Geo-questionnaire: a spatially explicit method for eliciting public preferences, behavioural patterns, and local knowledge – an overview

Open access

Abstract

Geo-questionnaires have been used in a variety of domains to collect public preferences, behavioural patterns, and spatially-explicit local knowledge, for academic research and environmental and urban planning. This paper provides an overview of the method focusing on the methodical characteristics of geo-questionnaires including software functions, types of collected data, and techniques of data analysis. The paper also discusses broader methodical issues related to the practice of deploying geo-questionnaires such as respondent selection and recruitment, representativeness, and data quality. The discussion of methodical issues is followed by an overview of the recent examples of geo-questionnaire applications in Poland, and the discussion of socio-technical aspects of geo-questionnaire use in spatial planning.

Alessa L., Kliskey A., Brown G., 2008. Social–ecological hot-spots mapping: A spatial approach for identifying coupled social–ecological space. Landscape and Urban Planning 85(1): 27–39. DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.09.007.

Anselin L., 1998. Interactive techniques and exploratory spatial data analysis. In: P. Longley, M. Goodchild, D. Maguire, D. Rhind (eds.), Geographical Information Systems: Principles, Techniques, Management and Application. John wiley & Sons, new york: 253–266.

Arnstein S.R., 1969. A ladder of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Planning Association 35(4): 216–224. DOI: 10.1080/01944366908977225.

Babelon I., Ståhle A., Balfors B., 2016. Toward Cyborg PPGIS : exploring socio-technical requirements for the use of web-based PPGIS in two municipal planning cases, Stockholm region, Sweden, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 60(8): 1366–1390. DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2016.1221798.

Bąkowska E., Kaczmarek T., Jankowski P., Zwoliński Zb., Mikuła Ł., Czepkiewicz M., Brudka C., 2016. Geo-questionnaire in urban planning – preliminary results of the experimental application in Poland. Rozwój Regionalny i Polityka Regionalna 35: 37–54.

Brown G., 2006. Mapping landscape Values and Development Preferences: a Method for Tourism and Residential Development Planning. International Journal of Tourism Research 113(8): 101–113.

Brown G., 2012a. Public Participation GIS (PPGIS) for Regional and Environmental Planning: Reflections on a Decade of Empirical Research. URISA Journal 25(2): 7–18.

Brown G., 2012b. An empirical evaluation of the spatial accuracy of public participation GIS (PPGIS) data. Applied Geography 34: 289–294. DOI: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.12.004.

Brown G., Fagerholm N., 2014. Empirical PPGIS/PGIS mapping of ecosystem services: A review and evaluation. Ecosystem Services 13: 119–133. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.10.007.

Brown G., Kelly M., Whitall D., 2014a. Which “public”? Sampling effects in public participation GIS (PPGIS) and volunteered geographic information (VGI) systems for public lands management. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 57(2): 190–214. DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2012.741045.

Brown G., Kyttä M., 2014. Key issues and research priorities for public participation GIS (PPGIS): A synthesis based on empirical research. Applied Geography 46: 122–136. DOI: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.11.004.

Brown G., Pullar D.V., 2012. An evaluation of the use of points versus polygons in public participation geographic information systems using quasi-experimental design and Monte Carlo simulation. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 26(2): 231–246. DOI: 10.1080/13658816.2011.585139.

Brown G., Raymond C.M., 2014. Methods for identifying land use conflict potential using participatory mapping. Landscape and Urban Planning 122: 196–208. DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.11.007.

Brown G., Reed P., 2009. Public Participation GIS: A New Method for Use in National Forest Planning. Forest Science 55(2): 166–182.

Brown G., Reed P., 2012. Social landscape Metrics: Measures for Understanding Place Values from Public Participation Geographic Information Systems (PPGIS). Landscape Research 37(1): 73–90. DOI: 10.1080/01426397.2011.591487.

Brown G., Reed P., Harris C.C., 2002. Testing a place-based theory for environmental evaluation: an Alaska case study. Applied Geography 22: 49–76.

Brown G., Schebella M.F., Weber D., 2014b. Using participatory GIS to measure physical activity and urban park benefits. Landscape and Urban Planning 121: 34–44. DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.09.006.

Brown G., Weber D., 2011. Public Participation GIS: A new method for national park planning. Landscape and Urban Planning 102(1): 1–15. DOI: 10.1016/j.landurb-plan.2011.03.003.

Brown G., Weber D., 2012. A place-based approach to conservation management using public participation GIS (PPGIS). Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 56(4): 1–19. DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2012.685628.

Brown G., Weber D., Zanon D., De bie K., 2012. Evaluation of an online (opt-in) panel for public participation geographic information systems surveys. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 24(4): 534–545. DOI: 10.1093/ijpor/eds001

Bugs G., 2012. Assessment of Online PPGIS Study Cases in Urban Planning. In: B. Murgante, O. Gervasi, S. Misra, N. Nedjah, A.M.A.C. Rocha, D. Taniar, B.O. Apduhan (eds.), Computational Science and Its Applications – ICCSA 2012, Springer: 477–490. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-31125-3_36.

Bugs G., Granell C., Fonts O., Huerta J., Painho M., 2010. An assessment of Public Participation GIS and web 2.0 technologies in urban planning practice in Canela, Brazil. Cities 27(3): 172–181. DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2009.11.008.

Bugs G., Kyttä M., 2016. Public Perception Spatial Data from the PPGIS Jaguarão Experiment. In: S. Konomi, G. Roussos (eds.), Enriching Urban Spaces with Ambient Computing, the Internet of Things, and Smart City Design, IGI Global: 257–278. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-0827-4.ch013.

Carver S. 2001. Participation and Geographical Information: a position paper. Position Paper for the ESF-NSF workshop on Access to Geographic Information and Participatory Approaches Using Geographic Information, Spoleto, 6–8 December

Chaix B., Kestens Y., Perchoux C., Karusisi N., Merlo J., Labadi K., 2012. An interactive mapping tool to assess individual mobility patterns in neighborhood studies. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 43(4): 440–450. DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2012.06.026.

Corbett J., Keller P., 2006. An analytical framework to examine empowerment associated with participatory geographic information systems (PGIS). Cartographica 40(4): 91–102.

Czepkiewicz M., Brudka C., Jankowski P., Kaczmarek P., Zwoliński Zb., Mikuła Ł., Bąkowska E., Młodkowski M., Wójcicki M., 2016a. Public Participation GIS for sustainable urban mobility planning: methods, applications and challenges. Rozwój Regionalny i Polityka Regionalna 35: 9–35.

Czepkiewicz M., Jankowski P., Młodkowski M., 2016b. Geo-questionnaires in urban planning: recruitment methods, participant engagement, and data quality. Cartography and Geographic Information Science 44(6): 551–567. DOI: 10.1080/15230406.2016.1230520.

Devillers R., Stein A., Bedard Y., Chrisman N., Fisher P., Shi W., 2010. Thirty years of research on spatial data quality: achievements, failures, and opportunities. Transactions in GIS 14(4): 387–400.

Dragićević S., Balram S., 2004. A web GIS collaborative framework to structure and manage distributed planning processes. Journal of Geographical Systems 6(2): 133–153.

Dunn C.E., 2007. Participatory GIS – a people’s GIS? Progress in Human Geography 31(5): 616–637.

Elwood S., Schuurman N., Wilson M.W., 2011. Critical GIS. In: T.L. Nyerges, H. Couclelis, R. McMaster (eds.), The SAGE Handbook of GIS and Society, SAGE, los Angeles: 87–106.

Faber B.G., Wallace W., Cuthbertson J., 1995. Advances in Collaborative GIS for Land-Resource Negotiation. The Proceedings of the GIS’95 Ninth Annual Symposium on Geographic Information Systems Vancouver, B.C. GIS world Inc. 1: 183–189.

Goodchild M.F., Li L., 2012. Assuring the quality of volunteered geographic information. Spatial Statistics 1: 110–120. DOI: 10.1016/j.spasta.2012.03.002.

Gottwald S., Laatikainen T.E., Kyttä M., 2016. Exploring the usability of PPGIS among older adults: challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 30(12): 2321–2338. DOI: 10.1080/13658816.2016.1170837.

Haklay M., Tobón C., 2003. Usability Evaluation and PPGIS: towards a user-centred design approach. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 17(6): 577–592.

IAP2 [International Association of Public Participation], 2014. IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation. International Association for Public Participation. Online: www.iap2.org/resource/resmgr/foundations_course/IAP2_P2_ Spectrum_FINAl.pdf (accessed 19 August 2018)

Innes J.E., Booher D.E., 2004. Reframing Public Participation: Strategies for the 21st Century. Planning Theory & Practice 5(4): 419–436.

Jankowski, P., Czepkiewicz, M., Młodkowski, M., Zwoliński, Zb. (2016). Geo-questionnaire: A Method and Tool for Public Preference Elicitation in land Use Planning Piotr. Transactions in GIS 20(6): 903–924. DOI: 10.1111/tgis.12191

Jankowski P., Czepkiewicz M., Młodkowski M., Zwoliński Zb., Wójcicki M., 2017a. Evaluating the scalability of public participation in urban land use planning: A comparison of Geoweb methods with face-to-face meetings. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science. DOI: 10.1177/2399808317719709.

Jankowski P., Kaczmarek T., Zwolinski Zb., Bakowska-waldmann E., Brudka C., Czpkiewicz M., Mikuła Ł., Młodkowski M., 2018. Zastosowanie aplikacji geoankiety i geodyskusji w partycypacyjnym planowaniu przestrzennym – dobre praktyki. Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Poznań: 1–81.

Jankowski P., Kaczmarek T., Zwoliński Zb., Mikuła Ł., Wójcicki M., Bąkowska E., Czepkiewicz M., Młodkowski M., Brudka C., 2017b. Narzędzia internetowe w konsultacjach społecznych w planowaniu przestrzennym. Idea, obszary zastosowań i wdrażanie. Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM, Poznań: 1–58.

Kaczmarek T., Wójcicki M., 2016. Participation in social consultations on physical planning documents. The case of Poznań City. Quaestiones Geographicae 35(2): 71–81.

Kahila M., Kyttä M., 2009. SoftGIS as a bridge builder in collaborative urban planning. In: S. Geertman, J. Stillwell (eds.), Planning Support Systems: Best Practices and New Methods, Springer: 389–412.

Kahila-Tani M., Broberg A., Kyttä M., Tyger T., 2015. Let the Citizens Map—Public Participation GIS as a Planning Support System in the Helsinki Master Plan Process. Planning Practice & Research 31(2): 195–214. DOI: 10.1080/02697459.2015.1104203.

Khakee A. 1998. Evaluation and Planning: two inseparable concepts. Town Planning Review 69(4): 359–374.

Kyttä M., Broberg A., Haybatollahi M., Schmidt-Thomé K., 2015. Urban happiness: context-sensitive study of the social sustainability of urban settings. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 47: 1–24. DOI: 10.1177/0265813515600121.

Kyttä M., Broberg A., Tzoulas T., Snabb K., 2013. Towards contextually sensitive urban densification: location-based softGIS knowledge revealing perceived residential environmental quality. Landscape and Urban Planning 113: 30–46. DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.01.008.

Kyttä M., Kahila M., Broberg A., 2011. Perceived environmental quality as an input to urban infill policy-making. URBAN DESIGN International 16(1): 19–35. DOI: 10.1057/udi.2010.19.

Leahy M., Hall G.B., 2010. Using open source software components to implement a modular web 2.0 design for map-based discussions. International Journal of Open Source Software and Processes 2(3): 30–47.

Lechner A.M., Raymond C.M., Adams V.M., Polyakov M., Gordon A., Rhodes J.R., Mills M., Stein A., Ives C.D., Lefroy E.C., 2014. Characterizing spatial uncertainty when integrating social data in conservation planning. Conservation Biology 28(6): 1497–1511. DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12409.

McCall M.K., Dunn C.E., 2012. Geo-information tools for participatory spatial planning: Fulfilling the criteria for “good” governance? Geoforum 43(1): 81–94. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2011.07.007.

Nyerges T., Aguirre R.W., 2011. Public Participation in Analytic-Deliberative Decision Making: Evaluating a large-Group Online Field Experiment. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 101(3): 37–41.

Pánek J., Benediktsson K., 2017. Emotional mapping and its participatory potential: Opinions about cycling conditions in Reykjavík, Iceland. Cities 61(1): 65–73. DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2016.11.005.

Pánek J., Pászto V., Marek L., 2017. Mapping Emotions: Spatial Distribution of Safety Perception in the City of Olomouc. In. I. Ivan, A. Singleton, J. Horák, T. Inspektor (eds.) The Rise of Big Spatial Data, Lecture Notes in Geoin-formation and Cartography: 211–224. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-45123-7.

Perchoux C., Kestens Y., Thomas F., Hulst A. Van, Thierry B., Chaix B., 2014. Assessing patterns of spatial behavior in health studies: Their socio-demographic determinants and associations with transportation modes (the RECORD Cohort Study). Social Science and Medicine 119: 64–73. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.07.026.

Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska A., Czepkiewicz M., Kronenberg J., 2017. Eliciting non-monetary values of formal and informal urban green spaces using public participation GIS. Landscape and Urban Planning 160: 85–95. DOI: 10.1016/j.Landurbplan.2016.12.012.

Pocewicz A., Nielsen-Pincus M., 2013. Preferences of wyoming residents for siting of energy and residential development. Applied Geography 43, 45–55. DOI: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.06.006.

Rantanen H., Kahila M. (2009). The SoftGIS approach to local knowledge. Journal of Environmental Management 90(6): 1981–1990. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.08.025.

Rinner C., 2001. Argumentation maps: GIS-based discussion support for on-line planning. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 28(6): 847–863. DOI: 10.1068/b2748t.

Rinner C., Bird M., 2009. Evaluating community engagement through argumentation maps—a public participation GIS case study. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 36(4): 588–601. DOI: 10.1068/b34084.

Salonen M., Broberg A., Kyttä M., Toivonen T., 2014. Do suburban residents prefer the fastest or low-carbon travel modes? Combining public participation GIS and multi-modal travel time analysis for daily mobility research. Applied Geography 53: 438–448. DOI: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.06.028.

Schlossberg M., Shuford E., 2005. Delineating “Public” and “Participation” in PPGIS. URISA Journal 16(2): 15–26.

Schmidt-Thomé K., Haybatollahi M., Kyttä M., Korpi J., 2013. The prospects for urban densification: a place-based study. Environmental Research Letters 8(2): 1–11. DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/025020.

Schmidt-Thome K., Wallin S., Laatikainen T., Kangasoja J., Kyttä M., 2014. Exploring the use of PPGIS in self-organizing urban development: Case softGIS in Pacific beach. The Journal of Community Informatics 10(3): 1–12. Online: ci-journal.net/index.php/ciej/article/view/1080/1111 (accessed 7 August 2018).

Sieber R., 2006. Public participation geographic information systems: A literature review and framework. Annals of American Association of Geographers 96(3): 491–507. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8306.2006.00702.x.

Slotterback C.S., 2011. Planners’ perspectives on using technology in participatory processes. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 38(3): 468–485. DOI: 10.1068/b36138.

Ståhle A., 2006. Sociotope mapping - exploring public open space and its multiple use values in urban and landscape planning practice. Nordic Journal of Architectural Research 19(4): 59–71.

Talen E., 2000. Bottom-up GIS: A new tool for individual and group expression in participatory planning. Journal of the American Planning Association 66(3): 279–294. DOI: 10.1080/01944360008976107.

de Vries S., Buijs A.E., Langers F., Farjon H., van Hinsberg A., Sijtsma F.J., 2013. Measuring the attractiveness of Dutch landscapes: Identifying national hotspots of highly valued places using Google Maps. Applied Geography, 45: 220–229. DOI: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.09.017.

Quaestiones Geographicae

The Journal of Adam Mickiewicz University

Journal Information


CiteScore 2018: 0.83

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.236
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.461

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 181 181 18
PDF Downloads 165 165 13