GRF · Information Integrity and Public Trust
Information Integrity and Public Trust
Trust, information quality, media governance and public communication under systemic stress and technological change. Information Integrity and Public Trust is an established platform of The Global Risks Forum.
- STEM methods
- 3
- Canonical methods this field applies
- Topics
- 8
- Subject pages in the field
- Counterparts
- 5
- Platforms in shared fields across the network
- Report series
- 1
- Reports series it contributes to
21 pages under Information Integrity and Public Trust.
- 01STEM methods3 canonical methods applied
- 02Topics8 subject pages
- 03Counterparts5 platforms in shared fields
- 04Report series1 Reports series
- 05Mandate, publisherMandate, publisher and status
- 06Discipline institutionalDiscipline and institutional issues
- 07Research institutionalResearch and institutional knowledge
- 08Professional practiceProfessional practice
Shared risks need shared facts.
Managing any serious risk depends on people receiving accurate information, understanding it and trusting its source enough to act. Warnings, health guidance, safety instructions and public explanations of hard choices all rest on that chain. When it breaks, a technically sound response can fail: people ignore an evacuation order, reject a vaccine, panic-buy or turn against institutions trying to help.
The information environment has changed faster than the institutions that rely on it. Digital platforms have lowered the cost of publishing and amplified content that provokes strong reactions. Local news has contracted in many places, leaving fewer trusted intermediaries. Coordinated campaigns can mimic organic opinion, and generative AI can produce convincing text, images, audio and video at scale. Research shows that false or misleading content can spread quickly through networks, but also that its effects depend heavily on existing distrust, polarisation and the absence of credible alternatives.
Trust is both a cause and a consequence. Low trust makes people more receptive to alternative narratives; institutions that communicate poorly, conceal uncertainty or fail to act on their own advice lose trust further. In a crisis, this spiral can turn a hazard into a governance failure. The field exists to understand these dynamics with evidence rather than assumption, and to help institutions earn trust rather than demand it.
Why now: the UN Global Principles for Information Integrity (2024) set expectations for states, platforms and media, and generative AI has changed how quickly false content spreads in a crisis. The platform is designed to convene public institutions, media and researchers on honest risk communication, test communication arrangements in Universe with contained scenarios, and feed reviewed findings to Reports.
Narrative monitor.
The screen a team would use to follow this field: its measures, states and decisions. Names are examples and values are illustrative.
Narrative monitor
Crisis information cell · Week 13
Narratives
| Tap water poisoned after flood | 61 | High | False | Correction out |
| Shelters charging fees | 43 | Medium | False | Drafting |
| Dam about to fail | 75 | High | Checking | Holding line |
| Aid only for registered voters | 44 | Medium | False | Prebunked |
Spread
Response protocol
- Detectmonitor
- Verifyprovenance
- Assess harmthreshold
- Respondcorrect · prebunk
- Reporttransparency
The questions this field works on.
Misinformation and disinformation
Information harms and analytical limits.
TopicInstitutional trust
Evidence, transparency and public confidence.
TopicCrisis information
Warnings, risk communication and trust.
TopicPlatforms and media systems
Digital media incentives and accountability.
TopicAI generated information
Synthetic media and authenticity.
TopicScience communication
Uncertainty and honest communication.
TopicCommunity information
Access and local language needs.
TopicInformation governance rights
Rights, free expression and public safeguards.
What tips a population into acting.
How the share of early movers and the thresholds people hold decide whether a protective behaviour, or a false narrative, stays local or spreads to most people. Teaching model with stated illustrative values, not a prediction. The map on this page shows Eastern Europe; the model itself is not tied to a place.
Controls
- Mean threshold (share of neighbours)
- 18%
- Spread of thresholds
- 8 points
- Early movers
- 2.0% of people
- Contacts per person
- 8
Readouts
- Share who acted in the end
- 100%
- Global cascade
- Yes
- Steps to settle
- 10
Numbers, methods and sources
| Step | Share who have acted (%) |
|---|---|
| 0 | 1.5 |
| 1 | 3.8 |
| 2 | 10.5 |
| 3 | 23.8 |
| 4 | 37.3 |
| 5 | 53.0 |
| 6 | 68.8 |
| 7 | 81.3 |
| 8 | 94.5 |
| 9 | 100.0 |
| 10 | 100.0 |
Methods
- Threshold models of collective behaviour Granovetter (1978), American Journal of Sociology 83
- Global cascades on random networks Watts (2002), PNAS 99
- Complex contagions Centola and Macy (2007), American Journal of Sociology 113
- One-at-a-time sensitivity (tornado) Saltelli and others (2008), Global Sensitivity Analysis: The Primer, Wiley
Data
No observed data enters this model: it runs on the teaching values set by the controls, to be replaced with a programme’s own evidence.
Across the six pillars, led by Nexus Consortium
- Experiments Labs
- Built in Information Integrity and Public Trust in Foundry
- Tested at Information Integrity and Public Trust in Universe
- Codified in Governance, Security and Society in Standards
- Published in Information Integrity and Public Trust in Reports
- Taught in Faculty of Governance, Policy and International Affairs in Academy
The areas of information and public trust this platform takes on.
Information Integrity and Public Trust studies how accurate, plural and trustworthy information reaches people, and how it is degraded: misinformation and coordinated disinformation, falling trust in institutions, information failures in crises, platform and media economics, AI-generated content, science communication and local news. Its pages set out the mechanisms, the records that measure them, the methods that test them and the institutions that decide, while protecting freedom of expression. Global Risks Forum convenes the dialogue; it does not fact-check, moderate content or rank outlets.
Misinformation and disinformation
False and misleading content, coordinated manipulation campaigns, foreign interference and the responses that work without harming expression.
Institutional trust
How trust in governments, courts, science and media is earned and lost, and what institutions do that changes it.
Crisis information
What people need to know in disasters and emergencies, how rumours spread and how authorities and media keep information flowing.
Platforms and media systems
Recommender systems, advertising markets, platform governance and the business models of news.
AI-generated information
Synthetic text, images, audio and video, provenance standards, labelling duties and detection limits.
Science communication
How research reaches the public and policy makers, communicating uncertainty and correcting the record.
Community information
Local news, community media and trusted local messengers, and the effects when local reporting disappears.
Rights and governance
Freedom of expression, access to information, media freedom, privacy and the limits of state and platform action.
From mandate to evaluation, by pillar.
The steps an instrument takes from mandate to evaluation, each with the pillar that runs it, and the decisions that stay with the authority. Teaching model with stated illustrative values, not a prediction. The map on this page shows Eastern Europe; the model itself is not tied to a place.
- Mandate and problem framing Competent authority (outside the programme)
A competent authority frames the problem and the mandate under its own rules. Howlett, Ramesh and Perl (2009) - Evidence and system model Foundry
The system is modelled with its feedbacks, data and stated limits. OECD (2014), principle 2 - Options appraised with scenarios Foundry
Instruments are compared under scenarios, with uncertainty shown. Hood (1983) - Exercise with stakeholders Universe
The options are tested in an exercise with those who would implement and bear them. OECD (2014), principle 3 - Standard or guidance drafted Nexus Standards
What works is codified as a standard or guidance, open to comment. Nexus Standards process - Decision by the authority Competent authority (outside the programme)
The authority decides, outside the programme, with the evidence on record. Howlett, Ramesh and Perl (2009) - Capacity and training Risk Academy
Those who implement are trained on the decided instrument and its data. Sendai Framework (2015), priority 2 - Monitoring and public report Reports
Indicators are published with sources, limits and corrections. OECD (2014), principle 5 - Evaluation and revision Nexus Standards
Results return to the standard and the model: the cycle closes. Howlett, Ramesh and Perl (2009)
Methods
- Policy cycle Howlett, Ramesh and Perl (2009), Studying Public Policy, Oxford University Press
- Governance of critical risks OECD (2014), Recommendation of the Council on the Governance of Critical Risks
- Layered drawing of directed graphs Sugiyama, Tagawa and Toda (1981), IEEE SMC 11
Across the six pillars, led by Nexus Consortium
- Experiments Labs
- Built in Information Integrity and Public Trust in Foundry
- Tested at Information Integrity and Public Trust in Universe
- Codified in Governance, Security and Society in Standards
- Published in Information Integrity and Public Trust in Reports
- Taught in Faculty of Governance, Policy and International Affairs in Academy
What Information Integrity and Public Trust does.
Information integrity is the accuracy, consistency and reliability of the information people receive, and the diversity and independence of its sources. Global Risks Forum’s platform compares how disinformation, trust, crisis information, platforms, AI content, science communication and local news are governed, while protecting freedom of expression. It does not fact-check.
Its community
Media researchers; science communicators; public institutions; integrity experts.
Its methods
Information ecosystem analysis; communication ethics; trust research.
Its outputs
Public trust research; communication guidelines; information integrity cases.
Exercise a cascade in Information Integrity and Public Trust with the people who decide.
Assembled from the Nexus Standards area profile Information integrity and trust: the hazards it names, the systems and communities that carry the loss, the controls and institutions that dampen it and the data that observe it. Pick an initiating event and step through the cascade to see where mandates meet and which decisions fall to whom. The Map view places the run on an example geography with open data. Every weight is a stated assumption. An exercise for dialogue, not a forecast, an assessment or a position. To model a place of your own choosing, open the full System Builder.
Hazards
- Civil unrest
- Ice-jam flood
- Tropical cyclone
- Heatwave
- HIV epidemic
- Dam failure
- Storm surge (set off downstream)
- Intense rainfall (set off downstream)
- River flood (set off downstream)
- Flash flood (set off downstream)
- Dangerous surf (set off downstream)
- Widespread power outage (set off downstream)
- Mass displacement (set off downstream)
- Coastal flood (set off downstream)
- Extreme fire weather (set off downstream)
- Wildfire (set off downstream)
- Heat-driven grid stress (set off downstream)
- Agricultural drought (set off downstream)
Systems and couplings
Controls
NS-0Constitution and principlesNS-2Citation and attribution format for UNIsNS-9Contextual UNIs (deployments, instances, programme instances)NS-11Verification and monitoring (evidence, attestations, zero-trust conformance observation)NS-12Software, model and AI/ML artefacts (supply chain, model cards, dataset sheets)NRS-H52Hazard family: Information-integrity attacks (NHS-1 cyber.integrity)NRS-X7Information integrity and public trustNRS-U23Universe platform profile: ReportsNRS-A4Zero-trust verification of standards and conformanceNRS-H65Hazard family: Planetary boundary transgressions (NHS-1 planet.boundary)NRS-H72Hazard family: Novel entities and emerging contaminants (NHS-1 poll.novel-entities)
Observation
- GDELT event database and global knowledge graph (listed for reference)
- Our World in Data datasets (listed for reference)
- Number of countries that adopt and implement guarantees for public access to information
Example geography
- The Horn of Africa: 253 hexagonal cells
- Night lights tonight, outages (VIIRS Day/Night Band), NASA GIBS
- Surface water through cloud, 30 m (OPERA DSWx-S1 radar), NASA GIBS
- Rain rate, last half hour (IMERG), NASA GIBS
- Surface air temperature, daytime (AIRS), NASA GIBS
Research, guidance and cases on information integrity.
Information Integrity and Public Trust is designed to publish public trust research, communication guidelines and information integrity cases. Its methods are information ecosystem analysis, communication ethics and trust research. It serves public institutions, researchers, journalists and communicators who need evidence on what works and where the limits of intervention lie.
Information ecosystems
How information moves through media, platforms, communities and institutions, and how harmful content gains reach.
Honest communication
Evidence on communicating risk and uncertainty in ways that are accurate, accessible and respectful of audiences.
Rights and safeguards
How responses to harmful information can protect the public without undermining free expression and rights.
How Information Integrity and Public Trust is governed: instruments, mandates and commitments.
The instruments, mandates, actors and accountability arrangements a policymaker, diplomat or development agency works with, citing the agreements that set them. Structures follow the frameworks named. Any state or progress drawn is illustrative, not a record.
Accountability cycle
How commitments on Information Integrity and Public Trust are held to account, from commitment to correction.
- CommitGovernmentA commitment with a mandate and a legal basis.
- PlanLead agencyA national plan with owners and milestones.
- ResourceMinistry of financeA budget line or financing on record.
- ImplementAgencies and local governmentDelivery against the plan.
- ReportStatistics officeIndicators reported in agreed definitions.
- ReviewLegislature, audit, civil societyIndependent review of results and gaps.
- CorrectGovernmentChanges to the plan, published with reasons.
Who holds which role
The actors around Information Integrity and Public Trust: who decides, who implements, who finances and who brings knowledge and voice.
Built on named methods, connected across three institutions.
The platform applies social and behavioural science, artificial intelligence and machine learning and network science and contagion; see the STEM foundation. The science of information systems is developed at the Global Centre for Risk and Innovation (GCRI), and GRF brings it into institutional dialogue.
- Society and Human Development at GCRIInstitutionGCRIWhat it addsResearch on media and information systems and social cohesion.
- Campaigns at GCRIInstitutionGCRIWhat it addsPublic campaigns on risk literacy, with evidence on what reaches people.
- information operations at GCRI Cybersecurity and Digital ResilienceInstitutionGCRIWhat it addsThe technical side of coordinated information operations.
- AI and Digital GovernanceInstitutionGRFWhat it addsGovernance of AI and digital systems, including rights and privacy.
People and exposure in Eastern Europe.
Population density, night lights and flood water over Eastern Europe, from NASA GIBS. Each layer carries its own date.
The interactive map needs JavaScript; the layer list and sources are below.
Layers 3
People and exposure, for this page
About this layer
- Evidence
- Estimated
- Source
- Gridded Population of the World v4.11 (NASA SEDAC (CIESIN, Columbia University))
- Provider
- NASA SEDAC (CIESIN, Columbia University)
- Licence
- CC BY 4.0
- Vintage
- null; Census-based estimate, static (2020)
- Resolution
- about 1 km grid
- Uncertainty
- Census-based estimate of people per square kilometre in 2020, shown as exposure context; not a count of people affected by any hazard.
- Reached through
- gibs.earthdata.nasa.gov, only after you allow the live map
About this layer
- Evidence
- Observed
- Source
- VIIRS Black Marble (VNP46A2) (NASA LAADS DAAC)
- Provider
- NASA LAADS DAAC
- Licence
- NASA open data
- Vintage
- daily; Satellite radiance, corrected for moonlight and atmosphere
- Newest at build
- 2026-10-12
- Resolution
- about 500 m grid
- Uncertainty
- Satellite night-time radiance for the date shown; lights are a proxy for electricity use and outages, not a measurement of supply or access.
- Reached through
- gibs.earthdata.nasa.gov, only after you allow the live map
About this layer
- Evidence
- Observed (persistent cloud still leaves gaps)
- Source
- VIIRS NOAA-20 Level 3, 8-day (NASA LANCE)
- Provider
- NASA LANCE
- Licence
- NASA open data
- Vintage
- 8-day; Satellite 8-day composite; persistent cloud still leaves gaps
- Newest at build
- 2026-09-14
- Resolution
- about 1 km grid
- Uncertainty
- Satellite skin temperature of the ground over the 8 days ending on the date shown, a heat exposure indicator; not air temperature, heat index or a heat warning.
- Reached through
- gibs.earthdata.nasa.gov, only after you allow the live map
About this layer
- Evidence
- Observed (clouds leave gaps)
- Source
- VIIRS Global Flood Product (NASA LANCE)
- Provider
- NASA LANCE
- Licence
- NASA open data
- Vintage
- daily; Satellite detection; clouds leave gaps
- Newest at build
- 2026-10-14
- Resolution
- about 250 m grid
- Uncertainty
- Satellite detection; clouds leave gaps. Satellite or model raster as the provider publishes it. Clouds, swath gaps and retrieval error leave gaps and noise; values are indicators, not measurements at a place.
- Reached through
- gibs.earthdata.nasa.gov, only after you allow the live map
About this layer
- Evidence
- Observed (clouds and overpass timing leave gaps)
- Source
- VIIRS NOAA-20 375 m (FIRMS) (NASA LANCE FIRMS)
- Provider
- NASA LANCE FIRMS
- Licence
- NASA open data
- Vintage
- daily; Satellite detection; clouds and overpass timing leave gaps
- Newest at build
- 2026-10-13
- Resolution
- about 500 m grid
- Uncertainty
- Satellite hot-spot detections for the day shown, including gas flares and industrial heat; not a confirmed fire, an incident report or a warning.
- Reached through
- gibs.earthdata.nasa.gov, only after you allow the live map
About this layer
- Evidence
- Observed (clouds leave gaps)
- Source
- OMI Aura (NASA GES DISC)
- Provider
- NASA GES DISC
- Licence
- NASA open data
- Vintage
- daily; Satellite retrieval; clouds leave gaps
- Newest at build
- 2026-10-10
- Resolution
- about 2 km grid
- Uncertainty
- Satellite column of nitrogen dioxide in the lower atmosphere on the day shown, mostly from combustion; not a ground-level concentration or a health warning.
- Reached through
- gibs.earthdata.nasa.gov, only after you allow the live map
Keyboard, with the map focused
Hold Ctrl or ⌘ and scroll to zoom
Latest available
NASA GIBS / EOSDIS · ASTER GDEM (METI, NASA) · Blue Marble (NASA) · © OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL) · Natural Earth
Loading the latest NASA imagery.
Drag to move. Ctrl or ⌘ and scroll, pinch or the buttons to zoom; hover for the values under the pointer; reset returns to the region.
People and exposure, framed on Eastern Europe.Satellite and model products as NASA publishes them, each with its own date. They are indicators, not assessments of any place.
Data: NASA GIBS · ASTER GDEM · Blue Marble · © OpenStreetMap contributors · Natural Earth · NASA EONET · CIESIN/Columbia, NASA SEDAC HBASE · U.S. Geological SurveySources and licences
- We acknowledge the use of imagery provided by services from NASA’s Global Imagery Browse Services (GIBS), part of NASA’s Earth Science Data and Information System (ESDIS). Colours redrawn from the published colour map; values averaged into hexagonal cells where shown (modified). NASA open data
- We acknowledge the use of imagery provided by services from NASA’s Global Imagery Browse Services (GIBS), part of NASA’s Earth Science Data and Information System (ESDIS). Colours redrawn from the published colour map; values averaged into hexagonal cells where shown (modified). NASA open data
- Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN), Columbia University. 2018. Gridded Population of the World, Version 4 (GPWv4): Population Density, Revision 11. NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC). Licensed under CC BY 4.0. Colours redrawn from the published colour map; values averaged into hexagonal cells where shown (modified). doi:10.7927/H49C6VHW. CC BY 4.0
- VIIRS Black Marble night-time lights, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center; distributed by the NASA Level-1 and Atmosphere Archive and Distribution System (LAADS DAAC); imagery via NASA GIBS. Colours redrawn from the published colour map; values averaged into hexagonal cells where shown (modified). NASA open data
- VIIRS near-real-time products (flood, land surface temperature, snow cover, corrected reflectance), NASA LANCE; imagery via NASA GIBS. Colours redrawn from the published colour map; values averaged into hexagonal cells where shown (modified). NASA open data
- NASA Fire Information for Resource Management System (FIRMS), VIIRS 375 m active fire product, NASA LANCE; vector tiles via NASA GIBS. Colours redrawn from the published colour map; values averaged into hexagonal cells where shown (modified). NASA open data
- OMI nitrogen dioxide (Aura) and OMPS aerosol index (Suomi NPP), NASA; distributed by the NASA GES DISC; imagery via NASA GIBS. Colours redrawn from the published colour map; values averaged into hexagonal cells where shown (modified). NASA open data
- ASTER GDEM is a product of METI and NASA (ASTER Global Digital Elevation Model V003, NASA LP DAAC); imagery via NASA GIBS. Colours redrawn from the published colour map; values averaged into hexagonal cells where shown (modified). Cite as: NASA/METI/AIST/Japan Spacesystems and U.S./Japan ASTER Science Team (2019). ASTER Global Digital Elevation Model V003. doi:10.5067/ASTER/ASTGTM.003. NASA open data
- Made with Natural Earth. Free vector and raster map data @ naturalearthdata.com. Public domain
- © OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL), via NASA GIBS (coastlines, boundaries, roads and place names). Colours redrawn from the published colour map; values averaged into hexagonal cells where shown (modified). ODbL
- Blue Marble, NASA Earth Observatory; imagery via NASA GIBS. Colours redrawn from the published colour map; values averaged into hexagonal cells where shown (modified). NASA open data
- Context on the globe and flat map: coastlines, boundaries, roads and place names from NASA GIBS reference layers (OpenStreetMap data, ODbL, © OpenStreetMap contributors); Blue Marble imagery as an optional base; 3D terrain and the elevation read-out from the ASTER GDEM elevation colour index (5 m to 200 m classes, exaggerated for legibility). Boundaries are drawn as published and imply no position on any territory.
- Live events: NASA Earth Observatory Natural Event Tracker (EONET); events are indicative and keep their original source links.
- Live: NASA EONET Events are indicative, not authority warnings.
- Context: CIESIN/Columbia, NASA SEDAC HBASE. Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN), Columbia University, and NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC): Global Human Built-up And Settlement Extent (HBASE) 2010; Seto, Guneralp and Hutyra 2012, Global Grid of Probabilities of Urban Expansion to 2030; Global Urban Heat Island (UHI) Data Set, 2013.
- Live: U.S. Geological Survey Events are indicative, not authority warnings.
- NASA GIBS: We acknowledge the use of imagery provided by services from NASA’s Global Imagery Browse Services (GIBS), part of NASA’s Earth Science Data and Information System (ESDIS).
- Air quality forecast, 5 days, PM2.5 (CAMS via Open-Meteo): Contains modified Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service information 2026.
- Weather data by Open-Meteo.com (https://open-meteo.com/), licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
- Optional layers (9 sources in the layer list: live, forecast, observed and context) print their provider credit on the map and here when switched on; forecasts are model output and derived indices are estimates.
Layers and dates
- Population density, 2020: Population: CIESIN, Columbia University, Gridded Population of the World v4.11 (2018), NASA SEDAC, CC BY 4.0 · static
- Night-time lights, daily: VIIRS Black Marble (VNP46A2), NASA LAADS DAAC · 12 Oct 2026
- Land surface temperature, day, 8-day composite: VIIRS NOAA-20 Level 3, 8-day, NASA LANCE · 14 Sep 2026
- Flood water, 3-day composite: VIIRS Global Flood Product, NASA LANCE · 14 Oct 2026
- Active fires and thermal anomalies: VIIRS NOAA-20 375 m (FIRMS), NASA LANCE FIRMS · 13 Oct 2026
- Nitrogen dioxide, lower atmosphere column: OMI Aura, NASA GES DISC · 10 Oct 2026
Built on named science, technology, engineering and mathematics.
Every claim on Information Integrity and Public Trust rests on methods with a canonical page in the STEM Commons, so readers can see what a finding depends on and where its limits lie.
See the STEM foundation of Information Integrity and Public Trust
How work moves in this field.
A question becomes evidence, a governed build, an organised community, a controlled test, a reviewed publication and, finally, a decision taken by the competent authority under its own rules.
- Question Universe National, regional or institutional priority. Question in Information Integrity and Public Trust
- Evidence Foundry STEM foundation of the platform. Evidence in Information Integrity and Public Trust
- Build Foundry Foundry. Build in Information Integrity and Public Trust
- Organise Universe Nexus ecosystem. Organise in Information Integrity and Public Trust
- Test Universe Universe (independent site). Test in Information Integrity and Public Trust
- Publish Reports Reports. Publish in Information Integrity and Public Trust
- Decide Competent authority Competent authorities and institutions, through NXS-RLS (participants, agreements and handoffs). Decide in Information Integrity and Public Trust
- Renew Universe Corrections and the next annual agenda. Renew in Information Integrity and Public Trust
Each step of the cycle in the pillar it runs in; the decision stays with the competent authority, outside the programme.
- Labs
- Foundry
- Universe
- Nexus Standards
- Reports
- Risk Academy
- Competent authority (outside the programme)
How this works across the six pillars.
Information Integrity and Public Trust works through six pillars of one annual programme, led by the Nexus Consortium, with GCRI, GRF and the Global Risks Alliance (GRA) each contributing in its role: explore, experiment and prototype in Labs, build, simulate and prepare in Foundry, convene and test in Universe, codify, correct and apply in Nexus Standards, publish in every format in Reports, teach in the open in Risk Academy.
handoff in playrecorded handoffno direct handoff
Programme yearAll phases
Route
The whole programme
Every pillar hands its work to another; together they close the year’s feedback loops.
L · F · U · S · R · A
- Pillars
- 6 of 6
- Handoffs
- 18 of 18
- Loops
- 17 closed
Handoffs in play
- F01Universe → Foundry · Admitted mission becomes a cycle project with a decision caseReadiness preparation
- F02Foundry → Universe · Core Build Report and go or no-go evidenceControlled build
- F03Foundry → Reports · Sealed observations and indicator series behind a profileCloseout
- F04Universe → Reports · After-action and scenario findings for chapters 10 and 13After-action review
and 14 more
- LabsWhere questions become experiments and prototypes: new methods, data and tools are tried in the open, with their limits on record, before the Foundry builds them, under the Nexus Consortium.Labs
- FoundryWhere the evidence behind a mandate or commitment is built, with its owner and limits on record.Information Integrity and Public Trust in FoundryFoundry
- UniverseWhere mandates become missions: GRF records each gate, convenes the parties and keeps implementation accountable.Information Integrity and Public Trust in Universeuniverse.nexus
- Nexus StandardsWhere shared rules are agreed in the open; each jurisdiction decides adoption, and no global body holds a veto.Governance, Security and Society in Standardsnexustandards.com
- ReportsWhere governance analysis and the year’s results are published, so commitments can be followed and checked.Information Integrity and Public Trust in ReportsReports
- Risk AcademyWhere policymakers, diplomats and agency staff learn the programme roles and decision-making on the record, on Risk Academy.Faculty of Governance, Policy and International Affairs in Academyrisksacademy.com
What the work is read against.
The platform does not set standards. It reads its evidence against the frameworks that competent bodies have adopted, so a finding can be placed where a decision-maker already works.
| Framework or standard | Body | What it sets |
|---|---|---|
| United Nations Global Principles for Information Integrity | United Nations Secretary-General | Principles of societal trust, healthy incentives, public empowerment, independent media and transparency for stakeholders in the information ecosystem |
| OECD Recommendation on Information Integrity | OECD Council | A policy framework for countering information manipulation while upholding freedom of opinion and expression, through resilience, transparency and institutional reform |
| Digital Services Act | European Union | Obligations on online platforms, including systemic risk assessment and audit for very large platforms, transparency and researcher data access |
| Code of Conduct on Disinformation | Signatories under the EU Digital Services Act framework | Commitments by platforms, advertisers and others on demonetisation, transparency, user empowerment and fact-checking cooperation |
| Guidelines for the Governance of Digital Platforms | UNESCO | A multistakeholder approach to platform governance grounded in human rights, transparency and accountability |
| International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 19, and the Rabat Plan of Action | United Nations; Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights | The right to freedom of expression, its permissible limits, and a threshold test for incitement to hatred |
| C2PA technical specification for content credentials | Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity | An open standard for attaching verifiable provenance information to digital media |
| EU AI Act transparency obligations | European Union | Duties to inform people when they interact with AI and to mark or disclose synthetic and manipulated content such as deepfakes |
| Journalism Trust Initiative standard | Reporters Without Borders, as CEN Workshop Agreement CWA 17493 | Indicators of transparency and professional practice that news organisations can self-assess and have audited |
The same field, seen three ways.
GCRI studies a field as science, GRF governs it and GRA builds shared financial understanding of it. Information Integrity and Public Trust links to its counterparts so that work on one side is visible on the others.
- CampaignsInstitutionGCRIShared fieldInformation and public trust, Society and human development
- Cities and Built EnvironmentInstitutionGCRIShared fieldSociety and human development
- Society and Human DevelopmentInstitutionGCRIShared fieldSociety and human development, Information and public trust
- Future of Work and SkillsInstitutionGCRIShared fieldSociety and human development
- Institutional Funds NexusInstitutionGRAShared fieldSociety and human development
Pages in Information Integrity and Public Trust.
Mandate, publisher and status
PageDiscipline and institutional issues
PageResearch and institutional knowledge
PageProfessional practice
PageDialogues and cooperation
PageProgrammes and projects
PageAnnual programme contribution
PageSpecialist and institutional community
PageLeadership and skills
PageConvenings and dialogues
PagePublished findings
PageParticipate
PageInstitutional contact
PageTransparency, rights and safeguards
PageSTEM foundation of Information Integrity and Public Trust
PageHow work moves in this field
PageBuild in Foundry
PageTest in Universe
PagePublish in Reports
PageThe same field across the Consortium
PageTopics
Where this page leads across the Consortium.
Questions and answers.
Who publishes Information Integrity and Public Trust?
Is Information Integrity and Public Trust active?
How can I contribute?
Where are findings published?
Which values on this platform are real?
How do I report an error?
Is the platform a fact-checking service?
Does it decide what counts as misinformation?
Contribute evidence from this page.
Reports is the Consortium’s quarterly publication. What you know about this subject can become evidence, a case or a correction in the next edition, credited to you and published under CC BY 4.0 where it is your own work.
- EmailGateway GW-GRFSend it from this pageEvidence, a correction, a case, a method, a review, a translation or profile input. It arrives tagged with this page, so the editor who owns it receives it.
- ZenodoOpen depositDeposit it and submit to the communityPublish your own record on Zenodo with your ORCID iD, then submit it to the Reports community there. Curators review it; the DOI stays yours.
- ReportsGlobal Risks ForumSee every way to contributeThe contribution types, how each is reviewed, what credit you receive, the licence and what is never accepted.
Never send personal data, sensitive infrastructure detail or anything you have no right to share. A contribution is reviewed before use; sending it confers no authorship or editorial rights, and sponsorship never buys a finding.
How Information Integrity and Public Trust works.
Choose a view and press Play to follow the platform’s process, its programme year, the standards it applies and how its findings are published. The outline shows how the work is designed to run, not the status of any decision.
Information Integrity and Public Trust
How Information Integrity and Public Trust works
Platforms · Programme year · Standards · Reports
A platform joins a field to named methods, labelled evidence and the outputs it publishes, without becoming the authority it serves.
01 Scope
- 01Field and familiesStart · The platform leadThe home states the field, its families and who it serves.
- 02Topic dossiersRecord · Platform authorsTopics explain the subject with labelled evidence.
02 Evidence
- 03Evidence labelsRecord · GCRIEach value is labelled: observed, published statistics, estimated, modelled, scenario or unknown.
- 04MethodsStep · Method ownersMethods come from the STEM Commons, each with one canonical page.
03 Work
- 05Scenarios on the systemsModel · Foundry pillarScenarios run on the Nexus systems, labelled as scenario.
- 06Standards that applyRecord · Nexus StandardsThe platform names the standards that apply. A validator report is evidence for review.
04 Publish
- 07EditionsRecord · ReportsFindings are published through Reports with their limits.
- 08Authority decidesOutcome · The competent authorityDecisions and execution stay with the government, operator or licensed institution.
Information Integrity and Public Trust home · Platforms · Shared methodsAn outline of how the work is designed to run; it does not report the status of any decision or record.
Take part in Information Integrity and Public Trust.
Start from who you are. Answer an open call. Or form and lead a competence cell on the Information Integrity and Public Trust platform.
National institutions
Ministries, statistics offices and agencies: a national desk and chapter, and a seat in the working groups. National chapters
Sectors and professions
Operators, regulators, banks, insurers and professional bodies whose work touches Information Integrity and Public Trust. Participate
Learning
Courses and practice, with a record of every course completed. Free to study. Open learning
Standards
Draft, review and adopt the methods and data standards with the working groups. Working groups
Communities and research
Universities, civil society and individual experts: projects, data and review. Write to the team
| Open call | Seeks | Closes |
|---|---|---|
| Founding call for experts to the working groups CALL-FOUNDING-EXPERTS | expert, editor, chair | 2026-12-15 |
| Open nomination for the three independent expert seats of the Global Standards Council CALL-GSC-IND | council-member | 2026-12-01 |
| Nominations of interim regional members (applies only if the transitional provision is decided) CALL-GSC-REG | council-member | 2026-12-15 |
| Review of the wave-1 risk core outlines (C1, C2, C3, C4, C8, C10, C11) CALL-REVIEW-WAVE1 | contributor | 2027-01-31 |
| Experts for the core standards of risk science: uncertainty and evidence grading, scales, structured expert judgement, tolerability, extremes and compound events, catastrophic and existential risk, ethics and equity, units and measurement (NRS-C17 to NRS-C24) CALL-CORE-SCIENCE | expert, editor, chair | 2027-01-31 |
| Independent reviewers for the families of the hazard atlas, three from at least two regions for each family (NHS2-R19), priority families first CALL-ATLAS-REVIEW | expert | 2027-03-31 |
| Members of the interim Frontier Safety Review Panel and red-team reviewers (biosafety and biosecurity, AI safety and security, critical-infrastructure security); applications treated in confidence CALL-FRONTIER-SAFETY-REVIEW | expert | 2026-11-30 |
| Experts in ontology, metrology, software verification and conformity assessment for the requirement register, the NHS-2 machine representation, the conformance test suites and the conformity assessment scheme CALL-CONFORMANCE-ONTOLOGY | expert, editor | 2027-01-31 |
Calls past their closing date are hidden automatically. Every call, proposal and route: open areas and calls.
Gather the cell
Bring together three to seven people with complementary skills: data, field practice, policy and communication.
Register it
Write to the team with the cell’s name, members, area and region. You receive a reference and a contact. Write to the team
Choose a charter
Pick one focus: research and evidence, data and maps, standards review, or community preparedness.
Learn together
Follow shared study paths at Risk Academy, with practice and a record of every course completed. Hazards and resilience
Lead and report
Hold regular sessions. Publish what the cell learns through Reports. Bring findings to the working groups. Working groups
What a national team or a local community can do on The Global Risks Index (NXS-GRX) today.
Your country’s profile
Open risk profiles for 195 countries, with sources and licences on every value. Open the Index
Correct or reply
Correct a value or reply for your country. The change is logged with its effect. Open the Index
Offer data
Offer a dataset. It enters through the licence gate, with your credit. Open the Index
Every figure on this page is indexed: society, demography, health, Eastern Europe.
The Index is the Consortium’s indexing system for risk data. Every indicator, hazard, series and country profile carries its Nexus Standards identifier, its source and its licence, so what this page shows can be traced, corrected and reused.
- 01 · Sources205 registered sourcesEvery value keeps its source and licence; withheld values are counted.Data and licences
- 02 · Nexus StandardsNIS-1 and NHS-1451 indicators, 905 hazards; every record carries a UNI.Nexus Standards
- 03 · The Index54 series, 195 country profilesComputed on the standards; no value is published until an edition is released.The Global Risks Index
- 04 · This pageInformation Integrity and Public TrustMaps, figures and feeds read the Index in the context of society, demography, health and Eastern Europe.Public API
Series in this context society, demography, health
- GSGlobal DevelopmentPoverty, inequality, human development, demographic pressure and displacement as the ground on which shocks become losses.NXS-GRX-AR-000064Society · Demography · Health
- GLBGlobal SystemsThe state of interdependent global risk: the twenty domain indices aggregated to the world, the five core systems (water, energy, food, health, biodiversity) and their couplings, the global tail register and the gap…NXS-GRX-AR-000002Society · Health · Demography
- GSGlobal HealthHealth security capacity, epidemic emergence and spread, heat and air-quality burden, health system stress and access.NXS-GRX-AR-000062Health · Society · Demography
- SRConflict, fragility and human securityConflict risk and escalation, fragility, organised violence, civilian harm and the conflict–climate–food–displacement nexus.NXS-GRX-AR-000075Governance · Demography · Society
Country profiles Eastern Europe
Every country profile carries the source and licence of each value. Correct a value or reply
Hazard domains NHS-1
- Health and biosecurityNXS-GRX-AR-000143
- Society, conflict and economyNXS-GRX-AR-000147
Geodata and API open
Open layers on an equal-area hexagon grid, shown as densities per km² or as symbols: People · GHSL 2025People · WorldPop 2025Built-up areaPortsAirportsRoadsRailwaysRivers and lake centrelines
/api/v1/public/grix · https://nexustandards.com/uni/{uni}
Developers · Data · Made with Natural Earth, Public domain; GHSL and WorldPop, CC BY 4.0
Snapshot of the Index registries pinned 2026-10-23 · 22c6eed. Research and risk-analytics information: not a rating, an official classification, a warning, a benchmark or advice.
Bring a governance question to the Forum.
Information and enquiries are open today. An enquiry receives a reference and names the next step; applications, payments, compute allocations and registrations open only when their team, terms and review capacity exist.
Legal documents.
Show all 18 legal documents
Maps, data and figures on this site are shown for context and general information. They are not advice, forecasts or warnings; the limits of the information are set out in the Disclaimers and Data Notices.