1. Chief results from Sheffield study 1. The public’s understanding of science is not so much a question of whether people understand pieces of science as a matter of the public’s evaluation of the institutions of science with which they have to deal; 2. Publics commonly have their own knowledges too, knowledges which may complement or rival expert conceptions of the matter in hand; 3. “Technical” understandings of science in public typically trade on a tacit or naive sociology since in public domains scientific knowledge embodies implicit models or assumptions about the social world

2. GIS for Participation: a forward step? Initial study was limited because participants were largely unable to present their knowledge spatially. New approach adopted: Captures local stakeholder knowledge in a spatial framework Represents knowledge in a form compatible and comparable with the outputs and inputs of computer models Useful for creating dialogue between local stakeholder and planners, modellers and policy makers

3. Stages of the GIS process air pollution from transport air pollution from industry and agriculture dust problems smells noise (transport, industry) health impacts of air pollution Stage 1 – Local stakeholder framing of the issue(s)

4. Stages of the GIS process Stage 2 – Locating local knowledge in a spatial framework

5. Stages of the GIS process Stage 3 – Transformation of knowledge into digital database I

6. Stages of the GIS process Stage 3 – Transformation of knowledge into digital database II Individual stakeholder groups maps Combined City-Centre Stakeholders Perceptions of Air Quality

7. Stages of the GIS process 4 – Feedback of transformed digital data to local stakeholders for checking

8. Stakeholder perceptions vs. computer modelling Computer Model Prediction of 2005 Nitrogen Dioxide Concentrations Combined City-Centre Stakeholders’ Perceptions of Air Quality