Contemporary planning debate goes beyond the issues of material placemaking. It has been proposed that Public Participation Geographical Information System (PPGIS) methods (mapping platforms in particular) can help to achieve civic maturity, sense of agency, and the social development of the inhabitants. However, researchers need to be consciously engaged (e.g., embracing a Participatory Action Research [PAR] approach), to really pass those platforms to the hands of the community and help the inhabitants to form a two-way communication. With the right use, mapping platforms can be more than just a simple data collection tool. Used without deeper awareness, it can only remain a modern tool.
AllmendingerPhilip. 2017. Planning Theory. London: Red Globe Press.
2.
ArcherMargaret S.2000. Being Human: The Problem of Agency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3.
ArcherMargaret S.2007. Making Our Way through the World: Human Reflexivity and Social Mobility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4.
ArnsteinSherry R.1969. “A Ladder of Citizen Participation.” Journal of the American Planning Association35 (4): 216–24.
5.
AronsonElliotWilsonTimothy D.AkertRobin M.SommersSamuel R.2018. Social Psychology. 9th ed.London: Pearson.
6.
BarnesBarry. 2000. Understanding Agency. Social Theory and Responsible Action. Exeter: University of Exeter.
7.
BoroushakiSoheilMalczewskiJacek. 2010. “ParticipatoryGlS: A Web-Based Collaborative GIS and Multicriteria Decision Analysis.” Urisa Journal22:23.
8.
BrownGregoryDonovanShannonPullarDavidPocewiczAmyTooheyRyanBallesteros-LopezRenata. 2014. “An Empirical Evaluation of Workshop versus Survey PPGIS Methods.” Applied Geography48:42–51.
9.
BrownGregoryKyttäMarketta. 2014. “Key Issues and Research Priorities for Public Participation GIS (PPGIS): A Synthesis Based on Empirical Research.” Applied Geography46:122–36.
10.
BrownGregory G.PullarDavid. 2012. “An Evaluation of the Use of Points versus Polygons in Public Participation Geographic Information Systems Using Quasi-Experimental Design and Monte Carlo Simulation.” International Journal of Geographical Information Science26:231–46.
11.
BrownMichael A.SharplesSarahHardingJennyParkerChristoper J.BearmanNickMaguireMartinForrestDavidHaklayMukiJacksonMike. 2013. “Usability of Geographic Information: Current Challenges and Future Directions.” Applied Ergonomics44:855–65.
BugsGeisa. 2012. “Assessment of Online PPGIS Study Cases in Urban Planning.” In Computational Science and Its Applications—ICCSA 2012, edited by MurganteBeniaminoGervasiOsvaldoMisraSanjayNedjahNadjaRochaAna Maria A. C.TaniarDavidApduhanBernady O., 477–490. Berlin: Springer.
14.
BugsGeisaGranellCarlosFontsOscarHuertaJoaquinPainhoMarco. 2010. “An Assessment of Public Participation GIS and Web 2.0 Technologies in Urban Planning Practice in Canela, Brazil.” Cities27:172–81.
15.
CampbellHeather. 2012. “Planning to Change the World: Between Knowledge and Action Lies Synthesis.” Journal of Planning Education and Research32 (2): 135–46.
16.
CardulloPaoloKitchinRob. 2019. “Being a ‘Citizen’ in the Smart City: Up and Down the Scaffold of Smart Citizen Participation.” GeoJournal84 (1): 1–13.
17.
CheckowayBarry. 2001. “Renewing the Civic Mission of the American Research University.” Journal of Higher Education72 (2): 126–47.
18.
ConnorDesmond M.1988. “A New Ladder of Citizen Participation.” National Civic Review77 (3): 249–57.
19.
CurryMichael R.1995. “Rethinking Rights and Responsibilities in Geographic Information Systems: Beyond the Power of the Image.” Cartography and Geographic Information Systems22:58–69.
20.
CzepkiewiczMichałBrudkaCezaryJankowskiPiotrKaczmarekTomaszZwolińskiZbigniewMikulaŁukaszBąkowskaEdytaMłodkowskiMarekWójcickiMichał. 2016. “Public Participation GIS for Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning: Methods, Applications and Challenges.” Rozwój Regionalny I Polityka Regionalna35:9–35.
21.
DaviesNorman. 2005. God’s Playground. New York: Columbia University Press.
22.
DimitrovaDaniela V.BeilockRichard. 2005. “Where Freedom Matters: Internet Adoption among the Former Socialist Countries.” International Communication Gazette67:173–87.
23.
DowlingRobyn. 2009. “Ethical Issues in Research.” In International Encyclopedia of Human Geography, edited by KitchinRobThriftNigel, vol. 3, 595–600. London. Elsevier.
24.
Hrast MassaFilipovičDekkerKarrien. 2009. “Old Habits Die Hard? Neighbourhood Participation in Post-WWII Neighbourhoods in Slovenia and the Netherlands.” Cities26 (3): 148–57.
25.
GiddensAnthony.1984. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.
26.
HaklayMukiTobónCarolina. 2003. “Usability Evaluation and PPGIS: Towards a User-Centred Design Approach.” International Journal of Geographical Information Science17:577–92.
27.
HartRoger A.2008. “Stepping Back from ‘The Ladder’: Reflections on a Model of Participatory Work with Children.” In Participation and Learning, edited by ReidAlanJensenBjarne BruunNikelJuttaSimovskaVenka, 19–31. Dordrecht: Springer.
28.
HorowitzCarol R.RobinsonMimsieSeiferSarena. 2009. “Community-based Participatory Research from the Margin to the Mainstream.” Circulation119:2633–42. http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/119/19/2633. Accessed April 22, 2019.
29.
InnesJudith E.1997. “The Planners’ Century.” Journal of Planning Education and Research16 (3): 227–28.
30.
JankowskiPiotrCzepkiewiczMichałMłodkowskiMarekZwolińskiZbigniew. 2015. “Geo-Questionnaire: A Method and Tool for Public Preference Elicitation in Land Use Planning.” Transaction in GIS20 (6): 903–24.
31.
JankowskiPiotrCzepkiewiczMichałMłodkowskiMarekZwolińskiZbigniewWójcickiMichhał. 2017. “Evaluating the Scalability of Public Participation in Urban Land Use Planning: A Comparison of Geoweb Methods with Face-to-Face Meetings.” Environment and Planning B. Urban Analytics and City Science46 (3): 511–33.
KahilaMaaritKyttäMarketta. 2009. “SoftGIS as a Bridge-Builder in Collaborative Urban Planning.” In Planning Support Systems Best Practice and New Methods, edited by GeertmanS.StillwellJ., 389–411. Berlin: Springer.
34.
KesbyMike.2007. “Spatialising Participatory Approaches: The Contribution of Geography to a Mature Debate.” Environment and Planning A39:2813–31.
35.
KesslerCarstenRinnerClausRaubalMartin. 2005. “An Argumentation Map Prototype to Support Decision-Making in Spatial Planning.” In AGILE 2005—8th Conference on Geographic Information Science, edited by ToppenFredPainhoMarco, 135–42. Lisboa: Instituto Geografico Portugues.
36.
KindonSaraPainRachelKesbyMike. 2007. Participatory Action Research Approaches and Methods: Connecting People, Partici-pation and Place. Routledge Studies in Human Geography No. 22. London: Routledge.
37.
KindonSaraPainRachelKesbyMike. 2009. “Participatory Action Research.” In: International Encyclopedia of Human Geography, edited by KitchinR.ThriftN., vol. 8, 90–95, London: Elsevier.
38.
KingstonRichardCarverSteveEvansAndrewTurtonIan. 2000. “Web-Based Public Participation Geographical Information Systems: An Aid to Local Environmental Decision-Making.” Computers, Environment and Urban Systems24:109–25.
39.
KotusJacek.2013. “Position of the Polish City on the Ladder of Public Participation: Are We Going the Right Way? The Case of Poznan.” Cities35:226–36.
40.
KotusJacekRzeszewskiMichał. 2015. “Methodological Triangulation in Movement Pattern Research.” Quaestiones Geographicae34:25–37.
41.
KotusJacekSowadaTomasz. 2017. “Behavioural Model of Collaborative Urban Management: Extending the Concept of Arnstein’s Ladder.” Cities65:78–86.
42.
KotusJacekSowadaTomaszRzeszewskiMichałPazderDominika. 2019. Zapraszamy Państwa Do Rozmów . . . wędrówki Po Labiryncie Wielkomiejskiej Partycypacji [We Invite You to the Discussion . . . A Wayfaring through the Maze of Participation in Large Cities]. Poznań: Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
43.
LouresLuisCrawfordPat. 2008. “Democracy in Progress: Using Public Participation in Post-Industrial Landscape (Re)-Development.” Transactions on Environment and Development9 (4): 794–803.
44.
LoveKaren.2011. “Little Known But Powerful Approach to Applied Research: Community-Based Participatory Research.” Geriatric Nursing32 (1): 52–54.
45.
McGinleyTimNakataKeiichi. 2015. “A Community Architecture Framework for Smart Cities.” In Citizen’s Right to the Digital City, edited by FothMarcusBrynskovMartinOjalaTimo, 231–252. Singapore: Springer.
46.
MukherjeeFalguni.2015. “Public Participatory GIS: History, Literature Review and Sustainability of PPGIS.” Geography Compass9:84–394.
47.
NielsenJakob.1993. Usability Engineering. San Diego, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
48.
PotapchukWilliam R.1991. “New Approaches to Citizen Participation: Building Consent.” National Civic Review80 (2): 158–68.
49.
RamasubramanianLaxmi.2010. Geographic Information Science and Public Participation. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.
50.
RamseyKevin.2010. “Public Participation GIS.” In Encyclopedia of Geography, edited by WarfBarney, 2305–2308. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
51.
ReardonKenneth M.1998. “Enhancing the Capacity of Community-Based Organizations in East St. Louis.” Journal of Planning Education and Research17 (4): 323–33.
52.
RinnerClausBirdMichelle. 2009. “Evaluating Community Engagement through Argumentation Maps—A Public Participation GIS Case Study.” Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design36:588–601.
53.
RzeszewskiMichałKotusJacek. 2019. “Usability and Usefulness of Internet Mapping Platforms in Participatory Spatial Planning.” Applied Geography103:56–69.
54.
SaijaLauraPappalardoGiusy. 2018. “An Argument for Action Research-Inspired Participatory Mapping.” Journal of Planning Education and Research. Published electronically December 19. doi:10.1177/0739456X18817090.
ShahidulMohammadSwapanHasan. 2016. “Who Participates and Who Doesn’t? Adapting Community Participation Model for Developing Countries.” Cities53:70–77.
57.
SheppardEric.1995. “GIS and Society: Towards a Research Agenda.” Cartography and Geographic Information Science22:5–16.
58.
SieberRenee.2006. “Public Participation Geographic Information Systems: A Literature Review and Framework.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers96 (3): 491–507.
59.
SkarlatidouArtemisWardlawJessicaHaklayMukiChengTao. 2011. “Understanding the Influence of Specific Web GIS Attributes in the Formation of Non-Experts.” Proceedings of the 25th International Cartographic Conference, Paris, July 3–8.
60.
SternEliahuGudesOriSvorayTal. 2009. “Web-Based and Traditional Public Participation in Comprehensive Planning: A Comparative Study.” Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design36:1067–85.
61.
SzeJulie. 2007. Noxious New York: The Racial Politics of Urban Health and Environmental Justice. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
62.
TalenEmily.2000. “Bottom-Up GIS: A New Tool for Individual and Group Expression in Participatory Planning.” Journal of the American Planning Association66:279–94.
63.
ThyerBruce A.2012. Quasi-Experimental Research Designs. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
64.
WarfBarney.2001. “Segueways into Cyberspace: Multiple Geographies of the Digital Divide.” Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design28:3–19.
65.
WassenMartin JRunhaarHensBarendregtAatOkruszkoTomasz. 2011. “Evaluating the Role of Participation in Modeling Studies for Environmental Planning.” Environment and Planning B38 (2): 338–58.
66.
WinklerTanja.2013. “At the Coalface: Community–University Engagements and Planning Education.” Journal of Planning Education and Research33 (2): 215–27.
67.
WinklerTanjaDuminyJames. 2016. “Planning to Change the World? Questioning the Normative Ethics of Planning Theories.” Planning Theory15 (2): 111–29.
68.
ZhaoJianfengColemanDavid J.2007. “An Empirical Assessment of a Web-Based PPGIS Prototype.” Proceedings of the 45th Annual Conference of the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association. CiteSeerX.
