Information communities, now a foundational course, was an emerging term in 2001, according to Joan Durrance. This focus for librarianship, she says, comes out of best practices for those who must demonstrate their impact and thus justify their work (and funding). She observed two decades ago that accelerating information technology and connectivity was leading to, “an increasingly fragmented information base, a large component of which is available only to people with money or acceptable institutional affiliations.”
If only we knew what was to come. When she wrote this, atmospheric carbon dioxide was about 371 ppm. Today that number is closer to 421 ppm (NOAA, 2023). Likewise, mis- and disinformation proliferates on the Internet. Reliable information is locked behind paywalls while fact-free screeds roam free.
Durrance defines information communities as a partnership of institutions and individuals, “constituencies united by a common interest in building and providing access to a set of dynamic, linked, and varying information resources” (2001). Fisher and Fulton (2022) further develop this notion with five key characteristics: (1) collaboration among a variety of information providers, (2) formation around information needs, (3) utilization of new technologies, (4) overcoming of barriers, and (5) fostering social connections.
The information community I would study centers around those engaged with the reality of climate change. In particular, I would focus on the relationship of climate scientists with affected communities and the organizations that advocate for them. For instance, how does the scientific community produce knowledge and communicate among themselves versus a wider audience? How do environmental groups and lay audiences make sense of the science? How do climate activists use and transform this knowledge to best affect policy change?
Relatedly, how can information science help us engage with the knowledges of those affected communities as well? As the field develops new, critical approaches to studying information-seeking behavior, we have an opportunity to help empower communities as they actively participate in solving the local problems of a changing climate (Du, Chu, and Partridge, 2023).
Collaboration Among Diverse Information Providers
Studying the climate is inherently multi- and interdisciplinary. Building knowledge about a system so complex requires communication among a variety of scientists: atmospheric chemists, oceanographers, geophysicists, meteorologists, glaciologists, and so on. How do these groups exchange information across knowledge silos? What are the controlled vocabularies and data standards in use to avoid overloading common terms with different meanings in disparate domains?
A wide variety of professional organizations, government agencies, educational institutions, scholarly publishers, and science communicators disseminate information among the scientific community and to the public. This happens online in a variety of modes both formal—academic journals or conference proceedings—and informal—social media or email listservs. Nonetheless, these institutions and individuals must work together to share needed information.
Community Information Needs
The type of information required by each role within the climate advocacy community depends in part on their scientific information literacy. Scientists speak one language, but the public speaks another, and policy makers still another. How do members of the scientific community produce the information products required for each audience? How to community organizations help translate this knowledge for their own use? Each constituency has need of similar information but at different levels of granularity.
Use of Emerging Technologies
Scientific communication has long made use of new and emerging technologies for the production and exchange of information. The world-wide web itself was created in support of physicists at CERN. As noted above, the proliferation of information technology has enabled instant access to weather and climate data but also echo chambers immune to evidence. Coordination among environmental and community groups also occurs on the Internet and locally, but these locations are likely separate from the scientific discourse. It is up to individuals and institutions to bridge this gap.
Overcoming Obstacles to Sharing Information
In 2009, emails exchanged between climate scientists at East Anglia University were leaked to the Internet. This event was known colloquially as “Climategate.” Climate deniers seized upon the emails as evidence of a scientific conspiracy (Hickman and Randerson, 2009).
I am curious to know how the climate science community responded. Did it affect their relationship with the public? How did their modes of communication change? Did the venue for information exchange shift? Place is essential to the framework for information grounds (Fisher and Fulton, 2022). This place was disrupted by revealing internal discourse divorced from its original context.
Social Connectedness
Effective advocacy for facing the reality of climate change requires interaction and collaboration between scientists, science communicators, and environmental justice advocates. In order to speak with one voice to policy makers, they need a shared vocabulary and worldview informed by science. Ultimately, what brings these people together is a shared goal of preventing the worst consequences of a warming planet.
References
Du, J. T., Chu, C.M., & Partridge, H. (2023, January 4). A critical approach to engaging communities in information behavior research. _Information Matters, (3)_1. https://informationmatters.org/2022/12/a-critical-approach-to-engaging-communities-in-information-behavior-research/
Durrance, J. (2001). The vital role of librarians in creating information communities: Strategies for success. _Library Administration & Management (15)_3.
Fisher, K. E., & Fulton, C. (2022). Information communities. In Hirsh, S. (Ed.). Information services today: An introduction (pp. 41–52). Rowman & Littlefield.
Hickman, L., & Randerson, J. (2009, November 20). Climate sceptics claim leaked emails are evidence of collusion among scientists. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/nov/20/climate-sceptics-hackers-leaked-emails
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2023, September). Global Monthly Mean CO2. US Department of Commerce. https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/global.html