Designing Participatory GIS/SDSS Piotr Jankowski Department of Geography San Diego State University

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1. Creativity and Innovation 2. Communication and Collaboration
Advertisements

Developing the Learning Contract
Study Objectives and Questions for Observational Comparative Effectiveness Research Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
5.1.2 Situative Planning 1 Situative Planning - A Strategic Approach to Urban Planning UPA Package 5, Module 1.
A Module of Purdue University’s LeadingEdge Program
A Logic Model for the Effective Implementation of Service Coordination: Culmination of Five Years of Research Michael Conn-Powers, Indiana University Julia.
Public Consultation/Participation in an EIA Process EIA requires that, as much as possible, both technical / scientific and value issues be dealt with.
Group Techniques John A. Cagle California State University, Fresno.
Highly Qualified Teachers Social Studies
Diversity Assessment and Planning with members of the October 14, 2005.
Decision Methodologies
Risk Management and Strategy Prioritisation Intelligence Step 8 - Risk Management and Strategy Prioritisaiton Considering the risks associated with action.
PPA 502 – Program Evaluation
Western States Energy & Environment Symposium October 27, 2009.
Teaching Methods Chapters 7 and 8 Instructors and Their Jobs and additional resources.
Towards Participatory Geographic Information Systems for Community Planning and Environmental Decision Making Piotr Jankowski Department of Geography San.
Do Too Many Cooks Spoil the Broth? The All Star Sports Team Case Key Learnings.
Measuring the effectiveness of government IT systems Current ANAO initiatives to enhance IT Audit integration and support in delivering Audit outcomes.
Copyright c 2006 Oxford University Press 1 Chapter 7 Solving Problems and Making Decisions Problem solving is the communication that analyzes the problem.
Project Communications Management J. S. Chou Assistant Professor.
Copyright © 2008 Allyn & Bacon Meetings: Forums for Problem Solving 11 CHAPTER Chapter Objectives This Multimedia product and its contents are protected.
Comparative Evaluation of the Impact of e- participation in Local Climate Change Policy Programs The Effectiveness of E-Participation.
1 Qualitative Evaluation Terms Coding/categorization The process of condensing qualitative data through the identification of common themes. Data Matrix.
Parliamentary Committees in Democracies: Unit 4 Research Services for Parliamentary Committees.
Chapter 11 Assessment Framing Solutions. Collaborative Planning Processes A comprehensive intervention or action plan includes –Goals and objectives –Targets.
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation 1.
Module 4: Systems Development Chapter 13: Investigation and Analysis.
Demystifying the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge Central Iowa IIBA Chapter December 7, 2005.
Who are we? And what is it that we do? LCC--Business Department Advisory Committee.
Ways for Improvement of Validity of Qualifications PHARE TVET RO2006/ Training and Advice for Further Development of the TVET.
National Science Foundation 1 Evaluating the EHR Portfolio Judith A. Ramaley Assistant Director Education and Human Resources.
Introduction to the Research Framework Work-in-progress Conceptualizing the Criteria to assess ‘appropriateness’ of actions in given ‘national’ circumstances.
Chapter 12 Team Decision Making Tools. Objectives Decision Making Tools: Brainstorming Nominal group technique (NGT) Voting.
Mysoltani.ir سایت فیلم روشهای مشارکتی Technology Foresight Foresight is about preparing for the future. It is about deploying resources in the best.
HIVQUAL Group Learning Guide – New York State DOH AIDS Institute 1 Team Self Evaluation Learning Objectives  To understand the importance of post-project.
What is Negotiated Rulemaking? Center for Public Policy Dispute Resolution The University of Texas School of Law.
Lecture : 5 Problem Identification And Problem solving.
2 nd Knowledge Area : Project Scope Management. Importance of Good Project Scope Management 1995 CHAOS study cited user involvement, a clear project mission,
Chapter 4 Developing and Sustaining a Knowledge Culture
Collaborative Policy Development CADRE Dispute Resolution Conference Janice LaChance – Maine Parent Federation Ann Nunery - Maine Administrators of Services.
Put Your Classroom On A 21 st Century DI-IT Create Engaging Technology Rich Differentiated Classroom Environments Create Engaging Technology Rich Differentiated.
27/3/2008 1/16 A FRAMEWORK FOR REQUIREMENTS ENGINEERING PROCESS DEVELOPMENT (FRERE) Dr. Li Jiang School of Computer Science The.
Source : The Problem Learning and innovation skills increasingly are being recognized as the skills that separate students who are.
Facilitate Group Learning
OTHER KNOWLEDGE CAPTURE TECHNIQUES CHAPTER 6. Chapter 6: Other Knowledge Capture Techniques 2 On-Site Observation  Process of observing, interpreting,
Developing a Framework In Support of a Community of Practice in ABI Jason Newberry, Research Director Tanya Darisi, Senior Researcher
Lecture 10 More Innovation SE3821 Software Requirements and Specification Dr. Rob Hasker (based on slides by Dr. Brad Dennis)
1 Project Communications Management Lecture 11. Learning Objectives Describe the importance of good communication on projects and major components of.
Independent Enquirers Learners process and evaluate information in their investigations, planning what to do and how to go about it. They take informed.
CASIE MYP Workshop June 21-23, 2011 International Mindedness: From Outside to Inside the Classroom.
PISA FOR DEVELOPMENT Technical Workshop Out-of-School 15 year old 1 st and 2 nd October 2014 OECD Secretariat 1.
CHAPTER TEN Multiple Parties and Teams McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2011 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
ANALYSIS PHASE OF BUSINESS SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT METHODOLOGY.
“Inspiring our students to reach their full potential.”
13-1 McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved CHAPTER THIRTEEN Multiple Parties and Teams.
Preparation Plan. Objectives Describe the role and importance of a preparation plan. Describe the key contents of a preparation plan. Identify and discuss.
Leadership Skills. Team Meetings Set the agenda by defining goals and desired outcomes Set the agenda by defining goals and desired outcomes Keep the.
Training on Safe Hospitals in Disasters Module 3: Action Planning for “Safe Hospitals”
CDIO: Overview, Standards, and Processes (Part 2) Doris R. Brodeur, November 2005.
1 Update on Teacher Effectiveness July 25, 2011 Dr. Rebecca Garland Chief Academic Officer.
AGRO PARKS “The Policy Cycle” Alex Page Baku November 2014.
GCM Community Involvement Tool Kit Glenburn Lodge, Muldersdrift, South Africa November 27-28, 2007.
Multiple Parties and Teams
NEGOTIATION SEVENTH EDITION
CHAPTER11 Project Risk Management
The Value of Twisting the Lion’s Tail: How the Design of Policy Experiments Impact Learning Outcomes for Adaptation Governance. Belinda McFadgen, PhD researcher,
Support for the AASHTO Committee on Planning (COP) and its Subcommittees in Responding to the AASHTO Strategic Plan Prepared for NCHRP 8-36, TASK 138.
Multiple Parties and Teams
What is PACE EH? PACE EH is a process for assessing and analyzing the environmental health of communities and for creating plans to address threats and.
Participatory Rural Appraisal.
Presentation transcript:

Designing Participatory GIS/SDSS Piotr Jankowski Department of Geography San Diego State University

Lecture Outline Public participation as organized activity Design framework Example of PPGIS designs guided by the framework

Public Participation = Structured Activity

Deliberative-Analytic Processes The deliberative component:  provides an opportunity to interactively give voice to choices about values, alternatives, and recommendations. The analytic component:  provides technical information that ensures broad-based, competent perspectives are treated.

Structured Participation Procedures Nominal group technique (NGT) Delphi process (DP) Citizen panel / citizen jury (CPJ) Technology of participation (ToP) 1. Goal statement 2. Brainstorm ideas 3. Clarify/negoti ate ideas 4. Vote on idea priority 1. Goal statement 2. Generate ideas 3. Collect ideas 4. Synthesize ideas 5. Playback ideas 6. Request for further change 1. Listen to evidence 2. Discuss evidence 3. Negotiate positions 4. Vote 5. Repeat until reach consensus 1. Goal statement 2. Generate ideas 3. Collect ideas 4. Cluster ideas 5. Synthesize ideas 6. Label ideas 7. Negotiate idea priority

Approaches to Structured Participation Step-wise Procedures for Four Methods of Structured Participation Nominal group technique (NGT) Delphi process (DP) Citizen panel / citizen jury (CPJ) Technology of participation (ToP) 1. Goal statement 2. Brainstorm ideas 3. Clarify/negoti ate ideas 4. Vote on idea priority 1. Goal statement 2. Generate ideas 3. Collect ideas 4. Synthesize ideas 5. Playback ideas 6. Request for further change 1. Listen to evidence 2. Discuss evidence 3. Negotiate positions 4. Vote 5. Repeat until reach consensus 1. Goal statement 2. Generate ideas 3. Collect ideas 4. Cluster ideas 5. Synthesize ideas 6. Label ideas 7. Negotiate idea priority

Comparing Methods NGTDPCPJToP Participatory Activities XXX Goal statement (context setting) XXX Brainstorm items XXX Negotiate (clarify) items XX Synthesize clusters and label items X Refine clusters XXX Vote/poll X Survey XX Review/evaluation

Which Participatory Activities? Participatory Activities Goal statement (context setting) Brainstorm items Negotiate (clarify) items Synthesize clusters and label items Refine clusters Vote/poll Review/evaluation Other activities?

More Questions Who participates? What Social-Institutional Influences? What Process? What Data? What Tools? What Outcomes?

Assessment Framework for PPGIS Convening ConstructsProcess ConstructsOutcome Constructs Social-Institutional Influence Group Participant Influence Data and Tool Influence Task Outcomes Social Outcomes AppropriationGroup Process Emergent Influence Public Participation as Social Interaction using Participatory GIS Tools (Nyerges & Jankowski, 1997, 2001)

Assessing Convening Constructs Social-institutional influence Power and control Convening influence Rules and norms

Assessing Convening Constructs Group participant Influence Participant values Knowledge of subject domain Attitudes towards technology

Assessing Convening Constructs Data and Tool Influence Availability of relevant data Availability of information aids

Public participation as social interaction using GIS tools Appropriation Group process Emergent influence

Summary of assessment framework Assess:  Problem context  Participatory process  Expected outcomes

Design Considerations Setting Synchronous | Asynchronous Group Size Small | Large Technology Simple | Complex

Eliciting participant information needs  In-depth interviews with a diverse sample of participants  Personas – fictional composites that adequately represent the spectrum of diversity in backgrounds and perspectives among the stakeholders

Identifying data and tools  Data and tools as function of participant information needs and process requirements  Process requirements guide the selection of tools supporting information flow

Integrating data and tools  Process requirements  Technological arrangements

Design example: community-based water protection zoning

Design example: Participatory Geographic Information System for Transportation (PGIST)

Step 1Discuss [Transportation] Concerns 1a: Brainstorm Concerns 1b: Review Summaries Step 2Review Planning Factors 2a: Review Planning Factors 2b: Weigh Planning Factors Step 3Create Packages 3a: Review Projects 3b: Review Funding options 3c: Create your own package Step 4Evaluate Candidate Packages 4a: Review Candidate Packages 4b: Vote Step 5Prepare Group Report Participatory Process:

Step 1Discuss [Transportation] Concerns 1a: Brainstorm Concerns 1b: Review Summaries Step 2Review Planning Factors 2a: Review Planning Factors 2b: Weigh Planning Factors Step 3Create Packages 3a: Review Projects 3b: Review Funding options 3c: Create your own package Step 4Evaluate Candidate Packages 4a: Review Candidate Packages 4b: Vote Step 5Prepare Group Report Agenda Builder Value Organizer Alternative Generator Choice Modeler Summary Generator

Future Challenges Research Questions  What are effective ways of eliciting public values and perspectives in different problem settings?  How to combine formal knowledge with informal knowledge?  How to assess costs and benefits of technology in order to make good design choices?

Acknowledgements Timothy Nyerges and the entire PGIST research team from University of Washington, University of Wyoming and San Diego State University Amy Owen, Delta State University NSF Information Technology Research Program

References Jankowski, P., T. Nyerges, S. Robischon, K. Ramsey and D. Tuthill, Design Consideration and Evaluation of a Collaborative, Spatio-Temporal Decision Support System, Transactions in GIS, 10(3): Nyerges, T., P. Jankowski, K. Ramsey and D. Tuthill, Collaborative Water Resource Decision Support: Results of a Field Experiment, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 96(4): Jankowski, P., and T. Nyerges GIS for Group Decision Making. Taylor & Francis, London Nyerges, T. and P. Jankowski, Enhanced Adoptive Structuration Theory: A theory of GIS-supported Collaborative Decision Making, Geographical Systems, 4:3, pp