I live in a little village (Spijkenisse) in the Netherlands that used to be quite average and was not really adopting 2.0 concepts. However this is changing, that itself is not very surprising, since it is not a question if you adopt 2.0 concepts, but more when you adopt them. The new library in my city will not only have a very innovative design, it will offer next to the regular space for books, also an extra space for 75.000 books. This space for 75.000 books is intended for the residents of Spijkenisse. Each resident is allowed to contribute one book to the library.
The community defines the content
This is a really great concept, since you have approximately 75.000 books in your library that a resident would recommend to others to read. Instead for going only the standard collections approach Spijkenisse is partly outsourcing / crowd sourcing the building of its collection. An easy way to collect the books that matter to the community. Also a nice way for writers to promote their own books though. On the other hand, people living in a certain place have a lot in common, therefore it might happen that you have some books that will occur multiple times in the crowdsourced selection. This isn’t a bad thing, especially since the crowd sourced collection also shows the interests of the residents. Based on the interests the library can extend its collection with books that will have fit with their residents.
Just by simply creating some shelf space, on which residents can put their books they think that are worth reading ,does the library of Spijkenisse create an immensive value. Not only will the crowd sourced collection be read by other residents (and probably more than the conventional collections), it also provided an enormous ammount of information about the (potential) clients for the library. The only thing the library did was to inviting people to give something to them for free.