To plan or not to plan : the role of participatory GIS in understanding the use of place

Abstract

All spaces around us are enjoyed in one way or another; by locals - people who reside within or in the proximity of these spaces - by people who walk through or walk by spaces, and by non-locals - visitors or tourists. If spaces are used, then within each space an activity is carried out, some of which even support more than one activity at once or consecutively. Thus, activity and use are interlinked, and the use of a space may affect how successful it becomes. For the user, a ‘space’ can become a ‘place’; indeed, “[c]oncepts of place often emphasise the importance of a sense of ‘belonging’ and of emotional attachment [with] unconscious ‘rootedness’ or a conscious sense of association or identity with a particular place” (Carmona, Tiesdell, Heath, & Oc, 2010, p.120). The study focuses on both regulated and unregulated uses of a place – ‘regulated use’ is that which has been designated throughout the policy-led planning process, while ‘unregulated use’ is that which is assigned informally. This correlation instigated the mixed methodological study, which compares different uses within a space; and the relationship between the final design, uses of the space and the planning process followed. Participatory GIS (PGIS) was studied since it was of particular interest to understand the potential of inclusion of the community throughout the process of space creation, in order to help inform the final design and use of the place, and in turn, to help the place become successful. ‘Criteria for success’ are those attributes, presented by several authors, which help a place become successful. On the basis of ‘use’ of place, the integration of public participation throughout the creation process of a place, and the criteria for success, the study aimed to understand how regulated uses differ from unregulated uses in placemaking and the potential that different public representation methods have to create successful places. Finally, it was an aim of the study to extract conclusions as to what leads to a successful place. The results of the study then informed whether a participatory approach to place-making addresses criteria for success. Results of this study suggest that direct public inclusion in place-making, through discussions and conversations, is critical - proving to be more successful than statutory representations submitted in writing. Through direct participation, people tend to feel freer to discuss both the positive and negative attributes of a place and would, in turn, provide more reliable information when executing the design process, with the potential of a more successful outcome.