Alternative Interfaces for Improved Representation and Cultural Inclusion in Web-Based PPGIS

The development of new infrastructure (such as wind farms) often faces opposition from local citizens and other stakeholders due to concerns over the trade-off between cultural and provisioning services. PPGIS (Public Participatory Geographic Information Science) can be used to collect areas of conflict, as well as obtain qualitative data on existing or proposed infrastructure and therefore minimise disruption at later stages of the planning process. Despite PPGIS being designed to increase democracy in the decision making process, the tools to do so are often lacking. This can result in the data collected being ignored or misinterpreted as it fails to adequately represent the views of citizens as well as the exclusion of certain parties due to digital divides. One way in which current tools are lacking is in the un-critical use of spatial primitives such as points and polygons. They dominate PPGIS tools yet can, in some circumstances, offer a poor representation of the complex relationships between people and place. This research explores three ways in which citizens’ views might be better represented by using alternative PPGIS interfaces. User surveys and interviews were carried out through a case study on the isles of Barra and Vatersay, Outer Hebrides, UK.

Firstly, we address the challenge of generalisation in line-based PPGIS by asking participants where they would like to see new footpaths. It replaces the traditional line digitisation model with one in which user-generated ‘anchor points’ are joined not with straight edges, but rather with least cost paths. This approach means that the level of generalisation of each line is standardised, based upon the resolution of the underlying elevation data. The standardised level of generalisation also means that similar inputs will follow the same route, avoiding the need for path bundling, which can draw results away from their intended location. As such, realistic and representative outputs can be produced with minimal effort required of the participant. Secondly, we use viewsheds as a spatial unit, drawn in real-time when the user clicks on the map. Participants are asked to click on locations from which they would not wish to be able to see a turbine (e.g. their house), and the map will then be populated with a viewshed delineating the areas in which a turbine could not therefore be placed. This approach is therefore able to better reflect how citizens would experience the installation in real life, rather than simply adding points at locations that they believe to be suitable or unsuitable without any contextual information. Finally, we consider the same questions again, but this time using a paper-based interface instead of the digital. This enables an assessment of how a non-digital PPGIS interface might influence participant accessibility and subsequent analysis.

We present preliminary results, and explore how alternative spatial units and interfaces might permit researchers to gain greater insight into participants’ spatial thoughts and feelings for more inclusive and representative environmental decision-making.