IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v6y2017i4p79-d117691.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What’s (Not) on the Map: Landscape Features from Participatory Sketch Mapping Differ from Local Categories Used in Language

Author

Listed:
  • Flurina M. Wartmann

    (Geography Department, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstr. 190, CH-8057 Zurich, Switzerland
    Current address: Institute of Geography, School of Geosciences, University of Edinburgh, UK.)

  • Ross S. Purves

    (Geography Department, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstr. 190, CH-8057 Zurich, Switzerland
    University Research Priority Programme Language and Space, University of Zurich, Freiestrasse 16, CH-8032 Zurich, Switzerland)

Abstract

Participatory mapping of local land use as the basis for planning and decision-making has become widespread around the globe. However, still relatively little is known about the conceptual underpinnings of geographic information produced through participatory mapping in given cultural and linguistic settings. In this paper, we therefore address the seemingly simple question of what is (not) represented on maps through an exploratory case study comparing land use categories participants represented on sketch maps with categories elicited through more language-focused ethnographic fieldwork. To explore landscape categorization, we conducted sketch mapping with 29 participants and in-depth ethnographic fieldwork with 19 participants from the Takana indigenous people in the Bolivian Amazon. Sketch mapping resulted in 74 different feature types, while we elicited 156 landscape categories used in language, of which only 23 overlapped with feature types from the sketch mapping. Vegetation categories were highly diversified in language but seldom represented on maps, while more obviously anthropogenic features were represented on sketch maps. Furthermore, participants seldom drew culturally important landscape categories such as fallow plots or important plant harvesting sites on maps, with important potential consequences for natural resource management.

Suggested Citation

  • Flurina M. Wartmann & Ross S. Purves, 2017. "What’s (Not) on the Map: Landscape Features from Participatory Sketch Mapping Differ from Local Categories Used in Language," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-16, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:6:y:2017:i:4:p:79-:d:117691
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/6/4/79/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/6/4/79/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Robbins, 2001. "Fixed Categories in a Portable Landscape: The Causes and Consequences of Land-Cover Categorization," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 33(1), pages 161-179, January.
    2. Martin Dodge & Rob Kitchin, 2013. "Crowdsourced Cartography: Mapping Experience and Knowledge," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 45(1), pages 19-36, January.
    3. F Harvey & N Chrisman, 1998. "Boundary Objects and the Social Construction of GIS Technology," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 30(9), pages 1683-1694, September.
    4. Chambers, Robert, 1994. "The origins and practice of participatory rural appraisal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 22(7), pages 953-969, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. World Bank Group, 2012. "Understanding Access to Justice and Conflict Resolution at the Local Level in the Central African Republic," World Bank Publications - Reports 16097, The World Bank Group.
    2. James Griffiths & William Dushenko, 2011. "Effectiveness of GIS suitability mapping in predicting ecological impacts of proposed wind farm development on Aristazabal Island, BC," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 13(6), pages 957-991, December.
    3. Jean‐Francois Trani & Megan Giesecke & Peter Hovmand & Nicholas Miller & Mary Kate Cartmill & Nicandro Mandujano Acevedo & Sandra Lee & William Liem & Braveheart Gillani & Ganesh Babulal, 2024. "Ageing among Black and non‐Hispanic White older adults: A community‐based system dynamics approach to examining quality of life," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 30-51, January.
    4. Eastwood, C.R. & Turner, F.J. & Romera, A.J., 2022. "Farmer-centred design: An affordances-based framework for identifying processes that facilitate farmers as co-designers in addressing complex agricultural challenges," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    5. A. Fleming & S. Agrawal & Dinomika & Y. Fransisca & L. Graham & S. Lestari & D. Mendham & D. O’Connell & B. Paul & M. Po & A. Rawluk & N. Sakuntaladewi & B. Winarno & T. W. Yuwati, 2021. "Reflections on integrated research from community engagement in peatland restoration," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, December.
    6. Ralph Lasage & Sanne Muis & Carolina S. E. Sardella & Michiel A. Van Drunen & Peter H. Verburg & Jeroen C. J. H. Aerts, 2015. "A Stepwise, Participatory Approach to Design and Implement Community Based Adaptation to Drought in the Peruvian Andes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-32, February.
    7. Robert Saputra & Tomáš Havlíček, 2024. "Strengthening Rural Governance for Rural Development Through Collaborative Strategy: the Application of Soft System Methodology and Textual Network Analysis," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 37(6), pages 1175-1193, December.
    8. Chilombo, Andrew & Van Der Horst, Dan, 2021. "Livelihoods and coping strategies of local communities on previous customary land in limbo of commercial agricultural development: Lessons from the farm block program in Zambia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    9. Jay Mitra & Mariusz Sokolowicz & Ursula Weisenfeld & Agnieszka Kurczewska & Silke Tegtmeier, 2020. "Citizen Entrepreneurship: A Conceptual Picture of the Inclusion, Integration and Engagement of Citizens in the Entrepreneurial Process," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 6(2), pages 242-260, July.
    10. Brooks, Jeremy S., 2010. "The Buddha mushroom: Conservation behavior and the development of institutions in Bhutan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 779-795, February.
    11. Griewald, Yuliana & Clemens, Gerhard & Kamp, Johannes & Gladun, Elena & Hölzel, Norbert & von Dressler, Hubertus, 2017. "Developing land use scenarios for stakeholder participation in Russia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 264-276.
    12. Glyn Williams & Manoj Srivastava & Stuart Corbridge & René Véron, 2003. "Enhancing pro-poor governance in Eastern India: participation, politics and action research," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 3(2), pages 159-178, April.
    13. Hargreaves, James R. & Morison, Linda A. & Gear, John S.S. & Makhubele, Mzamani B. & Porter, John D.H. & Busza, Joanna & Watts, Charlotte & Kim, Julia C. & Pronyk, Paul M., 2007. ""Hearing the Voices of the Poor": Assigning Poverty Lines on the Basis of Local Perceptions of Poverty. A Quantitative Analysis of Qualitative Data from Participatory Wealth Ranking in Rural," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 212-229, February.
    14. Heitor Mancini Teixeira & Leonardo Van den Berg & Irene Maria Cardoso & Ardjan J. Vermue & Felix J. J. A. Bianchi & Marielos Peña-Claros & Pablo Tittonell, 2018. "Understanding Farm Diversity to Promote Agroecological Transitions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-20, November.
    15. Woldehanna, Sara & Zimicki, Susan, 2015. "An expanded One Health model: Integrating social science and One Health to inform study of the human-animal interface," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 87-95.
    16. Laura Valadez-Martínez & Matt Padley & María Fernanda Torres Penagos, 2018. "A Dignified Standard of Living in Mexico: Results of a Pilot Study of the Minimum Income Standard Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 695-714, November.
    17. Wijayaratna, C. M., 1999. "Rural appraisal and sustainable development," Conference Papers h018590, International Water Management Institute.
    18. Molecke, Greg & Pinkse, Jonatan, 2017. "Accountability for social impact: A bricolage perspective on impact measurement in social enterprises," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 550-568.
    19. Schleicher, Michael & Souares, Aurélia & Pacere, Athanase Narangoro & Sauerborn, Rainer & Klonner, Stefan, 2016. "Decentralized versus Statistical Targeting of Anti-Poverty Programs: Evidence from Burkina Faso," Working Papers 0623, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    20. Jessica Goldberger, 2008. "Non-governmental organizations, strategic bridge building, and the “scientization” of organic agriculture in Kenya," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 25(2), pages 271-289, June.

    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:jlands:v:6:y:2017:i:4:p:79-:d:117691. 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.