地理信息系统(gis)英语论文

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

*DepartmentofUrbanandRegionalPlanningandGeo-InformationManagement,ITC,P.O.Box6,7500AAEnschede,Netherlands.Tel.:+31-53-487-4223;fax:+31-53-487-4575.

E-mailaddress:mccall@itc.nl(M.K.McCall).

0197-3975/03/$-seefrontmatterr2003ElsevierScienceLtd.Allrightsreserved.

doi:10.1016/S0197-3975(03)00005-5

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

550M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573

hoodsorancestraldomains,analysingandamelioratinglandandresourcecon icts,participatorylanduseplanning,awareness-raising,andeffortstobuildpeople’sempowerment.1Thegeo-informationtoolsusedintheseapplicationsincludecollaborativespatialdatacollectionusingRRA/PRAmethods,2participatorymaps,aerialphotosandremotesensingimages;andP-GISanalysesandrepresentations.

Thereisanimplicit,sometimesexplicit,assumptionthatusingGISatthislocallevelisbothef cientandeffective,inthatitisbelievedtosimultaneouslydealwiththeplanningcontent,answerthequestionsaskedofthegeo-information,andalsoaddressandsatisfythelocalstakeholders’underlyinginterests.P-GISisexpectedtobeimplementedinaparticipativemannerandmakeuseoflocalinformation,withinwhichindigenousspatialknowledge(ISK)isaspecialcategory.Assuchthereisanoften-madeassumptionthatthisuseofGISisatoolforbettergovernance.

Thispaperraisesquestionsforinvestigatingthevalidityoftheseassumptions.

*CanthegoalsofgoodgovernancebemetinsuchapplicationsofGIS?—withthegovernancecriteriaofaccountability,legitimacy,respectforrights,equity,andcompetence?

Toanswerthis,needssupplementaryquestions:

*

*

*

*

*Whatdegreesof‘participation’arefoundinparticipatorymapping(P-mapping)andP-GIS?WhatmotivationsliebehindthepromotionofP-GIS?Islocalknowledge/ISKappliedtobettergovernance?WhohasaccesstoISK?Doaccessanduserespectculturalrightsandentitlements?Ultimately,whoistheowner?Doesownershipofthespatialinformationoutput(andinputdata)accordadvantagestotheowner,beyondtheboundariesofgoodgovernance?WhatdifferencedoesGIT(GIStechnology)maketothedistributionofpower?

ThepaperbeginsinSection2withaninventoryoflocal-levelGISapplications.3Section3discussesthecriteriabehind‘goodgovernance’andsomespatialaspectsofgovernancemeasures.Section4looksatthedif cultiesfacedbyP-GISinpractice,includingthecharacterofindigenousandgenderedspatialknowledge.Section5questionsownershipandaccessibilityofthisknowledge,particularlyinthecontextofgoodgovernance.Section6considersstrengthsandweaknessesofP-GIS—operationalissuesandwhetherGIScan‘represent’ISK.Section7drawssomeconclusionsaboutthepotentialandpromiseofnewGITforP-GIS,temperedbytherealitiesofpowerandothergovernancedimensions.ThewayinwhichP-GISisactuallyusedwillalwaysre ectthepowersituation.

Amajordriverinrecordingandanalysingurban/communityPSPhasbeentheVareniusinitiativeoftheNationalCenterforGeographicInformationandAnalysis(NCGIA).Vareniusstudieswereconcernedwithissuesinpower,control,andaccessingeo-information,mainlyintheUSA,includingtheimpactsofunequalaccesstoGIStechnologyanddata,thefeasibilityofrepresentinga‘communityknowledgebase’withinGIS,thepotentialdistortionoflocalknowledgebytheGIformat,andultimatelywhetherP-GIScanactuallyleadtoempowermentindecision-making(cf.http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/varenius/ppgis/ncgia.html;Craigetal.,2002).2RRAreferstorapidruralappraisal,whilePRAisparticipatoryruralappraisal.3ForreviewsandreferencesinP-GISemployment—forurbancommunityplanningandmanagement,seeCraigetal.(2002);and,forlocal-levelruraldevelopmentandNRM,seeMcCall(2002)andKing(2002).1

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573551

2.Localandindigenouscommunitiesusinglocal-levelmappingandparticipatory-GIS

BeyondtheindistinctidealsofP-GISlikeempowermentandparticipation,thereareparticularpurposesbehindlocal-levelgeo-informationacquisition,analysis,andrepresentation.Generalcategories4aregivenbelow,togetherwithtypicalreferencesforurbanexamples.

Inarepresentative,thoughprobablyincompletesurvey,SawickiandPeterman(2002)identify67organisations(educationalinstitutions,NGOs,governmentdepartmentsandprivatecompanies)in40citiesintheUSAclaimingtohavesomeformofPPGIS.5

Inruralandnaturalresourcemanagement(NRM),P-GISisappliedfrequentlyamongstindigenouspeoplesofCanada,USA,NewZealand,andAustralia.ABritishColumbiasurveyshowed44%of109‘FirstNations’currentlyusingGIS,withanother36%interested,withthecommonestapplicationsbeing‘‘TraditionalUseStudies’’,treatyprocesses,andNRM(AMN,2002a,b).Poole(1995)foundmultipleexamplesofP-mappingorP-GISoutsidethesebigfour,onlyinBrazil,Philippines,Indonesia,Peru,Thailand,andKenya,and15othercountries.ESRI’sPPGISwebsites(ESRI,1997)listoneapplicationeachfromsixAsianorAfricancountries,comparedwithabout75casesfromNorthAmerica.

2.1.Claiming‘ourland’—demarcationofcommunityandneighbourhood,orlegalrecognitionofcustomarylandrights

DemarcationofcustomarytenureandtraditionaluseareasintheruralcontextaremostnotableinCanadaandUSA,withtheir‘FirstNations’constitutionalstatus.NewZealand,Australia,andincreasingly,thePhilippinesalsodesignateancestraldomain.Conventionally,GISisdeployedinformalisationandcommodi cationoflandandpropertyrights,althoughtherearelikelyseriousnegativeimplicationsinthisforcommonpropertyregimesandthepeopledependentonthem.Themapping/GISprocessneedstofollowproceduresknownandacceptabletolocalcommunitiesandinaccordancewithtraditionaldecision-making.Concomitantly,thespatial(map)productsmustsatisfytheformal,legallandtenurerequirementsforaccuracy,reliability,andlegitimacy.

Intheurbancontext,‘claimingourland’isunlikelytobeinlegalrightsterms,butasocio-cultural,munities,oratleasttheirconcerned,motivated,andcapacitatedmembers,demarcateandde netheboundariesandcontentsoftheplacethattheylivein(e.g.Elwood,2002;Craig&Elwood,1998).This‘community/neighbourhoodmapping’mayinclude‘historicalmapping’.Themappingprocessesmayremainveryconceptualandabstractasbe tsmappingpeople’sperceptionsandfeelings,buttheycanbemoresystematic,forinstancebymaintainingapublicrecordGIS(e.g.Casey&Pederson,2000;Craig,Harris,&Weiner,2002).‘Claimingtheneighbourhood’isusuallytheprecursortoparticipatorycommunityplanning(seeSection2.2).

CategoriesarebasedonWeineretal’s(2002)overviewofurbanapplications;andPoole’s(1995)seminalreviewofISKmappinginruralandNRMmappingcontexts.5ThedistinctionbetweenP-GISasthetool,andPPGIS(publicparticipationGIS),astheplanningcontext,isnotalwaysstraightforward.Thispaperusesboth.4

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

552M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573

2.2.Managementoftraditionallyheldterritoryandlandsystems

P-mappingandP-GIShavebeenappliedtorecordingandanalysingthewholegamutofindigenousNRMbasedonpeople’sindigenoustechnicalknowledge(ITK),fromsimplyexploitingaresourceoreco-unit,throughmaintainingaresourceovertime,tothecomplexlevelofmanagingtheecosystemnurturingtheresource.Poole(1995)providesnumerouslocalexamples,whilsttherearesystematicapproacheslike‘TraditionalUseStudies’,and‘BioregionalMapping’inCanada(e.g.Aberley,1993),and‘LandLiteracy’(environmentalappraisal)inKerala(e.g.Chattopadhyayetal.,1996).Mappinglocalknowledgeofhazardsisaparticularfocus(e.g.Drew,2002;Bitter&Marti,1998).

Thelocal,participatorymanagementofurbanneighbourhoodsusuallyfollowsonfrom‘claimingtheterritory’,andhastobemadecompatiblewithnationalorlocalauthorityregulationsonadministering,managingandplanningurbanterritory.PPGISappliedtoparticipatoryCommunity/NeighbourhoodPlanninghasbeenexaminedby,amongmanyothers,Howard(1999),Carver,Evans,Kingston,andTurton(1999),Leitner,McMaster,Elwood,McMaster,andSheppard(2002),andTalen(1999).Speci cattentionhasbeengiventoapplicationssuchashousingissues(e.g.Elwood,2002)orneighbourhoodrevitalisation(e.g.Craig&Elwood,1998).SpatialdatabasesalongwiththeP-mappingareusedtomaintainapublicrecordsGISorcommunitylandinformationsystems(e.g.Ventura,Niemann,Sutphin,&Chenoweth,2002).

Participatorydecision-makinginneighbourhoodmanagementsupposedlyisfurtheredbyinteractive,real-time,web-basedparticipationinapproachessuchasthe‘electronictownhall’(seeSection2.5).

2.3.Managingcompetitionandcon icts

InemployingP-GISinhandlingspatialcompetitionandcon icts,themapoutputsfromterritorialclaimsandlocal-levelmanagementareappliedinspatialcon ictanalysisandmanagement.Theoutputsareappliedtodelineatingboundaries(notnecessarilycleanlines)betweencompetinggroups,or,initiatingnegotiationeffortsbetweencompetinggroupsthoughmutuallyacceptable‘mapping’ofactualordormantspatialcon icts(competition)overresources,or,reducingcon ictsbymediationornegotiationbyusingGIS,ultimatelyareal-time,interactiveP-GIS.

P-GIScontributionstoparticipatory,communitycon ictmanagementarefoundin,forexample,locationchoiceforautilitytransmissionline(Towers,1997);spatialhousingchoice(Elwood,2002);assessingimpactsoftraf c owsandaccessibility(Schulte,1999);andenvironmentalmappingofhazardousareasandhazardousmaterials(Drew,2002).

2.4.Mappingequityandinequalities

P-GIShasdemonstratedstrongpotentialasatoolforanalysingandmappingindicatorsof‘poverty’,‘exclusion’,or‘discrimination’withinruralandurbancommunities.Thedisadvantagedgroupsofsocietycanbemappedasdistinctspatialsites,oraszonesofde ciency.

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573553

ApplicationsfromPPGISpracticeandresearchinclude:mapping‘‘environmentalracism’’,i.e.thespatialcorrelationbetweenenvironmentaldegradationandthedistributionofethnicorsocio-economicgroupsinurbanareas(e.g.Aitken,2002;Kellogg,1999);socialequitymapping,i.e.theidenti cationofsocio-economicgroupsthatarerelativelydisadvantagedbyeconomicclass,employmentstatus,ethnicity,language,caste,gender,age,or,bylocation;analysingdifferentialmobilityandpeople’saccesstoservicesaccordingtosocialcategories;asigni cantcomponentofthisitemisthegendereddifferencesinmobilityandaccess(e.g.Hall,1997;Kwan,2000);empoweringmarginalisedgroupsthroughsupplyingthemwithappropriategeo-information(e.g.Sawicki&Burke,2002;Poole,1995);andutilisingGIStopromotetransparencyindecision-making(e.g.Drew,2002).

Mappingsocialequitystatusfrequentlydoesnotendsimplywithparticipatorymaps,butapplyingthemindevelopmentactionplans(e.g.Carveretal.,1999;Talen,1999;Howard,1999).AninnovativeexampleinPSPwasinKerala,wherePanchayatgroupsevaluatedhumanandnaturalresourcesandthus,localdevelopmentpotentials(Chattopadhyayetal.,1996).

2.5.‘Buildingcommunity’—promotingcommunityawareness,institutionalstrengthening;empowermentP-GISisappliedtodevelopingcommunityawarenessoflocalsituations,andtostrengtheningcommunityinstitutionsasanelementinpromotingpeople’sempowerment.Inspeci ccases,itisoftendif culttodistinguishbetweenthese,the‘empowerment’isusuallythoughnotalwaystheultimateintentionbehindtheawareness-raisingorinstitution-building.

AswithotherP-GISapplications,therearemorecasesinruraldevelopment,thaninurbansituations.Therearenumerousexamplesofeliciting,structuringandguardingITKandISKinlocalNRM(e.g.Poole,1995);acomponentofwhichisP-mappingofcultural–socialspatialresourcesofindigenouspeoples,suchassacredlands,burialgrounds,andancestraltenure(e.g.Harmsworth,1997).

Intheurban eld,publicGISismaintainedtobuildcommunityfeeling(e.g.Casey&Pederson,2000;Craigetal.,2002);topromotetransparencyindecision-making(e.g.Drew,2002);ortoempowermarginalisedgroups(Sawicki&Burke,2002).

Web-based,interactive,‘electronictownhall’developmentstowards‘‘digitaldemocracy’’arereviewedbyKingston(2002)fortheUK,andVenturaetal.(2002)forUSA.Awell-developedcaseis‘‘VirtualSlaithwaite’’fromPFR6(Kingston,Carver,Evans,&Turton,2000;Carveretal.,1999;Carver,2001).

2.5.1.Geo-informationtoolsused

Geo-informationacquisitionandanalysistoolsusedinPSPandP-GISrangefromtraditionalmappingtoolsofparticipatorysketchmapsandephemeralmapsinanRRAorPRAsetting,to3-dimensional(3-D)models7andairphotointerpretation(small-formatobliqueorvertical),tosatelliteimagesandGIS.

‘PlanningforReal’sexerciseinSlaithwaitevillage,WestYorkshire.7Thepopularityof3-Dphysicalhardwaremodelsraisesquestionsastowhetheritisthetactilemanipulabilityofthedevicethathasaspecialdepthofmeaning?e.g.theparticipatory3-Dmodels(P3-DM)ofRambaldiandCallosa-Tarr(2000),orthePFRwhichuseda1:10003-DscalemodelofSlaithwaite.6

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

554M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573

Theanalyticaltoolsappliedaremainlyfromparticipatory,interactive,communicationanddecisiontoolsincollaborativeplanning—publicmeetings,Delphimodels,gamingsimulations,orscenarioassessment.Theyare,however,increasinglybeingusedindistance-settingsviaemailandinternet.

Representationsaremadefromthemaps,images,3-DmodelsandGISoutputsworkingwithnewvisualisationsoftware.AfocusedtoolwhichshouldbeemployedinPSPis‘countermaps’—mapsexplicitlydisplayingtheneedsandrequirementsofgroupswhoareusuallyexcludedfromscienti csurveysbecausetheyaresociallyandinstitutionallymarginalised.Rocheleau,Thomas-Slayter,andEdmunds(1995),forexample,contrastedgenderedcountermapsofresourcemanagementconstructedbyandwithruralwomen,with‘conventional’planners’mapsmadebymen.

ThemodalitiesfordeliveryofP-GIStorelevanturbanpublicstakeholdershavebeenclassi edbyLeitneretal.(2002)ascommunity-basedin-houseGISorNGO-basedGIScentres;university/researchinstitute–communitypartnerships;publiclyaccessibleGISininstitutions;maprooms;uallyprojectsandcommunitiesuseamixofthese.InruralandNRMP-GISapplications,thelinkagesareprimarilythroughcitizens’groups,traditionalleadershiporcustomarylawauthorities,NGOs,andCBOs(community-basedorganisations),withlimitedinputasyetfrominstitutionsandprofessionals(e.g.Poole,1995;Gonzalez,2000;Rambaldi&Callosa-Tarr,2000).

3.‘‘GoodGISforgoodgovernance’’—dimensionsandcriteriaofgoodgovernance

Goodgovernanceisnotjustaboutaccountabilityalthoughaccountabilityprovidesthegeneralcontext.8Accountabilitycanbeexpressedintermsofthetransparencyandvisibilityofgovernmentdecisionsandpolicies,accountabilitymechanisms,andresponsivenesstolowerlevels—communityinvolvementbeingameanstogenerateaccountability.

Accountability(opengovernment)isnottheendinitself,itisameansofsupportinghigher-levelsocial–politicalgoalsof:

*

*

*

*Legitimacy,Participation;RespectforRights,Empowerment;Equity(notsimply,equality);andCompetence(includingef ciency).

3.1.Legitimacy(ofthegoverningoverthegoverned)

DoGI(geo-information)toolssupportordetractfromgoodgovernanceinPSP,intermsoftherepresentativenessofregional,ethnic,class,religious,age,orgenderinterestsofthe‘governed’?Governancedimensionsaredevelopedfromamongothers,GoetzandGaventa(2001),vanKersbergenandvanWaarden(2001),Riggs(2000),andUNDP(1997)whichde nesabout15corecharacteristicsofgoodgovernance,including:participation;ruleoflaw;transparency;equity;effectivenessandef ciency;accountability;strategicvision;legitimacy;ecologicalsoundness;empowering;partnership;and,spatiallygroundedincommunities.8

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573555

‘Ownership’bythegoverned,and‘participation’ofthegoverned,arecentralelementsoflegitimacyingovernanceterms.Ownershipasatotalityimpliesowningthekeysourcesofinformation,plustheprocessesofmakingtheproduct,plusthe nalproducts.Allocatingownershipisanelementofbuildingtrustbetweengovernedandgoverning.Asymbolic,butpracticalcruxof‘ownership’isinthechoiceofthe‘maplegend’.9Eventhen,therearethequestionsof‘whoprovidesalternativenamesoflegenditems?’,and‘whatquestionsareaskedtoinitiatethenaming?’.Maybenotjustthelegend,butthewhole‘map’,hastobeliberated.Empowermentisprovokedbytransferringlegendandoutputownershipfromthepowerfultothedisadvantagedwithcountermapsthatchallengethe(spatial)viewsofthepowerful.

IftheGItoolsandapproachbuildcommunicabilitybetweenoutsidersandinsiders,thiscanlegitimisethevalueofendogenousknowledge(ISK)andlanguage,andmakethetoolsmoreacceptabletolocalusers.

LegitimacydemandsactiveparticipationatallstagesofPSP,andtherefore,atallstagesofthemappingprocesses,by‘allstakeholders’,implyinggovernmentagenciesandtheprivatebusinesssector,aswellascivilsociety(communityrepresentatives,traditionalleaders,NGOsandCBOs.)Partnershipisacharacteristicofgoodgovernance(UNDP,1997).

3.2.Respect(bythegoverningforthegoverned)

DoGItoolssupportordetractfromgoodgovernanceinrespectingbasichumanrights,civilliberties,women’srights,workers’rights,culturalandregionalrights;indigenous(technical)knowledge;lawsandpropertyrights,andnotleast,people’srightstolivelihoods?Amongthe rstclientsforimprovedspatialinformationarethetaxcollectorsandpolice.

PSPusingGItoolsrespectspeople’srightsbydemonstratingthatithastheability:*

*

*Toelicitandhandlelocalperceptionsandconceptualisationsofspaceandspatialvalues:Thiswouldinvolvecapturingandtranslatingspatialconcepts(‘mentalmaps’)ofboundaries,locations,zonesintomappableoutputs;buildingGISintolocalknowledgeprocess;andconsideringfuturetimesandfuturegenerationsbyprovidingastrategicvision;TohandleITKandISK:ThisimpliespromotingrespectforITK/ISK;presentingspatialoutput(mapsandGIS)insuchamannerthatlocalpeoplecanrecogniseandinterpretallrelevantfeatures;andtakingintoaccounttheheterogeneityoflocalpopulationsandthediversityoftheirknowledge.Tooperateatanappropriateresolutionofoutput:

Thisimpliesascale‘‘relevanttothelocalspace’’forlocal-levelmanipulation,thereforeatalargescale,1:5000–1:50,000.Thereseemstobeawindowof‘natural’scaleappealingtousers,whichmeetscompetingdesiresforcoverage,comprehensiveness,andinclusionontheonehand,andontheotherhand,informationdigestion,notinformationoverload,simplicity,andcomprehension.

9PointstressedbyG.Rambaldi(May2002,m.).

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

556M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573

3.3.Empowerment

Thetechnologyshouldbegivingvoicetolocalpeople,totheextentofputtinglocalpeopleonamoreequalfootingwithexternalexpertsanddecision-makers,suchasclaimedforP-GISusedinlandreforminSouthAfrica.AGItoolismoreempoweringwhenithastheassetofbeingconvincingtoexternaldecision-makers,whichstrengthensthevalidityofthetoolperseanditsoutputs,acrossboththegoverningandthegovernedgroups.Furthermore,aneffectivevisualisationoftheoutputsrendersthemmore‘attractive’forinsidersandoutsidersandraisesthetransparencyofthetool.

GITcanopenthehorizonsoflocalusers.Somearguethatthisenlargementofperspectiveisanaspectof‘modernisation’withnegativeconsequencesforthecommunity,thoughotherscredititformainstreamingandempoweringlocalpeoples.Nevertheless,a‘respectful’GItoolwouldnotunrealisticallyraiseempowermentexpectationsoflocalcommunities—the‘governed’—byprofferingapretentioustechnologythatpromisesmorethanitcandeliver.

3.4.Equity,betweengoverningandgoverned,andwithinthegoverned

DoGItoolssupport,ordetractfrom,equitygoalsofgoodgovernanceintermsofthedistributionof,accessto,andtake-upratesofpublicandprivateservicesfordisadvantagedgroups,orintermsofaccesstomarkets,laws,andpropertyrights?DoGItoolssupportspatialequitybystrengtheningobjectivesofdevolutionordecentralisation,andfollowingthesubsidiarityprinciple?DotheGItoolsre ecttherealityoflocal-levelPSPas‘multi-actor,multi-objective,multi-sector,multi-scale,dynamicplanninganddecisionsituations’dealingwithcompetitionandcon icts?

Inresource-poorandlowbudgetareas,planningandmanagementarelikelytobeproblem-drivenandre-active,ratherthanpro-active.Inthesesameconditions,thereisanabsolutescarcityofresourcestobesharedandoverallpovertyisthenorm.Insuchcases,investingtimeandeffortinP-mappingandGISareprobablyluxuriesbeyondsensiblebehaviour.

CantheGItoolmapequity?InKiepersol,SouthAfrica,theworkofHarrisandWeineron‘regionalpoliticalecology’aimsatrepresentinglocalconceptualisationsofenvironmentalandhealthrisksandspatialinequalities,especiallypost-apartheidaccesstoland,with‘integrated’equitymapping(Harris,Weiner,Warner,&Levin,1995;Weiner&Harris,2002).Similarequityobjectiveslaybehindthe‘mappingforlocaldevelopment’programmeinKerala’ssocialistruralcommunityplanning(Chattopadhyayetal.,1996).

AnimportantequityconsiderationinassessingGISapproachesforPSPistheirpracticalmanageabilityatlocallevelbylocalpeople.Thisalsocoversthe‘sustainability’ofthetoolsandapproaches,i.e.whethertheycontinuetofunctionaftersuchaGITprojectterminates.‘Manageability’coversarangeoffactors:

*

*

*Feasibility—whetherthetoolisadaptedtolocaloperatingconditions,includingculturalandsocial,aswellastechnicalandclimatic;Appropriatenessofthespatialscaleofinputdataandoutputsforthelocalusers;Breadthof(community)participationintheenterprise,notjustusing‘‘keyinformants’’whoarelikelytobeeducated,adult,senior,Anglophone,males;

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573

*557

*

*

*Comprehensibilityandsimplicityofusebyparticipants;literacy,numeracyandcomputer-literacyrequirements;Costeffectiveness;Maintenanceofthecurrencyofthedata—updatinginformationsetsiscostly,timeconsumingandliabletobeoverlookedintheenthusiasmofapplyingnewtools;andAbilityofcivilsocietytouseGItoolsforscenariobuildingtovisualisetheiralternativefutures.

petence—ef ciencyandeffectiveness

DotheGItoolssupportordetractfromthe‘competence’dimensionofgoodgovernance?Thiscanbesimplyre-interpretedasthequestions:

*

*

*

*

*

*Arethetoolsef cient,andeffective,forthedeliveryofservices?Dotheyaddtoadministrativecompetence?Cantheyeffectivelytranslatebetweenindigenousandscienti cspatialknowledge?Dothetoolsunderstandandsomehowhandle‘imperfectdata’?—or,aretheybefuddledwhencopingwithimprecision,incompleteness,fuzziness,andambiguity?Canthetoolshandledynamicand owdata?Canthetoolshandleknowledgeaboutpowerrelations?

4.Whereis‘participation’inparticipatory-GIS?Howdoesparticipatoryspatialplanningrelatetogovernanceandtoindigenousspatialknowledge?

Participationinspatialplanningisclearlyrelatedtolegitimacyasagovernancecriterion,butastrongparticipatoryapproachalsosupportsothergovernanceimperativesofequityandrespectforpeople’srights.

4.1.Intensitiesandpurposesof‘participation’

‘Participation’meansdifferentthingstodifferentpeople;onereasonisthatmanyanalystsconfusetheintensities,withthepurposes,ofparticipation.FourintensitiesofPSP,fromtheleasttothemost‘participatory’leveloftheladder,arerecognisable:10

*

*

*PSPas‘InformationSharing’impliesone-ortwo-waycommunicationbetween‘outsiders’andlocalpeople,andisprimarilytechnicalinformation,suchasneedsassessment.Thetopicsandmostinformation-gatheringtechniquesaresetbytheoutsideagencies.InPSPas‘Consultation’,externalagentsrefercertainissuestolocalstakeholdersforre nementorprioritising,butitistheoutsiderswhopre-de nethesalientproblems,andanalysisiscontrolledbyoutside.Ifalllocalandexternalactorsareinvolvedin‘Decision-making’,theyjointlyidentifypriorities,analysecurrentstatus,assessalternatives,andimplement.‘Participationisseenasaright,notjustasthemeanstoachieveprojectgoals’.

10SharingofBene ts—receivinggoodsandservicesorevenpoliticalcloutissometimesconsideredaformofparticipation,butthatis‘recipientparticipation’,conceptuallydifferentfrominvolvementin‘doing’.

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

558

*M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573PSPas‘InitiatingActions’meansthatindependentinitiativesaremadeand‘owned’byempoweredlocalpeople,e.g.peopleself-mobilisetoperformcommunityactivities;adifferentsituationfromsimplyimplementationwiththeirownlabourinputs.

Therearecriticaldifferencesintheunderlyingpurposesorintentionsoftheparties(externalorinternal)whichare‘pushing’PSPasastrategyand/orpromotingP-GIS(McCall,1988):*

*

*Facilitation—‘PSPispromoted’inordertoeaseoutsideinterventionsandinterests,toimproveexternalprojectef ciency,ortopassashareofthecostburdenontothe‘‘bene ciaries’’.Mediation—PSPispromotedtolink(mediate)outsidedemandsandlocalpeople’sprioritiesinordertoincreaseprogrammeeffectiveness,tobuilduplocalcommunitycapacity,ortomodifyoutsideinterventionstowardslocalaspirationsandneeds.Empowerment—PSPispromotedtoreinforcelocaldecision-makingandresponsibilitiestowardscommunityempowerment,tosupportequitablesocialredistribution,andtoempowerweakgroupsinresourceaccessandcontrol.

Therearesigni cantobstaclestoputtingthe‘empowerment’intentionintopractice.Frequentlythereishigh-levelexternalpoliticalresistanceto‘allowing’localempowermentordevolution,localelitesdonotgiveuptheirpowereasily,andtherearedegreesofapathyorfatalismamongthecommunitybasedontheirhistoricalexperiences(cf.Carver,2001).

munitiesarenothomogeneous

Therearecriticaldivisionsincommunitiesrelatedtogender,age,economicclass,socio-culturalstatus,tribeandcaste,life-style,etc.,whichleadtoanextensiverangeofneeds,opinions,andinterestsbetweentypesofactors.Highlysigni cantistheunequaldistributionofaccesstopowerfortheultra-poor,elderly,children,handicapped,inarticulate,minorities—e.g.ethnicgroups,castes,nomads.Womenespeciallyarefrequentlyexcludedfromstructuraldecision-making.Therefore,theessentialquestionstoaskofthedegreeof‘participation’inPSPorP-GISare:*

*

*Whoisparticipating?Whohandlesdataanddecisions?Whocontrolstheprocess?Whousestheoutputs?WhohasaccessibilitytoGIStoolsandtechniques?Isthere‘openaccesstothedevice’?Whohasaccessibilitytotheoutputs?HowdotheGItoolsbehaveintermsoftheintensities,andthepurposes,of‘participation’?

4.3.Costef ciencyinparticipatoryapproaches

Thepropertiesofinformationsupplyimportanttoadecision-makerincludespeedandsimplicity.Participatoryapproachesareseriouslytimeconsumingandoftencostly,allparticipatorydatacollectionmethodshaveahugeappetitefortimeandpatience,and,solutions(anysolution)areneededtoourgently.

Elicitinglocal(con dential)knowledgefromkeyinformantsmeans rstly,trust,builtonlengthydiscussions.Forthisreason,thetypicalseniordecision-makerwillacquireinformation

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573559

fromthe‘embodiedknowledge’ofknownandtrustedsubordinates,ratherthanfromanimpersonal,passivedatabase.Ofcoursesuchinformationisbiased,butthedecision-makercanadjustmoreeasilyforthatthanforthebuilt-inbiasesofageo-database.Theunderlyinggovernanceissuesherearerespectforcitizens,andlegitimacy.

WhenGITisinvolved,theoutputmaybefast,buttheinputscertainlyarenot.Acquiring,checking,andinputtingthespatialdataintheGISprocessisverytimeconsuming,andcommonlydivertstimeawayfrom eldactivities,defeatingtheoriginalpurposeoftheproject.Similarly,a‘limitingfactor’inaPSPprocessissimplythe‘‘restrictedtime’’ofthekeyinformants.Fromagoodgovernancepositiontherefore,competenceandef ciencyarecompromised.

ThetechnologyofOn-lineParticipationextendsthescopefordecision-makingandpolicysupport.AlthoughitisnotyetwidespreadeveninNorthcountries,itisbeingdevelopedforexampleinBengalandKarnatakainIndia,andinBrazil(Goetz&Gaventa,2001).

Somestrengthsofon-lineparticipationarethatspatialaccessibilityandgeographicallocationarenotconstraints,thereisuniversalaccessviatheinternet,andwith24/7therearenotimebarriers.Anonymitycancutdownculturalandpsychologicalbarriersofgender,status,ethnicity,age,andshyness(cf.Carver,2001).Theweaknesseshowevermustalsobeclearlyrecognised.Thereisaccessonlywherepeoplecanuseinternet,andbecause,asrecognisedindiffusion-of-innovationresearch,thisisnotface-to-face,itislikelytoleadto‘awareness’ratherthan‘conviction’.

4.4.Indigenousknowledgeandscienti cknowledge

ParticipatoryapproachestoplanningmustinvolvetheelicitationandapplicationofITK.ITKisembodiedknowledgetobeseenasalocalresourcethatbelongstoruralandurbanpeoplebothasindividualsandcommunities.Itshouldnotbedenigratedonlyasprimitive,unassimilated,andoutsideofthemarket.ITKisakeytoPSP(McCall,1988,1995),becauseitmaybetheonlyresourcethatthepoorestgroupscontrolwhilsttheirland,property,resources,orlabourarerapidlyappropriated;itisaresourceneedinglittleinvestmentforrealisation;itre ectsthecapabilityandcompetenceofthelocalcommunityandcanputthemonanequivalentfootingwithoutsiders;and,becauselocalknowledgeisoperational.

Onede nition,ofmany,cansummariseI(T)Kandthesigni canceforISKandGIapplications:‘‘IKistheinformationbaseforasociety,whichfacilitatescommunicationanddecision-making.Indigenousinformationsystemsaredynamic,andarecontinuallyin uencedbyinternalcreativityandexperimentationaswellasbycontactwithexternalsystems’’(Flavieretal.,1995,p.479).

LocalITKmaybedistinguishedfromscienti cknowledgebecause:

*

*

*itsderivationfromcloseandlongrelationshipsbetweenpeopleandaspeci clandareagiveITKits‘localness’,orlocalfocus;ownershipbythelocalcommunityintegratesITKwithsocialpriorities,eventhoughownershipisnothomogeneous;andclassi cationsinITKarelikelytobebasedonthefunctionalityoftheobjects,and/orthepurposivenessoftheactors;duetothis,ITKdependsmoreonholistic,combinatorialexplanationsthanonreductionism.

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

560M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573

Nevertheless,localITKhasmoreelementsthatitholdsincommonwithscienti cknowledge:*

*

*

*Dynamism—theinterestandabilitytoincorporatenewknowledgefromother(outside)sources,notwithstandingtheymaycontradictheldbeliefs;Taxonomiesasthebuildingblocksofexplanations;Identi cationofspeci cconditionsunderwhichgeneral‘laws’willhold;andKnowledgeisunevenlydistributedwithinacommunityofexperts.

4.5.Indigenousspatialknowledge

MuchofITKhasspatialconnotations.Considerforinstancethelocationsofindigenousresourcesandlocalresourcemanagementactivities,environmentalhazards,ecosystemsrelation-ships,spatialcorrelationsbetweenlocalgroupsandresourceunits.ThistypeoflocalknowledgecanbetermedISK.ISK‘‘describeshomeandactionspace,isinnateandsustainedknowledgeabouttheland,identi esissuesofimmediatesigni cance,andencodestheinformationabouttheenvironmentinalanguagearegions’inhabitantsunderstand’’(Duerden&Kuhn,1996).

Butbeyondtheseeasilyidenti able,materialitemswithinISK,thereisamoreslipperyconceptofspiritualormysticalknowledgeassociatedwithspace,andparticularlywithspeci careasofland(orcertainlandresources).

Therearepropositionsaboutbasicspatialcognition,or‘‘na. vegeography’’,11thatmaybevalidasgeneralisationsaboutISK,andthereforerelevanttoapplyingGIT.Thesepropositionsinclude:*

*

*

*

*

*Realspaceis‘‘tightlycoupled’’withtimeinpeople’sconceptualisations.UrbanlandscapeperceptionexamplesgobackatleasttotheworkofKevinLynch;whilstEgenhoferandMark(1995)nameoldEuropeanlandunitsinwhichfarmingareasarerelatedtotimerequirements.Reasoningaboutgeographicspacedealswithincompleteinformation,i.e.peoplehavetointerpolatemuchmissinginformationusing‘commonsense’rules.Multiplelevelsofdetailcorrespondtodifferentconceptualisationsofspace;somecognitivespacesarecontinuous,andsomediscrete.Boundariesarenotnecessarilydiscreteentities,andnotnecessarilyseenbyneighboursassymmetric;considertheboundariesinnaturalresourcecon icts,orintheperceptionsofurban‘neighbourhoods’.Distancesaremorelikelythannotasymmetric,dependingonthemeansofovercoming‘frictionofdistance’ormovementhindrances.‘‘Community’’Mapsaredistortedwhentheyareonlysimplisticagglomerationsofindividualmentalmaps.Grouprepresentationsofspaceareneeded,usingPRAmethods.

Landhasstrongspiritualandculturalvaluesformanypeoples,especiallyforindigenouspeoplesverylongsettledinauniquelocation.Foroneexample,ofMaorivaluesinNewZealand,Harmsworth(1997)putsitthatlandunitshavespeci ccharacteristicsoftapu(respect[forresources]),mana(authority),andmauri(lifeforce,lifeenergy).Therefore,‘land’cannotbesimplyde nedasaneconomiccommodity,andplacedinnarrowcategoriesof‘highvalue’,‘marginal’,or‘wastelands’.

‘‘Na. vegeographyisthebodyofknowledgethatpeoplehaveaboutthesurroundinggeographicworld’’(Egenhofer&Mark,1995).11

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573561

TheISKoflandresourcesthereforeincorporatescustomarylawsandancestor-directedobjectivesinspatialdecision-makingprocesses.‘Naming’ofsacredplacesandsymbologyinspatialrepresentationsareelementsofthis.Suchvaluesareidenti ableintheconceptsofprobablyallpeopleswhoretainaspiritualfeelingforland(e.g.Bartolo&Hill,2001,forAustralia;andtheAMNwebsiteforNorthAmerica,).Inthemodernurbancontext,somePPGISpractitionersareemphasisingsimilarlya‘senseofurbanplace’asaformofISK(cf.Casey&Pederson,2000;Carver,2001).

4.6.Genderedspatialknowledge

Genderedspacereferstoseveraldimensions:specialisedgenderedknowledgeofdistributionsinspace,thedifferentialaccesstoandownershipofresourceswiththeirnestedscales,andculturallandscapes/townscapesassociatedwithlifeexperiencesofmenandwomen.

ThegendercomponentofISKisofteninvisible.Muchliterally,cannotbeseen—inNRMforexample,women’suseofforestresourcesislikelytobethecollectionoffoodsormedicinesundertheclosedcanopyandforestgardening,ratherthanlarge-scalelumberingoragriculturalclearing,usuallydonebymen.Satelliteimageryisnotsensitiveenoughtoshowthevitalelementsofwomen’sspecialisedagricultureandnaturalresourceuse.‘‘Theymay,infact,belimitedtoparticularresources,orevenparticularproductsy,certainlymuchsmallerthanasinglepixelinmostlanduseorpropertyimagesy’’(Rocheleauetal.,1995,p.64).Thus,women’slandsareoftendenigratedas‘unusedwastelands’,andtheproductstheymakearenotrecognisedashavingeconomicorevenlivelihoodvalue.Moreover,thegenderaspectisnotrecognised—becausecensussurveydatadonotshowtherichnessofwomen’sreallives(normuchofmen’s),becauseofthefocusonmonetisedactivities,andtherestrictiveassumptionsmadeabouttherolesandcapacities,andthusthespatialactivitypatterns,ofwomen.The‘nomarketvalue’designationisoftenelidedintolabelsof‘primitive’or‘worth-less’activities(cf.Scott,1995).

Nationalemploymentorlabourforceparticipationdatatendtoignorethelabourfor‘reproductionofthehousehold’—careofchildrenandelderly,orhousework,andaresultofthisis‘misogynistic’distortionsofeconomicspace.Itfollowsthatthemappedversionsorotherspatialdatabasesareunabletoshowgenderdistinctions.Genderdifferencesinlevelsofmobilityareseenintherestrictions,andthusinthe‘‘invisibility’’,ofthelargeproportionofhouse-boundandnon-carowningwomenintheUS(Hall,1997).Additionally,therearethe‘real’andperceivedspatialrestrictionsduetopersonalsafety,security,orharassmentlocations.Kwan(2000)expectsthatGIStoolswillhelpplannerstoidentifyandunderstandurbanwomen’sconstrictedspacesand‘ xityconstraints’.

5.Ownershipandaccessibilityinindigenousspatialknowledge

5.1.Ownershipofindigenous(spatial)information

TheownershipofISKmaybefollowingthepathofconventionalgeo-spatialinformationresources,wherethetrendistowardsmarketrules,evenfor‘‘patrimonial’’informationin

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

562M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573

foundationgeo-datasets,includingtopodata,infrastructure,andcensusdata.Spatialdataarebeingsoldofftothehighestbiddertoexploitthevalue-addedofGIS,fuelledbythegrowingpowersoftheWTOandWorldIntellectualPropertyOrganisation(WIPO).

Atthelocallevel,issuesofownershipofintellectualpropertyrightsalsoappearinrelationtoprivacyoflandparcelinformation(e.g.inthehighresolutionPPGISSlaithwaitecase,Carveretal.,1999).

Averystrongpositiononownership,andthereforeonlimitingaccess,of‘secret’,sacred,ISKistakenbyHarmsworth(1997)inrelationtoMaoripeoples.Theseprotectionistviewstowardsindigenousculture,foundalsointheUS(e.g.Madsen,1995),couldhoweverbeinterpretedalsoasprotectingtheprivilegesofanelitewhothriveontherestrictedknowledgeofresourcelocationsoruses,privyonlytothemselves.Thecommonestgrouptoloseoutarewomen,whenmen’ssecurecontrolofresourceknowledgeandtheconsequentexclusionofwomenbecomelegitimisedby‘communitytraditions’.Inurbansettings,thecon dentiality/secrecyofISKisnotonlyrelatedtoillegalactivities,althoughitwouldincludesuchasdrugdealinglocations.Buttherearenumerous‘traditional’activitieswhichfallundervaryinglabelsofanti-socialorimmorality,becausetheyarenotsanctionedbythemajoritysociety.

Examplesof,whataretovaryingdegrees,protectedorcon dentialruralandurbanISKdatalayers:

*

*

*

*

*Traditionalhunting, shing,grazing,medicinalherbscollection;areasusedbyurbangroupsforlivelihoodsorlife-styleactivities.‘Traditional’,vulgaractivities(e.g.hunting,dragracing,raves,streetbetting,prostitution,dog ghting),whicharecurrentlyanti-socialorinappropriate.Customaryboundariesandsubdivisionsofcultureareas—tribes,neighbourhoods,customaryproperty,eruvim,streetgangs,maleandfemale,gayandstraightspaces,personalspace.Historicplaces,neighbourhoods,Holysites,burialgrounds,ceremonialareas,buriedculturalobjects.Indigenoussacredplacenames,cosmologicallocations,sacredpathways,songlines.

Arelatedquestioniswhetherownershipofknowledgeincludestherighttopreventothersfromusingit.AmongstFirstNationsinNorthAmericaandinAotearoatherearelegal–politicalmovestowardsa‘communalrightofprivacy’.Thismeanscustomaryleadershiptakingresponsibilityfordataprotection,andthuscontrolovercon dentialGISdatalayers.

Moreover,therightsofindigenouspeoplescanbeassertedtoincludefreedomfrom‘wantonexploitation’oftheirnaturalresourcedatafromaerialphotographyorRSplatforms.Inthiscontext,Madsen(1995)quotesfromaUSlegalopinion,(1928)whenJusticeBrandeis‘‘calledtherighttobeletalone‘themostcomprehensiveofrightsandtherightmostcherishedbycivilizedmen’’’.ThereissimilarconcernoverthesurveillanceandpolicingcapabilitiesofGISusedincombinationwithhi-techspatialdatacollection(e.g.Harrisetal.,1995;Pickles,1995).

LandcareResearchinNewZealandoffersthreeprotectionoptionsforsensitive,con dentiallayers:recordingtheinformationasconcealed leslinkedtoaGISandneedingapermission;recordingtheinformationasanoverlay,e.g.agridatcrudescale,whichpreventsspeci csite

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573563

identi cation;or,providingahyperlinktoarecognised(Maoriiwi)authorityresponsibletoanswerqueries(Harmsworth,1997).

5.2.Accessto,andexclusionfrom,spatialinformation

Whatevertheactualownership,peoplemusthaverightsofaccesstotheinformationstocksheldbythestate,asabasicconditionforgoodgovernance.Therearelimitstotheserights,setbynationalsecurityorcommercialcon dentiality,andtherearevastdifferencesbetweenwhatstates‘allow’theircitizensaccessto—Harrisetal.(1995)instancetheSouthAfricanlegacyofdistortedinformationunderapartheid.Theissuesofpublicaccesstoinformationheldbythelarge-scale,privatecommercialsectormustequallybeaddressedinpublicdebateandbesubjecttopublicpolicydetermination.Thereisastrongtendencytohiderelevantspatialdatainthebusinesssectorcamou agedundercommercialcon dentiality.

Lackof nancialresourceshowever,ismorepersistentthanareinstitutionalhindrances.Atlargerscale,thewealth(taxbase)ofcommunitiesisadeterminingfactorindevelopmentofPPGISintheUSA.HaklayandHarrison(2002)examinethe nancialdifferencesbetweenutilisingPPGISintheUKandtheUSA,intermsofcosts,easeofaccessandfamiliaritywithgeo-data,suchasOSmapsanddigitaldata.Attheindividuallevel,governanceobligationsnotonlyrequirethestatetoprovideaccessto(geo-)informationfortheircitizens,butatareasonableprice.CaseyandPederson(2000)lookattherealcostsofthetimeinvolvedtoacquireprimarydataorvisitdatabases.Accessibilityisnotonlyprice-related,therearephysicaltransportationandcommunicationconstructs.Mostoftheworldisinlowerincomecountries/classesandnotontheweb—eveninurbanareas,theymuststillwalkorbustoobtainpublicgeo-data.

The ipsideofaccessibilityisexclusion—despitetheimprovedaccessofmany,averysigni cantminoritywillbecomemoremarginalised—‘‘adoptionalsoimpliesnon-adoptionorinabilitytoadopt’’(Harrisetal.,1995).Therearetwolevelsoftheexclusionimpacts,relatedtothe‘intentions’ofpromotingparticipationforfacilitation,mediation,orempowerment(seeSection4).

Initially,thereisthepersistenceofan‘informationunderclass’excludedfromthedecisionloopbythe‘digitaldivide(e.g.Carver,2001).Becausetheyarewithouttheappropriatetechnicaltrainingor‘skills’,theoff-linegoatsareseparatedfromtheon-linewiredsheep.Inthesesituations,theroleofinformationhandlerorinterpreterwillbetakenbytheprofessionals—whethertheybeGISexperts,consultants,planners,orprofessional-levelNGOs.TherearemanycritiquesofthisinPPGISintheUSA.InreviewingalternativelocationsforapowerlineinWestVirginia,citizens’groupscomplainedthattheplanningprofessionalshi-jackedtheGISandmultimediatoolsandexcludedlocalconcernsoverdatacategoriesandweightingofimpacts(Towers,1997;King,2002).Technocraticplanningmodelsreplaced‘neighbourhooddiscourse’inaMinneapolisNeighbourhoodAssociationandintroducedalienterminology,conceptsanddecisionapproacheswhichexcludedthemarginalisedandlessarticulate—theelderly,blacks,andrenters,whereasthosewhocouldadoptthejargonandtheGISmilieufeltmoreempowered(Elwood,2002;Aitken,2002).OfcoursethisphenomenonisjustaspervasivewhereGITisinappropriatelyintroducedintorural,indigenous,‘non-technological’societies(e.g.Rundstrom,1995;Abbotetal.,1998).

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

564M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573

Beyondthis,istheelementallackofresourcesandaccesstopower,whichcreatesmoreimplacablehindrancesthanbeinguntrained(seeSection7).

6.HowwellcanGISrepresentITK?Strengthsandweaknessesofp-GIS

6.1.GISdistortionsofperceivedspace

GISoutputsareliabletodistortandtrivialisespatialrealitybecausetheypresentpatterns,notprocesses,even owscanbedif culttorepresent.Theycanonlydescribebutnotexplain;alternatively,theyexaminebutdonotprovideunderstanding.GIScanprovideanswerstothe‘what?’,‘when?’,‘who?’,andofcourse,‘where?’questions,butnotmuchofthe‘how?’,or‘why?’questions.Economicandsocialpower,whichisfundamentaltoexplaining‘why’?,rarelyappearsinGIS—thoughthatisasmuchduetotheownershipandobjectivesofmostconventionalGIS,asitistotechnicallimitations.

Thesenseofplaceassociatedwithparticularlocalitiesandbyparticulargroupsofpeopleinmentalmapsisqualitativeandfuzzy,metaphoricalormystical.ItmaynotbereducibletoEuclideanspace.Thedistortionsforcedonpeople’sperceivedspacebybeingembeddedinaprocrusteanlogicalpositivistGISbedmaythrowawaytoomuchculturalinformationbelongingtoISK.Aminimalrequirementisthatthenamesusedforobjects/people/placesshouldmeshwithindividualandcommunityknowledge(Brodnig&Mayer-Schonberger,2000).

Hall(1997)extendstheargumenttoidentifyGISasa‘‘masculinisttechnology’’whichismaterialistandpositivist,handlingonlydiscreteboundedunitsofanalysisthatareoftenpre-de nedandavoidfuzzyconcepts.Hercallisforworkonthe‘‘feminisationofGIS’’.Inasimilarvein,Varanka(1997)interpretsthestressontheprinciplesof‘plainstyle’incartography—thesimplicityofcontextbyeliminatingcompetingviewpoints,emphasisonmathematicalaccuracy,utility,lackoficonography,plainness—as‘‘manly’’;asopposedtootherobjectivesofrecordingambiguity,fuzzinessandspiritualvaluesthatareseenas‘‘feminineandjuvenile’’.Varanka(1997,p.1)proposesthatthe‘‘unacknowledgedconsequencesofPlainstylemappingare[masculinist]culturalyrepression[of]emotivestatementsandabstractionssuchasworldviewsandspirituality’’.

6.2.‘Preciseness’

Muchofwhatissigni cantinspatialpatternsinPSP,relatingforinstancetoneighbourhoodplanning,culturalzoning,orlocal-levelNRM,hasspatialcharacteristicsoffuzzy,multi-layeredzonesandzonalinformation(areas,polygons,rastergrids);blurred, exible,andmultipleboundaries(linedata);uncertain,hiddenorrestrictedspatiallocations(pointdata);anddynamics— owsofphysicalresources,informationormemes, owsofin uence,powerandcontrol.

GISapproaches,especiallythosebuiltonRSdata,mayplacemisleadingemphasisonspatialaccuracyorprecisenessoftheoutputinformation.Mostdevelopmentactivities,especiallyinruralsettings,donotneedahighdegreeofspatialexactitude.Theyareconcernedwithinterventionsatthelevelofcommunitiesorecologicalzones,whicharerelativelylargespatialentities,andmay

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573565

nothavepreciseboundaries.Manysocialinterventionsareaimedatcommunitiesofpeoplewhodonothaveauniqueor xedlocation(women,pastoralists,students,the‘‘poorest10%’’).Precisionisneededforspecialsituations,especiallylegalactions,suchascustomarylandrightsvs.thestateoraforestryconcession.

6.3.Visualisationandtechnical im- am

ConventionalprojectstodisseminateGIShavecommonlybeendrivenfromoutside,asa‘solutionlookingforaproblem’.‘‘GISandRSdemonstrations[ingeneral]are‘technology-driven’ratherthen‘demand-driven’’’(Hutchinson&Toledano,1993).Thisraisesquestionsofthelegitimacyandrespectdimensionsofgovernance.

GISsoftwaremarketedtocommunitygroupsisofteninappropriateinitsfunctionalitiesanddataappetite,munitycustomershavelearnttopreviewsoftwareoptions;forexample,theShuswapNationinCanadaassessedpertinentfactorsoflearning,informationinterchange,support,easeofuse,aswellascost(Johnson,1997).Ongovernancecriteria,softwaredecisionsrelatebothtoaccountabilityandcompetence/ef ciency.

ItisimpossibletooverestimatethevisualimpactofGISoutput,RSimagesand,tosomeextent,maps(cf.Monmonier,1996).Itisnotonlythequantityofinformationbitsthatcanbesummarisedinanimage(comparedwithawrittenreportordatatables),butthequalityoftheinformationimpartedisalsodifferent—the‘‘clarity’’,thesimplicityof‘‘distinguishing’’,andtheeaseofmakingcomparisons.Asmanyobserversnote,GISdisplayscanhavetooconvincinganimpactontheaudience—theeaseoflayeringandofchangingmaps,theapparentobjectivityandscienti ccontentofthedisplay,canhaveablindingeffect(cf.Abbotetal.,1998;Obermeyer,1994),althoughthisshoulddeclineasdecision-makersbecomemorefamiliarwiththetechniques.EvenproponentsofGISapplications,pointout(inthecontextoflandclaims)how‘‘yGIScanprovideanairofscienti cobjectivityrequiredwithinthelegalsystem’’(Johnson,1997).‘‘Spurious’’couldeasilybeaddedtothequote.

GISactivitiesareoftentreatedasshort-term,limitedprojects,ratherthanason-goingprocesses,despitebeingmarketedasstructuralinvestment.12InmostPSPapplications,however,thebene tsofparticipationareneitherfast,nornecessarilyina nancialcurrency;andwherethereareeconomicreturnsfromP-GISusedforcommunitydevelopment,theyarenotaccruingtothecommercialplayerswhocouldfundhigh-techGIS.

Thereareconcernshereforaccountability,aswellasforef ciencyinapracticalsense.FlashyGISimagescreateinfactnon-transparencyandnon-visibility,sothatrepresentationsanddecisionsaredistortedorconfusedbytheimage.

yering

Onthepositiveside,agreatstrengthofGISandP-GISwithrespecttoISKistheperformanceofthelayeringcapabilities.Multipleperspectivesalwaysdemandmulti-mappings,anditisarguablethatthiscapabilitymeansthatGIScansigni cantlyrepresentaholistic,non-12AsinexperiencesofmunicipalGISinCebuandLilongwe(vanderVegt,2001).

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

566M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573

reductionist,weltanschauungofindigenous/localpeoples.ThethematiclayerseasilycreatedinGISmappingcanre yeringhasasynergisticresultinthatthecombinationsofthemedspatialinformation,fromdifferentsocialperspectivesandsources,andbothquantitativeandqualitative,createawholegreaterthanthesumofitsparts.Thus,layeringhasafundamentalrelationshipwithrespectforrights,andtosomeextentwithequitycategories.Moreover,layeringisanywayusedtoimprovecompetence/ef ciencyofdeliveryeveninconventionalplanningapproaches.

Multimediaandinteractiveweb-basedmapping/GIScanshowmultipleviewsandvoices,layersofinformation,andlayersoftime.TypicalspatialandtemporalconstraintsofstandardmaporGISrepresentationareremovedbyusingmultimediaorawebpresentation(e.g.Weiner&Harris,2002inSouthAfrica;Kingstonetal.,2000inUK;Shiffer,1998inUSA).Theeasyabilitytoclickonamapto ndamagni cation,oraphotoorsketch,orwritteninformation,helpseventheinexperiencedusertoovercomemap-readingproblems(Kingstonetal.,2000).

6.5.Operationalissues—can‘civilians’workwith(P-)GIS?

PositiveexperienceswithP-GISshowthatanaf nity—‘feelingcomfortableworkingwithgeo-spatialinformation’—isnotdif culttostimulate.Forinstance,techno-professionalshaveappreciatedforadecadethatuntrainedpeople,withlocalISK,canworkeffectively,easilyandhappilyinterpretingaerialphotos(e.g.Groten,1997;Jordan&Shrestha,1998).WorkingwithGISsoftwareandhardwareisnotonlyfeasible,butwiththeappropriateapproach—culturallyaswellastechnically—itisveryeffective.AlthoughmostpackagedGIStrainingorcapacity-buildingisgearedtocomputerliterates,therearealternatives,asshownbytheexperiencesofAMNandESRI,andbytheexperiencesboth,oflong-runintensivetraining(e.g.Gonzalez,2000;Weiner&Harris,2002;Sawicki&Burke,2002),or,ofmorerapidPRAexercises.

WherethereareconstraintsagainstlocalpeopleororganisationsworkingwithGIS,theyareduetoexclusion—whethereconomic,social,and/orpolitical,andnotbecauseoftechnicalincapacity(e.g.Obermeyer,1994;Johnson,1997).Ontheotherhandarethescepticswhoconsiderthatthepublicshouldknowtheirlimitations(e.g.Casey&Pederson,2000;maybeCarver,2001).GISistoo‘complexabeast’liabletodistortionofitsresults,andamateurapplicationsofGISareatleastpronetoridicule,atworst,dangerous.

LossofskilledstafffromP-GISunitsisarelatedissue(Casey&Pederson,2000;vanderVegt,2001).ToavoidfastturnoveroftrainedGISstafftomorelucrativejobs,apre-conditionisastronglocalorganisation.

7.Conclusions—(spatial)information,power,andparticipationinspatialplanning

7.1.Indigenousspatialknowledgeanditsownership

MuchISKinagricultureandNRMisequivalenttoscienti cknowledge,inmanyrespectsbetter,becauseitembodiesdecadesorgenerationsofspeci cpracticalknowledgewhichisinteractiveandholistic,thusincorporatingreallinkages.ItishardertoarguesimilarlyforITK/ISKinurbansettings,thoughconsiderourfamiliaracceptance,andtheimpactof,

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573567

non-professional,localknowledgeoftravelpatterns,locationsoflife-styleactivities,orsafety/security,forinstance.

Beyondthis,thereisindigenousknowledgethatissymbolic,metaphoric,andvisionary,thoughoftenfunctionallyrelatedtolandandlandfeatures.Thisdeepknowledge,withitsobligationsofstewardshipoftheland—asincustomaryrestrictionsonusing‘sacredlands’whicharealsoaprotectedforest—togetherwiththelocation-andresource-speci c,problem-orientedITK,providethebasisforlocalpeople’sparticipation.

Thechallengeistointegratetheinsiders’pragmatic,ifsometimesalsomystical,knowledge(ISK)whichre ectslocalneeds,withtheexternaldemandsthatareratchetingupwithglobalisation.Therationalebehindthisintegrationisanalogoustoseeing‘communityparticipation’as‘mediation’,the‘thirdway’betweenfacilitatingexternalprojects,and,autonomousempowerment.ITK/ISKarekeystonesinthisprocess,becausetheyareameasureofthecapabilityandcompetenceofthelocalcommunity,andtheirownershiphasthepotentialtoplacethecommunityonanequalstatuswithoutsider‘experts’.

7.2.OwnershiporcontrolofISKcanempowerthecommunity

Empowermentisthedeepestoftheintentsofparticipation,andpromotingISKby,within,andfor,thelocalcommunityisamajorinstrumenttowardsthis.P-GISshouldprovidethepotentialforamoreequalexchangeofinformationandvaluesandunderstandingbetweenthepartiesinvolved,asfrequentlyasserted(e.g.Aberley,1993;Poole,1995;Gonzalez,2000;Weiner,Warner,Harris,&Levin,1995).CarryingoutaGISexercisewiththeproperinvolvementoflocalpartiesaffectsempowerment,andstrengthensthecapabilitiesofthoseparties.BeinginvolvedinaGISmeansthat‘‘thestakeholderpartiesarebeingtakenseriouslyy[through]ygreateropennessandaccountabilityonbehalfofdecisionmakers’’(Carver,2001).

However,iftheinputdataor(GIS)outputarenotparticipatorilyprocessedinsitu,theempowermentbene tsmaybelost,becauseanalienationbetweenpeopleand‘their’datacanarise(Jordan&Shrestha,1998).ThisisovercomewhentheGISperseisintegratedinto,andisseenas,avitalcomponentof,thewholeprocessofdecision-makinginPSP;thustheimportanceofusingparticipatoryresearchasthemethodologicalapproach,andGISasthetechnicaltool.Conversely,GISandmapsareanecessarybutnotsuf cientconditionbythemselvesforlocaldevelopment.Theymustbede nitivelyembeddedinparticipation,notjustasanoperationalmechanism,butdeliberatelyasatoolforempoweringlocalpeople.

7.3.Power

ThispositivespinonISKandempowermentmustbecounteredbytheideathat‘informationperseisnotpower’.Social-economicdevelopmentandimplementationaredirectedmuchmorebyrelativepowerandaccesstoandcontrolover,resources,thanby(geo-)information.13Thenexusanddeliverymechanismsofsocial–politicalpowerareformedby‘‘y‘thingslikethepoliticalprocess,thepropertymarket,propertydevelopment’y’’accordingtotheLondonrespondentsCritiquesalongtheselinesarenotnew—e.g.Yapa(1991),Pickles(1995),Rundstrom(1995),Harrisetal.(1995),debatesintheVareniusproject,Craigetal.(2002).13

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

568M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573

quotedbyHaklayandHarrison(2002,p.15).Thesesamerespondentsdemonstratedtheir‘‘yhealthyscepticismoftheabilityofPPGIStoalterpowerrelations’’.Similarly,inevaluatingwhyaGIStransfer-of-technologyprojectinIndiawasunsustainable,node cienciesinGISandcomputingcapabilitieswerefound,‘‘nocomputingproblemseemedbeyondtheirabilitytosolve’’.Thatisnotwheretheproblemslie,‘‘theproblemsofdevelopmentaredrivenybysocio-economicconsiderations’’(Hutchinson&Toledano,1993).

WhereversomeactorsgainfromintroductionofGIS,othersocialgroupswillloseout,becomingyetmoremarginalised.(P-)GISsimultaneouslyboth‘empowersandmarginalizes’(Brodnig&Mayer-Schonberger,2000).Onlywhere(geo-)informationshiftsthebalanceofpowersfromthe‘‘strongpublics’’tothe‘‘counter-publics’’14andchangesdifferentialaccesstoresources,aswellastoinformation,canitbeconsideredtoprogressivelyre-orientdevelopment.

Thereisarelationshipherewiththe‘exclusion’oftheinformationunderclass(Section5).TheGIT-literateareanywaytheeconomicallyandsociallypowerful,andthoughcriticalofgovernmentdecisions,areunlikelytobeupsettingthewholesocialapplecart.Evenwithadegreeof‘opengovernment’,informationaccruestothosealreadywithmostresources,rmationisaresourcewhosevalueisrealisedonlyincombinationwithothersocial/politicalresources,especiallypowerandaccesstopolicyinstruments.Thisisequallytrueforcustomaryknowledgewithinindigenoussocietiesliabletocontrolbyanolder,male,orclass,elite.Localsociety,whetherurbancommunityorruralvillage,isnotequitable,and‘participation’hastostruggletoreachthepower–poor,marginalisedandinarticulate.‘WerealisedthatsomerichandpowerfulpeopleinthecommunityobjectedtotheopenandparticipatoryusesofGIS’inruralGhana(Kyem,2002).

Carver(2001)beginsareviewof‘participationandGI’withthepessimisticideathatpossiblythegeneralpublicdonotwanttobemorecloselyinvolvedindecision-making,butheaddsthesigni cantquestionofwhetherpolicy-makersandpower-brokersactuallyvaluepublicinput.Developmentandinstallationofimproved(spatial)informationcapabilities(suchasGIS)needtoruninparallelwithimprovedinstitutionalsafeguardsforreasonablepublicaccessanduse.

Thereisayetunburiedmythabout‘value-neutralGIS’.GISisnomoreneutralthanstatisticsorbulldozers,italldependsonwhatitisbeingusedfor,andonwhoiscontrollingit.‘‘AGISre ectsthemandate[andthevalues,goals,biases]oftheagencythatoperatesit’’(Harrisetal.,1995).Itisaxiomaticthatgoodgovernancerestsnotonthetools,butonhowtheyareused,andbywhom.

7.4.Dimensionsofgovernanceand(P-)GIS

Giventhemessagesthatontheonehand,‘ownership’anduseofISKcanempower,andontheotherhand,(geo-)informationistheservantofthestatusquopowerstructure,inwhatrespectscanP-mapping/P-GISsupportgoodgovernance?FortheGISproponent,theaimmustbeto14TermsfromAitken(2002).

费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573569

identifythosefeaturesthatmakeP-GISutilisingISKmorecompatiblewiththetenetsandmeasuresofgoodgovernanceinPSP.

7.5.Legitimacy

P-GIS(andP-mapping)createopportunitiestovisualisethe(spatial)interests,needsandpotentialsofgroupsdisparateintermsoflocality,ethnicity,gender,orclass.Thus,theycanworktowardsbettergovernance,inthatthe‘governing’recogniseandappreciatetherepresentationsofthelegitimateinterestsofthe‘governed’.

However,muchofwhattermsitself‘P-GIS’and‘participatoryplanning’correspondstotheweakestoftheparticipationintentions(Section4)andisconcernedonlywith‘facilitating’more‘ef cient’implementation.Insuchapplications,alazyapproachistakenintermsofwhatsortsofindigenousknowledgearecollected,andthereisusuallyverylittle‘triangulation’(cross-checking)whichisasinequanonofPRA.

7.6.Respectforrights

Explicitly,P-GISprovidesaframeworkforlegal,politicalandadministrative(planning)legitimacy,suchaswithP-GIS/P-mapsusedforregisteringandlegalisingcustomarylandorneighbourhoodclaims.P-GISiscapableofsystematicallyidentifyingandrepresentingthespatialrightsofpeopletotheirlandandlandresources,intermsofownership,access,useandmanagement.

Implicitly,theapplicationofP-GISrespectsthevalueandintegrityofindigenouslocalknowledgeasanessentialelementinparticipatoryplanning;andP-GISworkstooperationaliseITK/ISKbylocating,analysingandpresentingit.

7.7.Equity

WhenP-GISisappliedtoequitymapping,itreinforcesarespectforminorities,theinarticulate,andtheresource-andpower-poor.

Thedistributionoverspaceofservices,functionsandresources(fromgovernmentorprivatesector)arehighlightedinP-GISindicators,morethaninaconventionalGIS.Moreoverthesourcesofinformationfortheseindicatorsarethepeopleaffected,notjustthetechnicalplanners.ItispertinentthatP-GISimplies‘people’sparticipation’atleasttosomedegree,whichformsthebasisforequityaswellaslegitimacy.

petence(ef ciency)

Onthisgovernancedimension,P-GISisnotsodifferentfromconventionalGIS,buttheparticipatoryelementinP-GISaddsthefactorthattheef ciencyandeffectivenessofthegoverningtowardsthegoverned—intermsofserviceprovision,responsetoneeds—canbetransparentlytested.

本文来源：https://www.bwwdw.com/article/cdp4.html