Abuse of Library Materials in Academic Libraries: A Study of the University of Cape Coast Main Library (Report‪)‬

Introduction The threat to intellectual property through theft, mutilation and other forms of abuse has posed tremendous challenge to the library profession worldwide. According to Jackson (1991) incidents of theft, non-return of materials and mutilation of library stock are on the increase. Lorenzen (1997) in his study of security issues of Ohio public and academic libraries in America showed that 62.5% of university libraries in Ohio believed that periodical mutilation was a problem, whilst a considerable number of public libraries (60%) did consider this a problem. This shows that periodic mutilation is a big problem for both public and academic libraries. He further states that 12% of library books in Ohio were missing while 3% had become unusable due to deterioration. Switzer (1991) in his survey of libraries revealed that with a collection size of 5000 items, a library can lose 3% per year. Sornam and Shyla (1997) reported that the theft and mutilation of library materials was common in many libraries and only the magnitude of the crime differed from place to place. Lorenzen's (1997) report on security in the public libraries in Illinois indicated that over half of the respondents believed their library had a problem with security and theft of its materials. Covington (1996) reported that in De Soto Public Library in Louisiana, computer monitors and virtually all other equipment had been stolen. In a report by Burrows and Cooper (1992), books not returned from loan accounted for almost a third (29 per cent) of all losses across the sectors of UK libraries.