When Web 2.0 Meets Public Participation GIS (PPGIS): VGI and Spaces of Participatory Mapping in China

Author(s):  
Wen Lin
Geography ◽  
2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy B. Norris

Participatory mapping (PM) and public/participation GIS (P/PGIS) are umbrella terms under which a variety of mapping research and practice takes place. Local people who reside “in the map” are included in the collection, analysis, sharing, and visualization of geospatial data with the goal to make GIS and cartographic practice more inclusive and democratic. To make a map, the map-maker must elicit knowledge from local people to capture the human geography of the area. Until relatively recently this cartographic process was practiced either by, or for, those in positions of power. The subsequent use of the maps most often reinforced power relations between rulers and the populations “in the map.” In post–Second World War development circles, and as a part of inclusive social science initiatives such as participatory rural appraisal (PRA) and participatory action research (PAR), PM emerged as a response to criticisms of such cartographic practices. During the same period, native peoples in Canada used land use and occupancy mapping to defend their ancestral territorial rights. Two fundamental assumptions emerged from these parallel processes that remain relevant to all participatory map-making. First, information gathered by local populations in a participatory/inclusive research design is more useful than information compiled by outside cartographers. Second, PM can empower local communities. With the advent of relatively inexpensive and readily available GIS technology in the 1990s, P/PGIS emerged as a close cousin to PM. While the power of these tools for planning and development is undeniable, researchers and practitioners recognized that P/PGIS might cause negative social effects such as marginalization of underprivileged populations and that P/PGIS lacks methods to represent qualitative aspects of culture. Indeed, debates around empowerment, inclusion, access, application, and representation of culture comprise the core of PM and P/PGIS research. Notwithstanding, there is no one definition of PM or P/PGIS and several other synonymous terms exist including participatory 3D modeling (P3DM), public participation GIS (PPGIS), community-integrated GIS (CiGIS), community GIS (CGIS), bottom-up GIS (BuGIS), and volunteered graphic information (VGI). While there are subtle differences between these terms, with VGI as a recognized outlier, definitions overlap substantially. This bibliography traces the emergence of PM and P/PGIS from the original participatory development and occupancy mapping work, follows it through the critical cartography debates in the 1980s and 1990s, covers their crystallization as fields at the turn of the 20th century, and closes with their continuing development as active research programs.


Cities ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 172-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geisa Bugs ◽  
Carlos Granell ◽  
Oscar Fonts ◽  
Joaquín Huerta ◽  
Marco Painho

2014 ◽  
pp. 813-830
Author(s):  
Nancy J. Obermeyer

This chapter examines the use of GIS, geovisualization, and other geo-locational technologies and applications, including social networking websites and mobile phones associated with Web 2.0, as a tool kit for promoting democratization or leading to loss of data privacy and freedom, focusing on the relevant historical events in 2011 and the first half of 2012. The chapter begins by presenting a brief history of the GIS and society literature, including public participation GIS, volunteered geographic information, and geoslavery. The discussion covers both the rosy view (geospatial and Web 2.0 technologies as a democratizing force) and the gloomy perspective (these same technologies as tools of control based on data capture and loss of privacy). Underlying both of these views are scale and the ability to jump scales, which are examined through the lens of Kevin Cox's (1998) “spaces of dependence and engagement.” Having laid this groundwork, the chapter considers events in the recent past, focusing first on the Arab Spring movements in Tunisia and Egypt and the Occupy movement in the U.S. as examples of the optimistic perspective. It then proceeds to discuss data capture from smart phones and cell phones as examples of the pessimistic view. The chapter concludes with a discussion of how individuals may enhance the democratization potential of geotechnologies and Web 2.0 while minimizing data capture, loss of spatial data privacy, and the harm that these can bring.


2014 ◽  
pp. 767-793
Author(s):  
Colleen Casey ◽  
Jianling Li

In this chapter, the authors evaluate the use of Web 2.0 technology to engage citizens in the transportation decision making process. They evaluate the potential of Web 2.0 technology to create effective participatory environments to enable authentic participation; provide an inventory of the current tools and technologies utilized, identify barriers faced by administrators in the implementation of these tools, and summarize universal lessons for public administrators. Based on a review of 40 cases of collaborations, the authors find that Web 2.0 technology is predominantly used as a complement rather than a substitute for traditional approaches. Furthermore, the review suggests that the full potential of Web 2.0 remains untapped, and additional tools and technologies can be utilized to overcome barriers to implementation.


Author(s):  
Galit Margalit Ben-Israel

This article deals with citizen engagement and public participation being in crisis on the Israeli home front, in the era of Web 2.0. Since 2004, Web 2.0 characterizes changes that allow users to interact and collaborate with each other in a social media dialogue as creators of user-generated content in social networking sites: Facebook, Twitter, blogs, wikis, YouTube, hosted services, applications, WhatsApp, etc. Since 2006, Israel is involved in asymmetric conflicts. The research defines the impact of Web 2.0 on public engagement in the Israeli home front. The case studies examined in the research are: 1) The 2006 Lebanon War (July-August 2006); 2) The Gaza War (27 December 2008 and ended on 18 January 2009); 3) Operation Pillar of Defense (November 2012); and 4) The 2014 Israel–Gaza conflict.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document