• Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
  • 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.
    Are you sure you want to
    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
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
308
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
2
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Informing in Participation:
    A one- ortwo-waystreet?
    Session ‘IN-FORM-LAND’
    PECSRL, August 23-28 2010, Riga
    J. Sophie Visser
    LandZij/Utrecht University
  • 2. Background
    M.Sc. Chemistry (includingInformatics)
    + 20 yearsCareer in InformationSystems (IS), Modeling & Management
    2006 M.A. (Historical) Geography,
    Utrecht University (Dr. Hans Renes)
    Start PhDResearch on
    Information & CommunicationonCultural/Historical landscapes
  • 3. 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
  • 4. Information: complex relations with data and knowledge
    Sharma, 2008:
    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,
  • 5. Communication : related to information, technology, people
    “(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)
    • Essential differences => implications!
  • Information/knowledge types  information technology (1)
    Information type  representation
    tacit/
    Implicit
    (‘embodied’)
    Explicit
    (‘narrative’)
    Formal (‘abstract’)
    codable
    Present in IS
    Present
    in GIS
  • 6. Information/knowledge types  information technology (2)
    Knowledge type  representationRepresentation technology
    Non-IT ‘tools’
    (‘media, representationdevices’)
    tacit/
    Implicit
    (‘embodied’)
    Explicit
    (‘narrative’)
    IT tools
    Formal (‘abstract’)
    Internet
    codable
    Geospatial
    tools
    Present in IS
    Present
    in GIS
    GIS
    tools
    Data
    Bases
    Notrepresented in
    technology
    Informationsystemscanhold a lot of information, but ……
  • 7. 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
  • 8. Expertises and judgements
    ‘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
    Makingaware, ---------------- Participation ----------------- Professionals
    ‘education’
  • 9. Expertises and judgements: positioningpeople in projects
    • Professional/experts:
    • 10. The right expertise and experience?
    • 11. 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?
  • 12. (2) Participation and levels: ‘participation ladders’
    Implicit
    perspective
    ‘citizen
    participation’
    ‘government
    participation’
    Adaptedfrom Van den Brink et, 2007, p 39
  • 13. Participation and digital media  requirements and power
    AfterStreich, 2004, from Van den Brink et al., 2007, p 41
  • 14. (3) Participation (systems) in landscape information decision making
    Landscape/
    historical
    research
    Future
    landscape
    Past/Present
    landscape
    Decision
    making,
    planning
    Agriculture
    Housing
    ………
    InformationDivergingConverging
    ´multiple knowledges´ (Rydin)
  • 15. Participation systems in landscape decision making, in research or both?
    Historical /
    Landscape
    research
    Past/Present
    landscape
    Future
    landscape
    Decision
    making,
    planning
    Agriculture
    Housing
    ………
    Selections,
    Summaries
    ,combining
    ………
    Participatory
    Planning GIS (PPGIS)
    Participatory
    (G)IS layer
    ………
    ParticipatoryHistorical/
    Landscape Research (S
    InformationDivergingConverging
    ´multiple knowledges´ (Rydin)
  • 16. 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?!)
  • 17. Participation and systems: what can professionals/officials do?
    ‘citizen
    participation’
    ‘government
    participation’
    1.
    Making systems
    for own uses
    2.
    Include other
    expertise &
    values
    3.
    Adapting system
    to others/
    co-development
    4.
    Empowering
    others to get
    own system
  • 18. Cat. 1 - Professionals’/governmental system and content
    Meaning: information model and content based on ‘official’ needs and values
    • Many ‘official’ (governmental) heritage systems
    • 19. Typically in GIS
    -Less so in local studies or spatial projects: more local participation
    • Belvedere spatial policy program 2000-2009: cooperation, participation
    • 20. Emergence of citizen’s participation in spatial issues
    • 21. Tendency towards Categories 2 and 3
    • 22. E.g. National Cultural Heritage system KICH (www.kich.nl)
    • 23. start in 2004: Category 1
    • 24. 2008/09 : including results of local project (Category 2)
    • 25. 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
  • 26. 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
    • 27. 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
    • 28. Western Bodensee (Germany) - running, presentation 2009 ARKUM
    • 29. Goeree-Overflakkee (Netherlands)
    • 30. 2006 - own local heritage inventory, with help from NGO + funds,
    internet solution by NGO
    • >2007 - put into GIS by Regional Water Board
    • 31. >2008 - GIS coupled to national system KICH (conversion program)
    • 32. Recently: information available through KICH
    -Foremost internet solutions, unless ……….. <=> own content management
    reason: dissatisfaction with available (‘official’) systems
  • 33. Conclusions
    • Participation in informing == participation in planning (and/or systems)
    • 34. Making aware may precede participation, but …….
    • 35. Participation  Perspective , e.g.
    • 36. Positioning/judgment of both professionals´ and others´ expertise
    • 37. Participation  Requirements , e.g.
    • 38. Broad views on technology (not just GIS…), information, presentation, …
    • 39. Project organization, decisions, ………….
    • 40. Giving something in return, e.g. in information (systems)
    • 41. Two-way street => not just talking, but thinking and acting accordingly!
    /
  • 42. Thankyou!
    j.s.visser [at] planet.nl