The Use of E-Tools to Engage Citizens in Urban Green Infrastructure Governance: Where Do We Stand and Where Are We Going?
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Urban Green Infrastructure Governance
1.2. The Potential of E-Tools in an UGI Governance Perspective
1.3. Categorisation of E-Tools in UGI Governance
2. Potentials and Limitations to Democratic UGI E-Governance
3. Integrating E-Tools in UGI Governance
4. Conclusions and Future Research
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Foster, A.; Dunham, I.M.; Science, C.K.U. Citizen Science for Urban Forest Management? Predicting the Data Density and Richness of Urban Forest Volunteered Geographic Information. Urban Sci. 2017, 1, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gulsrud, N.M.; Hertzog, K.; Shears, I. Innovative urban forestry governance in Melbourne? Investigating “green placemaking” as a nature-based solution. Environ. Res. 2018, 161, 158–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Andersson, E.; Barthel, S.; Borgström, S.; Colding, J.; Elmqvist, T.; Folke, C.; Gren, Å. Reconnecting Cities to the Biosphere: Stewardship of Green Infrastructure and Urban Ecosystem Services. Ambio 2014, 43, 445–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Konijnendijk, C.C.; Annerstedt, M.; Busse Nielsen, A.; Maruthaveeran, S. Benefits of urban parks: A systematic review. A report for IPFRA. IPFRA 2013, 1–71. Available online: https://pub.epsilon.slu.se/8995/6/annerstedt_m_120824.pdf (accessed on 28 September 2018).
- Artmann, M.; Kohler, M.; Meinel, G.; Gan, J.; Ioja, I.C. How smart growth and green infrastructure can mutually support each other—A conceptual framework for compact and green cities. Ecol. Indic. 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tzoulas, K.; Korpela, K.; Venn, S.; Yli-Pelkonen, V.; Kaźmierczak, A.; Niemela, J.; James, P. Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using Green Infrastructure: A literature review. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2007, 81, 167–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ernstson, H.; Barthel, S.; Andersson, E.; Borgström, S.T. Scale-Crossing Brokers and Network Governance of Urban Ecosystem Services: The Case of Stockholm. Ecol. Soc. 2010, 15, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beatley, T. Biophilic Cities; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- World Resources Institute. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis/Millennium Ecosystem Assessment; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005; Available online: http://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/Synthesis.aspx (accessed on 27 June 2018).
- Döhren, P.V.; Haase, D. Ecosystem disservices research: A review of the state of the art with a focus on cities. Ecol. Indic. 2015, 52, 490–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Danielsen, F.; Jensen, P.M.; Burgess, N.D.; Altamirano, R.; Alviola, P.A.; Andrianandrasana, H.; Brashares, J.S.; Burton, A.C.; Coronado, I.; Corpuz, N.; et al. A Multicountry Assessment of Tropical Resource Monitoring by Local Communities. BioScience 2014, 64, 236–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Van der Jagt, A.; Elands, B.; Ambrose-Oji, B.; Gerohazi, E.; Møller, M.S.; Buizer, M. Participatory Governance of Urban Green Spaces: Trends and Practices in the EU. Nord. Arkit. 2017, 28, 11–40. [Google Scholar]
- Buizer, M.; Elands, B.; Vierikko, K. Governing cities reflexively—The biocultural diversity concept as an alternative to ecosystem services. Environ. Sci. Policy 2016, 62, 7–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosol, M. Public Participation in Post-Fordist Urban Green Space Governance: The Case of Community Gardens in Berlin. Int. J. Urban Reg. Res. 2010, 34, 548–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Commission, F.C.E.F. Public Engagement in Forestry: A Toolbox for Public Engagement in Forest and Woodland Planning; Forestry Commission: Stockport, UK, 2011.
- Kooiman, J.; Bavinck, M.; Chuenpagdee, R.; Mahon, R.; Pullin, R. Interactive Governance and Governability: An Introduction. J. Transdiscipl. Environ. Stud. 2008, 7, 29–50. [Google Scholar]
- Arnouts, R.; van der Zouwen, M.; Arts, B. Analysing governance modes and shifts—Governance arrangements in Dutch nature policy. For. Policy Econ. 2012, 16, 43–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andersson, E.; Tengö, M.; McPhearson, T.; Kremer, P. Cultural ecosystem services as a gateway for improving urban sustainability. Ecosyst. Serv. 2015, 12, 165–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bertot, J.C.; Jaeger, P.T.; Grimes, J.M. Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Gov. Inf. Q. 2010, 27, 264–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vierikko, K.; Elands, B.; Niemelä, J.; Andersson, A.; Buijs, A.; Fischer, L.; Haase, D.; Kabisch, N.; Kowarik, I.; Luz, A.K.; et al. Considering the ways biocultural diversity helps enforce the urban green infrastructure in times of urban transformation. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2017, 22, 7–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Molin, J.F. Parks, People and Places. Place-Based Governance in Urban Green Space Maintenance. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Williams, D.R. Making sense of “place”: Reflections on pluralism and positionality in place research. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2014, 131, 74–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buijs, A.E.; Mattijssen, T.J.; Van der Jagt, A.P.; Ambrose-Oji, B.; Andersson, E.; Elands, B.H.; Møller, M.S. Active citizenship for urban green infrastructure: Fostering the diversity and dynamics of citizen contributions through mosaic governance. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2016, 22, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Musacchio, L. Key concepts and research priorities for landscape sustainability. Landsc. Ecol. 2013, 28, 995–998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McPhearson, T.; Pickett, S.T.A.; Grimm, N.B.; Niemela, J.; Alberti, M.; Elmqvist, T.; Weber, C.; Haase, D.; Breuste, J.; Qureshi, S. Advancing Urban Ecology toward a Science of Cities. BioScience 2016, 66, 198–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kyttä, M.; Broberg, A.; Tzoulas, T.; Snabb, K. Towards contextually sensitive urban densification: Location-based softGIS knowledge revealing perceived residential environmental quality. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2013, 113, 30–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brown, G.; Weber, D.; de Bie, K. Is PPGIS good enough? An empirical evaluation of the quality of PPGIS crowd-sourced spatial data for conservation planning. Land Use Policy 2015, 43, 228–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kahila-Tani, M.; Broberg, A.; Kyttä, M.; Tyger, T. Let the Citizens Map—Public Participation GIS as a Planning Support System in the Helsinki Master Plan Process. Plan. Pract. Res. 2015, 31, 195–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arts, K.; van der Wal, R.; Adams, W.M. Digital technology and the conservation of nature. Ambio 2015, 44 (Suppl. 4), 661–673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Babelon, I.; Ståhle, A.; Balfors, B. Toward Cyborg PPGIS: Exploring socio-technical requirements for the use of web-based PPGIS in two municipal planning cases, Stockholm region, Sweden. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2016, 60, 1366–1390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Innes, J.E.; Booher, D.E. Reframing public participation: Strategies for the 21st century. Plan. Theory Pract. 2004, 5, 419–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kleinhans, R.; Van Ham, M.; Evans-Cowley, J. Using Social Media and Mobile Technologies to Foster Engagement and Self-Organization in Participatory Urban Planning and Neighbourhood Governance. Plan. Pract. Res. 2015, 30, 237–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Falco, E.; Kleinhans, R. Digital Participatory Platforms for Co-Production in Urban Development. Int. J. E Plan. Res. 2018, 7, 1–27. [Google Scholar]
- Pfeffer, K.; Baud, I.; Denis, E.; Scott, D.; Sydenstricker-Neto, J. Participatory spatial knowledge management tools: Empowerment and upscaling or exclusion? Inf. Commun. Soc. 2013, 16, 258–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soma, K.; Termeer, C.J.A.M.; Opdam, P. Informational governance—A systematic literature review of governance for sustainability in the Information Age. Environ. Sci. Policy 2016, 56, 89–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arts, K.; Ioris, A.A.R.; Macleod, C.J.A.; Han, X.; Sripada, S.G.; Braga, J.R.Z.; van der Wal, R. Environmental communication in the Information Age: Institutional barriers and opportunities in the provision of river data to the general public. Environ. Sci. Policy 2016, 55, 47–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- García-Sánchez, I.-M.; Rodríguez-Domínguez, L.; Frias-Aceituno, J.-V. Evolutions in E-governance: Evidence from Spanish Local Governments. Environ. Policy Gov. 2013, 23, 323–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maffey, G.; Homans, H.; Banks, K.; Arts, K. Digital technology and human development: A charter for nature conservation. Ambio 2015, 44, 527–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Newman, G.; Graham, J.; Crall, A.; Laituri, M. The art and science of multi-scale citizen science support. Ecol. Inform. 2011, 6, 217–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elwood, S.; Goodchild, M.F.; Sui, D.Z. Researching Volunteered Geographic Information: Spatial Data, Geographic Research, and New Social Practice. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 2012, 102, 571–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goodchild, M.F. Citizens as sensors: The world of volunteered geography. GeoJournal 2007, 69, 211–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jankowski, P. Towards participatory geographic information systems for community-based environmental decision making. J. Environ. Manag. 2009, 90, 1966–1971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wang, Z.; Jin, Y.; Liu, Y.; Li, D.; Zhang, B. Comparing Social Media Data and Survey Data in Assessing the Attractiveness of Beijing Olympic Forest Park. Sustainability 2018, 10, 382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guerrero, P.; Møller, M.S.; Olafsson, A.S.; Snizek, B. Revealing Cultural Ecosystem Services through Instagram Images: The Potential of Social Media Volunteered Geographic Information for Urban Green Infrastructure Planning and Governance. Urban Plan. 2016, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamstead, Z.A.; Fisher, D.; Ilieva, R.T.; Wood, S.A.; McPhearson, T.; Kremer, P. Geolocated social media as a rapid indicator of park visitation and equitable park access. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2018, 72, 38–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wood, S.A.; Guerry, A.D.; Silver, J.M.; Lacayo, M. Using social media to quantify nature-based tourism and recreation. Sci. Rep. 2013, 3, 3976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Engaging People through e-Participation, 2016. United Nations E-Government Survey, 2016: E-Government in Support of Sustainable Development. Available online: https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/reports/un-e-government-survey-2016 (accessed on 27 June 2018).
- EU eGovernment Action Plan 2016–2020. Accelerating the Digital Transformation of Government. 2016. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/communication-eu-egovernment-action-plan-2016-2020-accelerating-digital-transformation (accessed on 27 June 2018).
- Anttiroiko, A.V. Electronic Government: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Sandoval-Almazan, R.; Gil-Garcia, J.R. Are government internet portals evolving towards more interaction, participation, and collaboration? Revisiting the rhetoric of e-government among municipalities. Gov. Inf. Q. 2012, 29, S72–S81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carrizales, T.; Melitski, J.; Manoharan, A.; Holzer, M. E-Governance Approaches at the Local Level: A Case Study in Best Practice. Int. J. Public Adm. 2011, 34, 935–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dawes, S.S. The Evolution and Continuing Challenges of E-Governance. Public Admin. Rev. 2008, 68, 86–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Liu, X.; Gao, S.; Gong, L.; Kang, C.; Zhi, Y.; Chi, G.; Shi, L. Social Sensing: A New Approach to Understanding Our Socioeconomic Environments. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 2015, 105, 512–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brown, G. A Review of Sampling Effects and Response Bias in Internet Participatory Mapping (PPGIS/PGIS/VGI). Trans. GIS 2016, 21, 39–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nam, T. Dual effects of the internet on political activism: Reinforcing and mobilizing. Gov. Inf. Q. 2012, 29, S90–S97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sieber, R.E.; Haklay, M. The epistemology(s) of volunteered geographic information: A critique. Geogr. Environ. 2015, 2, 122–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haklay, M. Volunteered Geographic Information and Citizen Science. In Understanding Spatial Media; Kitchin, R., Lauriault, T.P., Wilson, M.W., Eds.; SAGE Publications Ltd.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2017; pp. 127–135. [Google Scholar]
- Ervin, S. Geodesign. In Understanding Spatial Media; Kitchin, R., Lauriault, T.P., Wilson, M.W., Eds.; SAGE: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2017; pp. 84–92. [Google Scholar]
- Heikinheimo, V.; Di Minin, E.; Tenkanen, H.; Hausmann, A.; Erkkonen, J.; Toivonen, T. User-Generated Geographic Information for Visitor Monitoring in a National Park: A Comparison of Social Media Data and Visitor Survey. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2017, 6, 85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tenkanen, H.; Di Minin, E.; Heikinheimo, V.; Hausmann, A.; Herbst, M.; Kajala, L.; Toivonen, T. Instagram, Flickr, or Twitter: Assessing the usability of social media data for visitor monitoring in protected areas. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 17615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Royo, S.; Yetano, A. “Crowdsourcing” as a tool for e-participation: Two experiences regarding CO2 emissions at municipal level. Electron. Commer. Res. 2015, 15, 323–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kahila-Tani, M. Reshaping the Planning Process Using Local Experiences: Utilising PPGIS in Participatory Urban Planning; Aalto University: Espoo, Finland, 2016; Volume 90, pp. 1981–1990. [Google Scholar]
- Sui, D.; Goodchild, M. The convergence of GIS and social media: Challenges for GIScience. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2011, 25, 1737–1748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brandt, P.; Ernst, A.; Gralla, F.; Luederitz, C.; Lang, D.J.; Newig, J.; Reinert, F.; Abson, D.J.; von Wehrden, H. A review of transdisciplinary research in sustainability science. Ecol. Econ. 2013, 92, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dickinson, J.L.; Crain, R.L.; Reeve, H.K.; Schuldt, J.P. Can evolutionary design of social networks make it easier to be “green”? Trends Ecol. Evol. 2013, 28, 561–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nuojua, J. WebMapMedia: A map-based Web application for facilitating participation in spatial planning. Multimed. Syst. 2009, 16, 3–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buytaert, W. Citizen science in hydrology and water resources: Opportunities for knowledge generation, ecosystem service management, and sustainable development. Front. Earth Sci. 2014, 2, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sui, D.; Elwood, S.; Goodchild, M. (Eds.) Crowdsourcing Geographic Knowledge; Springer Science & Business Media: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2013. [Google Scholar]
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Steen Møller, M.; Stahl Olafsson, A. The Use of E-Tools to Engage Citizens in Urban Green Infrastructure Governance: Where Do We Stand and Where Are We Going? Sustainability 2018, 10, 3513. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103513
Steen Møller M, Stahl Olafsson A. The Use of E-Tools to Engage Citizens in Urban Green Infrastructure Governance: Where Do We Stand and Where Are We Going? Sustainability. 2018; 10(10):3513. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103513
Chicago/Turabian StyleSteen Møller, Maja, and Anton Stahl Olafsson. 2018. "The Use of E-Tools to Engage Citizens in Urban Green Infrastructure Governance: Where Do We Stand and Where Are We Going?" Sustainability 10, no. 10: 3513. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103513
APA StyleSteen Møller, M., & Stahl Olafsson, A. (2018). The Use of E-Tools to Engage Citizens in Urban Green Infrastructure Governance: Where Do We Stand and Where Are We Going? Sustainability, 10(10), 3513. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103513