Back to basics - cultural landscape analysis from an informational & perceptual perspective

1,005 views
884 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,005
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
11
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Back to basics - cultural landscape analysis from an informational & perceptual perspective

  1. 1. Back to basics<br />Cultural landscape analysis <br />from an <br />informational & perceptional perspective <br />J. Sophie Visser ICHG<br />LandZij August 2009<br />PhD-research University Utrecht Kyoto <br />
  2. 2. Background<br /> M.Sc. Chemistry (including Informatics)<br />+ 20 years Information Systems (IS), Modeling & Management<br />2006 M.A. (Historical) Geography,<br /> Utrecht University (Dr. Hans Renes)<br />2007 Start PhD Research, based on Master Research<br />
  3. 3. Presentation Outline<br />-Problems and insights from Master research<br />-historic landscape analysis at a local level <br /> -use of existing information systems<br /> -e.g.: example <br /><ul><li>Concepts: knowledge, values, information
  4. 4. Perception and consequences
  5. 5. Conclusions</li></li></ul><li>Master Research - 2004-2006<br />Amsterdam<br />“Green Heart of Holland”<br /><ul><li>(now) National Landscape
  6. 6. Peat area
  7. 7. Some natural rivers
  8. 8. Reclamation 1000-1300 AD
  9. 9. Digging for fuel >1600 AD</li></ul>‘Characteristic landscape’<br />-landscape structure<br />-many canals<br />-man-made lakes<br />Study area<br />-Reeuwijk + surroundings<br />-’natural boundaries’<br />Utrecht<br />The Hague<br />Rotterdam<br />
  10. 10. Reeuwijk from the air: <br />
  11. 11. Reeuwijk in higher government systems: usable information?<br />National level (KICH)*:<br />Aim:<br />-(inter)national values, presented as knowledge<br />Content in Reeuwijk area:<br />- 0 element (2004) to 3 (in 2005) to 1 (in 2009): <br /> only canals <br /> -data per element: <br /> 1 function (Defense line)<br /> 1 period <br />*excl. Archaeology & monuments<br />
  12. 12. Reeuwijk in higher government systems: usable information?<br />National level (KICH)*:<br />Aim:<br />-(inter)national values, presented as knowledge<br />Content in Reeuwijk area:<br />- 0 element (2004) to 3 (in 2005) to 1 (in 2009): <br /> only canals <br /> -data per element: <br /> 1 function (Defense Line)<br /> 1 period <br />Provincial level (South Holland)*:<br />Aim:<br /><ul><li>characteristic landscape elements
  13. 13. Values</li></ul>Content in Reeuwijk area:<br />-selection of landscape structure, canals, etc<br />-data in map legend: ‘type’ and “before 1950”<br /><ul><li>*excl. Archaeology & monuments</li></li></ul><li>Reeuwijk in higher government system: usable information? <br />-Value-driven => (too) selective<br />-Values not transparant<br />-hardly any data<br />-implicit knowledge/information <br />-Mainly ‘statements’ <br />-confusion knowledge <=> values<br />-hardly usable at <br /> - a local level<br /> - other purposes<br /> (although pretentions)<br />
  14. 14. Situation => solution:<br />“Different values upon (more or less) <br /> shared landscape history knowledge”<br />=> start from knowledge!<br />Example: Dubbele Wiericke<br />- complex history<br /><ul><li>events => changes => ‘object versions’
  15. 15. e.g. in a record structure: </li></li></ul><li>…… and keep values seperate!<br />depends<br />Selections: whatever purpose <br />e.g. Spatial quality plan <br />e.g. Heritage plan <br />
  16. 16. Knowledge, values, information (1)<br />Concept In information system<br />knowledge ‘the base’<br />Values derived from<br />knowledge,<br /> by criteria<br />Information view(s) on<br /> knowledge,<br /> values, …<br />knowledge<br />criteria<br />values<br />Enhanced transparency:<br />making values, knowledge and criteria (more) explicit<br />
  17. 17. Knowledge, values, information (2)<br />ConceptsDefinitions In information system<br />knowledge = body of meaningful concepts ‘the base’<br /> and associations <br />Values = combined qualities (suitability, derived from<br /> need, knowledge), giving some knowledge<br /> things significance over others by criteria<br />Information = communicated knowledge view(s) on<br /> (and values, ……………) knowledge,<br /> values, …<br />(Data = elementary ‘facts’)<br />knowledge<br />criteria<br />values<br />
  18. 18. Perception => influence in many ways<br />Perception mechanism <br />(2) Perception of information needs<br />(3) Perception of content => (landscape) concepts and associations<br />(4) Perception of who (and what) to include <br />
  19. 19. (1) Perception mechanism<br />Criteria, purpose,<br />Norms, standards, values<br />Needs, interests<br />Existing<br /> Knowledge<br />Integration<br />New CH landscape<br />Knowledge<br />Information processing<br />In brain<br />Perception<br />Criteria applied <br />on knowledge<br />for values<br />Criteria, etc<br />CH Landscape <br />Values<br />landscape<br />landscape<br />documents<br />
  20. 20. (1) Perception mechanism and what’s leading: knowledge, or ……<br />Criteria, purpose,<br />Norms, standards, values<br />Needs, interests<br />Existing<br /> Knowledge<br />Integration<br />New CH landscape<br />Knowledge<br />Information processing<br />In brain<br />Perception<br />Criteria applied <br />on knowledge<br />for values<br />Criteria, etc<br />CH Landscape <br />Values<br />landscape<br />landscape<br />documents<br />
  21. 21. (1) what’s leading in the perception: …. or values?<br />Criteria, purpose,<br />Norms, standards, values<br />Needs, interests<br />Existing<br /> Knowledge<br />Information processing<br />In brain<br />New <br />knowledge<br />Perception<br />Selection<br />In knowledge <br />Criteria, etc<br />CH Landscape <br />Values<br />
  22. 22. To what did you set your mind ……? <br />
  23. 23. (2) Perception of information needs of others …. <br />Criteria, values<br />Norms, standards<br />Needs, interests<br />Landscape study project <br />Information,<br />communication<br />Perception<br />Knowledge<br />Values<br />Landscape design<br />Landscape study <br />
  24. 24. (2) … meaning communication of information & needs ….. <br />Criteria, values<br />Norms, standards<br />Needs, interests<br />Criteria, values<br />Norms, standards<br />Needs, interests<br />Landscape design project <br />Landscape study project <br />Direct communication: talking, …<br />Information needs<br />Perception<br />Knowledge<br />Perception<br />Knowledge<br />Values<br />Values<br />Landscape design<br />Landscape study <br />
  25. 25. (2) … but time-delayed and multiple in information systems! <br />Information system<br />Criteria,<br />Norms<br />needs<br />Criteria, values<br />Norms, standards<br />Needs, interests<br />Knowledge,<br />Landscape design project <br />Values<br />Landscape study Project <br />Perception<br />of own needs<br />Perception<br />of uses, users<br />and <br />their needs <br />Information needs<br />Perception<br />Knowledge<br />Perception<br />Knowledge<br />Values<br />Values<br />Landscape plan<br />Landscape study <br />‘specifying in advance’ => - which needs, purposes, uses?<br /> - which ´content´?<br />
  26. 26. (3) Perception of ´content`: which concepts and relations included?<br />landscape<br />objects<br />Buildings <br />composition<br />Granddad <br />Urban area<br />structures<br />Water <br />structure<br />Peat digging <br />water<br />Lakes <br />shape<br />settlement<br />Historical geographer Landscape designer Local historian<br />-Which concepts: ´conceptual information model´ <br />-Whose concepts: inclusion/exclusion? <br />=> ‘content’ not neutral or just technical!<br />
  27. 27. (4) Perception of who to include ……<br />NGO’s, <br />Groups,<br />People<br />Local<br />Farmers<br />GIS Specialists <br />Local<br />Historians <br />Nature club<br />Landscape <br />policy plan<br />Landscape <br />policy plan<br />Project <br />teams<br />Web <br />designers <br />Spatial<br />project<br />Spatial<br />project<br />Decision makers: money, time<br />University<br />Government<br />Heritage<br />Institution<br />Historical <br />Geographers<br />Planning/design<br />bureau <br />
  28. 28. Conclusions<br /><ul><li>Usable information is about much more than GIS, computers, websites, ….
  29. 29. Decisions by people
  30. 30. Perceptions of people
  31. 31. Concepts and associations
  32. 32. Knowledge, values => sharing, communicating, ….
  33. 33. Multi-usable systems: going beyond one’s own perceptions
  34. 34. Awareness of other perceptions and needs
  35. 35. Willingness to include other knowledge and values
  36. 36. Integration/attuning of multiple needs, views, knowledge, values
  37. 37. Sound ‘conceptual information modelling ‘
  38. 38. Knowledge versus values </li></li></ul><li>Meant as programmer’s joke, but ……<br />…. information systems are made by people!<br />
  39. 39. Thank you!<br />j.s.visser@planet.nl <br />

×