Does mapping improve public participation? Exploring the pros and cons of using public participation GIS in urban planning practices

被引:156
作者
Kahila-Tani, Maarit [1 ]
Kytta, Marketta [2 ]
Geertman, Stan [3 ]
机构
[1] Aalto Univ, Mapita Ltd, Helsinki, Finland
[2] Aalto Univ, Helsinki, Finland
[3] Univ Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
DECISION-MAKING; SUPPORT; ENGAGEMENT; PPGIS; INTERNET; SYSTEMS;
D O I
10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.02.019
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
While participatory urban and regional planning have become a widely accepted approach to enhance the democratic aims of community and urban development, challenges still remain. Planners lack the knowledge of usable tools to reach broader groups of participants, which can turn participation into a small-group elitist activity. Also, the quality and utilisation of the knowledge produced is problematic, the collected data remains invisible and systematic analysis is often not realized. In this article, we ask whether digitally supported PPGIS (public participation Geographical Information Systems) tools can help addressing these challenges. Through a critical analysis and reflection upon over 200 real life planning cases in Finland (62%) and other countries (38%) using PPGIS methodology we study the ability of PPGIS tools to (1) enhance effective arrangements of public participation, (2) reach a broad spectrum of people and 3) produce high quality and versatile knowledge. Our results indicate a variety of advantages and disadvantages in using PPGIS methodology in urban and regional planning practice. By categorizing the pros and cons of using PPGIS in practise, we enable planners to implement more inclusive and people-centred urban and regional planning in the future.
引用
收藏
页码:45 / 55
页数:11
相关论文
共 57 条
[11]   Key issues and research priorities for public participation GIS (PPGIS): A synthesis based on empirical research [J].
Brown, Greg ;
Kytta, Marketta .
APPLIED GEOGRAPHY, 2014, 46 :122-136
[12]   Public participation, GIS, and cyberdemocracy: evaluating on-line spatial decision support systems [J].
Carver, S ;
Evans, A ;
Kingston, R ;
Turton, I .
ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING B-PLANNING & DESIGN, 2001, 28 (06) :907-921
[13]   The positive and negative implications of anonymity in Internet social interactions: "On the Internet, Nobody Knows You're a Dog" [J].
Christopherson, Kimberly M. .
COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2007, 23 (06) :3038-3056
[14]   Geo-questionnaires in urban planning: recruitment methods, participant engagement, and data quality [J].
Czepkiewicz, Michal ;
Jankowski, Piotr ;
Mlodkowski, Marek .
CARTOGRAPHY AND GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SCIENCE, 2017, 44 (06) :551-567
[15]   The Legacy of Positivism and the Emergence of Interpretive Tradition in Spatial Planning [J].
Davoudi, Simin .
REGIONAL STUDIES, 2012, 46 (04) :429-441
[16]  
Dewulf G. P. M. R, 2018, REV IN PLANEXT
[17]  
Douglass M., 1998, CITIES CITIZENS PLAN
[18]   Participatory Apps for Urban Planning-Space for Improvement [J].
Ertio, Titiana-Petra .
PLANNING PRACTICE AND RESEARCH, 2015, 30 (03) :303-321
[19]   Digital Participatory Platforms for Co-Production in Urban Development: A Systematic Review [J].
Falco, Enzo ;
Kleinhans, Reinout .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF E-PLANNING RESEARCH, 2018, 7 (03) :52-79
[20]  
Forss M., 2017, TRANSP RES BOARD TRB