Informing in Participation:

A one- or two-way street?

Session ‘IN-FORM-LAND’PECSRL, August 23-28 2010, Riga

J. Sophie VisserLandZij/Utrecht University

Background

1978 M.Sc. Chemistry (including Informatics)

+ 20 years Career in Information Systems (IS), Modeling & Management

2006 M.A. (Historical) Geography, Utrecht University (Dr. Hans Renes)

2007 Start PhD Research on Information & Communication on Cultural/Historical landscapes

Triggers in the IN-FORM-LAND description

-I essentially agree with intention and content, but ………

(1) “Role of information is fundamental”

=> which information, by/from whom, how communicated and represented, for which goals?

2) “…. to make people aware of …… , starting up participatory practices”

=> participation mainly done in order to get information from people, making aware implies a lack of knowledge => positioning people’s knowledge => which perspective?

(3) Is it about participation (systems) in landscape decision making, in landscape research, or both?

=> Essential concepts: Information, Communication, Expertise, Participation

More common: Data Information Knowledge Basic (meaningful) Meaningful Reasoning, inferring, etc.

‘facts’ (related) data

Disciplinary & personal: e.g. geologist, ecologist, landscape architect, citizen, ……….

From: Scientific research, experience, impressions,

Information: complex relations with data and knowledge

Sharma, 2008:

“(Social) interaction through messages “ => several lines of thought (Windahl, Fiske)

-Sender-Message-Channel-Receiver model Transmission of information, ideas, attitudes or emotion (from … to …), primarily through symbols

-Mutuality and shared perceptions A process in which the participants create and share information with one another in order to reach a mutual understanding

-The production and exchange of meanings How messages (texts, images, …) interact with people (signification)

ÞEssential differences => implications!

Communication : related to information, technology, people

Information/knowledge types information technology (1)

tacit/Implicit(‘embodied’)

Explicit(‘narrative’)

Formal (‘abstract’)codable

Present in ISPresent in GIS

Information type representation

tacit/Implicit(‘embodied’)

Explicit(‘narrative’)

Formal (‘abstract’)

codablePresent in IS

Present in GIS

Non-IT ‘tools’(‘media, representation devices’)

Geospatialtools

GIStools

IT tools

Internet

DataBases

Not represented in technology

Knowledge type representation Representation technology

Information/knowledge types information technology (2)

Information systems can hold a lot of information, but ……

Expertise : Ubiquitous tacit knowledge Specialist tacit knowledge Beer-mat =>popular => primary => interactional => contributory knowledge understanding source knowl. expertise expertise

Judging : From external Internal (relative to the expertise) ubiquitous => local => technical => downward => referred discrimination idem connaisseur discrimination expertise

Based on : credentials experience track record

Expertise(s)

‘know what you are talking about’ => mix of expertise and experience (Collins & Evans, 2007)

Expertise : Ubiquitous tacit knowledge Specialist tacit knowledge Beer-mat =>popular => primary => interactional => contributory knowledge understanding source knowl. expertise expertise

Judging : From external Internal (relative to the expertise) ubiquitous => local => technical => downward => referred discrimination idem connaisseur discrimination expertise

Based on : credentials experience track record

Expertises and judgements

Making aware, ---------------- Participation ----------------- Professionals‘education’

‘know what you are talking about’ => mix of expertise and experience (Collins & Evans, 2007)

Expertises and judgements: positioning people in projects

-Professional/experts: - The right expertise and experience?

- The right professionalism/disciplne? -e.g. local knowledge, in case of local project? -Participants: just stakeholders with certain interests? - but: can be professionals/experts as well

=> known to the project professionals? => taken seriously by them?

- ‘The public’/ ‘the people’: too easily judged?

Implicit perspective

‘citizen participation’

‘governmentparticipation’

(2) Participation and levels: ‘participation ladders’

Ladder of citizen participation (Arnstein)

Participation ladder (Edelenbosch)

Kind of participation

Manipulation Non-participation

Therapy

Informing Inform Non-interactive

Consultation Consult

Placation Give advice

Partnership Co-produce

Co-decide

Interactive

Delegated power

Citizen control

Adapted from Van den Brink et, 2007, p 39

After Streich, 2004, from Van den Brink et al., 2007, p 41

Information(‘ínform’)

Communication(‘advice, consult’)

Participation(‘co-produce)’

Aims Explanation (facts, changes);presentation

Coordination, correspondence and support of process

Actively influencing the process, open en free access

Technologies Internet/www Internet/intranet, e-mail, workflowsystems

Interactive access to knowledge stores, simulations, etc.

Who has Skills, Money, Time?

Professionals/Governments

Civic participants,Local historians?

yes

yes

yes

partly

yes

hardly

Participation and digital media requirements and power

Past/Presentlandscape

Futurelandscape

Landscape/historical research

Decision making, planning

Agriculture

Housing

………

(3) Participation (systems) in landscape information decision making

Information Diverging Converging ´multiple knowledges´ (Rydin)

Past/Presentlandscape

Futurelandscape

Historical /Landscape research

Decision making, planning

Participatory(G)IS layer

Agriculture

Housing

………

Participation systems in landscape decision making, in research or both?

Participatory Historical/Landscape Research (S

………

……… Participatory Planning GIS (PPGIS)

Information Diverging Converging ´multiple knowledges´ (Rydin)

Selections,Summaries,combining

Information system as ‘communicative act’ (Habermas)

-choices /selectivity in information content , presentation, etc: - which/whose -values

-expertise/knowledge-information needs-perception, model-method /approach -technology

-power to choose

A system as a ‘communicative act’ is about What is said (expectations) what is done (dissatisfaction?!)

Participation and systems: what can professionals/officials do?

3.Adapting system

to others/co-development

4.

Empowering others to getown system

‘citizen participation’

‘governmentparticipation’

2. Include other expertise &

values

1. Making systems

for own uses

Cat. 1 - Professionals’/governmental system and content

Meaning: information model and content based on ‘official’ needs and values

-Many ‘official’ (governmental) heritage systems - Typically in GIS

-Less so in local studies or spatial projects: more local participation - Belvedere spatial policy program 2000-2009: cooperation, participation- Emergence of citizen’s participation in spatial issues

-Tendency towards Categories 2 and 3- E.g. National Cultural Heritage system KICH (www.kich.nl)

- start in 2004: Category 1- 2008/09 : including results of local project (Category 2)- 2009 : Towards Category 3

Cat. 2 - Include other expertise & values

Meaning: other expertise and values taken up on ‘official’ terms

Next step in ‘official’ systems, e.g. KICH

Cat. 3 - Adapting system to others/ co-development

Meaning: information model, content, presentation for/by ‘all parties’

-Regional systems, e.g. from co-operation with academic partners or NGO’s

- Belvedere research project ‘Zandstad‘ (www.zandstad.nl) => history rather than heritage, no maps made

- Utrecht University research project ‘Venster op de Vecht ‘ (www.vensteropdevecht.nl) => history and heritage; internet maps with Tele Atlas

- Cultural Biography city of Maastricht (www.zichtopmaastricht.nl) => history, heritage, stories, etc. ; internet maps in Google Maps

-Some GIS, some internet solutions => participation in content management

Cat. 4. Empowering others own systems by regional/local experts

Meaning: information model, content, presentation by ‘others’

-Regional/local systems, with or without support from third parties

- Western Bodensee (Germany) - running, presentation 2009 ARKUM

- Goeree-Overflakkee (Netherlands) - 2006 - own local heritage inventory, with help from NGO + funds,

internet solution by NGO- >2007 - put into GIS by Regional Water Board- >2008 - GIS coupled to national system KICH (conversion program)- Recently: information available through KICH

-Foremost internet solutions, unless ……….. <=> own content management

reason: dissatisfaction with available (‘official’) systems

Conclusions

-Participation in informing == participation in planning (and/or systems) -Making aware may precede participation, but …….

-Participation Perspective , e.g. - Positioning/judgment of both professionals´ and others´ expertise

-Participation Requirements , e.g. - Broad views on technology (not just GIS…), information, presentation, …- Project organization, decisions, ………….- Giving something in return, e.g. in information (systems)

-Two-way street => not just talking, but thinking and acting accordingly!

/

Thank you!

j.s.visser [at] planet.nl