The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Geo-information tools for participatory spatial planning: Fulfilling the criteria for ‘good’ governance?
Open accessAbstract
The last few decades have seen increasing attempts to foster ‘collaborative’ and ‘participatory’ approaches to spatial planning and decision-making, with a more sophisticated conceptualisation of the contested term, participation. Participatory, ‘bottom-up’ geo-information technologies have been concurrently developing and these are expected to strengthen participatory spatial planning; important among these has been the transformation of conventional mapping and GIS tools into Participatory GIS (PGIS). In this paper we explore the potential contributions of participatory geo-information tools towards participatory spatial planning, in terms of the principles and criteria of good governance. We discuss five fundamental principles of ‘good’ governance: accountability, legitimacy, respect, equity, and competence, and the potential of geo-information tools to contribute to, and detract from, such principles; although we focus especially on participation and the recognition and validation of local knowledge. We derive criteria for the five principles, and we identify a range of evaluation questions which can be operationalised so as to interrogate the criteria for judging the contribution of participatory tools and participatory spatial planning activities. We conclude by summarily assessing the potentials of participatory geo-information tools, particularly participatory mobile GIS, participatory 3-dimensional modelling, and visualisation features in PGIS.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Ladder Of Citizen Participation
Arnstein, S. R. (1969) · Journal of the American Institute of Planners · doi:10.1080/01944366908977225 · Cited by 17,064
(2001) · Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) · Cited by 4,566
WHOSE WOODS ARE THESE? COUNTER‐MAPPING FOREST TERRITORIES IN KALIMANTAN, INDONESIA
Peluso, N. L. (1995) · Antipode · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8330.1995.tb00286.x · Cited by 779
The Development of Indigenous Knowledge: A New Applied Anthropology
Sillitoe, P. (1998) · Current Anthropology · doi:10.1086/204722 · Cited by 708
Feminist Visualization: Re-envisioning GIS as a Method in Feminist Geographic Research
Kwan, M.-P. (2002) · Annals of the Association of American Geographers · doi:10.1111/1467-8306.00309 · Cited by 635
Participatory GIS — a people's GIS?
Dunn, C. E. (2007) · Progress in Human Geography · doi:10.1177/0309132507081493 · Cited by 573
Self-citationFeminist Political Ecology: Global Issues and Local Experience
(2013) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203352205 · Cited by 571
Feminist Political Ecology: Global Issues and Local Experiences
Raghuram, P., Rocheleau, D., Thomas-Slayter, B., & Wangari, E. (1998) · The Geographical Journal · doi:10.2307/3060380 · Cited by 559
Community participation and geographic information systems
(2002) · Community Participation and Geographical Information Systems · doi:10.1201/9780203469484-8 · Cited by 509
Chapin, M., Lamb, Z., & Threlkeld, B. (2005) · Annual Review of Anthropology · doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.34.081804.120429 · Cited by 470
Cited by
Ilcan, S., & Rygiel, K. (2015) · International Political Sociology · doi:10.1111/ips.12101 · Cited by 189
Álvarez Larrain, A., & McCall, M. K. (2019) · Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory · doi:10.1007/s10816-018-9385-z · Cited by 89
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- McCall, M. K., & Dunn, C. E.
- Venue
- Geoforum
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-01
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 81-94
- ISSN
- 0016-7185 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2047214368
- Cited by
- 314
- References
- 52
- FWCI
- 126.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Geo-information tools for participatory spatial planning: Fulfilling the criteria for ‘good’ governance? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.geoforum.2011.07.007
- The paper
- McCall, M. K., & Dunn, C. E. (2012). Geo-information tools for participatory spatial planning: Fulfilling the criteria for ‘good’ governance? Geoforum. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2011.07.007
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.