Information literacy as social innovation: a systematic literature review

Competência em informação como inovação social: uma revisão sistemática de literatura

Alessandra de Souza Santos alessandra@mpmg.mp.br

Universidade FUMEC, Brazil

Luiz Cláudio Gomes Maia luiz.maia@fumec.br

Universidade FUMEC, Brazil

Information literacy is defined in many forms. It can represent different ways of experiencing information to learn ( BRUCE, 2008, 1997). It can be a learning approach ( LUPTON, 2008), a catalyst for all kinds of learning ( LLOYD, 2010) or a way of knowing ( LLOYD, 2021). Besides, it can be the lifelong-learning process of interaction and internalization of concepts, attitudes and skills related to the accurate use and thorough understanding of information ( BELLUZZO, 2017).

All of these definitions share a common correlation of information literacy to education and learning in diverse contexts, what Garcia (2018) corroborated in a study of research domains of information literacy and knowledge management. Moreover, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) also considers information literacy as a key competence for survival in the 21st century, since it is the ground foundation of lifelong learning ( HORTON JR., 2007; LEE et al., 2013). The growth of information literacy research in the last two decades and the increase in the citation impact each year confirm the importance of the topic ( DE LUCCA; NEUBERT, 2020).

Conceptions about information literacy have evolved and moved from the simple mastery of technological tools and sets of skills to a conception that involves the capacity for critical thinking to support ethical and informed choices, aimed at the common good ( CORRÊA; CASTRO JUNIOR, 2018; BERRÍO ZAPATA, 2012). Vitorino & Piantola (2011) advocate that there are four interdependent and complementary dimensions related to information literacy. These dimensions are: the technical dimension, linked to the domain of technology use and mastery; the aesthetics dimension, which involves creativity, motivation and the ability to re-signify information and externalize it in the collective sphere; the ethical dimension, which involves the responsible use of information; and the political dimension, which involves the exercise of citizenship and a full understanding of how information is produced and distributed, including what sort of information is considered relevant and what sort of information is not and why.

Santos, Maia & Pinheiro (2022a) and Righetto (2018) advocate that information literacy is interdisciplinary. Santos, Maia & Pinheiro (2022a) emphasize the connection between social innovation and information literacy whereas Righetto (2018) focuses on the promotion of cultural and cognitive awareness in the formation of a participatory community identity. Both articles stress the relevance of information literacy for the development of citizenship, especially among vulnerable populations. Furthermore, information literacy can also be considered as a basic human right ( GARNER, 2005), since information is essential in human and cognitive development ( RIGHETTO; VITORINO, 2019).

This is of the upmost importance, especially if one considers the broader perspective for the interpretation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights ( UNITED NATIONS, 1948), whose third generation (collective or solidarity) rights include digital and information inclusion ( MARQUES; SIMEÃO, 2015; CUEVAS-CERVERÓ; MARQUES; PAIXÃO, 2014).

Gómez-Hernández & Saorín (2015) suggest that the programs of information literacy emphasize learning for social innovation to empower peoples and communities. Righetto & Vitorino (2020) and Vitorino (2018) pointed out that information literacy is necessary in order to overcome information vulnerability and following the same line of thought, Righetto & Vitorino (2020), Santos (2020) and Santos, Maia & Pinheiro (2022b) suggested that information literacy and social innovation are correlated topics. Social innovation is also relevant for the 21^st century, since it is a way of overcoming inequalities, poverty and social exclusion ( HOCHGERNER, 2011).

Social innovation is a polysemic ( PHILLIPS et al., 2015; BESANÇON; CHOCHOY; GUYON, 2013) and multidimensional ( MOULAERT et al., 2005) word. Edwards-Schachter & Wallace (2017) found 252 definitions for social innovation. According to André & Abreu (2006), social innovation is a new and socially recognized response that generates social transformation, comprising three attributes: (i) satisfaction of human needs not satisfied by the markets; (ii) promotion of social inclusion; and (iii) training of individuals subjected to potential or effective processes of social exclusion/marginalization, with a consequent change in power relations. According to Harrisson & Klein (2007), social innovation means the transition from a knowledge economy to a knowledge society, in which the value produced by knowledge is widely shared both materially and immaterially.

For Avelino et al. (2019), social innovation results in lasting transformations by challenging, changing or replacing existing social relationships and practices, mainly through the co-production of knowledge and new structural changes. According to Moulaert (2016), social innovation usually refers to the satisfaction of non-satisfied human needs, by creating or improving relationships between individuals or social groups in various spheres and at different levels of society, thus improving social relations and socio-political capacity with solidarity, associativity, reciprocity, etc. For Moulaert & MacCallum (2019), social innovation actions take place in response to specific local issues and through the mobilization of territory-specific resources, such as nature and habitat, infrastructure, organizations, skills and knowledge, social and ecological networks and local governance.

Moulaert & MacCallum (2019) acknowledge that the concretization of social innovation leads to a concern with its ethics, due to the connection of social innovation with democratic participation and emancipatory and solidary actions through the development of social skills. Moreover, the authors point out that the equal sharing of knowledge and power in relationships cannot be overlooked, since the construction of societies and human rights is a cyclical process of construction and reconstruction of ethics through ways of thinking and acting, thus allowing social transformation by means of governance and social participation. Besides, Moulaert & MacCallum (2019) emphasize that interdisciplinarity allows the construction of a shared worldview (ontology) and a shared epistemology to address social problems when dealing with social innovations.

Foresti et al. (2018) believe that information literacy can promote a solidary and inclusive consumer culture, by disseminating ethical, aesthetic, political and technical principles when people, as informational subjects, oppose the processes of social innovation to socio-economic processes of a hegemonic character, thus playing a role of social revitalization and local development drive based on social innovation. Santos, Maia & Pinheiro (2022 b , 2021) acknowledge the relationship between information literacy and social innovation. Besides, a previous systematic literature review (SLR) on the potential relation between information literacy and social innovation was carried out by Santos (2020), who conducted the search in the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) and in the databases Brazilian Information Science Database (BRAPCI) and Redalyc. Despite the fact that the main results were based on the few articles retrieved in the search, the selected studies supported the premise that information literacy has a social role as a social innovation and indicated a potential field of study.

In order to further these previous findings, the present article consisted of a SLR that aimed at presenting whether information literacy is correlated to social innovation in scientific literature. The importance of this issue is to verify whether this correlation has been documented in scientific literature in order to support the proposition that both areas are correlated and can be jointly approached in interdisciplinary studies. This can lead to a consolidation of both areas concerning conceptual definitions, theoretical and research approaches. In relation to previous studies, this article differs by presenting a systematic literature review carried out in major international databases. Besides, the correlation of both topics can contribute to the solving of complex social demands that presuppose effective informational use from local societies, i.e. the implementation of social innovations such as the United Nations 2030 Agenda ( NAÇÕES UNIDAS, 2015). This article was developed within the scope of the research in progress at the Program of Post-Graduation in Information Systems and Knowledge Management at FUMEC University.

The present article is an exploratory research of a qualitative nature and consists of a SLR that followed propositions of Kitchenham, Budgen & Brereton (2016). In order to reach the main objective, the study attempted to answer the following questions:

(Q1) What were the main findings of the studies retrieved?

(Q2) How are the topics information literacy and social innovation addressed in the works?

(Q3) Were there any primary studies relating social innovation to information literacy? If so, what were the methods used in these studies?

In order to summarize the methodology applied in the SLR, the protocol used in the research process is shown in Table 1 below.

Table 1 -
Protocol used in the Systematic Literature Review

Source: The authors.

The results obtained were scarce. For the database Scopus, there were five (5) results retrieved; for the Web of Science database, there were three (3) results retrieved; for the SAGE Open database, there were no results retrieved; and for the Academic Search Premier (EBSCO) database, there were two (2) results retrieved, with a total of ten (10) results.

After carrying out the analysis of inclusion and exclusion criteria, one (1) out of five (5) results of Scopus was disregarded, since it consisted of a book chapter. For the Web of Science database, out of the three (3) results retrieved, two (2) articles were disregarded because they were repeated. For the SAGE Open database, there were no results retrieved and for the Academic Search Premier (EBSCO) database, out of the two (2) results retrieved, both were disregarded. One of them was disregarded because it was repeated and the other because it did not approach the topic social innovation in the article. Therefore, after the step of inclusion and exclusion criteria analysis, a total of five (5) documents were included in the study. The articles retrieved, as well as information about authors’ affiliation and country of institutional location are shown in table 2 below.

Table 2 -
List of selected articles.

Source: The authors

According to table 2, the articles originated from different countries and were divided into conference papers and journal articles, according to the databases from which they were retrieved. In order to answer the first question presented at the SLR protocol, table 3 below shows the main objectives and findings of the selected articles.

Table 3 -
Main objectives and findings of the selected articles.

Source: The authors.

According to the table 3, the selected articles are very diverse and involve the definition of concepts of information literacy and other related literacies, in addition to the application of information literacy in solutions to achieve social innovation. In relation to main findings, results vary from the presentation of theoretical or applied models to the correlation of information literacy and social innovation concepts. Another point that must be emphasized is that the articles selected do not approach the concepts of social innovation and information literacy to the same degree. Table 4 below shows how these two concepts were defined in the selected articles, in order to answer the second question presented at the SLR protocol.

Table 4 -
Concepts of social innovation and information literacy

Source: The authors.

According to table 4, it is possible to see how social innovation and information literacy concepts are understood. Karvalics (2013; 2014) does not define social innovation, this author only mentions that in the future human skills and social innovation will be very needed. In a general way, Karvalics (2013, 2014) considers that the standard definitions of information literacy are not sufficient to deal with the realm of new technologies and novel forms of participation and content production, thus the author names a non-exhaustive set of new literacies and defines them accordingly. Chian Tan, Pan & Cui (2014) perceive social innovation as a multi-dimensional phenomenon linked to the evolution of ICTs and encompassing three synergic dimensions, content or the satisfaction of basic human needs, process or the changes in social relations and empowerment of individuals and communities. Regarding information literacy, Chian Tan, Pan & Cui (2014) perceive it as inextricably linked to the availability of tools, personal capabilities and the ability to transform information, networks and systems into independence and opportunity in the digital media. In order to do so, individuals are required to develop all dimensions of information literacy proposed by Vitorino & Piantola (2011), since they have to understand how information is produced and consumed and what kinds of information are considered relevant by whom and why. Righetto & Vitorino (2020) consider social innovation as knowledge applied to social needs through the participation and cooperation of multiple social actors as well as regarding the three dimensions of social innovation. Moreover, the authors consider that social innovation is equal to social entrepreneurship, in which entrepreneurship aims at a social purpose. Concerning information literacy, Righetto & Vitorino (2020) also take into consideration the four dimensions of information literacy as proposed by Vitorino & Piantola (2011), with an emphasis on citizenry and on the emancipation of vulnerable communities. Potnis & Gala (2022) approached social innovation in the context of libraries and regarded a social innovation as a novel solution that creates social value for the communities and individuals that use the local library. Regarding information literacy, Potnis & Gala (2022) also defined related literacies necessary for everyday financial dealing and proposed a toolkit model to be used by public libraries to tackle their users’ ability to perform in financial situations.

Table 5 below illustrates the approaches and methods used in the selected articles, in response to the third question presented at the SLR protocol.

Table 5 -
Approaches and methods used in the selected articles.

Source: The authors.

According to table 5, all articles selected were of a qualitative nature and three of them consisted of literature reviews, whereas two were primary studies. Chian Tan, Pan & Cui (2014) used semi-structured interviews and documentary data to verify the perceptions of actors of Chinese e-commerce about information processing and their capabilities to use digital tools required in the business. To these authors, information processing capabilities enable digital social innovation. Potnis & Gala (2022) report ten steps that were carried out in order for them to develop a toolkit to be used in public libraries across India. These steps included the use of a survey questionnaire, a focus group questionnaire, and a set of hands-on exercises, which were later tested and validated in a number of public libraries.

Table 6 below shows relevance scores that were awarded to the articles according to the relevance criteria proposed in the SLR protocol.

Table 6 -
Approaches and methods used in the selected articles

Source: The authors.

According to table 6, the articles that present the most relevance were those that consisted of primary studies ( POTNIS; GALA, 2022; CHIAN TAN; PAN; CUI, 2014), since they provide a more tangible correlation between social innovation and information literacy. The literature review by Righetto & Vitorino (2020) is also relevant, since it provides readers with a comparison between patterns, principles and precepts of social innovation and information literacy, emphasizing similarities and points in common to base their analysis. The articles that were considered the least relevant in the selection were those by Karvalics (2014, 2013), because this author just mentioned the benefits of social innovation without defining the term or attempting any correlation between the two areas.

The purpose of the present article was to report on the findings of a systematic literature review (SLR) that aimed at presenting whether information literacy was correlated to social innovation in scientific literature to support the proposition that both areas are correlated and can be jointly approached in interdisciplinary studies, with mutual benefit. This can lead to a consolidation of both areas concerning conceptual definitions, theoretical and applied research approaches.

Even though the search was carried out in four (4) large international databases and the terms used aimed at a more extensive result, results actually obtained were scarce and only five (5) articles were retrieved. In spite of this fact, three (3) out of the five articles were considered relevant to the conducted search and contributed in confirming a correlation between social innovation and information literacy in scientific literature, after an analysis of objectives, main findings, concepts of both information literacy and social innovation and the methods used in the articles. Besides, the retrieved articles come from a variety of countries and mostly consisted of literature reviews and only two of them were primary studies.

The few articles retrieved suggest that the topic has a potential field of study, since frameworks and patterns as well as indicators and methodologies of both thematic areas can be interchangeably used to strengthen research and applications of both social innovation and information literacy. As the findings suggest, social emancipation can be achieved by the development of social innovations to equip vulnerable individuals and populations to deal with technological advances and meet social needs.

As suggestion for future research, one recommends further exploratory, documentary and empirical studies on information literacy to promote social innovation.