Expert Reports as Epistemic Participation: Knowing and Doing in Artificial Intelligence’s Environmental Debate

This study examines how nonscientific organizations participate in debates on the environmental footprint of artificial intelligence (AI) through the publication of reports, thus shaping the acquisition and distribution of expertise in the technical public sphere. Drawing on Eyal’s two dimensions of expertise, as tacit versus explicit and individual versus distributed, we use three concepts that best exemplify the various combinations of expert attributes, namely, communities of practice, epistemic communities, and international knowledge institutions. Our findings show reports on AI’s environmental footprint enable organizations to simultaneously engage with communities of practice and epistemic communities, thereby blurring the boundary between practical and epistemic expertise. This development creates challenges for international knowledge institutions, which promote inclusion and global dialogue, but do not always account for disparities in the quality of evidence produced. We conclude by suggesting that reports provide a valuable lens for examining expert organizations’ tacit knowledge and discuss the implications for the technical public sphere’s capacity to advance notions of objectivity.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International journal of communication
Published
2026-01-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.65476/r463pw43
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Expert Reports as Epistemic Participation: Knowing and Doing in Artificial Intelligence’s Environmental Debate

Théophile Lenoir, Christopher Anderson
International journal of communication
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Expert Reports as Epistemic Participation: Knowing and Doing in Artificial Intelligence’s Environmental Debate

Théophile Lenoir, Christopher Anderson
article en

Abstract

This study examines how nonscientific organizations participate in debates on the environmental footprint of artificial intelligence (AI) through the publication of reports, thus shaping the acquisition and distribution of expertise in the technical public sphere. Drawing on Eyal’s two dimensions of expertise, as tacit versus explicit and individual versus distributed, we use three concepts that best exemplify the various combinations of expert attributes, namely, communities of practice, epistemic communities, and international knowledge institutions. Our findings show reports on AI’s environmental footprint enable organizations to simultaneously engage with communities of practice and epistemic communities, thereby blurring the boundary between practical and epistemic expertise. This development creates challenges for international knowledge institutions, which promote inclusion and global dialogue, but do not always account for disparities in the quality of evidence produced. We conclude by suggesting that reports provide a valuable lens for examining expert organizations’ tacit knowledge and discuss the implications for the technical public sphere’s capacity to advance notions of objectivity.

International journal of communicationVol. 20
University of Milan (IT)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 97%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.