jiří pánek - the assessment of participatory mapping methods based on the expert system

The assessment of participatory mapping methods based on the expert system

Jiří PánekDepartment of Development Studies

Palacky University in Olomouc

Overview

• Introduction• Why is participation important• Participatory methods used (for mapping

and visualization) • Expert system (preliminary survey results)• Conclusion• One more slide

Introduction

• Participatory mapping as an independent approach historically comes mainly from Participatory Rural Appraisal (Chambers 2006).

• Creating their own community maps has an empowering effect on the participating members of the community (Vlok & Panek 2012).

Why is participation important?

• In the Local Agenda 21 (UN Earth Summit) community-based mapping was identified as a best practice for locally-based sustainability planning (IDRC, 1996).

• The sense of ownership sparks empowerment and actuates the momentum for sustainable development — driven and run by the community as it comes from within the community (Vlok & Panek 2012).

Participatory methods used in research

• 10 methods, mainly from Training Kit on participatory spatial information management and communication developed by EU-ACP Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation

Image by Mount Kenya Environment Protection Project

Images courtesy of Peter Poole ©/LEO

Image courtesy of Giacomo Rambaldi©/CTA

Image courtesy of A. Murphy, Global Diversity Foundation.

Image courtesy of Rachel Olsen

Expert system and survey results

• Who are the “experts”?• Male/Female = 64/36 (167 in total)• Average age = 38• Participants structure:

– LinkedIn, PPGIS, ResearchGate, Facebook– UNISA, ICC2013, students

Who were the experts?

• Dr. Stefano Marras – Map Kibera Project• Dr. Peter Kyem – Central Connecticut State

University• Prof. Nancy Obermayer – National Center for

Geographic Information and Analysis• Prof. Sarah Elwood – University of Washington• Prof. Jon Corbett – Centre for Social, Spatial and

Economic Justice, University of British Columbia

Preliminary survey results

Conclusions

• “Time available and needed for the mapping activity”, “Facilitator’s geo-skills and experience” and “Reason of the mapping activity” are the most important factors.

• On the other hand “Internet connection available”, “Colonial history of the community” and “Electrical equipment (PC, laptop) available” are among the least important factors.

Conclusion

• The results from the survey will be used in order to create a tool for selecting the most optimal participatory mapping method for specific community settings.

One more slide

• Please take part in the survey!

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/InDOG

Thank you for your attention!

Jiří PánekDepartment of Development Studies

Palacky University in Olomouc