A Framework for
Collaborative GI Science
-or-
The ‘distillation’ of a research idea
Robin S. Smith
ICOSS, University of Sheffield
European GeoInformatics Workshop
7 - 9 March 2007
Outline
Researching Society and Technology
e-(Social) Science
‘Collaboration’
Components of digital participation
‘Collaboration’ in GRADE
Summary
Researching Society and
Technology
‘social construction of technology’ (Bijker
et al., 1987)
‘social shaping’ of technology (Woolgar,
2003)



giving people/society a role
technologies are the product of complicated
interactions {users, non-users, policies,
practices and the technology}
A strategic/’holistic’ view of a technology
e-(Social) Science
Woolgar’s (2003) “consultative study”
Social Shaping:



“… all social scientific aspects of genesis, use,
implementation and effects of the new e
technologies…
[with a] tendency to distinguish between research
which uses the grid and research which is about the
grid [alongside]…
how grid technologies will affect practice, and how the
practices of social scientists will affect the
development and use of these technologies”
Four research themes
1.
Different activities around the globe and the impacts
this may have on the development combined research
infrastructures

– (G)SDI(s)?
Impact on other areas of “scholarship”, from “… more
routine aspects of academic life, teaching,
administration, journal operation, refereeing and so on”
2.

3.
- in silico research
the impact that such infrastructure will also have on the
existing “… operation of virtual communities… [such
as] sharing, privacy, trust, collaboration, IPR”

- SDIs?
“… historical comparisons with the development of
other communication technologies and ICTs… ideas
about web democracy… the need to explore
innovative models of cooperation and collaboration”
4.

– the motivation of this paper
e-(Social) Science
Scott & Venters’s (2006) ‘research practices’
“cyberinfrastructure [involves the] intersection of
Grid and collaborative research” (p. 2; after
David, 2004)
BUT


‘social science’ can be “… a fundamentally individual
endeavour” and social scientists have limited
knowledge of the Grid
= adapting tools made by other communities.
raster calculation vs. discipline-specific tools??
Unnecessary duplication of effort and /or infrastructure
Reduction in the possibilities of inter-disciplinary research
facilitated by a common toolkit/’language’?
A lack of social theory in recent technical
developments for e-social science
 requires an “… articulation between theory
and practice”
Contributing our experience to other Grid
communities e.g. for “combining information
from diverse and distributed data sources” –
‘GIS’ as a collaborative tool (?)
An established approach
to understanding the
social surroundings of esocial science through
social shaping
Glenmorangie (10y)
An established approach
to understanding the
social surroundings of esocial science through
social shaping
“A smooth and mediumbodied whisky, with a
delicate, slightly sweet
aroma” (Shaw, 1999)
Scotland’s best-selling
malt
Collaboration
Gray & Wood (1991)- business/economic
context
Nyerges & Jankowski (2001) Enhanced Adaptive
Structuration Theory 2 – GIS for group-based
interaction
Balram & Dragićević (2006) – consensual group
spatial decision processes within a “participanttechnology-data nexus”
(Recently highlighted as a “challenge” by Mark
Birkin (2005) in a discussion of e-social science
and GIS)*
* See http://www.wun.ac.uk/ggisa/seminars.html >> seminar archive
Components of digital participation
(Smith, 2006)
Notions of participation /collaboration
Issues /Research Problems
Audience
Methods
Outcomes
?
Arnstein’s (1969) Ladder of citizen participation
A less well-known
approach being adopted
from a related discipline
The Balvenie (10y)
A less well-known
approach being adopted
from a related discipline
“Founder’s Reserve has
a rich colour, bouquet and
flavour with a smooth,
clean, dry finish” (Shaw,
1999)
The distillery is not open
to the public
GRADE
Scoping a Geospatial Repository for
Academic Deposit and Extraction
Small group of researchers experiencing
geospatial data-sharing


using the demonstrator repository and
two web-based peer-to-peer technologies to
share GI
‘Action research’ for a potential e-social
science resource- beyond storage to use
‘Collaboration’
Highlighted in informal peer-to-peer
methods by participants
GRADE as a ‘collaborative resource’
‘Access’ issues



Issues of ‘trust’
Citation/acknowledgement/data control for the
re-use of data
Data policy, licensing and digital rights
Issues/research problems
Only an experiment- not a true settingwhat research contexts/problems require
participants to share GI?

Do these vary between different research
communities?
Geographical distribution of participants,
data and problems- the various ‘networks’
for collaboration
Audience
Close association of researchers to their
data (‘data mining’ and negotiating access)
Who is involved- relates to issues of trust
and control- again, does it vary by
discipline?
communicating as a group online and
meeting in-person for the workshop=
impacts on the outcomes of the study
Methods
Different methods



ease of installation/use
privacy and security
Work practices (home and office computer problems)
online communication to mediate sharing

(desired as an extension to a GRADE-type repository)
Technology uncovering attitudes to sharing


e.g. different approaches to using social network
software
Description through theory-driven/-identifier roles (?)
Outcomes
The technology


Trusted resource through Edina
Need for social tools
Experiences


How to install peer-to-peer software
Considering the role of p2p in real research/teaching
(e.g. “project/group work”)
Research practice



Generating a report
Participants considering furthering the research
Giving this paper!
An idea requiring further
empirical testing
Highland Park (12y)
An idea requiring further
empirical testing
“Highland Park is a
medium-bodied single
malt of character, with a
heathery-smoky aroma
and peaty flavour with
balancing sweet tones”
(Shaw, 1999)
One of Scotland’s most
northerly distilleries
Summary
Understanding the roles of the many
stakeholders in e-(social) science is aided by a
social shaping of technology approach
GISc is well placed to explore this concept given
its inherent need for data-sharing and
collaboration
‘collaboration’ can have many meanings for this
community
To some extent, related research in other virtual
communities, such as digital participation, can
help us to explore our domains of both e-social
and GI Science.- (+ data, + metadata?)
Slainte mhath!
robin.smith@shef.ac.uk
ICOSS
Purpose built research centre for policy relevant,
interdisciplinary research using large
(quantitative and qualitative) datasets
Promotes GIS as a collaborative tool between
researchers and their datasets
A place where public sector groups interested in
GIS can interact with academics for research
and infrastructure development
A place to study ‘collaboration’ in practice (?)