IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/9ghrn.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Geography and Equity of Crowdsourced Public Participation for Active Transportation Planning

Author

Listed:
  • Griffin, Greg Phillip

    (The University of Texas at San Antonio)

  • Jiao, Junfeng

Abstract

Transportation planners increasingly use new forms of online public participation alongside traditional in-person approaches, including crowdsourcing tools capable of encouraging geographically specific input. Digital involvement may be particularly valuable in exploring methods to plan at a megaregional scale. Research is beginning to address digital inequalities, recognizing that broadband and smartphone access may restrict opportunities for disadvantaged groups. However, the geography and equity of participation remain pragmatic issues for practice and research. This paper reviews the geography and equity of the participation methods in Austin, Texas for active transportation (bicycling and pedestrian) through three approaches to co-produce informed plans: in-person meetings, public participation geographic information system (PPGIS), and an emerging smartphone platform that logs trips and encourages input on route quality. In addition to spatial analysis with standard deviational ellipses, we include qualitative case analysis to contextualize the geographic and equity implications of different participation approaches. Results show that both online techniques resulted in a larger geography for participation than in-person meetings, with the regional PPGIS covering the most area. However, review of the income levels in each area shows that use of the smartphone-based crowdsourcing platform was aligned with lowest-income areas. This study shows that online participation methods are not homogeneous regarding geography or equity. In some contexts, smartphone applications can help reach lower-income communities, even when compared with in-person meetings. Crowdsourcing tools can be valuable approaches to increase geography and equity of public participation in transportation planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Griffin, Greg Phillip & Jiao, Junfeng, 2019. "The Geography and Equity of Crowdsourced Public Participation for Active Transportation Planning," SocArXiv 9ghrn, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:9ghrn
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/9ghrn
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5c398bf48047080018fceb7a/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/9ghrn?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. McAndrews, Carolyn & Marcus, Justine, 2015. "The politics of collective public participation in transportation decision-making," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 537-550.
    2. David Evers & Jochem de Vries, 2013. "Explaining Governance in Five Mega-City Regions: Rethinking the Role of Hierarchy and Government," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(4), pages 536-555, April.
    3. Judith Innes & David Booher & Sarah Di Vittorio, 2011. "Strategies for Megaregion Governance," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 77(1), pages 55-67.
    4. Griffin, Greg Phillip & Jiao, Junfeng, 2018. "Crowdsourcing Bike Share Station Locations: Evaluating participation and placement," SocArXiv mtnza, Center for Open Science.
    5. Robert Goodspeed, 2016. "The Death and Life of Collaborative Planning Theory," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 1(4), pages 1-5.
    6. Vanessa Watson, 2014. "Co-production and collaboration in planning - The difference," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 62-76, March.
    7. Catherine Ross & Myungje Woo & Fangru Wang, 2016. "Megaregions and regional sustainability," International Journal of Urban Sciences, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(3), pages 299-317, September.
    8. Nader Afzalan & Brian Muller, 2018. "Online Participatory Technologies: Opportunities and Challenges for Enriching Participatory Planning," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 84(2), pages 162-177, April.
    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. Goel, Pooja & Kumar, Aalok & Parayitam, Satyanarayana & Luthra, Sunil, 2023. "Understanding transport users' preferences for adopting electric vehicle based mobility for sustainable city: A moderated moderated-mediation model," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    2. Alattar, Mohammad Anwar & Cottrill, Caitlin & Beecroft, Mark, 2021. "Public participation geographic information system (PPGIS) as a method for active travel data acquisition," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    3. El Bachir Diop & Jérôme Chenal & Stéphane Cédric Koumetio Tekouabou & Rida Azmi, 2022. "Crowdsourcing Public Engagement for Urban Planning in the Global South: Methods, Challenges and Suggestions for Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-21, 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. Judith Westerink & Annet Kempenaar & Marjo van Lierop & Stefan Groot & Arnold van der Valk & Adri van den Brink, 2017. "The participating government: Shifting boundaries in collaborative spatial planning of urban regions," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(1), pages 147-168, February.
    2. Simin Yan & Anna Growe, 2022. "Regional Planning, Land-Use Management, and Governance in German Metropolitan Regions—The Case of Rhine–Neckar Metropolitan Region," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-24, November.
    3. Raimbault, Juste & Le Néchet, Florent, 2021. "Introducing endogenous transport provision in a LUTI model to explore polycentric governance systems," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    4. Claire Daniel & Christopher Pettit, 2022. "Charting the past and possible futures of planning support systems: Results of a citation network analysis," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 49(7), pages 1875-1892, September.
    5. Sophie King & Peter Kasaija, 2018. "State-movement partnership in Uganda: Co-producing an enabling environment for urban poverty reduction?," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series esid-098-18, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    6. Tubridy, Fiadh & Lennon, Mick & Scott, Mark, 2022. "Managed retreat and coastal climate change adaptation: The environmental justice implications and value of a coproduction approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    7. Alattar, Mohammad Anwar & Cottrill, Caitlin & Beecroft, Mark, 2021. "Public participation geographic information system (PPGIS) as a method for active travel data acquisition," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    8. Pwint Kay Khine & Jianing Mi & Raza Shahid, 2021. "A Comparative Analysis of Co-Production in Public Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-13, June.
    9. Philipp Horn & Diana Mitlin & Jhono Bennett & Beth Chitekwe-Biti & Jack Makau, 2018. "Towards citywide participatory planning: emerging community-led practices in three African cities," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 342018, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    10. Federica Natalia Rosati & Luisa Moretto & Jacques Teller, 2020. "An incremental approach to service co-production: unfolding the co-evolution of the built environment and water and sanitation infrastructures," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/314020, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    11. James Charlton & Ian Babelon & Richard Watson & Caitlin Hafferty, 2023. "Phygitally Smarter? A Critically Pragmatic Agenda for Smarter Engagement in British Planning and Beyond," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 17-31.
    12. McCullough, Sarah R. PhD & van Stokkum, Rebecca PhD, 2021. "Answers from the Margins: Participatory Planning with Disadvantaged Communities," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt0w49r6g5, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    13. Akaateba, Millicent Awialie & Huang, Huang & Adumpo, Emile Akangoa, 2018. "Between co-production and institutional hybridity in land delivery: Insights from local planning practice in peri-urban Tamale, Ghana," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 215-226.
    14. Das, Ashok & Susantono, Bambang (ed.), 2022. "Informal Services in Asian Cities: Lessons for Urban Planning and Management from the COVID-19 Pandemic," ADBI Books, Asian Development Bank Institute, number 30, Décembre.
    15. Bhattarai, Kiran Kumari & Pant, Laxmi Prasad & FitzGibbon, John, 2020. "Contested governance of drinking water provisioning services in Nepal’s transboundary river basins," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    16. Dmitry Sorokin & Vladimir Sharafutdinov & Elena Onishchenko, 2017. "On the Problems of Strategic Development of Tourism in the Regions of Russia (Case of the Krasnodar Region and the Resort City of Sochi)," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(3), pages 764-776.
    17. Stina Hansson & Merritt Polk, 2018. "Assessing the impact of transdisciplinary research: The usefulness of relevance, credibility, and legitimacy for understanding the link between process and impact," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 132-144.
    18. Griffin, Greg Phillip, 2018. "Co-producing Mobility: Lessons from Ridesharing for a More Just and Sustainable Autonomous Future," SocArXiv xqmhr, Center for Open Science.
    19. Skuzinski, Thomas & Weinreich, David & Hernandez, Carolina Velandia, 2023. "Exploring the link between regional transportation governance and outcomes: A novel measure of polycentricity in metropolitan public transportation systems," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 168-175.
    20. Peter TY Cheung, 2015. "Toward collaborative governance between Hong Kong and Mainland China," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 52(10), pages 1915-1933, August.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:osf:socarx:9ghrn. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.