费力好大劲才搞到的 地理信息系统 gis 英语论文

M.K.McCall/HabitatInternational27(2003)549–573563

identi cation;or,providingahyperlinktoarecognised(Maoriiwi)authorityresponsibletoanswerqueries(Harmsworth,1997).

5.2.Accessto,andexclusionfrom,spatialinformation

Whatevertheactualownership,peoplemusthaverightsofaccesstotheinformationstocksheldbythestate,asabasicconditionforgoodgovernance.Therearelimitstotheserights,setbynationalsecurityorcommercialcon dentiality,andtherearevastdifferencesbetweenwhatstates‘allow’theircitizensaccessto—Harrisetal.(1995)instancetheSouthAfricanlegacyofdistortedinformationunderapartheid.Theissuesofpublicaccesstoinformationheldbythelarge-scale,privatecommercialsectormustequallybeaddressedinpublicdebateandbesubjecttopublicpolicydetermination.Thereisastrongtendencytohiderelevantspatialdatainthebusinesssectorcamou agedundercommercialcon dentiality.

Lackof nancialresourceshowever,ismorepersistentthanareinstitutionalhindrances.Atlargerscale,thewealth(taxbase)ofcommunitiesisadeterminingfactorindevelopmentofPPGISintheUSA.HaklayandHarrison(2002)examinethe nancialdifferencesbetweenutilisingPPGISintheUKandtheUSA,intermsofcosts,easeofaccessandfamiliaritywithgeo-data,suchasOSmapsanddigitaldata.Attheindividuallevel,governanceobligationsnotonlyrequirethestatetoprovideaccessto(geo-)informationfortheircitizens,butatareasonableprice.CaseyandPederson(2000)lookattherealcostsofthetimeinvolvedtoacquireprimarydataorvisitdatabases.Accessibilityisnotonlyprice-related,therearephysicaltransportationandcommunicationconstructs.Mostoftheworldisinlowerincomecountries/classesandnotontheweb—eveninurbanareas,theymuststillwalkorbustoobtainpublicgeo-data.

The ipsideofaccessibilityisexclusion—despitetheimprovedaccessofmany,averysigni cantminoritywillbecomemoremarginalised—‘‘adoptionalsoimpliesnon-adoptionorinabilitytoadopt’’(Harrisetal.,1995).Therearetwolevelsoftheexclusionimpacts,relatedtothe‘intentions’ofpromotingparticipationforfacilitation,mediation,orempowerment(seeSection4).

Initially,thereisthepersistenceofan‘informationunderclass’excludedfromthedecisionloopbythe‘digitaldivide(e.g.Carver,2001).Becausetheyarewithouttheappropriatetechnicaltrainingor‘skills’,theoff-linegoatsareseparatedfromtheon-linewiredsheep.Inthesesituations,theroleofinformationhandlerorinterpreterwillbetakenbytheprofessionals—whethertheybeGISexperts,consultants,planners,orprofessional-levelNGOs.TherearemanycritiquesofthisinPPGISintheUSA.InreviewingalternativelocationsforapowerlineinWestVirginia,citizens’groupscomplainedthattheplanningprofessionalshi-jackedtheGISandmultimediatoolsandexcludedlocalconcernsoverdatacategoriesandweightingofimpacts(Towers,1997;King,2002).Technocraticplanningmodelsreplaced‘neighbourhooddiscourse’inaMinneapolisNeighbourhoodAssociationandintroducedalienterminology,conceptsanddecisionapproacheswhichexcludedthemarginalisedandlessarticulate—theelderly,blacks,andrenters,whereasthosewhocouldadoptthejargonandtheGISmilieufeltmoreempowered(Elwood,2002;Aitken,2002).OfcoursethisphenomenonisjustaspervasivewhereGITisinappropriatelyintroducedintorural,indigenous,‘non-technological’societies(e.g.Rundstrom,1995;Abbotetal.,1998).