. The second law is “every reader his or her book.” This means 
that every user should be able to find the materials they need and that the library should be 
organized in a way that makes this possible. 

The third law is “every book its reader.” This means that every book in the library 
should be read by someone. The fourth law is “save the time of the reader.” This means the 
library should provide services that save users time, such as providing information 
electronically or delivering materials to users’ homes. 

The fifth and final law is “the library is a growing organism.” This means that the library 
should always be improving and evolving to meet the needs of its users. 



 George / International Journal of Librarianship 7(2) 156 
 

The five laws were created to enhance the library’s position in the learning community. 
Reading was considered an activity that would broaden one's horizons and open one's intellect 
under the circumstances of the period. Since not everyone could afford books during that 
period, the library institution took over the book’s role. In his book, SR Ranganathan explained 
how to get as many people as possible into the library, how to use all the facilities there, how 
the books there could satisfy their needs and curiosities, and how libraries as organizations 
carried out their responsibilities and tasks. 

Reading was an activity to raise people’s quality of life and combat illiteracy when The 
Five Laws of Library Science first came into existence. Consequently, the library’s functions 
were necessary to be better. The area of library science, where books are the focus of all studies 
and libraries are seen as a physical location, is greatly influenced by Ranganathan’s five rules 
of library science. 

According to earlier studies, the field of library science study is periodically sequential 
and uses newspapers, electronic resources, archive materials, and repositories (Kawalec, 2013). 
The area of research into libraries as structures and as collections of books is still attractive. 

Generation Z is known as the digital generation. Of course, given their different traits, 
the five laws of library science need to be understood & applied with the same attitude while 
redefining library science. The five laws will be elucidated in this article in library science, in 
light of technological advancement in the digital age, making the findings of this research apply 
to the emphasis of the library. 

METHODS 

The literature review was employed as the methodology for this study. The literature review 
has several goals, including demonstrating to the reader the relevance of the research to the 
present and bridging the gap between earlier and more recent studies. The utilization of 
literature studies strengthens researchers’ opinions; it has no bearing on how other 
investigations turn out. The author read S. R. Ranganathan’s, The Five Laws of Library Science, 
who then combined the five laws with the traits of Generation Z to create new laws appropriate 
for this period. 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

The following information was analyzed from S. R. Ranganathan’s original work, The Five 
Laws of Library Science, and is detailed inside each law (Ranganathan, 1931): 

1. Books are for use: This is the basis for our work as librarians. Books should be used. 
Users did not have access to books for many centuries. They were typically tied in chains and 
locked down due to their importance and price. Only certain people were given access to them. 
Then, when they multiplied, they were still hidden away since it was believed that the common 
person should not have unrestricted access to them. You would “call” for a book at the 
circulation desk if you wanted one by noting its location from a catalog. This is how the term 
“Call number” was formed. The founding fathers of America, led by Benjamin Franklin, 
adopted a more egalitarian mindset. Users would have easy access to books through an “open 
access” collection. The names “closed stacks” and “open stacks” were derived from this. The 
idea that everyone in a democracy should have access to books was one that Thomas Jefferson 
firmly believed in. 



 George / International Journal of Librarianship 7(2) 157 
 

2. Every user his or her book: By extending the notion that books are for use, this 
second law builds upon the first. It asserts that everyone has a need or desire for books. It is 
vital to keep in mind that not everyone will want the same book at the same time; rather, it is 
assumed that different novels will appeal to different people at different periods. Very similar 
persons can occasionally have diverse tastes in books. Here, we agree that everyone has a right 
to read the books they want when they want them and a desire to do so.  

3. Every book its reader: This law examines the opposing side, presuming that every 
book has a reader, in contrast to the first two laws, which assumed that books are an intrinsic 
good and that everyone should have access to them. Some novels, such as those in the “Harry 
Potter” series, are well-read and successful in terms of sales. Others have a considerably 
smaller audience, especially technical or research literature. Having said that, this law is 
predicated on the idea that if a book is published, a reader will exist for it someplace, at some 
point. According to this rule, there is a reader for each book. There is a reason that book exists, 
even though they may not be prevalent or current today. 

4. Save the time of the reader: The first law that specifically mentions librarians is 
this one. The first three examined the consumers and objects (or “things”) that are the basis of 
our existence. We are now examining our goal. What we do as librarians, in both public and 
technical services, for our users is covered in a wide range of books, articles, and classes. But 
this guideline makes it very clear: We have a responsibility to respect the time of our users 
since it is valuable. They could spend hours trawling through directories, databases, finding 
aids, thesauri, etc., or we could step in and assist them—or, to put it another way, disambiguate 
their search. To assist readers in finding what they are seeking as quickly as possible, we have 
acquired specialized knowledge and training. Our mission is to make it easier for each reader 
to locate their ideal book and for each book to be discovered by a reader interested in its 
contents.  

5. The library is a growing organism: This final guideline serves as a reminder that 
our business is dynamic. We must evolve along with our users as they develop and change, just 
like books do. Keep in mind that the legislation declares “the library” to be a living thing. It 
assumes that the library is a real, live object. It implies that it develops and transforms over 
time. The books we buy and keep in our libraries will alter as time and our target audience do. 
A shift in the demography of a region’s libraries may prompt changes in collection 
development to reflect the change. Like an overgrown garden, our collections become out of 
date and many of the contents become irrelevant. To weed our collections, we delete any 
outdated articles with few readers.  

The patron, library, and book are the three entities that the author uses to describe each 
of the five laws mentioned above. Interaction between the three entities is taking place. The 
book’s exposition of the Five Laws of Library Science and S. R. Ranganathan’s perspective on 
them were written in the 1930s.  

The Five Laws and the Digital Age 

Ranganathan’s Five Laws of Library Science were written in the 1930s when colonialism and 
the Second World War were still active, and merely existing was still a goal. Therefore, it is 
essential to examine the five laws’ adoption in the contemporary digital era. 

1. User: In the ever-changing landscape of the digital age, anyone can access and use 
library services, not just those who register as members and present proof of membership cards. 
This is because there is a distinction between the physical world and the digital world, both 
must be seen as providing the same services. When patrons read in the library, they should also 



 George / International Journal of Librarianship 7(2) 158 
 

be permitted to access the web library and browse digital collections. People who open library 
repositories online can also read full-text, similar to scientific work services in libraries where 
students can read full-text theses. The user-entered library is a notion that needs to be integrated 
with the digital age. This idea encourages interaction in the library. 

The library requirement is significant for the more users who utilize it. Examples of 
user participation in the library include: 

a) Collection organization (Kawalec, 2013): full patron participation and input.  
b) Support the internet (full wifi access): which includes giving students more great 

room (Sanevely, 2012) to close gaps and correct misconceptions. Not all users of library 
services come from the same economical background. The Library provides a platform to bring 
services like internet and wifi access to those less privileged, thereby closing the gap in 
educational opportunities and economic status.  

c) Provide real-time communication tools for customers, such as live chat for 
references. (Rendina,2017) The fundamental principle of involving users forces libraries to 
“co-create, rather than impose value to users” (Miller, 2018). User studies, user needs 
(information needs), and information-seeking behavior can be used to study how users 
conceptually engage with the library (information behavior). 

2. Book: Books are considered information products since they provide the reader with 
information, which is then transformed into knowledge (Seemiller,2016). Of course, when the 
aforementioned Five Laws of Library Science was written in 1930, there was no such thing as 
an eBook, DVD, or CD. Indestructibility, transmutability, and repeatability are traits of digital 
information products. The idea of a book in the digital age places more emphasis on content 
than form (container). Because information goods are not only books, the word “information” 
is the appropriate term to describe a library in the digital age instead of “book.” 

3. The library: Technology disruption into libraries in the modern era has changed 
people’s perceptions of physical libraries, where everything can be accessed digitally. As a 
result, the focus of library management is not on how to grow libraries but on making them as 
user-friendly as possible for people who come in person. The way people acquire information 
has changed as libraries adapt to the digital age. They used to borrow books they could read in 
the library or take home, but they can now access everything digitally. Therefore, for clients to 
feel comfortable accessing library collections, a space must be provided in the library. For 
patrons to feel comfortable accessing library materials or even engaging in peer conversation, 
a space must be provided in the library; this is known as the Learning Common. 

To encourage user engagement through collaboration, experimentation, and exploration 
between users and librarians, the Learning Common is a physical space that is a part of the 
library building and is purposefully made available to users only for the needs of research and 
work activities for college assignments (Schader, 2008)(Sykes, 2016). 

One of the best strategies for promoting libraries is the benefits of knowing the standard 
(Lackie, 2015). There should be no distinction between physical and digital libraries in the 
context of library development. There should be librarians who can be invited to communicate 
online if they can be invited to communicate in person at the library. 

The same thing, for instance, should apply if students are given learning materials 
prevalent in libraries; learning materials should also be provided digitally. 

 



 George / International Journal of Librarianship 7(2) 159 
 

The Digital Age’s Five Laws of Library Science 

Following an explanation of the modifications to The Five Laws of Library Science and 21st-
century traits, the following are the outcomes of the revision: 

1. Information: Put Content First, Not the Container vs Books are for Use: Power 
comes from knowledge (Ranganathan, 1931). Anyone with informational access and the 
capacity to turn it into knowledge is considered powerful. Users in the digital age do not care 
about the structure of the information; what matters is the content itself. Because much 
significant information is not formally disseminated through the internet in the digital age, the 
material’s format need not be as necessary to be highlighted. People’s attitudes toward libraries 
still have a solid connection to the books, which will only use up library resources. Not 
everyone enjoys reading physical books, but many people also enjoy reading in digital form. 
Multitasking, or the desire to perform multiple tasks at once, is one of the traits of generation 
Z. Examples of such behaviors include reading online (Rendina, 2017).  

2. & 3. User Participation vs Every person his/her Book/ Every book its Reader: 
Libraries must first assess user satisfaction to create user engagement. If the library complies 
with the needs of its users, user happiness will be highly valued. The library faces expectations 
since it caters to user needs. Therefore, fully realizing it requires a user-centered analysis of 
how people use all of the library’s services and materials. It is required to conduct a prior 
investigation into (Snavely, 2012) before doing so: 

a) Using an information retrieval system to meet user needs increases system 
effectiveness. 
b) User effectiveness: How closely the system’s output matches the user’s expectations 
regarding accuracy and completeness. 
c) User effort: User engagement with information retrieval system methodology in the 
context of information search behavior. 
d) User characteristic: To involve themselves in the process, librarians undertake user 
research. 
4. Information quantitative analysis vs Saves the time of the Reader: A quantifiable 

evaluation is crucial in the digital age since Generation Z tends to think all the time logically. 
Knowing that they are concentrating on statistics and figures will strengthen the information. 
Quantitative analysis can take the shape of bibliometric, altimetric, or scientometric methods 
in studying libraries and information science. 

5. The Common Learning (Online and Offline) vs Library is a growing organism: 
Another trait of Generation Z is their preference for teamwork and interactions and learning 
methods that suit their tastes. The library must assume this role to transform the library into a 
place to find information. A library is where they go to study for exams. They conduct research 
for college assignments in libraries. A digital library must provide the same purpose on the 
digital side. Therefore, when a user visits the library online, they receive the same level of 
service. 

CONCLUSION 

In conclusion, Ranganathan’s Five Laws of Library Science provide a helpful framework for 
understanding the role of libraries in society. They also offer a useful set of guidelines for 
library professionals who wish to improve the quality of their services. While some of the laws 



 George / International Journal of Librarianship 7(2) 160 
 

may seem outdated in today’s digital world, they nonetheless provide an important foundation 
for understanding the importance of libraries and their place in our culture. Ranganathan's Five 
Laws of Library Science were created following the circumstances of the time they were 
created. The absence of technology undoubtedly results in various patron characteristics. In the 
present digital age the findings of this study demonstrate that Ranganathan’s Five Laws of 
Library Science have been reduced to four concepts: (1) information: concentrate on the 
content rather than the container; (2) user engagement; (3) quantitative analysis of information; 
and (4) everyday learning (online and offline). 

 

References  

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and 
mixed methods approaches.  

GlobalStillman, D., & Stillman, J. (2017). Gen Z @ Work: How the Next Generation Is 
Transforming the Workplace. New York: HarperCollins Publisher  

Hart, A. (2006). Strategy for the management of digital information products. Diplom.de. 
Lackie, R. J., & Wood, M. S. (2015). Creative Library Marketing and Publicity: Best 

Practices. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.  
Kawalec, Anna. (2013). Research trends in library and information science based Spanish 

scientific publication 2000 to 2010. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information 
Science, 18(2), 1–13  

Miller, Laura Newton. (2018). University Community Engagement and the Strategic 
Planning Process. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 13(1), 4–17.  

Ranganathan, S.R. (1931). The Five Laws of Library Science. New Delhi: Madras Library 
Association  

Rendina, D. L. (2017). Reimagining Library Spaces: Transform Your Space on any Budget. 
Portland, Oregon: International Society for Technology in Education.  

Schader, B. (2008). Learning Commons: Evolution and Collaborative Essentials. Oxford: 
Chandos.  

Seemiller, C., & Grace, M. (2016). Generation Z Goes to College. San Francisco, CA: 
Jossey-Bass  

Snavely, L. (2012). Student Engagement and the Academic Library. Santa Barbara, Calif: 
Libraries Unlimited, an imprint of ABC-CLIO, LLC.  

Sykes, J. A. (2016). The Whole School Library Learning Commons: An Educator’s Guide. 
Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited 

___________________________________________________________________________ 

About the author 

Sigy George is a cheerful and enthusiastic school librarian with over 10 years experience in 
various schools in Delhi, like International Baccalaureate, IGCSE &CBSE. She possesses 
Master’s degree in English Literature and Library and Information Science from IGNOU and 
Annamalai University respectively. She has also completed MBA in Library Management from 
ISBM, Mumbai. Committed to fostering critical thinking and research skills among students, 



 George / International Journal of Librarianship 7(2) 161 
 

while encouraging them to pursue their interests and passions with dedication and fervour. 
Proficient in helping students find books which help fire up their imagination and expand their 
knowledge. Her interests include Bibliotherapy, Academic Integrity & Plagiarism, Academic 
Library, Children’s literature, Research skills, Critical Thinking, Digital and Media Literacy 
and Information Literacy. 


	258_V7N2_George_title+page
	258-George-Final+submission_XR_CT