EPISTEMIC INJUSTICE IN KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION SYSTEMS

Abstract

Knowledge Organization (KO) is concerned with the analysis, modeling, and representation of the concepts that structure the production, circulation, and access to knowledge. In this context, Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS) play a central role in information organization and in mediating relationships among individuals, technologies, and knowledge domains. However, their semantic structures incorporate conceptual, terminological, and epistemological choices that influence the visibility, legitimacy, and circulation of different forms of knowledge. This study aims to comparatively analyze modes of knowledge representation in semantic tools applied to socially sensitive topics. The research is exploratory, descriptive, qualitative, and applied in nature, and is grounded in documentary, terminological, and semantic analysis. The corpus consisted of representations of the topics Family, Favela, Obesity, and Obstetric Violence across eleven KOS used in different contexts. Despite the specificities of the domains and systems analyzed, recurring patterns were identified, including the predominance of institutionally legitimized perspectives, the invisibilization of social actors and experiences, representational shortcomings, normative frameworks, stigmatizing terminologies, and difficulties in incorporating emerging concepts. The findings also suggest that forms of representation that are more attentive to the experiences of represented groups may contribute to greater diversity of perspectives within KOS. The study concludes that KOS produce effects that extend beyond information organization, influencing processes of social recognition, knowledge circulation, and the legitimization of worldviews. In this regard, possibilities for taxonomic repair are discussed, guided by the principles of epistemic justice, inclusion, and sociocultural diversity.