Integrating GIS and Participatory Mapping in Community Development Planning

In this 21-page paper, Vajjhala argues that given the "the changing nature
of development, the increasing emphasis
on social and environmental sustainability, and the global attention to
community-level planning, GIS [geographic information systems] need to move beyond conventional representations
of where people live to describe more effectively the dynamics of how people
live."



Vajjhala notes that while participatory maps offer a better insight into the how of
people's lives than do traditional GIS maps, many participatory methods
have drawbacks. These methods tend to be time-consuming, the data
collected is difficult to compile, and the results are not easily used by decision
makers.



To combine the benefits of the participatory and GIS methods, Vajjhala recommends the integration of the two techiques, with a particular focus on:

1. the participatory inputs into GIS;
2. the direct users of GIS software; and
3. the indirect users of GIS output.

She presents a theoretical framework for evaluating efforts to combine
participatory mapping and GIS. According to Vajjhala, these two methods share
three key dimensions, or values:

1. spatial and social objectives;
2. accuracy and precision, in map displays; and
3. representativeness and comprehensiveness.

While these values are shared by participatory mapping and GIS, the the two
methods tend to differ in the fous and strengths in each dimension.
Different mapping scenarios may, therefore, be best addressed by different mapping
techniques. She further notes that defining "the balance of attributes in advance of a project’s implementation
requires careful evaluation of the primary project and stakeholder needs." Vajjhala describes "digital participatory maps" as a method with the flexibility in "balancing multiple attributes and
making project-relevant (instead of technology-driven) trade-offs."



Vajjhala illustrates this point with three case studies from community
participation mapping experiments conducted with participants from Pittsburgh community organisations.
The research was aimed at identifying and developing "a
medium for participation that retains the elaborate information storage and
consolidation capacities of GIS while simplifying and tailoring the graphic
display to different audiences using elements and attributes of traditional mapping." The three
methods explored were:

1. Individual participatory sketch mapping interviews,
   in which participants created hand drawn maps, which were then
   integrated, through several additional steps, into a GIS. This method, according
   to the author, showed strong support for the promise of GIS integration, but
   proved to be very time consuming.
2. Group
   mapping techniques, in which a variety of methods were used to
   collect data simply from mixed groups. The most successful technique is
   described as one in which participants placed stickers
   on a printed GIS map to indicate the positive or negative connotations of
   a place. This appeared to appeal to those who might have been hesitant about
   creating hand drawn maps, but proved confusing for others who had trouble
   interpreting the base GIS map.
3. Digital pen technology,
   in which the Logitech io digital pen and a mobile GIS unit running

   ESRI's ArcPad software were used to allow participants to instantly input
   data into the GIS while using traditional hand drawing skills.The effort is
   described as successful and efficient, but also as hindered by the
   early stages of the technology, specifically the requirement for special paper.
   Two advantages are described: 1) process of data entry and integration are
   easily standardised, and 2) maps are directly stored as digital media
   files.

The author cites post-project survey to support the benefits of digital participatory maps
over traditional GIS maps. "First, the "sense of place" captured by these
new maps can be conveyed to an audience of indirect participants and
non-map-makers. Second, these digital participatory maps communicate different
types of information than comparable GIS maps."

[This paper was prepared for the ESRI International User Conference, in  San Diego,
CA, United States in July 2005.]