![Sample our Environment & Sustainability journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5935/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Environment-Sustainability.jpg"})
Abstract
Tools that support public engagement with sustainability are essential for local sustainability planning. This research investigates the ability of two geographic information system (GIS)-based tools to promote discussion of sustainability in a suburban context. A local ecological footprint tool and a community environmental atlas (an environmentally themed online mapping system) were created for seven suburban boroughs of Montreal. Variations of both tools have been used to support sustainability efforts, but their use has not been widely evaluated. Working from a public participation GIS (PPGIS) framework that recognizes the powerful influence of data representation, this research uses focus groups to evaluate how well these tools address three criteria that have emerged from the literature on public engagement in sustainability: interdependency across systems, reflexivity about personal and social decision making, and interactions across spatial scales. Whereas the atlas remains advantageous for discussing local spatial specifics, it was found that the ecological footprint helped people see the interconnections among systems, integrate local and global aspects of sustainability, and reflect on the values and assumptions underlying current social and economic structures.
Las herramientas que concuerden con el compromiso público por la sostenibilidad son esenciales para la planeación local de la sostenibilidad. Esta investigación explora la capacidad de dos herramientas basadas en sistemas de información geográfica (SIG) para promover la discusión sobre sostenibilidad en un contexto suburbano. Una herramienta local de huella ecológica y un atlas ambiental de la comunidad (sistema de mapeo en red etiquetado ambientalmente) fueron creados para siete barrios suburbanos de Montreal. Algunas variantes de ambas herramientas se han utilizado para ayudar en esfuerzos de sostenibilidad, pero tal uso no ha sido suficientemente evaluado. Trabajando en un marco SIG de participación pública (PPGIS) que reconoce la poderosa influencia de la representación de los datos, esta investigación utiliza grupos focales para evaluar qué tan bien estas herramientas responden a tres criterios que han surgido de la literatura sobre el compromiso público en sostenibilidad: interdependencia entre sistemas, reflexibilidad acerca de la toma personal y social de decisiones, e interacciones a través de escalas espaciales. A la vez que el atlas sigue siendo ventajoso para la discusión de especificidades espaciales locales, se descubrió que la huella ecológica ayudaba a la gente a ver las interconexiones entre sistemas, integrar aspectos locales y globales de la sostenibilidad, y reflexionar sobre los valores y supuestos que subrayan las actuales estructuras sociales y económicas
Acknowledgments
Notes
aDMTI Spatial is a company specializing in digital geospatial data for Canada.
bThe Doney Spur is an unused rail line. Local environmental groups are lobbying to have it turned into an additional commuter train line.
*The authors would like to thank the participants in the focus groups and to acknowledge support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Canada to the first author and from the Woodcock Foundation and the Fonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Société et la Culture to the McGill Project on Community Based Environmental Decision Support.
1. Although this is the only work we know of that has attempted to combine EFA with GIS in this way, there are extensive resources for creating EFAs in general. A companion paper (CitationKlinsky, Sieber, and Meredith 2009) outlines the method used in this study in depth. Other key resources include CitationWackernagel and Rees (1996), CitationChambers, Simmons, and Wackernagel (2000), and the Global Ecological Footprint Network (http://www.footprintnetwork.org).
2. Differences also arose from technological constraints; for example, the inability of ArcScene to mark grids that would distinguish marginal contributions of thin components such as food consumption.
