IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v8y2019i9p134-d263764.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Participatory Mapping in a Developing Country Context: Lessons from South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Dylan Weyer

    (Department of Environmental Science, Rhodes University, P.O. Box 94, Grahamstown 6140, South Africa)

  • Joana Carlos Bezerra

    (Department of Environmental Science, Rhodes University, P.O. Box 94, Grahamstown 6140, South Africa)

  • Alta De Vos

    (Department of Environmental Science, Rhodes University, P.O. Box 94, Grahamstown 6140, South Africa)

Abstract

Digital participatory mapping improves accessibility to spatial information and the way in which knowledge is co-constructed and landscapes co-managed with impoverished communities. However, many unintended consequences for social and epistemic justice may be exacerbated in developing country contexts. Two South African case studies incorporating Direct-to-Digital participatory mapping in marginalized communities to inform land-use decision-making, and the ethical challenges of adopting this method are discussed. Understanding the past and present context of the site and the power dynamics at play is critical to develop trust and manage expectations among research participants. When employing unfamiliar technology, disparate literacy levels and language barriers create challenges for ensuring participants understand the risks of their involvement and recognize their rights. The logistics of using this approach in remote areas with poor infrastructure and deciding how best to leave the participants with the maps they have co-produced in an accessible format present further challenges. Overcoming these can however offer opportunity for redressing past injustices and empowering marginalized communities with a voice in decisions that affect their livelihoods.

Suggested Citation

  • Dylan Weyer & Joana Carlos Bezerra & Alta De Vos, 2019. "Participatory Mapping in a Developing Country Context: Lessons from South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-16, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:8:y:2019:i:9:p:134-:d:263764
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/8/9/134/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/8/9/134/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cundill, Georgina & Bezerra, Joana Carlos & De Vos, Alta & Ntingana, Nokuthula, 2017. "Beyond benefit sharing: Place attachment and the importance of access to protected areas for surrounding communities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PB), pages 140-148.
    2. Ramirez-Gomez, Sara O.I. & Torres-Vitolas, Carlos A. & Schreckenberg, Kate & Honzák, Miroslav & Cruz-Garcia, Gisella S. & Willcock, Simon & Palacios, Erwin & Pérez-Miñana, Elena & Verweij, Pita A. & P, 2015. "Analysis of ecosystem services provision in the Colombian Amazon using participatory research and mapping techniques," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 93-107.
    3. Jacob Tropp, 2003. "Displaced People, Replaced Narratives: Forest Conflicts and Historical Perspectives in the Tsolo District, Transkei," Journal of Southern African Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(1), pages 207-233.
    4. Brown, Greg & Fagerholm, Nora, 2015. "Empirical PPGIS/PGIS mapping of ecosystem services: A review and evaluation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 119-133.
    5. Jessica Cockburn & Carolyn (Tally) G. Palmer & Harry Biggs & Eureta Rosenberg, 2018. "Navigating Multiple Tensions for Engaged Praxis in a Complex Social-Ecological System," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-24, November.
    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. Gaynor Paradza & Lebogang Mokwena & Walter Musakwa, 2020. "Could Mapping Initiatives Catalyze the Interpretation of Customary Land Rights in Ways that Secure Women’s Land Rights?," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-17, September.
    2. Jessica Cockburn & Eureta Rosenberg & Athina Copteros & Susanna Francina (Ancia) Cornelius & Notiswa Libala & Liz Metcalfe & Benjamin van der Waal, 2020. "A Relational Approach to Landscape Stewardship: Towards a New Perspective for Multi-Actor Collaboration," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-20, July.
    3. Barella Jennifer, 2024. "Visibilizing Empowerment as Topological Resonances: Analysis of a Participatory Mapping and Enumeration Project as Strategy for Active Waiting for Housing in Khayelitsha (South Africa)," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(2), pages 21582440241, June.
    4. Mdemu, M.V. & Kimaro, E.G. & Tafula, M. & de Sousa, W. & Moyo, M. & Parry, K. & Bjornlund, H. & Mukwakwami, N. & Ramshaw, P., 2023. "Participatory mapping of irrigation schemes in Tanzania, Mozambique and Zimbabwe and their value for multi-level learning," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 290(C).
    5. Tafadzwa Mindu & Innocent Tinashe Mutero & Winnie Baphumelele Ngcobo & Rosemary Musesengwa & Moses John Chimbari, 2023. "Digital Mental Health Interventions for Young People in Rural South Africa: Prospects and Challenges for Implementation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-15, January.
    6. Clements, Hayley S. & De Vos, Alta & Bezerra, Joana Carlos & Coetzer, Kaera & Maciejewski, Kristine & Mograbi, Penelope J. & Shackleton, Charlie, 2021. "The relevance of ecosystem services to land reform policies: Insights from South Africa," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).

    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. Arki, Vesa & Koskikala, Joni & Fagerholm, Nora & Kisanga, Danielson & Käyhkö, Niina, 2020. "Associations between local land use/land cover and place-based landscape service patterns in rural Tanzania," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    2. Tusznio, Joanna & Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Rechciński, Marcin & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2020. "Application of the ecosystem services concept at the local level – Challenges, opportunities, and limitations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    3. van den Belt, Marjan & Stevens, Sharon M., 2016. "Transformative agenda, or lost in the translation? A review of top-cited articles in the first four years of Ecosystem Services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 60-72.
    4. Jaligot, Rémi & Kemajou, Armel & Chenal, Jérôme, 2018. "Cultural ecosystem services provision in response to urbanization in Cameroon," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 641-649.
    5. Brown, Greg & Helene Hausner, Vera & Lægreid, Eiliv, 2015. "Physical landscape associations with mapped ecosystem values with implications for spatial value transfer: An empirical study from Norway," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 19-34.
    6. Garcia, Xavier & Benages-Albert, Marta & Vall-Casas, Pere, 2018. "Landscape conflict assessment based on a mixed methods analysis of qualitative PPGIS data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PA), pages 112-124.
    7. Ming-Kuang Chung & Dau-Jye Lu & Bor-Wen Tsai & Kuei-Tien Chou, 2019. "Assessing Effectiveness of PPGIS on Protected Areas by Governance Quality: A Case Study of Community-Based Monitoring in Wu-Wei-Kang Wildlife Refuge, Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-20, August.
    8. Ray L. Ison & Kevin B. Collins & Ben L. Iaquinto, 2021. "Designing an inquiry‐based learning system: Innovating in research praxis to transform science–policy–practice relations for sustainable development," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(5), pages 610-624, October.
    9. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    10. Beichen Ge & Congjin Wang & Yuhong Song, 2023. "Ecosystem Services Research in Rural Areas: A Systematic Review Based on Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    11. Hausner, Vera Helene & Engen, Sigrid & Muñoz, Lorena & Fauchald, Per, 2021. "Assessing a nationwide policy reform toward community-based conservation of biological diversity and ecosystem services in the Alpine North," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    12. Kulczyk, Sylwia & Woźniak, Edyta & Derek, Marta, 2018. "Landscape, facilities and visitors: An integrated model of recreational ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 491-501.
    13. Amalia Vaneska Palacio Buendía & Yolanda Pérez-Albert & David Serrano Giné, 2021. "Mapping Landscape Perception: An Assessment with Public Participation Geographic Information Systems and Spatial Analysis Techniques," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, June.
    14. Karimi, Azadeh & Yazdandad, Hossein & Fagerholm, Nora, 2020. "Evaluating social perceptions of ecosystem services, biodiversity, and land management: Trade-offs, synergies and implications for landscape planning and management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    15. Schröter, Matthias & Kraemer, Roland & Mantel, Martin & Kabisch, Nadja & Hecker, Susanne & Richter, Anett & Neumeier, Veronika & Bonn, Aletta, 2017. "Citizen science for assessing ecosystem services: Status, challenges and opportunities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 80-94.
    16. Schaafsma, M. & van Beukering, P.J.H. & Oskolokaite, I., 2017. "Combining focus group discussions and choice experiments for economic valuation of peatland restoration: A case study in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 27(PA), pages 150-160.
    17. Nie, Xin & Huang, Chengdao & Wang, Han, 2025. "A new method to classify cultural ecosystem services and visualize their economic value: A case study of Guilin, a famous tourist destination in China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    18. Jessica Cockburn & Eureta Rosenberg & Athina Copteros & Susanna Francina (Ancia) Cornelius & Notiswa Libala & Liz Metcalfe & Benjamin van der Waal, 2020. "A Relational Approach to Landscape Stewardship: Towards a New Perspective for Multi-Actor Collaboration," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-20, July.
    19. Linjun Yu & Xiaotong Zhang & Feng He & Xiaojun Wang, 2022. "Participatory Historical Village Landscape Analysis Using a Virtual Globe-Based 3D PGIS: Guizhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-16, October.
    20. Kubiszewski, Ida & Concollato, Luke & Costanza, Robert & Stern, David I., 2023. "Changes in authorship, networks, and research topics in ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).

    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:8:y:2019:i:9:p:134-:d:263764. 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.