IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/quageo/v37y2018i3p163-175n11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Legal and organizational framework for the use of geoweb methods for public participation in spatial planning in Poland: experiences, opinions and challenges

Author

Listed:
  • Bąkowska-Waldmann Edyta

    (Institute of Socio-Economic Geography and Spatial Management, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Poland)

  • Brudka Cezary

    (Poznań University of Economics, Poznań, Poland)

  • Jankowski Piotr

    (Department of Geography, San Diego State University, USA)

Abstract

Geoweb methods offer an alternative to commonly used public participation methods in spatial planning. This paper discusses two such geoweb methods – geo-questionnaire and geo-discussion in the context of their initial applications within the spatial planning processes in Poland. The paper presents legal and organizational framework for the implementation of methods, provides their development details, and assesses insights gained from their deployment in the context of spatial planning in Poland. The analysed case studies encompass different spatial scales ranging from major cities in Poland (Poznań and Łódź) to suburban municipalities (Rokietnica and Swarzędz in Poznań Agglomeration). The studies have been substantiated by interviews with urban planners and local authorities on the use and value of Geoweb methods in public consultations.

Suggested Citation

  • Bąkowska-Waldmann Edyta & Brudka Cezary & Jankowski Piotr, 2018. "Legal and organizational framework for the use of geoweb methods for public participation in spatial planning in Poland: experiences, opinions and challenges," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 37(3), pages 163-175, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:quageo:v:37:y:2018:i:3:p:163-175:n:11
    DOI: 10.2478/quageo-2018-0032
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/quageo-2018-0032
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/quageo-2018-0032?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kerstin Nordin & Ulla Berglund, 2010. "Children's Maps in GIS: A Tool for Communicating Outdoor Experiences in Urban Planning," International Journal of Information Communication Technologies and Human Development (IJICTHD), IGI Global, vol. 2(2), pages 1-16, April.
    2. Ari-Veikko Anttiroiko, 2012. "Urban Planning 2.0," International Journal of E-Planning Research (IJEPR), IGI Global, vol. 1(1), pages 16-30, January.
    3. Eefje Cuppen, 2012. "Diversity and constructive conflict in stakeholder dialogue: considerations for design and methods," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 45(1), pages 23-46, March.
    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. Setiawan, Andri D. & Cuppen, Eefje, 2013. "Stakeholder perspectives on carbon capture and storage in Indonesia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1188-1199.
    2. Ari-Veikko Anttiroiko, 2016. "City-as-a-Platform: The Rise of Participatory Innovation Platforms in Finnish Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-31, September.
    3. Gomes, Sharlene L. & Hermans, Leon M. & Thissen, Wil A.H., 2018. "Extending community operational research to address institutional aspects of societal problems: Experiences from peri-urban Bangladesh," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 904-917.
    4. Francesco Pinna & Francesca Masala & Chiara Garau, 2017. "Urban Policies and Mobility Trends in Italian Smart Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-21, March.
    5. Edwards, David M. & Collins, Timothy M. & Goto, Reiko, 2016. "An arts-led dialogue to elicit shared, plural and cultural values of ecosystems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 319-328.
    6. Kenter, Jasper O. & Reed, Mark S. & Fazey, Ioan, 2016. "The Deliberative Value Formation model," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 194-207.
    7. Julio C. Zambrano-Gutiérrez & Claudia N. Avellaneda, 2023. "Inter-municipal vs. Inter-governmental Cooperation: Their Impact on International Aid," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 861-881, September.
    8. Sneegas, Gretchen & Beckner, Sydney & Brannstrom, Christian & Jepson, Wendy & Lee, Kyungsun & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2021. "Using Q-methodology in environmental sustainability research: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    9. Ensor, Jonathan & de Bruin, Annemarieke, 2022. "The role of learning in farmer-led innovation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    10. Ngar-yin Mah, Daphne & Hills, Peter, 2014. "Participatory governance for energy policy-making: A case study of the UK nuclear consultation in 2007," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 340-351.
    11. repec:mth:bmh888:v:5:y:2017:i:1:p:30-51 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. de Bruin, Jilske Olda & Kok, Kasper & Hoogstra-Klein, Marjanke Alberttine, 2017. "Exploring the potential of combining participative backcasting and exploratory scenarios for robust strategies: Insights from the Dutch forest sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 269-282.
    13. Vitale Brovarone, Elisabetta & Staricco, Luca & Verlinghieri, Ersilia, 2023. "Whose is this street? Actors and conflicts in the governance of pedestrianisation processes," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    14. Rehana Shrestha & Heike Köckler & Johannes Flacke & Javier Martinez & Martin Van Maarseveen, 2017. "Interactive Knowledge Co-Production and Integration for Healthy Urban Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-21, October.
    15. Kate Crowley & Brian W. Head, 2017. "The enduring challenge of ‘wicked problems’: revisiting Rittel and Webber," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(4), pages 539-547, December.
    16. Moein Nedaei & Alexis Jacoby & Els Du Bois, 2022. "Design-Driven Conflicts: Exploring the Contribution of Design for Constructing Social Controversies from a Theoretical Standpoint," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-21, October.
    17. Kathelijne Bouw & Carina J. Wiekens & Casper Tigchelaar & André Faaij, 2023. "Involving Citizens in Heat Planning: A Participatory Process Design for Informed Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-36, January.
    18. Soud K. Al-Thani & Cynthia P. Skelhorn & Alexandre Amato & Muammer Koc & Sami G. Al-Ghamdi, 2018. "Smart Technology Impact on Neighborhood Form for a Sustainable Doha," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-17, December.
    19. Corsini, Filippo & Certomà, Chiara & Dyer, Mark & Frey, Marco, 2019. "Participatory energy: Research, imaginaries and practices on people' contribute to energy systems in the smart city," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 322-332.
    20. Wolf, Eva & Van Dooren, Wouter, 2021. "Fatal remedies. How dealing with policy conflict can backfire in a context of trust-erosion," SocArXiv z5uxy, Center for Open Science.
    21. Moshe Maor & Tereza Capelos, 2023. "Symposium: Affect and emotions in policy dynamics," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(3), pages 439-448, September.

    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:vrs:quageo:v:37:y:2018:i:3:p:163-175:n:11. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.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.