Embodied cognition in digital ecosystems

1. Lecture 6
Embodied cogni1on in digital
ecosystems
If we described liquid architecture as a symphony in space, this descrip5on should s5ll
fall short of the promise. A symphony, though it varies within its dura5on, is s5ll a fixed
object and can be repeated. At its fullest expression a liquid architecture is more than that.
It is a symphony of space, but a symphony that never repeats and con8nues to develop.
If architecture is an extension of our bodies, shelter and actor for the fragile self, a liquid
architecture is that self in the act of becoming its own changing shelter.
Marcos Novak

2. Topics
• How ecology concepts may be used in new
media environments?
• Func1oning of digital ecosystems
• Embodied cogni1on in digital ecosystems

3. Essay topics
• Digital ecosystem – a fer1le metaphor or the
new type of ecosystem that uses ecological
principles?
• In this empirical essay you should describe
how you conceptualize digital ecosystem
concept using the examples from new media
environments.

4. Ecologies and ecosystems
• The terms of “ecology” (a discipline) and
“ecosystem” (a system) are oGen misused as
synonyms of each other to describe such
knowledge building that is facilitated by new
media technologies.
• Another issue is ‐ can we use these terms
merely as metaphors taken from biological
systems, or are the ecological principles fully
applicable to the new media systems?

5. Informa1on ecology ‐ metaphorical
• The biological human‐centred understanding of
informa:on systems, (Davenport and Prusack,
1997, p. 11) has primarily used the informa:on
ecology as a metaphorical term to capture
holis:c and human‐centred management of
informa:on.
• The term “ecology” is used because it is one of
the most expressive language currently has to
indicate the massive and dynamic interrela:on
of processes and objects, beings and things,
pa@erns and ma@er (Fuller, 2005, p.2).

6. Knowledge ecology ‐ metaphorical
• The knowledge ecology term marks the
rapidly developing area that binds knowledge
crea:on and u:liza:on with the social and
management aspects in human networks
(Pór & Malloy, 2000; Pór & Spivak, 2000).

7. Knowledge ecology ‐ metaphorical
• G. Siemens published a book “Knowing
Knowledge” (2006) captures a new knowledge
ecology vision.
• Siemens (2006) wrote in his book Knowing
Knowledge that Connec1vism is a staged view
of how individuals encounter and explore
knowledge in a networked/ecological
manner.

8. Knowledge ecology ‐ metaphorical
• The central concepts Siemens discusses are:
knowledge, learning, spaces, networks and
knowledge ecologies.
• However, the Connec:vism framework is
inconsistent in elabora:ng the ecological role
of tools, ac:vi:es, and communi:es in the
forma:on and evolvement of knowledge
ecologies.

9. Knowledge ecology ‐ metaphorical
• Ecology is a knowledge‐sharing environment
(p. 87).
• Networks occur within ecologies. Ecology is a
living organism. It influences the forma5on of
the network itself. (p. 92).
• Ecologies and networks provide the solu5on to
needed structures and spaces to house and
facilitate knowledge flow (p. 86).
G. Siemens, book “Knowing Knowledge” (2006)

10. Knowledge ecology ‐ metaphorical
• Our mind is a network… and ecology. It adapts
to the environment (p. 27).
• Individuals are ac5ve in the learning ecology/
space in terms of consuming or acquiring new
resources and tools (2006, p. 45)
• The health of each personal learning network is
influenced by the suitability of the ecology in
which the learner exists (p. 92).
G. Siemens, book “Knowing Knowledge” (2006)

11. Knowledge ecology ‐ metaphorical
• The ecology fosters connec5ons to original and
knowledge sources, allowing for currency.
• The ecology fosters rich interac8on between
disparate fields of knowledge, allowing
growth and adapta8on of ideas and concepts.
• Each par5cipant in the ecology pursues his/her
own objec5ves, but within the organized
domain of knowledge of a par5cular field (p.
117).
G. Siemens, book “Knowing Knowledge” (2006)

12. Knowledge ecology ‐ metaphorical
• Ecologies permit diverse, mul5‐faceted concepts…
and meanings to emerge based on how items are
organized or self‐organize (p. 87).
• Ecologies are nurtured and fostered…instead of
constructed, organized and mandated (p. 90).
• Ecologies are: loose, free, dynamic, adaptable,
messy, and chao5c (p. 90).
• Ecology is a living organism (p. 92).
G. Siemens, book “Knowing Knowledge” (2006)

13. Media ecology ‐ metaphorical
• Book “Media Ecologies” is an analysis of the
determinates of radio, telephones, cameras, surveillance,
computa1onal media, and networks.
• Media ecology term refers to the business‐oriented
discussions of media and informa:on management (e.g.
1me management processes, intellectual property
regimes, database and soGware design, content control,
access structuring, metadata, archiving, and the use and
genera1on of new document and informa1on types).
• “Media ecology” describes a kind of environmentalism:
using a study of media to sustain a rela1vely stable
no1on of human culture.
Fuller, Ma`hew. Book (2005). Media ecologies : materialist energies in art and technoculture

14. Can we use ecology principles
explaining new media systems?

15. Transla1ng from ecology concepts
Personal
environment
Community as a kind of species
Personal
network
Associa1ons of communi1es
Digital ecosystem = technology, people, ar1facts
Person as an
individual of a
community

16. System levels in digital ecologies
Interac1ons of
individuals and
environments
Learner and
personal places
Learner and PLE
Learner and
network
Learner and
community
Learner and
digital ecosystem
Interac1ons of a
community and its
environment
Interac1ons in the
community
Community and
its digital habitat
Community and
its niche
Interac1ons in
associated
communi1es and
ecosystems
Self‐organiza1on
in associated
communi1es and
digital ecosystems
Interac1ons
between
communi1es in
associated
communi1es

17. I. Behavioral digital ecology
• Studies:
– interac1ons of individuals with digital habitats
For example the PLE studies.
– adap1veness of digital behavior
• Niche crea1on
• Fitness to the niches
• Naviga1on in niches such as swarming

18. PLEs in digital ecosystem
• Personal learning environments (PLEs) that
people construct and use in their daily ac1vi1es
are not merely the mediators, ‘the inac1ve pipes’
that enable knowledge flow.
• PLEs are dynamically evolving ac:vity systems in
which the personal objec:ves and human and
material resources are integrated in the course
of ac1on.
• PLE is also distributed ecologically, integra:ng
our minds with the environment.

19. PLE as our way for taking ac1on

20. Ecological ac1on control
• Hommel (2003), has wri`en that ac:on control to
all behavioral acts is ecologically delegated to the
environment ‐ when planning ac1ons in terms of
an1cipated goals, the sensory‐motor assemblies
needed to reach the goal are simultaneously
selec:vely ac:vated in the environment, and bind
together into a coherent whole that serves as an
ac:on‐plan, facilita1ng the execu1on of the goal‐
directed ac1ons through
the interac1on
between the environment
and its embodied
sensory‐motor ac1va1ons.
An embedded ac1on cue
delegated to the environment

21. PLE as our way for taking ac1on
• We actualize certain dimensions from the
environment around us integra:ng it to the
ac:on‐plans, and simultaneously the
environment extends certain dimensions to us
changing and shaping our inten:ons.
• The “network” (as referred by Siemens, 2005) in
the ecological framework may be interpreted as a
distributed system con:nuously constructed of
our minds and the environment components.

22. Embodied cogni1on
• Varela, Thompson & Rosch (1991, p. 149)
wrote that knowledge is the result of ongoing
interpreta:on that emerges from our
capaci:es of understanding.
• These capaci1es are rooted in the structures
of our biological embodiment but are lived
and experienced within a domain of
consensual ac:on and cultural history.
Varela, F. J., Thompson, E. & Rosch, E. (1991) The Embodied Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.

23. Embodied cogni1on
• Using the term enac5on they focused on two
points:
– 1) percep1on consists of perceptually guided
ac1on, and
– 2) cogni1ve structures emerge from recurrent
sensory‐motor pa`erns that enable ac1on to be
perceptually guided (Varela et al., 1991, p. 173).

24. Embodied cogni1on
• They coined the term embodied ac:on to
transmit the idea that cogni:on depends
upon the kinds of experience that come from
having a body with various sensory‐motor
capaci:es, and second that these individual
sensory‐motor capaci1es are themselves
embedded in a more encompassing
biological, psychological, and cultural
context.

25. Ecological cogni1on
• Ecological psychologists locate meaning and
intelligent ac:on into coupling of individual
and environment
• Ecological approach aims at understanding
cogni:ve systems in terms of their
environmental situatedness (Magnani, 2005).

26. We are eco‐cogni1ve engineers
• Humans are powerful eco‐cogni:ve
engineers.
• Humans use the environment itself as a
representa:on by manipula:ng and even
crea:ng it so as to find room for new
cogni:ve chances not immediately available.
Bardone, 2010

27. Crea1ng and ac1ng upon ecological
chances
• Humans turn environmental constraints into
ecological chances when facing the challenges
posed by the environment itself.
• Human cogni:on is chance‐seeking system that
is developed within an evolu1onary framework
based on the no1on of cogni:ve niche
construc:on.
• We build and manipulate cogni:ve niches so as
to unearth addi:onal resources for behavior
control.
Bardone, 2010

28. Eco‐cogni1ve engineering
• Humans constantly delegate cogni:ve
func:ons to the environment
• Human beings overcome their internal
limita:ons by
(1) disembodying thoughts and then
(2) re‐projec:ng internally that occurring
outside
• to find new ways of thinking.
Bardone, 2010

29. Eco‐cogni1ve engineering
• Human cogni1ve behavior consists in ac:ng
upon anchors – the affordances ‐ which we
have secured a cogni:ve func:on to via
cogni1ve niche construc1on.
• Affordances can be related to the variable
(degree of) abduc:vity of a configura:on of
signs.
Bardone, 2010

30. Interac1onal affordance concept
• Gibson (1979) originally defined affordances as opportuni:es
for ac:on for an observer, provided by an environment.
• Gaver (1996) emphasized that affordances emerge in human
ac:on and interac:on and, thus, go beyond mere percep1on.
• Affordances are the perceived possibili:es for both thinking
and doing, what learners evoke and signify during their
actual interac:on with an ar:fact or tool and with each
other.
• Michaels (2003) claimed that perceiving affordances is more
than perceiving rela1ons, but it brings a@en:on to the
ac:on‐guiding informa:on and sets up ac:on systems to act.

31. Affordance networks
• Barab and Roth (2006) have noted that
connec:ng learners to ecological networks,
where they can learn through engaged
par1cipa1on, ac:vates the affordance networks.
• Barab and Roth (2006) assumed that affordance
networks are not read onto the world, but
instead con:nually “transact” (are coupled) with
the world as part of a percep:on‐ac:on cycle in
which each new ac:on poten:ally expands or
contracts one’s affordance network.

32. Affordance networks
• Learning is a process of becoming prepared to
engage dynamic networks in the world in a goal‐
directed manner (Hoffmann & Roth, 2005).
• affordance networks are dynamic sociocultural
configura1ons
• include sets of perceptual and cogni1ve
affordances that collec1vely come to form the
network for par1cular goal sets
• affordance networks are extended in both 1me
and space

33. Cultural affordances as an ecological
knowledge
• Vyas and Dix (2007) dis1nguished 3 levels of
affordances: personal, organiza:on/community,
and culture level, which differ also on the level of
how rapidly they can change.
• HeG (2001) wrote that:
“…we engage a meaningful environment of
affordances and refashion some aspects of them…
These laYer constructed embodiments of what is
known – which include tools, ar8facts,
representa8ons, social paEerns of ac8ons, and
ins8tu8ons – can be called ecological knowledge”.

34. embodied simula1on
• Discoveries in cogni1ve and neuroscience
about the func1oning of mirror‐neuron systems
(Gallese et al., 1996), claim, that cogni:on is
embodied through grounding knowledge
directly in sensory‐motor experiences without
the media:on of symbolic representa:ons
(Pecher & Zwaan, 2005).

35. Embodied simula1on
• Research indicates that
– from observa:on of others and the
environment (Rizzolap et al., 2001),
– from listening narra1ves (Rizzolap &
Arbib, 1998; Iaccoboni, 2005) or
– from reading narra:ves (Scorolli &
Borghi, 2007) and
– from looking everyday images of
objects or works of art (Gallese &
Freedberg, 2007)
• we perceptually ac:vate certain
mul:‐modal ac:on‐poten:alites of
embodied symbols that mediate our
purposeful and goal‐directed ac:ons
(see Gallese & Lakoff, 2005).
Embodied symbols evoke ac1on
Smile and the world will smile
back:)

36. Besides possibili1es of
organizing meanings with
various ways in social learning
environments, much more
a@en:on needs to be put on
these ac:on‐related cues
individuals and communi:es
interact with in the
environment.

37. Embodied simula1on
• When ac1ng in social learning environments not only
the meanings are newly created from found
informa1on, but also the emo:on and ac:on‐related
cues are picked up from different narra:ves and from
the whole systems, and they are integrated into our
ac:on plans.
• Embodied simula1on may be how storytelling works as
a personal “tool” for placement in hybrid ecosystems
• It is the source of ecological inheritance that may be
used as a naviga:onal “tool” for interac:on in
community niches (as an intersubjec:vity)

38. Social ecology of iden1ty
identity
structure
negotiabilityidentification
communities economies of meaning
Forms of membership Ownership of meaning
Mode of belonging
engagement
imagination
alignment
Identities of
participation
Identities of non-
participation
Identities of
participation
Identities of non-
participation
Close circle of
friends doing
everything together
Experience of
boundaries through
a faux-pas
Having one’s
ideas adopted
Marginality through
having one’s ideas
ignored
Affinity felt by the
readers of the
newspaper
Prejudice through
stereotypes
Vicarious
experience
through stories
Assumption that someone
else understands what is
going on
Allegiance to a
social movement
Submission to
violance
Persuasion through
directed experience
Literal compiliance
as in tax returns
Wenger, 1998. Social ideology of iden1ty

39. Community niches
• People with various perspec:ves are
simultaneously at present in ecosystems and
influencing them.
• Many abstract subspaces can be formed within
ecosystems.
• Such spaces emerge when parts of the
environment are embodied and used similar way
by many people.
• Groups of individuals who have something in
common in their iden:ty create abstract
learning spaces in the ecology ‐ niches.

40. Community niches
• Hutchinson (1957) defined a niche as a region (n‐
dimensional hypervolume) in a mul:‐dimensional space
of environmental factors that affect the welfare of a
species.
• Niches have been conceptualized as the environmental
gradients with certain ecological amplitude, where the
ecological op:mum marks the gradient peaks where
the organisms are most abundant.
• Each niche gradient defines one dimension of the
learning space.
• All niche gradients are situated and establish a mul:‐
dimensional hyper‐room, which axes are different
environmental parameters.

41. Niche gradients
• Any niche gradient is a peak of the fitness
landscape of one environmental characteris:c
(Wright, 1931), which can be visualized in two‐
dimensional space as a graph with certain skew
and width, determining the ecological amplitude.
• The shape of the fitness graph for certain
characteris1c can be plo`ed through the
abundance of certain specimen benefipng of this
characteris1c.

42. Defining community niches by
affordances
• People determine the personal learning
affordances within their PLEs.
• Any individual conceptualizes affordances
personally, but the range of similar learning
affordance conceptualiza1ons may be clustered
into more general affordance groups eg. ‘pulling
social awareness informa1on’ or ‘searching
ar1facts by social filtering’ etc.
• These affordance clusters may be interpreted and
used as the abstract learning niche gradients.

43. Affordances of social tools in a
community

44. Community niche guides naviga1on of
individuals
Community niche2 Community niche1
My ini1al place
The community space

45. Naviga1ng in community niches
• Ecologies integrate
many niches of
different communi1es.
• Niches enable to enact
knowledge and
influence personal
networks because of
ecological inheritance
leG as feedback to the
social soGware
systems.
Adapted from: Technical and Design Considera1ons for a Mobile Informa1on System.
Mark Bilandzic & Marcus Foth (2009).

46. Niche construc1on as an ecological
factor
• A recent literature in evolu1onary theory
emphasizes the idea of niche construc:on
(Odling‐Smee et al., 2003) as an ecological factor.
• It is argued, the organism has a profound effect
on the very environment as a feedback loop.
• Organisms have influence on their environment,
and the affected environment can have a
reciprocal effect on other organisms of this
species or on other species, crea1ng an
environment different from what it would have
been before it was modified.

47. Niche construc1on as an ecological
factor
• Ecological inheritance, however, does not
depend on the presence of any environmental
replicators, but merely on the persistence,
between genera:ons, of whatever physical
changes are caused by ancestral organisms in
the local selec:ve environments of their
descendants.

48. Ecological inheritance
• People create a feedback loop to hybrid
ecosystem that influences the evolu:on of
communi:es and determines their individual
interac:on with the ecosystem.
• This feedback loop is an ecological
inheritance created by organisms themselves
into their environment, which has influence
on their evolu:on (Odling‐Smee et al., 2003)
Odling‐Smee, F.J., Laland, K.N., & Feldman, M.W. (2003). Niche Construc1on: The
Neglected Process in Evolu1on. Monographs in Popula1on Biology, 37, Princeton
University Press.

49. Ecological inheritance
Community
iden1ty
t
t + 1
Time
Niche crea1on
Adapta1on to the niche Culturally
defined
affordances
of the
digital
ecosystem
Adapted from Odling‐Smee, F.J., Laland, K.N., & Feldman, M.W.

50. Ecological inheritance
Ecological inheritance is the par1cular set of
culturally defined affordances and meanings leG
into the systems by various communi1es in the
form of meaning‐ and ac1on‐relevant cues.
“Ecosophy” ‐ the cross‐fer:liza:on of the three
modes: “mental,” “natural,” and “social” means
that any of these modes of an ecology always
demand carrying over into another mode,
another universe of reference in order to have
any func:on (Felix Gua`ari)

51. Naviga1ng in community niches
Pata, 2009

53. II. Digital popula1on ecology
• Studies abundance
and distribu1on of
digital (species)
communi1es
• Deals with the
popula1on
dynamics in
communi1es and
their interac1ons
with the
environment

54. III. Ecology of associa1ons of digital
communi1es
• Studies the composi1on and organiza1on of
the associated digital communi1es

55. III. Ecology of associa1ons of digital
communi1es
• Ecosystems grow and develop in four progressive
growth forms reflected in boundary, structure,
network, and informa1on rela1onships.
– Boundary growth brings the input of low‐entropy
(ordered) material into the system.
Entropy is essen1ally a measure of how organized or
disorganized a system is, of the number of ways in which a
system may be arranged, oGen taken to be a measure of
“disorder” (the higher the entropy, the higher the
disorder).
– Structural growth occurs when the physical quan:ty of
biomass in the system increases, oGen as a result of the
increase in the amount, number, and size of components
in the ecosystem.
More
ar1facts
are
imported
to the
digital
ecosystem
Communi1es grow bigger.
More communi1es with par1cular iden1ty are associated into digital ecosystem.

56. II. Ecology of associa1ons of digital
communi1es
• Network growth is growth in connec:vity of the
system through addi:onal energy–ma@er
transac:ons, which results in pathway prolifera1on
and more cycling of ma`er and energy. Network
growth deals specifically with the internal
organiza1on of the system.
• Informa:on growth is qualita:ve growth in system
behavior from exploita:ve pa@erns to more
conserva:ve pa@erns, which are more energe:cally
efficient.
Informa1on growth deals with the development of
ecosystem compartments themselves, as they tend to
increase their own performance within the system.
More
network
connec1ons
and ar1fact
and
knowledge
transac1ons
Conserving
informa1on

57. Knowledge ecosystem
• A knowledge ecosystem comprises:
– (a) a human network of produc:ve conversa:ons
designed to create
– (b) a knowledge network of ideas, informa:on,
and inspira:on, supported by
– (c) a technological network consis:ng of
knowledge bases and communica:on links that
altogether generate value and intelligence for the
whole ecosystem.
Pór, G., & Molloy, J. (2000). Nurturing Systemic Wisdom Through Knowledge Ecology.
Systems Thinker, 1 (8), 1–5.

58. Digital ecosystem
• Digital ecosystem (DE) is an
– open,
– self‐organizing agent environment,
– containing human individuals,
– informa1on services,
– network interac1on,
– knowledge sharing tools, and
– resources
• that help maintain synergy among human beings
or organiza1ons, where
– each agent of each species is proac1ve,
– responsive regarding its own benefit/profit and
– responsible to its system.
Boley, H., & Chang, E. (2007). Digital Ecosystems: Principles and Seman1cs, published at
the 2007 Inaugural IEEE Interna1onal Conference on Digital Ecosystems and Technologies.
Cairns, Australia. February 2007. NRC 48813.

59. Ar1fact ecology
• Ar:fact ecologies refer to a system consis1ng
of
– different digital and physical ar:facts,
– people,
– their work prac:ces and values, and
– their emerging and dynamic rela:onships.
Vyas, D.M., & Dix, A. (2007). Artefact Ecologies: Suppor1ng Embodied Mee1ng
Prac1ces with Distance Access. In Proceedings of UbiComp 2007 Workshops, Sept
2007, Innsbruck, Austria (pp. 117‐122). University of Innsbruck.
Compare previous knowledge ecosystem terms with the ar5fact ecology term! How is the
ecology term different of the ecosystem term, or is it a synonym?

60. Example: social media marke1ng
ecosystem

61. Hybrid ecosystem
• “Hybrid” refers to the structural property of the
world that is achieved by deliberate blending of
geographical spaces with content elements of
social environments, such as blogs, microblogs,
wikis, social repositories and ‐networks, using
mobile and web applica1ons.
• Ar1facts (eg. digital narra1ves, images, real‐world
objects), soGware (eg. social soGware tools),
language (eg. user‐created ontologies such as
tags), other actors, and geographical loca1ons all
serve as mediators of ac:on.

62. Hybrid ecology
• Hybrid ecologies rely on the ar:cula:on of
‘fragments of embodied virtuality’ or
fragmented interac:on.
Crabtree, A., & Rodden, T. (2007). Hybrid ecologies: understanding interac1on in
emerging digital‐physical environments. Personal and Ubiquitous Compu1ng

63. Hybrid digital ecosystem
• Social media environments together with
geographical loca1ons can be conceptualized
as a “hybrid ecosystem”, provided that
par:cipants of social media have ecological
dependence of the par:cular set of
mediators that they use as their niche for
taking ac:on.

64. IV. Digital community ecology
• Studies interac1ons between the (species)
communi1es of digital associa1ons of
communi1es:
– Food networks such as artefact‐actor networks
John Seeley Brown (1999; 2002), and George
Siemens (2005; 2006) related knowledge ecology
and knowledge ecosystem terms with weaving
informa:on and artefacts, meanings and
knowledge, networks and connec:ons.

65. Engineering web
• Jones et al. (1997) highlights the indirect interac1ons
between species and the organism connec:vity by the
engineering web and not by the food web: The
ecosystem engineers can regulate energy flows, mass
flows, and trophic paYerns in ecosystems to generate
an “engineering web”—a mosaic of connec8vity
comprising the engineering interac8ons of diverse
species.
• Can co‐exis1ng human communi1es in social soGware
environments or hybrid environments engineer their
niches so that this niche starts to constrain or facilitate
other community?
Does such engineering web exist in digital ecosystems?
Jones, C. G., Lawton, G. H., & Shachak, M. (1997).
Ecosystem engineering by organisms: Why seman1cs
ma`ers. Trends in Ecology & Evolu1on, 12, 275.

66. IV. Digital community ecology
• Some communi1es benefit from the niches of other
communi1es.
– Commensalism
– Symbiosis
– Parasi1sm

67. IV.Digital community ecology
• Vandermeer (2008) dis1nguishes between
obligate and faculta:ve organisms and niches,
formula1ng assump1ons how these organisms
are influenced by niche construc1on:
– a) In an obligate construc:ve niche the organism dies
in the absence of niche construc:on;
Example: Wikis and microblogging environments can
be considered obligate construc1ve niches, where
single person without the community has very li`le
benefit of the system

68. IV.Digital community ecology
– b) In a faculta:ve construc:ve niche the
organism survives even in the absence of niche
construc:on, nevertheless it will benefit further
from the construc:on
Example: Blogs or social bookmarking systems
may be seen as faculta1ve construc1ve niches, in
which keeping individual diary or collec1ng
bookmarks gives some addi1onal value even
without sharing it with the community

69. IV.Digital community ecology
• c) A faculta:ve organism survives even in a
non‐construc:ve niche, but benefits further
from the construc:on
Example: A faculta1ve user of social web
systems does not rely on its’ ac1vi1es on the
niche construc1on of the other users

70. IV.Digital community ecology
• d) An obligate organism does not survive
unless a constructed niche becomes
available.
Example: An obligate web user has
constructed its personal learning environment
of community tools and services eg. of ‘pulling
feeds’, and cannot func1on effec1vely without
this niche construc1on.

71. IV.Digital community ecology
1. The community as a system
increases by the input of low‐
entropy energy (ideas?) or
ma`er (people, ar1facts?)
across the system boundary.
2. During the next growth and
development system
connec1vity and cycling
increases through addi1onal
network transac1ons. This
retains the energy–ma`er
within the system boundaries
for a longer 1me. As a result,
system entropy produc1on
decreases (system is more
ordered).
Networks and connec1vity
People, ar1facts
• Succession in digital communi1es

72. IV.Digital community ecology
h`p://www.geog.mcgill.ca/faculty/peterson/susfut/adap1veCycle/index.html
Release, or
crea5ve
destruc5on ‐
tightly bound
accumula1on of
ar1facts and ideas
and people are
suddenly released
System can
easily be
reorganized by
small inputs as
actors or ideas
begin to
capture
opportunity

73. V. Digital ecosystem ecology
• Studies how ma@er (such as ar:facts and ideas)
circulates in ecosystems
– Mul1plica1on such as embedding or copying
– From some ar1fact types to another types (blog ‐> twi`er)
so that informa1on can move across systems and
communi1es
– Deriva1on such as referring in new context, elabora1ng,
summarizing, mixing etc.
– Evalua1ng such as commen1ng, ra1ng
– Sharing in community databases (community browsing)
– Annota1ng (tagging) to make shortcuts, redistribu1ng
across users, spaces

74. V. Digital ecosystem ecology
• Studies:
– How energy circulates in ecosystems
An energy in ecosystems allows the interac1on and
exchange of ma`er (ideas?) between its animate and
inanimate components.
Energy is ability to do work. Can the new media system
architecture, the networks (bounds, kine1c energy), or
the “cultural interface” create this “energy”?
h`p://000fff.org/the‐power‐of‐digital‐ecoystems/
Does energy get released in the representa1on process?
Does semiosis, the crea1on of meanings release, energy?
Can extra “energy”
be created in new
media
environments?
ar1facts
people
The kine1c energy of a moving object depends on its mass (think "weight") and its speed.

75. V. Digital ecosystem ecology
• Studies:
– Entropy rela:onships in ecosystems
Entropy is a measure of how evenly energy is distributed in a
system.
Entropy serves as a measure of how close a system is to
equilibrium — that is, to perfect internal disorder.
Shannon's entropy represents an absolute limit on the best
possible lossless compression of any communica1on, under
certain constraints.
– One of the most important features of biosystems is how they
are able to maintain local order (low entropy) within their
system boundaries. At a steady state, specific entropy
produc1on is minimized.
Low entropy High entropy

76. Entropy in open and closed digital
ecosystems
• A closed system has no interac1on with anything
outside it, to and from it no energy or ma`er can
flow.
• The second law of thermodynamics says that a
closed system always tends towards achieving a
state with a maximum of entropy (disorder).
• The entropy of an open system is low.
• Example: Open digital ecosystems (if we consider for
example one certain social soGware system) seem to be
possessing low entropy, and higher orderliness.
h`p://www.informa1onphilosopher.com/solu1ons/scien1sts/layzer/