The words you are searching are inside this book. To get more targeted content, please make full-text search by clicking here.

Nathan-2012-Journal_of_the_American_Society_for_Information_Science_and_Technology

Discover the best professional documents and content resources in AnyFlip Document Base.
Search
Published by PANAGIOTIS MANTAS, 2017-09-14 18:27:57

Nathan-2012-Journal_of_the_American_Society_for_Information_Science_and_Technology

Nathan-2012-Journal_of_the_American_Society_for_Information_Science_and_Technology

Sustainable Information Practice:
An Ethnographic Investigation

Lisa P. Nathan
School of Library, Archival and Information Studies, The University of British Columbia | Vancouver, Suite 470,
Barber Learning Centre 1961 East Mall, Vancouver, BC Canada V6T 1Z1. E-mail: [email protected]

This project develops the concept of sustainable infor- architects, librarians, archivists) is in part informed by and in
mation practice within the field of information science. part scaffolds the information practices of the rest of society.
The inquiry is grounded by data from a study of 2 Yet until a few years ago, the profession’s relationship to
ecovillages, intentional communities striving to ground sustainability was rarely discussed in the academic literature
their daily activities in a set of core values related to (Blevis, 2007), particularly in the area of library and infor-
sustainability. Ethnographic methods employed for over mation science (Nolin, 2010).
2 years resulted in data from hundreds of hours of par-
ticipant observation, semistructured interviews with 22 Developing an understanding of the relationship between
community members, and a diverse collection of com- information practice and long-term sustainability is critical
munity images and texts. Analysis of the data highlights for information professionals, strong proponents of the
the tensions that arose and remained as community digital age, and the information society. Academics from
members experienced breakdowns between community other fields and NGOs have carefully documented how
values related to sustainability and their daily informa- current, mainstream information practices involving digital
tion practices. Contributions to the field of information information tools are dependent upon a host of finite
science include the development of the concept of sus- resources and create a mind-numbing expanse of toxic waste
tainable information practice, an analysis of why com- (Grossman, 2006; Robinson, 2009; United Nations Educa-
munity members felt unable to adapt their information tional, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2011; World
practices to better match community concepts of sus- Bank, 2010). The ethnographic investigation described
tainability, and an assessment of the methodological in this article looks at ecovillages, communities actively
challenges of information practice inquiry within a com- involved in identifying, defining, developing, and supporting
munal, nonwork environment. Most broadly, this work deeply sustainable daily practices, to enhance our under-
contributes to our larger understanding of the chal- standing of this relationship.
lenges faced by those attempting to identify and develop
more sustainable information practices. In addition, Initially, the project sought to identify innovative adapta-
findings from this investigation call into question previ- tions related to the use of information tools within these
ous claims that groups of individuals with strong value sustainability-oriented communities. However, rather than
commitments can adapt their use of information tools to documenting innovative appropriations, the findings reveal
better support their values. In contrast, this work sug- barriers to sustainable information practice innovations, par-
gests that information practices can be particularly resil- ticularly when participants engaged with digital information
ient to local, value-based adaptation. tools. The work surfaces the tensions that arose as individu-
als’ mainstream information practices conflicted with their
Information professionals, those who conceptualize, values related to sustainability. It reveals the pressing need
design, build, repair, and modify information systems for information science research and practice to develop and
(whether a physical reference desk or a social networking support the concept of sustainable information practice. In
site), have an increasingly powerful influence on the long- addition, the findings counter the assertion that an explicit
term sustainability of human life on the planet (Blevis, 2007; commitment to a set of values is sufficient to strongly influ-
DiSalvo, Senger, & Brynjarsdóttir, 2010). The work of infor- ence a group’s information practices, their use of informa-
mation professionals (e.g., interaction designers, document tion tools to support daily life (Nardi & O’Day, 1999).

Received January 6, 2012; revised April 23, 2012; accepted April 24, 2012 The article begins with a standard literature review
exploring the ecological consequences (both positive
© 2012 ASIS&T • Published online in Wiley Online Library and negative) of mainstream information practice using

(wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/asi.22726

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 63(11):2254–2268, 2012

contemporary information tools. In addition, it briefly Somewhat in contrast to the negative implications men-
addresses past studies that either investigated ecovillages or tioned above, some findings in the area of human–computer
focused on sustainability-oriented individuals (not living in interaction suggest that positive ecological (and other) out-
community) in terms of broad technology use. The literature comes can be achieved through interactions with digital
review is followed by and deepened through a value sensi- information tools (e.g., Bang, Gustafsson, & Katzeff, 2007;
tive design-inspired conceptual investigation (Friedman, Froehlich et al., 2009; Froehlich, Findlater, & Landay, 2010;
Kahn, & Borning, 2006). The conceptual investigation Kuznetsov, Davis, Cheung, & Paulos, 2011). This range of
explicates key terms used throughout the article. Continuing findings exposes the fact that in our contemporary, digital,
with the value sensitive design parlance, the next section highly networked information environment, questions
provides an overview of the methods used for the empirical related to the outcomes of information practice become
investigation, the primary focus of this work. The findings increasingly complex. How do we determine which infor-
from the empirical investigation are provided in three mation practices are sustainable? Who might be actively
sections. engaged in identifying, developing, and supporting these
practices?
The first section provides insight into the ecovillage
ethos, articulated through the voices of ecovillage commu- In work published in 1999, Nardi and O’Day claim that
nity members. The second section of findings relates the groups of individuals can form what they term “information
explicit value terminology that both communities developed ecologies.” An information ecology is “a system of people,
to support internal decision making and issues of gover- practices, values, and technologies in a particular local envi-
nance. The third and final sections provide a thematic over- ronment” (Nardi & O’Day, 1999, p. 49). In addition, they
view of the challenges to sustainable information practice claim that such an ecology can be a “local habitation in
identified through data collection and analysis. Taken as a which we can reflect on appropriate uses of technology in
whole, these themes foreground the resiliency of North light of our local practices, goals and values” (Nardi &
American norms related to information practices, even in O’Day, 1999, p. 49). They suggest three ways to strengthen
communities explicitly dedicated to developing alternatives information ecologies: work from core values; pay attention
to mainstream practices. The conclusion highlights the need and reflect on the use of technology; and ask “what if” and
for more work that helps us explicitly identify, develop, and “why” questions. The authors suggest that by forming
scaffold sustainable information practice. reflective information ecologies, communities of individuals
can explicitly shape how they engage with information tools
This project is firmly based on the premise that the prac- and base their practices on the values they hold in common
tices we develop to interact with digital information tools are and actively reflect upon.
critically tied to our long-term ability to solve problems,
address complexity, and exist in ways we find enjoyable and Strongly inspired by the work of Nardi and O’Day, I
fulfilling. Information professionals, with a sociotechnical chose to investigate questions related to sustainable infor-
appreciation for the complex interactions between humans mation practice by looking for information ecologies made
and their information tools, are particularly well positioned up of individuals focused on developing sustainable life-
to engage in research that develops our understanding of styles. I went on a search for communities of individuals
sustainable information practice. who work from core values of ecological sustainability,
pay attention and reflect on the use of technology, and
Literature Review constantly ask “what if” and “why” questions. I found com-
munities that fit these attributes: They are termed “ecovil-
The ecological costs of current information practices are lages,” groups of co-located individuals who join together
intricately linked to the manufacture, use, and disposal of to support their shared values related to ecological
information tools (Chen, Dietrich, Huo, & Ho, 2011; Envi- sustainability.
ronmental Protection Agency, 2007; Grossman, 2006).
There are also physical (Hayes, Sheedy, Stelmack, & The term ecovillage has been in use for just over two
Heaney, 2007; Kautiainen, Koivusilta, Lintonen, Virtanen, decades (Gilman & Gilman, 1990). Although in its infancy,
& Rimpelä, 2005; Punamäki, Wallenius, Nygård, Saarni, & academic research on these communities is growing.
Rimpelä, 2007; Yan, Hu, Chen, & Lu, 2008) and psycho- However, the focus to date has not been on the use of
logical (O’Driscoll, Brough, Timms, & Sawang, 2010; information tools. Recent work specific to ecovillages
Sparrow, Liu, & Wegner, 2011; Thomée, Dellve, Härenstam, includes Kirby’s 2003 analysis of interviews with ecovillag-
& Hagberg, 2010) concerns related to these practices. In ers in Ithaca, New York, and Chitewere’s more rigorous,
addition, recent scholarship suggests that time spent inter- longitudinal work with the same community a few years
acting with digital information tools can prevent people later (2006). Both are representative of exploratory
from engaging in unmediated, direct experience with the ecovillage-based projects that focus on issues of consump-
“natural” environment, affecting many aspects of our lives, tion, consumerism, and identity quite broadly rather than
including our ability to handle and recover from stress offering specific insights on the topic of information practice
(Kahn et al., 2008; Kahn, Severson, & Ruckert, 2009; Louv, or information tool use.
2005; Pergams & Zaradic, 2006).
There are other studies that focus on individuals
concerned with issues of sustainability (e.g., Woodruff,

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—November 2012 2255
DOI: 10.1002/asi

Hasbrouck, & Augustin, 2008) or individuals concerned • Human beings are oriented toward each other (Barnes, 2001).
with voluntary simplicity (e.g., Housel, 2006). The work by Information practices are “the ways in which we collectively
Woodruff and her colleagues highlights individuals’ identi- [emphasis added] share, withhold, and manage information;
ties around being “green” and is not focused on information how we interpret such acts of sharing, withholding, and
tools or information practice per se. Similarly, Housel’s managing; and how we strategically deploy them as
work interviewing 10 self-described homesteaders in part and parcel of everyday social interaction” (Dourish &
Bloomington, Indiana, is a broad study of self-reflections on Anderson, 2006, p. 335).
the choices that these homesteaders felt they needed to make
(e.g., whether or not to live “off the grid”). Again, there is • To interact with an information tool, one needs a theory, albeit
not an explicit focus on information practices and their informal or unarticulated, of what the tool is, how it works,
relationship to concepts of sustainability. The project and how the tool is used (Bijker, 1995).
described in this article is the first to begin explicating the
notion of sustainable information practice and the first to do • Instead of being invariant across situations, information prac-
so through investigating the use of information tools by tices are processes whereby “particular, uniquely constituted
ecovillagers. circumstances are systematically interpreted so as to render
meaning shared and action accountably rational” (Suchman,
Conceptual Investigation 1987, p. 67).

Before proceeding further, a few concepts need clarifica- • Information tools and information practices are heavily inter-
tion: information tools, information practice, sustainability, dependent. For example, to effectively engage in the practice
values, and sustainable information practice. The following of tweeting, you need to know about the 140-character limit
explications add conceptual depth to the literature review and public nature of tweets.
above, referencing influential work that the project builds
upon. • Practices are different from habits. Practices are learned from
others, are mutually constituted, and can be done incorrectly
Information tools as sociotechnical constructs. Informa- (Barnes, 2001). One can be said to have a good or bad habit,
tion tools are broadly defined herein as artefacts for creating, but one is not going to be told that one does their habit well or
recording, organizing, storing, manipulating, and sharing poorly (e.g., well-done hair flipping). Yet if you are engaged
information (adapted from Kling, Rosenbaum, & Sawyer, in an information practice (e.g., writing, reading, or texting),
2005, p. 11). Information tools are not unambiguous, inde- you may find that others believe you are doing it poorly (e.g.,
pendent entities. They are physically embodied, cultural your message is indecipherable).
constructions. The broader term, information system, labels
the complicated array of social and cultural practices and the In sum, an information practice is a collectively recog-
political and technical infrastructures required for informa- nized and negotiated activity for creating, recording, orga-
tion tools to “work” (Bijker, 1995; Latour, 1992; Suchman, nizing, storing, manipulating, and sharing information.
1987).
Sustainability. Over thousands of years human civiliza-
Information practice: Experiential and collective. Our tions have become increasingly complex, drawing upon
interactions with information tools can form identifiable, more resources as new problems arise that require more
discernable patterns of behavior or information practices. complexity to address (Dubos, 1965; Tainter, 2011).
Within the field of information science, use of the term Throughout this time the earth’s ecosystems have continued
information practice often signals a research project that to shift and change in response to an incomprehensible
privileges social and contextual factors over individual number of factors, striving for homeostasis (Dubos, 1965). It
cognitive processes (Savolainen, 2007). For a strong is critical to recognize that sustainability is not a static state
review of the term’s use within the field, Savolainen’s of being that the human species can somehow reach. We are
2007 investigation of research within the areas of informa- a complex species dependent upon dynamic, fluctuating
tion behavior and information practice provides an excel- ecosystems (Tainter, 2011). How much human complexity
lent starting point. As Savolainen’s writing makes clear, can the earth’s ecosystems handle before adapting in ways
many information-practice-oriented projects have focused that we find unbearable? What do we consider unbearable
on the practice of information seekers (e.g., McKenzie, today? What will be considered unbearable tomorrow?
2003) and much work remains to theoretically ground the Perhaps it is more fruitful to conceptualize sustainability as
term. This study takes steps to address this and other cri- a constantly negotiated process.
tiques raised by Savolainen through investigating a
“nonwork” context, maintaining a broad conceptualization The most widely applied definition of sustainability is
of the term information practice, and building upon the drawn from the work of the United Nations’ World Com-
following theoretical principles: mission on Environment and Development published in
1987 and intertwined with the term development: Sustain-
able development is development that meets the needs of the
present without compromising the ability of future genera-
tions to meet their own needs. One of the strengths of this
definition is that it brings attention to the term “needs.”
Some needs are obvious as they are tied to basic survival
(e.g., food and water). What about needs that go beyond
surviving? What do we need to flourish? Needs, and thus

2256 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—November 2012
DOI: 10.1002/asi

sustainability, are socially negotiated concepts tied to community monitors (e.g., Nathan, Friedman, & Hendry,
values. To debate needs for current and future generations, it 2009), social networking sites (e.g., Mankoff, Matthews,
is critical to consider human values. Fussell, & Johnson, 2007), or various other “design-a-tool”
approaches.
Values. Within academia, the term “value” quickly sur-
faces deep conceptual differences. What is a value? What However, a recent critique calls attention to the limita-
differentiates moral, social, and cultural values? Are there tions of this strategy, suggesting that it can be dogmatic, be-
universal values? Who defines the values of interest—the haviorally manipulative, and is of limited proven
researcher or the researched? This project is informed by benefit (DiSalvo et al., 2010). Other critiques refer to well-
value-sensitive design approaches (Friedman et al., 2006) documented phenomena such as the Jevons Paradox to ques-
and closely related nascent work by Friedman and Nathan tion the focus on creating more efficient technologies
(2010) on multilifespan information system design. Specifi- (Nathan, 2009; Tomlinson, Silberman, & White, 2011). The
cally, the project is designed to address the following: Jevons Paradox refers to a recurrent phenomenon that comes
into play when people switch to more resource-efficient
• The need for longer term, multistakeholder approaches to technologies. Simply stated, in the long term, these same
address societal challenges (Friedman & Nathan, 2010; people end up using more resources (e.g., buying a more
Nathan, Friedman, Klasnja, Kane, & Miller, 2008) fuel-efficient car leads to more driving).

• The importance of considering both social and technical Projects that focus solely on individualist models of deci-
aspects of information systems (Friedman & Kahn, 1992; sion making (e.g., monitoring individual resource use or
Friedman & Nissenbaum, 1996) ambient feedback) risk ignoring the social shaping of our
resource consumption and understandings of what is sus-
• The multiplicity of roles that individuals take on throughout tainable behavior. Since knowledge concerning appropriate
daily life (e.g., scientist, sister, daughter, patient, citizen; consumption and use is socially structured, research that
Friedman et al., 2006) focuses solely on individual calculations of economics and
resource use feedback is likely to be of limited use (Lutzen-
• The need to consider consequences of the pervasive use of hiser, 1993, 2008). Reflective scholars suggest consideration
information tools throughout society (for users and nonusers; of other approaches beyond designing, producing, and mar-
Friedman & Nathan, 2010; Nathan et al., 2008) keting new tools (Baumer, & Silberman, 2011; DiSalvo
et al., 2010; Hirsch & Anderson, 2010; Kaufman, 2011; Pan
• The need to explicitly identify and address value tensions & Blevis, 2011; Tomlinson et al., 2011).
(Friedman et al., 2006; Friedman & Nathan, 2010; Miller,
Friedman, Jancke, & Gill, 2007; Nathan et al., 2008). The norms, policies, and practices through which we
engage with information tools are critically important to our
Research with shared sensibilities to value sensitive understanding of what is desirable and worth trying to
design also engages with the relationship between values sustain. The empirical investigation described below
and information tool interactions (e.g., Flanagan, Howe, & deepens our understanding of negotiations concerning sus-
Nissenbaum, 2005; Klasnja et al., 2009). However, much tainability and how they relate to our information practices.
of this previous work, including critiques of value sensitive The investigation turns to project participants to identify
design (e.g., Le Dantec, Poole, & Wyche, 2009), tends to sustainable information practices in an effort to build on the
foreground the role and responsibilities of designers. In earlier definition that an information practice is a collec-
other words, the work of supporting end-user values (e.g., tively recognized and negotiated activity for creating,
privacy, trust, sustainability) is placed on the shoulders recording, organizing, storing, manipulating, and sharing
of those developing the tools. This project stands apart information.
because it explores how values are negotiated, supported,
or negated through the information practice of end users. Empirical Investigation
This perspective focuses on explicit adaptations to infor-
mation practices rather than designing “value sensitive” This project focused on the information practices within
information tools. two ecovillages, intentional communities made up of indi-
viduals striving to develop and support ecologically sustain-
Why sustainable information practice? Within the area of able lifestyles. The investigation was motivated, in large
human–computer interaction (HCI) the majority of research part, by the author’s belief that these sites made up of
undertaken to date related to sustainability has focused on sustainability-motivated individuals would be seedbeds for
the role and responsibilities of system designers in making innovative, sustainable information practice. The findings do
digital devices more sustainable either through “green” fea- not support this belief. In addition, the findings counter the
tures embedded in the devices themselves or by designing assertion that an explicit, reflective commitment to a set of
devices that encourage users to adopt more sustainable values will strongly influence a group’s information prac-
behaviors (e.g., DiSalvo et al., 2010; Goodman, 2009; tices, their use of information tools to support daily life
Tomlinson, 2010). Burgeoning interest in the latter area (Nardi & O’Day, 1999). Nardi and O’Day state that through
continues to fuel countless projects attempting to lower forming a “local habitation in which we can reflect on
resource use, whether through the design and implementa-
tion of sensor interfaces (e.g., Froehlich et al., 2010),

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—November 2012 2257
DOI: 10.1002/asi

appropriate uses of technology in light of our local practices, to establish the workings of the community. This choice of a
goals and values,” individuals will form what they term forming community was based on the premise that if adap-
information ecologies (1999, p. ix). The inspirational work tations to information practices were going to develop
proceeds to develop that idea that local sites where people during a two-year research project, then it was likely that
have come together to reflect on and make choices based on they would occur during when a community was still
a shared set of values are exactly the types of places where forming.
information practices will develop that support these values.
In part, this work investigates this suggestion. I chose a well-established community called Springhope
Ecovillage as the second field site, in large part to act as a
How does Nardi and O’Day’s idea bear up under inves- comparison point to look for similarities and differences
tigation? Do individuals living together for the purpose of between the findings from the forming ecovillage and those
supporting an explicit set of values related to sustainability from the more established community. The community of
develop unique information practices, or in other words, a Springhope was over 10 years old at the time of data col-
sustainability-oriented information ecology? To find out, lection. Although Springhope Ecovillage was still recruiting
ecovillages, were selected as sites where sustainability- members, the primary social and physical infrastructure of
oriented, information ecologies would likely be found. the community was considered “formed” by members,
although change was anticipated as a natural part of the
The term ecovillage refers to a type of intentional com- community’s lifecycle.
munity made up of individuals who strive to develop life-
styles that are “examples of what it means to live in harmony Methodology
with nature in a sustainable and spiritually-satisfying way in
a technologically-advanced society” (Gilman & Gilman, The project is based on two ethnographically informed
1990, p. 3). The Global Ecovillage Network’s (GEN) data- case studies. The case studies attend to the information prac-
base listed over 500 ecovillages in 2011, located in over 60 tices within the two ecovillages described above. I drew
countries around the world, from Argentina to Zimbabwe. upon standard methods of ethnographic practice throughout
Of particular interest for this project is the strong ethos of the project: participant observation, semistructured inter-
critical reflection within the ecovillage movement, specifi- views, information tool ownership and demographic
cally for rethinking interactions with mainstream tools. surveys, and a cultural probe. For the purpose of this work,
Attention is not confined to deciding which tools to acquire, ethnography is considered an approach to research that
but to how they were manufactured, where they are pur- supports
chased, who owns them, how they are used, and the process
for handling them when they are no longer deemed useful. • the development of a deep appreciation and understanding of
In addition, the concern for sustainability within the ecovil- the lived experience of participants,
lage movement is not limited to efforts to reduce the direct
ecological impacts of a certain tool or behavior. The ecov- • researcher reflexivity throughout the investigation, and
illage literature suggests that spiritual, economic, and social • the process of a researcher’s perceptions developing into
aspects of community life must be addressed to achieve a
level of deep sustainability (Bang, 2005; Jackson & Svens- insights and findings through a reflective and analytic writing
son, 2002; http://gen.ecovillage.org/). process.

One scholarly perspective on intentional communities For evidence, I draw upon (a) the words ecovillage
frames them as birthplaces for societal opportunities, or new members used to describe and make sense of their past and
ways of thinking and living in the world (Brown, 2002). future actions, (b) the behaviors that I observed during time
Those embedded within the ecovillage movement make in the ecovillages, and (c) the artefacts which are represen-
similar claims, stating that ecovillages serve as demonstra- tations of (a) and (b) captured in different formats such as
tion sites or living experiments for the larger society written proposals, photographs, videos, websites, blogs,
(Bang, 2005; Jackson & Svensson, 2002; http://gen. letters, memos, calendars, etc.
ecovillage.org/). What better place to investigate whether a
community’s commitment to sustainability influences their I visited Brook, the forming ecovillage, more than 70
interactions with information tools than in a community of times for over 350 hours. The first few visits began in 2005
individuals who have made explicit commitments to develop and extended into a regular schedule throughout 2007 and
more sustainable lifestyles, look critically at their tool use, 2008. I camped in a tent on the property of Springhope,
and be a demonstration site, welcoming visitors who want to the established ecovillage, for two weeks in the fall of
learn about their efforts? 2008.

The first ecovillage to participate in the study, Brook Direct engagement with community members allowed
Ecovillage, was early in its development. Members were me to develop my identity within the communities, build
actively engaged in crafting policies, initiating building relationships, stumble into new understandings of what it
projects, and recruiting members. I chose a developing com- means to live in community, and experience the challenges
munity for this project precisely because members presented of defining and crafting a sustainable lifestyle. As stated by
themselves as founders, engaged in pivotal decision making Jackson, “one’s ethnographic understanding of others is
never arrived at in a neutral or disengaged manner, but is

2258 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—November 2012
DOI: 10.1002/asi

negotiated and tested in an ambiguous and stressful field of a state recognized for progressive politics, the 9,000 resi-
interpersonal relationships” (1998, p. 5). dents of this city have earned a reputation for an exception-
ally liberal political orientation. At the end of 2008, 14
At both communities I asked individuals older than 17 adults and two children were considered members of Brook.
years of age, who were recognized by the ecovillage as The adult members in 2008 were aged 40 years and older.
members, to participate in interviews. After receiving per- They came from a variety of professional backgrounds. A
mission from interviewees, I used digital audio recording few members were retired, but the majority held either part-
devices to capture ideas shared during these discussions. time or full-time paid positions. Job titles used to describe
Typically, the interviews lasted between an hour and an hour members’ professional lives included massage therapist,
and a half. Fourteen interviews were conducted in Brook professor, teacher, counselor, construction worker, pediatri-
Ecovillage and eight interviews in Springhope Ecovillage. cian, contractor, and translator-interpreter. The majority
Each interview covered topics regarding sustainability, of members owned personal computers and the community
living in a community, and use of information tools. In had its own website; however, many members expressed
addition, I asked individuals older than 17 years of age in dissatisfaction with the depth of their computer knowledge
both communities to fill out a survey regarding basic demo- throughout the project.
graphic information and details concerning information tool
ownership and use. The following excerpts come from members (pseudo-
nyms used) responding to a question asking how they
Analysis described Brook Ecovillage to people unfamiliar with
the community. The responses provide insight into how
Instead of looking for situations that are replicable or members viewed their community and the values they
in some ways identical, the communities investigated in associate with it.
this project were analyzed for “illustrative commonalities”
(Hoffman, 2004, p. 326). Although analysis was in part [Brook is] a group of people learning how to live more in
informed by the inductively oriented concepts introduced by harmony with each other and with the earth. We are doing it by
grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967), it is not possible developing in a way that demonstrates a more sustainable way
to begin a project without bringing the influence of theory of living by sharing resources and working together to try and
into the field. To be clear, use of the term “theory” in this limit our use of those resources. The goals of the ecovillage are
sense is “more in terms of repertoires than blueprints” to develop a community of people who do live in harmony using
(Snow, Morrill, & Anderson, 2003, p. 14). Thus, sociotech- Non Violent Communication. We have very specific techniques
nical theories on the interactional nature of our relationships for that. Using a process that really honors every voice which is
with information tools (e.g., Bjiker, 1995; Latour, 1992; our formal consensus process. Building a group of people who
Winograd & Flores, 1986) influenced the framing of the have tremendous diversity, both socioeconomic as well as a
project. However, it is critical to keep in mind that this work cultural, age, sexual preference. We really would like to have a
is primarily inductive in nature. Although academic litera- lot of human diversity because that way we get just better ideas
ture informed the initial framing of the study, the findings and a better mix of people. Then looking at the way we develop
developed first and foremost from themes that arose from our houses, it would be using low impact techniques, natural
the data. building techniques, having limits to the sizes of our personal
spaces and then sharing resources as much as possible. Like
Information practices that community members referred laundry facilities, like cars, so that we can really learn to use
to as sustainable were sought throughout the analysis. The fewer resources. (Conrad, Brook Ecovillage)
concrete steps of analysis took the form of an iterative
process of observation that led to an inductive analysis of Some people say that the world cannot really afford North
data, circling back to more observations and further analy- America and the North American lifestyle and at least from my
sis, following the analytic ethnography tradition (Lofland, perspective what I am trying to do is see if there is a way I can
1995; Snow et al., 2003). Data are presented and analyzed live more within the actual means of support within the planet
with the aim being to inform proposition and theory devel- and of the local region specifically and to do that joyously and
opment, both within this work and in future work. However, not think of it as a harsh and bitter circumstance but actually a
a key aspect of analytic ethnography is recognizing that return to a more joyful, more balanced, more peaceful and more
“because truth is elusive and error is legion, there is not a playful and more creative way of living. That has a lot to do
final word” (Lofland, 1995, p. 44). This perspective wel- with how one gets along with the people in the community. That
comes the clarifications, corrections, and elaboration that is obviously what part of that means, that you live with other
will evolve from discussions and debate about the work people in a cooperative way and you share resources rather than
itself and from future work in the area. everyone having their own dishwasher and washing machines
and cars, and I think ultimately it is to share amenities and
Findings: Brook Ecovillage and Sustainability resources so we use less and we use more efficiently the things
that we need to live. In the process, of course we have to be
Brook, the forming ecovillage, is located within a small better at communicating because we need to be able to handle,
city in the Pacific Northwest region of the United States. In to know how to handle conflict and develop an atmosphere of
trust rather than fear and competition, and it is that aspect that
I find very satisfying, that we are beginning to develop that
capability as a community—at least those of us who have been

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—November 2012 2259
DOI: 10.1002/asi

here for a while, when you deal with conflict in a skilful way that phrase instead of sustainability because most people in my
and come to resolution. (Joseph, Brook Ecovillage) experience don’t have a sense of what that means compared to
the phrasing of environmentally friendly. Then to actually
Note that the tool examples provided in the responses explain what that means I use a lot of examples to try and point
above include items such as cars, refrigerators, washing out just how different the lifestyle is here. I will explain that, as
machines, and other modern appliances. Computers, cell an example, we own three vehicles and those three vehicles are
phones, and other digital tools are not mentioned. The fact shared amongst 45 people. I live in a building that is 225 square
that members of Brook Ecovillage share a deep concern for feet which is basically my bedroom and my office and then I
the state of the environment and humans’ influence on the share my kitchen and my bathroom and basically my living
environment is not surprising. However, other less obvious room and other common spaces. All those other things are
concerns that emerge from villagers’ descriptions include a served by things that I share with other people. (Jordan, Spring-
desire to develop strong communication and conflict reso- hope Ecovillage)
lution skills within the community along with a wish for
supporting equality and diversity. Key to this project is the A group of people who have come together who are willing to, to
understanding that social, economic, and environmental sus- some extent, be the experiment of how you actually live sustain-
tainability concerns are tied together. ably in our culture. It is also an intentional community, which
means a group of people who live together for some kind of
Members of Brook felt passionate about their ideals and shared purpose. So, I live with a group of people in rural [state
were striving to become a groundbreaking site for sustain- removed] and we are building a village that we are hoping is
able living. They openly acknowledged the possibility that between 500 and 1,000 people eventually. It will be as sustain-
the endeavor might not be successful. They recognized that able as we can make it, not just ecologically, but also socially and
the ecovillage might not be able to attract enough members culturally. I really feel like this community has hit the sweet spot
to make it solvent over the long term. Rather than adopting between having a really clear set of ideals and a clear framework
a pessimistic outlook toward the future, members attempted that people have to live within in to be a member of the commu-
to be appreciative of opportunities that come from living in nity. Having a lot of freedom for creatively figuring out how to do
community: singing, working, eating, and celebrating their that where individuals are being able to do it in many, many
time together. different ways but there are still a clear set of guidelines for what
is happening. (Mary, Springhope Ecovillage)
Findings: Springhope Ecovillage and Sustainability
I think for a lot of people what they get out of being here is that,
Springhope, an established ecovillage, is located on 280 suddenly you are not the weirdo, you are not the oddball who is
acres in a small, rural town (with a population of 100) in the the only one who is caring about these things. Suddenly, here,
Midwestern United States. The area is primarily agricul- these things are just normal, so there is that level of support.
tural, meeting all preconceived notions of the American Where it is not that someone is helping you grow your food, all
Midwest with rolling hills, farmhouses, and fields of soy- you neighbours are growing their food too and that is just a
beans and corn. Approximately 45 people (adults and chil- normal thing. That is a big part of what makes, what helps make
dren) were residents of Springhope at the time of this this work is that you don’t feel that you are fighting against
project. The stated long-term goal of the ecovillage is to something all the time. (Carlo, Springhope Ecovillage)
grow to 500–1,000 people.
Once again modern information tools and practices are
The age range of Springhope was a bit broader than striking in their absence. Digital information tools are not
Brook, with some adult members in their early 20s and mentioned during these descriptions of sustainability and
many young children. In other ways (e.g., education level, ecovillage life. Similar to the voices from Brook, Spring-
socioeconomic status), the two ecovillages are quite similar. hope members describe their community and their interest in
Professional titles that community members held or previ- sustainability as being far more than a concern about envi-
ously held include massage therapist, teacher, consultant, ronmental sustainability. They wrap social and economic
counselor, construction worker, contractor, and farmer. sustainability into a broad, overarching concern about how
Many Springhope members had an active online presence humans structure their daily life. There is also a commonly
through work, entertainment, and community-related activi- voiced idea that there is not one way to live a lifestyle that
ties. The community-based web design business hosted a strives to be more sustainable. The founders of Springhope
prominent website, as does the community itself. Various set up a structure that they hoped would support a lifestyle
community members regularly contributed to a number of for groups of individuals who have a vast array of different
blogs, wikis, and photo and video sharing sites. needs and beliefs. They envisioned many different paths
leading to more sustainable practices.
Below are excerpts from interviews with Springhope
members (pseudonyms used) addressing how he or she Findings: Community Values
responded when asked to describe their community.
Both communities had engaged in extensive discussions
I say that I live in a community that is trying to live in as to develop descriptions of explicit community values (pro-
environmentally friendly a way as possible. I specifically use cesses described in detail in Nathan, 2009). For the purposes
of this work, it is important to note that the value of

2260 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—November 2012
DOI: 10.1002/asi

ecological sustainability is what drew many to initially join followed by a discussion suggesting that although the ten-
their community. However, for both ecovillages, social and sions identified are not unique to ecovillages, they appear to
economic values are critical for creating and maintaining be compounded by the complexity of information practice.
sustainable practice. Other named values that both commu- The analysis concludes with reflections on possible ways to
nities shared include diversity, trust, respect, equality, and reduce these tensions, explicitly calling for research that
responsibility. In addition, a regular discussion point at both contributes to the identification and perhaps even the design
communities was the idea that decision making at the com- of sustainable information practices.
munity level is influenced by whether people explicitly
reflect on community values during the decision-making Challenges of Material Forms
process.
Many of the difficulties described below arose from a
Findings: Information Practice Tensions deceptively simple point: The information practices dealt
with throughout this project handle information represented
Whether dealing with long-term decisions of governance in a material form (Buckland, 1991). Thus, the tools used to
or more immediate questions such as who must close the facilitate these practices have distinct material properties.
chicken coop for the night, an enormous amount of infor- Information can be represented by symbols carved into
mation was created, shared, saved, and sought throughout a wood, chipped into stone, set with ink, reflected by light
typical ecovillage day. Throughout the data, rather than beams, or various other mechanisms that have distinct mate-
identifying examples of sustainable information practice, rial features. Once created, information tools constrain the
one finds community members reflecting on the topic of forms of information they transmit. In turn, material prop-
breakdowns. The term “breakdown” is drawn upon in ways erties for both the information and the tool, whether digital
similar to the construct discussed by Winograd and Flores: or nondigital, place limits on practice. Findings from this
project suggest that material constraints can complicate, and
By this we mean the interrupted moment of our habitual, stan- even prohibit, explicit adaptation of information practices to
dard, comfortable “being-in-the-world.” Breakdowns serve an better meet a set of core values. In the following subsections,
extremely important cognitive function, revealing to us the issues tied to the material nature of information and infor-
nature of our practices and equipment, making them “present- mation tools are introduced, briefly discussed, and clarified
to-hand” to us, perhaps for the first time. (1986, pp. 77–78) through specific examples.

One can understand the concept of breakdown at the level Material Accessibility
of the individual. Consider the familiar example of the
breakdown that occurs when an individual attempts to pho- Making an information tool accessible can mean many
tocopy the page of an over-sized book on an unfamiliar (or things. First, we will consider technological access (rather
annoyingly familiar) photocopy machine. For the purpose of than physical, intellectual, or emotional access). In order for
this analysis, the term breakdown is used more broadly to ecovillage members to access the Internet, a substantial
suggest that there are breakdowns on a more collective level amount of material infrastructure is required. At the time of
because an accepted practice does not support the values of this project, ecovillage members needed electricity, tools
an entire community (Umble, 1996). capable of communicating with the Internet (e.g., a laptop or
desktop computer, modem, wires, etc.), and an Internet
The following analysis suggests that many information service provider (ISP). An ISP in turn needs a significant
practices, particularly those related to digital information amount of material resources to run their service (e.g.,
tools (e.g., e-mailing, word processing, wiki use), were not power, servers, modems).
seamless interactions for many community members. In
large part, these breakdowns occurred because of the ways As a specific example, at Springhope, one young man
that the practices either did not support or actively negated spent the 2007–2008 Midwestern winter (temperatures typi-
community values. Yet findings suggest that these break- cally below freezing) sleeping in a hammock strung between
downs rarely lead to active efforts to find or create a “fix.” two trees in a grove close to the village common house.
Rather, members continued to follow mainstream expecta- Although there were blue tarps draped over the hammock,
tions of practice (e.g., checking e-mail daily if not hourly) these served only to keep the snow off his sleeping bag and
because they felt that was the correct way to use the tool. blankets. He was concerned that building a more substantial
What is important to reflect on here is that one of the primary structure to sleep in would draw upon too many material
motivators for living in an ecovillage is to develop nonmain- resources. Yet this same individual required a laptop to
stream practices of interacting with modern tools that accomplish his software design work and to fully participate
support community values. Examples of nonmainstream, in matters of governance at Springhope (e.g., receive and
noninformation practices that villagers developed include send community e-mail). To use the laptop, to send infor-
sharing three vehicles among 45 people, using a refrigerator mation in a form through that tool, he needed access to an
as a solar food dryer, and composting human excrement. ISP and all of the material resources currently required to the
support the vast infrastructure of the global Internet (not to
The following sections lay out specific information prac-
tice tensions that arose throughout the study. These are

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—November 2012 2261
DOI: 10.1002/asi

mention a warm, dry place to store the laptop). This moti- For a surprisingly simple example, consider the garden
vated young man viewed sleeping in subzero temperatures ribbon system introduced during a growing season at Brook.
as an acceptable alternative practice, but saw no alternative Individuals tending the community vegetable gardens were
practices for supporting his digital information tool work. having problems sharing asynchronous information with
each other via e-mail (e.g., which garden beds needed water-
A second issue of material accessibility focuses attention ing). A few involved in managing the garden chores began to
on the material shape of digital information tools and is use wooden stakes tied with colored ribbons to signify dif-
related to physical access. The prevalent digital information ferent needs. At first, different colored ribbons signified one
tools for accessing the Internet at both communities were of two watering schedules (daily or bi-weekly) and perma-
laptops and desktops. To use the keyboards on both types of nent markers were used to add notations directly to the
machines, users adopted a small set of relatively static body ribbons (e.g., how much water). This initial ribbon use soon
postures. Often this translated into a slouched back, curved expanded. Ribbon colors were added to represent weeding
shoulders, and bent neck. A number of individuals from priorities and harvesting allotments. In a matter of weeks,
Springhope described debilitating back pain, severe eye- wooden stakes bedecked with plastic ribbons festooned the
strain, and repetitive stress injuries from prolonged key- gardens. Old ribbons were not taken down, new ones were
boarding while engaging in community-related information added, and soon members found it easier to ignore the
practices (e.g., developing proposals, e-mailing, checking ribbons and hunt down the garden manager than to attempt
the community wiki). One member described in detail how to decode the rainbow of ribbons on each wooden stake.
symptoms related to her chronic illness would flare up,
causing her to suffer extreme nausea if she read from a Too much information, conflicting information, and no
computer screen (e.g., to keep up with a community e-mail way to easily determine which information was relevant
thread). During these periods, she would be cut off from any were all issues that community members complained about.
community decisions, social gatherings, or other items asso- There were also disgruntled comments concerning the use
ciated with this digital tool. of so much plastic throughout the verdant gardens. Not
surprisingly, too much information and an inability to
The third issue related to material accessibility identifies easily determine the relevance of the information were
roadblocks to participation facing community members who more common challenges in the realm of digital informa-
did not own a computer. As one example, for over a year a tion, particularly e-mail. Community members complained
member of Brook was dependent upon the local library for that they were simply faced with too much e-mail and that
her personal computer use. This severely limited her ability they did not have an effective way of filtering out unnec-
to keep up with and actively engage in issues of governance essary information.
that were shared over e-mail (e.g., proposals, committee
discussions) and to learn about social events shared through Proposal development, visitor announcements, agenda
the same medium. Although villagers spoke heatedly about posting, event notifications, and intermember communica-
their frustration with issues of material access in relation to tion were a few of the daily information practices in which
digital information tools, Drew, a member of Brook, e-mail played a major role at both communities. Interest-
expressed a commonly held belief: ingly, the same members that bemoaned that they were over-
whelmed by e-mail’s prevalence in community life stated
I think everyone who is doing anything organizing these days is that it was by far the most efficient tool for sharing infor-
relying heavily on e-mail. Any organization that is trying to get mation among community members.
anything done is using e-mail. Some people probably function
better with e-mail than others. . . . But the organization is According to members of both communities, the promi-
relying heavily on e-mail for its communication, just the infor- nent feature of e-mail is that it makes it possible to send
mational stuff. information to all members or to select particular members
with a quick “click” of an icon. The ability to send informa-
Drew’s overall argument was based on the premise that if tion quickly was described as both a positive and a negative
Brook Ecovillage wanted to run as a well-functioning, aspect of e-mail, similar to how it is discussed outside of
modern organization, it would have to use e-mail and would ecovillages. For example, e-mails are quick and easy to send
consequently be bound by its associated constraints. Recall (and have no recall feature), thus easily leading to embar-
that both communities wanted to serve as forward-thinking rassing mistakes. Community members also acknowledged
demonstration sites; they were not isolationist or Luddite. that sending a message via e-mail does not mean that the
intended recipient will read it. Quickly sent does not equate
Too Much: Material Overload to quickly read. However, the assumption of quickly read
was prevalent. Discourse at meetings suggested that
Once an information tool began to be used by members members were expected to check e-mail daily, if not mul-
of an ecovillage, it did not take long before the tool was used tiple times during the day. There were a few members of
to create, manipulate, share, and store a great deal of infor- both ecovillages unable or unwilling to do this. These indi-
mation, more than some members felt capable of handling. viduals were considered to have deviant practices. In other
This observation was not limited to digital information tools. words, they did not use e-mail “well.” For example, Julia, a
member of Springhope, expressed a mixture of frustration

2262 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—November 2012
DOI: 10.1002/asi

and awe when describing another member’s e-mail practice, express hope that in the future the community would figure
saying, “John just deletes shit. Like he won’t read his e-mail out what to do with the tools that would be in keeping with
for two or three weeks and then he just deletes like 60 an ethos of sustainability. Keep in mind that these tools
messages. I can’t conceive of that.” were rarely broken. Many were still capable of working in
the way they were designed, but because of issues of
Another telling example of information overload tension speed, interoperability, or weight, they were deemed to no
becomes apparent through juxtaposing two separate interac- longer work well enough.
tions concerning e-mail at Brook. Both conversations
included Greta, who was working in the main vegetable Members of both communities expressed frustration over
garden one summer afternoon. The descriptions below high- not having a solid understanding of the physical nature of
light how Greta felt overwhelmed by e-mail and knew others their information tools. They were not sure of the options to
were similarly unable to keep up with their e-mail, but still recycle, reuse, repurpose, or get rid of these materials
believed daily e-mail use to be the information practice of (digital or nondigital tools). Nor was there clarity on where
choice for the community. Note Greta’s attitude toward exactly digital information tool items went when they were
checking and reading e-mail in the two conversations. recycled. At Springhope, conversations concerning recy-
cling digital information tools often went in a circular
Interaction 1: pattern as no one expressed confidence on exactly which
items could be recycled, where, and what happened to the
Sandra: Did you hear about my move? materials during the process. The stockpiling of dated digital
Greta (Brook): Nope. information tools appeared to be a particularly common
Sandra: Oh. You don’t read your e-mail? information practice at both communities. Neither commu-
Greta: Usually, but not lately. nity had models to draw on to gain ideas for alternative
Sandra: I sent out a message over e-mail over a month ago. practices.
Greta: I have been on vacation, I must not have read it.
Lacking Models: Portrayals of Sustainable Digital
Interaction 2: Information Practice
Later the same day, after taking a break, Greta recounted
her chat with another garden worker. Greta explained that As mentioned earlier, part of the rationale for ecovillag-
the woman had appeared a bit “lost.” Greta learned that this ers living together is to collaboratively develop, share, and
woman had not read the garden update e-mail and did not model more sustainable practices. In the words of Jana, a
know where to begin to work. Greta stated that she did not member at Brook,
want to appear “righteous,” but she felt that the woman
should really keep up with e-mail. In some very specific ways lifestyle choices, resource use
These two exchanges involving Greta highlight a choices are modeled by people. A good example and a story I
common tension in both communities. Members would often tell is . . . at one of the first summer workshops I went to
complain that they found it difficult to “keep up” with their there were a lot of people and we needed some extra food and
e-mail, but would also express frustration because others some ingredients for a meal we were planning. Alina jumped on
were unable to “keep up” with e-mail. This tension was not her bike and went to the co-op and I would probably have
directly addressed. Again, the absence of alternative practice jumped in my car and went to the co-op, just out of habit and
is striking in comparison to the number of community-level figuring there was some kind of rush, and we just needed to get
alternative practices developed for using noninformation it. So that is a very specific example of lifestyle changes that are
tools. modeled by members of the ecovillage that make it easier for
me to move toward to that kind of more sustainable
Material Unknowns transportation.

Material features of an information tool influence The modeling of daily practices happens through casual
whether and how it can be reused or repurposed. For in-person interactions as well as through ecovillage “how-
example, connectors hardwired to a device constrain which to” books and various types of outreach information such
devices are able to connect with it (unless you know as community websites and workshops. One of the analy-
enough about the materials to hack together workarounds). ses for this project took the form of a thematic coding of
In addition, an understanding of an information tool’s images from a popular text on ecovillage life (Jackson &
physical components and the materials it is made from is Svensson, 2002). Throughout the book one finds photos of
essential for determining whether parts of it can be villagers engaged in a range of practices in support of
recycled or need special handling as hazardous materials. ecovillage values. These include using hand tools for
Often unknowns concerning a tool’s physical properties tilling soil, building dwellings from earthen materials,
lead to the all too familiar practice of stockpiling. Placing using hand pumps to draw water, and installing solar
a tool on a shelf, in a drawer, or at the back of a storage panels to capture and collect energy. One gets a strong
locker was a common practice found in both communities. sense of particular practices that are deemed emblematic of
When queried about these stockpiles, individuals would ecovillage values.

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—November 2012 2263
DOI: 10.1002/asi

Throughout the book’s 288 beautiful, glossy images, both ecovillages stated that they did not know how their
there is only one picture of a person working on a computer. practice of engaging in e-mail for hours every day related
Why is this part of daily ecovillage life almost invisible? Is to issues of environmental sustainability. Because of the
this lone image a result of the book’s 2002 publishing date, interdependent nature of information tools and their lack
somewhat early in the era of personal computers and the of knowledge about how the tools that existed offsite
Internet? Personal recollections from Springhope members operated, they felt constrained in making decisions that
corroborated by early community documents suggest that supported ecovillage values.
many ecovillages were using personal computers on a daily
basis in the early 2000s. Interestingly, it is through Spring- It is a piece of data that I feel is missing from my life, what is
hope’s community website that one is again struck by the the true ecological cost of a computer, a cellphone, a server, the
absence of images that show people interacting with digital Internet in general? What is my share of the Internet? Even if
information tools. In June of 2009, within Springhope’s you just look at the wires, the data centers, the hubs, switches all
extensive website, individual pages were filled with dozens of the—not even what is in peoples’ homes, just the infrastruc-
upon dozens of high-quality digital images. ture to support it. I don’t feel like I know the answer to that.
(Carlo, Springhope)
Similar to the ecovillage book from 2002, villagers were
portrayed gardening, planting trees, sowing wild grass Often, the term “ecological footprint” would enter the
seeds, and building structures from earthen materials (e.g., conversation when ecovillage members (at both communi-
straw, sand, and mud). Of the dozens of laptops, personal ties) discussed their lifestyle choices. Ecological footprint is
digital assistants (PDAs), and cellphones on the property, a term used to describe how much area (land and/or water)
not a single one was found on the website. Observations, is needed to support the resources needed to manufacture,
interviews, and self-reports from the project survey suggest use, and dispose of a product or service (Global Footprint
that members of Springhope used digital information tools Network, n.d.). Conversations at both villages raised ques-
on a daily basis, yet these interactions were essentially invis- tions concerning the material properties of various informa-
ible in pictorial representations of ecovillage practices. tion tools in terms of the ecological costs of material
manufacture, their toxicity, and whether the tools were reus-
Of note, during the same month in 2009, one page of able or recyclable. During individual interviews at both
Springhope’s website included a wish list of items that sup- Brook and Springhope, members revealed that they did not
porters of the community could contribute. The majority of have a clear idea of the ecological footprint of their digital
these 100+ items fit well with the practices depicted through information tools. They had a hunch that the footprint was
the website images: how-to books, axes, drills, seedlings, significant. Other than discouraging desktops at Springhope
canning/preserving equipment, bikes, and bike parts. (in favor of less energy-consuming laptops), I found little
However, the first five items listed were: evidence of sustained attempts to better understand and
perhaps improve the ecological footprint of digital informa-
1. Laptop computers (Mac or PC) tion tools used at either village. Longstanding members at
2. Ethernet cables, cards and hub both communities noted that as prices dropped, more digital
3. General office supplies information tools were appearing. When the topic of the
4. PDAs (CE) ecological footprint of digital information tools came up,
5. Printers shoulders were shrugged over the complexity of the factors
involved.
Whereas ecovillagers were exposed to many visual rep-
resentations of sustainable practices (for building homes, Discussion: Tyranny of the Norm1
gardening, cooking, etc.), absent were portrayals of digital
information practices that actively support ecovillage A careful reader may note that in the Methodology
values. section, I suggested that I chose the two ecovillage sites
specifically to position myself to be able to look for simi-
Complex Costs of Practice larities and differences between the two communities (one
still forming and the other more established). The differ-
Although some may conceptualize ecovillages as repre- ences were few and receive little space in this article. The
senting a nostalgic return to a less technologically dependent similarities between the sites were very strong and informed
lifestyle, daily activities were tightly tied to the 21st century the themes above. In addition, many readers may find that
technological infrastructure of computing devices, modems, they too relate to the themes above, regardless of whether
cables, massive server farms, and all of the resources that they live in an ecovillage. The striking factor is that these
these tools depend upon.
1Helen Nissenbaum (2004) uses this phrase to critique her own
This adherence to modern technology leads to another approach to address the ethical quandaries of determining privacy infringe-
area where the use of e-mail provides an illustrative ments. Here, the term is being used broadly to call out the oppressive power
example of value tensions. E-mail is tightly connected to inherent in societal norms.
the intertwined and difficult-to-measure material and
energy costs of modern information systems. Members at

2264 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—November 2012
DOI: 10.1002/asi

individuals lived in an ecovillage but were unable to come security and maintain privacy through having one’s own
up with practices for interacting with information tools that computer. For a second example, imagine that you want to
they felt were sustainable (ecologically, socially, or eco- cut down on the amount of technical infrastructure you
nomically). Instead, they felt compelled to follow main- depend on when using an e-mail application. Perhaps you
stream practice. Referring back to the definition of only want to draw upon green Internet service providers and
information practice, recall the claim that an information server farms. At this point in time, it not only takes a great
practice is a collectively recognized and negotiated activity. deal of knowledge and skill to understand the various paths
Following from that claim, in order for others to understand that a single e-mail may take, but it is not possible to control
your use of information tools, they have to hold a shared that path to avoid pulling on particular points of the infra-
understanding of how the tool is used. structure of interconnected modems, servers, wires, etc.
These examples suggest that developing more sustainable
The Resiliency of Information Practice practices can be difficult to conceptualize for those who do
not have the knowledge and skills to create innovative prac-
This project investigated broad questions related to sus- tices with these interdependent tools.
tainability and information practice. How does a community
explicitly trying to develop more sustainable lifestyles adapt In large part, ecovillagers decided to live together to
their information practices to better fit their values? Do they support each other in developing lifestyles that push against
form a specific type of information ecology, one that is mainstream norms. Yet findings from this project suggest
oriented towards issues of sustainability? The work suggests that there was little support for shifting their information
that ecovillagers did not adapt their information practices in practices. I found no evidence of ecovillagers drawing on
ways significantly different from the rest of modern society. resources instructing them how to participate in alternative
In the following paragraphs, an argument is constructed that uses of information tools similar to what is available for
information practices, once established, are particularly other tools. The complexity related to the material nature of
resilient and resistant to change. To actively reflect on and information tools, their form, substance, and how they work
potentially adapt our information practices, we need to (e.g., the infrastructure) made it particularly difficult for
increase our competence and sophistication in using these ecovillage members who do not consider themselves digi-
tools. tally proficient to appropriate these devices in ways they felt
were more sustainable.
Knowledge, Skills, and Models for Becoming
Information Adept Interestingly, the barriers to developing more sustainable
information practices are tied to visibility. There is a striking
Although information tools are embedded into our daily absence of information concerning the material costs of
lives, this does not mean that they are intuitive to use. digital information tools within the ecovillage literature. In
Developing the knowledge and skills to reflectively and cre- addition, visual portrayals of sustainable information prac-
atively use these devices is nontrivial. Compared with other tices were not found through the ecovillage websites or a
tools that village members used on a daily basis (e.g., cars, “how-to” text on ecovillage life. Although ecovillagers are
bicycles, ovens), the complexity involved in developing and exposed to multiple examples of sustainable ways of using
maintaining the knowledge and skills needed to engage in other types of tools to build homes, garden, cook, govern,
creative information practice was perceived as much etc., there is little information to be gleaned from the ecov-
greater. The majority of village members at Brook dis- illage literature on developing sustainable patterns of use in
cussed their knowledge and familiarity with digital infor- relation to their digital information tools. Having a role
mation tools in disparaging terms. Those at Springhope model who demonstrates sustainable information practices
were more mixed in their self-evaluations, in large part would encourage members to believe that shifting one’s
because a few village members felt they were heavily information practice is in the range of the possible. Without
involved with computers (primarily in terms of website a role model, members are only left with examples of main-
design). However, even at Springhope individuals expressed stream practices.
frustration because of inadequate information tool knowl-
edge and skill. Trying to adapt practices without role models, making
choices not supported by mainstream infrastructures, and
Consider the difference between sharing a car (pre-GIS juggling issues of a material nature are barriers for people
installations) and sharing a personal computing device. The across North America.
types of information that one has on a computer (files,
e-mail account information, banking information) and the Limitations
transferability of these digital files has far more potential for
security and privacy intrusions than the items one typically Going into this project I was aware of the limitations to
keeps in a car. For the majority of community members, ethnographically informed projects, particularly when
setting up a secure profile on a shared computer is not a undertaken by a single researcher. However, studying infor-
known skill and it was viewed as far simpler to achieve mation practices in a communal home environment limited
the study in ways I did not anticipate. Throughout the project
I attempted to balance a respectful relationship with project

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—November 2012 2265
DOI: 10.1002/asi

participants with my desire to collect more information A second contribution of this work is that it offers the
about community life. As relationships deepened, a number field of information science an example of a longitudinal
of difficulties arose. ethnography of information tool use outside the workplace.
The work can be drawn upon in the following ways:
The one I highlight here is the issue of privacy. Privacy
concerns directly influenced the amount and types of data I • As a methodological learning tool, particularly for those
collected and the selection of data for analysis and reporting. wishing to conduct in-depth field work in a non-work
Privacy concerns became particularly salient during my time environment
at Brook. As more people moved into Brook’s common
house, the difficulty of maintaining personal privacy became • As a description of two communities focused on issues of
a frequent topic among members. Those living in the sustainability, a burgeoning interest area within the field
common house shared the kitchen, dining areas, sitting
areas, one washing machine, and two bathrooms. Not sur- • To facilitate future longitudinal studies of information
prisingly, the number of drop-in guests increased as more practices by highlighting the difficulties of such work,
members moved into the common house. Initially, I thought particularly in home environments.
that over time, as trust built, more data collection activities
(e.g., information tool “tours” of individuals’ personal living The third area of contribution, and one that points most
spaces) would be easier to initiate. Instead, developing rela- clearly to future work, is that the project highlights chal-
tionships with community members increased my sensitivity lenges to information practice adaptation that the field of
to my own probing presence. I grew reluctant to add to information science is well poised to address. Bounded by
members’ concerns regarding their lack of privacy by asking the social and technical infrastructure needed for informa-
for more access to their personal space (virtual or physical). tion tool use on one side and a lack of examples of alterna-
A similar concern for maintaining personal privacy existed tive ways of working with these tools on the other,
at Springhope. While I was staying on the property, other ecovillage community members faced large obstacles to
visitors included extended family members, interns, a tele- envisioning alternatives. There are innumerable ways that
vision film crew, and a group of touring musicians. ongoing and future work of information science educators,
designers, and researchers can help address this lack.
In hindsight, my assumptions entering the field sites seem
particularly naïve, but I would argue that they are common Community members acknowledge that they are moti-
for an academic focused on increasing the amount and types vated through exposure to alternative choices, particularly
of data for research and publication purposes. Through when these options are supported by research. If community
caring relationships with community members, I was con- members are interested in designing and building sustain-
stantly reminded that I was also an invited guest in commu- able housing, setting up unconventional ownership agree-
nal living environment. ments, or improving face to face communication practices,
then they have a number of resources to draw upon (e.g.,
Contributions and Future Work how-to manuals, texts, academic articles, seminars, work-
shops, documentaries). Many of these resources report
The most evolved types of responses are the processes of social sound practices based on empirical research. Yet for infor-
adaptations, through which the individual organism and the mation practices, ecovillagers found it much harder to locate
group modify either their environment or their habits, or both, data to help them discern which actions are likely to be more
in order to achieve a way of life better suited to their needs and sustainable on a variety of fronts.
tastes. (Dubos, 1965, p. 261)
Future work needs to focus on developing policies and
When first conceptualizing this project, I was inspired by educational programs that raise our level of technological
Nardi and O’Day’s book, Information Ecologies: Using savvy, particularly in terms of conceptualizing what sustain-
Technology With Heart (1999). I found their claim that it is ability looks like in relation to the long-term consequences
possible for groups of individuals to change practices and of our interactions with information tools. In combination,
policies to develop “appropriate uses of technology in light information science, human–computer interaction, and par-
of our local practices, goals and values” (p. ix) a deeply ticipatory research approaches can help citizens develop
empowering and persuasive idea. This work set out to see if practices that reduce negative ecological, economic, and
there was evidence of people reflecting on their values and social impacts of our information practices.
goals and using that reflection to adapt their information
practices to better support their goals. The first contribution Conclusion: The Challenge of Sustainable
of this work is that it provides evidence that stands in stark Information Practice
opposition to Nardi and O’Day’s claim, at least in terms of
contemporary information tools. The findings strongly This project is concerned with the long-term influence of
suggest that an explicit focus on values is not enough for a our practices using digital information tools, the systems we
community of individuals to significantly alter their infor- draw upon “to be” in the world (Winograd & Flores, 1986).
mation tool use away from mainstream practices. It calls into question our ability to explicitly influence these
practices. If we identify certain information practices as
problematic, how can we consciously and collectively adapt
them to better support the values we hold important?

2266 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—November 2012
DOI: 10.1002/asi

As a result of this work, I take the position that sustain- and Software, 17(1), 7–14. Retrieved October 3, 2011 from http://
able information practices—the socially negotiated patterns www.itu.dk/courses/MOSP/F2011/papers/friedman92.pdf
of behaviour through which we create, change, share, and Friedman, B., Kahn, P.H., Jr., & Borning, A. (2006). Value sensitive design
store information—stand apart from many of our other daily and information systems. In P. Zhang & D. Galetta (Eds.), Human-
practices. As information professionals, it is imperative that computer interaction and management information systems?: Founda-
we develop and inform the knowledge base, skills, technical tions (pp. 348–372). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
infrastructure, and sociocultural framings (what is seen as Friedman, B., & Nathan, L.P. (2010). Multi-lifespan information system
possible) required to identify, develop, and support informa- design?: A research initiative for the HCI community. In Proceedings of
tion practices that meet today’s needs while also allowing the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing
future generations to meet their needs. Systems (CHI ’10) (pp. 2243–2246). New York: ACM.
Friedman, B., & Nissenbaum, H. (1996). Bias in computer systems. ACM
Acknowledgment Transactions on Information Systems, 14(3), 330–347.
Froehlich, J., Dillahunt, T., Klasnja, P., Mankoff, J., Consolvo, S., Harrison,
The author would like to thank the ecovillage members B., & Landay, J. (2009). UbiGreen: Investigating a mobile tool for
for their generosity, patience, and friendship. tracking and supporting green transportation habits. In Proceedings of
the 27th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing
References Systems (CHI ’09) (pp. 1043–1052). New York: ACM.
Froehlich, J., Findlater, L., & Landay, J. (2010). The design of
Bang, J.M. (2005). Ecovillages: A practical guide to sustainable communi- eco-feedback technology. In Proceedings of the 28th International Con-
ties. Gabriola Island, BC, Canada: New Society Publishers. ference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’10) (pp. 1999–
2008). New York: ACM.
Bang, M., Gustafsson, A., & Katzeff, C. (2007). Promoting new patterns in Gilman, R., & Gilman, D. (1990). Ecovillages and sustainable communi-
household energy consumption with pervasive learning games. Lecture ties: A report for Gaia Trust. Bainbridge Island, WA: Context Institute.
Notes in Computer Science, 4744, 55–63. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory
strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co.
Barnes, B. (2001). Practice as collective action. In T.R. Schatzki, K. Knorr Global Footprint Network. (n.d.). At a glance. Retrieved from http://
Cetina, & E. von Savigny (Eds.), The practice turn in contemporary www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/at_a_glance/
theory (pp. 17–28). New York: Routledge. Goodman, E. (2009). Three environmental discourses in human-computer
interaction. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference
Baumer, E.P.S., & Silberman, M.S. (2011). When the implication is not to Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA
design (technology). In Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on ’09) (pp. 2535–2544). New York: ACM.
Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’11) (pp. 2271–2274). New Grossman, E. (2006). High tech trash: Digital devices, hidden toxics, and
York: ACM. human health. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Hayes, J.R., Sheedy, J.E., Stelmack, J.A., & Heaney, C.A. (2007). Com-
Bijker, W.E. (1995). Of bicycles, Bakelites, and bulbs: Toward a theory of puter use, symptoms, and quality of life. Optometry & Vision Science,
sociotechnical change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 84(4), 738–745.
Hirsch, T., & Anderson, K. (2010). Cross currents: Water scarcity and
Blevis, E. (2007). Sustainable interaction design: Invention & disposal, sustainable HCI. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference
renewal & reuse. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI
Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’07) (pp. 91–100). New York: ACM. EA’10) (pp. 2843–2852). New York: ACM.
Hoffman, D. (2004). The submerged promise: Strategies for ethnographic
Brown, S.L. (2002). Intentional community: An anthropological perspec- writing in a time of war. Anthropological Quarterly, 77(2), 323–330.
tive. Albany: State University of New York Press. Housel, T.H. (2006). Solar panels, shovels and the ‘Net?: Selective uses of
technology in the homesteading movement. Information, Communica-
Buckland, M.K. (1991). Information as thing. Journal of the American tion & Society, 9(02), 182–201.
Society for Information Science, 42(5), 351–360. Jackson, H., & Svensson, K. (Eds.). (2002). Ecovillage living: Restoring the
Earth and her people. Devon, UK: Green Books Ltd.
Chen, A., Dietrich, K.N., Huo, X., & Ho, S. (2011). Developmental neu- Jackson, M. (1998). Minima ethnographica: Intersubjectivity and the
rotoxicants in e-waste: An emerging health concern. Environmental anthropological project. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Health Perspectives, 119(4), 431–438. Kahn, P.H., Jr., Friedman, B., Gill, B., Hagman, J., Severson, R.L., Freier,
N., Feldman, E.N., Carrere, S., & Stolyar, A. (2008). A plasma display
Chitewere, T. (2006). Constructing a green lifestyle: Consumption and window? The shifting baseline problem in a technologically mediated
environmentalism in an ecovillage (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). natural world. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28(2), 192–
State University of New York at Binghamton. 199.
Kahn, P.H., Jr., Severson, R.L., & Ruckert, J.H. (2009). The human relation
DiSalvo, C., Sengers, P., & Brynjarsdóttir, H. (2010). Mapping the land- with nature and technological nature. Current Directions in Psychologi-
scape of sustainable HCI. In Proceedings of the 28th International cal Science, 18(1), 37–42.
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’10) (pp. Kaufman, S.J. (2011). Rebound effects in sustainable HCI. In Proceedings
1975–1984). New York: ACM. of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems (CHI ’11) Workshop Paper. Retrieved from http://www.
Dourish, P., & Anderson, K. (2006). Collective information practice: jamesjpierce.com/CHI-2011//papers/kaufman.pdf
Exploring privacy and security as social and cultural phenomena. Kautiainen, S., Koivusilta, L., Lintonen, T., Virtanen, S.M., & Rimpelä, A.
Human-Computer Interaction Journal, 21(3), 319–342. (2005). Use of information and communication technology and preva-
lence of overweight and obesity among adolescents. International
Dubos, R. (1965). Man adapting (rev. ed.). New Haven: Yale University Journal of Obesity, 29(8), 925–933.
Press. Kirby, A. (2003). Redefining social and environmental relations at the
ecovillage at Ithaca: A case study. Journal of Environmental Psychology,
Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Report to Congress on server 23(3): 323–332.
and datacenter energy efficiency. Retrieved from http://www.energystar.
gov/ia/partners/prod_development/downloads/EPA_Datacenter_Report_
Congress_Final1.pdf

Flanagan, M., Howe, D.C., & Nissenbaum, H. (2005). Values at play?:
Design tradeoffs in socially-oriented game design. In Proceedings of
the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
(CHI ’05) (pp. 751–760). New York: ACM.

Friedman, B., & Kahn, P.H., Jr. (1992). Human agency and responsible
computing: Implications for computer system design. Journal of Systems

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—November 2012 2267
DOI: 10.1002/asi

Klasnja, P., Consolvo, S., Jung, J., Greenstein, B.M., LeGrand, L., O’Driscoll, M.P., Brough, P., Timms, C., & Sawang, S. (2010). Engagement
Powledge, P., & Wetherall, D. (2009). “When I am on Wi-Fi, I am with information and communication technology and psychological
fearless”: Privacy concerns & practices in everyday Wi-Fi use. In Pro- well-being. In D.L. Ganster & P.L. Perrewe (Eds.), New developments in
ceedings of the 27th International Conference on Human Factors in theoretical and conceptual approaches to job stress (Vol. 8, pp. 269–316).
Computing Systems (CHI ’09) (pp. 1993–2002). New York: ACM. Bingley, UK: Emerald.

Kling, R., Rosenbaum, H., & Sawyer, S. (2005). Understanding and com- Pan, Y., & Blevis, E. (2011). What if sustainable HCI doesn’t work (well
municating social informatics: A framework for studying and teaching enough)? Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors
the human contexts of information and communication technologies. in Computing Systems (CHI ‘11) Workshop Paper. Retrieved from http://
Medford, NJ: Information Today, Inc. www.jamesjpierce.com/CHI-2011//papers/pan.pdf

Kuznetsov, S., Davis, G., Cheung, J., & Paulos, E. (2011). Ceci n’est pas Pergams, O.R.W., & Zaradic, P.A. (2006). Is love of nature in the
une pipe bombe: Authoring urban landscapes with air quality sensors. In US becoming love of electronic media? 16-year downtrend in national
Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Com- park visits explained by watching movies, playing video games, internet
puting Systems (CHI ’11) (pp. 2375–2384). New York: ACM. use, and oil prices. Journal of Environmental Management, 80(4),
387–393.
Latour, B. (1992). Where are the missing masses? The sociology of a few
mundane artifacts. In W.E. Bijker & J. Law (Eds.), Shaping technology/ Punamäki, R.-L., Wallenius, M., Nygård, C.-H., Saarni, L., & Rimpelä, A.
building society?: Studies in sociotechnical change (pp. 225–258). Cam- (2007). Use of information and communication technology (ICT) and
bridge, MA: MIT Press. perceived health in adolescence: The role of sleeping habits and waking-
time tiredness. Journal of Adolescence, 30(4), 569–585.
Le Dantec, C.A., Poole, E.S., & Wyche, S.P. (2009). Values as lived expe-
rience: Evolving value sensitive design in support of value discovery. In Robinson, B.H. (2009). E-waste: An assessment of global production and
Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Human Factors in environmental impacts. Science of the Total Environment, 408(2), 183–
Computing Systems (CHI ’09) (pp. 1141–1150). New York: ACM. 191.

Lofland, J. (1995). Analytic ethnography: Features, failings, and futures. Savolainen, R. (2007). Information behavior and information practice:
Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 24(1), 30–67. Reviewing the “umbrella concepts” of information-seeking studies.
Library Quarterly, 77(2), 109–132.
Louv, R. (2005). Last child in the woods: Saving our children from nature-
deficit disorder. Chapel Hill: Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill. Snow, D.A., Morrill, C., & Anderson, L. (2003). Elaborating analytic
ethnography: Linking fieldwork and theory. Ethnography, 4(2), 181–
Lutzenhiser, L. (1993). Social and behavioral aspects of energy use. Annual 200.
Review of Energy and the Environment, 18, 247–289.
Sparrow, B., Liu, J., & Wegner, D.M. (2011). Google effects on memory:
Lutzenhiser, L. (2008). Greening the economy from the bottom up? Cognitive consequences of having information at our fingertips. Science,
Lessons in consumption from the energy case. In M. Biggert (Ed.), 333(6043), 776–778.
Readings in economic sociology (pp. 345–356). Oxford, UK: Blackwell
Publishers. Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-
machine communication. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mankoff, J., Matthews, D., Fussell, S., & Johnson, M. (2007). Leveraging
social networks to motivate individuals to reduce their ecological foot- Tainter, J.A. (2011). Resources and cultural complexity: Implications for
prints. 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences sustainability. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences, 30(1–2), 24–34.
(HICSS’07). Retrieved from http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/
HICSS.2007.325 Thomée, S., Dellve, L., Härenstam, A., & Hagberg, M. (2010). Perceived
connections between information and communication technology use
McKenzie, P.J. (2003). A model of information practices in accounts of and mental symptoms among young adults—A qualitative study. BMC
everyday-life information seeking. Journal of Documentation, 59(1), Public Health, 10(1), 66.
19–40.
Tomlinson, B. (2010). Greening through IT: Information technology for
Miller, J. K., Friedman, B., Jancke, G., & Gill, B. (2007). Value tensions in environmental sustainability. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
design: The value sensitive design, development, and appropriation of a
corporation’s groupware system. In Proceedings of the 2007 Interna- Tomlinson, B., Silberman, M.S., & White, J. (2011). Can more efficient IT
tional ACM Conference on Supporting Group Work (GROUP ’07) (pp. be worse for the environment? Computer, 1(44), 87–89.
281–290). New York: ACM.
Umble, D.Z. (1996). Holding the line: The telephone in Old Order Men-
Nardi, B.A., & O’Day, V.L. (1999). Information ecologies: Using technol- nonite and Amish life. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
ogy with heart. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2011).
Nathan, L.P. (2009). Ecovillages, sustainability, and information tools: An Reflection and analysis by UNESCO on the Internet. Retrieved from
ethnography of values, adaptation, and tension (Unpublished doctoral http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002110/211062e.pdf
dissertation). University of Washington, Seattle.
Winograd, T., & Flores, F. (1986). Understanding computers and cognition:
Nathan, L.P., Friedman, B., & Hendry, D G. (2009). Information system A new foundation for design. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
design as catalyst: Human action and environmental sustainability. Inter-
actions, 16(4), 6–11. Woodruff, A., Hasbrouck, J., & Augustin, S. (2008). A bright green per-
spective on sustainable choices. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual
Nathan, L.P., Friedman, B., Klasnja, P., Kane, S.K., & Miller, J.K. (2008). SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI
Envisioning systemic effects on persons and society throughout interac- ’08) (pp. 313–322). New York: ACM.
tive system design. In Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Conference on
Designing Interactive Systems (DIS ’08) (pp. 1–10). New York: ACM. World Bank. (n.d.). Internet users. Retrieved from http://data.
worldbank.org/indicator/IT.NET.USER
Nissenbaum, H. (2004). Privacy as contextual integrity. Washington Law
Review, 79(1), 119–158. World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our
common future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and
Nolin, J. (2010). Sustainable information and information science. Infor- Development. Geneva, Switzerland: Oxford University Press.
mation Research, 15(2). Retrieved from http://informationr.net/ir/15–2/
paper431.html Yan, Z., Hu, L., Chen, H., & Lu, F. (2008). Computer Vision Syndrome: A
widely spreading but largely unknown epidemic among computer users.
Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 2026–2042.

2268 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—November 2012
DOI: 10.1002/asi


Click to View FlipBook Version