The HE corpus contains 26,377 occurrences of the concept knowledge.
Click here to enlarge and for more details
Refresh the website if the graphics are not shownKnowledge occurs mostly in documents published in Europe, followed by Asia, North America, Africa and Oceania with comparatively smaller contributions. Overall, the top five contributors in terms of occurrences are NGO, IGO, RC, NGO_Fed and Net organisations.
NGO, IGO, RC, NGO_Fed and Net documents provide the greatest number of occurrences, primarily from activity reports published in Europe.
is a
first step, prerequisite, foundation
requirement, key
solution
safeguard
factor
characteristic
benefit
resource
source of resilience
has subject areas
has specialisations
is characterised by location
local knowledge, which can refer to
what humanitarians know about a locale
what local populations know that humanitarian don't
what local populations know about issues & solutions
regional, global, etc.
is referred to by time frame
has varying relevance
has varying degrees of sophistication
is specific to communities
e.g, indigenous knowledge, which
can be integrated into operations
is at risk of disappearing
can be difficult to define
is contrasted with other types
workers', public, etc.
is ascribed a value
can be quantified
is acquired by different means
the lack of which causes/aggravates issues
is shared in order to
create solutions
change behaviours
raise awareness of issues & risks
is shared via
knowledge bases
knowledge products
knowledge exchanges
knowledge networks/hubs
is managed as an organisational asset
as part of a culture of learning & sharing
as a community effort
which can be offered as a service
which requires
its own infrastructure & systems
progressive improvement
better integration & tools
which can suffer from short-term programmes & staff turnover
is not equally/fully available, causing knowledge gaps
among actors (humanitarians, authorities, affected populations)
within specific data sets & activities
is the basis of knowledge societies
in which economic production relies on knowledge-centric services
should be shared in a multidirectional fashion
moving away from a pure knower/learner dichotomy
with more "South-South" interaction
promoting better partnership
can be adopted reluctantly or ignored by some actors
has a debated association with outcomes
due to some models being discredited, e.g.,
information deficit model
knowledge, attitude, behaviour model
which implies the need for new methods
can be combined with information
e.g., information & knowledge management
although information & knowledge are generally distinct
with information management as a technical challenge
with knowledge management as a social-behavioural challenge
is the opposite of ignorance
Just two explicit definitions were found for knowledge, which is a ubiquitous concept sharing sometimes unclear borders with others like skill and information. The definitions found both focus on knowledge as something acquired, retained, and employed by individuals.
"This principle ensures the staff's right to learn; it defines knowledge not only as the skills and capabilities necessary to perform their duties, but also as the development of skills and capacities in general.
Knowledge refers to the totality of acquired information and skills that an individual utilises in solving problems.
Contexts that implicitly categorise knowledge do refer to it as a characteristic of individuals, but here it is more often seen through an organisational lens: knowledge as a resource, factor, and prerequisite. It can also be linked directly to other humanitarian concepts, as with knowledge categorised as a source of resilience.
first step, prerequisite, foundation
requirement, key
solution
safeguard
factor
attitudes, behaviours, practices
characteristic
skills, education, abilities, attitudes, personality traits
benefit
resources
resource
capital
time
skills
experience
source of resilience
In the HE corpus, knowledge has various types and characteristics, the highest frequency of which are listed below. Of these, the majority have relatively few cases compared to the most predominant types, which are later described in detail. A large number of lower frequency types (with fewer than 50 cases) have been excluded but tend to fit within the categories below.
subject area
IHL knowledge, knowledge of international human rights
cultural knowledge
health knowledge
scientific knowledge
risk knowledge
knowledge of human rights
first aid knowledge
legal knowledge
hygiene knowledge
medical knowledge
management knowledge
knowledge of humanitarian principles
agricultural knowledge
specialisation
technical knowledge
practical knowledge
traditional knowledge
academic knowledge
theoretical knowledge
professional knowledge
institutional knowledge
general knowledge
advanced knowledge
specific knowledge
specialized knowledge
location
local knowledge
regional knowledge
global knowledge
time frame
new knowledge
current knowledge
existing knowledge
prior knowledge
relevance
necessary knowledge
relevant knowledge
related knowledge
appropriate knowledge
community
shared knowledge
collective knowledge
indigenous knowledge
workers' knowledge
staff knowledge
public knowledge
participants' knowledge
health workers' knowledge
Japanese knowledge
women's knowledge
expert knowledge
community knowledge
specialist knowledge
quality
valuable knowledge
effective knowledge
essential knowledge
requisite knowledge
best knowledge
proper knowledge
sound knowledge
good knowledge
better knowledge
improved knowledge
enhanced knowledge
adequate knowledge
quantity
limited knowledge
extensive knowledge
sufficient knowledge
level of sophistication
deep knowledge
thorough knowledge
detailed knowledge
basic knowledge
in-depth knowledge
means of acquisition
evidence-based knowledge
accumulated knowledge
contextual knowledge
acquired knowledge
first-hand knowledge
IHL knowledge is one of the highest frequency types. However these cases exist almost entirely in RC Activity Reports. Such contexts focus on spreading, increasing, promoting, and enhancing the knowledge of various groups: humanitarians, military, police, authorities, students and academics, and governments.
To spread knowledge of IHL and improve compliance with it, the ICRC carried on supporting the teaching of this body of law among armed forces, security and law-enforcement forces, other weapon bearers, academic circles and the media.
Local knowledge and phrases including "knowledge of local..." have a much higher relative density in Strategy and General Documents. Regardless of document type, local knowledge is considered a valuable asset and necessity for many operations.
Local knowledge is associated with several similar types, such as traditional and indigenous knowledge, such that their definitions can become ambiguous. It can also be contrasted with types of knowledge that organisations consider non-endogenous to an area, including evidence-based knowledge, although such distinctions tend to be framed with an emphasis on synergy rather than tension.
Local knowledge often has one of three senses, which may be clear when contextualised but indicate some ambiguity:
what humanitarians know about local conditions and issues
what local populations know that humanitarian operations can benefit from
what local populations know about issues and solutions, which is smaller before humanitarian intervention and greater afterward
In particular, our local knowledge, work with beneficiaries and preparedness had an enormously positive impact on local communities.
Due to the hazardous nature of the situation, we do not deploy response teams in the area but rely on local organisations whose staff have on-the-ground-contacts, local knowledge and the ability to blend in.
SSP educated local communities through formal health and nutrition education sessions that increased the local knowledge with regards to nutrition and its related issues.
There is ultimately no substitute for local knowledge and strong relationships on the ground.
Local knowledge is a prerequisite of getting aid into areas which are constantly under attack and where the political situation is complex. between three and five months; the remainder received food for one month only.
Effective capacity building happens when a country's local knowledge interacts with outside expertise that is not present in that country.
By prioritizing local knowledge and in-country projects we ensure that beneficiaries are the leaders driving the change that they want to see.
Indigenous knowledge is generally used in the context of preserving, valuing, and utilizing this type of knowledge as part of humanitarian efforts (for example, adaptation and disaster risk reduction).
Frequencies of this level are generally too low to make strong claims regarding text types, but there is a clear geographic split between regions where relative densities are especially high or low. Africa, Asia, CCSA, and Oceania focus much more on indigenous knowledge than Europe, North America, and MENA.
There is also some debate over the definition of indigenous knowledge, which at times appears interchangeable with local knowledge (see Debates & Controversies).
In Ethiopia, for example, indigenous knowledge and practices are documented, shared and combined with modern technology to strengthen and promote decentralised early warning and response systems.
The methodology used is participatory for purposes of ensuring that disaster anagement is understood by people at grassroots level, as they will be involved in identifying the inherent risks/hazards in their communities, prioritising the identified risks/hazards and working out mechanisms for reduction of the prioritised risks. This requires full participation of the local communities, as the communities are the custodians of indigenous knowledge and everyday occurrences and are the people who should be involved in the risk reduction processes of the same.
Thanks to centuries of experience, Tutti's inhabitants have built indigenous knowledge and skills, developing early warning systems based on different tones of drums, horns and whistles that alert the community of an upcoming Nile flood.
When risk assessment and management are governed locally and localized or indigenous knowledge is incorporated, then capacity is strengthened.
New knowledge is a significant term in that it is often used by organisations as an indicator of their activities in a community. New knowledge can be gained by any actor, but in the humanitarian field it especially serves as shorthand for knowledge that the organisation has offered populations. In this context, providing knowledge is considered a step toward prevention and solutions.
Besides, it is crucial to introduce new knowledge, skills, technologies and crop varieties in the area that helps communities pursue saline resistant cropping, brackish water farming or marine aqua culture.
Girls and women received new knowledge about their rights to marry with consent and to claim their inheritance, while fathers, revenue officers, health workers and religious leaders became engaged in supporting these changes.
Knowledge is often seen as a solution to various problems. In some cases it is perceived as something that can be employed to achieve a specific result, such as gaining agricultural knowledge to resolve hunger. In other cases, knowledge shared by humanitarians is intended to encourage behavioural change (to stop harmful practices) or to protect populations via greater awareness of risks.
Despite the necessity of sharing knowledge, the idea that more knowledge leads to behavioural changes may be discredited. For example, teaching about climate change or environmental disasters does not necessarily cause a successful outcome (see Debates & Controversies).
Nonetheless, humanitarians do assess their impact in part based on knowledge, with clear linguistic associations between knowledge and success, on the one hand, and ignorance and failure, on the other. The context below exemplifies how organisations might track how knowledge sharing progressively leads to significant, measurable results.
EFICOR improved the knowledge of communities on effects of climate change and its consequences on livelihood. This encouraged CBOs to take up land treatment and apply watershed management techniques especially, 'drainage line treatment' with soil and water conservation measures, and Water Harvesting Structures at selected places in the target areas. This has recharged 'ground water' leading to an increase in the surface water level (open wells) and the vegetation coverage in the area.
Knowledge management (KM) is seen as a key area of operations that organisations develop over time. It is a collective, rather than individual, effort, with sharing knowledge as a main component. KM is treated in depth in the HE corpus, with more definitional contexts than knowledge alone, as well as other compounds.
In some cases, organisations may consider themselves providers of KM as a service or highlight this area as their strength. In others, authors identify the need to improve KM. KM also appears in other multiword terms, such as
research and knowledge management (RKM),
knowledge management services (KMS), and
knowledge management activity/unit/tool, etc.
ADB defines knowledge management as the way organizations create, capture, store, retrieve, enhance, disseminate, and apply knowledge to achieve organizational objectives.
LASOONA understands Knowledge Management as the cultivation of an environment within which people are willing to share, learn and collaborate together leading to improvement.
Knowledge management (documentation, sharing and dissemination) has been an essential ingredient of the project.
The knowledge management strategy is now built on 2 pillars:
- Management of knowledge on the outcomes and impacts of WASH in emergency responses with the creation of a database repository (hosted at the GWC website). This new database will have clear criteria for inclusion of documents based on existing and recognized repositories of WASH partners;
- Generation of specific knowledge on coordination outcomes and impacts, firstly looking backward with a literature review and an analysis on how coordination impact is normally evaluated, supported by the development of a theory of change and secondly looking forward with the design of a protocol to assess the outcomes and impacts of coordination in future emergency response.
Data Quality: USAID's Knowledge Management Services (KMS) Project examines all third-party data for this indicator, and triangulates them with various sources to verify their quality, validity, and reliability.
Knowledge management platforms are a valuable vehicle for countries and communities within countries to share lessons, experiences and good practices and to support each other in accelerating implementation of relevant, context-specific climate resilience actions.
Knowledge gap typically refers to an organisation's lack of data concerning an area of activity, but it is also used for other actors and their particular circumstances: authorities, military, civilians, local populations, etc.
Partly because of this knowledge gap, authorities have been reluctant to acknowledge and tackle the phenomenon. Given their reluctance and the lack of systematic data, responses to IDPs' needs have been fragmented.
There will always be gaps in knowledge and (often justified) mistrust between civilian and military stakeholders.
Knowledge economy/society describe the shift in a country's productivity from industrial to information-based goods and services. Topics in the HE corpus include the social implications of such a transformation and the changing roles of humanitarian organisations as the world economy becomes more information-centric.
Except for Turkmenistan, all the Central Asian countries have governments committed to better education and more advanced knowledge societies, and to working in differing degrees of partnership with each other, with international agencies and with civil society.
The knowledge economy is growing in importance and the search for talent is becoming as competitive as it is global.
Knowledge commonly combines with a variety of terms revolving around its production and exchange, which are not necessarily exclusive to the humanitarian domain. These include the following:
knowledge sharing
knowledge base
knowledge product
knowledge exchange
knowledge transfer
knowledge network/hub
Knowledge sharing is actively pursued to promote best practices, showcasing innovative projects, developing capacity, and encouraging institutional reform.
Our learnings are encapsulated in knowledge products which help in advocating on various issues affecting the underprivileged, and easily accessible to one and all.
Dynamic developments in the economic, social and ecological spheres of the emerging economies are strengthening their interest in sound planning, steering and process management expertise. Their need for technology-based knowledge transfer is declining, while policy advisory services for reform are in greater demand than ever before.
Frequent words that accompany a term are known as collocates. A given term and its collocates form collocations. These can be extracted automatically based on statistics and curated manually to explore interactions with concepts.
Comparisons over time between organisation types with the greatest number of hits (NGO, IGO, RC, NGO_Fed and Net organisations) may prove to be meaningful. Below is an histogram for the top yearly collocation for each of the five organisations with the greatest contribution as well as across all organisation types.
Collocational data for knowledge was found to be scarce. Across all 5 organisation types analysed, only 6 top collocates were obtained:
acquire; and
skill
NGO documents generated acquire as top collocate in 2015.
IGO documents generated acquire as top collocate in 2005 with the highest overall score.
RC documents generated acquire as top collocate in 2016.
NGO_Fed documents generated acquire as top collocate for 2014.
Net documents generated scientific as top collocate for 2012.
Organisation subcorpora present unique and shared collocations with other organisation types. Unique collocations allow to discover what a particular organisation type says about knowledge that others do not.
NGO documents feature the following top ten unique collocates:
TTBAS ( Trained Traditional Birth Attendants)
LASOONA (An NGO: Society for Human & Natural Resource Development )
KAP (Knowledge, Attitude and Practices)
HIVOS (Humanist organisation)
clinical
Jewish
retention
logistic
possess
polish
IGO documents feature the following top ten unique collocates:
pursuit
decent
MRC (Medical Research Council)
UNISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction)
capacity-building
e-asia
preserve
ADPC (Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre)
high-quality
RC documents feature the following top ten unique collocates:
bolster
prevention-implementation
prevention-dissemination
necessity
augment
RRCS (Rwanda Red Cross Society)
hone
IHL-related (IHL: International Humanitarian Law)
troop
forensic
NGO_Fed documents feature the following top ten unique collocates:
activist
keen
sight
intact
open-data
AAU ( ActionAid Uganda)
HRBA (Human Rights-Based Approach)
capacitate
catalyse
TLMTI (The Leprosy Mission Trust India)
Net documents feature the following top ten unique collocates:
co-creation
CCA (Climate Change Adaption)
NIRAPAD (NGO:Network for Information, Response And Preparedness Activities on Disaster)
GFDRR (Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery)
IFPRI (International Food Policy Research Institute)
INEE (Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies)
IRCT (International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims)
amplify
convene
SISRI ( Small Island States Resilience Initiative)
Shared collocations allow to discover matching elements with organisations who discuss knowledge. These constitute intersections between subcorpora.
Top collocates shared by 2 organisation types are:
refresh (RC + NGO)
cultural (NGO + IGO)
acquisition (NGO + IGO)
light (NGO_Fed + NGO)
intellectual (NGO + IGO)
CDKN (Climate Development Knowledge Network) (NGO + Net)
health-based (NGO + Net)
acceptance (RC + NGO)
refine (RC + IGO)
know-how (NGO + IGO)
Top collocates shared by 3 organisation types are:
confidence (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO)
translation (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO)
pool (NGO + Net + IGO)
add (NGO + Net + IGO)
portal (NGO + Net + IGO)
insight (NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
translate (NGO + Net + IGO)
outreach (NGO + Net + IGO)
intimate (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO)
reinforce (RC + NGO + IGO)
Top collocates shared by 4 organisation types are:
theoretical (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
generation (NGO_Fed + NGO + Net + IGO)
leverage (NGO_Fed + NGO + Net + IGO)
product (NGO_Fed + NGO + Net + IGO)
enrich (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
pass (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
traditional (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
repository (NGO_Fed + NGO + Net + IGO)
networking (NGO_Fed + NGO + Net + IGO)
obtain (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
Top collocates shared by 5 organisation types are:
skill (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + Net + IGO)
acquire (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + Net + IGO)
share (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + Net + IGO)
expertise (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + Net + IGO)
attitude (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + Net + IGO)
experience (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + Net + IGO)
gain (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + Net + IGO)
enhance (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + Net + IGO)
disseminate (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + Net + IGO)
exchange (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + Net + IGO)
The chart below represents the distribution of knowledge between 2005 and 2019 in terms of the number of occurrences and relative frequency of occurrences. It also allows you to view the distribution across Regions, Organisations and Document types.
The relative frequency of a concept compares its occurrences in a specific subcorpora (i.e. Year, Region, Organisation Type, Document Type) to its total number of occurrences in the entire HE corpus. This indicates how typical a word is to a specific subcorpus and allows to draw tentative comparisons between subcorpora, e.g. Europe vs Asia or NGO vs IGO. You can read these relative frequencies as follows:
Relative frequency is expressed as a percentage, above or below the total number of occurrences, which are set at 100%. This measure is obtained by dividing the number of occurrences by the relative size of a particular subcorpus.
Under 100%: a word is less frequent in a subcorpus than in the entire corpus. This is means that the word is not typical or specific to a given subcorpus.
100%: a word is as frequent in a subcorpus as it is in the entire corpus.
Over 100%: a word is more frequent in a subcorpus than in the entire corpus. This means that the word in question is typical or specific to a given subcorpus.
As an author, you may be interested in exploring why a concept appears more or less frequently in a given subcorpus. This may be related to the concept's nature, the way humanitarians in a given year, region, organisation type or document type use the concept, or the specific documents in the corpus and subcorpora itself. To manually explore the original corpus data, you can consult each Contexts section where available or the search the corpus itself if needs be.
Occurrences of knowledge were highest in 2015. However, this concept obtained the highest relative frequency recorded in 2012 (96%).
Europe generated the greatest number of occurrences and Asia generated the highest relative frequency with 159%.
The top 5 organisation types with the highest relative frequency of knowledge are Net, WHS, RC, State and Found.
Activity reports provided the greatest number of occurrences and Strategy documents generated the highest relative frequency with 178%.
This shows the evolution of knowledge and in the vast Google Books corpus, which gives you a general idea of the trajectory of the term in English books between 1950 and 2019. Values are expressed as a percentage of the total corpus instead of occurrences.
Please note that this is not a domain-specific corpus. However, it provides a general overview of and its evolution across domains.
Knowledge decreases from 1967 until 1980. It then increases until it reaches its peak in 2005. It then decreases very slightly and then maintains a linear course until 2019.
Challenges surrounding knowledge in the humanitarian world often fall into these general themes:
the lack of knowledge causing problems
the problematic notion that knowledge transfer is unidirectional
reluctance by parties to use new knowledge
opportunities and challenges when working with indigenous knowledge
knowledge management challenges
the disconnect between offering knowledge and reaching successful outcomes
Of the 25 contexts found, they are split mostly between Activity Reports and General Documents, the latter of which come exclusively from Europe. GD-102 in particular has a focus on knowledge in the realm of disaster risk reduction.
There can be challenges related to unknowingly imposing knowledge that may not be culturally or contextually appropriate in sensitive or traditional environments, or pushing local communities beyond their own interests and developmental agendas. It was noted that these challenges are frequently less apparent in South-South exchanges, as there are often greater sensitivity to cultural adaptability, and there is a less frequent mistrust from the local communities due to the appearance of similar backgrounds in the cultural and political contexts.
This innovative platform will provide an alternative to the tradition of one-way knowledge transfer from the Global North to the Global South, instead modelling multidirectional knowledge exchange that will continuously generate new learning for improved health policy and practice in the 21st century.
Rethinking definitions of knowledge
Simplistic notions of knowledge suggest that it is a commodity given in a linear form with the learner being a passive receiver from a superior provider. Over the years, researchers have rejected this model, arguing that knowledge is fluid and the roles played by knower/learner are inter-changeable, not static. This new model of knowledge transfer should be adopted for technical assistance. Hired experts from abroad should endorse and facilitate a 'learning with' approach. Donor personnel should be hired for medium-term tenure to facilitate assimilation, a deeper understanding of local cultures, and their ability to incorporate this knowledge into their work.
A warning from a DRR organization that people are in a dangerous place is not going to make them move away to 'safety', because they believe that moving is less beneficial than the loss of their livelihoods over the longer term. The idea that information and knowledge will make people behave differently ('rationally') in relation to serious hazards (the 'information deficit model') is discredited. In public health policy, it has long been known that people do not change their behaviour (e.g., in eating habits or for safe sex) simply because they get information (Marteau et al., 2002). The information deficit model is similar to the 'knowledge, attitude, behaviour' model that many NGOs believe is effective in their work. This has also been shown to be inadequate in most aspects of human behaviour, especially in regard to environmental problems and most notably in relation to climate change (van der Linden, 2014; Kolmuss and Agyeman, 2002). It cannot be assumed that information or even education guarantees that people will face up to the risks that confront them.
Indigenous knowledge can be difficult to define and identify, since in many cases it emerges more as a way of life rather than a set of specific initiatives or tools.
Local communities have been known also to be aware of a number of indicative early observations, such as changes in animal behaviour in advance of major environmental events. This has led to a growing appreciation of the role of indigenous knowledge in early warning and action, though a debate is often present as to whether the knowledge is better described as local (i.e., has developed in a specific location due to multiple factors from multiple sources) or indigenous (attributable historically to that setting and uniquely handed down over generations).
Indigenous knowledge was often displayed as inadequate, untrue or mythical. Modern biomedical knowledge was promoted as being superior, while some traditions were condemned as supporting the spread of HIV. Participatory projects with traditional healers were introduced, but healers were not given equal footing.
[....]
In principle, traditional healing systems, due to their low level of formalization, are very flexible and may easily adopt new influences (Ingstad, 1990; Andrae-Marobela et al., 2010). But this requires an attempt to acknowledge the potential of healers and to engage them in a process of communication. The influence of traditional healers on people's health-related perceptions must not be underestimated – healers can, for instance, serve as good mediators between different understandings of disease, health and healing.
At the same time we also need to learn from the experiences of others, and share with them our own learnings. We refer to this as ''reflective practice'' rather than the more common term of ''knowledge management'', to signal that the real challenge is that of application and not just a simple transfer of knowledge.
The creation of new information systems and tools, however, does not necessarily ensure effective interorganisational coordination and decision-making. In order to be effective, these systems and knowledge management tools must become integrated into the work and decisionmaking processes of the international humanitarian response, including donors.
Single-year programmes also increase the likelihood of staffing shortages and delivery problems in between funding cycles as one-year projects close and new ones start up, and can make it more difficult to align humanitarian programmes with development interventions. They can also hinder systematic information and knowledge sharing amongst partners and potentially stifle innovation and experimentation.
An additional area of improvement relates to the considerable challenge of collective knowledge management. Frequent staff turnover and staffing gaps have an acknowledged impact on institutional memory within individual agencies, and this is reflected within the community as a whole.
While most people think of knowledge management as maintaining a database of information, it is really about creating a culture where staff members within an organisation feel confident collecting/documenting best practices, pursuing and experimenting with new approaches, and connecting with one another to improve work processes in a specific discipline.
Also, a lack of long term vision translates itself into a lack of commitment. The reluctance to engage with new knowledge and advanced intellectual traditions in order to revise one's own thoughts and practices compounds the problem. We must be clear that as development workers and social activists, neither can we assume the role of government agencies nor of political parties.
The relationship between knowledge and information can be both obvious and ambiguous, with the differentiation of these concepts, which encompass many possible uses, being quite contextual. While knowledge can be considered a person's "totality of acquired information and skills," as defined in AR-747, this is a single datum that does not reflect their full complexity in the corpus.
Rather than attempt to compare the most basic meanings of these terms, we can focus on a more concrete aspect of their relationship. For example, knowledge and information have similar compounds, like knowledge management and information management. Do these multiword terms have the same meaning, or do they differ in important ways?
Whereas knowledge management has explicit definitions in the HE corpus, information management lacks definitional contexts. The terms can be combined, say as information and knowledge management, but this practice is limited. While some cases could be considered synonymous - or substantially overlapping - most usage indicates they are separate concepts.
As detailed in Compounds, knowledge management is considered not simply a kind of infrastructure but a cultural practice that endeavours to improve understanding (and hence capacity) among actors. In contrast, contexts with information management focus on a system for collecting, organising, securing, and analysing data.
Both terms are fairly common, at roughly 2,500 cases for information management and 1,400 for knowledge management. Knowledge management has high relative densities in Asia and Africa, whereas information management is more common in North America and Europe. Both have a higher relative density in Strategy documents.
The case of knowledge/information management appears representative of similar terms, like knowledge/information exchange. While some possibility exists of synonymous meanings, especially in casual usage, these sets of terms highlight different kinds of interactions. Working with information often implies a technical challenge, unlike the social and pedagogical challenge of spreading knowledge.
Highly accessible, reliable, and secure information management and technology systems and services are the basis of all human rights work.
Currently, NCA does not have a project information management system, which means most data collected is silo-based and difficult to aggregate or learn from at organisational level.
The gender-based violence information management system, which is designed to collect and analyse standardized data on reported cases of such violence, is being used in five countries.
Ignorance is explicitly defined in contrast with knowledge in the HE corpus, but its low frequency (235) does not suggest any weight besides for pointing out where humanitarian work can be targeted. Whereas knowledge has many possible uses, the problem of ignorance is associated with root causes and often found among rhetorical flourishes that express an organisation's values and efforts.
But how can understanding take place when, at the same time, ignorance is identified as a major barrier for behavioural change? How can it be decided whether people act out of ignorance? By definition, ignorance means a lack of knowledge or understanding, but on whose part?
As indispensable partners, we strive to banish poverty, ignorance , and sickness from the lives of the young, and continue to explore new and effective ways to live up to our maxim of helping others to help themselves.
You can add your feedback on this LAR and say whether you need us to expand the information on any section by filling in a brief form.