Abstract
Participatory spatial tools—community mapping, PGIS, and others—find increasing resonance among research and non-governmental organizations to make stakeholder claims and community perspectives explicit for more inclusive landscape governance. In this paper, we situate the use of participatory spatial tools in debates on integrated landscape approaches and inclusive development. We show that using such spatial tools is not new but argue that their application for inclusive landscape governance requires a new research agenda that focuses on expanding the scope of application of the tools, improving the inclusivity of the processes, and developing new technologies.
Highlights
The growing demand for food and non-food crops and rural land for other uses is increasing the dynamics and complexity of landscapes, affecting rural and peri-urban land use, ecosystem services, and livelihoods in multiple interacting ways (Shackleton et al 2019; Macchi et al 2020)
A growing body of literature vindicates the use of participatory spatial tools to uncover and visualize stakeholder perspectives of landscape dynamics and associated conflicts as a basis to negotiate solutions. This literature is indicative of the increasing endorsement of participatory spatial tools in place-based landscape governance
From an inclusive development perspective, participatory spatial tools may enhance the empowerment of marginalized people and give them a voice in landscape governance by making their interests and claims spatially explicit
Summary
The growing demand for food and non-food crops and rural land for other uses is increasing the dynamics and complexity of landscapes, affecting rural and peri-urban land use, ecosystem services, and livelihoods in multiple interacting ways (Shackleton et al 2019; Macchi et al 2020). While many terms exist for landscape approaches (Scherr et al 2012; Reed et al 2014), the common denominators are place-based and cross-sector stakeholder negotiation and engagement, multi-objective decision-making, and governance oriented toward achieving multifunctional landscapes Such landscapes simultaneously provide food security, biodiversity and ecosystem services, sustainable livelihoods, and climate resilience (Sayer et al 2013). This driver appears in the Citizen Science principles of respect for local knowledge, committedness, and promoting people’s participation in scientific research (Haklay 2013; Robinson et al 2018) This alternative ‘people’s knowledge’ is frequently critical of prevailing authorities and may disrupt social-political systems by contesting the sources and presentations of authoritative spatial information (Rambaldi 2005; Radil and Anderson 2019; McCall 2021). Further research on collaborative and participatory modeling is important (see, e.g., Voinov et al 2016)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
