IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i12p6508-d570652.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scalability in the Application of Geodesign in Brazil: Expanding the Use of the Brazilian Geodesign Platform to Metropolitan Regions in Transformative-Learning Planning

Author

Listed:
  • Ana Clara Mourão Moura

    (School of Architecture and Urbanism, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte 30130-140, Brazil)

  • Christian Rezende Freitas

    (School of Architecture and Urbanism, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte 30130-140, Brazil)

Abstract

The Brazilian Geodesign platform was proposed based on extensive experience in Geodesign workshops, aiming to adapt the method to the country’s cultural specificities, with a commitment to support the construction of opinions in planning, in the process of transformative-learning planning. To test the scalability of the method, a study was developed in 13 metropolitan regions of the country, with the involvement of universities, distributed from north to south, in different biomes and urbanization conditions. The same method was proposed for everyone, starting from the same collection of 40 thematic maps to support discussions about alternative futures in land use. Participants used the GISColab platform and went through the same stages of analysis, proposition, and negotiation of ideas. As a result, there was an improvement in the projects developed between the first and the last day of work, with the expansion of compliance with the goals of sustainable development (SDG) and areas for carbon credit. It was possible to observe that, although they used the same framework proposed, each group adapted the method to their local reality, proving the scalability of the process and the necessary flexibility for employment in different realities, ensuring a defensible and reproducible criterion. As recommendations, it would be interesting to apply the same study of multiple simultaneous cases in another country, to analyze the scalability and flexibility to local changes, as it happened in the experiment. This would be entirely possible, as the platform is based on worldwide OGC standards (Open Geospatial Consortium) and would have full interoperability in use.

Suggested Citation

  • Ana Clara Mourão Moura & Christian Rezende Freitas, 2021. "Scalability in the Application of Geodesign in Brazil: Expanding the Use of the Brazilian Geodesign Platform to Metropolitan Regions in Transformative-Learning Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-18, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:12:p:6508-:d:570652
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6508/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6508/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John F. Forester, 1999. "The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262561220, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ana Clara Mourão Moura & Camila Marques Zyngier & Ítalo Sousa Sena & Vanessa Tenuta Freitas, 2021. "Geodesign Experiments in Areas of Social Vulnerability in the Iron Quadrangle, Minas Gerais, Brazil," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-29, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. E. Melanie DuPuis & Brian J. Gareau, 2008. "Neoliberal Knowledge: The Decline of Technocracy and the Weakening of the Montreal Protocol," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1212-1229, December.
    2. Makena Coffman & Karen Umemoto, 2010. "The triple-bottom-line: framing of trade-offs in sustainability planning practice," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 12(5), pages 597-610, October.
    3. te Brömmelstroet, Marco, 2017. "Towards a pragmatic research agenda for the PSS domain," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 77-83.
    4. Primmer, Eeva & Kyllonen, Simo, 2006. "Goals for public participation implied by sustainable development, and the preparatory process of the Finnish National Forest Programme," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(8), pages 838-853, November.
    5. Liz Barry, 2022. "Community science and the design of climate governance," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 1-17, April.
    6. Crystal Legacy & Ryan van den Nouwelant, 2015. "Negotiating Strategic Planning's Transitional Spaces: The Case of ‘Guerrilla Governance’ in Infrastructure Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(1), pages 209-226, January.
    7. Peter Dithan Ntale & Jude Ssempebwa & Badiru Musisi & Genza Gyaviira Musoke & Kimoga Joseph & C. B. Mugimu & Ngoma Muhammed & Joseph Ntayi, 2020. "Gaps in the structuring of organizations in the graduate employment context in Uganda," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    8. Patricia Molina Costa, 2014. "From plan to reality: Implementing a community vision in Jackson Square, Boston," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 293-310, September.
    9. Ratka ÄŒolić & Ä orÄ‘e Milić & Jasna Petrić & NataÅ¡a ÄŒolić, 2022. "Institutional capacity development within the national urban policy formation process – Participants’ views," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 40(1), pages 69-89, February.
    10. Jongwng Ju & Jaecheol Kim, 2023. "Applying the Delphi Approach to Incorporate Voiceless Stakeholders in Community Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    11. repec:lib:000cis:v:5:y:2017:i:1:p:26-34 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Peter Wilshusen, 2009. "Social process as everyday practice: the micro politics of community-based conservation and development in southeastern Mexico," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(2), pages 137-162, May.
    13. David Brain, 2005. "From Good Neighborhoods to Sustainable Cities: Social Science and the Social Agenda of the New Urbanism," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 28(2), pages 217-238, April.
    14. Mickey Lauria & Mellone Long, 2017. "Planning Experience and Planners’ Ethics," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 83(2), pages 202-220, April.
    15. Kenneth M. Reardon, 2005. "Empowerment planning in East St. Louis, Illinois," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 85-100, April.
    16. Malene Freudendal-Pedersen & Sven Kesselring, 2016. "Mobilities, Futures & the City: repositioning discourses – changing perspectives – rethinking policies," Mobilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(4), pages 575-586, August.
    17. Gaber, John & Gaber, Sharon L., 2010. "Using face validity to recognize empirical community observations," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 138-146, May.
    18. Shlomit Flint Ashery & Carl Steinitz, 2022. "Issue-Based Complexity: Digitally Supported Negotiation in Geodesign Linking Planning and Implementation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-19, July.
    19. Vanessa Watson, 2009. "Seeing from the South: Refocusing Urban Planning on the Globe’s Central Urban Issues," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 46(11), pages 2259-2275, October.
    20. Michael Duijn & Marc Rijnveld & Merlijn van Hulst, 2010. "Meeting in the middle: joining reflection and action in complex public sector projects," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(4), pages 227-233, July.
    21. Heather Campbell & Robert Marshall, 2004. "Towards justice in planning: A reappraisal," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 239-252, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:12:p:6508-:d:570652. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.