Information Sharing across Group Boundaries by Knowledge Brokers during a Disaster – Lessons for the Tourism Industry

Abstract

During disasters, information sharing across group boundaries is seen as highly significant. It requires extensive information sharing flow between different groups and individuals in the community, and among the different response teams. People who receive and share information during a disaster are also known as knowledge brokers (KB). The importance of information sharing during a disaster has been discussed in both academic and practitioner. However, very little attention has been paid to the individual level. This study explored the nature of cross-group boundary information sharing by knowledge brokers during a disaster, specifically in New Zealand. Our objective was to identify how KB assesses the veracity of the information they receive and to whom the information is relevant during a disaster. We used multiple case studies via in-depth face-to-face interviews. Case studies were taken from past New Zealand disasters. The scenario experienced by the KB was the level of analysis. 10 different disasters involving 22 unique scenarios were analyzed. It was found that a KB went through two phases in deciding on the veracity and relevance of information they received. In both phases, KB received information across four types of boundaries and used different types of cognitive resources in the process.

Connecting Forecast and Warning: A Partnership Between Communicators and Scientists

“…Frameworks that link members through early warning systems, disaster management systems and earth system science have established structures and relationships that move from the development of science, forecasts and models to effective communication with emergency managers and decision-makers, including the general public (Beaven et al 2016). Information needs to be shared across group boundaries, specifically by knowledge brokers (Ali et al 2019). Boundary organisations and individuals that link research with communication and knowledge application are key facilitators of these relationships (Pielke, Jr. 2007).…”