Context factors shape the nuances of any given conflict and have an equally important role in determining which digital technology uses can be appropriate. Key to determining the relevance of any digital technologies is an understanding of a context’s information ecosystem, which can be analysed across three dimensions: the production of information, the access to information and the flow of information.
An information ecosystem is shaped by the technological, socio-cultural and political factors that affect the production, access to and flow of information on a given topic:
- Production of information: technological, socio-cultural and political factors that affect the sources from which information comes, the range, quality and type of information produced and the ability of people to produce their own information.
- Access to information: technological, socio-cultural and political factors that affect the availability of the information that is produced, and that enable or prevent people from accessing the information that is produced.
- Flow of information: technological, socio-cultural and political factors that affect the way information spreads, the speed and dimensions through which it moves and the kinds of actions that people take in response to information.
The checklist below discusses the context factors which shape an information ecosystem in greater detail. Considering the following list provides a solid grounding for the selection of appropriate digital technologies.
Political Factors
- Overall information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure, including the electricity grid, network coverage and geographic variations in infrastructure
- Access to technologies, including the availability of wifi, cost of mobile phone data, and internet & smartphone penetration
- Platform usage, including most popular social media and digital news media
Socio-cultural factors
- Level of digital literacy, including understanding of misinformation, awareness of privacy / consent, and disparities across groups
- Barriers to technology use stemming from social, cultural and linguistic diversity
- Hierarchies of information dissemination, including who is used to speaking out, who is considered a trusted source, and what kinds of information are trusted
- Culture of technology use, including what topics are discussed on social media and whether there is a culture of political and social questioning
Political Factors
- Political surveillance practices (by state and foreign actors), including control of the media, censorship and surveillance of individuals
- State oppression and control, including internet and network blackouts, censorship, and regulation / control of network & internet providers
- Strength of civil society, including ability to oppose surveillance and oppression tactics, and connection to international actors (often determines ability to circumvent surveillance and oppression tactics)
Political factors | Overall information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure, including the electricity grid, network coverage and geographic variations in infrastructure Access to technologies, including the availability of wifi, cost of mobile phone data, and internet & smartphone penetration Platform usage, including most popular social media and digital news media |
Socio-cultural factors | Level of digital literacy, including understanding of misinformation, awareness of privacy / consent, and disparities across groups Barriers to technology use stemming from social, cultural and linguistic diversity Hierarchies of information dissemination, including who is used to speaking out, who is considered a trusted source, and what kinds of information are trusted Culture of technology use, including what topics are discussed on social media and whether there is a culture of political and social questioning |
Political factors | Political surveillance practices (by state and foreign actors), including control of the media, censorship and surveillance of individuals State oppression and control, including internet and network blackouts, censorship, and regulation / control of network & internet providers Strength of civil society, including ability to oppose surveillance and oppression tactics, and connection to international actors (often determines ability to circumvent surveillance and oppression tactics) |
We encourage you to use the checklist above to draw general conclusions about what context factors enable or constrain specific digital technology interventions and which interventions may be most appropriate for your context.
To illustrate how this checklist applies to real-world cases, consider the differences between Myanmar, Sudan and Colombia. The examples below are not meant to be comprehensive – we understand they offer only superficial context analysis – but rather illustrative of how this information ecosystem lens can be applied.
Myanmar has a relatively vibrant and trusted civil society, including multiple forms of online and offline media, expressing a variety of opinions on many topics. There are high levels of internet and social media penetration across the country, except in certain geographic areas (coinciding with the most conflict-affected areas), where access to information and opportunities to produce information are constrained by weak infrastructure. Furthermore, internet and media freedoms are not protected, online surveillance has been used to harass / detain journalists, and the government has used internet shut-downs to constrain online expression in conflict-affected areas. As a result, self-censorship on certain topics abounds. Digital literacy is also very low, largely as a result of the recent and rapid adoption of digital technologies by the majority of the population, and this has been exploited by some political actors to run misinformation and hatespeech campaigns on social media, most notably to incite violence against the Rohingya.
Sudan has a fragmented and often controlled civil society, with limited access to information or the means to produce information. There are relatively high levels of internet and social media penetration in the capital, but very low levels elsewhere in the country where both the electricity and network infrastructures are weak. Furthermore, the country has a tightly controlled media sector and high levels of surveillance, including of social media. Civil society is further weakened by these surveillance and oppression tactics (including internet blackouts and tracking of activists online). Despite these contextual factors, recent protests against the government were largely coordinated and communicated using online and social media tools.
Colombia has a vibrant civil society, including both offline and online media expressing multiple political opinions. There are high levels of internet and social media penetration across the country, except in certain geographic areas (coinciding with the most conflict-affected areas), where access to information and opportunities to produce information are constrained by weak infrastructure. Furthermore, there are strong, entrenched protections for media and internet freedom. The country has struggled with online misinformation and polarization over the past years, particularly as it relates to negotiations with armed groups and political elections.
For a more detailed approach to information ecosystem assessments developed by Internews for humanitarian operations, we recommend the following resources:
What is an information ecosystem? Why does it matter? (article)
Mapping Information Ecosystems to Support Resilience (Toolkit & Curriculum)
