Author
Listed:
- Olaf Schroth
(Collaborative for Advanced Landscape Planning (CALP), Department of Forest Resources Management/Landscape Architecture, University of British Columbia, 2321–2260 West Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada)
- Ellen Pond
(Collaborative for Advanced Landscape Planning (CALP), Department of Forest Resources Management/Landscape Architecture, University of British Columbia, 2321–2260 West Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada)
- Cam Campbell
(Collaborative for Advanced Landscape Planning (CALP), Department of Forest Resources Management/Landscape Architecture, University of British Columbia, 2321–2260 West Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada)
- Petr Cizek
(Collaborative for Advanced Landscape Planning (CALP), Department of Forest Resources Management/Landscape Architecture, University of British Columbia, 2321–2260 West Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada)
- Stephen Bohus
(Software Developer, 2555 Mill Hill Road, Victoria, BC, V9B 4X6, Canada)
- Stephen R. J. Sheppard
(Collaborative for Advanced Landscape Planning (CALP), Department of Forest Resources Management/Landscape Architecture, University of British Columbia, 2321–2260 West Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada)
Abstract
Virtual globes, i.e. , geobrowsers that integrate multi-scale and temporal data from various sources and are based on a globe metaphor, have developed into serious tools that practitioners and various stakeholders in landscape and community planning have started using. Although these tools originate from Geographic Information Systems (GIS), they have become a different, potentially interactive and public tool set, with their own specific limitations and new opportunities. Expectations regarding their utility as planning and community engagement tools are high, but are tempered by both technical limitations and ethical issues [1,2]. Two grassroots campaigns and a collaborative visioning process, the Kimberley Climate Adaptation Project case study (British Columbia), illustrate and broaden our understanding of the potential benefits and limitations associated with the use of virtual globes in participatory planning initiatives. Based on observations, questionnaires and in-depth interviews with stakeholders and community members using an interactive 3D model of regional climate change vulnerabilities, potential impacts, and possible adaptation and mitigation scenarios in Kimberley, the benefits and limitations of virtual globes as a tool for participatory landscape planning are discussed. The findings suggest that virtual globes can facilitate access to geospatial information, raise awareness, and provide a more representative virtual landscape than static visualizations. However, landscape is not equally representative at all scales, and not all types of users seem to benefit equally from the tool. The risks of misinterpretation can be managed by integrating the application and interpretation of virtual globes into face-to-face planning processes.
Suggested Citation
Olaf Schroth & Ellen Pond & Cam Campbell & Petr Cizek & Stephen Bohus & Stephen R. J. Sheppard, 2011.
"Tool or Toy? Virtual Globes in Landscape Planning,"
Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 3(4), pages 1-24, October.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jftint:v:3:y:2011:i:4:p:204-227:d:14426
Download full text from publisher
Most related items
These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
- Fenglian Liu & Aiwen Lin & Huanhuan Wang & Yuling Peng & Song Hong, 2016.
"Global research trends of geographical information system from 1961 to 2010: a bibliometric analysis,"
Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(2), pages 751-768, February.
- Frederic Kaplan & Isabella di Lenardo, 2020.
"The Advent of the 4D Mirror World,"
Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(2), pages 307-310.
- Hossam M. Faheem & Birgitta König-Ries & Muhammad Ahtisham Aslam & Naif Radi Aljohani & Iyad Katib, 2018.
"Ontology Design for Solving Computationally-Intensive Problems on Heterogeneous Architectures,"
Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, February.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jftint:v:3:y:2011:i:4:p:204-227:d:14426. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.