Building Programmatic Capacity at the Grassroots Level: The Reactions of Local Nonprofit Organizations to Public Participation Geographic Information Systems
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online December, 2010
Building Programmatic Capacity at the Grassroots Level: The Reactions of Local Nonprofit Organizations to Public Participation Geographic Information Systems
Diffusion and acceptance of geographic information systems (GIS) technology is not fully understood in public or private organizations, and even less is known about the role of GIS in the nonprofit sector. Using spatial analysis, this study examines the extent to which nine nonprofit organizations in Columbia, Missouri, meet the needs of their target populations. Findings revealed that nonprofit entities met from less than 1% to about 20% of client demand for services. Reactions to GIS analysis of program outputs was largely positive, with most of the nonprofits expressing an interest in using GIS technology to further communication and networking with other organizations. GIS is viewed by nonprofit administrators as a potentially useful tool in grant applications, strategic planning, program reporting, and advocacy activities, among others. Nonprofit administrators embrace GIS if they can use it to help with more immediate and practical concerns, such as improving client care and services.
Barndt, M. ( 1998). Public participation GIS: Barriers to implementation . Cartography & Geographic Information Systems, 25(2), 105-112.
2.
Brown, M.M., & Brudney, J.L. ( 1998). A "smarter, better, faster, and cheaper" government: Contracting and geographic information systems. Public Administration Review, 58(4), 335-345.
3.
Brudney, J.L., & Brown, M.M. ( 1992). Do geographic information systems meet public managers’ expectations? State and Local Government Review, 24(2), 84-90.
4.
Carver, S. ( 2003). The future of participatory approaches using geographic information: Developing a research agenda for the 21st century. URISA Journal, 15(APA I), 61-71.
5.
Cox, K.R. ( 1998). Spaces of dependence, spaces of engagement and the politics of scale, or: Looking for local politics. Political Geography , 17(1), 1-23.
6.
Craig, W. ( 1995). Why we can’t share data: Institutional inertia . In H. J. Onsrud & G. Rushton (Eds.), Sharing geographic information (pp. 107-118). New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers.
7.
Elwood, S. ( 2006a). Beyond cooptation or resistance: Urban spatial politics, community organizations, and GIS-based spatial narratives. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 96(2), 323-341.
8.
Elwood, S. ( 2006b). Critical issues in participatory GIS: Deconstructions, reconstructions, and new research directions. Transactions in GIS, 10(5), 693-708.
9.
Elwood, S. ( 2008). Grassroots groups as stakeholders in spatial data infrastructures: Challenges and opportunities for local data development and sharing. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 22(1), 71-90.
10.
Elwood, S., & Ghose, R. ( 2001). PPGIS in community development planning: Framing the organizational context. Cartographica, 38(3&4), 19-34.
11.
Gahin, R., & Paterson, C. ( 2001). Community indicators: Past, present, and future. National Civic Review, 90(4), 347-361.
12.
Ghose, R. ( 2001). Use of information technology for community empowerment: Transforming geographic information systems into community information systems . Transactions in GIS, 5(2), 141-163.
13.
Ghose, R. ( 2007). Politics of scale and networks of association in public participation GIS. Environment and Planning A, 39, 1961-1980.
14.
Ghose, R., & Elwood, S. ( 2003). Public participation GIS and local political context: Propositions and research directions. URISA Journal, 15(APA II), 17-24.
15.
Howell, E.M., Pettit, K.L.S., Ormond, B.A., & Kingsley, G.T. (2003). Using the National Neighborhood Indicators Partnership to improve public health. Journal of Public Health Management Practice, 9(3), 235-242.
16.
Jankowski, P., & Nyerges, T. ( 2003). Toward a framework for research on geographic information-supported participatory decision-making. URISA Journal, 15(APA I), 9-17.
17.
Kevany, M.J. ( 1995). A proposed structure for observing data sharing. In H. J. Onsrud & G. Rushton (Eds.), Sharing geographic information (pp. 76-100). New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers .
18.
Kingsley, G.T., & Pettit, K.L.S. (2004). Neighborhood information systems. Retrieved April 23, 2007, from http://www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID=900755
19.
Leitner, H., McMaster, R.B., Elwood, S., McMaster, S., & Sheppard, E. ( 2002). Models for making GIS available to community organizations: Dimensions of difference and appropriateness. In W. J. Craig, T. M. Harris, & D. Weiner (Eds.), Community participation and geographic information systems (pp. 37-52). London : Taylor & Francis.
20.
Leitner, H., Pavlik, C., & Sheppard, E. ( 2002). Networks, governance, and the politics of scale: Inter-urban networks and the European Union. In A. Herod & M. Wright (Eds.), Geographies of power (pp. 274-303). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
21.
Lin, W., & Ghose, R. ( 2008). Complexities in sustainable provision of GIS for urban grassroots organizations. Cartographica, 43(1), 31-44.
22.
Meredith, P.H. ( 1995). Distributed GIS: If its time is now, why is it resisted? In H. J. Onsrud & G. Rushton (Eds.), Sharing geographic information (pp. 7-21). New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers.
23.
Nedovic-Budic, Z., & Godschalk, D.R. (1996). Human factors in adoption of geographic information systems (GIS): A local government case study. Public Administration Review, 56(6), 554-567.
24.
Nedovic-Budic, Z., Pinto, J.K., & Warnecke, L. ( 2004). GIS database development and exchange: Interaction mechanisms and motivations. URISA Journal, 16(1), 15-29.
25.
Obermeyer, N.J. ( 1995). Reducing inter-organizational conflict to facilitate sharing geographic information. In H. J. Onsrud & G. Rushton (Eds.), Sharing geographic information (pp. 138-148). New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers.
26.
Obermeyer, N.J. ( 1998). PPGIS: The evolution of public participation GIS. Cartography & Geographic Information Systems, 25(2), 65-66.
27.
Obermeyer, N.J., & Pinto, J.K. ( 1994). Managing geographic information systems. New York: Guilford.
28.
O’Looney, J. ( 2000). Beyond maps: GIS and decision making in local government . Redlands, CA: Environmental Systems Research Institute.
29.
Onsrud, H.J., & Pinto, J.K. ( 1991). Diffusion of geographic information innovations. International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 5(4), 447-467.
30.
Onsrud, H.J., Pinto, J.K., & Azad, B. ( 1992). Case study research methods for geographic information systems. URISA Journal, 4(1), 32-44.
31.
Pinto, J.K., & Onsrud, H.J. ( 1995). Sharing geographic information across organizational boundaries: A research framework. In H. J. Onsrud & G. Rushton (Eds.), Sharing geographic information (pp. 44-64). New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers.
32.
Schlossberg, M., & Shuford, E. ( 2005). Delineating "public" and "participation" in PPGIS. URISA Journal, 16(2), 15-26.
33.
Sieber, R. ( 2006). Public participation geographic information systems: A literature review and framework. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 96(3), 491-507.
34.
Tulloch, D., & Harvey, F. ( 2005). When data sharing becomes institutionalized: Best practices in local government GI relationships. Retrieved April 23, 2009, from http://www.urisa.org/publications/journal/articles/when_data_sharing
35.
Tulloch, D., & Shapiro, T. ( 2003). The intersection of data access and public participation: Impacting GIS users’ success? URISA Journal, 15( APA II), 55-60.
36.
U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2004 ). Informing our nation: Improving how to understand and assess the USA’s position and progress. U.S. Government Accountability Office, Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Science, Technology, and Space, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, U.S. Senate.
37.
Ventura, S.J. ( 1995). The use of geographic information systems in local government . Public Administration Review, 55(5), 461-467.
