Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Information ecology: open system environment for data, memories, and knowing

  • Published:
Journal of Intelligent Information Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An information ecology provides a conceptual framework to consider data, the creation of knowledge, and the flow of information within a multidimensional context. This paper, reporting on a 1 year project to study the heterogeneity of information and its management within the Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) community, presents some manifestations of traditionally unreported ‘invisible work’ and associated elements of informal knowledge and unarticulated information. We draw from a range of ethnographic materials to understand ways in which data-information-knowledge are viewed within the community and consider some of the non-linear aspects of data-knowledge-information that relate to the development of a sustained, robust, persistent infrastructure for data collection in environmental science research. Taking data as the unit of study, the notion of long-term research and data holdings leads to consideration of types of memory and of knowledge important for design of cyberinfrastructures. Complexity, ambiguity, and nonlinearity are part of an information ecology and addressed today by exploring multiple types of knowledge, developing information system vocabularies, and recognizing the need for intermediation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ashby, W. R. (1956). Introduction to cybernetics. London: Chapman & Hall.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Atkins, D., & NSF Blue-Ribbon Advisory Panel on Cyberinfrastructure. (2003). NSF-AP Report: Revolutionizing Science and Engineering Through Cyberinfrastructure.

  • Babbage, C. (1837). The ninth bridgewater treatise, a fragment. London: John Murray.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, K. S., Benson, B. J., Henshaw, D. L., Blodgett, D., Porter, J. H., & Stafford, S. G. (2000). Evolution of a multisite network information system: The LTER information management paradigm. BioScience, 50–11, 963–978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, K. S., Bowker, G., & Karasti, H. (2002). Designing an infrastructure for heterogeneity in ecosystem data, collaborators, and organizations, in Proceedings of the second national conference on digital government research (pp. 141–144). Los Angeles, CA. http://www.dgrc.org/dgrc/dgo2002/.

  • Boland, R. J., & Tenkasi, R. V. (1995). Perspective making and perspective taking in communities of knowing. Organization Science, 6–4, 350–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowker, G. C. (2000). Biodiversity, datadiversity. Social Studies of Science, 30–5, 643–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowker, G. C. (2006). Memory practices in the sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowser, C. J. (1986). Historic data sets: Lessons from the past, lessons for the future. In W. T. Michener (Ed.), Research data management in the ecological sciences (pp. 155–179). Columbia, South Carolina: University of South Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brand, S. (1994). How buildings learn. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunt, J. W. (1998). The LTER network information system: A framework for ecological information management. In Proceedings (RMRS-P-12) of North American science symposium—towards a unified framework for forest ecosystem monitoring and research (pp. 435–440). Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico.

  • Chalmers, A. (1976). What is this thing called science: An assessment of the nature and status of science and its methods. Cambridge: Hackett.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choo, C. W. (1995). Information management for the intelligent organization: Roles and implications for the information professions. In Digital Libraries Conference.

  • Davenport, T. (1997). Information ecology; mastering the information and knowledge environment. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deetz, S. (1996). Describing difference in approaches to organization science; rethinking burrell and morgan and their legacy. Organization Science, 7–2, 191–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, M. (1986). How institutions think. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eaton, A. J. J., & Bawden, A. D. (1991). What kind of resource is information. International Journal of Information Management, 11, 156–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ecological Visions Committee (2004). Ecological science and sustainability for a crowded planet. Ecological Society of America.

  • Edwards, T. C., Homer, C. H., Bassettt, S. D., Falconer, A., Ramsey, R. D., & Wight, D. W. (1995). Utah GAP analysis: An environmental information system. Technical Report 95–1. Logan, Utah: Utah Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Unit, Utah State University.

  • Eriksen, T. H. (2001). Tyranny of the moment: Fast and slow time in the information age. London: Pluto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finholt, T. (2002). Collaboratories. In E. B.Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology, vol. 36 (pp. 73–107). Medford, NJ.

  • Franklin, J. F., Bledsoe, C. S., & Callahan, J. T. (1990). Contributions of the long-term ecological research program—An expanded network of scientists, sites, and programs can provide crucial comparative analyses. BioScience, 40–7, 509–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Futrell, J., & AC-ERE. (2003). Environmental cyberInfrastructure: Tools for the study of complex environmental systems AC-ERE. http://www.nsf.gov/ere.

  • Gasson, S. (2004). The management of distributed organizational knowledge. In Proceedings of the Hawaii international conference on information systems.

  • Gosz, J. (1999). International long term ecological research: Collaboration among national networks of research sites for a global understanding, long term ecological research: Examples, methods, perspectives for Central Europe, Madralin, Poland, International Centre of Ecology, Polish Academy of Sciences.

  • Greenland, D., Goodin, D. G., & Smith, R. C. (2003). An introduction to climate variability and ecosystem response. In D. Greenland, D. G. Goodin, & R. C. Smith (Eds.), Climate variability and ecosystem response at long-term ecological research sites (pp. 3–19). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henshaw, D. L., Stubbs, M., Benson, B. J., Baker, K. S., Blodgett, D., & Porter, J. H. (1998). Climate database project: A strategy for improving information access across research sites. In W. K. Michener, J. H. Porter, & S. G. Stafford (Eds.), Data and information management in the ecological sciences: A resource guide (Proceedings of workshop, held at University of New Mexico, Albuquerque NM, 8–9 August, 1997) (pp. 123–127). Albuquerque, NM: Long-Term Ecological Research Network Office, University of New Mexico.

  • Hobbie, J. E. (2003). Scientific accomplishments of the long-term ecological research program: An introduction. BioScience, 53, 17–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, T. P. (1983). Networks of power: Electrification in western society, 1880–1930. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iivari, J. (1991). Paradigmatic analysis of contemporary schools of IS development. European Journal of Information Systems, 1–4, 49–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, B. (1996). Ethnographic workplace studies and CSCW. In D. Shapiro, M. Tauber, & R. Traunmuller (Eds.), The design of computer supported cooperative work and groupware systems (pp. 17–42). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, J. (2001). An experiment for all seasons. Science, 293–5530, 624–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, S., & Seebeck, L. (2001). Harnessing complexity in CSCW. In Proceedings of the seventh european conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 359–397), Kluwer.

  • Karasti, H. (1994). What’s different in gender oriented ISD? Identifying gender oriented information systems development approach. In E. A. Adam (Ed.), Women, work and computerization (pp. 45–57). North-Holland: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karasti, H., & Baker, K. S. (2004). Infrastructuring for the long-term: Ecological information management. In Proceedings of the Hawai’i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) 2004, 5–8 January, Big Island, Hawaii. IEEE, New Brunswick, NJ.

  • Kinzig, A. P., Carpenter, S., Dove, M., Michael, M., Heal, G., Levin, S., et al. (2000). Nature and society: An imperative for integrated environmental research. In Executive summary of a workshop sponsored by NSF, Developing a Research Agenda for Linking Biogeophysical and Socioeconomic Systems (p. 72). Tempe, Arizona. http://lsweb.la.asu.edu/akinzig/report.htm.

  • Levi-Strauss, C. (1966). The savage mind. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Likens, G. E. (1989). Long-term studies in ecology: Approaches and alternatives. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magnuson, J. J. (1990). Long-term ecological research and the invisible present—Uncovering the processes hidden because they occur slowly or because effects lag years behind causes. BioScience, 40–7, 495–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manovich, L. (1999). Database as a symbolic form. Millenium Film Journal, 34 (Fall).

  • Michener, W. K., Brunt, J. W., Helly, J. J., Kirchner, T. B., & Stafford, S. G. (1997). Nongeospatial metadata for the ecological sciences. Ecological Applications, 7–1, 330–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michener, W. K., Brunt, J. W., & Stafford, S. G. (1994). Environmental information management and analysis: Ecosystem to global scales. London: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC. (2001). Grand challenges in environmental sciences. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odum, E. P. (1995). The emergence of ecology as a new integrative discipline. Science, 195, 1289–1293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Odum, E. P. (1998). Ecological vignettes: Ecological approaches to dealing with human predicaments. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohman, M. D., & Venrick, E. L. (2003). CalCOFI in a changing ocean. Oceanography, 16, 76–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orr, D. W. (2002). The nature of design: Ecology, culture, and human intention. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfirman, S. (2003). Complex environmental systems; synthesis for earth, life and society in the 21st Century. A report summarizing a 10-year outlook for the National Science Foundation.

  • Pickett, S. T. A., & Cadenasso, M. L. (2002). The ecosystem as a multidimensional concept: Meaning, model and metaphor. Ecosystems, 5, 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poore, B. (2003). Blue Lines: Water, Information, and Salmon in the Pacific Northwest. Ph.D Thesis, University of Washington. 335p.

  • Redman, C., Grove, J. M., & Kuby, L. (2000). Toward a unified understanding of human ecosystems: Integating social sciences into long-term ecological research. In White Paper of the Social Science Committee of the LTER Network. http://www.lternet.edu/documents/Publications/sosciwhtppr/index.html.

  • Robertson, P. D., Coleman, C., Bledsoe, C. S., & Sollins, P. (1999). Standard oil methods for long-term ecological research. Long-term ecological research network series. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serres, M. (1990). Le Contrat Naturel. Paris: F. Bourin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. R., & Marx, E. L. (1994). Does technology drive history? The dilemma of technological determinism. Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, P. (1997). Discovering information behavior in sense making. I. Time and timing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48–2, 1097–1108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spasser, M. A. (1997). The enacted fate of undiscovered public knowledge. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48–8, 707–717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Star, S. L., & Bowker, G. C. (2002). How to infrastructure. In L. A. Lievrouw & S. L. Livingstone (Eds.), The handbook of new media (pp. 151–162). London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, “translations,” and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 19, 387–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Star, S. L., & Ruhleder, K. (1996). Steps toward an ecology of infrastructure: Design and access for large information systems. Information Systems Research, 7–1, 111–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Star, S. L., & Strauss, A. (1999). Layers of silence, arenas of voice: The ecology of visible and invisible work. CSCW, 8, 9–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, L. (2000). Organizing alignment: A case of bridge-building. Organization, 17–2, 311–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • US JGOFS (2001). Ocean biogeochemistry and the global carbon cycle: An introduction to the U.S. joint global ocean flux study. Oceanography, 14–4, 5–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, J. P., & Ungson, G. R. (1991). Organizational memory. Academy of Management Review, 16–1, 57–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wauzzinski, R. A. (2001). Discerning prometheus: The cry for wisdom in our technological society. Madison: Associated University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2001). Managing the unexpected, assuring high performance in an age of complexity. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K., Sutcliffe, K., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of Sensemaking. Organization Science, 16–4, 409–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, E. A. (2000). Tacit and explicit knowledge: Conceptual confusion around the commodification of knowledge. In Conference proceedings of knowledge management: Concepts and controversies (pp. 62–64). University of Warwick.

  • Yates-Mercer, P., & Bawden, D. (2002). Managing the paradox: The valuation of knowledge and knowledge management. Journal of Information Science, 28–1, 19–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, A. S. (2003). Data sharing and secondary use of scientific data: Experiences of ecologists. PhD Thesis. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of California, San Diego, CA, USA

    Karen S. Baker

  2. Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, CA, USA

    Geoffrey C. Bowker

Authors
  1. Karen S. Baker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Geoffrey C. Bowker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karen S. Baker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Baker, K.S., Bowker, G.C. Information ecology: open system environment for data, memories, and knowing. J Intell Inf Syst 29, 127–144 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10844-006-0035-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10844-006-0035-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation