Informing in participation: a one- or two-way street?

483 views
396 views

Published on

2 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Beste Jan Stuip, Dank je wel, ik heb het toen met veel plezier gedaan. Dankzij Ineke Verkaik kwam er bovendien toen nog een herdruk van mijn boek Het Reeuwijkse land, dat eerst binnen 3 maanden was uitverkocht.Mijn proefschrift is nog onder handen, maar krijgt steeds meer definitief gestalte.
    Een afspraak is prima. Stuur maar een mail naar mijn mailadres j.s.visser@planet.nl.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • beste Sophie,al weer een tijdje geleden hield je bij de Rotary Club Reeuwijk een mooi verhaal over je promotiewerk. Helaas was ik daar niet bij, maar ik heb er toen wel enthousiaste reacties over gehoord en je proefschrift, dat ik af en toe bij 'de 'dingen', die ik nog doe. Laatst zag ik een wat meer filosofisch getinte ppt in slide share van je over de rol van informatie, wijsheid, inzicht e.d. In deze ppt over information in participation heb je het daar ook over. Zouden we een keer daarover van gedachten kunnen wisselen (mede i.r.m. met zaken als MijnAardeXpedition, slibproblematiek in de Eems, maar nu zal ik in raadselen voor je spreken, sorry).
    Met vriendelijke groeten, Jan Stuip
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
483
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
2
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Informing in participation: a one- or two-way street?

  1. 1. Informing in Participation:<br />A one- ortwo-waystreet?<br />Session ‘IN-FORM-LAND’<br />PECSRL, August 23-28 2010, Riga<br />J. Sophie Visser<br />LandZij/Utrecht University<br />
  2. 2. Background<br />M.Sc. Chemistry (includingInformatics)<br />+ 20 yearsCareer in InformationSystems (IS), Modeling & Management<br />2006 M.A. (Historical) Geography,<br /> Utrecht University (Dr. Hans Renes)<br /> Start PhDResearch on<br />Information & CommunicationonCultural/Historical landscapes<br />
  3. 3. Triggers in the IN-FORM-LAND description<br /><ul><li>I essentially agree with intention and content, but ………</li></ul>(1) “Role of information is fundamental” <br /> => which information, by/from whom, how communicated and represented, <br /> for which goals? <br />2) “…. to make people aware of …… , starting up participatory practices”<br /> => participation mainly done in order to get information from people,<br />making aware implies a lack of knowledge<br /> => positioning people’s knowledge => which perspective?<br />(3) Is it about participation (systems) in landscape decision making, <br /> in landscape research, or both?<br />=> Essential concepts: Information, Communication, Expertise, Participation <br />
  4. 4. Information: complex relations with data and knowledge<br />Sharma, 2008: <br />More common: Data Information Knowledge<br />Basic (meaningful) Meaningful Reasoning, inferring, etc. <br /> ‘facts’ (related) data<br />Disciplinary & personal: e.g. geologist, ecologist, landscape architect, citizen, ……….<br />From: Scientific research, experience, impressions, <br />
  5. 5. Communication : related to information, technology, people <br />“(Social) interaction through messages “ => several lines of thought (Windahl, Fiske)<br /><ul><li>Sender-Message-Channel-Receiver model </li></ul>Transmission of information, ideas, attitudes or emotion (from … to …), primarily through symbols<br />-Mutuality and shared perceptions<br /> A process in which the participants create and share information with one another in order<br /> to reach a mutual understanding <br />-The production and exchange of meanings<br /> How messages (texts, images, …) interact with people (signification)<br /><ul><li>Essential differences => implications!</li></li></ul><li>Information/knowledge types  information technology (1) <br />Information type  representation<br />tacit/<br />Implicit<br />(‘embodied’)<br />Explicit<br />(‘narrative’)<br />Formal (‘abstract’)<br />codable<br />Present in IS<br />Present <br /> in GIS<br />
  6. 6. Information/knowledge types  information technology (2) <br />Knowledge type  representationRepresentation technology<br />Non-IT ‘tools’<br />(‘media, representationdevices’)<br />tacit/<br />Implicit<br />(‘embodied’)<br />Explicit<br />(‘narrative’)<br />IT tools<br />Formal (‘abstract’)<br />Internet<br />codable<br />Geospatial<br />tools<br />Present in IS<br />Present <br /> in GIS<br />GIS<br />tools<br />Data<br />Bases <br />Notrepresented in <br />technology<br />Informationsystemscanhold a lot of information, but …… <br />
  7. 7. Expertise(s) <br />‘know what you are talking about’ => mix of expertise and experience <br />(Collins & Evans, 2007)<br />Expertise : Ubiquitous tacit knowledge  Specialist tacit knowledge<br /> Beer-mat =>popular => primary => interactional => contributory<br /> knowledge understanding source knowl. expertise expertise <br />Judging : From external  Internal (relative to the expertise) <br /> ubiquitous => local => technical => downward => referred <br /> discrimination idem connaisseur discrimination expertise<br />Based on : credentials experience track record <br />
  8. 8. Expertises and judgements<br />‘know what you are talking about’ => mix of expertise and experience <br />(Collins & Evans, 2007)<br />Expertise : Ubiquitous tacit knowledge  Specialist tacit knowledge<br /> Beer-mat =>popular => primary => interactional => contributory<br /> knowledge understanding source knowl. expertise expertise <br />Judging : From external  Internal (relative to the expertise) <br /> ubiquitous => local => technical => downward => referred <br /> discrimination idem connaisseur discrimination expertise<br />Based on : credentials experience track record<br />Makingaware, ---------------- Participation ----------------- Professionals<br /> ‘education’ <br />
  9. 9. Expertises and judgements: positioningpeople in projects<br /><ul><li>Professional/experts:
  10. 10. The right expertise and experience?
  11. 11. The right professionalism/disciplne? </li></ul> -e.g. local knowledge, in case of local project? <br /><ul><li>Participants: just stakeholders with certain interests?</li></ul> - but: can be professionals/experts as well<br /> => known to the project professionals?<br /> => taken seriously by them?<br />- ‘The public’/ ‘the people’: too easily judged? <br />
  12. 12. (2) Participation and levels: ‘participation ladders’ <br />Implicit <br />perspective<br />‘citizen <br />participation’<br />‘government<br />participation’<br />Adaptedfrom Van den Brink et, 2007, p 39<br />
  13. 13. Participation and digital media  requirements and power<br />AfterStreich, 2004, from Van den Brink et al., 2007, p 41<br />
  14. 14. (3) Participation (systems) in landscape information decision making <br />Landscape/<br />historical<br />research<br />Future<br />landscape<br />Past/Present<br />landscape<br />Decision <br />making, <br />planning<br />Agriculture<br />Housing<br />……… <br />InformationDivergingConverging<br /> ´multiple knowledges´ (Rydin)<br />
  15. 15. Participation systems in landscape decision making, in research or both?<br />Historical /<br />Landscape <br />research<br />Past/Present<br />landscape<br />Future<br />landscape<br />Decision <br />making, <br />planning<br />Agriculture<br />Housing<br />……… <br />Selections,<br />Summaries<br />,combining<br />……… <br />Participatory<br />Planning GIS (PPGIS)<br />Participatory<br />(G)IS layer<br />……… <br />ParticipatoryHistorical/<br />Landscape Research (S<br />InformationDivergingConverging<br /> ´multiple knowledges´ (Rydin)<br />
  16. 16. Information system as ‘communicative act’ (Habermas)<br />-choices /selectivity in information content , presentation, etc: <br /> - which/whose -values<br /> -expertise/knowledge<br /> -information needs<br /> -perception, model<br /> -method /approach <br /> -technology<br /> -power to choose <br />A system as a ‘communicative act’ is about<br /> What is said (expectations)  what is done (dissatisfaction?!)<br />
  17. 17. Participation and systems: what can professionals/officials do? <br />‘citizen <br />participation’<br />‘government<br />participation’<br />1. <br />Making systems <br />for own uses <br />2. <br />Include other <br />expertise & <br />values <br />3.<br />Adapting system <br />to others/<br />co-development <br />4.<br />Empowering<br /> others to get<br />own system <br />
  18. 18. Cat. 1 - Professionals’/governmental system and content<br />Meaning: information model and content based on ‘official’ needs and values<br /><ul><li>Many ‘official’ (governmental) heritage systems
  19. 19. Typically in GIS</li></ul>-Less so in local studies or spatial projects: more local participation <br /><ul><li>Belvedere spatial policy program 2000-2009: cooperation, participation
  20. 20. Emergence of citizen’s participation in spatial issues
  21. 21. Tendency towards Categories 2 and 3
  22. 22. E.g. National Cultural Heritage system KICH (www.kich.nl)
  23. 23. start in 2004: Category 1
  24. 24. 2008/09 : including results of local project (Category 2)
  25. 25. 2009 : Towards Category 3 </li></li></ul><li>Cat. 2 - Include other expertise & values<br />Meaning: other expertise and values taken up on ‘official’ terms <br />Next step in ‘official’ systems, e.g. KICH <br />
  26. 26. Cat. 3 - Adapting system to others/ co-development <br />Meaning: information model, content, presentation for/by ‘all parties’ <br /><ul><li>Regional systems, e.g. from co-operation with academic partners or NGO’s
  27. 27. Belvedere research project ‘Zandstad‘ (www.zandstad.nl) </li></ul>=> history rather than heritage, no maps made <br /><ul><li>Utrecht University research project ‘Venster op de Vecht ‘</li></ul> (www.vensteropdevecht.nl) <br />=> history and heritage; internet maps with Tele Atlas<br /><ul><li>Cultural Biography city of Maastricht (www.zichtopmaastricht.nl) </li></ul> => history, heritage, stories, etc. ; internet maps in Google Maps<br /><ul><li>Some GIS, some internet solutions => participation in content management</li></li></ul><li>Cat. 4. Empowering others  own systems by regional/local experts<br />Meaning: information model, content, presentation by ‘others’ <br /><ul><li>Regional/local systems, with or without support from third parties
  28. 28. Western Bodensee (Germany) - running, presentation 2009 ARKUM
  29. 29. Goeree-Overflakkee (Netherlands)
  30. 30. 2006 - own local heritage inventory, with help from NGO + funds, </li></ul>internet solution by NGO<br /><ul><li>>2007 - put into GIS by Regional Water Board
  31. 31. >2008 - GIS coupled to national system KICH (conversion program)
  32. 32. Recently: information available through KICH </li></ul>-Foremost internet solutions, unless ……….. <=> own content management<br />reason: dissatisfaction with available (‘official’) systems <br />
  33. 33. Conclusions<br /><ul><li>Participation in informing == participation in planning (and/or systems)
  34. 34. Making aware may precede participation, but …….
  35. 35. Participation  Perspective , e.g.
  36. 36. Positioning/judgment of both professionals´ and others´ expertise
  37. 37. Participation  Requirements , e.g.
  38. 38. Broad views on technology (not just GIS…), information, presentation, …
  39. 39. Project organization, decisions, ………….
  40. 40. Giving something in return, e.g. in information (systems)
  41. 41. Two-way street => not just talking, but thinking and acting accordingly! </li></ul>/<br />
  42. 42. Thankyou!<br />j.s.visser [at] planet.nl<br />

×