Public Participation GIS

Public Participation Geographic Information Systems (PPGIS) was born, as a term, in 1996 at the meetings of the National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (NCGIA). PPGIS is meant to bring the academic practices of GIS and mapping to the local level in order to promote knowledge production. The idea behind PPGIS is empowerment and inclusion of marginalized populations, who have little voice in the public arena, through geographic technology education and participation. PPGIS uses and produces digital maps, satellite imagery, sketch maps, and many other spatial and visual tools, to change geographic involvement and awareness on a local level.

Applications

Attendees to the Mapping for Change International Conference on Participatory Spatial Information Management and Communication conferred to at least three potential implications of PPGIS, it can: (1) enhance capacity in generating, managing, and communicating spatial information; (2) stimulate innovation; and ultimately; (3) encourage positive social change.

The range of applications for PPGIS is great. The potential outcomes of PPGIS uses can be applied from community and neighborhood planning and development to environmental and natural resource management. Marginalized groups, be they grassroots organizations to indigenous populations could benefit from GIS technology.

Governments, non-government organizations and non-profit groups are a big force behind many programs. The current extent of PPGIS programs in the US has been evaluated by Sawicki and Peterman. They catalog over 60 PPGIS programs who aid in “public participation in community decision making by providing local-area data to community groups,” in the United States (Craig et al., 2002:24). The organizations providing these programs are mostly universities, local chambers of commerce, non-profit foundations.

In general, neighborhood empowerment groups can form and gain access to information that is normally very easy for the official government and planning offices to obtain. It is easier for this to happen than for individuals of lower income neighborhoods just working by themselves. There have been several projects where University students help implement GIS in neighborhoods and communities. It is believed that access to information is the doorway to more effective government for everybody and community empowerment. In a case study of a group in Milwaukee residents of an inner city neighborhood became active participants in building a community information system, learning to access public information and create and analyze new databases derived from their own surveys, all with the purpose of making these residents useful actors in city management and in the formation of public policy (Ghose 2001). In many cases, there are providers of data for community groups, but the groups may not know that such entities exist. Getting the word out would be beneficial.

Some of the spatial data that the neighborhood wanted was information on abandoned or boarded up buildings and homes,vacant lots, and properties that contained garbage, rubbish and debris that contributed to health and safety issues in the area. They also appreciated being able to find landlords that were not keeping up the properties. The University team and the community were able to build databases and make maps that would help them find these areas and perform the spatial analysis that they needed. Community members learned how to use the computer resources, ArcView 1.0, and build a theme or land use map of the surrounding area. They were able to perform spatial queries and analyze neighborhood problems. Some of these problems included finding absentee landlords and finding code violations for the buildings on the maps (Ghose 2001).

The local, participatory management of urban neighborhoods usually follows on from ‘claiming the territory’, and has to be made compatible with national or local authority regulations on administering, managing and planning urban territory (McCall 2003). PPGIS applied to participatory Community/Neighborhood Planning has been examined by, among many others, [Howard (1999)], [Carver, Evans, Kingston, and Turton (1999)], [Leitner, McMaster, Elwood, McMaster, and Sheppard (2002)], and [Talen (1999)]. Specific attention has been given to applications such as housing issues (e.g. [Elwood (2002)]) or neighborhood revitalization (e.g. [Craig & Elwood (1998)]). Spatial databases along with the P-mapping are used to maintain a public records GIS or community land information systems (e.g. [Ventura, Niemann, Sutphin, & Chenoweth (2002)]). These are just a few of the uses of GIS in the community.

Approaches

There are two approaches to PPGIS use and application. These two perspectives, top-down and bottom-up, are the currently debated schism in PPGIS.

Top-down

According to Sieber (2006), PPGIS was first envisioned as a means of mapping individuals by many social and economic demographic factors in order to analyze the spatial differences in access to social services. She refers to this kind of PPGIS as top-down, being that it is less hands on for the public, but theoretically serves the public by making adjustments for the deficiencies, and improvements in public management.

Bottom-up

A current trend with academic involvement in PPGIS, is researching existing programs, and or starting programs in order to collect data on the effectiveness of PPGIS. Elwood (2006) in The Professional Geographer, talks in depth about the “everyday inclusions, exclusions, and contradictions of Participatory GIS research.” The research is being conducted in order to evaluate if PPGIS is involving the public equally. In reference to Sieber's top-down PPGIS, this is a counter method of PPGIS, rightly referred to as bottom-up PPGIS. Its purpose is to work with the public to let them learn the technologies, then producing their own GIS.

Public Participation GIS is defined by Sieber as the use of geographic information systems to broaden public involvement in policymaking as well as to the value of GIS to promote the goals of nongovernmental organizations, grassroots groups and community based organizations (Sieber 2006). It would seem on the surface that PPGIS, as it is commonly referred to, in this sense would be of a beneficial nature to those in the community or area that is being represented. But in truth only certain groups or individuals will be able to obtain the technology and utilize it. Is PPGIS becoming more available to the underprivileged sector of the community? The question of “who benefits?” should always be asked, and does this harm a community or group of individuals.

The local, participatory management of urban neighborhoods usually follows on from ‘claiming the territory’, and has to be made compatible with national or local authority regulations on administering, managing and planning urban territory (McCall 2003). PPGIS applied to participatory Community/Neighborhood Planning has been examined by, among many others, [Howard (1999)], [Carver, Evans, Kingston, and Turton (1999)], [Leitner, McMaster, Elwood, McMaster, and Sheppard (2002)], and [Talen (1999)]. Specific attention has been given to applications such as housing issues (e.g. [Elwood (2002)]) or neighborhood revitalization (e.g. [Craig & Elwood (1998)]). Spatial databases along with the P-mapping are used to maintain a public records GIS or community land information systems (e.g. [Ventura, Niemann, Sutphin, & Chenoweth (2002)]). These are just a few of the uses of GIS in the community.

See also

• Participatory GIS (PGIS)
• Geographic information systems (GIS)
• Crime mapping
• Neighborhood planning
• Traditional knowledge GIS
• GIS Day

External links

• National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (NCGIA)
• Open Forum on Participatory Geographic Information Systems and Technologies
• Public Participation and GIS: Annotated Bibliography
• Community Mapping, PGIS, PPGIS and P3DM Virtual Library
• Ecosensus: Participatory Resource Management and Decision Making in the Northern Rupununi River Catchment in Guyana

Organizations

• Village Earth - Provides facilitation, consultation and training in for community-based mapping initiatives including mapping of indigenous territories, community census projects, community/government interactions.
• International Institute for Sustainable Development - Provides online training in community-based mapping.
• Integrated Approaches to Participatory Development (IAPAD) - Provides information on Participatory 3-Dimensional Modelling (P3DM) method.

Participatory redistricting

• Dave's Redistricting
• Public Mapping Project

References

• Beever, L. B. 2002. Addressing Environmental Justice (EJ) through Community Impact Assessment (CIA). Proceedings of the 8th TRB Conference on the Application of Transportation Planning Methods, Corpus Christi, TX, 22–26 April 2001, ed. R. Donnelly and G. Bennett, 388–98. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
• Carver, S., Evans, A., Kingston, R., & Turton, I. 1999. Virtual Slaithwaite: A web-based public participation ‘Planning for Real’ system. Leeds: University of Leeds, School of Geography, Case Study Report, 14pp. http://www.geog.leeds.ac.uk/papers/99-8/
• Craig & Elwood 1998. W.J. Craig and S.A. Elwood, How and Why Community Groups use Maps and Geographic information. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems 25 2 (1998), pp. 95–104.
• Elwood, S. 2002. The Impacts of GIS Use for Neighbourhood Revitalization in Minneapolis. In: W. J. Craig, T. M. Harris, & D. Weiner (Eds.). Community Participation and Geographic Information Systems (pp. 77–88). London: Taylor & Francis.
• Ghose, Rina. 2001. Use of Information Technology for Community Empowerment: Transforming Geographic Information Systems into Community Information Systems. Transactions in GIS 5(2): 141-163.
• Howard 1999. Geographic information technologies and community planning: Spatial empowerment and public participation. http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/varenius/ppgis/papers/howard.html.
• McCall, M. K. 2003. Seeking good governance in participatory-GIS: A review of processes and governance dimensions in applying GIS to participatory spatial planning. Habitat International 27:549–73.
• Plescia, M., S. Koontz, and S. Laurent. 2001. Community assessment in a vertically integrated health care system. American Journal of Public Health 91 (5): 811–14.
• Rambaldi G., Kwaku Kyem A. P.; Mbile P.; McCall M. and Weiner D. 2006. Participatory Spatial Information Management and Communication in Developing Countries. EJISDC 25, 1, 1-9 .
• Rambaldi G, Chambers R., McCall M, And Fox J. 2006. Practical ethics for PGIS practitioners, facilitators, technology intermediaries and researchers. PLA 54:106-113, IIED, London, UK
• Hoicka, D. 2002. Connecting the dots. Journal of Housing and Community Development 59 (6): 35–38.
• Sieber, Rene. Public Participation Geographic Information Systems: A Literature Review and Framework . Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 96(3), 2006, pp. 491–507.
• E. Talen, Constructing neighbourhoods from the bottom up: The case for resident-generated GIS. Environment and Planning B 26 (1999), pp. 533–554.
• Ventura, S. J., Niemann, B. J., Sutphin, T. L., & Chenoweth, R. E. (2002). GIS-enhanced land-use planning. In: W. J. Craig, T. M. Harris, & D. Weiner (Eds.). Community participation and geographic information systems (pp. 113–124). London: Taylor & Francis.