Five classes of geospatial data and the barriers to using them

Darcy Reynard

doi:10.1111/gec3.12364

journal article Mar 08, 2018

Five classes of geospatial data and the barriers to using them

Darcy Reynard

Geography Compass Vol. 12 No. 4 · Wiley

View at Publisher Save 10.1111/gec3.12364

Abstract

Abstract
Geospatial technologies implemented through the World Wide Web (Geoweb) have improved steadily over the last decade. This Geoweb has the potential to allow citizens to collect and use geospatial data in an effort to influence urban planning in a bottom‐up manner—a stark departure from traditional top‐down public consultation in urban planning. This article reviews five classes of geospatial data available to citizens trying to influence urban planning.
These classes have been reviewed in the academic literature before, but not at the same time and not with respect to urban planning. Looking at them together allows for examination of the interconnection as well as the boundaries between them. This paper establishes an understanding of these Geoweb data classes and examines the main barriers citizens face when trying to use geospatial data—with a focus on technological and financial barriers. Despite improvements in the Geoweb that help in reducing these barriers, preliminary evidence suggests that the voices of citizens are still not being fully heard in urban planning.
This article tells the story of a Geoweb project by Paths for People, a biking and walking advocacy group in Edmonton, Canada. Paths for People initiated a Public Participatory Geographic Information Systems (PPGIS) project to inform the development of biking infrastructure in Edmonton, but this was largely ignored by city council, which adopted a top‐down cycling plan. This paper highlights the large gap between the promises of the Geoweb, the current practice of urban planning, and grassroots capabilities of this form of community engagement.

Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References

71

[1]

10.1162/104648800564635

[2]

Al‐Kodmany K. "Bridging the gap between technical and local knowledge: Tools for promoting community‐based planning and design" Journal of Architectural and Planning Research (2001)

[3]

10.1111/tgis.12203

[4]

10.1016/s0305-9006(02)00020-x

[5]

10.1177/2043820613513390

[6]

10.1177/0008125616683703

[7]

10.1177/0739456x0202100301

[8]

Crowdsourcing the Public Participation Process for Planning Projects

Daren C. Brabham

Planning Theory 10.1177/1473095209104824

[9]

Brown G. "Public Participation GIS (PPGIS) for regional and environmental planning: Reflections on a decade of empirical research" URISA Journal (2012)

[10]

10.1080/02697459.2013.820037

[11]

10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.11.004

[12]

City of Edmonton. (2009).The way we move: Transportation master plan. City of Edmonton. Retrieved fromhttps://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/documents/land_sales/TransportationMasterPlan.pdf

[13]

City of Edmonton. (2012).Summary of all questions ‐ 2012 Municipal Census. City of Edmonton. Retrieved fromhttps://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/documents/PDF/Summary_Report_of_All_Questions_Edmonton_2012.pdf

[14]

City of Edmonton. (2014).Summary of all questions ‐ 2014 Municipal Census. City of Edmonton. Retrieved fromhttps://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/documents/Summary%20Report%20of%20All%20Questions_Edmonton_2014.pdf

[15]

City of Edmonton. (2016a).102 Ave Bike Route Fact Sheet. City of Edmonton. Retrieved fromhttps://www.edmonton.ca/documents/RoadsTraffic/102AveBikeRoute_Factsheet_May2016.pdf

[16]

City of Edmonton. (2016b).Minimum grid for physically separated bike lane infrastructure.

[17]

City of Edmonton. (2016c May).Summary of all questions ‐ 2016 Municipal Census. City of Edmonton. Retrieved fromhttps://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/documents/census/Summary%20Report%20of%20All%20Questions_EDMONTON_2016.pdf

[18]

Bringing Local Knowledge into Environmental Decision Making

Jason Corburn

Journal of Planning Education and Research 10.1177/0739456x03022004008

[19]

Beyond the geotag: situating ‘big data’ and leveraging the potential of the geoweb

Jeremy W. Crampton, Mark Graham, Ate Poorthuis et al.

Cartography and Geographic Information Science 10.1080/15230406.2013.777137

[20]

10.1080/13658816.2014.977905

[21]

10.1080/10630732.2012.673056

[22]

Drew C. H. "Transparency—Considerations for PPGIS research and development" URISA Journal (2003)

[23]

10.1007/978-94-007-4587-2_2

[24]

Goetz M. &Zipf A.(2012).Towards defining a framework for the automatic derivation of 3D CityGML models from volunteered geographic information: International Journal of 3‐D Information Modeling.1(2) 1–16.https://doi.org/10.4018/ij3dim.2012040101 10.4018/ij3dim.2012040101

[25]

10.1007/s10708-007-9111-y

[26]

10.1111/j.1749-8198.2008.00167.x

[27]

10.1080/1365881031000114107

[28]

Planning Through Consensus Building: A New View of the Comprehensive Planning Ideal

Judith E. Innes

Journal of the American Planning Association 10.1080/01944369608975712

[29]

10.1080/01944369908976071

[30]

10.1080/1464935042000293170

[31]

10.1080/10580530.2012.716740

[32]

Jasanoff S. (2016)

[33]

10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2016.03.006

[34]

Jia T. &Jiang B.(2010).Measuring urban sprawl based on massive street nodes and the novel concept of natural cities. arXiv Preprint arXiv:1010.0541. Retrieved fromhttps://arxiv.org/abs/1010.0541

[35]

10.1007/s10708-011-9416-8

[36]

10.1007/978-94-007-4587-2_5

[37]

10.1080/02697459.2015.1104203

[38]

10.1177/2043820613513388

[39]

Kitchin R. Coletta C. LeightonEvans LiamHeaphy &DarachMacDonncha. (2017).Smart cities urban technocrats epistemic communities and advocacy coalitions. SocArXiv. Retrieved from osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/rxk4r 10.31235/osf.io/rxk4r_v1

[40]

Knack A.(2016 October 11).Downtown minimum bike grid. Retrieved 4 April 2017 fromhttp://www.andrewknack.com/downtown‐minimum‐bike‐grid/

[41]

Knudsen A.‐M. S. &Kahila M.(2012).The role of volunteered geographic information in participatory planning. Examples from Denmark and Finland. Geoforum Perspektiv 11(21). Retrieved fromhttp://journals.aau.dk/index.php/gfp/article/view/488

[42]

10.1080/00330124.2014.970839

[43]

Leitner H. "Modes of GIS provision and their appropriateness for neighborhood organizations: Examples from Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota" URISA Journal (2000)

[44]

Leitner H. (2002)

[45]

10.1007/s11434-013-0100-x

[46]

10.1080/19479832.2016.1215355

[47]

Martin S. Foulonneau M. Turki S. &Ihadjadene M. (2013).Open data: Barriers risks and opportunities. In Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on eGovernment: ECEG (pp.301–309).

[48]

10.1016/j.geoforum.2011.07.007

[49]

Monno V. (2012)

[50]

10.1111/gec3.12223

Showing 50 of 71 references

Metrics

6

Citations

71

References

Details

Published: Mar 08, 2018
Vol/Issue: 12(4)
License: View

Authors

D

Darcy Reynard

University of Alberta

Cite This Article

Darcy Reynard (2018). Five classes of geospatial data and the barriers to using them. Geography Compass, 12(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12364

Five classes of geospatial data and the barriers to using them

You May Also Like