A management perspective to using Public Participation GIS in planning for visitor use in national parks

Abstract

Academics have frequently used and endorsed the Public Participation GIS approach for national park management. However, it is only minimally used by public agencies such as national park organisations. This study explores the potential that managers of Finnish national parks see in the PPGIS approach in the context of planning for the visitor use of parks. Ten semi-structured interviews with managers of Parks and Wildlife Finland were conducted. The managers perceived that PPGIS could help in optimising site management, and preferred PPGIS studies that are practical and clearly connected to planning site management actions. They envisioned a mobile phone application that would allow mapping visitor experiences on the spot. Overall, the managers were open to adopting place-based planning practices. The study increases the understanding of public agencies' views towards PPGIS. It also produces practical information for conducting PPGIS case studies as well as for integrating PPGIS tools into planning processes.

Exploring human–nature interactions in national parks with social media photographs and computer vision

“…To develop the recreational use of protected areas in line with conservation goals, protected-area organizations in many countries actively gather visitor informa-tion. Depending on the organization, visitor information may be collected using registration forms at the park entrance, placing counters along the paths, or by conducting surveys or interviews on-site or online (Pietilä & Fagerholm 2019). Information about different groups of visitors may then be used to guide national park management and marketing actions, as well as conservation strategies (Kruger et al 2017).…”

A methodological framework for analysis of participatory mapping data in research, planning, and management

“…We encourage a shift towards more evidence-based, or knowledge-informed planning (Rydin 2007, Davoudi 2012) by integrating more complex methods of spatial analysis into the planning process, including elements of exploration, explanation, and prediction. This would entail greater attention to: different sampling strategies for eliciting spatial attributes; different approaches to aggregating spatial attributes (including overlap and conflict analyses); possibilities for integrating different forms of spatial attributes; addressing issues of commensurability and compatibility; and the development of automated analyses tools targeted for practitioners (building on Raymond et al 2014, Brown 2017, Pietilä and Fagerholm 2019, Kenter et al 2019). In addition, an essential future direction relates to determining which methods are most suitable in the context of planning; adapting analyses methods to different phases of planning and decision-making processes (Kahila-Tani et al 2019), each with their different purposes and intended outcomes.…”

PPGIS for a better understanding of peoples values: experiences from Finland and the Faroe Islands

“…The reluctance to introduce new technologies like PPGIS to planning may reflect the fact that either the method is unfamiliar to the participants or they fail to see the additional benefits of participatory mapping for the planning process. As Pietilä and Fagerholm (2018) found, the authorities regard PPGIS as useful if surveys are practical and clearly connected to the planning process. Similarly, the willingness of stakeholders to respond to PPGIS depends on the objectives of the participatory process, which must also be in the interests of stakeholder groups (Reed, 2008).…”