Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI)

With the advent of the Geospatial web and Web 2.0 technology innovations, the opportunity for the public to contribute geographic data is almost endless. This new trend seems to be good news for those geographers calling for a more democratic process in creating and accessing maps, but it also raises many questions about the impact of volunteered information to the maps themselves. In the two articles by Michael Goodchild and David Tulloch, implications of spatial data provided by the public, within the wider phenomenon of user-generated content, are discussed in terms of both developments within the discipline and also to mapping in general.

In Goodchild’s article, “Citizen as sensors: the world of volunteered geography”, the term, Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI) is posed to describe data provided by the public to services such as Google Maps, Google Earth, Open Street Map or Wikimapia. In this context, he tries to understand what drives people to volunteer information on the web and make it public; as well discussing issues around accuracy, privacy, and the impact to conventional data sources. Upon reviewing the examples of VGI, and the enabling technologies such as geotagging web content or making data using GPS, he emphasizes that VGI is filing a gap left by poorly funded mapping institutions. But while it might take the pressure of agencies, the motivation for contributors are only guessed at suggesting personal satisfaction of seeing the results or just plan self-promotion. On the same note, is the disparity between data derived from volunteers and that of mapping agencies. He points out, that mapping agencies have strict standards and methods for producing data, as well as cartographers with documented qualifications. On the contrary VGI, is often offered without references or citing of any authority, except for the assertion of its creator. But, is the pure sense of VGI egalitarianism dwarf the question of authenticity? Well, as Goodchild addresses, it is only democratic to those being able to access it with the pricey equipment and good broadband access. Although the digital divide appears to be shrinking, it still exists to much of the world’s populations. So location and place is important even on the web, as it can divide your access to the web. This brings forth one of Goodchild’s most interesting points in this article, is that perhaps the power of VGI is to address local activities in locations that go unnoticed by traditional forms of media. In this light, maybe VGI is best served as a new voice for the local rather than a replacement for underfunded mapping labs.

With lots of questions around VGI looming in its wake, Tulloch in his article “Is VGI participation? From vernal pools to video games” dives into VGI’s relationship to Public Participatory GIS (PPGIS). Drawing on two VGI case studies he addresses how VGI and PPGIS intertwine in some ways and diverge in others. The emphasis of PPGIS tends to be on participation, with the intent of contributing to a specific outcome that most often is aimed at increasing collaboration on GIS projects or empowering members of the public through their participation in the mapping process. PPGIS derives from both academics and practitioners of GIS, with a growing body of literature, and a defining language. On the contrary, VGI has largely been based on individuals creating data on their own initiative for informal purposes. VGI’s body of literature remains to be seen as well as the vocabulary it draws on. He suggests that they both rely on people investigating locations that are important to them. But, not all cases that could be viewed as VGI examples would fit nicely into the spectrum of PPGIS. As his example of Second Life, an urban planning video game hardly resembles a GIS. As well, VGI can simply be based on providing spatial information, but not the other elements of PPGIS, such as decision-making, or empowering for social change. Ultimately he suggests that VGI revolves more around applications and information, where as PPGIS concerns itself with process and outcomes. Although different, the article concludes that VGI could benefit from being aligned with a more defined PPGIS, as it finds ground in academia, as well PPGIS could benefit from the innovation and energy found in emerging areas of research. To tie it back to Goodchild’s article, aligning it with the ideals of PPGIS, could move it forward in it’s use as a voice for communities that are largely unheard.

As in many young areas of inquiry, the authors only offer glimpses of how VGI may take shape within the viewpoint of PPGIS or just floating around the World Wide Web. We seem to know for now what it is, or could be but with technology changing rapidly, and fundamentally driving VGI, the possibilities are too vast to try and pin down. For now, the wake of VGI, has barely hit the “sweet spot” and we need to hang on a little longer to see possibly where it will take us.

Musing on Neogeography

“…we are witnessing the emergence of a new geography without geographers” (Sui 2008).

With the surfacing of new Geospatial web applications and the increased access of these technologies to the public, map-making by unschooled geographer’s is on the rise. In this review, I synthesize three articles from Gupltill 2007, Plewe 2007 and Sui 2008 that touch on the implications of what some refer to as Neogeography, where non-experts are harnessing Web 2.0 technologies to not only consume but also produce an ever-growing array of geographic information. The articles suggest that these new movements in map-making pose new questions and possibly new challenges to the way geographers situate themselves and society in the geospatial world.
Stephen Guptill in his brief essay “GIScience, the NSDI, and GeoWiki’s” touches on the changing role of the U.S Geological Survey and GIScience in the age of web based mapping technologies. In his description of the array of changes in mapping technologies, from surveying in the past to the cell phone based data fusion buttons of the future. He urges a partnership between government agencies and the private sector leaders such as Google or Microsoft to deliver services. Finally he puts forward the wave of the future is in combining government data with web-based applications for a platform for a GeoWiki, in order to allow for collaborative spatial data information.
Brandon Plewe’s article “Web Cartography in the United States” divides new frontiers in geography by three service types: consumer-oriented applications, citizen oriented applications and enterprise applications. Stating that each type has undergone different changes in cartography, but each bringing the practice of map-making out to the “mainstream”(133). However, he points out that the importance of design held by cartographers has been left out of the programmer and consumer driven mapping applications. Highlighting, how the professional cartographers are increasingly left out of the map-making picture. At the same time research, in map-making has changed as well, and can be seen to fit into four categories: high-impact applications, improving performance, societal implications, and design of interactive cartography. Plewe, suggests that the later, is where cartographic research could have the most impact. Overall, he urges that cartographers and society should embrace web-based mapping, by making a valuable contribution where the can, because the benefits a spatially thinking populace are without doubt. Although it is left ambiguous what a valuable contribution would look like, maybe a good wrestle with the programmers and some lessons in php.
Sui's article, “The wikification of GIS and its consequences: Or Angelina Jolie’s new tattoo and the future of GIS” takes a look at the implications of these technologies within society. Drawing on his examples of maps made about or from celebrities’ personal information, , he highlights privacy as a an emerging implication of neogeography. Although he sites wikification has occurred in all aspects of GIS components, the most significant changes have occurred to the data side. Pointing to the formation of volunteered geographic information (VGI) prompted from the capability of GIS users to become contributors as well, VGI poses new problems, such as those explored through the example of Angelina Jolie’s, where a map was made by fans from the latitudes and longitude of her children’s birthplace that is displayed on her arm. With VGI ever on the rise, Sui suggests geographers could meet the same Web 2.0 fate of journalists. Media is moving forward without professional journalists, will the new geography lose the need for geographers? From these three articles the theme of neogeography is change. Whether it is the transformation of government Geospatial systems or the very role of cartography itself with the take over of mapmaking by everybody from amateurs to professional computer developers, one thing seems certain as geographers in this century, we can rescind technology development but never the act of critique.

Reference:
GUPTILL, S. (2007). GIScience, the NSDI, and GeoWiki’s. Cartography and Geographic Information Science 34(2):165-166.
PLEWE, B.(2007). Web Cartography in the United States. Cartography and Geographic Information Science 34(2): 133-136.
SUI, D. (2008). The wikification of GIS and its consequences: Or Angelina Jolie’s new tattoo and the future of GIS. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 32, 1-5.

CANADA’S HOUSE OF COMMONS MUST CONVENE INQUIRY INTO FOSSIL FUEL SUPPLY

by National Farmer's Union

HOWE ISLAND, Ont—A recent front-page report by the British newspaper, The Guardian, is
the latest reason why Canada needs a top-level analysis of global hydrocarbon supplies.
The Guardian’s November 9th story is headlined “Key oil figures were distorted by US
pressure, says whistleblower.” The story focuses on the world’s top energy monitoring and
forecasting body, the International Energy Agency (IEA). The Guardian quotes senior IEA
officials and explains that the US encouraged the IEA to underplay the rate of decline from
existing oil fields while overplaying the chances of finding new reserves. The IEA insiders
dismiss projections of significant oil production increase as “nonsense” and warn that “the
world is much closer to running out of oil than official estimates admit.” These revelations
call into question the integrity of the world’s leading authority of petroleum reserves. Industry
analysts and governments, including Canada’s, rely heavily on IEA data to formulate policy
and business decisions.

The November 9, 2009 Guardian report is available at:
http://www.energybulletin.net/node/50659
The NFU believes that there are several reasons why an independent Canadian inquiry is
needed:
1. The Guardian report is only the most recent document to question the reliability of
the IEA’s global oil supply projections;
2. There are widely acknowledged trends pointing to future oil supply problems—trends
which Canada’s politicians and our lead energy ministry are failing to acknowledge;
and
3. Energy, food, climate, water, and our economy are interlinked, so miscalculations
regarding energy supplies and prices will have dramatic effects on every aspect of
Canadian society.
“As a organization of family farmers, the NFU is acutely aware that food is tightly linked to
energy, both locally and globally. Farmers use diesel fuel to run tractors and trucks. We
require natural gas to make critical nitrogen fertilizer. Canadians depend on secure supplies
of affordable energy to import and export food, to process and package it, and to refrigerate
it. Shortage or volatility on global energy markets will rapidly turn into shortage and
instability in food markets,” said NFU energy security analyst Rick Munroe. Munroe has
recently commented on energy issues in various media venues, including CBC Radio’s
political affairs program, “The House.”

Over the past three years, the NFU has written to the government of Canada (including its
lead energy department, Natural Resources Canada), calling for a formal examination of
energy security concerns. NRCan has indicated that it sees no need for such research and
continues to actively deny that there could be any problems with Canadian or global oil
supplies.
NRCan regularly states that “there is no imminent peak oil challenge” and that “Canada’s oil
supply is secure for about 200 years.”
The NFU believes that both NRCan statements are false and that their issuance is
misleading and ultimately dangerous. In dismissing concerns regarding a global peak oil
challenge, NRCan is at odds with a growing number of experts. For example, a landmark
report conducted for the United State Department of Energy (DOE) begins with this sobering
statement, “The peaking of world oil production presents the U.S. and the world with an
unprecedented risk management problem” (Hirsch Report, 2005, p. 4,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirsch_report )
Because of the critical links between agri-food and energy, the NFU will continue to press the
Canadian government to conduct a full and independent examination of the implications of
looming fossil fuel supply insecurity.

For more information, please contact:
Rick Munroe, NFU member and energy security analyst: (613) 546-6009 or rmj@kos.net
Darrin Qualman, NFU Director of Research: (306) 652-9465

National Office
2717 Wentz Ave.
Saskatoon, Sask., S7K 4B6
Tel (306) 652-9465
Fax (306) 664-6226

Powering up Indigenous Mapping

Cartography is no longer the sole province of princes

In this article mapping is reviewed as a powerful tool increasingly utilized by Indigenous people to gain rights to ancestral land and resources. The authors trace early projects beginning around 1960’s and 1970’s to Canada and Alaska, and subsequent branching out of mapping to the rest of North America, Southeast Asia, Latin America and Africa. Across time and space different Indigenous mapping methodologies have evolved. Some of the first mapping projects emerged through land claim processes in Canada and Alaska. These were often referred to as traditional land use studies or subsistence maps reflecting societies that were thought of as hunters or fisheries. Outside of North America, the use of participatory approaches, such as participatory rural appraisal (PRA) or participatory action research (PAR) combined with Geographic Information Systems (GIS) grew in prominence. There is also a range of types of maps, such as atlas books to more technical GIS and remote sensing projects, with projects overwhelming aimed at serving a collective purpose to highlight an Indigenous presence within a region, and a desire for autonomy.

The authors say, “without doubt, GIS laboratories managed by indigenous peoples provide a number of benefits”. The benefits are mostly found in successful negotiations with non-Indigenous governments to gain back rights, and more recently communities are finding ways to use mapping to strengthen culture. Despite the promises of Indigenous mapping listed in the review, the authors also note many lingering issues. For instance, although countries like the United States Indigenous communities have afforded their own GIS teams, in many parts of the world communities continue to rely on outside organizations to facilitate and fund the mapping projects. Overall, except for some North American tribes, there is a lack of funding and support for communities to take on any kind of long-term use of technologies such as GIS. As a result, most mapping is done project-to-project with little ability for any continuity and mostly driven by outside donors. The authors conclude by posing a serious of questions that articulate the problematic nature of Indigenous mapping. These questions juxtapose the message of the article that highlights the positive effect of Indigenous mapping. In the end, the authors emphasize the uneven distribution of Indigenous mapping from North America to poorer regions such as those in the southern hemisphere, and pose this as the greatest challenge for the field of Indigenous mapping to overcome.

(Chapin et al. 2005. Mapping Indigenous Lands. Annu Rev.Anthropol 34:619-38)

Rundstrom’s Critical GIS Perspective

The institutions of assimilation that have silenced indigenous peoples throughout history have been those of the state, education, and religion. Clearly, GIS has been promoted by agents of the first two, with a missionary zeal exceeded only by agents of the third. (p.56)


Rundstrom, in his article “GIS, Indigenous Peoples, and Epistemological Diversity” makes a strong statement that the fundamental design and objective of Geographic Information Systems are incompatible with the epistemology of that found in many Indigenous cultures in North America. He argues that GIS is a mere techno-science where “technology has become the embodiment of science and its precepts”(46). In this light, GIS is constructed within a framework conducive to a particular way of knowing, that compromises the diversity within Indigenous people’s way of knowing. As a result, trying to capture knowledge from Indigenous people into a GIS is a form of cultural assimilation. In this way, GIS can destroy rather than augment non-western ways of life.

He summarizes four implications of trying to represent Indigenous knowledge in a GIS:
• The knowledge becomes accessible and tangible resulting in a fixed, de-contextualized state.
• Removes the details of expressing the geographic knowledge through personal contact, denies incorporative or performative expressions
• Every-time the information is used, it becomes more distant from its context.
• Inscribed knowledge allows the recipient & source to be separated in time & space removing personal responsibility of the knowledge.

Rundstrom’s makes the case that Indigenous people and Euro-North Americans have very different ways of perceiving, communicating and translating geographic knowledge. For example, the techno-science culture depends on a sense of time that is linear, where temporal change is often measured against technological evolution. This is problematic as it tries to capture a cyclical way of knowing time that is based on earthly patterns. At the same time, GIS does little to represent for instance the nonhuman world or the relatedness between species that is inherent in many Indigenous knowledge systems. At the root, many Indigenous cultures have had evolving oral traditions in knowledge translation that does not easily translate into a formalized GIS.

In conclusion, Rundstrom draws attention to the fundamental assumption made by technoscientists—that technology is good for all people. The problem is that contemporary western culture is marked by technological evolutions, that leads to the prominence of technoscience and it is the dominant culture. GIS comes from a technoscience and not from or for Indigenous people. Trying to “capture” a cultures way of seeing the world in a way that does not come from that culture potentially reduces and segments it into something that can be seen only by the technoscience eye. A better situation would see a knowledge translation system designed by and from an Indigenous perspective. But for now, no one wants to be left off the map.

(RUNDSTROM, R. A. (1995). GIS, Indigenous Peoples, and Epistemological Diversity. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems, 22 (1), 45-57.)