1. The Potential of an Online Map-based Discussion Forum to Engage Residents in Local Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Insoo Steven Chung, Claus Rinner Ryerson University

2. Order of Presentation 1.Introduction 2.ArgooMap 3.Objectives 4.Methodology 5.Findings 6.Conclusion

3. 1. Introduction  Objective to examine the potential for utilizing map-based discussion support in climate change related discussions  In Context of the Live Green Toronto program  Five year climate change engagement strategy  goal to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions  “community animators,” city website, “Sustainabilty Map”

4. 1. Introduction  “Sustainability Map”  Based on the ArgooMap tool and Argumentation Mapping; Mashup based on Google Maps API  Allows stakeholders to discuss climate change issues, repository of “green” information  Study a unique opportunity to observe large-scale GeoWeb implementation in development

5. 2. ArgooMap

6. Simplified conceptual diagram of the ArgooMap tool. (Note: integration with external social networking services has not yet been implemented)

7. 3. Objectives to examine the potential for utilizing map-based discussion support in climate change related discussions 1.What functionality is needed for the goals of the Live Green Toronto Program? 2.How will the ArgooMap tool be integrated into the overall strategy? 3.What are the program’s perspectives on public participation, and factors for long-term viability of the tool?

8. 4. Methodology  Demonstration of ArgooMap to Animators and Program Staff  Questions regarding functionality were answered  All interviewees had subsequent hands-on experience of the tool before the interviews  Interview Study  Five people among animator team and program staff  Conducted between July 28 th and August 11 th, 2009  Question topics in tutorial and demonstration formed basis for interview

9. 5. Findings

10. 5.1. Functional needs of the Sustainability Map  Importance of spatial component in climate change discussions  Input and Organization of Information  Stakeholder Specific Needs  General Public  City of Toronto  Animators

11. 5.2. Integration of ArgooMap tool into overall strategy  Part of integrated strategy  Common platform for information exchange and analysis  Public participation and networking  Phased integration approach

12. 5.3. Public Participation and Long-term viability Public Participation  Varying definitions of participation  Privacy issues important but not overwhelming concern  Phasing-out of animators as participation and use of map increases  Indirect influence programming and policy

13. 5.3. Public Participation and Long-term viability Long-term Viability  Financial and technical barriers  Open-sourcing city data, interesting “seed” content  Continued commitment for updates of tool  Maintaining engagement with stakeholders and expanding utility to non-English speaking minorities  Requires firm commitment for outreach programs  Map does not replace existing forms of public participation

14. 6. Conclusion  The GeoWeb is practical and relevant for climate change discussions  Contextual factors will influence how GeoWeb is used  Highlights infancy of Web 2.0, GeoWeb adoption in government  Long-term commitment needed, remaining hurdles  Platform for civic engagement  Likely add to toolkit for engagement strategies  Promising applicability to other programs  Generic and open-source platforms (eg. ArgooMap) flexible for use across policy domains (eg. public health)

15. Thank you. Grant provided by:In Partnership with: Environment Office www.geoide.ulaval.ca