Spatializing science and technology studies: exploring the role of GIS and interactive social research by Sonia Talwar B.A., McGill University, 1994 M.Sc., University of Edinburgh, 1995 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Geography) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) April 2008 © Sonia Talwar, 2008 Abstract This thesis is an interdisciplinary study based on the interplay between science, technology and society in order to inform the design of knowledge exploration systems. It provides a rationale for the integration of science knowledge, geographic information, with digital libraries to build knowledge and awareness about sustainability. A theoretical reconceptualization of knowledge building is provided that favours interactive engagement with information and argues against a traditional model of science production and communication that is linear and unidirectional. The elements of contextualization, classification and communication form the core of the reconceptualization. Since many information systems entrench the traditional model of science production, the three elements are considered in light of library and information science and geographic information science. The use of geographic information systems is examined to identify how they can be used as part of a social learning model for scientific, social, cultural, and environmental issues to further assist people in connecting to place and sustainability. Empirical data was collected from four case studies. One case study centred on the design and development of a web‐based digital library called the Georgia Basin Digital Library, another two case studies focused on the use of part of this digital library with youth, senior and environmental groups in south‐western British Columbia. The remaining case study observed a community deliberation to consider how knowledge exploration systems might support deliberation in future processes. The case study research confirms that collaborative research with communities is a fruitful way to engage with sustainability issues. Such collaborations require consideration of institutional arrangements, information collections, relationship building, technology transfer and capacity building. ii Table of Contents Abstract................................................................................................................................................ ii Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................. iii List of Tables .......................................................................................................................................v List of Figures.................................................................................................................................... vi List of Abbreviations ...................................................................................................................... vii Acknowledgements........................................................................................................................viii Dedication...........................................................................................................................................xi 1 Introduction: Bridging between science, technology and society for sustainability ......... 1 1.1 Research premise................................................................................................................ 2 1.2 Research context................................................................................................................. 4 1.3 Methodological framework .............................................................................................. 4 1.4 Structure of the dissertation ............................................................................................. 6 2 A theoretical perspective: science, technology & society studies and information exploration.................................................................................................................................... 11 2.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 11 2.2 Science & society .............................................................................................................. 12 2.3 Technology & society....................................................................................................... 16 2.4 Beyond linearity – contextualization, communication, and classification............... 20 2.5 Implication of this theoretical approach for knowledge sharing in libraries .......... 27 2.6 Knowledge building and information exploration for sustainability ...................... 35 2.7 Conclusion......................................................................................................................... 40 3 Extending the theoretical perspective to geographic information systems use ................ 42 3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 42 3.2 GIS use ............................................................................................................................... 42 3.3 Barriers and limitations to the use of GIS ..................................................................... 46 3.4 Rise of participatory use of GIS...................................................................................... 49 3.5 Gaps in PPGIS research: narratives, geolibraries, and evaluation ........................... 51 3.6 Conclusion......................................................................................................................... 57 4 Methodological approach ............................................................................................................ 58 4.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 58 4.2 Description of methods ................................................................................................... 61 4.3 Case study descriptions .................................................................................................. 69 4.4 Data collection, analysis and results.............................................................................. 86 4.5 Conclusion......................................................................................................................... 90 iii 5 Setting the context: The design and development of the Georgia Basin Digital Library for sustainable development..................................................................................................... 91 5.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 91 5.2 Study area: Georgia Basin ............................................................................................... 92 5.3 Conceptual framework for the Georgia Basin Digital Library .................................. 96 5.4 GBExplorer application ................................................................................................. 101 5.5 GBExplorer use............................................................................................................... 111 5.6 Conclusion....................................................................................................................... 116 6 Exploring transformations: case studies of technology in process .................................... 117 6.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 117 6.2 The use of GBExplorer by community groups .......................................................... 118 6.3 Snug Cove Village Plan Review, Bowen Island (CS#3) ............................................ 123 6.4 Reflections on the design of GBDL (CS#4) ................................................................. 126 6.5 Case study conclusions ................................................................................................. 129 7 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 134 7.1 Interactive engagement – the case of Local Stories ................................................... 134 7.2 Outcomes for knowledge discovery............................................................................ 135 7.3 Outcomes for technology transfer ............................................................................... 137 7.4 Outcomes for technology in participatory processes................................................ 139 7.5 Implications of the case studies.................................................................................... 142 7.6 Implications for 3C framework .................................................................................... 148 7.7 Theoretical contributions .............................................................................................. 151 7.8 Implications for future research................................................................................... 154 Bibliography.................................................................................................................................... 156 Appendix A: Local Stories survey ............................................................................................... 172 Appendix B: CHiRP membership ............................................................................................... 174 Appendix C: CHiRP needs assessment ...................................................................................... 176 Appendix D: Guide to using Local Stories................................................................................ 179 Appendix E: Ethics certificate….……….……………………………………………………….181 iv List of Tables Table 2.1 An extension of the constructivist learning model from Jonassen et al. 1999 with reflections on the implications for knowledge exploration and the 3C approach. ......................................................................................................................................... 34 Table 4.1 Identification of research methods applied to each research goal outlined in chapter1.......................................................................................................................... 59 Table 4.2 Bowen Island Community Forum Sessions. ................................................................ 84 Table 5.1 Research themes in Georgia Basin Digital Library Project (GBDL Final Report, 2002)................................................................................................................................ 94 Table 7.1 Explanation of the GBExplorer implementation of the 3C framework linked to case study outcomes................................................................................................... 150 Table 7.2 Theoretical elements presented and extended with this research. ......................... 152 v List of Figures Figure 4.1 Four case studies undertaken within this research. .................................................. 60 Figure 4.2 Relationship between the four case studies undertaken within this research. ..... 71 Figure 4.3 Map of Greater Vancouver highlighting the Northeast Sector (GVRD, 2003) ...... 72 Figure 4.4 Survey results rating the overall usefulness of Local Stories................................... 87 Figure 4.5 Survey results on the ease of navigation of Local Stories indicating that over half of the participants found the application easy to navigate..................................... 88 Figure 4.6 The Community Habitat Resources Project’s (CHiRP) adaptation of Local Stories, residing on their own server. ...................................................................................... 89 Figure 5.1 News & Information module of GBExplorer ........................................................... 102 Figure 5.2 Ideas & Perspectives module of GBExplorer ........................................................... 104 Figure 5.3 Local Stories module of GBExplorer ......................................................................... 106 Figure 5.4 Library Collections module of GBExplorer.............................................................. 108 Figure 5.5 GBExplorer application architecture ......................................................................... 110 vi List of Abbreviations ESRI CHiRP CS#1 CS#2 CS#3 CS#4 GBDL GBExplorer GBFP GIS GVRD LIS OGC PPGIS RMOW SSK STAR STS Environmental Research Systems Institute, Inc. Community Habitat Resources Project Case Study #1: Coquitlam, BC Case Study #2: Whistler, BC Case Study #3: Bowen Island, BC Case Study #4: Design and development of Georgia Basin Digital Library Georgia Basin Digital Library Project Georgia Basin Explorer – web application built from the conceptual design of GBDL Georgia Basin Futures Project Geographic Information Systems Greater Vancouver Regional District (now known as Metro Vancouver) Library and Information Science Open GIS Consortium Public Participation Geographic Information Systems Resort Municipality of Whistler Sociology of Scientific Knowledge Sustainability Tools and Resources Science and Technology Studies vii Acknowledgements The completion of this thesis could not have occurred without the guidance and support of many people. My co‐supervisors, John Robinson and Brian Klinkenberg provided constructive advice and thoughtful criticism that genuinely enhanced the final product. I am particularly thankful for the endless enthusiasm that John Robinson brings to all his endeavours because it is inspiring, infectious and so generously extended to his students. He helped push my thinking in new directions and I have learned so much from him throughout this process. Brian Klinkenberg encouraged me to define the boundaries of my work and help clarify my thinking about the use of GIS in public settings. My committee member Rick Kopak’s sage advice in the early stages of this work helped me manage my diverse interests and focus my research. Nadine Schuurman, the final member of my committee, proffered incisive questions about my research purpose which helped me frame the implications of my work. She and John in particular provided compassionate advice as I prepared for the defense which was greatly appreciated. My committee provided opportunities to pick apart the key questions and challenges in this work that helped me rethink many of my own assumptions about the relationship between society and science and I am grateful for those discussions. My colleagues on the GBDL project created a rewarding team environment to explore ideas and were keen supporters of my research interests. Conversations with Murray Journeay, Boyan Brodaric, and Rob Harrap ignited a spark about many of the research themes in GBDL that we then carried on throughout the project. I have fond memories of the grassy knoll where we began to chart this path. We were so fortunate to be able to add the talents of Joost van Ulden and Ryan Grant into this mix. As application developers, they have an uncanny knack of keeping the conceptual intent in mind while wrestling with technical feasibility. I’m quite sure there isn’t anything they couldn’t tackle. Shannon Denny jumped into the project with a keen focus and ability to improvise as we went along. Sean Edwards uncovered a zest for the public use of technology that would buoy my own enthusiasm. In particular, I wish to extend my heartfelt thanks to Murray Journeay for his creative spirit, dedication and excitement for exploring new ideas. I’m especially appreciative of our many thoughtful discussions about the role of public science in society and for connecting many of the UBC researchers with the community of Bowen Island to extend collaborative research opportunities for all. Way back when, he offered me the opportunity to work on a digital library for geoscience information which was my first professional opportunity to merge my interests in libraries with my academic training in geography and GIS. He also shouldered many of my work responsibilities while I was on study leave. I am so appreciative of his steady encouragement and support. I extend my thanks to each of the community groups and their representatives who made the case study research possible. Your realistic perspectives served to ground the experience of conducting this research and provided me with numerous insights, both personal and professional. Financial support for this research was secured through the National Centre of Excellence in geomatics, GEOIDE (Geomatics for Informed Decision) through grant RES#52 (2000‐2002). In addition, acknowledgments are extended to my employer, Natural Resources Canada, for granting me educational leave (2002‐2004) to conduct the much of the research. Natural Resources Canada also contributed funding to the overall Georgia Basin Digital Library Project. I thank Sandy Colvine, Director of the Pacific Division of the Geological Survey of Canada, and Irwin Itzkovitch, Assistant viii Deputy Minister of the Earth Sciences Sector, for their support of my leave and of my research interests. I would like to thank all the many friends and colleagues that I have met through UBC and the Sustainable Development Research Initiative. Most were associated in some way with the GBFP project where many, many hours were spent in meetings, workshops, and presentations to further both the GBFP and GBDL objectives. These discussions were enhanced by contributions from James Tansey, Jeff Carmichael, Randi Kruse, Sean LeRoy, Alison Munro, Deborah Herbert, Misty Lockhart, Estelle Levin, Rob VanWynsberghe, Kevin McNaney, Mike Walsh and Dave Biggs. Working with all of these people deeply enriched my understanding of the process of collaborative research and also resulted in me making some great friends in the process. Stephen Sheppard, Jon Salter, Cam Campbell, Alison Shaw, David Flanders, Sarah Burch, and Shana Johnstone have involved me in subsequent research activities that help me see how some of the ideas and challenges presented here are manifest. Sincere appreciation is extended to Siobhan Murphy for her assistance with the workshops. Her light‐heartedness and commitment made for a great working environment. The warmth and support that my friends provided has been exceptional. My deepest gratitude is extended to Stephanie Higginson, Kevin Trotter, Holly Skelton, Catherine Rigg, Tracey Burns, Susan Hunter, Eliot McIntire, Céline Boisvenue, Leandre Vignenault, Lynn Lee, Kelly Higginson, Clare Maloney, Alison Shaw, Mike Ellerbeck, Arnim Wiek, Katja Brundiers, and Gillian Moran. I particularly appreciate the friendship and skilled editorial guidance of Tracy Lavin and Ruth‐Claire Weintraub. I am so lucky to be surrounded by such loving and talented people in my life. Central to the discipline of geography is place and I was lucky to be able to take advantage of some beautiful writing spots. Thanks to Catherine Rigg, Peter Katinic, James Tansey, and Murray Journeay for inspirational West Coast island settings that helped me transition my ideas into words on the page at key stages along the way. My best friend, Marjorie Malpass, has been one of my most passionate supporters. She listened endlessly and provided thoughtful, tailored advice to inspire me and keep me motivated. She focused her powerful spirit to reclaim and rebuild her life by successfully fighting leukemia in 2004. This served to teach me that the core of our beings is so very strong – akin to the strength of our lasting friendship. One day we will figure out this curious connection between geographers and actors. My parents, Joanne & Mangal Talwar, have been my most ardent supporters for as long as I can remember. Their belief in my abilities has never faltered and continuously provides me with great strength and clarity of purpose. Their love and support is constant and unwavering, a crucial touchstone at many times during this degree. My brother, Sanjay, has always offered sound advice and good humour at the most opportune times. He even let me overshadow one of his milestone birthdays with my defense. Our love and support of one another is steadfast. I am also thankful for the great relationship I have with Marion Dakin, my grandmother. I do hope my bridge game will sharpen up in the coming years. In addition to my close friends and immediate family, my thanks are extended to the Ray, Hayward, and Menounos families for all their support and encouragement throughout the years. Thoughtful notes of encouragement from Kim, discussions about the tribulations of academia with Brian, and reminders of the importance of playing with airplanes from Nathan kept my spirits positive. Helen ix was always interested in hearing about my progress and empathized since she knew first‐hand of the challenges of working full‐time and completing a graduate degree. I have been known to explain the thesis process as one where your soul and spirit are sucked out, battered around only to leave the final test of reassembling the self, and the work, into some new, coherent whole. It has certainly been a kind of ‘humpty dumpty’ process for me. My ability to put all my pieces together again is attributed, in large part, to the love and support afforded to me by Derek Ray. Derek, your relentless encouragement and sense of humour helped me to soldier on with the writing. You had complete confidence in my abilities when my faith in myself faltered. You provided assurance and love when I needed it most. I’m so grateful for who you are and that we have shared so much of our lives together. You’ve stuck around for three degrees and, don’t worry, there won’t be anymore. Finally, to little Tess, who curled up under my desk and kept my feet and spirit warm on many a dark night. x Dedication This thesis is dedicated to the life lived by my Auntie, Krishna Devi Talwar (1930‐2003) I am forever shaped by two worlds. xi 1 Introduction: Bridging between science, technology and society for sustainability This thesis is an interdisciplinary study about geographical knowledge, where I use place as a focus for an exploration of technological issues related to developing knowledge and awareness of sustainability. The seeds for this project germinated as the development and use of the internet was reshaping how individuals and groups communicated and worked together locally and globally. These developments generated questions about the role geographic information and geographic information systems (GIS) could play in knowledge and awareness building in a world increasingly characterized by personal computing and interconnected networks of people and technology. This work also emerges from my interest in experimenting with the design and development of geographic information for use in web‐based environments by novice users of geographic information technologies. To that end, I embark on a theoretical reconceptualization of the use of spatial technologies that favours interactive engagement with information and argues against a traditional model of science production and communication to support users exploring ideas about local place and sustainability. Conceptually, sustainability embraces environmental, social and economic concerns and their interrelationships in the present and, importantly, over time. Using a case study approach, I provide an assessment of the use of emerging technologies by diverse communities of practice to serve self‐defined objectives related to sustainability. I provide methodological recommendations on the design, development and evaluation of community‐based knowledge and awareness building technologies. As a result of the case study research, I have provided findings about the use of spatial technologies in the types of community contexts I examined, which included knowledge discovery, technology transfer, and community decision making (or deliberative) processes. 1 In this introductory chapter, I frame the central issues that will be discussed throughout the subsequent chapters. These include a discussion of models of scientific knowledge production, communication models and information sharing and my efforts at reconceptualizing and extending science communication models and technology use for interactive engagement with core concepts of sustainability. Under scrutiny is the prevalence of a unidirectional model of science production and use that hinders a rich sharing of lived experience with published or peer‐reviewed scientific knowledge (Jasanoff & Wynne 1998, 43). I argue that information and information technologies play a role in reinforcing this model, which becomes manifest as technological determinism and instrumental rationality 1 (MacKenzie & Wajcman 1999). I also consider whether the role of information is sufficiently problematized within the established critiques of positivism, as found in the literatures of the sociology of scientific knowledge and science and technology studies. 1.1 Research premise The initial spark for this research resulted from my curiosity about how the effectiveness of digital libraries could be augmented by integrating content, services, users, and technology in new and exciting ways (Marchionini & Fox 1999). That succinct editorial in a library and information studies journal provided a useful and resonant conceptual approach within which to consider the dimensions of a digital library that could be applied to geological information (Brodaric et al. 1999; Talwar et al. 1999). The initial exploration followed the route of pragmatics – how to build something that would encapsulate the meaning structures that geologists hold in their heads such that other professionals and knowledgeable lay‐people would be able to gain access to relevant information in text, image and map forms (Brodaric & Gahegan 2002; Brodaric & Hastings 2002). This entirely practical response stemmed from an intuitive approach to a simple problem: could more and different people make use of geological and geographical information to make policy decisions? Traditionally, geological information has been developed and targeted toward These concepts are described in more detail in chapter 2. 1 2 mineral exploration and energy supply fields, whereas the application of geological interpretations could extend into other domains such as biology or forestry if a more holistic perspective were adopted. In short order, my conceptual problem space was extended from supporting access to disparate information in geology to an interdisciplinary digital library that might ultimately enter into socially‐relevant decisionmaking. Throughout this dissertation, my goals are to: Explore the potential role of information and geographic information in building knowledge and awareness about sustainability; View GIS as an edge science that can blur boundaries between science and communication and to explore whether GIS can be used fruitfully as an enabling technology in an interactive social setting; Conceptualize a geolibrary as a kind of ‘metaGIS’ and to determine the implications for its use in exploring information about sustainability; Identify successful approaches to make use of GIS for the public to explore their community and identify key issues of concern; Articulate how the challenge of understanding sustainability provides a useful framing to explore the capabilities of web‐based GIS and digital library technologies. The implications of these issues lead me into the territories of the nature of knowledge production and communication, the sociology of scientific knowledge, user interaction design, information and communications technologies, social learning, knowledge management, geographic information systems, public decision making and community engagement issues. The theoretical implications of these literatures are woven into my arguments in Chapters 2 and 3 to create an interdisciplinary perspective on the list of issues I have raised above. 3 1.2 Research context Throughout much of my doctoral research work I operated within a team research environment. I had the great pleasure of being part of an extremely talented group of researchers who were equally committed to furthering ideas about the use of geographical information systems and web‐based technologies in order to facilitate dialogue about people’s concerns around sustainability. As a research team, we were interested in designing the conceptual framework for an online spatial information system – something we called a digital library and that others have called geolibraries (Goodchild 1998a, 2000a). These geolibraries would serve to make information 1) available and 2) meaningful to concepts of sustainability. One of our starting points as a research team was the notion that putting sustainability into action might be facilitated by a system that promotes building awareness and generating knowledge about local issues. Furthermore, we assumed that this could be related to broader theoretical concepts of sustainability. A challenge that this research environment presented for the dissertation was to identify my own contributions to this research endeavour, as required by the academic process of producing a dissertation. Throughout this thesis, I represent my own ideas and arguments for why and how to deploy information systems in order to engage users in merging local and expert knowledge so that they could develop a view of environmental, social and economic issues that resonate with their lived experiences and their desired futures. While these are my own ideas, they have been deeply informed by my interactions with other team members and collaborators. 1.3 Methodological framework I adopted a case study methodology for this dissertation research. Four case studies that co‐exist in a complementary fashion were used to address the research issues identified in section 1.2. Each of the case studies addresses different elements of the research process, 4 from exploration (conceptual design of the Georgia Basin Digital Library 2 and the web application called GBExplorer 3 ), to description (the studies of GBExplorer use in Coquitlam and Whistler, BC) and finally to observations on the use of spatial technologies for neighbourhood land use planning on Bowen Island, BC. The case studies include 1) an examination of how youth and seniors used GBExplorer to build awareness and knowledge about sustainability in Coquitlam; 2) an exploration of how technology transfer can enhance local capacity in Whistler; 3) the use of participant observation to shape my perspective on how community dialogue can be supported with information technologies on Bowen Island; and 4) the design and development of the Georgia Basin Digital Library (GBDL) concept and the instantiation of these concepts into a web‐based software application called GBExplorer. Three of the case studies were located in communities, including the City of Coquitlam (case study #1), the municipality of Whistler (case study #2), and the municipality of Bowen Island (case study #3). The fourth case study (case study #4) reflects on the design and development of GBExplorer that formed the basis for the case studies in Coquitlam and Whistler. All of the communities are located in south‐western British Columbia amidst a backdrop of increased population growth and limited opportunity (i.e. land base) to accommodate the growth. The region has established itself as an innovator in terms of sustainability in action through the Greater Vancouver Regional District’s Livable Region I use distinct terminology to differentiate between the conceptual ideas of the web‐based geolibrary for sustainability (Georgia Basin Digital Library) and the resultant application, GBExplorer, that was the software engineered, spatial data management, and user interface. The GBExplorer is the artefact of the concept of GBDL. 3 The Georgia Basin Explorer application can still be located through its original development site here: http://www.georgiabasin.info. Note that since this research has been completed operational aspects of the GBDL prototype have been transformed into a new application called Phoenix (in Canada) and GeoSemantica (in South America). It is available here: http://phoenix.geosemantica.net. A discussion of these implications and results of the research occurs in chapter 6. 2 5 Strategic Plan, the City of Vancouver’s recent Eco‐density initiative, and through numerous green‐building developments within the region (City of Vancouver 2006; GVRD 1996). 1.4 Structure of the dissertation The purpose of my research is to characterize and critique the use of GIS and digital libraries for information providers and information seekers. My particular position is that these technologies have fallen short of their capabilities because they are used within a practice that does not fully address the social dimensions and implications of scientific inquiry. The chapters in this dissertation are structured to guide the reader through the key theoretical elements to provide insights into knowledge and awareness building about sustainability. Briefly, in chapters 2 and 3 I focus on the relevant literatures of science and society studies and the use of GIS, respectively, to provide the necessary grounding for the selection of research methods covered in chapter 4. A description and some results for three of the case studies are provided in chapter 4. In chapter 5 I describe the components of Georgia Basin Digital Library while in chapter 6 I discuss how some community groups engaged with the GBExplorer application to share stories and perceptions of local sustainability issues (case study #1 and case study #2). Chapter 6 also presents some results from the observations from the community planning process on Bowen (case study #3) and reflects on the design of GBExplorer (case study #4). In the final chapter I provide some recommendations on the interplay of institutions, actors and technologies for knowledge exploration. In chapter 2 I provide an overview of science production models and their critiques in an effort to reconceptualize the role of information and knowledge communication within the critiques of science represented in the sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK), science and technology studies (STS), and the social shaping of technology critiques. The SSK and STS critiques of science production are helpful in advancing our understanding of the interplay 6 between issues of concern to scientists and issues of concern to society. However, because of its emphasis on technical artefacts and science production, I postulate that the STS literature in particular does not sufficiently problematize the role of information and, by extension, what we commonly know as information technologies. I hope to add some reasoned reflection on this role to the discussion and in so doing extend these critiques of science production in a useful way. The model that I propose in chapter 2 will also be reviewed and discussed with respect to extending the notion of digital libraries into a balanced integration of technology, community, services and content as proposed by Marchionini and Fox (1999). In particular I will argue that such an integration may be a useful approach to overcome technological determinism in the library and information sciences field’s research into digital libraries in the late 1990s and early 2000s (Borgman 1999; Chowdhury & Chowdhury 1999; Frew 2000; Marlino et al. 2001; McCray & Gallagher 2001; Toms 1999). In the subsequent chapter, I follow with a more in‐depth discussion of GIS in light of key issues raised from the social shaping of technology literature. Chapter 3, then, is where I provide a critique of the history and culture of GIS use. The impetus for this work was my realization that the potential for information technologies was underrealized in both academic and professional environments. These ‘technologies’ were geographic information systems and digital libraries. My bias was, in the first instance, that GIS were not exploiting the “IS” in “GIS” enough. Instead of becoming a more meaningful “IS” because the spatial dimension was being managed explicitly, these systems were often being used as glorified drawing packages, their analytical potential thus squandered, and they thus failed in facilitating the coherent and persistent management of both spatial and non‐ spatial data sources. There are many parallels between the development and use of GIS and digital libraries, such as integrating diverse data types and classifying data for retrieval and analysis. In both 7 cases, there remain questions concerning whether and how these technologies contribute to societal knowledge. The products of GIS procedures have lacked a mechanism by which they can be returned to a knowledge collective and there has been no explicit provision to manage or steward these newly derived information assets/products. GIS implementations in the public domain have seen limited success as a means of integrating information among science and social science disciplines. Some of the limiting factors in Canada and BC include data access, training, spatial literacy, education and cost. In recent years, participatory GIS has emerged as a field of inquiry to address questions related to the use of GIS by and for the public. As a result, urban and regional planning – particularly land‐use, density and transportation planning concerns – have been a focus of participatory GIS research. By addressing issues of power, information stewardship, interdisciplinarity, public participation and metaphor within GIS, in chapter 3, I situate GIS practice within a new model for interactive social research using information technologies that was presented in chapter 2. During the course of the dissertation research, the field of public participation GIS (PPGIS) 4 expanded considerably. The first use of the term occurred at the International Conference on Empowerment, Marginalization and Public Participation GIS, Santa Barbara, California 14‐17 October 1998 5 , and since the first PPGIS conference in 2002 there have now been numerous meetings on the topic in the United States, Europe and Australia. In chapter 4 I discuss the methods and how they were undertaken within this research. Using a blend of research approaches that included literature reviews, participant observation, and case study methodologies, I have engaged in an inquiry that embraces the deep connections between theory and practice for the design and implications of embedding The terms public participation GIS (PPGIS), participatory GIS, and community GIS are terms that are interchangeably used to denote the use of GIS within public processes and usually where members of the public, or some organized group of the public, engage directly with the technology. The term PPGIS is used throughout the thesis. 5 See http://www.iapad.org/ppgis_principles.htm 4 8 technologies within social learning and policy processes. The research is divided into four case studies; three of which are described in this chapter. I provide the background and setup information on the case studies undertaken during this research: 1) the use of part of the GBExplorer application with community users in Coquitlam, BC, 2) the adaptation and use of part of the GBExplorer application with a community organization located in Whistler, BC and 3) a description of a series of community and technology engagements with the municipality of Bowen Island through the development of GBDL and subsequent research projects. The case studies represent different phases of the research and are not intended to be of a comparative nature but, rather, to provide support for how I developed the theoretical and conceptual frameworks about the development and public use of information technologies. The design and development of the Georgia Basin Digital Library, which serves as the fourth case study, is detailed in chapter 5. The Georgia Basin region serves as the regional backdrop for a series of case studies that took place as part of a larger study. I explain the conceptual model used as a basis for the design of the Georgia Basin Digital Library. This conceptual model was intended to provide an alternative model of science communication that takes advantage of advances in web‐based technologies for spatial information and embraces popular notions of communities of practice, social learning and civic science literacy (Brown & Duguid 1991; Chermack & van der Merwe 2003; Dillon 2000; Jonassen et al. 1999; Lewenstein et al. 2001; Robinson 2003; Roth & Lee 2002; Wenger 1998). The premise was deeply rooted in the belief that providing context to information is central to meaning‐ making. The project designers assembled a cross‐disciplinary team with expertise in cognitive science, computer science, geographic information systems, and library and information science. In chapter 6 I discuss the results of the case study work, where components of GBExplorer were used with senior and youth groups in Coquitlam (case study #1) and in Whistler, BC where I worked with a collective of community groups interested in environmental 9 conservation and community mapping (case study #2). I also provide findings from my experience within the community of Bowen Island as residents conducted a public consultation for the Snug Cove village plan, an official amendment to their Official Community Plan (case study #3). In addition, other spatial information technologies (visualization) and environmental and social indicators were used in a public dialogue series on Bowen Island. Observations gleaned from this experience contribute to the commentary on the relationship between deliberative processes and the use of information technologies. This chapter also includes reflections on the design of GBDL (case study #4). My last chapter articulates conclusions and recommendations about the key dissertation research issues, including the role of geographic information in exploring issues related to sustainability, the design of a web‐based digital library to provide a shared knowledge space to explore multiple perspectives and epistemologies about sustainability supported by information representation in the form of documents, narratives and spatial data. One of the primary outcomes of my research provides support for the notion that the process of introducing information technologies to new users ultimately affects its use. I discuss the outcomes from what was learned from the case studies about interactive engagement, knowledge discovery, technology transfer and the use of technology in participatory processes. Areas for future research are identified, most notably the need for increased attention on the institutional implications of interactive and participatory research that can support and advance the ways in which collaborative research is undertaken among organizations such as academia, government and communities. 10 2 A theoretical perspective: science, technology & society studies and information exploration 2.1 Introduction In this chapter, the design of information systems for knowledge building and sharing is considered. The conceptual design of knowledge exploration systems that are meaningful for modern social and environmental issues necessitates a discussion of interplay between society, science knowledge and technological innovation. The elements that form the cornerstone of this conceptual design are derived from a synthesis of the literature from the sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK), science and technology studies (STS), and social shaping of technology, viewed from the perspective of information studies. Many information systems entrench a pervasive, traditional model of how science knowledge is produced and shared. The current critique of this traditional model has been developed to specifically comment on the design of information and communications technologies and how they shape the negotiated territory between science, technology and society. Two domains of information science are implicated in this critique. The first domain is the field of library and information studies where there has been a lack of critical engagement from a philosophical perspective (Budd 2001; Hjorland 2005, 47; Sundin & Johannisson 2005). The absence of such critical engagement has limited the opportunity to explore the theoretical foundations of library and information science in more depth (Hjorland 2005). It also reveals the irony that a field concerned with the management, storage, mediation and search for different knowledge claims yet lacks consideration of the epistemological foundations for these claims (Sundin & Johannisson 2005, 24). The second domain of interest is web‐based geographic information systems (GIS) used to support the creation and sharing of experiential and locally‐relevant knowledge in forms that are visually and narratively rich (see chapter 3). This builds on previous work to engage with GIS from a critical perspective (Kwan 2002; Schuurman 1999; Schuurman & Pratt 2002). Rather than relying on traditional instrumentalist and deterministic views of technology, 11 information systems can be designed as a process relationship that focuses on the management of collective knowledge. Such an approach will transcend a prescriptive or reductionist view of how that collective knowledge is created, managed, and accessed. It can also assist in moving beyond an instrumental view of technology towards one that is more nuanced and meaning‐laden. 2.2 Science & society Questions of what science ‘is’ received considerable attention in the 1970s as a response to positivism. Scientific knowledge has been subject to scrutiny from disciplines such as the history and philosophy of science, sociology, cultural anthropology and the philosophy of technology (Feenberg 1995, 1999). These disciplines continue their critical explorations of whether science and its methods are separate and distinct from humans’ social and cultural contexts (Barnes 1974; Bloor 1976; Ihde 2002; Shapin & Schaffer 1985). In turn, this has raised questions about the production of scientific knowledge claims and how one claim comes to dominate another. The doctrine of essentialism of kinds advanced by Putnam (1973) postulates that the role of science is to uncover essential properties that underlie the natural world, where nature possesses a unique and understandable structure in and of itself. By uncovering these essential properties, science takes on the role of explaining the natural worlds’ division into kinds. However, Bryant (2000) argues that the complexity of the natural world belies this doctrine of essentialism of kinds and its objectivist position. Bryant draws attention to weaknesses in the objectivist approach, namely the lack of regard for human perspective. By employing internal realism, she concludes that knowledge of the world can “never be pure, direct or unmediated, since experience (knowledge) requires prior conceptualization or structuring, it requires the adoption of perspective [and thus,] perspective allows for more than one true description of the world” (Bryant 2000, 37). 12 The sociology of scientific knowledge discipline also critically examines the notion that science results in uncontestable truths that are subsequently used to determine societal implications and associated policy responses. This notion has been referred to as ‘speaking truth to power’ and carries two implications: (1) that scientific uncertainty has been reduced sufficiently to make a claim about scientific knowledge and (2) that the political domain (i.e. society or policy) will base its response on the objective knowledge claim (Jasanoff & Wynne 1998). The ‘truth speaks to power’ notion continues to persist in society. It often underpins regulatory and legal frameworks that use science as a basis for judgments (Jasanoff 1987). A vast and influential scholarship has emerged that takes issue with the linear, ‘truth speaks to power’ model of scientific knowledge production and claim‐making (Collins & Pinch 1994; Gibbons 2000; Gibbons et al. 1994; Jasanoff & Wynne 1998; Knorr‐Cetina 1981; Nowotny et al. 2001; Sarewitz 1996; Wynne 1992). Many of the early studies focused on the actual practice of laboratory science and on the notions of scientific controversy and how disagreement affects scientific claim‐making (Latour & Woolgar 1979; Lynch 1985). These studies examined how science is conducted in laboratories and other settings where knowledge claims become stabilized. This led to a wealth of empirical observations about the settings of innovation as well as narratives about how science is actually practised (Knorr‐Cetina 1981; Latour 1987; Shapin & Schaffer 1985). These studies called into question the role and nature of replicability in the scientific method by highlighting local effects within laboratories. Latour (1987, 15) notes “other people shy away from the disorderly mixture revealed by science in action and prefer the orderly pattern of scientific method and rationality”. In so doing, differences were highlighted between how science should proceed (rigourous and objective manner) and the messy, contingent, and localized procedures that actually occur within a specific laboratory. Although society has been informed by science for over half a millennium, this relationship has recently undergone some re‐thinking in order to signal a closer interaction between science and society (Gibbons 1999, 2000; Gibbons et al. 1994; Nowotny et al. 2001). These 13 authors acknowledge that such a claim is not particularly bold but insist that the idea bears repeating (Nowotny et al. 2001, 2). Indeed, it continues to bear repeating, particularly in light of the emergence of new settings, such as knowledge systems and web‐based GIS that contribute to a reconfiguring of how individuals and groups engage in new knowledge production and sharing. 2.2.1 Social contract with science At the close of the 20th century, many researchers were calling for a rethinking of the science‐society relationship that included identifying key areas of scientific inquiry for the next century (Cutter et al. 2002; Gibbons 2000; Goodchild 2000b; Lubchenco 1998). The previous century of scientific endeavours had provided society with improved medical understanding of our minds and bodies and greater understanding of the evolution of the earth (Lubchenco 1998). During the Second World War, the scientific research effort was keenly focused on augmenting military power through the creation of the atomic bomb. The scientific research agenda for the post‐war era in the United States sought to shift from a military and security emphasis to other benefits of the use of science for the material betterment of society, particularly economic betterment (Bush 1945a). Key areas of focus included medical research (war on disease), and basic scientific research (the U.S. reliance on fundamental research from Europe diminished due to rebuilding efforts), and the training of scientists (Bush 1945b). Gibbons (2000) notes that the prevailing contract between science and society has been one where the expectation of science is to produce reliable and credible knowledge and that those discoveries would be communicated to society. Similarly, the persistent thread throughout Bush’s research program is the betterment of society as a direct result of scientific work. In his view, science provides the “swiftest communication” between individuals (Bush 1945a). 14 The idea that scientific information, including the outcomes of social scientific research, should serve some societal or public purpose was reinforced by Lynd (1939 in Innes 1998). Bush (1945a) argued that scientists in the post‐war period should turn their attention to the management of the vast store of scientific knowledge that existed and synthesize it in some manner to derive societal benefits from existing knowledge. Bush’s position identifies knowledge management as a key challenge for the scientific endeavour. In a more recent twist on a similar argument, Willinsky (1999) suggests that a key challenge within the social sciences is for the public to be better served by what we already know. Even though a progression from scientific knowledge to social science and policy impact is expected from the enterprise of science, Innes (1998, 53) notes that “the literature offers few examples of when social science or formal information, specifically, has influenced public decisions because of its substance”. The policy domain is directly implicated in this underlying notion that science can directly benefit society since policy instruments are used to govern collective behaviours and social norms. However, there are numerous examples, particularly in land use planning, that highlight the inability of increased scientific information to transform policy outcomes (Feldman 1989; Szanton 1981; Caplan 1975). Jasanoff (1987) has also noted a similar challenge in environmental policy and health regulation. Lindblom and Cohen (1979) call into question the usability of the formal information produced by experts (in Innes 1998). Indeed, there is more literature documenting the failure of information to influence decisions than demonstrating success, as Innes (1990) has contended. Although it is easier to show that there are strategic and symbolic uses for information, as outlined by Weiss (1979), it “remains difficult to demonstrate that the information produced for policy making does serve instrumentally rational purposes” (Innes 1998, 60). Sarewitz’s (1996) ‘myth of infinite benefit’ also discounts the idea that increased science and technology will lead to more public good and notes that although the sociology of scientific knowledge literature has effectively countered this myth, it remains prevalent in the policy arena and influences policy decisions. It seems counterintuitive that public good would not be enriched by more 15 science and technology. But one of the major reasons for this lack of connection is the problematic nature of the conceptualization of science and technology that underlies this unidirectional model of science impacts on policy (i.e., as argued against in the preceding sections). A more useful way forward would embrace the co‐production of scientific knowledge where a focus can emerge on qualities and characteristics of socially‐robust knowledge (Gibbons 2000; Gibbons et al. 1994; Nowotny 2003; Nowotny et al. 2001). This approach provides a foundation from which the ‘myth of infinite benefit’ can be cast aside in favour of an open, dynamic, multivalent relationship between science, technology and society. The issues raised within this chapter extend the science‐technology scholarship into the challenge of knowledge building and social learning. Knowledge systems that support a reconfiguration of the interaction between science and society need to be designed to reinforce and enable a more pluralist model of information sharing and discovery. In a similar vein that the sociology of scientific knowledge and social studies of science raised questions and critiqued of the traditional, linear science production model from, there also exists a set of questions about technological progress (Pinch & Bijker 1984). This is the focus of the next section in this chapter. 2.3 Technology & society Originally the meaning of technology referred to the study of arts and crafts and encompassed the knowledge that masons and painters should possess. As the standardization of trades and skills became more common at the beginning of the 19th century with the advent of engineering schools, a shift in the meaning of the term “technology” took place. Its meaning transformed from one of arts and crafts to “include and emphasize purposeful invention and, by implication, the strategic deployment of such inventions” (Rip & Kemp 1998). As such, the sense of utilitarian, functional, and dedicated purposefulness began to infuse society’s view of and approach toward technology: it became an instrument to be taken up and used for some practical reason. 16 In terms of technological innovation, scientific knowledge has traditionally been expected to yield advances and growth in material production. The assumption that technology is asocial and that its outcomes are predictable and well‐defined is known as technological determinism (Sorensen & Williams 2002; Winner 1986, 1993). Such determinism implies that the development of technology follows a predictable path that is independent and beyond influence from cultural or political spheres. However, the risk of treating technology as exogenous is recognized by the critiques from the social construction of technology and the social shaping of technology (Bijker et al. 1987; Bijker & Law 1992; MacKenzie & Wajcman 1999; Pinch & Bijker 1984). These critiques are closely connected and informed by the sociology of scientific knowledge. They suggest that, in an effort to bring technology and society together, the view of technology as exogenous to society needs to be overcome (Rip 2003). When technology is exogenized, it is separated from society. This cannonball view, where technology is akin to a wrecking ball crashing into the brick wall that guards society, reinforces the sort of linear models of technology diffusion that suffer the same limitations as speaking truth to power. In such a view of technology, society is impacted by technology in a unidirectional manner. Such a view undermines the notion that there is a mutual interaction between technological artefacts and society and, as such, also reinforces the misguided idea that society and human behaviour (such as the reaction to a new technology) can be wholly predictable. Research into the social shaping of technology, an outgrowth of the critiques of technological determinism, focuses attention on technology developers and technological design as artefacts that are socially shaped (Russell 1986; Russell & Williams 1987). The social shaping of technology research agenda is grounded in the notion that the relationship between technology and society is highly interactive. Technology can act as a catalyst, engendering a shift occurs in the social order that enables new options for actors and strategies to make use of the destabilized situation (Sorensen & Williams 2002). When a 17 technology is introduced, if it is transformed from an alien element into a familiar and embedded one, then it has integrated with the actors and the meanings they attribute to the technology. This is referred to as domestication. Entrenchment is the outcome of the collective process of domestication wherein the technology becomes part of a stable sociotechnical configuration (Sorensen 2000). As technologies become entrenched they provide opportunities for reflexivity and interactivity that contribute to technology being viewed as an object of policy and not just an instrument of economic growth (Sorensen & Williams 2002; Woolgar 2000). Technology is given meaning through a collective process in which actors shape the catalyst, domestication and entrenchment of technology. The notions of catalyst, domestication and entrenchment are germane to the issue of how to design knowledge exploration systems because the successful design and use of such a system necessarily involves these stages. A co‐production approach between science and technology offers a useful framing point for the design of scientific information systems that are socially relevant. Thus, the creation of a socially robust information system must incorporate co‐production elements into its design: As technology moves from the restricted domain of technological institutions and becomes more pervasive in economic and social life, it impinges upon the activities of a wide range of decision‐makers with more general remits. Thus today, information and communication technology has become an issue across virtually all policy domains and sectors. (Sorensen & Williams 2002, 4) This weaving of socially relevant or socially robust knowledge into policy domains extends to the artefacts that deal with the storage, manipulation, management and transfer of information, namely the information and communications technologies referred to above. Engagement with socially robust knowledge can also be considered from a social learning perspective. Jonassen et al. (1999) discuss a shift in how technology is used in educational environments toward enabling learners to construct knowledge through engagement. They 18 describe ways for technology to support individual and social meaning making that build on the idea that learning results from thinking that is engaged by activity. In addition, they assert that learners do not actually learn from teachers, technologies or well‐structured databases of neutral information. Rather, people learn from experiencing phenomena, folding this into the experiences and information already known, and then reasoning and reflecting on the phenomena. Bruner (1990) views this process as one of meaning making. Relating and classifying new knowledge against what is already known draws attention to the importance of context of the experience (Brown & Duguid 1991; Wenger 1998). New knowledge is anchored within the informational context surrounding it which includes how the learner constructs that knowledge in light of what the learner already knows. Experiences and perceptions shape the knowledge production experience. “Knowledge‐ building requires articulation, expression, or representation of what is learned (meaning that is constructed)” (Jonassen et al. 1999, 5). In order for an information system to support such knowledge‐building activities, the system must support an individual user in articulating or expressing what they are learning, experiencing and how this relates to their world. Since no two people have the same experiences and their perceptions of the world differ, there are multiple perspectives on the world: a successful information system must be designed to accommodate these perspectives. This section identified the relationship between technology and society as co‐informed, or socially shaped, in a manner similar to the way in which science and society are co‐ informed. As such, a more nuanced model of the interaction between science, technology and society is advanced to overcome limitations of linear models of scientific knowledge production or technological innovation. The next section explores how these ideas point to three key elements that must be considered in the design of information systems to support the sharing of socially robust knowledge. 19 2.4 Beyond linearity – contextualization, communication, and classification Given the aforementioned concerns about the linear transformation model between science and policy, or between technology and society, it is useful to consider ways of reconfiguring an approach to knowledge building that eschews such a tradition. Society is currently being transformed into an increasingly networked society, demonstrated by the widespread public use of the internet and communications technologies (Berners‐Lee 1999; Capurro & Hjorland 2003; Castells 1991, 1996). Thus, it is also important to discuss how an information or knowledge‐based society could contribute to an agenda that moves us beyond such linear transformations in decision making and knowledge exploration. At the root of the problems with instrumental rationality and technological determinism is the unidirectional, linear relationship between science and decision making. Where, then, does the issue of building awareness of new knowledge (not new knowledge production per se) become situated and what role does it assume in light of the convincing critiques from SSK and STS that support the co‐production of knowledge? Three constitutive elements that should be considered in the design of such a system are proposed. These include 1) the context of the knowledge, 2) its classification and 3) the communication model on which such a system is based. Taken together these elements, referred to as the 3C approach, are presented as important criteria for the design of knowledge systems that do not inadvertently reinforce linear models between science, technology and society. The 3C elements are discussed in turn below and their implications for design are explored in the subsequent sections. 2.4.1 Context There are many examples of the importance of local context in the environmental policy field. For example, Honadle (2003) provides a thoughtful account of the need for attention to context, to local settings, in his work on linking environmental policy to people and place. Drawing on a series of examples from his extensive work in developing nations, he emphasizes the importance of context for natural resource and environmental policy to 20 promote sustainable development. Many of his examples address the challenges of technology transfer in the agricultural sector in Africa. The seemingly simple example of importing a plough from India to Tanzania faced unanticipated problems when it was discovered that the bullock required to pull the plough is a completely different size in Tanzania than in India. The imported solution fails because the full spectrum – the social and the problem context‐ were not taken into account prior to introducing the instrumental solution. This is also important in light of the popularity of ‘best practices’ from one location being imported to another as a means to build on a local experience. The act of taking the technological solution out of context and reapplying it elsewhere calls into question whether we should be reconsidering the idea of best practice and replacing it with a ‘best process’ that would take into account the local context of the problem as well as socially‐ and culturally‐relevant factors. This notion of best process has been proposed in the health promotion literature (Green & Krueter 1991). The previous example highlights that modern societies are increasingly complex. Any conceptualization of the relationship between science and society must grapple with this shifting complexity. This is occurring as the tacit contract between science and society is shifting from one where science speaks to society to one where, increasingly, society makes demands and speaks back to science. The blurring of the boundaries between science and society has implications for rethinking knowledge and the processes and products that are involved in its generation, construction and access (Gibbons 1999, 2000; Gibbons et al. 1994; Nowotny et al. 2001). Gibbons uses the term contextualization to describe the process of how modern society is shaping, and is shaped by, science. Nowotny (2004) asserts that contributing to joint problem solving is more than simple juxtaposition of different types of expertise but, rather, knowledge and expertise are transgressive. She frames the notion of knowledge ‘seeping’ in both directions between science and society where multiple actors bring key skills and expertise to a context of application, where the value‐added quality of context infuses the 21 definition of good science that integrates societal values. Therefore, the importance of context is underscored as a key element that supports the transgressive nature between knowledge and expertise. By adopting a research approach that is interactive, the research activities can benefit from and be enhanced by the diverse contexts in which the research is situated (Caswill & Shove 2000; Robinson 2008; Scott et al. 1999; Woolgar 2000). Indeed, many contextual factors such as the process of how science is conducted or how technology is engaged can drastically affect research outcomes, particularly when public stakeholders are involved. As Beierle & Konisky (2000) have noted “the process of participation appeared to be more important than the context in which participation took place…successful participation …related to features of…process” . The important elements of interactive research include deliberative process, two‐way communication between the participants and the government agencies, and obvious government commitment to the process. Such interactivity highlights the reality that contextual factors have implications for stakeholders. 2.4.2 Classification Classification is the “process by which human beings group together particular entities and treat them as equivalent in some sense or senses” (Bryant 2000, 11). Kwasnik (1992; 1999) sees classification as the meaningful clustering of experience . This supports the idea that classifications can be socially constructed. In cognitive terms, it is a means to develop relationships between entities, allowing some to cluster and others to remain distinct, based on certain criteria. Associations between specific concepts are held within the brain, this structure leads to understanding. Metaclassification examines the foundations and shifts of features within classification systems in general and examines the shape and structure of taxonomies and categories (Bowker & Star 1999). Humans classify to communicate information in the aggregate (Bowker & Star 1999). Classification is an attempt to create order out of chaos, to develop linkages and 22 understanding by grouping and relating ideas or concepts. In their exploration of how classification systems have been designed and used, Bowker and Star examine how semantic conflicts are managed by reviewing theories of formal and informal classification. The pre‐existing cognitive model of Miller, Galanter and Pribram (1960 quoted in Bowker and Star 1999) stated that people derive formal, abstract plans and then execute them. In the 1980s, the failure of formalism was acknowledged with the inability of expert systems to capture tacit knowledge. This was reinforced with Suchmanʹs (1987) work on the situated action perspective that led to a critique, and explanation, of artificial intelligenceʹs inability to formally specify the mind. Bowker and Star offer a reconsideration of formal and informal classifications and note that the two operate in conjunction, often seamlessly, such that the two systems can become indistinguishable and are lost to the historical record. Traces of politics and bureaucracy are often incorporated and persist in classifications. As a result, classification also becomes an instantiation of the social and political forces operating concurrent to the establishment of a scheme (Bowker and Star 1999, 54). Classification schemes represent views of how the world or a particular domain may be ordered. Such a scheme is typically manifested through language and this language is open to interpretation by all users. It is for this reason that within the library community, controlled vocabularies and reserved names were developed to inject some consistency into schemes that were to be widely applicable. The implementation of classification schemes sometimes suffers from the need to establish a single (one‐to‐one) entry between an information object and a classification, which can prove to be prohibitively restrictive. From a philosophy perspective, Bryant (2000, 45) observes that scientific classification of natural (non‐manufactured) objects is not simply a reflection of the way the world is structured but includes an element of choice and decision on the part of the scientist doing the classifying. This is reminiscent of earlier arguments presented from the SSK and social constructivists that view the scientist is an actor in his/her own network. Recall, from earlier in this chapter, that knowledge of the world requires the adoption of perspective thus 23 allowing for multiple views of the world. This pluralist approach suggests that scientific classification is not clear‐cut but a process in which humans play a role in the categorization process. The endeavour of classification – or ‘sorting into kinds’ – is based on three principles: 1) objects are similar or different in more that one way, 2) classification is not solely based on lists of attributes but also includes some holistic or inferential reasoning and, 3) human concepts are sensitive to context and not stable across all situations. This framing of human categorization blurs the distinction between expert and lay classification; indeed it indicates that expert classification is more similar to lay classification than many believe. The contextual nature of classification is reinforced by “the temporary consensus which form around particular definitions of science tends to be an index of contingent social and institutional interests rather than a more lasting description of essential core characteristics” (Bryant 2000, 47). Bryant’s arguments provide insights and support for the idea that classification and the process of categorization is a pluralist account of the world, thus reinforcing the requirement that information systems operationalize the ability to access and explore multiple perspectives on an issue. 2.4.3 Communication Shannon and Weaver (1949) developed a transmission model of information communication where an information packet is transmitted linearly between a sender and a receiver in order to maximize the efficiency of telephone cables. This mathematical model did not explicitly treat the content of the information packet as relevant but merely something that required transmission between the end points of a source and a destination. The information content could be decoded using commonsense and would occur objectively without interpretation from the receiver. In their model, information from a sender was encoded, transmitted through a channel, and the receiver decoded the original message from the signal. This simplistic model of human communication led to further research between communication and information theory. However, the model is typically faulted 24 because it does not consider the meaning of the information packet but, rather, treats the information as any other commodity capable of being shipped from point A to point B. Although the transmission model was developed by engineers and is mechanistic and functional in its framing, it has endured in popular language through such common phrases as “convey meaning” and “getting an idea across”. The persistence of such ideas in our everyday language is also – arguably – a direct result of the idea that science is ‘communicated to’ the public or stakeholders under the prevalent model that is not consistent with the claims of SSK scholars about the actual practice of science or the way it interacts with the policy process. Together, the transmission model of communication and the idea that science informs the public or policy have reinforced ideas of technological determinism and instrumental rationality in the communicative acts of society at large. The conduit metaphor frames a transference model of human communication where ideas, in the form of words, need to get across from a sender to a receiver (Reddy 1979). The conduit metaphor is based on four core ideas: (1) language functions like a conduit, transferring thoughts bodily from one person to another; (2) in writing and speaking, people insert their thoughts or feelings in the words; (3) words accomplish the transfer by containing the thoughts or feelings and conveying them to others; and (4) in listening or reading, people extract the thoughts and feelings once again from the words. (Reddy 1979, 290) In this metaphor, “the speaker puts ideas (objects) into words (containers) and sends them (along a conduit) to a hearer who takes the idea/objects out of the word/containers” (Lakoff & Johnson 1980, 10). The implications for learning from the conduit metaphor of knowledge transfer is that learning would then be unproblematic, effortless and accurate and could even be expected to be consistent among receivers. Reddy notes that the threads of the conduit metaphor are everywhere in society and that the implications of this metaphor may bias our thinking. The conduit metaphor reduces human 25 communication to the transmission of messages without a deeper conceptualization of meaning‐making. Reddy proposes an alternate paradigm that is based on the idea that successful human communication involves an increase in organization. His alternative metaphor serves to draw awareness to the persistence of the conduit metaphor. The limitations of the conduit metaphor reinforce the reality that some statements have no meaning without a context for the statement—that words are not always sufficient to convey meaning if not contextualized. Habermas (1984) outlines a new way of building rational knowledge in his Theory of Communicative Action. Devised on the premise that scientific knowledge is not the only valid knowledge, he suggests including other types of valid knowledge such as instrumental, ethical and aesthetic knowledge. In their article on a transdisciplinary research group in suburban planning, Després and colleagues (2004) provide a succinct summary of these other forms of valid knowledge, according to Habermas. Instrumental knowledge refers to pragmatic knowledge, the knowledge of how to go about things. Experienced professionals, technicians or workers are generally the main channel for this knowledge. Ethical knowledge, however, corresponds to customs, beliefs, values and past experiences which bring people to determine what is wrong and what is right on specific issues. Citizens and elected officials are key sources for these types of knowledge. Aesthetic knowledge comprises images, and refers to aesthetic experiences, tastes, preferences and feelings that help define what is beautiful and what is ugly. Although experts can express their ethical and aesthetic position, non‐experts are as skillful in doing the same because they too experience everyday life in ethical and aesthetic ways. For Habermas, cognitive rationality or scientific knowledge alone cannot explain everything (Després et al. 2004). The four types of knowledge he describes, scientific, instrumental, ethical and aesthetic, can come together when the people holding these different types of knowledge interact and communicate. It is in this type of interactive communication that knowledge can be augmented and emerges out of the process of engagement. This process, 26 where holders of these different knowledge types “learn to listen and understand each other is called intersubjectivity” (Després et al. 2004). This argument for the need to support multiple types of meaning is helpful in supporting pluralistic perspectives on knowledge generation and sharing. Taken with the previous argument concerning how the conduit metaphor uses a linguistic argument to emphasize the importance of context, these arguments imply that contextualization and multiple forms of communication are integral criteria for socially robust knowledge systems. Germane to the issue of the design of knowledge exploration systems is the Habermasian idea that any communication process involves a mediated dialogue of generating mutual understanding among stakeholders, exploring different viewpoints and understanding different perspectives. The result of such a process is a communicative rationality where mutual understanding from multiple viewpoints is achieved. By incorporating design elements that support communicative action rather than a transmission communication model, a knowledge exploration system will be more suitably equipped for the social sharing of knowledge. This line of reasoning is supported by the notion that the iterative and co‐evolutionary nature of the relationship between science and society is shaped by the actors, their motivations and social norms. The outcomes of such processes are emergent from the very interaction that takes place (Robinson 2003, 2004). 2.5 Implication of this theoretical approach for knowledge sharing in libraries Libraries are one of the most enduring of human institutions 6 and are often viewed as cultural dimensions of society insofar as historical societies used libraries and were affected by libraries (Lerner 1998). Libraries have acted as repositories of knowledge since Ptolemy and his librarian, Demetrius, gathered together books of Greek poetry, Hebrew scriptures The Library of Alexandria is one of the earliest examples of a civilization gathering, managing and classifying written works (see Lerner 1998 for additional information on the evolution of libraries). 6 27 and other manuscripts. The advancement of libraries as we currently know them is intertwined with the history of the advancement of science: In the Advancement of Learning (1605), Francis Bacon divided all human knowledge in to History (memory), Poesy (imagination), and Philosophy (reason), for each of which he offered further subdivisions…Thomas Jefferson used this adaptation of “Lord Bacon’s table of science” as the basis for arranging his own book collection in 44 “chapters”. When his books were sold to the United States government, a modification of his classification scheme was used in the Library of Congress for several decades, and it has some influence on the design of the modern Library of Congress Classification. (Lerner 1998, 133) Libraries have exercised the role of building collective knowledge for a community of scholarly researchers through the development of collections within university libraries. The public library, in the sense that we now use the term, emerged in response to the need of an evolving democracy to socialize immigrants for urban industrial society (Lerner 1998). Materials traditionally collected by public or academic libraries included books and journals, as these materials were deemed to have both intrinsic worth and permanent reference value. The dominant ethos of a library is the selection and preservation of material for the permanent use of a wider community and to serve as a cultural meeting space (American Library Association 1939). With advances in telecommunication and the associated rise of digital information, access to information has increasingly replaced the provision of books as focus. Library and information science (LIS) manifests itself within the domain of applied research and problem solving. This domain provides a rich professional practice but lacks critical engagement with the research tenets that underlie this practice (Bishop et al. 2003; Budd 2001; Hjorland 2005; Sundin & Johannisson 2005). Until recently, there had been little research to indicate that the LIS discipline had reflected on how positivism had infused its approach as a neutral conveyor of objective knowledge claims. Value neutrality is “highly regarded as a professional outlook for librarians” (Dick 1995, 217). The research agenda 28 within LIS has largely been occupied with the “library’s structural and functional characteristics…determined by its definition as an institution contrived to consume, preserve, transmit and reproduce high culture in printed form” (Harris 1986). Thus the field faces a curious paradox since LIS, a domain that concerns itself with the classification, management, storage and retrieval of knowledge (objects) and knowledge claims, performs minimal critical examination of the knowledge structures and epistemological foundations on which it is based (Sundin & Johannisson 2005). Although some researchers are beginning to address the need for theory in information science (Buschman 2006; Capurro & Hjorland 2003; Stonier 1991; Webber 2003) and others are increasingly drawn to explore epistemological foundations for LIS (Budd 2001; Buschman 2006; Dick 2002; Fallis 2002; Hjorland 2005; Stonier 1991; Sundin & Johannisson 2005), the field is nascent and may be fruitfully informed by a conceptual model that builds on the critiques in the sociology of scientific knowledge to guide the design of interdisciplinary information systems. Libraries and information science have historically dealt with the production and transmission of knowledge (Lerner 1998). Together with a proliferation of information (Shenk 1997; Wurman 1989), and advances in information technologies, it is worthwhile to consider whether these factors taken together might create an opportunity for libraries to reengage with their public good role as a way to connect people with knowledge in novel ways. Given the importance of communication, contextualization and classification in the design of successful information systems, these three elements and their relevance to LIS are explored in the following sub‐sections. 2.5.1 Classification of information Classification schemes have assisted librarians and information managers with the categorization and management of knowledge in a wide spectrum of fields from medical diseases to formal classifications for flora and fauna. At a practical level, classification schemes structure and organize large volumes of data and information to facilitate retrieval. Linktyping has also been use to develop context in hypertext to establish a point of view 29 from related pieces of information (Kopak 1999). Structured searches by professionals and advanced users exploit the strengths of a classification scheme to return limited and focused search results when a specific information need is defined. Browsing is another method of information retrieval typically characterized by a heuristic approach to acquiring information where the desired outcome is not known at the outset. The process is usually informal and is not task‐oriented (Bates 1990; Marchionini 1995). When browsing, the user does not have a clearly defined problem space but engages in a browsing strategy and assesses the results against the poorly‐defined problem. The assessment process often results in a revised conceptualization of the information need and a re‐engagement in a retrieval strategy in an iterative manner. With browsing, rather than search strategies, it is less straightforward to evaluate whether returned search results satisfy the information need since when browsing, the problem definition is less clear. To support knowledge exploration about a complex and multidisciplinary topic such as sustainability, the ability to browse concepts can enable users to uncover and make novel concepts meaningful. The ability to browse, therefore, is an important requirement for knowledge exploration systems. Browsing is a form of information seeking and retrieval and numerous models have characterized the process. Interestingly, some of the insights from the sociology of scientific knowledge resonate with aspects of the information retrieval process. For example, Belkin’s (1980) anomalous states of knowledge model suggests that capturing and acknowledging the user’s cognitive viewpoint is equally important as how well the object, i.e. document, is classified. Given that information seeking is an activity that engages a significant portion of the population, the user‐centred perspective is crucial and supports other work along these lines by Bates (1990), Belkin (1980), and Dervin et al.(1992). Marchionini’s (1995) characterization of the information seeking process rests on two key tenets: dynamism and interactivity. As humans engaged in daily life, we develop skills that support our efforts to uncover new knowledge and seek out information. In addition, we have the ability to integrate new knowledge within our pre‐existing understanding of the way the world 30 works, which reinforces the co‐production of knowledge. As a result, information becomes situated within our context of operation that influences our attitudes, behaviours and the way we approach looking for information. It also related to how we assign meaning and to the cognitive categorizations that form in the mind. In this way, we can understand information as a building block in the process of altering a person’s knowledge (Marchionini 1995). In the Information Search Process Model, Kuhlthau (1993) characterizes the process of searching for information as an interplay between the cognitive, affective and physical spheres (i.e. thoughts, feelings and actions). This provides a broad continuum along which to characterize the information search process. Other approaches to information seeking for complex or ill‐defined problem solving have identified multiple axes and dimensions of consideration in order to capture the interplay between the user’s state, the information, uncertainty and the shifting problem domain (Chang et al. 1993; Rice et al. 2001; Waterworth & Chignell 1991). How information is structured and managed, and whether this occurs from a user‐centred and pluralist perspective is a consideration in the design of a system that aims to explore, conceptually and with examples, a complex topic such as sustainability. 2.5.2 Communication of information Library and information science have been understood with a focus on communication (Budd & Raber 1996; Sundin & Johannisson 2005). One of the failings of the Shannon‐ Weaver model discussed earlier is the failure of the model to address meaning‐making. Metaphor is basic to our thinking (Berger 2000). In their examination of how human cognition is informed by metaphor, Lakoff and Johnson (1980, 3) note that “[m]ost people think they can get along perfectly well without metaphor. We have found, on the contrary, that metaphor is pervasive in everyday life, not just in language but in thought and action. Our ordinary conceptual system, in terms of which we both think and act, is fundamentally metaphoric in nature”. The use of metaphor, then, is extremely useful for communicating 31 new concepts such as explicating the internet as an ‘information highway’ and adding the term ‘digital’ to library to create a ‘digital library’ to explain an electronic collection of texts or documents. But confusion can arise when the dominant metaphor is unclear, which we have seen in the predicament of terminology, or identity crisis, that surrounded the early digital library development (Borgman 2000). In practice, it would be useful to the design of knowledge exploration systems if there was an explicit recognition that knowledge is socially constructed and, as a result, that design of information systems must accommodate this in some way. This configuration supports an interactive knowledge sharing. Eventually, the configuration may evolve into one that facilitates decision support. However, care must be taken not to assume that increased knowledge alone influences decision making either institutionally or with individuals, as indicated by Green & Krueter (1991). 2.5.3 Context for information Motivated by an interest in overcoming the split between research and practice, Wilson (2003) suggests phenomenology as a philosophical device to help alleviate this split, and relies heavily on intersubjectivity to ground his arguments. The ways in which scientific knowledge claims can be shared and begin to address nuances in meaning can benefit from an intersubjective approach that acknowledges the contextual nature of science knowledge, whereby we “experience the world with and through others” (Wilson 2003: 447). This perspective is relevant to the present discussion because it echoes the need for information systems to at once integrate multiple perspectives –not to integrate neutrally but rather to accommodate a plurality of viewpoints. A general model for information behaviour can be of benefit to more than the field of library and information studies. Wilson’s (1997) general model may benefit such fields as consumer behaviour, innovation research, health communication, and organizational decision making. This serves as an important acknowledgement that LIS does not have a 32 monopoly on research into information needs and information behaviour which may also be informed from sociology, psychology and other disciplines, including science studies and geographic information research. The field of library and information science can be subsumed by pragmatist positions which impose a goal‐oriented, purposive‐inquiry similar to the demands that are expressed in information needs and seeking studies that are explicitly task‐oriented. A weakness in such an approach is a limited ability to accommodate browsing and knowledge exploration. The term social epistemology was originally coined by Egan and Shera over fifty years ago to provide a framework to examine and analyze the production, distribution, and utilization of intellectual products in society (Egan & Shera 1952). Fallis (2002) draws on their work, indicating that the management of digital information can provide concrete applications for social epistemology and reinforces the need for stronger epistemological tools in library and information science, see also Sundin & Johannisson (2005). How society and information science are co‐informed relates to how knowledge is generated, constructed, acquired and shared in a society, and has implications for how the intellectual products of society and social learning unfold. The widespread use of information technologies in learning environments has become a topic of interest in educational technologies and social learning. In their review of constructivist learning approaches, Jonassen et al. (1999) establish five attributes of meaningful learning: 1) intentional learning, 2) active learning, 3) constructive learning, 4) cooperative learning, 5) authentic learning. By creating links between learning approaches and the proposed 3C approach, elements of a knowledge exploration system can also contribute to a social learning model. Different types of constructivist learning can be related to knowledge exploration activities (Table 2.1). 33 Attribute of meaningful learning Intentional learning 1. (Reflective/Regulatory) 2. Active learning (Manipulative/Observant) Description Goal‐oriented learning Learners are engaged by a meaningful task in a natural and adaptive human process. Activity is insufficient for meaningful learning. When learners begin to construct mental models and intertwining new experiences with prior knowledge, they can construct new meaning. 3. Constructive learning (Articulate/Reflective) 4. Humans naturally seek out others to assist with Cooperative learning problem solving; work (Collaborative/Conversational) naturally in knowledge‐ building communities 5. Authentic learning (Complex/Contextual) Engage learners in higher‐ order thinking to resist oversimplified views of the world. Relationship to knowledge exploration Information seeking; clear task definition 3C Element Classification Browsing; curiosity‐ based learning; adaptive Context Information in context; burden of learning is on learner; socially constructed; relationship between new and existing knowledge Context Process that embeds knowledge exploration is critical; support Communication / collaborative and Context individual learners with technology. Maintain context for information; avoid rote learning. Context Table 2.1 An extension of the constructivist learning model from Jonassen et al. 1999 with reflections on the implications for knowledge exploration and the 3C approach. Thurk and Fine (2003, 108) note that “because studies of knowledge construction stop at the point of consensus formation, they tell us little of how knowledge is socially shared or the role that technology plays in that process.” But, as the literatures discussed in this chapter reveal, the domains of science studies and information science are interested in questions of the interplay between science, technology and society along the lines of how information generally and scientific and technical information in particular can delineate different perspectives on an issue. A knowledge exploration system that engages all of these domains and takes into account issues of context, classification and communication of scientific and public knowledge may take on the form of a boundary object: Boundary objects are objects which are both plastic enough to adapt to the local needs and constraints of the several parties employing them, yet robust enough to maintain a common identity across sites. They are weakly structured in common use, and become strongly structured in individual site use. These objects may be abstract or concrete. They have 34 different meanings in different social worlds but their structure is common enough to more than one world to make them recognizable, a means of translation. (Star & Griesemer 1989, 393) In this way, the knowledge exploration system, as a technological artefact, can be flexible enough to serve multiple functions and occupies the negotiated space of knowledge construction or meaning making between science, technology and society. 2.6 Knowledge building and information exploration for sustainability Sustainability, or sustainable development, has been defined in various ways over the past thirty years. Encapsulated as humans living in harmony with nature (meeting its present and future needs), the concept of sustainable development gained momentum internationally from the Bruntland Report (World Commission on Environment and Development 1987) to the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and the World Summit on Sustainable Development held in 2002. One of the most widely cited definitions originates from the Brundtland report and positions sustainable development as the ability to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs (World Commission on Environment and Development 1987, 43). In an examination of sustainable development concepts, Mebratu (1998) provides a three phase chronological evolution to the terminology and concept development prior to the Brundltand Commission in 1987. The first phase, Pre‐Stockholm (until 1972) saw attempts to develop theories of environmental limits based on population expansion as the root cause of unemployment, illness and poverty (Mebratu 1998). Between the UN Conference in Stockholm in 1972 and the 1987 WECD conference, sustainable development was further advanced by recognizing that environmental and development issues should be considered concurrently (Mebratu 1998). The final, post WECD phase, encompasses the increased international focus on sustainable development, which included the UN’s development of Agenda 21 that emphasized altering local practices to affect global shifts. 35 Robinson (2004) argues for an approach to sustainability that is integrative, action‐oriented, and that engages local communities. Meppem and Gill (1998, 123) classify definitions of sustainability into positivist or normative terms where positivist science is a body of systematized knowledge concerning what is and a normative science is a body of systematized knowledge relating to criteria of what ought to be. If we continue to build information systems that are solely focused on an inventory approach to cataloguing and archiving the products of positivist science then we are no closer to operationalizing an information system that supports the shift towards sustainability through knowledge exploration. Nor do we benefit from opportunities to engage in interactive social research with such technologies and with new forms of partnerships between researchers and society (Caswill & Shove 2000; Robinson 2008; Robinson & Tansey 2006). The Brundtland report focused on the need to create political systems that support citizen participation in decision making. Over the past two decades since the report was released, sustainable development or sustainability (the latter term will be used throughout this document) has emerged as a persistent force with respect to globalization, population growth, and human health. The evolution of the concept has increasingly drawn on the aspects of governance and social equity in addition to ecological carrying capacity and economic development. The oft‐referred to ‘three‐legged stool’ analogy, where the sustainable development challenge is often framed as one of balancing each leg, environment, society, economy such that they are all in level harmony is a useful metaphor. The importance of governance and democratic processes to address sustainability echo the equity notion idea that underpins the need to balance and reconcile three spheres that do not necessarily need to be as opposed as they seem. The definition from the Bruntland report has been widely used and was helpful in developing a global view of the planet’s future as well as a collective or global responsibility towards the planet and its inhabitants, as reflected in the report’s title, Our Common Future. 36 This work led to many initiatives at varying scales form local to global to begin to address the issues of sustainable development, although many met with frustration in their attempts to address such complexity (Mebratu 1998) which towards the end of the last century was often exacerbated by overwhelming amounts of information (Mebratu 1998; Shenk 1997; Wurman 1989, 2000) and an accelerated pace of change that challenged people’s realizations sustainability outcomes (Senge 1990). While sustainability as a holistic concept can be viewed globally, ways forward identified by the Bruntland report included local agendas that may, when taken collectively, could lead to global scale shifts away from practices and policies that compromise a sustainable future. This raises important questions about what a sustainable future looks like and how societies might transition towards these. Building on the Brundtland definition, Robinson and colleagues (1996) advocate extending the definition to include social practices and human beliefs and attitudes such that these normative dimensions form an integral part of the definition of sustainability. Given that the future is unknowable and that future state is a core element of moving towards sustainability, there needs to be consideration about the ecosystem, its carrying capacity as well as the adaptive capacity of human and natural systems. Forecasting takes historical trends and projects these forward into the future without considering that humans have the capacity for individual and societal choice. However, a backcasting approach frees the analysis from business‐as‐usual trends so that the desired future is articulated and, working backwards, the feasibility of that future and the policies needed to achieve it are determined through scenario analysis (Robinson 2004; Robinson & Tinker 1997; Robinson 1996) whereby the desired future state is articulated and considered in light of the policies and practices that might enable societal shifts in that direction. Indeed, sustainability is often framed as a journey and a transition (National Academy of Sciences 1999; Robinson 1996). The process of achieving this is one that is collective, uncertain and adaptive (National Academy of Sciences 1999). Sustainability science recognizes the limitations of “reductionist disciplinary approaches to understanding systems” (Blackstock & Carter 2007, 344) and is a term originally coined by 37 (Kates et al. 2001). Kates and his authors view sustainability science as a geographical endeavour that is place‐based, temporal and integrative. By addressing the spatio‐temporal domains and the integration of four key areas including biological, geophysical, social and technical, sustainability science considers how human and earth ecosystems are interdependent. This area of research shines additional light on the issue that addressing sustainability at different scales from global, national to local may take on very different forms from national scale assessments of biophysical conditions to local scale strategies to enhance community resilience and adaptive capacity. Some advocate particular attention at the local scale as a helpful in working towards tractable sustainability solutions (Prugh et al. 2000). Othersr have tried to develop scaleable solutions for organizations or governments (Robert 1999; Robert et al. 2002). Given that the policy context for sustainability is crucial to shifting societies onto more sustainable paths, it is also vital that appropriate spatial and temporal scales of analysis are determined in order to enable decision makers to leverage policy‐oriented, collaborative research (Robinson, Carmichael, VanWynsberghe et al. 2006, 166). Even though there are variations on a similar theme for the definition of sustainability and that these are often vague and ambiguous, the concept has had considerable use since the Brundtland report. And while it remains difficult to deliver on the hope of sustainable development because of these differing views (i.e. what should be developed or what should be sustained) the essence of the concept of sustainable development is to reconcile the imperatives of ecological carrying capacity, the provision of adequate material standards for all in terms of economics, and social governance systems that embrace the values that enable people to lead their lives (Robinson & Tinker 1997). The notion of citizen participation has become more prevalent and aligns well with the prescriptions for community capacity building, knowledge generation and augmentation of social capital through learning organizations put forth by Crawford (2000) and for social justice by Pezzoli (1997). However, the sustainability field has been plagued by top‐down 38 government programs on sustainability rather than citizen‐led or citizen‐engaged approaches that could galvanize interested parties to explore action‐oriented ways of achieving sustainability. Indeed, from his experiences in the UK, Barr (2003) notes that that process of engagement is commonly seen in government circles as a problem of awareness: that environmental problems do not register on citizen’s radars of concern. The policy response by governments on the issue of lack of awareness is to design education campaigns and improve information and knowledge dissemination with the expectation that a shift in attitude and, presumably, behaviour would actually result directly, and unproblematically, from such programs. This type of response is based on the unidirectional view of science‐society interaction and on a one‐way model of communication from a single, expert view on the problem. Instead, more interactive and dialogue‐based approaches have a far greater potential to raise awareness and enable people to become engaged with sustainability ideas. Because of the integrated nature of sustainability, a robust means of integrating and aggregating relevant information sources that may be brought to bear on issues relating to sustainable development (i.e. transportation, air quality and water availability, among many others). Organizational mechanisms to support the management of the knowledge generated within this discipline reveals a logical area of overlap between sustainability studies and library and information science. An increased focus on local governance within the sustainability dialogue may also lead to an increased need to represent, manage and store what a community determines is valuable for its social, economic and ecological sustainability. In turn, the information technologies that support exploration of sustainability must be able to incorporate and engage local knowledge, values and preferences. In order to address the design issues of knowledge exploration for sustainability, a wide ranging set of literatures was brought to bear on the issue. The intent of the 3C approach is to weave through these disciplines to forge a path across the boundaries of science 39 knowledge, technological knowledge, information management, and public participation. Another goal is to be able provide some meaningful commentary on the social sharing of knowledge based on further empirical work on these design issues (see chapter 4). This has required an interdisciplinary approach. Interdisciplinarity is a way to overcome the fragmentation of knowledge across disciplines. Recently, studies that are highly collaborative and whose research teams succeed in working across boundaries have been called transdisciplinary to emphasize their highly collaborative approach. Klein documents the evolution of the use of the terms interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity (Klein 1990, 1996, 2004a, 2004b) and an exploration into these issues is complemented by numerous other researchers in the sustainability, global climate change and land use planning fields (Després et al. 2004; Heintz & Origgi 2004; Nowotny 2004; Robinson 2008). 2.7 Conclusion The design of information and knowledge systems can support a model of science and society that is interactive and co‐produced, if consideration is given to three elements: context, classification and communication. By thinking critically about how these elements are configured within information system design, a system that supports the sharing of socially robust knowledge can be developed. To do so, the information content of the system should be classified to provide context and support meaning making by way of metaphor. The system design should also facilitate interactive forms of communication in order to democratize engagement and support multiple perspectives. As these three elements are incorporated into information system design, they provide a foundation for the exploration of complex interdisciplinary issues such as sustainability. As a result, such a system can be an enabling technology to address sustainability as an emergent property of the interplay of values, beliefs, science knowledge and societal priorities of an economic and social nature. 40 The implications of the ability to incorporate the 3C elements‐‐contextualization, communication and classification‐‐as part of the design of an information system will be revisited later in the dissertation in light of building a prototype information system that incorporates these elements (chapter 5) and using the application within a series of case studies on sustainability (see chapter 4 for a discussion of methodology). Beyond the challenges of incorporating the 3C elements into the information system design lies an important research contribution: developing an understanding of the role of such systems within diverse social environments in order to ensure that an instrumentalist solution is not perpetuated and that the temporal issues of managing collective knowledge over time are addressed (chapter 6). In the next chapter, consideration is given to the use of geographic information systems in ways that contribute to the exploration and sharing of socially robust knowledge that builds on the 3C elements of context, classification and communication. 41 3 Extending the theoretical perspective to geographic information systems use 3.1 Introduction Geographic information systems (GIS) are computerized systems that allow for the storage, access, display and management of spatial information. GIS resulted from a convergence of influences, including advances in computation, databases, graphical representation, mapping overlays, and applications within land and resource management in the late 1960s (Foresman 1998). In this chapter, standard and emerging uses of GIS are presented. In particular, a central focus is placed on public participation and GIS. Opportunities to overcome previous limitations of the use of GIS technology in meaningful public engagement settings are discussed. Furthermore, attention is drawn to options that could extend the role of GIS and secure an integral place in the management and exchange of local knowledge. In so doing, this chapter explores ways in which GIS use is shaped by social processes and could offer fruitful contributions as a mediating technology for community engagement and social learning. 3.2 GIS use GIS use is divided into three categories: i) representation, ii) communication, iii) analysis. GIS communication devices rely particularly on its visual representations of space, most often Cartesian space, that may appear on a computer monitor or as cartographic output such as paper maps generated from a GIS. Analytical uses of GIS tend to involve data integration and spatial analysis to generate new information, often in response to a defined problem. 3.2.1 Landscape representation Geographic information systems have a rich Canadian history. The Canada Geographic Information System was developed by Roger Tomlinson and others in the 1960s for the 42 Canada Land Inventory. The land inventory was created to assist with land use decisions and to manage natural resources within the vast Canadian territory (Tomlinson 1998). It was an initial example of the use of computer systems to represent, store and manage geographic information that described the use of land parcels and their geometries to perform basic analytical functions, such as computing land area by different use categories (Goodchild 1998b). Emerging on the heels of the quantitative revolution in geography, the early geographic information systems were developed to catalogue and store information (Foresman 1998). Satellites orbiting the planet logging vast amounts of data that are subsequently used to determine land use and land cover, particularly following the adoption of GIS in the forestry and mining sectors. The culture of GIS use at the outset was heavily dominated by the quantitative assessment of potential resources, including timber harvesting and natural resource extraction. They have also provided captivating synoptic images of earth from space for the first time, providing people with a view of the entire territory. Earth observation data also serves as a frequent data provider to GIS, as a precursor to topographic and thematic map creation. 3.2.2 Maps as communication devices Technological changes within the cartographic community fostered the growth of both digital cartography and geographic information systems. These advances were firmly rooted in cartographic traditions particularly from the seventeenth century onward where “European map makers increasingly promoted what we would describe today as a standard scientific model of knowledge and cognition” (Harley 1992, 232). Within this standard cartographic model, maps depicted physical, topographical relationships and were originally created to determine locations and distances between places. In addition to representing physical landscapes, maps portray relationships such as those between people and nature. The inventory or cataloguing approach aims to document or reflect the current state of land usage, occupation, and activity and, as such, seeks to objectively or unproblematically 43 represent the physical landscape and its associated processes. In so doing, it positions the map as a communication device to semiotically represent the ‘world out there’ through the map design that depicts spatial relationships using symbology (Crampton 2001). Maps act as a communication device, where the object of mapping is to produce a ‘correct’ rational model of the terrain (Harley 1992). Indeed, maps have played a central role in the communication of spatial information throughout history. The communicative role of maps is task‐oriented: maps depict inventories and categorizations of land features and socioeconomic data (such as Canada’s multicultural heritage or gross domestic product). This task‐oriented communication then creates a particular focus for the design and use of maps which is oriented towards conveying concepts, messages or ideas. “Under the map communication model the goals of cartography are to produce a single, optimal (best) map, which presents information clearly, and which is based on known factors of map use” (Crampton 2001). There is already distortion from representing a geoid on a flat sheet of paper and many features are included or excluded for the sake of legibility and coherence (Monmonier 1996). It is important then to carry a “healthy scepticism” about maps – to examine them critically as they are often afforded a highly‐credible status, much like statistics, even when this may be unjustified. Harley (1989) takes aim at how cartography artificially divided theory and practice since its richness as a bidirectional communication device was hindered by an undialectic use of maps. It was hampered by the requirement for maps to unproblematically ‘reflect’ or convey the underlying power structure between what is ‘known’ as fact or universal knowledge claim. Crampton (2002) frames the disjuncture as one between ontical inquiry (what is there) and ontological inquiry (what is possible). The ontological stance is more encompassing in that it accommodates pluralist views and provides more room for negotiation to allow humans to negotiate the world in which they live (Foucault 1985 in Crampton 2002). 44 Just as the social construction of science questions the objectivity of science practice and scientific results, the constructivist argument has been put forth within GIS to encourage a shift in thinking from a realist view, where GIS is representing the real world adequately but with imprecision to a view in which GIS products such as maps and resultant analyses (in the form of maps or newly generated database tables) may be viewed as artefacts that are co‐produced, a result of the experience of engaging with the technology (Schuurman 1999, 2002). 3.2.3 Spatial analysis The advent of GIS has enabled previously labour intensive spatial analysis functions to take place with greater ease. Unwin (1997) offers four useful categories (originally, views) of spatial analysis ranging from (i) data manipulation (arguably the most fundamental of GIS operations), (ii) spatial statistical analyses – where many GIS still require augmentation from external statistical applications, (iii) ”a geography‐based and data –driven view of spatial analysis rooted in the quantitative revolution of the 1960s and 1970s in geography, and (iv) a spatial modelling view common with decision support systems and dynamic modelling environments (Unwin 1997). Algorithms allow topological relationships to be revealed, lines generalized, and annotation to be controlled. Many GIS packages embed analytical procedures, ranging from performing simple queries on spatial database records to allowing users to conduct spatial analyses, such as map overlays, nearest neighbour analysis, inverse distance weighting, and volumetric calculations. Such capabilities provide the spatial modeller, or expert user, with a suite of analytic techniques suitable for problem‐solving in the biophysical or social sciences. With the widespread use of personal computers and the reconfiguration of GIS software for desktop use, such techniques are also increasingly available to less expert users. The previous section provided a framework in which to consider how GIS has been most commonly used over the past three to four decades. This framework considered GIS use 45 from the point of view of providing 1) an inventory of known quantities, initially natural resource based and more recently business, telecommunications and other networks; 2) a means of map communication and; 3) analytical applications that may be components of a scientific analysis or support for policy decisions. GIS was critiqued as an instrument of the quantitative revolution in geography when social theorists and cultural geographers began to question the tenets on which GIS activities are based (Lake 1993; Pickles 1995; Schuurman 2000b). As a technology, GIS permeates the boundaries between academic research and the GIS industry, that create the products and provide professional analytic services. In addition, the early adoption of GIS by many levels of government solidified the technology as part of the information management approach in order to deliver on their public service mandates. A forest company may use a GIS to prepare its five‐year development plans to indicate proposed logging activity. Meanwhile a forest conservation society may be using GIS to identify endangered habitat and argue that the forest company should alter its proposed logging. Both are instruments of the organization’s activities and in this example, each ‘side’ perpetuates the view of GIS as a neutral technology to further their own aims. 3.3 Barriers and limitations to the use of GIS Early GIS implementations were hindered by barriers of data access, data quality, cost of both hardware and software, and lack of skilled personnel (Obermeyer 1999; Obermeyer & Pinto 1994). The use of GIS facilitated the study of geographical phenomenon by providing users with rapid processing of spatial analysis. However, phenomena are distributed over time, as well as over space: the difficulty of handling this temporal dimension was a significant limitation of early geographic information systems (Langran 1994). Most national land management agencies in developed nations began to address the first two limitations by establishing spatial data infrastructure programs on national scales (e.g. US (1994), UK (1996), Canada (1996), Australia and New Zealand (1997)). The rise of 46 personal computing power throughout the late 1980s and early 1990s cleared the way for desktop GIS use that reduced a barrier to use. Commercial software costs remain an impediment and, although college and university education systems have responded to the demand for skilled personnel and began teaching technical application of geography in degree and diploma‐granting organizations, the lack of adequately trained personnel remains a limitation. Even within the GIS profession, concern has been expressed that the field suffers from a lack of trained analysts (Kemp 2003). A debate surrounding whether GIS professionals should be certified has been occurring for more than a decade (Goodchild and Kemp 1992; Obermeyer 1993; Kemp 2003). The accreditation debate draws attention to the particular skills that GIS professionals possess and provides the opportunity to reflect on aspects of the GIS curriculum that may need to shift to allow explicit inclusion of ethical and social dimensions of GIS training in order to ensure that the GIS professionals are aware of the social ramifications and responsibilities associated with their expertise. The ability to share geographic information has been identified as having the potential to resolve many social and environmental issues. Large scale data sharing requires significant data standardization. The move towards data standardization for topographic data raised a number of issues, such as data interoperability, metadata and standards, and the costs of sharing spatial data (Clement et al. 1998; Evans et al. 1998; Gahegan et al. 1998; Harvey et al. 1998; Klinkenberg 2003; Sears 2001; Sheth et al. 1998; Vckovski et al. 1998). In Canada, students frequently gain little or no experience working with public databases due to cost or restricted terms of use (Klinkenberg 2003; Sears 2001). Since data availability is a primary limiting factor for GIS use, access to all forms of data becomes a fundamental need for a fully operational GIS. The issue of who within an organization or between organizations has access to data, then, can affect power relations between those who have access to spatial information and those who do not. This issue 47 increases in importance when spatial information can be useful for policy setting and decision making where government agencies or industry have access to specialized datasets and trained professional analysts. In contrast, community groups have historically lacked the ability to develop equally powerful counterarguments and evidence due to poor data access or a lack of technical capacity. In response, many non‐profit groups and community‐ academic alliances have been formed to develop the skills necessary to redress the power dynamic and support a more even dialogue about issues such as natural habitat, urban planning, neighbourhood design or public health. When using GIS in community or neighbourhood settings, the outcomes have often indicated that the use of the technology has the mixed result of simultaneously marginalizing and empowering users (Craig et al. 1998; Elwood & Leitner 1998; Howard 1998; Leitner et al. 2002; Meredith 1999). Other issues raised include the lack of connectivity both in the technical and conceptual sense between the stakeholders and the GIS (Carver 2001). GIS also suffers from non‐data‐related limitations. The organizational implications of GIS were much discussed in the late 1980s and early 1990s as more and more large national agencies and private companies began using GIS (Obermeyer & Pinto 1994). For some, it was the first time that they needed to consider organizational data policies. In these instances, the increased development and deployment of GIS meant that, overall, an increased awareness of information management, more generally, could occur within these organizations. GIS and information management are messy, dynamic processes. Instead of developing ways to allow the messiness to exist, many organizations have tried to adopt a reductionist approach to simplify and limit the messiness. It may be more useful, however, to develop strategies to cope with the messiness and uncertainty. 48 The lack of data, for reasons of cost or access, limited technical skills and inadequate engagement with the social dimensions of GIS use have contributed to limited success in the non‐expert use of GIS. Over the past fifteen years, advances in computing have resulted in more widespread access to GIS technology. This technological advancement has contributed to a more widespread engagement with GIS by community and neighbourhood organizations. In some cases, the technical capacity gap is fulfilled through partnerships with universities (Elwood 2002; Elwood & Leitner 1998; Ghose & Huxhold 2005), but data access issues often remain. However with more widespread use and as a result of the development of standardized spatial data infrastructures, some of these barriers are slowly being addressed. As GIS is used in participatory settings, new limitations such as resolution may become more prominent as the scale of analysis becomes larger. 3.4 Rise of participatory use of GIS Within geography, three waves of critiques of GIS have occurred (Schuurman 1999). The first phase (1990‐94) took the form of human geographers criticizing GIS research and applications for its positivist slant (Lake 1993), claimed value‐neutrality, and ontological separation between subject and object (Schuurman 1999, 2000a). The second phase (1995‐96) saw GIS scholars welcoming the critiques that expressed key shortcomings in the technological approach but also arguing that there was a lack of understanding of GIS on the part of its critics. The latter phase (1997‐2000) saw a closer working relationship between the social theory and GIS scholars within geography. Since the turn of the millennium, numerous studies have considered the use of GIS in public participation settings (Craig et al. 2002; Elwood 2006; Elwood & Ghose 2004; Ghose 2001, 2007; Ghose & Huxhold 2005; Sieber 2000, 2003; Talen 1999, 2000). An emphasis on the use of GIS emerged in the early to mid 1990s as scholars began to examine the social and political consequences of such digital technologies (Goodchild 1998b). Concerns about the bi‐directional impact between GIS and society began to be discussed in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The GIS and Society literature of the 1990s drew 49 attention to the societal impacts of GIS use (Aitken & Michel 1995; Curry 1994; Lake 1993; Miller 1995; Obermeyer 1993; Pickles 1995); it also extended a debate around the political economy and epistemology of GIS and, in particular, power relations associated with its use (Harris & Weiner 1998). Numerous research activities further developed aspects of human and societal impacts of GIS use. In particular, the National Centre for Geographic Information and Analysis’ Initiative 19 and the Varenius Project extended this research considerably (Craig & Elwood 1998; Craig et al. 1998; Goodchild et al. 1997; Hirtle & MacEachren 1998; Janelle & Hodge 1998; Miller & Han 1999). The field of public participation GIS (PPGIS) is a growing area of research and has involved considerable use of case studies to examine the use and application of GIS. This work has focused attention on GIS use at regional, local and neighbourhood scales. Taken as a body of literature, these case studies have generally concluded that the use of GIS in local settings helps to reveal power relations among actors who negotiate the process of using GIS within a decision making context. The power relations stem from economic, educational, social, cultural and political constraints affecting full access to GIS functionality. The case studies also highlight use in first and developing worlds particularly for resource management and decision making (Craig et al. 2002). The PPGIS literature has focused on neighbourhood development and planning that adopts a stronger, user‐centred focus (Elwood & Leitner 1998; Talen 1999, 2000). From a community point of view, the opportunity to map at a meaningful scale and to represent significance (natural, cultural, social, economic or political) in a participatory planning process is an enabling one and offers a new way to exert power. Recent advances in web‐based technology, distributed computing and spatial information infrastructures to manage the sharing of spatial data have been considerable. This has provided the ground work necessary for the emergence of a more participatory focus on the use of GIS and an exploration of information technology to facilitate the sharing of spatial data (Goodchild, Egenhofer, Fegeas et al. 1999; Onsrud & Rushton 1995). It also formed part 50 of the focus of some of the early research in the Varenius project (Goodchild, Egenhofer, Kemp et al. 1999). These results have implications for issues of power that relate to information control by calling into question who owns the data and who accesses it. If data access is restricted to an elite set of users, there is no equitable foundation for dialogue or resolution of contested issues. Moreover, the legitimacy of analyses may also be questioned because, for example, different spatial interpolation techniques can produce diverse results depending on the resolution of the data or assumptions about data quality. As advances in information and communications technologies occurred during the 1990s, there were opportunities for increased and diverse kinds of stakeholder interaction with GIS that could support interaction that was neither co‐located nor temporally coincident (Balram et al. 2003; MacEachren 2001; Shiffer 1998). Shiffer (1998) characterized the types of interaction as a 2x2 matrix of temporal and locational settings for public participation and GIS that include direct human communication and interaction with GIS technologies (same time, same place). The opposite extreme shifts to an interaction model where users engage individually with distributed technology (different time, different place). User reactions and comments may take the form of posts in online discussions, letter writing or opposite‐ editorials in newspapers. Relationship and trust building can occur more quickly with the co‐located and contemporaneous style of interaction. However, the flexibility of access is an advantage when the interaction is determined by each individual. As a result, the design of PPGIS engagement processes may derive additional successes by melding these two types of interactions. This would provide flexibility and context to the user experience. 3.5 Gaps in PPGIS research: narratives, geolibraries, and evaluation As a field of inquiry, PPGIS research explores the participatory settings, techniques and use of GIS by non‐experts. While this raises many fruitful directions for on‐going study, three particular directions are considered in this section: i) narratives, ii) geolibraries, and iii) evaluation. Given that the map and image metaphor is a pervasive element in the GIS, it is proposed that the use of narrative elements within GIS could provide context and useful 51 support for the human‐computer interaction that takes place when users engage with GIS technology. This would allow the user experience to extend beyond one of communication to more interactive engagement that resonates with the users’ lived experience and view of the world. The concept of a geolibrary refers to a library filled with georeferenced information including, but not limited to, spatial data as well as spatially‐referenced images, texts and videos (Goodchild 1998a). This content is managed by classification techniques such as data description (metadata) and data standardization. Since PPGIS activities engage non‐experts in the use and application of GIS, the desired outcomes are often related to land use planning and policy decisions or have an educational purpose, such as social learning. Such outcomes require more than linear innovation models that are focused on communication. They demand that evaluation measures are based on co‐production of knowledge and diverse perspectives. 3.5.1 Capturing sense of place with narratives (Context) The experience of using GIS may be enhanced by the ability to explore diverse datasets and to use the analytic capabilities of GIS to generate new knowledge. Maps are often described as compelling and highly communicative for the representational information they portray using symbols for features, topological relationships and cartographic style. The interaction experience of using GIS in participatory decision making or land use planning processes could greatly benefit from an infusion of storytelling and narrative elements that would anchor the map representation within the lived experience of place. Approached as a place‐based technology, GIS may be used to create a shared sense of place among people. Through the negotiation of such ‘shared’ concepts, participants undergo a process of interpretive flexibility by attributing meaning and utility to the geographic information system. Relph (1997, 208) addresses this sense of place as “an innate faculty, possessed in some degree by everyone, that connects us to the world. It is an integral part of all of our environmental experiences and it is only because we are first in places that we can then develop abstract arguments about environment, economy or politics”. His 52 argument is that the sense of place is derived from human experience, such that critical reasoning skills flow from the specific (embedded in place) to general (applicable across place). This may result in exclusionary practices or non‐shared cultural experiences or inequitable participation in social activities, for example, exclusion on the basis of culture. Within geography, sense of place is viewed critically as a way to understand the nuances of what is positively and negatively reinforced with the notion of place and such discussions can be enhanced with the inclusion of narratives and storytelling to contextualize sense of place. The addition of narrative elements to the GIS user experience also raises interesting questions with respect to overcoming the tendency for GIS to empower and marginalize participants. In particular, does the combination of storytelling with fuzzy spatial locations (approximation over accuracy) help lessen the divide between empowered and marginalized users? Do issues of trust, such as those presented by Harvey (2003), affect the cases where marginalization occurs? Does the ability to represent personal or experiential perspectives, through user‐developed narratives within a PPGIS, assist in overcoming issues of either trust or marginalization? The shift from institutional data providers such as government agencies, which produce quantitative spatial datasets, to individuals, who develop qualitative textual or multimedia data, could result in a fruitful blending of quantitative and qualitative perspectives. 3.5.2 Links to libraries (Classification) GIS offers some new ways to organize, manage, and access spatial information, which in turn suggest the importance of recognizing GIS as sociotechnical systems –that engage the human mind with computational capabilities. With the shift to increased interconnectivity of systems on the world wide web and proliferation of data (Shenk 1997), managing and organizing the volume of information available becomes more challenging. Information management and classification have historically fallen under the purview of libraries (Lerner 1998); therefore, the library role of GIS requires the same kind of rethinking as any 53 other GIS role, such as land use planning support, land use inventory, and map communication. A key element of this rethinking is the notion that libraries and the concept of libraries have something to offer GIS use in terms of a model of information and knowledge sharing (McGlamery 1995). The connection between GIS and libraries has been explored quite consistently over time with traditional map libraries being interested in providing services to their patrons as desktop GIS and spatial data became readily available for use with desktop GIS (Cobb 1995; McGlamery 1995). Monmonier (1996) reminds us to view maps as an authored collection of information – much as a reader should approach a book of individually authored articles. However, map users receive little or no training—unlike readers. Operationally, making data available is often confused with making it accessible. Unless the conceptual criteria of context, communication and classification, as outlined in chapter 2, are provided to scaffold the user’s experience with spatial information, the user may be at a loss to derive any benefit from engaging with the technology. The current parallel to the original development of GIS as a land inventory system is the internet‐ready spatial data inventory where clearinghouses of objective information can be accessed remotely and used for a myriad of purposes. The development of national and global spatial data infrastructures support this objective, which contributes to solving the problem of data availability but does not necessarily address the issue of how accessible or usable that spatial data is to clients because the context of its use is not typically provided. The design of the world wide web was intended to support social interactions rather than the commercial and advertising purposes that have come to dominate over the past decade. Initially the intention was to create a means of interaction that was dynamic since, as a new technology, the use of the world wide web was experiencing interpretive flexibility during its development. As the originator of the world wide web, Tim Berners‐Lee (1999, 165) indicates: 54 My original vision for a universal Web was as an armchair aid to help people do things in the web of real life. It would be a mirror, reflecting reports or conversations or art and mapping social interactions. But more and more, the mirror model is wrong, because interaction is taking place primarily on the Web. People are using the Web to build things they have not built or written or drawn or communicated anywhere else. The interactive design of the world wide web can effectively support the development of geolibraries. The geolibrary concept provides a useful option for reconceptualizing the use of GIS (Crampton 2001). A geolibrary is a collection of georeferenced information that is distributed and accessible online (Goodchild 1998a; Mapping Science Committee 1999). One of the earliest examples of a geolibrary is the Alexandria Digital Library, a research project from the University of California at Santa Barbara that explored problems related to designing, developing and maintaining a distributed digital library for geographically‐ referenced information. Boxall (2003) notes that the geolibrary metaphor provides a bridge between the library and GIS communities and that its evolution as a concept paralleled that of the national spatial data infrastructures that were addressing some of the data standardization issues to facilitate spatial information retrieval between distributed georeferenced collections. Geolibraries play a role as the technology that enables the social sharing of geospatial information. In this way, they connect separate domains and effectively become boundary objects, as indicated in chapter 2 (Star & Griesemer 1989). Geolibraries can offer a more flexibly structured, multi‐perspective approach to geographical information and knowledge, as informed by the concept of boundary objects and through the social shaping of technology lens, which includes the concepts of interpretive flexibility, stability and closure. From the point of view of information management, any map, atlas and other physical artefact that houses data or are spatial representations may be viewed as a text. It is useful to think of documents as ‘texts’ if that helps to further the argument that maps need to be 55 seen in the context of meaning‐making rather than simple communication devices. Considering them as texts should also reinforce the recognition that GIS use would be enhanced if the technology included ways to both represent and explore different perspectives and contexts to allow users to construct knowledge. This knowledge construction argument supports the extension of GIS as a learning model about human interaction with place. 3.5.3 Evaluation of PPGIS (Communication) A common indicator of success in technology adoption is abundant and frequent use. This expectation typifies a unidirectional model of technology adoption, is an example of technological determinism, and does not consider how social settings shape the use of technology. There has been a lag in developing evaluation measures that address the outcome of engagement with technology and that are able to determine what meaningful impact (and according to whose meaning) technology engagement has fostered. There is general agreement that the addition of GIS to participatory planning processes is a useful approach to increasing public involvement and dialogue on planning decisions that may have broad impact on the current or future state of the community (Al‐Kodmany 2000; Carver & Peckham 1999; Elwood & Leitner 1998; Holden 2000; Howard 1998; Shiffer 1998; Snyder 2001; Stillwell et al. 1999). The persistent tension that PPGIS researchers uncover is that the use of GIS in such processes can simultaneously empower and marginalize the participants (Craig et al. 1998; Harris & Weiner 1998; Meredith 1998; Talen 1999). At the heart of the challenge for PPGIS evaluation is the fundamental question: What should be evaluated? The use of PPGIS involves the public or a set of stakeholders engaging with spatial information technologies for dialogue or decision making. This presents three possible foci for evaluation: 1) the outcomes of the entire process (summative evaluation); 2) the role of the technology in the process (sociability evaluation); and 3) the technology itself (usability evaluation). In human‐computer interactions, evaluation is useful when focused on specific questions; goals, equations, and metrics can form an evaluation approach (Preece 56 2000). Cronbach’s (1980) advice, “…an evaluation ought to inform and improve the operations of the social system” would fall in line with a summative evaluation. Rossi et al. (2004) include both a description and measure, using judging standards or criteria, of the entity being evaluated. Hacklay and Tobón (2003) drew heavily on human‐computer interaction and usability evaluation to advocate a user‐centred design for PPGIS that includes an iterative development cycle. 3.6 Conclusion It has taken nearly 40 years for GIS to begin to realize its potential in terms of broad use for socially‐relevant issues. Over that time, GIS has had a growing impact on society as a result of increased use and through the elimination or attenuation of early barriers to its use. Taken together, the issues raised in this chapter support the use of GIS as part of a learning model for environmental, cultural, social, economic and science issues. The active integration and construction of these components may contribute to learning and knowledge building about an interdisciplinary issue such as sustainable development. By incorporating elements such as narrativity into an information management construct like a geolibrary, the use of GIS and public participation GIS can be further explored by considering ways to integrate spatial data and qualititative data that indicate how people are connected to place. 57 4 Methodological approach 4.1 Introduction The nature of geographic research varies widely from the study of earth and atmospheric systems to research on human and behavioural systems and to the study of spatial representations of human and earth systems. The current research lies at the intersection of spatial technologies, information access, and the production and use of spatial information by the general public and others interested in sustainable development. In chapter 2 an important gap within the field of science, technology and society studies was identified: the limited consideration of geographic information systems and information and communications technologies. The theoretical framework outlined in chapter 2 emphasizes the value of personal experience, local knowledge and context. This theoretical framework highlights the danger of selecting research methods that may reinforce the unidirectional relationship between science and policy. From a methodological point of view, it is also important to be wary of unidirectionality in the relationship between the research practice (described in this chapter), theory (described previously in chapter 2), and the discussion of outcomes (chapter 6) and comments that are drawn from the rich knowledge base developed throughout the course of this work. Methodological approaches were selected for this project on the basis of their potential to contribute to an understanding of the relationship between the design of information and communication technologies and the processes in which these systems may be used to build awareness, generate new knowledge, or support decisions. To briefly recap, the current research questions include: 1) exploring the role of geographic information in developing awareness and building knowledge about sustainability; 2) determining whether GIS can be used as an enabling and transforming technology in an interactive social setting; and 3) establishing how a geolibrary may be used to explore sustainability concepts. To 58 accomplish these research objectives, multiple research methods were employed, including literature reviews, interactive research, interaction design, case studies and participant observation. Literature reviews were conducted to situate the overall research problem and to devise the methodological approach and are manifest in the theoretical and practical gaps identified in chapters 2 and 3. These reviews also provided the foundation within which to develop the research goals and for the case study research design (Yin 2003). An interdisciplinary approach was necessary to address the numerous aspects at play in an examination of new technologies being used to support real‐life situations that engage with place‐based issues such as land use planning. The research methods selected are aligned with the research goal, as identified in chapter 1, where the method was applied (Table 4.1). Interaction Design Interactive Research Literature Review Research Inquiry Participant Observation Methods Case Study 1) Role of geographic information in awareness & knowledge building for sustainability 2) GIS as enabling and transforming technology 3) Geolibrary as metaGIS & how geolibrary is used to explore sustainability 4) Why understanding sustainability is useful technological challenge for geolilbraries and digital libraries 5) Identify approaches for GIS use by the public Table 4.1 Identification of research methods applied to each research goal outlined in chapter1. Interactive research and interaction design are additional methods employed during the development of the technical application (GBExplorer) that was used within the community case studies (see chapters 5 and 6). 59 Case study methodology, coupled with participant observation, was applied to uncover the processes and meanings at play in community contexts where the technical applications and social interactions met. Four case studies were undertaken and each case served a different purpose in the research design. Three of the case studies were located in communities in southwestern British Columbia, including the City of Coquitlam (case study #1, henceforth referred to as CS#1), the municipality of Whistler (case study #2, CS#2) and the municipality of Bowen Island (case study #3, CS#3). The fourth case study (CS#4) reflects on the design and development of the web‐based application, GBExplorer, that formed the basis for case studies #1 and #2 in Coquitlam and Whistler, respectively (see Figure 4.1). CS#1: Coquitlam CS#2: Whistler CS#3: Bowen CS#4: Georgia Basin Digital Library Design & Development (GBExplorer) 2001 2002 2003 Year 2004 2005 Figure 4.1 Four case studies undertaken within this research. The objectives of the four case studies were to explore and describe: i) the creation of the GBDL concept and the instantiation of a software system, GBExplorer (CS#4); ii) how different community groups used GBExplorer to extend their municipal community engagement process for seniors and youth (CS#1); iii) how the application technology was transferred and modified for use by a consortium of community groups in Whistler (CS#2); and iv) how and why spatial visualizations were used for a public planning process on Bowen Island, BC (CS#3). 60 4.2 Description of methods In this chapter, the merits and suitability of each research method are discussed in turn. Descriptions of how the methods were applied are also provided with a focus on the workshops and community forums, which served as the field sites for data collection. The implications and reflections on the research outcomes are discussed in chapter 6 and linked to the outcomes with the theoretical framework presented in chapter 2. Below, the research methods are explained; they include literature reviews, interactive research and interaction design, case study, and participant observation. 4.2.1 Literature reviews Extensive literature reviews were conducted in order to develop and justify the hypothesis that a unidirectional view of the science/policy relationship is too limiting for public knowledge systems. Consequently, literature reviews were conducted into this project’s four major research themes: 1) science and technology studies, 2) public participation and GIS, 3) digital library design, implementation and evaluation, and 4) the use of information and communication technologies in (a) deliberative public decision making / dialogue processes and (b) for communicating science information for various types of users. Conducting a literature review carries a persistent tension between providing sufficient detail and depth to describe the research problem without succumbing to oversimplification and maintaining the fluidity of a generalist’s perspective to recognize patterns and useful ideas among the diverse literatures and perspectives (Law & Mol 2002). The reviews contributed to the 3C elements and their implications for library and information science presented in chapter 2 and discussed in light of GIS technology in chapter 3. The PPGIS research agenda is concerned with how and why GIS are used within social groups interested in local planning issues (e.g. environmental activists, non‐governmental groups, and neighbourhood groups; (Craig et al. 2002). The predominant approach in the field is to conduct and document case studies that identify a spatial problem, fundraise, train, apply spatial analysis techniques, analyze results, and proceed to the next problem. 61 As a result, there are numerous case studies within the literature that document a diverse array of GIS applications in local settings. As such, PPGIS needs to be treated as a science and not solely as a technology (Tulloch 2003). Although they have increased substantially in the interim, at the outset of this doctoral study there were very few web‐based PPGIS applications. Noticeably absent were PPGIS applications that were suited to many different communities and issues; most were site‐ specific developments that offered one‐off solutions (Leitner et al. 2002). As a result of the literature review, a case study method was adopted to examine the use of GBExplorer in community settings and to better understand how and why it was used in these environments (Yin 2003). The review of the literature suggests that it would be fruitful to extend GIS functionality into a web‐based environment coupled with digital library technologies (Carver et al. 2001). In so doing, the hybrid system could begin to address each field’s deficiencies. These two technological approaches present similar shortcomings, notably the lack of evaluation structures and narrowly defined domains of use. They were outgrowths of older technologies or models that had shaped their context of use. From the library perspective, digital libraries were shaped by the institutional model of a physical, bricks‐and‐mortar library that played the role of collective knowledge keeper in a society. From the GIS perspective, the model is an instrumental view of technology where GIS is a “tool” for conducting spatial analysis and examining spatial relationships and the model of GIS use is dominated by this perspective as well. What was envisioned here was an information experience that was more process‐ and product‐oriented in such a way that it could engage with new information in a way that was compelling and made meaningful by those who both contributed to it and made use of it. In this way, the purpose of the work was not to build a ‘website’ that would be the panacea of information about the Georgia Basin. Rather, it was an attempt to reconceptualize the nature of engagement with socially‐relevant, place‐ based information in context. The practical implications are that human‐computer 62 interaction and traditional usability studies are inadequate because they are constrained by their unidirectional view, and they are technologically deterministic. 4.2.2 Interdisciplinarity context: Sustainability Interdisciplinarity or transdisciplinarity is identified as a research approach because it shaped the design and development of the Georgia Basin Digital Library. The nature of interdisciplinary research is holistic and integrative – its innovation often results from synergies between seemingly disparate areas of research (Després et al. 2004; Klein 1990, 1996, 2004b; Lau & Pasquini 2004; Mitcham 2003; Nowotny 2004). “Something about the geographic turn of mind wants to see the big picture, is not content with unrelated fragments, and wants to grasp how the pieces fit together in place” (Hanson 1997). With a focus on knowledge generation and exploration the GBDL sought to create a ‘living’ web environment that would parallel people’s web‐like existence in the world (Berners‐Lee 1999). Sustainability, or sustainable development, is often defined as a balance between social, economic and environmental supply and demand to meet current and future needs (WECD 1987). Examining sustainability more procedurally to address issues of agency (knowledge to action), temporality (decisions now have implications for sustainability later) and choice (what is the spectrum of possible choices that can contribute to achieving sustainability?). It can be helpful to think of sustainability as the emergent property of a discussion about desired futures that is informed by some understanding of the economic, social and ecological implications of different choices (Robinson 2004). In essence, the novelty of the development of the Georgia Basin Digital Library is that it merged sustainability (as a problem sphere), geographical information systems (as representations of that problem sphere) and digital library technologies (as both content and media for that problem sphere) together into a technology and process dynamic. To accomplish this a multi‐disciplinary team was required to support the development of the 63 application and the furthering of the research agenda on the relationship between technologies and community process. The team included natural scientists, social scientists, computer scientists, and geographic information systems specialists. The nature of interdisciplinary research is reflected pragmatically in a diverse team of talent that converges to address innovation. Interdisciplinarity necessitates and entrenches disciplines; there cannot be ‘inter’ discipline without the a priori existence of disciplines in and of themselves. 4.2.3 Interactive research and interaction design This section addresses interactive research and interaction design as methodologies for application development and community‐based research activities, respectively. User‐ centred design is a popular component of computer software and web application design. As it suggests, this type of design considers the end‐user at the outset of system design, invoking a shift from what is merely technically feasible to what is acceptable to the anticipated users of the system. Typically, this involves conducting user requirement analyses, determining the personas of intended users, and encapsulating user goals to identify both scenarios of use and specific tasks that the users would undertake (Hix & Hartson 1993; Nielsen 2000; Preece 1994, 2000; Shneiderman 1998). Motivated by a desire to create ever more effective, efficient and user‐friendly systems, user‐centred design has surged in utility as increasing numbers of businesses and agencies begin to rely on the world wide web to provide information and sell products. From the point of view of creating a new type of web functionality that combines elements of geospatial data integration and digital resource management, a user‐centred design approach was adopted to specify a generic user for the GBDL (Harrap et al. 2000). This provided boundaries from within which to scope the technical and functional requirements of the system (i.e., what does the application need to do? What does it need to look like?). Interactive social science research may be thought of as a meta‐research method above interaction design. It has been defined as “a style of activity where researchers, funding 64 agencies and ‘user groups’ interact throughout the entire research process, including the definition of the research agenda, project selection, project execution and the application of research insights.” (Robinson & Tansey 2006; Scott et al. 1999). The research undertaken within the Georgia Basin Digital Library project involved the partner agencies of the University of British Columbia (UBC) and Natural Resources Canada in the definition and execution of research goals. The Georgia Basin Futures Project, also underway at the same time at UBC, had adopted an interactive approach to the development of game‐like software and community engagement activities to support the development of sustainable future scenarios for the Georgia Basin region (Carmichael et al. 2004; Robinson, Carmichael, VanWynsberghe et al. 2006; Robinson & Tansey 2006; Tansey et al. 2002; VanWynsberghe et al. 2003). In turn, this doctoral work scoped case studies that fit within the research objectives of both organizations. The Georgia Basin Futures Project (GBFP) was a five‐year regional participatory integrated assessment project that engaged experts and the general public in an exercise to explore and identify desirable, sustainable future scenarios for the Georgia Basin region to the year 2030. This exploration took into account the implications, strategies, and policies that would bring about such desired futures (Robinson, Carmichael, VanWynsberghe et al. 2006). The overall goals were to develop a picture of how participants think and feel about sustainability issues and to determine how the use of integrated assessment modelling tools affects the values, attitudes, beliefs and behaviours of those who use such tools (Tansey et al. 2002). Community engagement, partner collaboration, and the use of computer tools to explore aspects of sustainability were research themes where the GBFP and GBDL had synergies. The community of Bowen Island was one of three municipal case studies in GBFP and one of the first to use QUEST 7 . QUEST was used in a workshop setting to develop a collective QUEST is a computer scenario‐generation modelling system designed to help users create an explore future scenarios for their region and to acquaint them with the necessary social, environmental and economic trade‐offs associated with their envisioned future (Carmichael et al. 2004; Tansey et al. 2002). 7 65 desired future for Bowen Island. Both the GBFP and GBDL operated and focused attention on the interface between science, technology and society and the projects’ research themes and outcomes are relevant to the other and go some measure to advance understanding of how to conduct collaborative and interactive social research. The interactive social research approach, as well as the interdisciplinary perspective, the case study methods and participant observation, were all adopted to reinforce the notion that fieldwork is at once political, personal and professional (Hyndman 2001). 4.2.4 Case study methodology Case studies are social science research techniques that are widely used within the academic fields of sociology, economics, anthropology, history and psychology to understand complex social phenomena—particularly when the phenomena are contemporary and occur in a real‐life context (Yin 2003). Increasingly, they have been adopted as teaching methods in law, management science, medicine and public policy (Yin 2003). Often employed to answer ‘how’ and ‘why’ type research questions, case studies are explanatory or descriptive devices that uncover operational relationships that unfold temporally and spatially. The goal of the Georgia Basin Digital Library (GBDL) was to develop awareness and understanding of issues related to sustainability. The project aimed to develop the conceptual framework for a community‐focused digital library that could promote the integration of natural science and socio‐economic information for the purposes of sustainability within the Georgia Basin region. The development of the conceptual framework was broken down into five research themes that included interface design, community engagement, visualization, knowledge representation and knowledge architecture. Interface design focused on elements relating to human‐computer interaction, including the use of a library metaphor to frame the user experience of exploring ideas about sustainability. The community engagement theme was an effort to promote understanding and instigate involvement in issues that relate to sustainability in the 66 Georgia Basin region. Under the visualization research theme, work was conducted to explore new manners of representing geospatial data, focusing specifically on three‐ dimensional landscape visualization in an effort to bring geospatial data into a familiar environment for the user. The knowledge architecture theme focused on translating the conceptual ideas into a prototype software application and the data model design to manage relationships between thematically complex spatial data and associated attribute, image and text data. The knowledge representation theme explored the development of ways to create understanding and interrelationships of concepts surrounding sustainability and developing a means of linking these concepts to geospatial data in an effort to enhance understanding. This particular research theme resulted in a component of the GBExplorer application known as Local Stories. Local Stories incorporated an interactive map, which allowed users to select a location on the map and compose a narrative description of the significance of that place with respect to sustainability, as defined by the participant. In this way, the Local Stories application provided a testbed for linking the experience of place through narrative with an interactive map display. An objective of the case studies was to determine the role of Local Stories in developing community capacity—defined as citizens as a group realizing the potential of their social, economic, environmental, cultural and political assets to develop their community in a manner that suits their needs (Crawford 2000). As a result, case study selection hinged on identifying a group of users that was pre‐existing (don’t come together just for this purpose) and had an on‐going project that they felt would be enhanced by the incorporation of Local Stories and/or other elements of GBExplorer. Another consideration in terms of case study selection was whether the community group would have some technical skills (information technology management, programming skills) to customize, adapt and maintain the application to suit their needs over time. This would provide some indication of any knowledge architecture changes the GBExplorer development team could consider into a future design phase to make the application more readily customizable by different sets of users. 67 4.2.5 Participant observation Berger (2000, 161) notes that participant observation is a “form of field research that lack(s) the control and structure typically found in experiments”. Supplementing the case study methodology with participant observation contributes to an understanding of the patterns of interplay between actors in a given setting or group that is being studied. Also, it helps determine what questions to ask informants. As well, it can be an unobtrusive means of gleaning information about individual and group behaviour (Berger 2000). Typically, the researcher is faced with a trade‐off between familiarity and neutrality; an alternate slant is to view the researcher as providing a particular perspective. When conducting participant observations, it is important to capture the setting, the participants, the nature and purpose of the group, the behaviour of people in the group, the frequencies and durations of behaviour (Berger 2000). It can be useful to draw threads through these high‐level themes to postulate the effect of the setting on the behaviour, who (and who is not) participating, for what reason and what happens in the setting. Some concerns with participant observation include focus, the effect of the observers on behaviour, unrecognized selectivity –observers implicitly include and exclude observations as a function of becoming part of the process and of their expectations of it. Case study research is undeniably messy. “Imperfect engagement is better than no engagement or a paralyzing angst” (Hyndman 2001, 265). Hyndman notes that the practice of fieldwork, which for this purpose is coincident with the case study approach, is an exercise in communication, trust and timing. Relationships must be established with potential case study groups to explore the possibility of working together. Once this relationship is established, it requires further development to parameterize the relationship between the community group (and the researcher). All of these steps are highly contingent on establishing the trust and credibility of the researcher and, importantly, an alignment between the case study research objectives and the community groups’ objectives. 68 Berger (2000) indicates that ‘mind reading’ can be problematic when the observer crosses a line between recording what people do and attributing a motivation or cause to the behaviour. There is a dance between suggesting and determining patterns of motivation for certain behaviours and over‐interpreting on the basis potentially unfounded assumptions. It is important to be aware of the tendency to determine what people think on the basis of their actions – these are not necessarily causally connected, and the participant‐observer can only ever observe actions. 4.3 Case study descriptions The Georgia Basin Digital Library Project established a conceptual framework for the design and development of a knowledge exploration system for the Georgia Basin region of British Columbia. A prototype application, GBExplorer, was developed based on this conceptual framework. GBExplorer consists of a series of web‐based services aimed at promoting community‐based learning and participatory planning. The GBExplorer application instantiated conceptual ideas into a set of five functional groups, called modules, that were made publicly accessible via the internet. The ‘News & Information’ module culls sustainability‐related stories from local and international sources; ‘Ideas & Perspectives’ provides functionality to explore different concepts of sustainability, ‘Local Stories’ is a community mapping application, ‘Library Collections’ searches distributed sources for spatial data, and ‘Future Scenarios’ connects with the GB‐QUEST scenario modelling game to allow users to create their desired future for the Georgia Basin in the year 2040. The rationale underlying the selection of the design elements in GBExplorer, as well as a description of each of the modules in the application, is described and discussed in the next chapter. Once a prototype application had been developed to instantiate the philosophy of a visually‐compelling, narrative‐ and place‐based exploration of current society, its use in different contexts could be explored to provide a more nuanced understanding of the strength and suitably of GBExplorer for supporting individual and collective explorations of 69 place. The descriptions of CS#1 and CS#2 that follow in the next section focus on how different community groups used the Local Stories module. During 2003 and 2004, workshops on the use of Local Stories were conducted with two different communities. In the City of Coquitlam, BC, workshop participants included the non‐profit Smart Choices Society and the city’s department of Leisure & Parks. In Whistler, BC, the participants consisted of a network of community groups. The Whistler experience served as a technology transfer case study as participating groups adopted the Local Stories application and customized it for use by their membership. Lastly, CS#3 was based on participant observation of a sub‐area plan review in the community of Bowen Island in 2004. The case studies in Coquitlam, Whistler and Bowen built on the experience of designing and developing the GBDL and its associated prototype application, GBExplorer (Fig. 4.2). Each of the case studies addresses different elements of the research process from exploratory (development of GBExplorer), to descriptive (the use studies in Coquitlam and Whistler; the community planning discussions within the Bowen Island Community Forum). As noted earlier, the GBFP and GBDL operated simultaneously and Bowen Island provided a point of overlap with each project undertaking a case study there although at different times and to observe different processes. 70 Local Stories CS#2: Whistler Tech Transfer CS#4: Georgia Basin Digital Library Design & Development (GBExplorer) CS#3: Bowen Spatial Technologies in Land Use Planning CS#1: Coquitlam Georgia Basin Futures Project Figure 4.2 Relationship between the four case studies undertaken within this research. In Coquitlam, workshop participants were interested in how the application could support socially oriented community processes (bring demographic groups together such as seniors, youth and decision makers). In Whistler, the community groups had a predominant interest in natural habitat issues. The third case study, with the Municipality of Bowen Island, built upon a pre‐existing research partnership between UBC and the community. The subsequent sections in this chapter describe the genesis and conduct of each the case studies as well as data collection and analysis techniques. 4.3.1 Case Study #1: Smart Choices Society (Coquitlam, BC) Located roughly 30km east of Vancouver, the municipalities of Port Moody, Coquitlam and Port Coquitlam are commonly known as the Tri‐Cities. Together with two adjacent villages, Anmore and Belcarra, the five municipalities form the Northeast sector of the Lower Mainland region of Greater Vancouver (Figure 4.3). The Northeast Sector has a total 71 population of 203, 751 (BC Stats, 2006). The small communities of Anmore and Belcarra contribute about 2,200 people to the overall number reported for the Northeast Sector. Figure 4.3 Map of Greater Vancouver highlighting the Northeast Sector (GVRD, 2003) The Smart Choices Society is a non‐profit agency created in 1999 when the City of Coquitlam applied for an Industry Canada “Smart Communities” project grant. The Smart Communities Initiative from Industry Canada held a national competitive process, accepting proposals from communities who detailed how they would create informed, engaged and connected communities using information technology to stimulate economic prosperity. The initiative sought demonstration projects of smart community principles, “a community with a vision of the future that involves the use of information and communication technologies in new and innovative ways to empower its residents, institutions and regions as a whole” (Industry Canada 1998). Industry Canada awarded a total of twelve geographically diverse projects: one in each province, one within the three territories and one First Nations smart community demonstration project. The twelve ‘demonstration’ projects, as they were referred to by Industry Canada, would serve as living laboratories for testing new technologies on the ground. The intent was to have the twelve communities try different approaches to see what works best; there was no 72 on‐going funding commitment for other communities nor was there an upfront strategy for how communities, other than the twelve selected, would actually benefit from the experimentation that would take place in the demonstration projects. At the time, the diffusion plan for best practices seemed to rely exclusively on osmosis since Industry Canada lacked any formal mechanism to evaluate the demonstration projects. However, the participating communities anticipated social and economic advantages as a result of the smart communities program in the form of direct grants for technological infrastructure development. The Smart Choices Society includes the City of Coquitlam, the City of Port Moody, the area’s school district and Douglas College, a post‐secondary training institute located in Coquitlam. They focused their efforts on the creation of an ‘innovation’ centre – physical infrastructure in the form of a newly‐constructed building to house meeting rooms, highspeed computer access, a coffee shop and business development services available for local entrepreneurs. This was coupled with significant human and financial resources to develop a web‐based community portal that they named Citysoup.ca. The portal provided web hosting services for businesses to promote and market their goods and services online. In addition, it provided residents with community event information such as recreation program schedules and registration and a directory for local businesses. The use of Local Stories with community members in the Tri‐Cities took place through a relationship that developed with Community Solutions (a United Way sponsored program on Sustainability Study Circles), the City of Coquitlam and the Smart Choices Society of British Columbia. Working with representatives from the City of Coquitlam’s Leisure & Parks division, several workshops were held with community residents using an adapted version of Local Stories. Through discussions with the community engagement coordinator of the Smart Choices Society, community groups were identified and prioritized based on their interest in and likelihood of deriving some benefit from participating in a workshop. 73 Five groups were identified: 1) seniors, 2) youth, 3) arts organizations, 4) sports organizations and 5) community organizations. The Smart Choices Society Community Engagement Coordinator identified the first two as priority groups because they met regularly and because the coordinator felt that the staff organizers for the senior and youth groups were amenable to incorporating the workshops into their winter programming. Local Stories provided some value‐added technology to the existing design of the Citysoup.ca web portal since the pre‐existing online mapping component only provided map viewing capability and was not designed to receive data from its users via a map interface. The existing online mapping component provided location information for businesses and community services. The addition of Local Stories offered a two‐way communication between the citysoup.ca portal and the residents, as well as a means of communication and knowledge sharing among resident groups. This idea was raised and received support from the citysoup.ca community engagement coordinator who was looking for ways to get different constituents interested in using the web portal. The technical details of incorporating Local Stories within the citysoup.ca architecture were discussed and resolved over a series of meetings and phone calls between the two technical teams. As a result, Local Stories became accessible via the citysoup.ca portal as well as directly through georgiabasin.info. Workshop sessions on the use of Local Stories were held with four different community groups in Coquitlam. These included the Coquitlam Youth Council and three different organized groups of seniors. The Coquitlam Youth Council’s mission is to provide a voice for all youth. The Council arranges community projects geared towards youth and their families, such as fundraising activities for cancer research and activities to connect with other teen committees. The Youth Council meets with a local elected councillor on a monthly basis to voice their youth‐related concerns. The seniors groups operate out of two main hubs located at community centres within the city: the Dogwood Pavilion and the Pinetree Community Centre. At the Dogwood Pavilion, two potential groups were 74 approached by their community coordinator to participate. The first is a small group of about eight seniors who have established a small computer lab with five workstations and a server in an office of the centre. They provide instructional workshops to other seniors on basic computer skills, introduction to word processing, the internet, email, spreadsheets and multimedia software (i.e. manipulation of digital images). The second was the Dogwood Lifewriters group. This larger group of about twenty seniors come together to share life stories. Invariably, since many of the seniors are from the Tri‐Cities area, the stories that they write are personal histories of place. Similar to the Dogwood group but based out of a different facility, Pinetree Community Centre, this third group of seniors engages in activities such as games, arts and crafts, fitness classes, and organized bus trips. An additional group participated in the Tri‐Cities workshop. At the request of the Leisure & Parks division, a workshop was conducted in Coquitlam with the city’s Leisure and Parks Services Management Team. The Leisure and Parks Services Management Team is tasked with working with the community to create opportunities, through leisure and parks, to encourage healthy lifestyles. They develop, maintain and administer programs, recreation facilities, parks and hiking trails. Seven workshops were conducted in Coquitlam, BC between February and April of 2004. The workshop format was aimed primarily at a) familiarizing participants with the Local Stories application within GBExplorer, b) to allow them the opportunity to use the system and c) discuss the potential for use within their community groups. Workshops were held with one youth group, three groups of seniors, and, at the request of the Leisure & Parks division, a workshop was conducted with municipal staff. The workshop format took place, when possible, in the information technology lab at the municipal hall in Coquitlam. This instructional setting had twelve networked computer workstations as well as whiteboards, data projector and screen at the front of the room. The workshops were conducted with the approval of the UBC Behavioural Research and Ethics Board. The workshops were designed and facilitated with the assistance of a planning student from UBC who wanted to 75 focus on the Local Stories application for her master’s thesis (Murphy 2004). The following agenda was followed in all of the workshops: An introduction, including round table of participant introductions (10 minutes) Presentation and review of Local Stories (10 minutes) Adding your own stories (60 minutes) Wrap‐up and next steps (10 minutes) In the workshop introduction, participants were provided with some background on the GBDL and informed of the facilitators’ interest in exploring ways for their local knowledge to be recorded and shared with residents and decision makers. They were given a demonstration of the Local Stories application, which included interface explanation, basic map navigation and the identification of media with which to construct a story (html, images, sound). The remainder of the session, usually about an hour, was devoted to free exploration by the participants. They were invited to use the application to create stories that were of interest to them. This task was left deliberately open ended, although in the demonstration session, two or three example stories were provided to act as a springboard to generate ideas for the assembled participants. The workshop facilitators were available to provide technical and user support. A brief questionnaire (see appendix A) was administered on an optional basis. The Citysoup Community Engagement Coordinator encouraged the use of a survey instrument with the groups she had prioritized since it would also provide her project with helpful data that they had not yet collected. These workshops provided an opportunity to observe the participants as they created their own local stories and reacted to a) the idea of such an application and b) the actual workings of the prototype application. 76 4.3.2 Case Study #2: Community Habitat Resources Project (Whistler, BC) The uptake of Local Stories by community groups in Whistler originated with a slightly different focus, brought about by the conglomeration of actors in that community. The Resort Municipality of Whistler (RMOW) officially adopted the Natural Step™ framework in 2000. This is a significant endorsement for sustainability principles by the official decision‐making body for the community. As a result of the adoption of the Natural Step Framework, the community is committed to public consultation and values‐based decision making on behalf of the RMOW. Whistler is a world‐class ski resort community and is rapidly evolving into a year‐round destination resort community with skiing activities from November to April and mountain biking and hiking in the summer season. The community started expanding about twenty‐ five years ago and continues to grow. Key local issues centre on a balance between the resort lifestyle and the natural setting of the Whistler valley and surrounding mountains. Specifically residents are concerned about the availability of affordable housing and growth management. There is such a vast, and inflated, market for recreational homes that average income earners are unable to afford housing and, as a result, commute from the near‐by communities of Squamish and Pemberton (InterVISTAS Consulting Inc. 2007; Points of View Research & Consulting Ltd. 2002). Development pressures are substantial in the Resort Municipality of Whistler. The high demand for land for seasonal and residential housing developments threaten wildlife corridors, sensitive and critical habitats and sharpens the need to create a harmonious relationship between the natural environment where the mountain terrain supports a world‐class ski and mountain bike resource and the built environment that accommodates year‐round residents, seasonal residents, and tourists. Such concerns are being addressed 77 by a coalition of eleven community groups 8 that joined forces, received grant funding and created the Community Habitat Resources Project (CHiRP) in 2003. Collectively, they created the following mission for CHiRP: “To create a web‐based vehicle that involves all community members in natural habitat monitoring and protection” (CHiRP, 2003). With funding from the Community Foundation of Whistler, the group met in early 2003 to identify their priorities and to allocate the funding they had received to accomplish their stated mission. One of the primary activities the group decided to tackle was an amalgamation of their diverse information holdings in an effort to provide a summary of the state of knowledge of the Whistler region. This data integration exercise was intended to accomplish two things: 1) data synthesis and 2) data sharing among the organizations. In effect, in order for each group to better meet their own individual mission statements, they needed to combine forces and integrate their data resources to provide a more robust approach to habitat monitoring that would cut across their individual interest area such as birds, bears or mountain biking. A major goal of the CHiRP was “to strengthen and foster community involvement at a grass roots level to further the awareness and protection of our natural habitat” (CHiRP backgrounder 2003). Their approach included the development and integration of spatial data to catalogue and map known habitat of bears, birds, and other wildlife. They had planned to launch a website to provide information on their project and were hoping to deliver their spatial data inventory through an online map viewer. In addition, some of the community groups represented recreational use of habitat such as off‐road cycling, skiing and land uses of the municipality. Following a presentation on the Local Stories module, the steering committee of the Community Habitat Information Resources Project (CHiRP) decided to enter into an agreement with Natural Resources Canada and the GBDL project to re‐use the technology A description of each group is provided in appendix B. 8 78 developed in prototype form for GBExplorer. The steering committee had become quite intrigued with the story upload functionality that the module provides. They felt that the interface and the storytelling component made the application more compelling and could increase attractiveness to both their website and cause. They had considered other applications such as ESRI’s ArcIMS (Internet Map Server) and the Community Mapping Network but decided to use the Local Stories module. The board elected to pursue a partnership approach where the GBDL team provided some guidance to the process while CHiRP customized the Local Stories application for their own use. The Local Stories application was built onto the OpenGIS mapping technology (freeware) called MapServer 9 that originated at the University of Minnesota. One aspect of Local Stories that was received particularly favourably was that “the CHiRP site could include links to ’stories’ embedded in the maps. The stories could be provided by the public, telling people about experiences in different areas, and giving a heads‐up about what visitors to the area should look for. Other stories could include educational information about a habitat or species, and links to various reports and studies” (Mitchell 2003). The organizer of CHiRP referred to the draw of the storytelling function within Local Stories as “one of the things people might be able to relate to and use on the Internet, pointing to a spot on a map and getting the story from someone who’s been there. It’s a great way of capturing the community, and getting the community involved. It really makes the landscape speak” (Mitchell 2003). Since CHiRP had dedicated funding to support both a part‐time project manager and a part‐ time GIS specialist, they decided to re‐deploy Local Stories within their own web application. As such, they provide a case study that emphasizes the reusability of the technical architecture of GBDL. The primary work with Whistler then became an issue of technology transfer. The theory and implementation decisions that support Local Stories Mapserver is an Open Source development environment for building spatially‐enabled internet applications, available from http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/ 9 79 emphasize broad access to what is commonly viewed as a specialized technology. The intent of Local Stories is more ubiquitous access to locally‐relevant spatial data with a strong emphasis on user‐generated content. A series of meetings took place in September and October 2003 to i) conduct a needs assessment of mapping requirements and ii) develop a workplan fulfill the functional requirements. The CHiRP GIS specialist was hired in October 2003 and held discussions with all eleven CHiRP community organizations to gain an understanding of their data holdings and data display requirements. This needs assessment is provided in appendix C. The range of identified needs varied from group to group: some groups already had spatial data of habitat while others required a means of digitizing some of their habitat data in order to make use of Local Stories’ mapping function. The GIS specialist for CHiRP felt that an “open source” solution (which has no direct cost implications) was a good choice for the CHiRP member groups and that it may provide a means for the mapping activity to continue beyond the end of the CHiRP project in 2005 (T. Howlett 2004, pers. comm.). A site visit was conducted to the CHiRP management team in November 2003. The purpose of this session was to assist in the installation and setup of the mapserver software and to provide a version of Local Stories that the GIS specialist could then modify and customize over the course of the next few months as the development of both the website and datasets proceeded over the winter. The lead technical developed for GBExplorer participated in this visit. The CHiRP website launch took place on May 24th, 2004 in Whistler. During the launch, the member organizations received a demonstration of the CHiRP mapping application by the GIS specialist and the project manager. The resultant application had two primary components. The first component was a map browser view that allowed for the display of map information, toggling between layers with much of the dataset composed of natural habitat data on bears and birds. The second component was the Local Stories module that 80 provided a means for the general public and the members of the community organization to contribute to the knowledge base by adding their own stories. In discussions with participants at the event, it became clear that several participants felt very positive about the development of the Local Stories and mapping components and indicated that it was exactly the kind of support they wanted for their community groups. From a technology transfer perspective, the GIS specialist indicated that her experience in developing the open source web‐based mapping application was no more difficult than using standard commercial software. One benefit of using an open source application was that the open source GIS community was available whenever problems arose. The GIS specialist posted questions to the open source community over the 6‐month development period and also had access to the GBExplorer developer for questions via email. Subsequent to the launch of the application, the GIS specialist was invited to present the experience of developing the CHiRP site to a conference of mapserver developers who meet annually to exchange ideas and to foster the strong collaborative loyalty within the open source community. CHiRP’s development of their own version of Local Stories served as an example that the GBDL conceptual ideas could be modified for other uses and exist as a stand‐alone application for general community mapping activities. 4.3.3 Case Study #3: Snug Cove Village Plan Review (Bowen Island, BC) Located in the heart of Howe Sound, a twenty minute ferry ride from West Vancouver, Bowen Island is a rural community with about 3000 year‐round residents and another 1500 seasonal residents. Incorporated as a municipality within the Greater Vancouver Regional District in 1999, Bowen Island residents faced the task of taking a greater degree of local control over the island’s natural and built environment. The community of Bowen Island figured prominently throughout all phases of this thesis research – indeed for the entire phases of the Georgia Basin Digital Library’s conceptual development and for the design of the GBExplorer prototype. 81 The programming team worked with a school group during the design phases of Local Stories as the grade 8 social studies class conducted a term project on the natural habitat in the lands behind the school. The students collected digital photographs and composed stories relating to the flora and fauna on the island using Local Stories. In this way, the design team was able to collect direct feedback on the interface elements and to identify any hurdles in using the application. Adjustments included adding numbers to the data input screen to help users navigate through point digitizing, story creation and image or sound file upload. In parallel projects, the community developed a sense of community practice (Crawford 2000) and undertook data collection on the natural and socioeconomic conditions on the island. These data were initially compiled by students in the Capilano College Environmental Studies program and some of the students continued the data collection as a summer project which resulted in the publication of a “state of the environment” report for Bowen (Julian & Bailey 2001). A parallel volume compiled over fifty layers of spatial data into a map atlas for the community (Shoji et al. 2000). Metadata were described for these spatial layers and eventually all the information was provided to interested parties in the form of a cd‐rom, available for purchase for $10. This served as a diverse dataset against which to design the GBDL. Bowen featured repeatedly throughout the research process from pre‐prototyping some of the conceptual ideas of the GBDL into a locally available cd‐ rom and website (Journeay & Dunster 2002) to the Community Forum that was held in the winter of 2004 to consider a proposed amendment to a planning document. Rather than discuss all of these interactions here, the focus will be on one process, which is the review of a draft village plan within the municipality’s Official Community Plan. An official community plan is “a statement of objectives and policies to guide decisions on planning and land use management, within the area covered by the plan, respecting the purposes of local government” (Revised Statute of British Columbia 1996). Public consultation is a requirement of the review process. The case study will focus on this 82 Community Dialogue, which consisted of a series of public forums in the winter of 2004. It will also draw on previous activities including a case study by Savelson (2004; Savelson et al. 2005), undertaken as part of the GBFP, to highlight trends in the subsequent discussion in chapter 6. The Snug Cove Village Plan draft 5 articulates a neighbourhood scale plan and is of importance to all residents since the area encompasses the island’s sole ferry terminal, the link to the mainland for transportation, employment, and access to goods and services. Endorsed by the municipal council, the Community Forum process was a citizen‐led dialogue series designed to discuss the recommendations within the Village Plan. The process was led by a facilitation team of three residents who held five dialogue sessions between January and March of 2004. The purpose of the Community Forum was “to ensure that people are involved in the decisions that affect them; giving them an opportunity to be part of and influence the process, and ensure that people understand the logic and reasoning behind the decisions that are made” (Journeay et al. 2004). The sessions included an introductory presentation and discussion of the Snug Cove Village Plan draft 5 which took place on January 18, 2004. This was followed on February 15, 2004 by a dialogue session on one of the key issues for the Village Plan which is traffic and ferry marshalling. Two sessions were held at UBC’s Landscape Immersion Lab, which used immersive landscape visualization with hypothetical models of housing development in a part of Snug Cove to consider the questions: “How might a community use decision support tools and do they help?” These workshops had lively discussions about the densification options articulated in the Village Plan. Community indicators such as population, water consumption, energy consumption were used interactively to stimulate dialogue and respond to participants’ queries. These workshops took place on February 18 and 24, 2004 and were attended by 5 and 8 people, respectively. A summary workshop was held on March 7, 2004 where participants were able to review a draft report and articulate their reactions to the process. The table below summarizes the workshops in the 83 Community Forum process, which all took place on Bowen Island—except for the two visualization workshops that took place in a lab at the University of British Columbia. Date 1 18 Jan 2004 Event Presentation & discussion of Snug Cove Village Plan, draft 5. 2 21 Jan 2004 Presentation & discussion of Snug Cove Village Plan, draft 5. 3 24 Jan 2004 Presentation & discussion of Snug Cove Village Plan, draft 5. 4 15 Feb 2004 Traffic and ferry marshalling options discussion Objective Collect feedback and preference selections. Location School # attendees 110 Collect feedback and preference selections. Legion Hall 11 Collect feedback and preference selections. Municipal Hall 6 School 40 UBC – Landscape Immersion Lab 5 UBC – Landscape Immersion Lab (didn’t attend) School 20 Explore these two issues in more detail (and with visualization) as a result of the feedback from the first three workshops. 5 18 Feb 2004 Visualization of Visualize examples futures for Bowen of densification in keeping with the land use guidelines in the OCP. 6 24 Feb 2004 Visualization of Visualize examples futures for Bowen of densification in keeping with the land use guidelines in the OCP. 7 7 Mar 2004 Reflecting results Present results of back to the series of workshops community back to participants. Table 4.2 Bowen Island Community Forum Sessions. The first three workshops took place over the course of one week and all contained the same information. Three workshops were provided at staggered times to allow for scheduling conflicts and to give residents the opportunity to acquire an understanding of the key issues 84 under consideration in the Village Plan. The facilitators provided the residents with prepared workbooks that outlined the set of workshops over the course of a two‐month period and framed the main issues presented in the Village Plan as well as voting forms to identify key guiding principles in each of the five categories. The issues were divided into five categories including the built environment (scale, character, and aesthetics), land use, natural environment, transportation and economic activity. The built environment included the guiding principles of maintaining heritage character, promoting a pedestrian‐oriented environment, preserving the village ambience, and enhancing the park ambience (there is a regional park in the Snug Cove area). The land use guiding principles included promoting the village as a social, economic and cultural hub of the island, accommodating higher residential densities and accommodating a mix of land use elements. The transportation guiding principles included creating an aesthetically pleasing entry to Snug Cove, balancing the functions of Government Road (currently used for ferry marshalling, consumer retail and pedestrian), and exploring solutions for ferry marshalling and parking. Economic activity guidelines included supporting and generating small and local business opportunities, providing for a mix of commercial activities and balancing development regulations and community values. The natural environment guidelines included protecting and preserving unique environmental features and sensitive ecosystems and to adopting a balance in managing new development. The workshops were structured by the facilitators to introduce each category in turn, review the associated guiding principles, and to allow time for small table (groups of 6‐8) discussions of the examples provided for that category. Following this discussion, workshop participants were given an opportunity to indicate their degree of support along a six point scale (from ‘I agree to the guiding principles’ to ‘I veto the guiding principles’). This input was subsequently tallied and mapped by the facilitators to gauge whether the responses were clustered together or were wildly variant. 85 Another workshop was added to the schedule when it became clear that more discussion was needed around the options for ferry marshalling and transportation in Snug Cove. Since every islander takes the ferry to and from Bowen, they all have experiential knowledge about ferry transportation, departing and arriving in Snug Cove and also have a range of opinions concerning how the area will or should change over time as population growth alters the previous reality. The final workshop served as an opportunity to synthesize the results of the feedback. 4.4 Data collection, analysis and results In the workshop series in Coquitlam (CS#1), I led the workshops and observations were recorded by a colleague. She recorded field notes of impressions and occasionally there were opportunities during the sessions to compare impressions. In addition, we conducted verbal reflections with each other immediately following the sessions and further observations were recorded following the workshops. In addition, a short questionnaire was administered at the end of each workshop. These surveys served as a means to gauge generic user information such as frequency of computer use, frequency of internet use, and an overall ranking of the utility of Local Stories. Twenty‐three surveys were returned from four sets of workshop participants (2 different groups of seniors, a youth group, and city staff). The seniors groups completed fewer surveys than other groups because many were novice computer users and were still engaged in story creation at the end of the workshop. About 74% of the respondents were women and just over 85% of respondents used the internet on a daily basis. All respondents had been computer users for at least two years. All the respondents indicated that the application was at least somewhat useful with 95% indicating that it was useful or very useful (Fig. 4.4). 86 Respondents' rating of overall usefulness of Local Stories 100 80 60 % of responses 40 20 0 Not at all Useful Not Very Somewhat Useful Useful Useful Very Useful Figure 4.4 Survey results rating the overall usefulness of Local Stories. In terms of the ease of navigation of the interface, the results were split with about half the respondents indicating that the interface was easy to navigate and about 40% indicating that they did not find it easy to navigate or that parts were easy and other were not (mixed, see Fig. 4.5). The map interface required a great deal of zooming and panning to obtain the desired area and some users found this frustrating, “hard to find certain places on the map” (Respondent 4), “once I figured out where to click, I found where I wanted to be quite easily” (Respondent 7) and others did not find the navigation difficult, “very clear and easy to follow” (Respondent 10). It should be noted that the orthophoto available for the region, which was used as the base map, was not of the highest resolution so some users may have found it difficult to orient themselves due to the spatial resolution of the available image. However, this did not prevent them from grasping the relevant concepts and creating local stories. 87 Local Stories: Ease of Navigation 9% 9% Yes 52% 30% No Mixed No Answer Figure 4.5 Survey results on the ease of navigation of Local Stories indicating that over half of the participants found the application easy to navigate. The Whistler case study (CS#2) employed participant observation during a series of meetings and email exchanges to establish the terms of reference of the relationship between CHiRP and GBDL. Also, observations were recorded during a half‐day session to assist the technical lead of CHiRP to build the new server to run Local Stories as well as the CHiRP website, which was under construction at the time. These recorded observations were reviewed and analyzed for emergent themes to provide an analysis of CHiRP’s concerns and challenges in transferring and augmenting Local Stories for their purposes. Contact was maintained with the lead technical developer for GBExplorer to gauge the frequency and type of interaction and mentoring he provided to the CHiRP application developer. CHiRP launched the application in May 2004 (Fig. 4.6). 88 Figure 4.6 The Community Habitat Resources Project’s (CHiRP) adaptation of Local Stories, residing on their own server. In the Bowen case study (CS#3), observations were gathered during the lead up to the forum process in preparatory meetings with the facilitators and and field notes were taken during each island workshop session and during one of the two UBC visualization lab sessions. These notes were transcribed after each session. In addition, a content analysis were conducted on documents relating to the forum, including newspaper articles, posts on the online community discussion forum, the workbook for the workshop, the written feedback comment sheets returned from each participant for each of four themes, and the facilitator’s final report. The content analysis included the development of a set of codes or categories with a frequency analysis using a standard word processor (Denzin & Lincoln 1994; Thomas 2003). 89 During the Community Forum process on Bowen, key comments were noted: these included some frustration with the selection of guiding principles that some deemed “too motherhood” to have any value, particularly when participants wanted to know how the guiding principles would be achieved in order to determine whether it was a priority for them. At the end of the large group session, the tone in the room was one of frustration. This may have been a reflection of the difficult nature of the discussion on how to accommodate future growth and maintain the island way of life even though this means something slightly different to everyone. This sense of frustration was also reflected in numerous postings on the community’s online forum immediately following the first session: ““They certainly didn’t do things the way I would have done them”; “All we did was talk, talk talk. I want action! Bowen has to move forward!” (Bowen Online Forum, 22 Jan 2004). 4.5 Conclusion An overview of the methods applied in this research project and a detailed description of the research activities that were undertaken has been provided in this chapter. Details concerning each community’s use of Local Stories and spatial technologies are presented and discussed in chapter 6, where the research results are oriented into a set of categories that comprise relationship building, engagement, task orientation, and technological adaptation. In the next chapter the design of GBDL is presented along with a description of how those conceptual ideas were manifest in the GBExplorer application. 90 5 Setting the context: The design and development of the Georgia Basin Digital Library for sustainable development 10 5.1 Introduction “All social research sets out with specific purposes from a particular position, and aims to persuade readers of the significance of its claims; these claims are always broadly political” (Clough & Nutbrown 2002). In that tradition, one of the current research goals is to reform the culture of technological support in decision making. This requires paying attention to the interplay and power dynamics between groups of social actors and the technologies that can support the processes of building awareness of social, environmental and economic issues. In doing so, it is also important to explore a space where expertise and local experience find a comfortable balance between the authentic, the legitimate and the valuable. The starting point for this research endeavour is the notion that that GIS technologies have typically been developed and used in ways that view the information associated with spatial data as neutral. The view driving the current research is that this approach is misguided and has contributed to a failure to realize the full potential for widespread public use of GIS technologies as an exploratory tool for knowledge discovery, creation and sharing. The purpose of the specific research activities undertaken for this dissertation was to contribute to the design of a system that merges web‐based GIS functionality with digital library technologies (i.e. information management capabilities) to extend the overall information experience that users commonly experience on the web. An additional research purpose was to encourage use through user contribution and bi‐directional communication – to increase the validity of the plurality of opinions and evidence that lend support to an A version of this chapter has been published elsewhere (Talwar et al. 2003). 10 91 individual or group’s point of view. This persuasive element is not intended to merely increase the quantity but to extend the quality of participatory voices in debate. As indicated in chapter 2, studies of knowledge construction do not tend to deal with how knowledge is socially shared even though it has been demonstrated that the material technologies that generate and standardize representations also mediate the sharing of knowledge (Thurk & Fine 2003). These claims have implications for notions of individual and collective agency, the nature of people’s interactions with information, the credibility and reliability of information, accessibility of both content and meaning, and its relevance. This chapter describes the design and development of a conceptual framework and prototype web‐based geospatial digital library for the Georgia Basin region of British Columbia. In so doing, this chapter serves two purposes. The first is methodological: to provide a description of the first of four case studies completed as part of this dissertation work. The second is contextual: to create the backdrop for discussion of two other case studies by way of explaining the GBExplorer application that was used in the Coquitlam and Whistler case studies. These are described in the next chapter. 5.2 Study area: Georgia Basin The Georgia Basin region of southwestern British Columbia which occupies nearly 46,000 km2 of land and sea, is experiencing considerable population growth in an environment of extensive natural diversity. Nearly three million people currently reside in this region roughly demarcated by the drainage basins of the Strait of Georgia (BC Stats 2000). The population is expected to grow substantially, to approximately 5 million people, by the year 2040. The area has served as a focal point for numerous sustainable development‐related research projects over the past ten years. The design and development of the Georgia Basin Digital Library is a place‐based approach to engaging with sustainability issues. The project was initiated to complement research themes within the Georgia Basin Futures Project, so a brief description of that project is provided as context for other sustainability research 92 taking place coincident with the design and development of the Georgia Basin Digital Library. The Georgia Basin Futures Project (GBFP) was a five‐year project designed to explore the reconciliation between global carrying capacity and human well‐being in the Georgia Basin over a forty year timeframe (2000‐2040). The region was selected due to its wealth of natural and human resources. Compared with other highly populated and rapidly growing areas, the Georgia Basin’s environment is less degraded, which creates a site of high potential for reconciling human well‐being and natural limits (GBFP Backgrounder 2001). The GBFP engaged communities throughout the region with a suite of tools, processes and research focused on the subject of sustainability. The intention of the project was to engage the public and local and regional decision makers in a collaborative dialogue about sustainability to develop potential future scenarios for the Georgia Basin. These future scenarios were explored using Georgia Basin QUEST (GB‐QUEST) which is a computer simulation game that embodies expert understanding about how complex ecological, social and economic systems work (GBFP Overview, 2001). It provides users with a way to create one or more desirable futures and to explore policy mechanisms that could actualize the desired future scenario that they created. This research has contributed to regional sustainability by connecting to real world decision making and planning through university ‐ community relationships over the course of the project (Robinson 2003; Robinson, Carmichael, Tansey et al. 2006; Robinson, Carmichael, VanWynsberghe et al. 2006; Robinson & Tansey 2006; Tansey et al. 2002; VanWynsberghe et al. 2003). The Georgia Basin Digital Library (GBDL) project was a two‐year project (2000‐2002) to develop a conceptual framework for a web‐accessible spatial digital library. This research grant secured a partnership commitment between the recipient, the Sustainable Development Research Institute at the University of British Columbia and one of the contributing sponsors, Natural Resources Canada (Earth Sciences Sector). The original aim of the GBDL project was to design and develop a conceptual framework for such a system. 93 The initial premise was that individuals need a familiar and understandable frame of reference in which to assess the complex interrelationships between the ecological, social and economic systems of which they are a part. The understandable frame of reference echoes the sense of place that people can establish with their surroundings (Relph 1976). A shared sense of place is an important element in developing a meaningful understanding of what sustainability may mean in the context of a region or community, and for making informed decisions about a collective future. It was comprised of the following six research components: Research Component Interface Design Description Development of a user interface that represents the desired functionality of the site while demonstrating usability and familiarity to the user. Community Engagement Involvement of the community in an effort to promote understanding and instigate involvement in issues that relate to sustainability in the Georgia Basin region. Visualization Development of new manners of representing geospatial data, focusing specifically on three‐dimensional (3‐D) visualization, in an effort to bring geospatial data into a familiar environment for the user. Knowledge Representation Development of a means of creating understanding and interrelationships of concepts surrounding sustainability and developing a means of linking these concepts to geospatial data in an effort to enhance understanding. Knowledge Architecture Development of an architecture that manages relationships between thematically complex polygonal data, specific observations and associated attribute, image and text data. Scenario Modelling Display and integration of backcast scenario models developed through GB‐QUEST that represent issues relevant to the Georgia Basin such as water, agriculture and neighbourhood planning. Table 5.1 Research themes in Georgia Basin Digital Library Project (GBDL Final Report, 2002). The linkage between GB‐QUEST’s future context and the GBDL framework to encapsulate some current information on the Georgia Basin and public perceptions of sustainability created the potential to explore the temporal component of sustainability issues at a regional scale. The GBDL project was distinct from GBFP but maintained tight linkages, particularly around community engagement and linkages to future scenario development. Placing the 94 technology in context, it is important to stress that the GBDL design intended to address the fragmentation of digital spatial data (Journeay et al. 2000). The goal was not simply to build a website but to examine the use of the web for information exploration and for engagement with non‐market, learning‐based activities. Over the course of this work, the scope evolved into a system that supports knowledge exploration (including knowledge generation) and could support decision activities. The next sections describe one of the methods employed in this thesis – interaction design. The application and its conceptual tenets have been described elsewhere (Talwar et al. 2003) and what follows is a reworking of this piece to reinforce methodological implications of interaction design as it was carried out as part of the GBDL. The process of designing and creating the GBDL was foundational to the subsequent individual case study research into the use of spatial technologies with community groups is described in detail in the next chapter. The overarching goal of the GBDL was to develop awareness and understanding of issues related to regional sustainability. To accomplish this, GBDL integrated web‐based geographical information systems (webGIS), knowledge representation, community mapping, sustainability, and public participation techniques. More specifically, the project developed a conceptual framework and specifications for a digital library that emphasized user services over archive or advanced search functionality. This acknowledged that the expected audiences of the GBDL project would not typically be familiar with web technology beyond the browser level and would have little background in interpreting research data and reports. One of the key goals of the project was to provide functionality that was both accessible and non‐intimidating to such an audience. In the course of the project, it became apparent that a manifestation of the conceptual framework into a prototype application, GBExplorer, would provide shape and depth to ideas that were evolving. This represents an important shift in thinking between building a 95 website of information and creating a research prototype, which is ultimately what the GBDL was. The crux of GBExplorer was the functional and technical architecture that will help promote the integration of natural science and socio‐economic information for the purposes of awareness building around sustainability issues at community and regional scales. An overview of the conceptual design and a description of the online components is provided in the next section. 5.3 Conceptual framework for the Georgia Basin Digital Library The disaggregated nature of information has led to processes that fall short of embracing a holistic approach to decision making about a collective future (Journeay et al. 2000). The transition to sustainability, in this region and elsewhere, includes the challenge of place‐ based knowledge building and integration (National Research Council 1999). Libraries have played a fundamental role in managing information collections, a role that is being reexamined in the face of the societal shift toward the pervasiveness of information technology and the World Wide Web. Over and above the
- Library Home /
- Search Collections /
- Open Collections /
- Browse Collections /
- UBC Theses and Dissertations /
- Spatializing science and technology studies : exploring...
Open Collections
UBC Theses and Dissertations
Featured Collection
UBC Theses and Dissertations
Spatializing science and technology studies : exploring the role of GIS and interactive social research Talwar, Sonia 2008
pdf
Page Metadata
Item Metadata
| Title | Spatializing science and technology studies : exploring the role of GIS and interactive social research |
| Creator |
Talwar, Sonia |
| Publisher | University of British Columbia |
| Date Issued | 2008 |
| Description | This thesis is an interdisciplinary study based on the interplay between science, technology and society in order to inform the design of knowledge exploration systems. It provides a rationale for the integration of science knowledge, geographic information, with digital libraries to build knowledge and awareness about sustainability. A theoretical reconceptualization of knowledge building is provided that favours interactive engagement with information and argues against a traditional model of science production and communication that is linear and unidirectional. The elements of contextualization, classification and communication form the core of the reconceptualization. Since many information systems entrench the traditional model of science production, the three elements are considered in light of library and information science and geographic information science. The use of geographic information systems is examined to identify how they can be used as part of a social learning model for scientific, social, cultural, and environmental issues to further assist people in connecting to place and sustainability. Empirical data was collected from four case studies. One case study centred on the design and development of a web-based digital library called the Georgia Basin Digital Library, another two case studies focused on the use of part of this digital library with youth, senior and environmental groups in south-western British Columbia. The remaining case study observed a community deliberation to consider how knowledge exploration systems might support deliberation in future processes. The case study research confirms that collaborative research with communities is a fruitful way to engage with sustainability issues. Such collaborations require consideration of institutional arrangements, information collections, relationship building, technology transfer and capacity building. |
| Extent | 3473654 bytes |
| Subject |
Geographic information systems Digital libraries Public participation Sustainability |
| Genre |
Thesis/Dissertation |
| Type |
Text |
| File Format | application/pdf |
| Language | eng |
| Date Available | 2008-04-21 |
| Provider | Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library |
| Rights | Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International |
| DOI | 10.14288/1.0066368 |
| URI | http://hdl.handle.net/2429/755 |
| Degree |
Doctor of Philosophy - PhD |
| Program |
Geography |
| Affiliation |
Arts, Faculty of Geography, Department of |
| Degree Grantor | University of British Columbia |
| Graduation Date | 2008-05 |
| Campus |
UBCV |
| Scholarly Level | Graduate |
| Rights URI | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ |
| Aggregated Source Repository | DSpace |
Download
- Media
- 24-ubc_2008_spring_talwar_sonia.pdf [ 3.31MB ]
- Metadata
- JSON: 24-1.0066368.json
- JSON-LD: 24-1.0066368-ld.json
- RDF/XML (Pretty): 24-1.0066368-rdf.xml
- RDF/JSON: 24-1.0066368-rdf.json
- Turtle: 24-1.0066368-turtle.txt
- N-Triples: 24-1.0066368-rdf-ntriples.txt
- Original Record: 24-1.0066368-source.json
- Full Text
- 24-1.0066368-fulltext.txt
- Citation
- 24-1.0066368.ris