A Digital Knowledge Ecosystem to Increase Participation in Emergency Warnings and Alerts Management

  • Paloma Díaz
  • Teresa Onorati
  • Ignacio Aedo
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10232)


Early warning contributes to reduce the damages when updated and reliable information is collected before a hazard happens, so that early response can be orchestrated. Integrating volunteers and citizens into data collection can help to get a better picture of the situation, since they are intelligent sensors equipped with mobile devices that can be used everywhere to collect and share information. In this paper we discuss the architecture of a digital knowledge ecosystem to support such participatory early warning process. This DKE deals with a complex knowledge coproduction problem by separating information according to its meaning, quality and reliability. The use of technological tools is aimed at supporting a self-organized, scalable and sustainable process. The different agents and interactions involved and some design requirements are drawn from a use case in the context of the Spanish early warning system.


Emergency management Citizen’s participation Technology acceptance models  



This work is supported by the project PACE grant funded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitivity (TIN2016-77690-R).


  1. 1.
    Briscoe, G.: Complex adaptive digital ecosystems. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Management of Emergent Digital EcoSystems, pp. 39–46. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Petak, W.J.: Emergency management: a challenge for public administration. Publ. Adm. Rev. 45, 3–7 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Oliver-Smith, A., Hoffman, S.M.: Theorizing disasters: nature, power and culture. In: Oliver-Smith, A. (ed.) Catastrophe and Culture: The Anthropology of Disaster. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Turoff, M., Chumer, M., Van de Walle, B., Yao, X.: The design of a dynamic emergency response management information system (Dermis). J. Inf. Technol. Theory Appl. (JITTA) 5(4), 1–36 (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Waugh, W.L., Streib, G.: Collaboration and leadership for effective emergency management. Public Adm. Rev. 66(s1), 131–140 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Principles of Emergency Management. FEMA, Washington DC (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Goodchild, M.F.: Citizens as sensors: the world of volunteered geography. GeoJournal 69(4), 211–221 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Palen, L., Anderson, K.M., Mark, G., Martin, J., Sicker, D., Palmer, M., Grunwald, D.: A vision for technology-mediated support for public participation & assistance in mass emergencies & disasters. In: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM-BCS Visions of Computer Science Conference, p. 8. British Computer Society (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Díez, D., Díaz, P., Aedo, I.: virtual communities of practice: design directions for technology-mediated collaboration in the early warning activity. In: Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM 2010) (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Silvertown, J.: A new dawn for citizen science. Trends Ecol. Evol. 24(9), 467–471 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Norris, F.H., Stevens, S.P., Pfefferbaum, B., Wyche, K.F., Pfefferbaum, R.L.: Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness. Am. J. Commun. Psychol. 41(1–2), 127–150 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dynes, R.R.: Social capital dealing with community emergencies. Homel. Secur. Aff. 2, 1–26 (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Díaz, P., Carroll, J.M., Aedo, I.: Coproduction as an approach to technology-mediated citizen participation in emergency management. Future Internet 8(3), 41 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    French, S., Niculae, C.: Believe in the model: mishandle the emergency. J. Homel. Secur. Emerg. Manag. 2(1), Article No. 1 (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hildreth, P.M., Kimble, C.: The duality of knowledge. Inf. Res. 8(1), 1–18 (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Davis, F.D.: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 13, 319–340 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Venkatesh, V., Davis, F.D.: A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manag. Sci. 46(2), 186–204 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mathieson, K., Peacock, E., Chin, W.W.: Extending the technology acceptance model: the influence of perceived user resources. SIGMIS Database 32(3), 86–112 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., Davis, F.D.: User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q. 27(3), 425–478 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Aedo, I., Díaz, P., Carroll, J.M., Convertino, G., Rosson, M.B.: End-user oriented strategies to facilitate multi-organizational adoption of emergency management information systems. Inf. Process. Manag. 46(1), 11–21 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zhang, P., Li, N., Sun, H.: Affective quality and cognitive absorption: extending technology acceptance research. In: Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS 2006, vol. 8, p. 207a. IEEE (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    O’Brien, H.L., Toms, E.G.: What is user engagement? A conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 59(6), 938–955 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stallings, R.A., Quarantelli, E.L.: Emergent citizen groups and emergency management. Public Adm. Rev. 45, 93–100 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ginige, A., Paolino, L., Romano, M., Sebillo, M., Tortora, G., Vitiello, G.: Information sharing among disaster responders-an interactive spreadsheet-based collaboration approach. Comput. Support. Coop. Work 23(4–6), 547–583 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sutton, J., Palen, L., Shklovski, I.: Backchannels on the front lines: emergent use of social media in the 2007 Southern California fire. In: Proceedings of Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management Conference (ISCRAM), Washington DC (2008)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Endsley, M.R.: Design and evaluation for situation awareness enhancement. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 32(2), pp. 97–101. SAGE Publications (1988)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Malizia, A., Bellucci, A., Diaz, P., Aedo, I., Levialdi, S.: eStorys: a visual storyboard system supporting back-channel communication for emergencies. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 22(2), 150–169 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Diaz, P., Onorati, T., Olmo Pueblas, S.: Analyzing and visualizing emergency information in a multi device environment. In: Díaz, P., Bellamine Ben Saoud, N., Dugdale, J., Hanachi, C. (eds.) ISCRAM-med 2016. LNBIP, vol. 265, pp. 181–194. Springer, Cham (2016). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-47093-1_16 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Keim, D.A., Mansmann, F., Schneidewind, J., Ziegler, H.: Challenges in visual data analysis. In: Tenth International Conference on Information Visualization, (IV 2006), pp. 2–7 (2006)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    de León, J.C.V., Bogardi, J., Dannenmann, S., Basher, R.: Early warning systems in the context of disaster risk management. Entwicklung Ländlicher Raum 2, 23–25 (2006)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Onorati, T., Díaz, P.: Giving meaning to tweets in emergency situations: a semantic approach for filtering and visualizing social data. SpringerPlus 5(1), 1782 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Interactive Systems DEI-LabUniversidad Carlos III de MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations