This paper examines the increasing use of geographic information systems (GIS) to support the project of ‘collaborative’ planning. Specifically, I explore the ways in which the use of GIS in collaborative planning programs works to counteract and/or reproduce patterns of marginalization always present in local political struggles. Through a review of the literature and an analysis of a case study of the use of GIS in rural water resource management, I argue that the discourse and practices of collaboration can often lead to a problematic depoliticization of GIS. Furthermore, I show how this depoliticization can normalize both uneven power dynamics and the marginalization of alternative and oppositional perspectives. I employ this case study as a backdrop to propose an alternative practice of participatory GIS motivated by Mouffe's notion of ‘agonistic pluralism’. This practice of agonistic participatory GIS is designed to foreground, rather than obscure, the politics of spatial knowledge production by explicitly juxtaposing alternative understandings of space and spatial problems. I conclude by discussing the importance of this work to the critical and participatory GIS research agendas.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbramS A, 2000, “Planning the public: some comments on empirical problems for planning theory”Journal of Planning Education and Research19351–357
2.
AitkenS CMichelS M, 1995, “Who contrives the ‘real’ in GIS? Geographic information, planning and critical theory”Cartography and Geographic Information Systems2217–29
3.
BaldwinJBrandtD H EWicherskiB, 2000, “Cumulative impacts assessment, Thousand Springs Area of the Eastern Snake River Plain, Idaho”, Ground Water Technical Report No. 14, Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, Boise, ID
4.
BickerstaffKWalkerG, 2001, “Participatory local governance and transport planning”Environment and Planning A33431–451
5.
BickerstaffKWalkerG, 2005, “Shared visions, unholy alliances: power, governance and deliberative processes in local transport planning”Urban Studies422123–2144
6.
BrownM P, 1997Replacing Citizenship: AIDS Activism and Radical Democracy (Guilford Press, New York)
7.
ChrismanN, 2005, “Full circle: more than just social implications of GIS”Cartographica4023–35
8.
DennisS, 2006, “Prospects for qualitative GIS at the intersection of youth development and participatory urban planning”Environment and Planning A382039–2054
9.
ElwoodS, 2002a, “Neighborhood revitalization through ‘collaboration’: assessing the implications of neoliberal urban policy at the grassroots”GeoJournal58121–130
10.
ElwoodS, 2002b, “GIS use in community planning: a multidimensional analysis of empowerment”Environment and Planning A34905–922
11.
ElwoodS, 2004, “Partnerships and participation: reconfiguring urban governance in different state contexts”Urban Geography25755–770
12.
ElwoodS, 2006, “Beyond cooptation or resistance: urban spatial politics, community organizations, and GIS-based spatial narratives”Annals of the Association of American Geographers96233–454
13.
ElwoodSLeitnerH, 1998, “GIS and community-based planning: exploring the diversity of neighborhood perspectives and needs”Cartography and Geographic Information Systems2577–88
14.
ElwoodSLeitnerH, 2003, “GIS and spatial knowledge production for neighborhood revitalization: negotiating state priorities and neighborhood visions”Journal of Urban Affairs25139–157
15.
FischlerR, 2000, “Communicative planning theory: a Foucauldian assessment”Journal of Planning Education and Research19358–368
16.
FlyvbjergB, 1998Rationality and Power: Democracy in Practice (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL)
17.
FoucaultM, 1980Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972–1977 (Pantheon Books, New York)
18.
GhoseR, 2005, “The complexities of citizen participation through collaborative governance”Space and Polity961–75
19.
GhoseRHuxholdW, 2001, “Role of local contextual factors in building public participation GIS: the Milwaukee experience”Cartography and Geographic Information Science28195–208
20.
GoughJ, 2002, “Neoliberalism and socialisation in the contemporary city: opposites, complements and instabilities”Antipode34405–426
21.
HarrisTWeinerD, 1998, “Empowerment, marginalization, and ‘community-integrated’ GIS”Cartography and Geographic Information Systems2567–76
22.
HealeyP, 1992, “Planning through debate: the communicative turn in planning theory”Town Planning Review63143–162
23.
HealeyP, 1996, “The communicative turn in planning theory and its implications for spatial strategy formation”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design23217–234
24.
IDWR, 1997, “Upper Snake River Basin study”, Idaho Department of Water Resources, Boise, ID
25.
InnesJ, 1995, “Planning theory's emerging paradigm: communicative action and interactive practice”Journal of Planning Education and Research14183–189
26.
InnesJ E, 1998, “Information in communicative planning”Journal of the American Planning Association5452–63
27.
InnesJ EBooherD E, 2000, “Public participation in planning: new strategies for the 21st century”, in Annual Conference of the Association of Collegiate Schools of PlanningUniversity of California at Berkeley Institute of Urban and Regional Development, pp 1–39
28.
JessopB, 2002, “Liberalism, neoliberalism, and urban governance: a state-theoretical perspective”Antipode34452–472
29.
JordanG, 2002, “GIS for community forestry user groups in Nepal: putting people before the technology”, in Community Participation and Geographic Information Systems Eds CraigW JHarrisT MWeinerD (Taylor and Francis, New York) pp 232–245
30.
KingG, 1996Mapping Reality: An Exploration of Cultural Cartographies (St Martin's Press, New York)
31.
KingstonRCarverSEvansATurtonI, 2000, “Web-based public participation geographical information systems: an aid to local environmental decision-making”Computers, Environment and Urban Systems24109–125
32.
KyemP A K, 2004, “Of intractable conflicts and participatory GIS applications: the search for consensus amidst competing claims and institutional demands”Annals of the Association of American Geographers9437–57
33.
LaclauEMouffeC, 1985Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics (Verso, London)
34.
McCannE J, 2003, “Framing space and time in the city: urban policy and the politics of spatial and temporal scale”Journal of Urban Affairs25159–178
35.
McGuirkP, 2001, “Situating communicative planning theory: context, power, and knowledge”Environment and Planning A33195–217
36.
MacnabP, 2002, “There must be a catch: participatory GIS in a Newfoundland fishing community”, in Community Participation and Geographic Information Systems Eds CraigW JHarrisT MWeinerD (Taylor and Francis, New York) pp 173–191
37.
MouffeC, 1993The Return of the Political (Verso, New York)
38.
MouffeC, 1999, “Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism?”Social Research66745–758
ParkerCPascualA, 2002, “A voice that could not be ignored: community GIS and gentrification battles in San Francisco”, in Community Participation and Geographic Information Systems Eds CraigW JHarrisT MWeinerD (Taylor and Francis, New York) pp 55–64
PicklesJ, 1995, “Representations in an electronic age: geography, GIS, and democracy”, in Ground Truth: The Social Implications of Geographic Information Systems Ed. PicklesJ (Guilford Press, New York) pp 1–30
43.
PicklesJ, 2004A History of Spaces: Cartographic Reason, Mapping, and the Geo-coded World (Routledge, New York)
44.
PløgerJ, 2001, “Public participation and the art of governance”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design28219–241
45.
PonceletE C, 2001, “A kiss here and a kiss there': conflict and collaboration in environmental partnerships”Journal of Environmental Management2713–25
46.
PurcellM H, 2007, “Neoliberal governance and democratic resistance: Seattle's Duwamish River cleanup”, paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association of American Geographers, San Francisco; copy available from PurcellM, Department of Urban Design and Planning, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
47.
RamasubramanianL, 1999, “Nurturing community empowerment: participatory decision making and community based problem solving using GIS”, in Geographic Information Research: Trans-Atlantic Perspectives Eds CragliaMOnsrudH (Taylor and Francis, New York) pp 87–102
48.
RamseyK, 2004“Stakeholder involvement and complex decision making: a case study into the design and implementation of a GIS for supporting local water resource management”, unpublished MA thesis, Department of Geography, University of Washington
49.
RamseyK SWilsonM W, forthcoming, “Rethinking the ‘informed’ participant: precautions and recommendations for the design of online deliberation”, in Online Deliberation: Design, Research, and Practice Ed. DaviesT (CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA) forthcoming
RundstromR, 1995, “GIS, indigenous peoples, and epistemological diversity”Cartography and Geographic Information Systems2245–57
52.
SandercockL, 1998, “The death of modernist planning: radical praxis for a postmodern age”, in Cities for Citizens: Planning and the Rise of Civil Society in a Global Age Eds DouglassMFriedmannJ (John Wiley, Chichester, Sussex) pp 163–184
53.
SawickiD SBurkeP, 2002, “The Atlanta Project: reflections on PPGIS practice”, in Community Participation and Geographic Information Systems Eds CraigW JHarrisT MWeinerD (Taylor and Francis, New York) pp 89–100
54.
SchuurmanN, 2002, “Reconciling social constructivism and realism in GIS”ACME173–90
55.
SehlkeG, 2000An Evaluation of the Conjunctive Management of Surface Water and Ground Water Resouces in Idaho Hydrology, University of Idaho, Idaho Falls, ID
56.
SheppardE, 2005, “Knowledge production through critical GIS: genealogy and prospects”Cartographica405–21
57.
SieberR E, 2000, “Conforming (to) the opposition: the social construction of geographical information systems in social movements”International Journal of Geographical Information Science14775–793
58.
StratfordEArmstrongDJaskolskiM, 2003, “Relational spaces and the geopolitics of community participation in two Tasmanian local governments: a case for agonistic pluralism?”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series28461–472
59.
TalenE, 2000, “Bottom-up GIS: a new tool for individual and group expression in participatory planning”Journal of the American Planning Association66279–294
60.
TuthillD, 2002Utilization of Emerging Geo-spatial Technologies in the Implementation of Conjunctive Administration of Surface and Ground Waterdissertation, Civil Engineering, University of Idaho, Boise, ID
61.
TuthillD, 2003, “Development of modeling tools and public interfaces to be used in the implementation of adaptive management in the Thousand Springs Area”, in Thousand Springs Surface and Ground Water Users Stakeholder Public Meeting, Hagerman, ID copy available from the author, Idaho Department of Water Resources, Boise, ID
62.
VenturaS JNiemannB JSutphinT LChenowethR E, 2002, “GIS-enhanced land-use planning”, in Community Participation and Geographic Information Systems Eds CraigW JHarrisT MWeinerD (Taylor and Francis, New York) pp 113–124
63.
WalkerDLeitchA MDe LaiRCotterellAJohnsonA K LPullarD, 2002, “A community-based and collaborative GIS joint venture in rural Australia”, in Community Participation and Geographic Information Systems Eds CraigW JHarrisT MWeinerD (Taylor and Francis, New York)
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
