Professor Rina Ghose
Bolton Rm. 478
rghose@uwm.edu
(414) 229-4797
Spring 2005
Geography 734: GIS and Society
Class Time: 3.30 to 6.10 pm, Thursday
Class Location: Bolton 768b
Office Hours: W10-11 am; R 2-3 pm; Or by appointment
Office Location: Bolton 478
COURSE OBJECTIVE: Geographic Information Systems (GIS) is widely used in a
range of disciplines, and in public and private sector. Due to its popularity, it is a multibillion dollar global business. In order to be proficient in it, one not only needs to
understand the technology, but also the science behind the technology. This course
explores a primary research agenda in GIScience, that of GIS and Society. This research
agenda explores the interconnected relationship between the society and GIS, and
explores the implications and impacts of such a relationship.
Within the GIS and Society body of literature (as highlighted by the University
Consortium of Geographic Information Science), the following questions have been
raised:
In what ways will GIS actually affect and alter the society it is intended to represent and
serve? How can various conceptions and representations of space, not based on
traditional map formats or geometric views, be embedded within a GIS? Is GIS more
appropriate for some cultures than others? Can GIS be developed to reflect complex and
ambiguous perceptions of social and physical space? How will GIS affect the
relationships among and within government agencies, and between them and the various
citizen groups concerned with the environment, property rights, and advocating the needs
of local communities? What are the interpersonal implications of GIS? Can GIS provide
citizens with an increased ability to monitor and hold government accountable for
proposals and actions? Will GIS provide citizens with an understanding of their rights
and interests in land? How accessible will spatial data and related GIS analysis tools be to
all parts of society? Can GIS be used to increase participation in public decision making?
(http://www.ucgis.org).
This course aims to answer some of these questions and intends to create a critical
awareness of the hidden implications within GIS technology. This course is organized as
a seminar, with weekly readings and reflection papers. Geography 525 (or consent of
instructor) is the pre-requisite for this course.
ASSIGNMENTS & COURSE EVALUATION:
 Regular participation in class discussion: 60 points, 5 points will be deducted
with every absence
Meaningful participation is expected every week from students. To do this,
students must come to class having critically read that week’s scheduled reading
and undertake informed discussions.

Written summary of weekly reading: 140 points (each 10 points)
This should be between one and a half to two pages long, double spaced
document (point 12 font size). Must summarize the key points of the weekly
readings. Points will be deducted for late submission (5 point deduction per late
day).
Grade: The percentage necessary to receive certain grades will be no higher than the
following: 88% (A-), 78% (B-), 68% (C-), 58% (D-)
READINGS:
The readings are available on the library’s electronic reserve website.
WEEKLY SCHEDULE & READINGS
Weekly readings are assigned below. To facilitate discussion, readings must be
completed prior to the appropriate session. The outline may be subject to change (with
advance warning) so please assume responsibility for keeping up with classroom
announcements.
Week 1, Jan 23
Evolution of GIS and Society Research Agenda
Abler, R.F. 1993. Everything in its place: GPS, GIS, and geography in the 1990's.
Professional Geographer 45(2): 131-139.
Sheppard, E. 1993. Automated geography: What kind of geography for what kind of
society? The Professional Geographer 45 (4): 457-60.
Shepppard, E. 1995. GIS and Society: Towards a Research Agenda. Cartography and
Geographic Information Systems, vol. 22 (1): 5-16.
Chrisman, N. Configuring the User: Social Divisions of Labor in GIS Software. Research
paper (draft).
Week 2, Jan 30
GIS and Ethics
Curry, M. 1995. Rethinking Rights and Responsibilities in Geographic Information
Systems: Beyond the Power of the Image. Cartography and Geographic
Information Systems 22 (1): 58-69.
Crampton, J. 1995. The Ethics of GIS. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems
22 (1): 84-89.
Onsrud, H. J. 1995. Identifying Unethical Conduct in the Use of GIS. Cartography and
Geographic Information Systems 22 (1): 90-97.
Week 3, Feb. 6
GIS Diffusion, Use in Urban Planning
Innes, J. and Simpson. D. 1993. Implementing GIS for Planning: Lessons from the
History of Technological Innovation. Journal of the American Planning
Association 59 (2): 230-236.
Budic, Z. 1994. Effectiveness of geographic information systems in local planning.
Journal of the American Planning Association 60 (2): 244-63.
Campbell, H. 1996. Theoretical perspectives on the diffusion of GIS technologies. In
GIS Diffusion: The Adoption and Use of Geographical Information Systems in
Local Government in Europe, eds. I. Masser, H. Campbell, and M. Craglia, pp.2348. London: Taylor and Francis
Nedovic-Budic, Z. 1998. “The impact of GIS technology.” Environment and Planning B:
Planning and Design 25/5: 681-692.
Week 4, Feb. 13
GIS Implementation in Organizations
Budic, Z., and Godschalk, D. R. 1996. Human Factors in Adoption of Geographic
Information Systems (GIS): A Local Government Case Study. Public
Administration Review 56 (6): 554-67.
Campbell, H. 1991. Organisational Issues in Managing Geographic Information. In
Handling Geographic Information, eds. I. Masser and M. Blakemore. London:
Longman. 259-282.
Nedovic-Budic, Z. and Pinto, J. 2000. Information Sharing in an Interorganizational GIS
Environment. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 27 (3): 455474.
Week 5, Feb. 20
The Technocratic Nature of GIS
Lake, R.W. 1993. Planning and Applied Geography: Positivism, Ethics, and Geographic
Information Systems. Progress in Human Geography 17 (3): 401-13.
Obermeyer, N. J. 1995. The Hidden GIS Technocracy. Cartography and Geographic
Information Systems 22 (1): 78-83
Aitken, S. and Michel, S.M. 1995. Who Contrives the "Real" in GIS? Geographic
Information, Planning and Critical Theory. Cartography and Geographic
Information Systems 22 (1): 17-29.
Miller, R. 1995. Beyond Method, Beyond Ethics: Integrating Social Theory in GIS and
GIS into Social Theory. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems 22
(1):98-103.
Week 6, Feb. 27
GIS and Democracy
Pickles, J. 1995. Representations in an Electronic age: Geography, GIS and Democracy.
In: J. Pickles (ed.), Ground truth: The social implications of geographic
information systems. New York, New York: Guilford Press. pp. 1-30.
Hutchinson, C. F., and Toledano, J. 1993. Guidelines for Demonstrating Geographical
Information Systems Based on Participatory Development. International Journal
of Geographical Information Systems 7 (5): 453-61.
Clark, M. J. 1998. GIS- Democracy or Delusion? Environment and Planning A 30(2):
303-316.
Rundstrom, R.A. 1995. GIS, Indigenous Peoples, and Epistemological Diversity.
Cartography and Geographic Information Systems 22 (1): 45-57.
Week 7, March 6
Digital Divide in GIS
Sawicki, D. and Craig, W. 1996. Democratization of Data: Bridging the Gap for
Community Groups. Journal of the American Planning Association 62 (4): 512523.
Harris, T. and Weiner, D. 1998a. Empowerment, Marginalization and 'CommunityIntegrated' GIS. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems 25(2): 67-76.
Talen, E. 1998. Visualizing Fairness. Equity Maps for Planners. Journal of the American
Planning Association 64 (1): 22-38.
Obermeyer,N.J.1998. The Evolution of Public Participation GIS. Cartography and
Geographic Information Systems 25(2): 65-66.
Week 8, March 13
Public Participation GIS
Elwood, S. and Leitner, H. 1998. GIS and Community-based Planning: Exploring the
Diversity of Neighborhood Perspectives and Needs. Cartography and
Geographic Information Systems 25 (2): 77-88.
Ghose, R. 2001. Use of Information Technology for Community Empowerment:
Transforming Geographic Information System into Community Information
Systems. Transactions in GIS, 5(2): 141-163.
Ghose, R. 2003. Investigating Community Participation, Spatial Knowledge Production
and GIS Use in Inner City Revitalization. Journal of Urban Technology 10 (1):
39-60.
Ghose, R. and Huxhold,W.E. 2002. Role of Multi-Scalar GIS-based Indicators Studies in
Formulating Neighborhood Planning Policies. URISA Journal 14(2): 5-17.
Week 9, March 20
No class – spring break
Week 10, March 27
PPGIS: Barriers, Models, And Local Contextual Factors
Barndt, M. 1998. Public participation GIS—Barriers to Implementation. Cartography
and Geographic Information Systems 25 (2): 105-112.
Leitner, H., McMaster, R , Elwood, S., McMaster, S., Sheppard, E. 2002. Models for
Making GIS Available to Community Organizations: Dimensions of Difference
and Appropriateness. In Community Participation and Geographic Information
Systems, eds. W. Craig, T. Harris, and D. Weiner, pp. 37-52. London: Taylor &
Francis.
Elwood, S. and Ghose, R. 2001. PPGIS in Community Development Planning: Framing
the Organizational Context. Cartographica 38 (3&4): 19-33.
Ghose, R., and Huxhold, W. E. 2001. The Role of Local Contextual Factors in Building
Public Participation GIS: The Milwaukee Experience. Cartography and
Geographic Information Systems 28(3): 195-208
Week 11, April 3
PPGIS in the Urban Context
Bosworth, M., Donovan, J., and Couey, P. 2002. Portland Metro’s Dream for Public
Involvement. In Community Participation and Geographic Information Systems,
eds. W. Craig, T. Harris, and D. Weiner, pp. 125-136. London: Taylor & Francis.
Elwood, S. and Leitner, H. 2003. Community-based Planning and GIS: Aligning
Neighborhood Organizations with State Priorities? Journal of Urban Affairs 25
(2): 139-157
Casey, L. and Pederson, T. 2002. Mapping Philadelphia’s Neighborhoods. In Community
Participation and Geographic Information Systems, eds. W. Craig, T. Harris, and
D. Weiner, pp. 65-76. London: Taylor & Francis.
Sawicki, D. and Peterman, D. 2002. Surveying the Extent of PPGIS Practice in the United
States. In Community Participation and Geographic Information Systems, eds. W.
Craig, T. Harris, and D. Weiner, pp. 17-36. London: Taylor & Francis.
Week 12, April 10
PPGIS in the Environmental Context
Ventura, S., Niemann, B., Sutphin, T., and Chenowith, R. 2002. GIS-Enhanced LandUse Planning. In Community Participation and Geographic Information Systems,
eds. W. Craig, T. Harris, and D. Weiner, pp. 113-124. London: Taylor & Francis.
Kyem, P. 2002. Promoting Local Community Participation in Forest Management
through a PPGIS Application in Southern Ghana. In Community Participation
and Geographic Information Systems, eds. W. Craig, T. Harris, and D. Weiner,
pp. 218-230. London: Taylor & Francis.
Meredith, T., Yetman, G., and Frias, G. 2002. Mexican and Canadian Case Studies of
Community-based Spatial Information Management for Biodiversity
Conservation. In Community Participation and Geographic Information Systems,
eds. W. Craig, T. Harris, and D. Weiner, pp. 205-217. London: Taylor & Francis.
Sieber, R. 2000a. Confronting the Opposition: The Social Construction of Geographical
information systems in social movements. International Journal of Geographic
Information Science 14(8): 775-793.
Week 13 April 17
Critical GIS
Harvey, F. 2000. The Social Construction of Geographical Information Systems.
International Journal of Geographical Information Science 14 (8): 711-713.
McHaffie, P. 2000. Surfaces: Tacit Knowledge, Formal Language and Metaphor at the
Harvard Lab for Computer Graphics and Spatial Analysis. International Journal
of Geographical Information Science 14 (8): 755-773.
Martin, E. 2000. Actor-Networks and Implementation: Examples from Conservation GIS
in Ecuador. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 14 (8):
715-738.
Week 14 April 24
Critical GIS
Harvey, F. and Chrisman, N. 1998. Boundary Objects and the Social Construction of GIS
Technology. Environment and Planning A 30: 1683-1694.
Kwan, M.P. 2002. Introduction: Feminist Geography and GIS. Gender, Place and Culture
9 (3): 261-62.
Kwan, M. P. 2002. Is GIS for Women? Reflections on the Critical Discourse in the
1990s. Gender, Place and Culture 9 (3): 271-279.
Kwan, M.P. 2002. Feminist Visualization: Re-envisioning GIS as a Method in Feminist
Geographic Research. Annals of the AAG 92(4): 645-661.
Week 15 May 1
Critical GIS
Harvey, F. 1997. National Cultural Differences in Theory and Practice: Evaluating
Hofstede’s National Cultural Framework. Information Technology and People 10
(2): 132-146.
Harvey, F. and Chrisman, N. 2003 . The Imbrication of Geography and Technology: The
Social Construction of Geographic Information Systems. In Techno Earth, ed. S.
Brunn.
Harvey, F. 2000. Constructing GIS: Actor Networks of Collaboration. Journal of URISA
13 (1): 29-38.
Week 16, May 8
What have we learnt? Discussions based on the semester’s readings. New research
directions?
No class on finals week