Interactive GIS as a Tool for CITIZEN PARTICIPATION

1
Interactive GIS as a Tool for CITIZEN
PARTICIPATION

• David C. Prosperi
• Professor
• Florida Atlantic University

2
This Presentation

• IS NOT
• An Overview of Technology
• A Discussion of E-Government
• About Visualization

• IS
• About Interactive or Participatory GIS
• About Citizen Participation
• Examples Resources

3
STRUCTURE

• GETTING TO NOW
• THE PPGIS NEXUS
• FOCUS OF PRESENTATION
• RESULTS
• CONCLUSIONS
• RESOURCES

4
A Brief Diversion

• Three Visions
• Enthusiastic Techno-Positivists (emphasis
  herein )
• Social Practices (emphasis herein )
• GIS-Hating Social Theorists (emphasis herein
  )
• Enterprise v. Specific Applications
• Is the US Lagging?

5
GETTING TO NOW

• GIS -gt Interactive GIS
• Citizen Participation -gt E-Participation
• Public Participation GIS

6
Geographic Information Systems

• Geographic Information Systems
• Basic Elements
• Interactive GIS
• Definitions of Interaction
• Participatory GIS

7
Basic Elements

• Geo-coded Data
• Map Reference Systems
• Work Flow Models
• Data Models
• Metadata
• Stand Alone -gt Network -gt Web

8
Interactive and Participatory GIS

• Interaction
• Single User -gt Breadth
• Single User -gt Depth
• Many Users -gt Breadth
• Many Users -gt Depth
• Participatory
• Guiding Principles (http//www.iapad.org/ppgis_pri
  nciples.htm)

9
Citizen Participation

• Many Variations
• Required v. Desired
• Two Multi-Definitional Concepts
• Who are Citizens?
• How Do They Participate?

10
Who are citizens?

• Us the public, but also
• Other Governments
• Employees
• Businesses
• Gives rise to new language

11
Who are Citizens?

• G2G(overnments), G2E(mployees), G2B(usiness),
  G2C(itizens),
• No group is homogeneous with regard to IT talent
  or skill

12
How Do They Participate?

• Arnstein as metaphor
• Design Evaluation
• Internet Revolution
• New Forms of Design Evaluation

13
Arnsteins Ladder

• Arnstein Ladder
• Citizen Control
• Delegated Power
• Partnership
• Placation
• Consultation
• Informing
• Therapy
• Manipulation

• Arnsteins Ladder
• Citizen Power
• Tokenism
• Non-Participation

14
Design Evaluation Pre Internet

• Design
• Government Led v. Citizen Led
• Mandates / Regulation
• Participation Rates
• Quality of Participation
• Evaluation
• Participation Rates
• Quality of Participation

15
The Internet Revolution

• E-Government
• Activities that focus primarily on providing
  information and transactive type services to
  customers of government
• E-Governance
• Activities that focus on the public in its role
  of citizen and include such attributes as on-line
  dialoging and polling among others all designed
  to make government more accessible and
  transparent
• (Abramson and Morin, 2003)

16
Design EvaluationE-Participation

• E-Participation Updates of Arnstein
• Carver (Right to Know, Informing, Restricted
  Participation, Public Participation in Defining
  Agenda, Public Participation in Analysis, Public
  Participation in Decisions)
• Smyth (Online Service Delivery, Communication
  Barrier, Online Discussion, Online Opinion
  Surveys, Online Decision Support Systems)
• New Management Skills
• Wilson (2004), Process Tools
• Burdi (2002), Recording Project Comments
• SR40 (2003), Recording Planning Comments

17
THE PPGIS NEXUS

• But,
• PPGIS LACKS CLEAR DEFINITION
• Tulloch (2003)

18
History of PPGIS

• NCGIA
• Group 17 Collaborative Spatial Decision Making
• Group 19 GIS and Society
• 1996 (Maine), 1998 (Santa Barbara)
• 2001 (Spoleto, Italy)
• URISA
• PPGIS Conferences (2002, 2003, )

19
Elements of PPGIS

• Inclusion
• A Participatory GIS Agency
• Levels of Analysis
• The PPGIS Community (Vendors, Academics,
  Organizations)
• Social Practices for Encouraging Inclusion
  (overcoming digital divide having decision
  making frameworks)

20
(1) Inclusion

• Access questions about role of government in
  delivering information
• Participatory Models questions about how people
  actually participate
• Openness to Citizen Led Initiatives
• Unequal Distribution of Resources

21
(2) Organizations

• What is a PPGIS Organization? (Sawicki
  Peterman)
• The Spoleto Papers as Examples
• Jankowski and Nyerges
• De Montalvo
• Eric de Man
• Intranet v. Internet

22
(3) Levels of Analysis

• Map Viewing
• Analysis (Use of Data Models)
• Decision Making

23
(4) Vendors, Academics, Organizations

• Software
• ESRI (www.esri.com)
• MAPINFO (www.mapinfo.com)
• COMMUNITYVIZ (http//www.communityviz.com/)
• CALIPER (http//www.caliper.com)

• Consultants
• GIS Planning (www.gisplanning.com)
• IAPAD (www.iapad.org)
• Urban Insight (www.urbaninsight.com)
• Criterion Engineer (http//www.crit.com/)

24
Academics, Organizations

• Academics
• NCGIA (www.ncgia.ucsb.edu)
• RUTGERS (http//policy.rutgers.edu/cupr/rcopc/part
  gis/)
• OTHER (http//www.geography.ccsu.edu/kyem/PPGIS/GI
  S_PPGIS.htm)

• Organizations
• URISA (www.urisa.org)
• PPGIS (http//www.urisa.org/ppgis.htm)
• UDMS (www.udms.net)

25
FOCUS OF PRESENTATION

• To attempt to categorize the range of
  interactive or participatory GIS systems
• To demonstrate FIVE live sites
• To whet appetite

26
A PPGIS Categorization
27
Portland Mapshttp//www.portlandmaps.com/mapping.
cfm

• Enterprise GIS - many layers (property, crime,
  census, schools parks, capital improvements,
  development)
• Aerial Photography Included
• Zoom capabilities
• Capacity to Look at Databases
• Related Links

28
Empower San Diegohttp//www.empowersd.com/map.asp

• Focus on County Services Rather Than Parcel and
  Demographic Information
• Lots of Layers
• Zoom
• Driving Directions
• Multi-lingual
• Great Navigation Tools Feedback Surveys

29
Arlington, Texashttp//www.gisplanning.net/arling
ton/ed.asp?bhiw916bhih556

• Economic Development GIS
• Data for Analysis
• Data Models
• Lots of Attached Demographic / Economic (CENSUS
  data)

30
Orlando, Florida http//www.cityoforlando.net/pub
lic_works/esd/gis/interactive_mapping.htm

• Great Graphics
• Large Environmental Component
• Identification of Features
• Best Site
• Harder to Access
• Multi-lingual

31
Leeds, WOODS Projectwww.ccg.leeds.ac.uk/dales/

• One of the Granddaddys of Participatory GIS
• Planning for Real -- Study Based Participatory
  GIS
• Environmental
• Decision Making Rules

32
More Examples, But Not Today

• Dublin, Ohio (www.dublin.oh.us/business/gis/intro)
  
• Westerville, Ohio (www.westerville.org)
• San Diego (www.sangis.org)
• Showcase of ESRI Internet Sites
  (www.esri.com/software/internetmaps/visit_sites.ht
  ml)
• www.Realtor.com
• Transportation Planning (www.SR40.org)

33
CONCLUSIONS

• Summary
• Have attempted definitions of interactive GIS
  and citizen or public participation
• Have provided some examples
• Have concluded that potential is enormous, but
  current examples tend to focus on low levels of
  participation or have special purposes

34

• Findings
• Intranet (Enterprise?) G2G, G2E
• Example Palm Beach County (NAVREG)
• Specificity by Problem
• Example GIS Planning its economic development
  clients
• Higher Levels of E-Participation in Environmental
  Scenarios
• Example Leeds, Others

35

• Findings (Continued)
• Mostly Low Levels of Participation
• Examples Map Viewing Only
• Many Functions Other Than Property Layers (e.g.,
  Crime, Services)
• Example Portland, San Diego
• Interactive GIS still not well understood
• (Viewing v. Analyzing v. Participating)

36

• Next Steps
• There are places to go after this
• (ESRI and its partners, URISA, etc.)
• Think about your agency in terms of how it
  approaches the notion of a being a PPGIS AGENCY

37

• Next Steps (Continued)
• Play with provided examples and others
• GOOGLE interactive GIS and participatory GIS
• Get thee to URISA PPGIS Madison, Wisconsin,
  July 2004 (www.urisa.org/ppgis.htm)

38
RESOURCES

• General Web Sites
• www.planetizen.com/
• www.sunsite.berkeley.edu/GIS/intergis.html
• http//t.webring.com/hub?ringppgis
• www.sli.unimelb.edu.au/gisweb/menu.html
• www.earth.clarku.edu/gisid/applications.html
• www.inside.uiadaho.edu/interactive/mapping.htm

• Published Material
• URISA Journal
• Craig et al. Book
• Cartography and Geographic Information Systems
• Computers, Environment and Urban Systems
• International Journal of Geographic Information
  Systems
• Landscape and Urban Planning

39
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am grateful for the assistance of Susan Pennie
Lesser, Karen F. Stevens, and Andrew Walton
Yancey in the preparation of this paper and
presentation. IT could not have been done
without their yeoman activity and fresh insights.
All errors and omissions are, of course, the
responsibility of the author.
40
This, Or This?