Multi-sensory PPGIS combining the qualities of soundscape research and landscape values mapping.

Written on .

Public participation GIS methodology has been mainly used to map the social values and behaviour patterns of users in city and neighbourhood levels.  However, very little attention is paid to the role of different sensory systems in the perception and the embodied experience of place. The new paper by Korpilo et al. (2023) addresses this gap by integrating the soundscapes and landscape values of urban green infrastructure in two neighbourhoods in Helsinki, Finland.

The paper develops, tests and validates a Multi-sensory Public Participation GIS (MSPPGIS) method combining the qualities of soundscape research and landscape values mapping. The analysis consisted of hotspot mapping, spatial overlap assessment and compatibility analysis showing the level of spatial compatibility between positive landscape values and positive and negative soundscapes (see Figure below). Results indicated very low to low spatial overlap between the different landscape values and pleasant/unpleasant sound hotspots, suggesting that landscape values do not necessarily reflect sonic perception of urban green and blue spaces. Pleasant and unpleasant sounds were located closer to home than landscape values, indicating that respondents’ soundscape ‘cognitive map’ is smaller in spatial range.

The MSPPGIS method enables the elicitation of a more dynamic and diverse set of sounds compared to previous soundscape mapping which tend to focus on ‘noise’ instead of multiple experiences of different sounds. Also, the combination of landscape values and soundscapes in MSPPGIS provides for a more integrated assessment of ‘where’ and ‘how’ to design urban green infrastructure.

 

Check out the paper: Korpilo, S., Nyberg, E., Vierikko, K., Nieminen, H., Arciniegas, G., & Raymond, C. M. (2023). Developing a Multi-sensory Public Participation GIS (MSPPGIS) method for integrating landscape values and soundscapes of urban green infrastructure. Landscape and Urban Planning, 230. doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2022.104617

methods, MSPPGIS, Silviya Korpilo

PMAP webinar Tuesday November 1 with Prof. Marketta Kyttä as speaker

Written on .

Welcome to join PMAP webinar Tuesday 1st November, 2022 at 3:30-4:30 pm CET time (4:30 pm Helsinki, London 2:30 pm, New York 9:30 am, Tokyo 10:30 pm)!

Professor Marketta Kyttä presents on PPGIS in environmental health promotion research.

Marketta Kyttä works as a professor of Land Use Planning at the Department of Built Environment at Aalto University, Finland. Having background in environmental psychology, her interests cover widely human aspects in planning. Her research topics include environments that promote wellbeing and health, active living, child- and age-friendly environments, social sustainability, urban lifestyles, perceived safety and new methods for public participation. She has extensive experience developing and applying PPGIS methods. For example, the so called “softGIS” methodology originates from her research team.

Please join the webinar via Zoom: utu.zoom.us/j/69773543922 (no pre-registration required).

In case you have interest to present in PMAP biannual webinar series, please do not hesitate to contact Associate Professor Nora Fagerholm (nora.fagerholm@utu.fi).

Marketta Kyttä, webinar

Increased interest in comparing PPGIS and social media data

Written on .

A recent publication by Stahl Olafsson et al. (2022) has explored 19 case sites across Europe to compare perceived landscape values applying and comparing both PPGIS and geolocated social media (Flickr) data.  Authors find more cross-site differences than similarities both in spatial patterns and value types. Most agreement in spatial patterns across the two data sets are found in densely populated landscapes; however, comparison of types of perceived landscape values is challenged by the differing assumptions of each value elicitation technique. The results show that PPGIS elicits a wider spectrum of values, while Flickr mainly elicits relationships to and with landscapes. The authors argue for the complementary potential of both approaches and highlight the strengths and weaknesses of using the two together in landscape research, planning and management.

Please check the article below to read more about this study:

Olafsson, A.S., Purves, R.S., Wartmann, F.M., Garcia-Martin, M., Fagerholm, N., Torralba, M., Albert, C., Verbrugge, L.N., Heikinheimo, V., Plieninger, T. and Bieling, C., 2022. Comparing landscape value patterns between participatory mapping and geolocated social media content across Europe. Landscape and Urban Planning, 226, p. 104511. doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2022.104511

 

Interested to read more about this topic? Over the recent years, studies have increasingly addressed such comparative setting between PPGIS and geolocated social media data. Check for example the following articles:

Depietri, Y., Ghermandi, A., Campisi-Pinto, S. and Orenstein, D.E., 2021. Public participation GIS versus geolocated social media data to assess urban cultural ecosystem services: Instances of complementarity. Ecosystem Services, 50, p. 101277. doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101277

Heikinheimo, V., Tenkanen, H., Bergroth, C., Järv, O., Hiippala, T. and Toivonen, T., 2020. Understanding the use of urban green spaces from user-generated geographic information. Landscape and Urban Planning, 201, p. 103845. doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103845

Levin, N., Lechner, A.M. and Brown, G., 2017. An evaluation of crowdsourced information for assessing the visitation and perceived importance of protected areas. Applied geography, 79, pp. 115-126. doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2016.12.009

Muñoz, L., Hausner, V.H., Runge, C., Brown, G. and Daigle, R., 2020. Using crowdsourced spatial data from Flickr vs. PPGIS for understanding nature’s contribution to people in Southern Norway. People and Nature, 2(2), pp. 437-449. doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10083

 

comparison, cross-site analysis, PPGIS, social media

Webinar by ISPM June 16

Written on .

Please note the webinar organised by the International Society for Participatory Mapping!

This webinar, to be delivered on 16 June 2022, 13.00-14.30 (Mexico Central time/ CST), presents the efforts of three significant organisations in Latin America, very active in developing the strengths of participatory mapping and critical cartography so as to apply them to support activists in real political, social and cultural urban struggles in the continent.

Two of the presentations will be offered in Spanish and one in Portuguese (with english subtitles in Zoom). More information below.

PMAP webinar #1 recording now online

Written on .

Now you have a chance to go back to the first PMAP webinar by Jirka Panek and Ian Babelon on 100+ shades of geoparticipation!

The webinar recording is accessible through the PMAP website. PMAP has now also a YouTube channel where all recordings are posted.

Looking forward to the next webinar fall 2022!

Participatory Mapping Institute
Copyright 2020