Evaluating Geodesign for Community-Based Tribal Planning
The Role of Planners in Marginalized Communities
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21476632 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jonathan Davis (0000-0002-5164-1241, Twitter (United States)), K David Pijawka, Elizabeth A Wentz (0000-0002-2881-0668), Michelle Hale (0000-0001-5640-8927, Twitter (United States)), David A King (0000-0002-8401-6514, Twitter (United States)) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 87 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 527-541 |
| Publication date | 2021-10-02 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of the American Planning Association (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0194-4363 • E-ISSN: 1939-0130 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/01944363.2021.1873168 |
| OpenAlex | W3163432803 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 61 |
Problem, research strategy, and findings Geodesign is a technology-supported planning approach that combines community collaboration and engagement with geospatial analysis to make land use decisions quickly. In this study we tested the role of Geodesign in improving the quality of local plans through community participation and collaborative decision making supported by geospatial analysis. Our research evaluates Geodesign as a tool and process in establishing community engagement in planning decisions by applying and analyzing Geodesign in two Navajo Nation communities in Arizona to use scientific and community knowledge to make consensus-based decisions for land use planning. There are three critical components to this analysis. First, we evaluate the use of Geodesign as a plan-making tool. Second, we examine how Geodesign can be inclusionary for planning using Arnstein’s ladder of citizen participation with marginalized American Indian communities. Finally, we look at the planner’s role and required planning expertise in developing successful Geodesign plans. We conclude that Geodesign can empower historically marginalized Indigenous communities to make community-based land use plans that leverage local knowledge/values and geospatial analysis.Takeaway for practice Planners can use Geodesign approaches to collaborate and guide marginalized communities to engage in the planning process and incorporate diverse perspectives and cultural values in decision making. A planner should judiciously apply their expertise in their role as a planning facilitator, trainer, and knowledge resource. Using geospatial data and community engagement, Geodesign produces community-based land use plans
Community engagement · Environmental planning · Facilitator · Geography · Geospatial analysis · Planner · Political science · Public relations · Spatial planning · Computer Science · Geographic Information Systems Studies
Field Notes on Science & Nature
Consensus Building and Complex Adaptive Systems
The Communicative Turn in Planning Theory and its Implications for Spatial Strategy Formation
Citizen Participation in the Planning Process
Mandating Citizen Participation in Plan Making
Inclusion and Democracy
Evaluation of community-based land use planning through Geodesign
Breaking down the silos through geodesign – Envisioning Sydney’s urban future
Geodesign dynamics for sustainable urban watershed development
Making Better Places
The Sage Handbook of Case-Based Methods
Discursive Democracy
Participatory mapping to negotiate indigenous knowledge used to assess environmental risk
Crowdsourcing the Public Participation Process for Planning Projects
The Minority-Race Planner in the Quest for a Just City
Evaluation of Public Participation
Assessing the validity of facilitated-volunteered geographic information
Maintaining and Restoring Public Trust in Government Agencies and their Employees
A Ladder Of Citizen Participation
Green Cities, Growing Cities, Just Cities
The just city
An array of qualitative data analysis tools
The Invasion of Indian Country in the Twentieth Century
Sovereignty and Nation-Building
| Unique citing works | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0.67 |
| Citation span | 2023 - 2025 (3) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |