This special issue of Information Matters explores how the discipline of Information Literacy (IL) can develop: in the future, and for the future. The argument that IL is a subject of research and practice in its own right has been gaining ground, in particular with the formation in 2021 of the international collaboration, ILIAD (Information Literacy is a Discipline).

Is information literacy (IL) capable of enabling people to effectively use information in the age of AI? The advent of artificial intelligence (AI) into the mainstream has been even more disruptive than previous technological advancements, such as the World Wide Web or social media, and in some ways has fostered much disorder and uncertainty within the world of information. While new IL models and tools are being developed to address AI, they have tended to treat AI-generated information similarly to how earlier IL models provided checks and balances for considering human-created information sources and tools. Continuing to enable effective use of information, IL needs to keep pace with evolving ideas of AI-generated information and its effects on the human beings that interact with it.

You know that polycrisis isn’t just an academic obsession when the accountants start saying it’s a thing. In a document that mentions polycrisis 84 times, the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants (CIMA) identifies that understanding “the interconnectedness of external factors such as climate change, nature, or inequality, and seeing the patterns of change and the feedback loops between the factors” is essential for developing a sustainable business model.

Considering the ubiquity of devices available to children and content created for them, parents of children 12 and younger should be targeted as a specific group for new information literacy programs.  A May 2025 Pew Research Center survey reported that parents of children 12 and younger allow their children to use various devices (TVs, tablets, smart phones) to access platforms (YouTube and social media), for reasons such as entertainment, learning, staying connected, and calming down. Parents of the same survey also reported that smartphones and content created for social media is more harmful that beneficial and that tech companies and law makers should do more to prevent harms. They also reported challenges about deciding what to allow and how to manage screentime for their children. Many reported they felt a need to improve their decision making related to screentime and content. Today, families are less likely to receive instruction and support from libraries to evaluate technology and content for children than in the past due to more option to access devices and information.

Why do we automatically respond to new technologies by wanting to create more? The Mexican writer Juan Villoro observes that our relationship with technology has evolved into one of dependence in which failure is defined by “the fear of missing out”. This is the fear that pushes us towards production fed by our tendency towards addition and complexity, a phenomenon well documented. When solving problems, we tend to add rather than subtract. Faced with the challenge that generative AI presents to learning and research in higher education, the same instinct has shaped our response.

Have you ever used strategies while searching for a specific problem? Well, most youngsters do not even bother whether they are consuming actual information on the internet or not, because they only care about synthesized information to fulfill their needs. The major issue in developing nations like Pakistan is that we, as students, face the risk of believing all the information we find on Google or social media is accurate. When it comes to information literacy, people who consume content on social media and in their daily lives don’t bother about the authentication of the news they consume. So, the question is what will happen when students get literacy instructions at college and early university life in all disciplines?

This article discusses the science of happiness and the intersection of conceptions of information happiness, as they relate to the disciplinarity of information literacy.

When people hear the term information literacy, they often think about searching online, spotting misinformation, or evaluating websites. These skills matter. Yet recent thinking in Information Literacy suggests that IL is also about understanding how knowledge is created, valued, shared, and sustained within communities. Information literacy is not only about finding information. It is also about recognizing valuable knowledge, preserving it, sharing it responsibly, and ensuring that it survives for future generations. In Iran, one of the most important priorities for the future of IL may be helping rural women preserve the indigenous knowledge they already possess and pass on to future generations.

Over the last fifty years, IL has evolved from a “niche” library practice and skill into a concept connected to democracy, social justice and human rights. Yet much discussion in the field still revolves around definitions, frameworks and competences, while broader social and political realities shaping information practices receive less attention. If IL is to be socially relevant and “fit for the future”, its value cannot lie only in conceptual refinements, but in its ability to respond to the conditions affecting our lives.  

Citizen’s assemblies are forms of civic participation, which can be enhanced by insights from Information Literacy, thereby countering dis/misinformation, promoting reasoned outcomes, and contributing to healthier democracy

In an age where generative AI tools like ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok, and Claude can produce essays, summarize research, generate code, create lesson plans, and even draft emails in seconds, one might wonder whether traditional Information Literacy remains essential. The answer is a simply “Yes”, perhaps more than ever before. While AI dramatically changes how we access, create, and interact with information, it does not replace the critical human skills needed to evaluate, interpret, contextualize, and ethically use that information. In fact, the rise of AI-generated contents make strong information literacy skills even more crucial for navigating an increasingly complex information landscape.

Information literacy has become a serious focus in scientific research and political advocacy within Brazilian Librarianship and Information Science. Since the early 2000s, Brazil has come a long way: it shifted from a simple, user education approach to studies about critical thinking, multiple perspectives, and real social commitment. Shaped by real challenges such as regional inequalities, political turbulence, and the rush to go digital, Brazilian research can’t be separated from social justice, fixing education, and keeping democracy strong.

Digital healthcare can increase convenience, reduce travel time, and make services available to more people, more quickly. Patients can access test results, book appointments, renew prescriptions, and, in many countries, read their medical records online. Yet as healthcare becomes increasingly digital, I find myself asking a different question: who is this system really designed for? More specifically, who is expected to understand it?

For decades, the golden rule of information literacy was simple: check the source. Who wrote the article? When was it published? Does the URL end in .gov or .edu? Those questions still matter, but in today’s digital ecosystem, they are no longer enough. Modern users don’t just read static webpages; they navigate a chaotic blend of search engine snippets, algorithmic social feeds, influencer testimonials, and AI-generated summaries. In high-stakes arenas like personal health, evaluating a single “source” is no longer the primary task. The real challenge is making sense of an entire information environment.

In many academic and professional settings, IL is treated as something people either possess or lack. Once someone is qualified or trained, they are often assumed to be information literate by default. In contrast, we believe that becoming information literate in the workplace is a continuous, effortful, and highly contextual process, particularly for neurodivergent people, for example, for autistic librarians in the workplace.

It was more than fifty years ago that Paul Zurkowski (1974) coined the term “information literacy.” To be sure, education preceded that date in the form of bibliographic instruction, library instruction, and other names. That earlier instruction tended to be concentrated on assisting students and others with the rudiments of searching, locating physical items, and citing the found items properly. Zurkowski signaled a break with the past by his recognition of the complexity of ever-increasing amounts and kinds of information.

Opposite Ends of the Tay explores a growing collaboration between NHS Tayside and public libraries to strengthen information literacy and support preventative, person‑centred healthcare. Set against stark health inequalities in Scotland, it argues that libraries are vital community infrastructure for enabling people to find, judge and use health information safely.