Engaging the public with online discussion and spatial annotations: The generation and transformation of public knowledge

Abstract

Online discussion with spatial annotations has been proposed as a method of facilitating public participation in spatial planning. It has been assumed that it will widen the knowledge base behind decisions by bringing local, first-hand knowledge into planning. However, what type of knowledge will be generated by such a geographically referenced public discussion in the planning process? This article addresses this question by tracing how an online discussion that allowed spatial annotations was implemented in a real-life land-use planning process in Tampere, Finland. The analysis focuses on two distinct phases of knowledge production. First, discussion focuses on how establishing this particular technology as a public forum impacts on the type of knowledge that is provided by the participants. The second part of the study addresses how planners assimilate information from geo-referenced public discussion. The article suggests that the interplay between (1) the site of knowledge production that was at the same time the arena of public discussion, (2) the issues that were deemed necessary to be cared for publicly, and (3) the people who were willing and able to enter the public arena and address issues in the way that the public arena afforded was crucial in shaping the type of knowledge that was generated. Furthermore, the results suggest that the constraints set by the local planning procedures and practical work of planners effectively guide the transformation of this knowledge into the domain of planning. The article starts to unravel contingencies of knowledge production related to public participation methods which use online discussion and spatial annotations.

Keywords:

• online discussion
• spatial annotations
• public participation
• knowledge-in-practice
• public knowledge
• urban planning

Acknowledgements

This article is based upon work supported by The Academy of Finland project (2004-2006), YHTYMÄ graduate school (The Finnish Graduate School for Social-Scientific Environmental Research) and the author's personal research grant (2011) from the Foundation for Municipal Development, Finland.

Notes

1. By invoking this term I want to speak of various types of technologies that are used to represent, illustrate and organise geographical matters. These technologies include both more traditional GIS and such technologies that have been described by Elwood (2009) as “not-quite GIS” assemblages of hardware, software and functionalities.

2. Translation from the original Finnish title Nurmi-Sorilan plussat ja miinukset.

3. See Bamberg (2010) about design choices that were made.