Galen J. Maclaurin
Methodology Presentation Class Wiki
Geography 5161
Professor Foote
February 16, 2009
Presentation Roadmap
Participant observation:
 Researcher interprets and analyzes information
 Outsider as the mental filter for what is relevant, important and insignificant
Collaborative research:
 Working with local people ultimately for their benefit
 Rarely involves local people in data collection and interpretation
Participatory Research:
 Researcher bridges a role between observer and facilitator
 Shift away from a positivist research paradigm of university-based scholars: A move to
break the researcher-researched, subject-object dichotomy of knowledge production.
 Alternative way to collect scientific information that decentralizes the process and shifts
the ownership of the project from the researcher to the local people.
Conceptual diagrams to understand participation in research
Research without a participatory focus
Participatory Methodologies
Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)
One definition of PRA is “an approach and methods for learning about rural
life and conditions from, with and by rural People” (Chambers 1994, 953).
PRA as a methodology is described as “a family of approaches and methods
to enable rural people to share, enhance, and analyze their knowledge of life
and conditions, to plan and to act” (Chambers 1994, 953).
Chambers’ point of view is that PRA is constantly evolving and therefore a
definition is not helpful.
Implementation frameworks are more useful than definitions.
Common sense, ethical awareness and practical experience are better than
frameworks.
 PRA methods are mostly visual, verbal and kinesthetic
 Participatory mapping is not exclusively used in PRA methodologies, nor was it
pioneered in PRA. Participatory mapping techniques and applications are found in the
research of many fields; however, the literature is more extensive in PRA.
I will present five methodological categories commonly found in the participatory mapping
literature: sketch maps, mental maps, transect walks, overlay mapping and computer-based
mapping. This list is not exhaustive; there are other methods described as participatory
mapping.
Sketch maps

Sketch maps can be drawn individually or in groups by participants. They are useful for
exploratory purposes, identifying opportunities or vulnerabilities. Here is an example of
a paper map and a ground map. See Chambers (2006) for a good comparison of paper
versus ground sketch maps.
Mental maps
This mental map was drawn by a nine year old girl in Toronto, Canada showing how she
perceives her play area. She lived in a low rise, or rather not a high rise, apartment building.
This mental map shows the play area of a nine year old girl living in a high rise apartment
building in the same part of Toronto.
This is an example of a mental map drawn by a researcher after conducting interviews with
groups of people from different socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds. The author tried to
summarize how well each of these groups could identify certain geographic features and
locations surrounding them in Los Angeles. The map on the left is based on interviews
conducted with middle class white individuals, the top right with lower class African American
individuals and the lower right with Hispanic Spanish speaking individuals.
 Maps can be drawn by participants or researchers. In participatory mapping, mental
maps are different from sketch maps in that they help us understand perceptions where
as sketch maps more useful as a means of community survey, description and
exploration. Mental maps can be useful to explore spatial perceptions but they should
not be used to make generalizations or conclusions about larger groups represented by
participants.
Transect walks
 Transect walks can serve many purposes; this can be a participatory method for data
collection, community surveying and ground truthing. This activity helps to understand
the cultural significance of features being mapped, as well as orienting the researcher in
the community and building relationships with community members.
Overlay mapping
 Overlay maps or base maps can be drawn individually or in groups by participants using
photo maps (1:5000; 1:20,000), topographic maps or specially prepared base maps.
Participants can draw on transparent plastic overlays or directly on the maps.
o Useful for collecting qualitative or quantitative spatial data.
o Problems with readily available data and geographic information, under-mapped
areas, representations of power in existing maps and data sets. This is one reason
why photo maps are preferred.
o Aerial photographs are usually easier for people to use who are not familiar with
maps.
Computer-based mapping
 Computer-based maps: Approaches that use technologies such as GIS, GPS and
computer to create maps. Raises many issues of participation, empowerment and
disempowerment. More of a focus in PPGIS. Critical issues include:
o Differential access to data, technology, training and equipment.
o Differential amounts of participation among community member; exclusion of
certain groups.
o Problems with data and geographic information, like above.
Example of a participatory mapping process from Buzi, Mozambique
The following images come from a mapping project that addressed vulnerability to
flooding and drought in rural communities of the Buzi region of Mozambique
(Kienberger 2008). These images come from one of the communities that participated.
For further information regarding this project, see the link I have provided in my
bibliography. I chose to present this project because it integrates many of the
participatory methods being discussed.
Sketch map
Participatory data collection
The image above is an example of analytical diagramming used to summarize the data
collection process where community members ranked each of these threats to their
community. The blue represents vulnerabilities to flood and the amber to drought.
Community members weighted the severity of each of these by marking each piece of
paper with seeds, as seen in the photograph.
These photographs were taken during participatory mapping activities. This is essentially
overlay mapping; they are defining the spatial distribution of the vulnerabilities
identified in the previous activity, by drawing on paper maps with chalk.
Computer generated map of results
This map was created by the researcher and given to the community for negotiation
meetings with the state to address these issues of vulnerability. In this project,
community members facilitated most of the data collection and interpretation process;
however, I do not think community members were trained in GIS in order to prepare
such maps on their own. It was probably out of the scope of the project and not feasible
based on the technology available to the community.
Conclusion
Sources
Bunge, W.W. and R. Bordessa. 1975. The canadian alternative: Survival, expeditions and urban
change. Toronto: Geographical Monographs.
Chambers, R. 1994. The origins and practice of participatory rural appraisal. World
Development 22, no. 7: 953-969.
Cistulli, Vito. 2002. Environment in decentralized development : Economic and institutional
issues. Training materials for agricultural planning, 44. Rome: Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations.
Dana, Peter H. 2008. Surveys of people and place. In The handbook of geographic information
science, ed. John P. Wilson and A. Stewart Fotheringham:494-518. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Gould, P and R White. 1986. Mental maps. Boston: Allen & Unwin.
Kienberger, Stefan. 2008. Vulnerability Assessment - GIScience and Remote Sensing.
http://projects.stefankienberger.at/vulmoz (accessed February 12, 2009).
Mather, Richard A. 2000. Using photomaps to support participatory processes of community
forestry in the middle hills of nepal. Mountain Research and Development 20, no. 2: 154-161.
Puginier, Oliver. 2001. Can Participatory Land Use Planning at Community Level in the
Highlands of Northern Thailand Use Geographic Information Systems (GIS) As a
Communication Tool? [S.l.]: Participatory Avenues, IAPAD.
http://www.iapad.org/participatory%5Flanduse%5Fplanning%5Fin%5Fnorthern%5Fthailand.ht
m (accessed February 12, 2009).
Recommended Readings:
Chambers, Robert. 1994. The origins and practice of participatory rural appraisal. World
Development 22, no. 7: 953-969.
Chambers, Robert. 2006. Participatory mapping and geographic information systems: Whose
map? Who is empowered and who disempowered? Who gains and who loses? Electronic
Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries 25, no. 2: 1-11.
Chapin, Mac, Zachary Lamb, and Bill Threlkeld. 2005. Mapping indigenous lands. Annual
Review of Anthropology 34: 619-638.
Kwaku Kyem, Peter A. 2001. Power, participation, and inflexible institutions: An examination
of the challenges to community empowerment in participatory gis applications. In
Cartographica, 38:5-17: University of Toronto Press.
Nietschmann, Bernard. 1995. Defending the miskito reefs with maps and gps: Mapping with
sail, scuba, and satellite. Cultural Survival Quarterly 18, no. 4: 34-38.
Wainwright, Joel and Joe Bryan. 2009. Cartography, territory, property: Postcolonial
reflections on indigenous counter-mapping in nicaragua and belize. Cultural Geographies 16:
153-177.