Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Disinformation has become a systemic challenge to democratic governance, eroding trust, weakening social cohesion, and complicating the work of public institutions. This article reframes the issue as a question of community resilience and examines how such resilience can be assessed at the local level. Building on resilience theory and indicator-based methodology, it develops a maturity-model framework across four domains: policy, governance, and regulation; education and public awareness; technology; and media, communication, and information. The framework is explored in a pilot/diagnostic study involving two related Norwegian local-governance respondent settings: elected councilors in one anonymized municipality and administrative respondents from a broader municipal sample. Across both settings, the results indicate a broadly similar pattern: communication-related capacities are more developed than educational, participatory, and technologically advanced ones, while resilience remains uneven and only partly institutionalized overall. Conceptually, the study links disinformation research to community-resilience theory; methodologically, the instrument should be understood as a governance-oriented diagnostic framework for assessing and comparing the maturity of local countermeasures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pursiainen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: