Sustainability Science

, Volume 14, Issue 4, pp 1161–1171 | Cite as

Knowledge mobilization for community resilience: perspectives from data, informatics, and information science

  • Arika VirapongseEmail author
  • Ruth Duerr
  • Elizabeth Covelli Metcalf
Case Report
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Disaster Preparedness and Risk Management


This paper presents the perspectives of data, informatics, and information scientists and practitioners regarding how data solutions can be developed for place-based community resilience. Data were collected from participants at an Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP) meeting in 2015. Results show that to develop such data solutions, terminology related to community resilience must be further clarified to coordinate better with data and informatics systems, and institutional support of place-based community resilience must be prioritized. In addition, accessibility and usability of developed data solutions are crucial, and gaps along the information pathway must be filled to better connect data practitioners and community resilience practitioners.


Data science Informatics Community resilience Information pathways Knowledge mobilization 



We thank the ESIP 2015 summer meeting attendees who participated in the study and contributed their comments and insight. ESIP also provided key logistical assistance and a venue for conducting the study. Three anonymous reviews provided valuable comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. Finally, we acknowledge Hurricane Irma of 2017, whose presence served as great inspiration during one of the final revisions of this paper.


  1. AAAS (2016) Scientific community managers’ top challenges and training needs. TrellisGoogle Scholar
  2. Aguilar J (2017) Where will future hurricanes make landfall? The Denver Post, September 13, 2017Google Scholar
  3. Ahern J (2011) From fail-safe to safe-to-fail: sustainability and resilience in the new urban world. Landscape Urban Plan 100(4):341–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Altaweel M, Virapongse A, Griffith D, Alessa L, Kliskey A (2016) A simple typology for complex social-ecological systems in mountain communities. Sustain Sci Pract Policy 11Google Scholar
  5. Arbon P (2014) Developing a model and tool to measure community disaster resilience. Aust J Emerg Manag 29(4):12Google Scholar
  6. Armitage D, Marschke M, Plummer R (2008) Adaptive co-management and the paradox of learning. Glob Environ Change 18:86–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Arup (2016) City Resilience Index. ArupGoogle Scholar
  8. Baker KS, Duerr RE, Parsons MA (2015) Scientific knowledge mobilization: co-evolution of data products and designated communities. Int J Digital Curation 10(2):110–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blickley J, Deiner K, Lacher I, Meek M, Porensky L, Wilkerson M, Winford E, Schwartz M (2012) Graduate student’s guide to necessary skills for nonacademic conservation careers. Conserv Biol 27:24–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Blue Water Baltimore, Sewage (2018) Blue Water Baltimore. November 28, 2017. Accessed 03 June 2018
  11. Board, Space Studies (1986) Issues and recommendations associated with distributed computation and data management systems for the space sciences. National Academies PressGoogle Scholar
  12. Borgman CL (2012) The conundrum of sharing research data. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 63:1059–1078. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brinkman TJ, Winslow D, Hansen F, Chapin S, Kofinas G, BurnSilver S, Rupp TS (2016) Arctic communities perceive climate impacts on access as a critical challenge to availability of subsistence resources. Clim Change 139(3–4):413–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brugha R, Varvasovszky Z (2000) Stakeholder analysis: a review. Health Policy Plan 15:239–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Burton CG (2015) A validation of metrics for community resilience to natural hazards and disasters using the recovery from Hurricane Katrina as a case study. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 105(1):67–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. CARRI (2013) Definitions of community resilience: an analysis.
  17. Cash DW, Adger W, Berkes F, Garden P, Lebel L, Olsson P, Pritchard L, Young O (2006) Scale and cross-scale dynamics: governance and information in a multilevel world. Ecol Soc 11(2):8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. CCSDS: Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (2012) Reference model for an open archival information system (OAIS). Accessed 4 June 2018
  19. Chang SE, Shinozuka M (2004) Measuring Improvements in the disaster resilience of communities. Earthq Spectra 20:739–755. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cheruvelil KS, Soranno PA, Weathers KC, Hanson PC, Goring SJ, Filstrup CT, Read EK (2014) Creating and maintaining high-performing collaborative research teams: the importance of diversity and interpersonal skills. Front Ecol Environ 12:31–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Collier MJ, Nedović-Budić Z, Aerts J, Connop S, Foley D, Foley K, Newport D, Mcquaid S, Slaev A, Verburg P, Collier MJ, Nedovic Z, Newport D, Mcquaid S, Slaev A, Verburg P, Nedović-Budić Z, Aerts J, Connop S, Foley D, Foley K, Newport, D, Mcquaid S, Slaev A, Verburg P (2013) Transitioning to resilience and sustainability in urban communities. Cities 32:S21–S28.
  22. City of Boulder (2016) City of Boulder resilience strategy. City of Boulder, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  23. Cutter SL, Ahearn JA, Amadei B, Crawford P, Eide EA, Galloway GE, Goodchild MF, Kunreuther HC, Li-Vollmer M, Schoch-Spana M, Scrimshaw SC, Stanley EM, Whitney G, Zoback ML (2013) Disaster resilience: a national imperative. Environ Sci Policy Sustain Dev 55:25–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Desouza KC, Flanery TH (2013) Designing, planning, and managing resilient cities: a conceptual framework. Cities 35:89–99. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Duerr RE, McCusker J, Parsons MA, Singh Khalsa S, Pulsifer PL, Thompson C, Yan R, McGuinness DL, Fox P (2015) Formalizing the semantics of sea ice. Earth Sci Inf 8(1):51–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. EPA (2017a) Air topics. Accessed 20 Sep 2017
  27. EPA (2017b) Ground water and drinking water. Accessed 20 Sep 2017
  28. ESIP (2018) ESIP connecting science, data, and users. Accessed 2 June 2018
  29. Fowler R (2015) ESIP Federation summer meeting addresses data-driven community resilience. The Earth Observer (Sep–Oct), 27(5):26–28Google Scholar
  30. Goring SJ, Weathers KC, Dodds WK, Soranno PA, Sweet LC, Cheruvelil KS, Kominoski JS, Rüegg J, Thorn AM, Utz RM (2014) Improving the culture of interdisciplinary collaboration in ecology by expanding measures of success. Front Ecol Environ 12:39–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hampton SE, Parker JN (2011) Collaboration and productivity in scientific synthesis. Bioscience 61:900–910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hey AJG, Trefethen AE (2003) The data deluge: an e-science perspective. In: Berman F, Fox G, Hey AJG (eds) Grid computing: making the global infrastructure a reality, vol 2. Wiley, USA, pp 809–824Google Scholar
  33. Himes-Cornell A, Kasperski Stephen (2015) Assessing climate change vulnerability in Alaska’s fishing communities. Fish Res 162:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Holmes O, Agencies (2017) Florida governor says ‘pray for us’ as Hurricane Irma begins its assault. The Guardian, September 10.
  35. Hou C-Y (2015) Meeting the needs of data management training: the federation of earth science information partners (ESIP) data management for scientists short course. Issues Sci Technol, LibrariansGoogle Scholar
  36. Jha AK, TW Miner, Stanton-Geddes Z (eds) (2013) Building urban resilience: principles, tools, and practice. World Bank PublicationsGoogle Scholar
  37. Kapucu N (2008) Collaborative emergency management: better community organising, better public preparedness and response. Disasters 32(2):239–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kapucu N, Arslan T, Collins ML (2010) Examining intergovernmental and interorganizational response to catastrophic disasters: toward a network-centered approach. Admin Soc 42(2):222–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kelly C, Ferrara A, Wilson GA, Ripullone F, Nolè A, Harmer N, Salvati L (2015) Community resilience and land degradation in forest and shrubland socio-ecological systems: evidence from Gorgoglione, Basilicata, Italy. Land Use Policy 46:11–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kharrazi A, Fath BD, Katzmair H (2016) Advancing empirical approaches to the concept of resilience: a critical examination of panarchy, ecological information, and statistical evidence. Sustainability 8(9):935CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kitchin R (2014) The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism. GeoJournal 79(1):1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kouper I (2013) CLIR/DLF digital curation postdoctoral fellowship—the hybrid role of data curator. Bull Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 39:46–47. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Leichenko P (2011) Climate change and urban resilience. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 3:164–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Levin B (2008) Thinking about knowledge mobilization. An invitational symposium sponsored by the Canadian Council on Learning and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. 2008Google Scholar
  45. Luederitz C, Lang DJ, Von Wehrden H (2013) A systematic review of guiding principles for sustainable urban neighborhood development. Landsc Urban Plan 118:40–52.
  46. Lynch C (2008) Big data: how do your data grow? Nature 455:28–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Marshall R, Cook S, Mitchell V, Summerskill S, Haines V, Maguire M, Sims R, Gyi D, Case K (2015) Design and evaluation: end users, user datasets and personas. Appl Ergon Special Issue: Inclusive Des 46(Part B):311–317.
  48. Matyas D, Pelling M. (2015). Positioning resilience for 2015: the role of resistance, incremental adjustment and transformation in disaster risk management policy. Disasters 39(s1)Google Scholar
  49. Mayernik MS (2015) Research data and metadata curation as institutional issues. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. Google Scholar
  50. Mitchell K (2013) Colorado flood: jamestown residents can’t evacuate after roads washed out. Denver Post, September 12, 2013. Accessed 3 June 2018
  51. Murdoch TB, Detsky AS (2013) The inevitable application of big data to health care. JAMA 309(13):1351–1352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. NASA (2017) Earth. Accessed 20 Sep 2017
  53. NSF (2014) Dissemination and sharing of research result. Accessed 10 May 2016
  54. NSTC-National Science and Technology Council (2014) National plan for civil earth observations. Office of Science and Technology Policy, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  55. PCAST-President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (2011) Sustaining environmental capital: protecting society and the environment. Executive office of the President, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  56. PCAST-President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (2016) Technology and the future of cities. Executive office of the President, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  57. Rael A (2013) Town completely isolated by Colorado flood. The Huffington Post. September 19. Accessed 03 June 2018
  58. Redman CL, Grove JM, Kuby LH (2004) Integrating social science into the long-term ecological research (LTER) network: social dimensions of ecological change and ecological dimensions of social change. Ecosystems 7(2):161–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Richard SM, Pearthree G, Aufdenkampe AK, Cutcher-Gershenfeld J, Daniels M, Gomez B, Kinkade D, Percivall G (2014) Community-developed geoscience cyberinfrastructure. Eos Trans Am Geophys Union 95(20):165–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Rutter M (2015) Resilience: concepts, findings, and clinical implications. Rutter’s Child Adolesc Psychiatry 341–351Google Scholar
  61. Stokols D, Misra S, Moser RP, Hall KL, Taylor BK (2008) The ecology of team science: understanding contextual influences on transdisciplinary collaboration. Am J Prev Med 35(2S):S96–S115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Stringer LC, Dougill AJ, Fraser E, Hubacek Prell C, Reed MS (2006) Unpacking “participation” in the adaptive management of social–ecological systems: a critical review”. Ecol Soc 11(2):39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sullivan PJ, Acheson J, Angermeier PL, Faast T, Flemma J, Jones CM, Knudsen EE, Minello TJ, Secor DH, Wunderlich R, Zanetell BA (2006) Defining and implementing best available science for fisheries and environmental science, policy, and management. Fisheries 31(9):460–465Google Scholar
  64. Tödtling F, Trippl M (2005) one size fits all? Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Res Policy 34(8):1203–1219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Turner B, Fuchs C, Todman A (2015) Static vs. dynamic tutorials: applying usability principles to evaluate online point-of-need instruction. Inf Technol Libr 34:30Google Scholar
  66. Upton J (2014) San Francisco rising to threat of swelling seas. Climate Central. October 23. Accessed 03 June 2018
  67. USDA (2017) Data and statistics. Accessed 20 Sep 2017
  68. USGS (2015) Preservation Requirements for digital scientific data [WWW Document]. Accessed 10 May 2016
  69. USGS (2017) Early warning system for NOAA/USGS demonstration flash-flood and debris-flow. Accessed 20 Sep 2017
  70. Virapongse A, Barbieri L, Duerr, R, Wee B, White C (2018) The socioeconomic value of earth science data for community resilience. ESIP, Connecting Science, Data and Users (blog). April 30. Accessed 4 June 2018
  71. Walls RL, Deck J, Guralnick R, Baskauf S, Beaman R, Blum S, Bowers S, Buttigieg PL, Davies N, Endresen D, Gandolfo MA (2014) Semantics in support of biodiversity knowledge discovery: an introduction to the biological collections ontology and related ontologies. PLoS One 9(3):e89606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wilson GA (2012) Community resilience, globalization, and transitional pathways of decision-making. Geoforum 43:1218–1231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 100 Resilient Cities (2018) City strategies. Accessed 11 June 2018

Copyright information

© Springer Japan KK, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ronin Institute for Independent ScholarshipMontclairUSA
  2. 2.Middle Path EcoSolutionsBoulderUSA
  3. 3.College of Forestry and ConservationUniversity of MontanaMissoulaUSA

Personalised recommendations