Map-based technology to support public participation

vague” (Rantanen & Kahila, 2009, p.1981). Since location is an essential attribute in human activities, using local spatial information can be considered to help citizens to express their preferences and complaints of their living area (Nuojua, 2010). There have been some approaches to connect local knowledge and spatial data twenty years ago, including “interacting groups, silent reflective techniques, surveys, focus groups, and dialectic groups”. (Talen, 2000) “Sticker map” method allows residents to use colored markers to mark locations on laminated maps and add comments (Nuojua, 2010). As a part of Kansas City’s Comprehensive Plan³ adopted in 1997, Neighborhood Prototypes Plan encouraged citizens to show satisfaction about their neighborhood using local maps with street framework (Talen, 2000). However, the traditional practices have limited efficiency and participants, and cannot fulfill the requirements of new Land Use and Building Act. Thus, recent years, new methods of utilizing geography information system

2 Internet use and activities, http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-datasets/-/isoc_bde15cua

3 FOCUS – The City’s Comprehensive Plan, http://kcmo.gov/planning/comprehensive-plan/

(GIS) based on the Internet have been put forward to make public participation process more interactive and transparent.

2.2.1 The role of Public Participation Geographic Information System (PPGIS) in urban planning

The term of Public Participation Geographic Information System (PPGIS) is convinced to “describe how GIS technology could support public participation with the goal of including local or marginalized populations in planning and decision processes” (Brown, 2012, p.7) in 1996 at the meeting of the National Center of Geography Information and Analysis. GIS is widely used to “collect, handle, store and visualize” spatial patterns and distributions (Rantanen & Kahila, 2009, p.1983). Currently only some limited functionalities of GIS have been utilized to PPGIS, mostly including “digital cartography that links local (qualitative) and expert (quantitative) knowledge” (Nuojua, 2010, p.5).

According to Tulloch (2008), PPGIS can be outlined as a study focus on public application with geospatial technologies to participate in the different planning process.

In recent years, a variety of regional and environmental application have been implemented by PPGIS studies, ranging from national nature environment planning to urban park planning (Brown, 2012). GIS described by Talen (2000) as a valuable tool for residents to express inclination of their neighborhood in a simple but highly efficient way.

With the ability to handle complex spatial data, GIS allows citizens to present their perceptions in a wide variety of aspects, range from local environment satisfaction (e.g.

suggest to construction of neighborhood) to social issues result from human activities (e.g.

figure out unsafe areas). Meanwhile, individuals can not only inquiry and add comments to existing base map, but also build future city outlines and land use. Further, residents’

willing to express ambiguous local knowledge in a given area can be stimulated through GIS provides a specific spatial context for identifying the local elements, such as the location of a certain building, distribution of neighborhood and forest density. Compared to traditional paper map, GIS can respond to user’s inquiry needs interactively, basically being able to change the scale of map. To handle residents’ progressive and changing preferences, GIS allows residents to view a variety of distributed spatial variables with their desired coverages (“a theme or layer of data”) to see the interconnection of issues, reflect their formulation and make the choices. (Talen, 2000)

However, residents’ views of their living areas cannot be all expressed only via GIS, which has limitation to represent some certain qualities of meanings not related to spatial context. Thus, the purpose of using GIS is to enhance the “quality and depth” of native views collection of living environments from citizens rather than to alternate the other communication methods. (Talen, 2000) Since GIS is still complex and expensive tool to use at the moment, there should be experts to employ the technology in planning process.

(Tulloch, 2008)

2.2.2 Web-based Public Participation Geographic Information System (PPGIS) approach

Talen (2000) described a bottom-up GIS concept (BUGIS) in the planning process, which allows residents to express their perception of neighborhood, since the traditional top-down GIS is a controversial way which may ignore some types of local knowledge from certain groups. In BUGIS, residents’ local knowledge is respected as equally as expert knowledge in urban planning process. (Nuojua, 2010) As illustrated in Figure 2, public participation starts from individual expression, and the final goal is to reach a consensus.

The typical public participation in planning process from identifying to resolving certain issues, can be described as “description, evaluation, and prescription” listed below:

- Description: Residents can use GIS to describe their daily life activity patterns, such as the places for working, shopping and services and for social activities. GIS functions including drawing and selecting can be used in the description, specially the linear features can be used to outline the routes by usual travel methods.

- Evaluation: Residents are allowed to evaluate the given area in both positive and negative aspects, including transport, spatial distribution, city views, natural environment among others. These images can be recorded by GIS.

- Prescription: Residents can express the expects of the local environment. For example, the potential area for particular function and improvement option for space can be identified with GIS tools.

Figure 2. Conceptual model of BUGIS in planning process (Talen, 2000, p.238) Since the Internet has been creating a more gainful environment for mapping applications (Brown, 2012), SoftGIS method is proposed based on bottom-up approach, utilizing potential of the Internet to map local knowledge from citizens (Nuojua, 2010). Relying on “Web 2.0” technology, mapping applications can be accessed by anyone who has internet connection and web browser at anywhere (Jankowski et al., 2016). The aim of

SoftGIS approach is to assimilate local knowledge into planning process and support it, and the essential tool is interactive map with highly usable interface. SoftGIS can be implemented in two basic ways in urban planning process:

- Online questionnaire: In SoftGIS research, the online questionnaire with mapping tool can be developed to gather public perceptions. Citizens can respond the open and closed questions related to their living area step by step, thus the planner can get known about the attitudes from public via analyzing the GIS data.

- Development forum: It provides a continuous cooperative platform between residents and city planners. It combines interactive map and content management system, to contain local knowledge from local users together with formal knowledge from authority. (Rantanen & Kahila, 2009)

SoftGIS approach emphasizes the value of utilizing local knowledge in planning process.

Cooperation is required for both the urban professionals and the citizens. The scientific methods and forums to handle local knowledge vary in the factors of versatile local perception, intention of multiple stakeholders and certain situation of cases. (Rantanen &

Kahila, 2009)