Assessing Participatory GIS for Community-Based Natural Resource Management:

Claiming Community Forests in Cameroon

Author(s): Michael K. McCall and Peter A. Minang
Source: The Geographical Journal , Dec., 2005, Vol. 171, No. 4 (Dec., 2005), pp. 340-356
Published by: Wiley on behalf of The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of
British Geographers)

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3451206

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3451206?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Wiley and The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) are
collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Geographical Journal

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
The Geographical Journal, Vol. 171, No. 4, December 2005, pp. 340-356

Assessing participatory GIS for community-based

natural resource management: claiming
community forests in Cameroon
MICHAEL K McCALL AND PETER A MINANG
International Institute for Geolnformation Science and Earth Observation (ITC), PO Box 6,
7500 AA Enschede, The Netherlands
E-mail: mccall@itc.nl; minang@itc.nl
This paper was accepted for publication in July 2005

This paper critically reviews and analyses participatory GIS (PGIS) and participatory
mapping applications within participatory spatial planning for community-based natural
resource management in developing countries. There is an often implicit assumption that
PGIS use is effective, in that it meets content needs, satisfies underlying local stakeholder
interests and therefore is a tool for better governance. The analytical framework looks
at participatory spatial planning performance with respect to key dimensions of
governance, especially the intensity of community participation and empowerment,
equity within communities and between 'governed' and 'governing', respect for
indigenous knowledge, rights, ownership, legitimacy, and effectiveness. Specific
development focus is given by a case study using participatory mapping and PGIS in
community forest legitimization, planning and management in Tinto, Cameroon. 'Good
governance' criteria are applied ex-post to the implementation procedures, the geo-
information outputs, and the longer-term outcomes of the PGIS processes. Impacts of
incorporating PGIS were examined in terms of the types and degrees of participation in
the process; access to, and the uses made of, the geographic information; whether the
information outputs met stakeholders' requirements; and the overall changes in equity
and empowerment in the community. It was found that PGIS/participatory mapping
processes contributed - positively, though not comprehensively - to good governance,
by improving dialogue, redistributing resource access and control rights - though not
always equitably - legitimizing and using local knowledge, exposing local stakeholders
to geospatial analysis, and creating some actor empowerment through training. PGIS
promoted empowerment by supporting community members' participation in decision-
making and actions, and by enabling land use planning decisions beyond community
forestry itself.

KEY WORDS: Cameroon, participatory GIS, good governance, community forest management,
participatory spatial planning

Introduction underlying interests of stakeholders, and thus is a

tool for better governance. We use 'good govern-
his study addresses participatory-GIS (PGIS) ance' dimensions (Figure 1) in an ex-post evalua-
and participatory mapping in participatorytion of the process of applying PGIS in the
spatial planning applications for community- planning and authentication of a Community Forest
based natural resource management. It queries the Management (CFM) project.
implicit assumption that the participatory applica- In the first section we critically review PGIS
tion of GIS at the local level is effective, simultane- applications in local level Natural Resource
ously meeting the content needs and satisfying the Management (NRM) in developing countries in
0016-7398/05/0002-0001/$00 20/0 @ 2005 The Royal Geographical Society

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resource management 341

Good Governance Dimension Criteria Indicators

Participation during,
- Sketch mapping
- GPSlcompass data co
- Aerial photo interpre
Representation and - GIS processing
involvement of actors

LEGITIMACY &G. f
LEGITIMACY & Direct involvement in,
PARTICIPATION- Land use allocation and use rights
decisions
Involvement in decision making - ISK inclusion and exclusion decisions
- Forest boundary decisions
- Map content decisions (sketch maps
and GIS maps)

Evidence of actor learning from

participatory mapping process
EMPOWERMENT Empowerment of actors

Actor involvement in any Geo-info

related training during the process

Direct access to,

Access to Geo-information and - Analogue Geo-info during process
GIS - Digital Geo-info during process
OWNERSHIP OF SPATIAL - GIS facility during process
KNOWLEDGE & PROCESS

Use of Geo-information in PGIS

Geo-information use - Digital
- Hardcopylprinted

RESPECT FOR LOCAL PEOPLE Respect for indigenous Evidence of act

& THEIR KNOWLEDGE technicalspatiknowledgeexploration/use of I

Actor gain in resource control or

access rights as a result of
EQUITY - GOVERNING & Change in power and control participatory-GIS decisions
GOVERNED relations

Lost resource contr

as a result of comm

EFFECTIENES
COMPETENCE
& Satisfaction with map outputs
Figure 1 Good governance criteria and indicators used in this study

terms of participation and good governance. The

Participatory spatial planning and good governance:
following section assesses the application of PGIS
principles and practices
over a period of years in a community forest
management project in Tinto, Cameroon, by PGIS and participatory mapping have two decades of
employing key dimensions of good governance. applications in participatory spatial planning, whether
The third section concludes by discussing salient
manifested as rural-located 'community-based natural
issues in empowerment impacts and functional resources' (for examples, see Poole 1995; McCall 2004),
effectiveness in PGIS processes that should contrib-
or as 'participatory neighbourhood planning' in urban sett-
ute to well-governed resource management. ings (for examples, see Craig et al 2002; McCall 2003):

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
342 Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resource management

* 'Claiming land' - legal recognition of customary commercial sector and government agencies, as
well as civil society, community representatives,
land and resource rights, or demarcating neighbour-
hood boundaries. traditional leaders and NGOs. 'Homogeneous'
* Management of customary land and resources, communities cannot be presumed when there are
usually under 'traditional' management systems. significant ethnic, economic class, socio-cultural,
* Managing competition and ameliorating conflicts. and gender divisions. Essential questions about
* Mapping social and environmental inequalities. legitimacy are: 'Who controls the types, analysis,
* 'Building community', strengthening communityand uses of data and knowledge?' 'Who handles
awareness and cultural identity. the spatial data and information?' 'Is there open
access to the spatial planning instruments?' 'Who
Participation is a key element among the criteria ofuses, and, who has access to, the outputs?' 'Who is
'good governance' for effective participatory spatialactively participating?'
planning. Governance is a set of measures of the Participation in PGIS can be characterized both
relationships between the 'governed' (civil society into types and intensities (cf. participation ladders
and the public) and the 'governing' (the govern- of, for example, Arnstein 1969; McCall 1988 2003;
ment, its institutions, and private sector interests).Catley 1999; Ingles et al. 1999; Carver 2003), from
The pertinent power relationships are those involv-lowest to highest.
ing policy setting, decision-making, planning and
implementation. Core concepts for understanding * Manipulative and passive participation involving
governance are accountability - closely related to information flows between local people and 'outsid-
legitimacy, and effectiveness, and within these ers', regarding primarily technical information, such
concepts are categories such as lawfulness and as resource assessment, e.g. participatory mapping
subsidiarity and inclusion (or participation). But, in many rapid rural appraisal exercises.
'good' governance is hard to define unambigu-* Consultation or functional participation - outsiders
ously, since it introduces relativist political and refer selected, focused issues to local stakeholders,
ethical categories and priorities - the prescriptive and interpret their responses into 'scientific' frame-
contextual questions are as follows. Accountability works, such as maps of 'needs'.
for what types of actions? Legitimacy for what* Interactive involvement in decision-making by all
ends? Effective for whose purposes? (See discus- actors in most stages - 'participation seen as a right,
sions in, for example, Aubut (2004), Goetz and not just as the means to achieve outsiders' project
Gaventa (2001), van Kersbergen and van Waarden goals'.
(2001), OECD (2001) and UNDP (1997).) * Initiating actions - independent initiatives from, and
The analysis in this paper is based on a set of 'owned' by, local people; or self-mobilization. This
characteristics and dimensions of good governanceis a strong indicator of empowerment.
which incorporate prescriptive objectives and initi-
atives to strengthen civil society in order to make
Empowerment
the governing more accountable, more transparent
The four intensities of participation can be seen
(open policy-setting and decisions), responsive, and
as related to underlying intentions of whatever
effective. Thus we follow the more progressive
goal-directed interpretations of good governanceagencies
of are 'pushing' participatory spatial planning -
the OECD (2001) and UNDP (1997). Accountabil- or PGIS or participatory mapping - as a strategy.
ity, legitimacy and effectiveness, therefore, are At one extreme is 'facilitation', when participa-
interpreted as the means towards political-ethical tion is promoted to introduce and lubricate
higher values of strengthening legitimacy of the outside programmes, whilst the other extreme is
governing, empowering the governed especially the'empowerment', where participation is intended to
marginalized, creating respect for rights, ensuringprioritize local decision-making and reinforce
ownership (of geo-information), emphasizing responsibilities. Coming in between is 'mediation'
equity, and reinforcing competence in dealing withor 'collaboration', where the intention is for the
geo-information. participatory approach to trade-off the interests and
priorities of outside projects and local people. An
'empowerment functionality' of PGIS approaches
Legitimacy and participation
should give voice to local people by putting
Legitimacy demands interactive participation them and their indigenous technical and spatial
throughout the spatial planning processes, by all knowledge on an equal footing with the external
stakeholders, in all stages from problem prioritiza-experts.
tion, data collection, spatial analysis, through to There are many examples of 'empowerment'
decision-making. 'All stakeholders' here implies thePGIS used to 'claim our land', that is, the demand

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resource management 343

for legal recognition of customary land and specialized, location- and resource-specific,
resource rights (cf. Poole 1995; McCall 2004). For problem-oriented indigenous technical knowledge,
instance; in Guyana, Amerindian peoples claimed provide a basis for local people's participation in
ancestral land titles (Griffiths 2002); the Zuni resource management.
pueblo of New Mexico prepared digital maps of
'non-graphic descriptions' of their appropriated
Respect for indigenous spatial knowledge and
lands to receive a quarter of a million acres as
people's cognition of land
compensation (Marozas 1991); in the Philippines,
claiming Ancestral Domain Title is conditional on Indigenous or local spatial knowledge is specific
preparing a resource management map for the area and ongoing knowledge about the land and land
(Rambaldi and Callosa-Tarr 2002); and in Indo- resources, and local people's management of them.
nesia, participatory mapping and PGIS identify It is usually problem and solution oriented, it sets
traditional village territories and competing rights people in their environmental context by describ-
claims (Eghenter 2000; Sirait et al. 1994). ing activity spaces and responsibility spaces, and
uses an understood natural language. Often enough
there are functional connections between indige-
Respect for local peoples and their local and
nous spatial knowledge and 'scientific' explan-
indigenous knowledge
ations, as in customary restrictions on using 'sacred
Indigenous knowledge is a measure of local land' which is also a traditionally protected forest
community capability, with the potential to setor grazing reserve.
community members on an equal status with Land and place, however, have visceral cultural
outsider 'experts', and maybe the only resource of values, on a higher plane than simple economic
which local groups, especially the 'resource-poor', categories of 'high value', 'marginal', or 'waste-
have unhindered ownership. Indigenous knowledge lands'. The sense of place associated by people in
and scientific knowledge frequently have similar perceptual or mental maps is a quality, fuzzy,
cognitive structures, although the referents and metaphorical, emotional and holistic, not reduc-
units may be difficult to translate - as with, for tionist place. For example, Maori land embodies
instance, much indigenous technical knowledge tapu (respect for resources), mana (authority), and
(ITK) of pest management, soil and water conserva- mauri (life force) (Harmsworth 1997), and Austra-
tion, ethnopedology, ethno-veterinary knowledge lian Aboriginal sacred sites signify '. . . stability, a
and ethno-medicine. Indigenous technical know-spatial and temporal anchorage in specific place
ledge is normally more reliable, and maybe also names and the ancestors bound within' (Brazenor
more accurate, because it embodies generations of 2000).
practical essential knowledge, and it operates in It is arguable that GIS and indigenous spatial
interactive, holistic systems. knowledge may be inherently incompatible
Many examples of PGIS - applied to ethnopedo- because of a dichotomy between the reductionism
logy - can be found; for instance, comparison of and ultra-precision of digitized geo-data, and the
farmers' and scientific soil classifications in the fuzziness, ambiguity, and synthesicity of 'natural
Senegal River valley (Tabor and Hutchinson 1994), language' spatial knowledge. Rundstrom (1995)
a 'folk expert system' for classifying soils in the expressed extreme scepticism that GIS can work
Colca Valley, Peru (Furbee 1989), and an extensive with indigenous cognitive, spatial concepts and
review by Barrera-Bassols and Zinck (2000). communication - 'representation is re-presentation',
Another common natural resource management when outsiders elicit and present indigenous know-
field using PGIS to map indigenous technical ledge in a map, they effectively alter and control
knowledge is pastoral management, e.g. remotely it. However, the widespread and productive
sensed images interpreted with Bedu shepherds inapplications of PGIS utilizing indigenous technical
Jordan (Patrick 2002); and mapping indigenousknowledge by indigenous peoples in North
knowledge of grazing lands in Burkina Faso America, Australasia, and Southeast Asia, provide
(Sedogo 2002). a counter argument. Participatory spatial planning
using PGIS tools should guarantee some respect
Beyond indigenous technical knowledge, there is
indigenous knowledge that is apparently qualita- for people's rights by their abilities to elicit and
tively different from scientific knowledge. This handle local conceptualizations of space and
indigenous knowledge is symbolic, metaphoric, spatial values. It should not only capture and trans-
and visionary - mystical in 'scientific' terms - andlate 'mental maps' of boundaries, locations, and
commonly related to the land and land features. zones into geo-referenced mapable outputs, but also
This deep knowledge, with its obligations of build geo-information into the local knowledge
stewardship of the land, together with the process.

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
344 Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resource management

Gendered space contains the socio-cultural

Ownership of spatial knowledge and process
spatial and time restrictions on women visiting
A strong position on ownership, and therefore on and using places (see, e.g., Mehta's (1996) study
limiting access to spatial cultural knowledge (of of seclusion and female 'discomfort' in male
locations, uses, even stories), is taken by public spaces in Himalayan India). Indigenous
Harmsworth (1997) with regard to Maori peoples, spatial knowledge includes gendered knowledg
with similar initiatives in Australia and North of resource distributions, the differential access an
America. There are moves towards a 'communal ownership of resources, and overlapping cultural-
economic
right of privacy', that is, for customary leaders to landscapes associated with men and
women. Rural women have specific indigenous
take responsibility for data protection and control
over GIS data layers such as sacred sites. Such technical knowledge of livelihoods concerning
protectionism could also be interpreted as foods, medicinal herbs, fibres, and fuels. When
maintaining the privilege of elite, and usually male,these are denigrated as simply women's materials
elders. Amongst First Nations, examples of spatial datafor women's work, they remain often 'invisible' in
layers to be restricted, with increasing resolution, local (men's) accounts, government statistics, and
are as follows. in maps. Management of women's working spaces
remains equally invisible, even though participa-
* Traditional hunting, fishing, grazing and fuel collec-
tory mapping with women (and some PGIS) is we
tion lands, tool sources, waterholes.
developed (for example, mapping of tree and
* Boundaries of culture and ethnic areas, and indigen- resource tenure in Zimbabwe or Dominican
ous place names.
Republic; Fortmann 1996; Rocheleau et al. 1
* Customary delineations within the cultural bound-
'Countermaps' of resource use and managem
ary, by clan, household, male and female areas.
constructed by rural women can be used to re-
* Historic places, battlegrounds and old settlements.
'standard' land use maps (Peluso 1995).
* Sacred sites, burial grounds, ceremonial areas, buried
art and sites of creation myths.
Effectiveness and competence: dealing with
'Who chooses the items depicted on the map and
imperfect data and spatial (im)precision
decoded in the map legend?' (Rambaldi 2004).
Participatory spatial planning, in its various
There are crucial questions of who in the commu-
manifestations, demonstrates the common 'imperfect
nity provides the legend items? Empowerment can
be promoted by transferring ownership from thedata' characteristics of 'naive geography' (Egenhofer
conventionally powerful to the disadvantaged and Mark 1995):
by the use of counter maps that challenge the
* fuzzy and layered zones and zonal information (area
(spatial) views of the powerful (e.g. Peluso 1995; data);
McConchie and McKinnon 2002). Getting 'onto
* simultaneity of views and 'jumping scale' - people's
the map' is often the first step for marginalized
consciousness and cognition operate at several
groups to gain public acknowledgement.
spatial scales simultaneously;
* fuzzy, blurred, flexible and multiple boundaries
Equity within the 'governed', and between (line data);
'governing' and 'governed' * perceived distances which are asymmetric and/or
nonlinear;
Participatory mapping and PGIS, as well as
* ambivalent, hidden or restricted spatial locations
conventional mapping of spatial indicators, are
(point data);
utilized in environmental justice and equity an-
* dynamics - the flows of resources, information,
alyses of the spatial distribution of environmental
ideas, influence, power;
impacts (e.g. Clary-Meuser website). PGIS methods,
" use of empirically graspable, but indistinct spatial
however, do not necessarily contribute to equity
terms like 'near', 'far', 'isolated', 'crowded', 'central',
goals by supporting disadvantaged groups, whether
'peripheral';
in access to services and markets, or by protecting
* soundscapes and smellscapes.
their property rights and entitlements. GIS tools do
not easily handle knowledge about power relations (cf. Aitken 2002; Porteous 1990; Rundstrom 1995;
(cf. Abbott et al. 1998). Having the information Scott
is and Cutter 1996; Weiner et al. 2002).
not the same as having the power, the resources, A few GIS tools, such as IDRISI, recognize and
the legal back-up and political clout to implementhandle 'imperfect data' in their ambiguity, non-
change. Moreover, it is the elites who obtain theexclusivity, fuzziness, incompleteness, and impre-
powers, and who are likely also to monopolize the cision. However, few GIS users sufficiently
GIS outputs. understand and have the skills to represent such

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resource management 345

imprecise data within the confines of standard GIS

Participatory mapping and PGIS in community
tools such as ArcView/ArcGIS. Concomitantly, GIS
forestry in Cameroon: a case study
flashiness can create a false precision and legitimi-
zation of what is actually 'Garbage In Garbage After reviewing the good governance dimensions of
Out' (Abbott et al. 1998). Hall (1996) takes the PGIS used in community level participatory spatial
arguments further with her identification of GISplanning
as applications, this section assesses a recent
a 'masculinist technology', being materialist and PGIS experience from Tinto Community Forest in
positivist, handling only bounded, pre-set unitsCameroon,
of using good governance criteria and
analysis, and avoiding ambiguous or emotional indicators. The research critically looks at the PGIS
concepts. process, seeking to answer the questions of
GIS approaches, especially those built on remote whether or not, and how, PGIS experiences in
sensing data, may place misleading emphasis on Tinto have promoted good governance. The policy
spatial precision. Most participatory spatial provisions for Community Forest planning in
Cameroon are first introduced.
planning activities do not need a high degree of
spatial exactitude, being concerned with ambigu-
ous, non-exclusive values and categories about
Community forestry policy and geo-information
communities or zones, as relatively large spatial
entities without precise boundaries. The important The Cameroon Government's forestry management
questions are: 'what degrees of accuracy/precisionreforms resulted in a 1994 environmental law that
are needed in PGIS?', and, 'what are the costs of introduced inter alia the concept of community
working with lower levels of accuracy/precision?' forest. Community forest is defined therein as 'that
There are significant current developments in part of non-permanent forest estate (not more than
geo-information software and hardware that will5000 ha.) that is the object of an agreement
better accommodate the 'imperfect and fuzzybetween government and a community in which
spaces' of indigenous spatial knowledge, such as communities undertake sustainable forest manage-
with mobile GIS, innovative visualization software,ment for a period of 25 years, renewable'. The
dynamic web cartography and interactive web aims of the introduction of community forests were
GIS, GIS wall boards, participatory 3D modelling, to enhance local governance through community
multimedia and virtual reality displays. participation, to integrate indigenous forest
management practices, to provide direct economic
benefits to communities, and to improve forest/
Effectiveness: technical manageability of PGIS at the
biodiversity conservation.
local level by local people
The procedures of the Cameroon Ministry of
Technical manageability of GIS and PGIS by local Environment and Forestry (MINEF) prescribe the
groups has a number of requirements, notably the following geo-information needed for granting a
following. community forest:
* a map showing the boundaries of the intended
* Feasibility, which can be interpreted as the adapta-
community forest (community forest boundary
bility of geographic information technology hard-
map);
ware - such as Global Positioning System and
* a clear description of activities previously carried
mobile GIS - to local physical and climatic condi-
out in the proposed community forest area;
tions, e.g. solar charging, cockroach and termite
* an inventory report of community forest resources;
damage, and the maintenance support needed.
* a final management plan, zoning the forest into
* Local cultural and social conditions referring to
compartments.
information interchange, multi-application capaci-
ties, simplicity to learn and use, and literacy, numer- In the last few years the community forestry
acy and computer literacy requirements. constituency has been growing. By October 2002,
* Operational inclusiveness - PGIS should be a com- the Ministry had received 190 applications for
munity enterprise, not just using 'key informants' community forests (Brown et al. 2003). Interna-
who are likely to be educated, adult, and senior tional donor and NGO interest has also grown
males. since the promulgation of the community forestry
* Maintaining the currency of data - updating infor- law. Many communities, with NGO support, have
mation is costly, time-consuming, and liable to be been able to incorporate the use of GIS and
overlooked. geographic information technology to fulfil the
* Cost-effectiveness in local terms, meaning looking geo-information
at requirements. These experiences
qualify as a form of PGIS, given both the use of
the full implications of the costs of 'voluntary' time
investments and comparative returns. participatory rural appraisal and participation

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
346 Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resource management

methods, and the involvement of people in stand- participate in many community forest planning
ard GIS tools. activities and are particularly concerned with
access rights to non-timber forest activities. Living
Earth Foundation (the NGO) facilitated the
The Tinto community
planning process, providing access to finance,
Tinto, in the South West Province of Cameroon,technical
is knowledge, geo-information technology,
lobby and facilitation skills and links with partners
well drained, between 160 and 280 m in altitude,
with a rainfall of about 2000 mm/year and is outside the community. Other stakeholders playing
located within the evergreen forest areas of roles in conflict resolution and political support to
Cameroon known for endemism. The community the process include Tinto Rural Council and the
of 1700-2000 consists of three neighbouring elite of Tinto living in other parts of the country.
villages of the same clan, very homogenous with
fewer than 1% 'outsiders', typically rural, but it is
The PGIS process in Tinto
an administrative (District) headquarters with a
Forestry Office. Most farmers grow cocoa or coffeeThe PGIS process in Tinto can be divided into four
as cash crops, along with cassava, maize and other main phases: the preparatory stage; land use
subsistence crops. Forest activities include hunting,mapping and planning; community forest boundary
collecting non-timber forest products and timber. mapping; and the community forest management
The three village chiefs and councils are repre- plan mapping phase. The preparatory phase was
aimed mainly at the Ministry's Forest Plan at
sented on the Tinto Clan Council whose decision-
national, regional and local levels to see if forests
making is based on customary laws. The Clan
Council oversees local resource management in the area were eligible for community forestry,
based on the provisions of the 1994 forestry law. In
policy, especially farming rights given to clear
order to designate part of the local forest area as a
forest, and the administration of sacred groves.
Some local controls are enforced, such as to potential community forest, the community must
proceed through a sort of land use mapping and
reduce poisons in fishing. Part of the forest within
the clan boundaries lies in the Banyang Mbo planning process as in phase two. The designated
Sanctuary, wherein the Council works with Minis-area was then demarcated and the boundaries
try of Environment and Forests projects to regulatemapped in the third phase. The last phase consti-
forest activities. Tinto began the community foresttuted planning and mapping the forest into forest
planning process, with Ministry staff and an NGOmanagement zones. A summary of the phases is
(Living Earth Foundation), in November 1999. presented in Table 1; Figures 2 and 3 can also be
Actual community management of a 1300 ha interpreted as a work flowchart. The process can
community forest started in December 2002. be characterized as 'learning by doing' over a four-
year period. It should, therefore, not be interpreted
Actors The current distribution of roles and functions as uni-linear; the tabular rendition is a simplifica-
and diverse interests of the multiple actors in the tion for presentation purposes, because in reality
Tinto context is important for understanding there was a good deal of iteration.
forest governance. The Tinto Clan Community
Forest Management Committee represents and Research methods in the case study
organizes the community in community forest
activities, while the Chiefs and Clan Council The field research (Minang 2003) was designed to
remain the custodians of the forest with all the assess the extent to which PGIS promoted good
customary powers to authorize and monitor governance by supporting community participa-
resource access. The local Ministry staff are tion in decision-making and actions within the
supposed to assist communities technically in community forest process, and possible extensions
community forest management, as well as to into land use planning decisions. The first step in
oversee the management plan implementation, butthe research was to select and describe a number
they are often inadequately staffed and lack of indicators to represent 'good governance'
resources. Hunters are very important in sharing dimensions, based on the principles in the first
their knowledge with the community in the section, and on governance literature (UNDP 1997;
planning process, and, as such, are key players in OECD 2001; van Kersbergen and van Waarden
the demarcation process, mapping and inventories. 2001; McCall 2003). The dimensions and indica-
They, however, need to be assured of access rights tors were selected to be relevant, reliable and
within the community forest. Farmers are particu- valid in describing and assessing complex PGIS
larly concerned with rights of access to forestland processes. Figure 1 shows the seven initial good
in the process. Women as a group, like farmers, governance dimensions and criteria, and the

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resource management 347

Table 1 PGIS process in Tinto

Phases

III. Community forest IV. Management

I. Preparatory phase II. Land use mapping boundary mapping plan mapping

Activities involved Stakeholder analysis; Sketch mapping; Boundary agreement Participatory forest
PRA; baseline survey; transects; mapping demarcated on ground inventory; desk
manual overlay; the forest; by villagers (by men); cartography (consultant
transparencies specifications from GPS (by villagers); + villagers); agreement
community GIS (by consultant) on zones
Actors Chiefs; NGO; Ministry NGO; Ministry; chiefs; 14 hunters; NGO; 23 villagers; inventory
hunters; village women; Ministry; GIS consultant team; NGO; Ministry;
family and quarter reps consultants
GIT tools Topo sheets; Topographic sheets GPS; air photo GPS and compass for
transparency overlays interpretation; inventory; topo sheets;
GIS mapping (ArcView) desk cartography
Outputs Village study report Village sketch map; social Forest boundary map; Map of management
map of village; forest use (GIS) shows land use zones
map zones; transects; P-map
of current uses
Tools of PRA tools Participatory mapping; Participatory mapping Participatory inventory
participation forest use survey for forest description
Degree of Consultation Decision-making; Mediation; Decision-making
participation empowerment empowerment for zoning; some
empowerment

corresponding indicators selected were

andrecorded,
used and transcripts made, with the
in this
study. transcripts later read back to the interviewees and
The second step in the analysis consisted of criti- discussion group members for validation. All
cally reviewing project documentation to assess the discussions, formal or informal, were based on
project design and implementation. (One of the the same checklists using the indicators in Figure 1.
authors had previously worked on the project for This ensured rigour and validity in the process
about three years.) The third step involved the through triangulation both of sources and in the
application of participatory-rapid rural appraisal methods. A rigorous content analysis was
techniques, such as focus group discussions, semi- employed to analyse the transcripts from the 18
structured interviews, diagramming and meetings. semi-structured interviews, three focus group
The choice of method was guided by the mainly discussions and diagramming session notes made
discursive nature of the data required in the analy- by the researcher in order to elicit the answers for
sis, and the fact that these tools are flexible and put various indicators. Because most of the data are
fewer restrictions on expression than pre-structured based on people's perceptions, we have been
tools (Nyerges et al. 2002), thereby allowing careful to make conclusions only on data from
'looking for and learning from exceptions, oddities multiple sources.
and dissenters' (Chambers 1994). Four 3-4 h
meetings were held in the Tinto area and 18 inter-
Findings on the selected good governance
views were held with key informants. These dimensions
informants were specifically chosen in order to
include actors who had participated in the process, Participation (legitimacy) Participation in sketch
some who had not participated, and representatives mapping and using GPS was widespread, whereas
from amongst various stakeholders. Project staff the actors involved in the aerial photo interpret-
were deliberately left out of the meetings to avoid ation and GIS tools were restricted to mainly the
biased responses. All formal meetings and interviewsoutsiders, although hunters were included (see

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
348 Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resource management

Dev of mgt plan Mapshowing

16/M management
zones

Transect information, Participatory inventory Inventory

spatial dist and location 14 + 15/Fmap
information for resources

Training Key
compass use
i14 + 15/E Intensities of Participation
Consultation (Catley, 1999)
meeting produced (Catley, 1999)
13/F boundary
map I1 - Manipulative
Dist. previous GIS mapping participation
activities in 13/F 12 - Passive participation
forest 13 - Participation by
Photo consultation
Traced CF boundaries interpretation Points data 14 - Participation for material

15, benefits
Specialist local Global positioning 16 - Interactive partic
15 - Functional participation

knowledge of forest -- system survey 17 - Self mobilization

15/F
Purposes of Participation
Survey and community (McCall, 1998)
demarcation

16/E F - Facilitation

1 E - Empowerment
M - Mediation

Sketch / Farm extents,

emapth
map sacred areas,
Outputs
(maps)

Process
Participation
Sketch mapping Permanent and non- Toposheet Codes
(PRA) permanent forests interpretation
16/E 14/F

t Inf
Flow

Local knowledge/mind
maps (village
boundaries, land marks)

Figure 2 Participation intensities and purposes by activity in the Tinto PGIS

Table 2). Open popular meetings were the main and purposes attained in the community fore
forums for analysis and decision-making, whereas PGIS process in Tinto for various activities, in
participation in decision-making for the map terms of the 'participation ladders' from Catle
content involved exclusively just the consultants (1999) and McCall (2003), respectively. The Catley
and experts. However, serious efforts were ladder shows deeper involvement and higher
specially made by NGOs and the community quality participation progressing from levels 11
17. The McCall ladder refers to the underlying
leadership to involve women in parts of the PGIS
process. purpose or intentions behind the promotion o
Intensities of participation varied between participation,
activ- which can be seen as a continuum
from F as 'satisfying external objectives', to E as
ities. Figure 2 shows the participation intensities

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resource management 349

Dev of mgt plan Map showing

A2,3; S3,4; 08 management
zones Key

Transect informa
spatial dist and location A2; S3,4; T6,08 map (Adapted to CF from Craig and
information for resources3p E w o ,1 9 Elwood, 1999)

Training A -ADMINISTRATIVE
compass use

Consultation GIS Al - Information for Management

meeting produced committee staff support
A3; 08 boundary A2 - Information planning by location
A3; 08a in forest.
Dist. previous m
activities in ?

forest PS - STRATEGIC
Traced CF boundaries T6
tepretatoS3 - General
nterpretation Points data resources Assessme
S4 - Plan existing re
S5 - Initiate action (

Specialist local Global positioning advocacy)

knowledge of forest system
T6
survey T - TACTICAL

Survey and community T6 - Guide assistance to specific

demarcation resource location
Al, A2; T6; 010 T7 - Contest map of oponents
O - ORGANIZING

08 - Facilitate meetings
09 - Define respresentation
010 - Conflict Resolution

Sketch Farm extents,

map sacred areas,
S(maps)/
Process

Sketch mapping Permanent and non- Toposheet GIS USE

(PRA) interpretation CODE
S (PRA) 1 permanent forests
S3,4; T6; 08,9 T6; 08

Infos.
Flow
Local knowledge/mind
maps (village
boundaries, land marks)

Figure 3 Geo-information uses in the Tinto PGIS

internally driven 'empowerment'. The higher the participation in the process, but narrowly focused,
levels attained, the greater the contribution to good especially only towards GPS and sketch mapping.
governance. The evidence shows that inter-group Some community actors, though, were empowered
dialogue was improved through dynamic geo- through the exposure to new forms of analysis
information use to support participatory forums, using geo-information, which improved their
leading to a better understanding between actors, capacity for decision support. Empowerment was
and towards conflict resolution. more widespread from learning how to manipulate
access and control rights through joint land use
Empowerment Knowledge and skills acquisition
planning and natural resource management
in geo-information technology per se were decision-making. Table 3 summarizes key aspects
widespread through formal training and community of actor empowerment in the Tinto process.

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
350 Assessing participatory GIS for communlty-based natural resource management

Table 2 Participation (legitimacy)

Tinto
Involvement of actors Activities Committee Chiefs Farmers Hunters Women MINEF NGO

Involvement of actors Sketch mapping Y Y Y Y Y N Y

in mapping processes GPS Y N Y Y P Y Y
Aerial photo interpretation Y N N Y N N Y
GIS processing N N N N N N P
Involvement in Land use allocation and land Y Y Y Y Y Y N
decision-making in: use rights decisions
Forest boundary decisions Y Y Y Y P P P
Indigenous spatial knowledge N Y N Y N N N
inclusion / exclusion decisions
Map content decisions:
(a) Sketch maps Y Y Y Y Y N P
(b) GIS outputs N N N N N Y Y
Final map representation N N N N N Y Y
decisions

Key: Y = significantly involved, N = not involved, P = partial involvement.

Respect for indigenous knowledge and indigenous

from the geo-information use framework of Craig
spatial knowledge Some actors were empowered and Elwood 1998). Geo-information produced in
through the external recognition and use of their the Tinto community forest PGIS process was
local knowledge in the map outputs. There was applied for all purposes: for strategic planning and
evidence of the community protecting spatial infor-assessing resources; in community organization,
especially for facilitating meetings; in tactical
mation about sensitive (sacred) sites. After consult-
ation with the elders, the team of 14 appointed to operations, as geo-information was significant in
carry out the initial forest boundary demarcation highlighting specific resource locations; and it was
decided that the sacred part of the forest, in which in general use for administration.
the king tree (or 'king stick' as it is called locally) is There was, however, little community use of
digital geo-information. The Tinto community
found, should be excised out of the community
forest. The participatory sketch maps showed more used many paper maps for land use planning,
indigenous spatial knowledge than did subsequentin the community forest application process, in
GIS products, including village boundaries, forestconflict resolution, and for choosing
farm areas, forest tracks and local names for representatives.
villages and streams. However, females were not
included in the mapping in the forest (Table 2), Equity: inclusiveness, and gender In the PGIS p
which results in missing out considerable women's and decision-making, some actors lost previo
indigenous technical knowledge of forest products'held resource access rights or control pow
locations and use. whilst others gained, which thus change
social power equations (see Table 4). Howev
Ownership (legitimacy) Access to standard geo- cannot be ruled out that some power shifts
information, mainly maps, was relatively easy for the result of extraneous globalization fact
the community through the Community Forest Moreover, the PGIS processes provided a plat
Officer, but digital geo-information facilities and
for innovative meetings between stakeholders
information access were difficult or impossible, helped build relationships and institutions
except for the Ministry of Environment and Forestsstructures emerged with responsibility for f
and the NGO (see Tables 3 and 5). management, which gave disadvantaged gr
including women, a louder voice in decis
making. Records and attendance sheets an
Uses of geo-information The uses of geo-information
are categorized as follows: for administrative andfor Tinto show that women were involved in the
management purposes; for strategic planning; for village meetings (although less than a quarter of
participants), but only two women were present
tactical interventions; and for generally organizing
and promoting participation (see Figure 3, adaptedfor activities in the forest.

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resource management 351

Table 3 Legitimacy, ownership and empowerment

Legitimacy-ownership

Types of geo- Tinto

'Ownership' of geo-information information CFMC Chiefs Farmers Hunters Women MINEF

Access to geo-information Analogue geo-information Y Y P P P Y

and to GIS
Digital geo-information N N N N N P
GIS facilities N N N N N P
Use of geo-information Hard copies Y Y Y Y Y Y
Digital geo-information N N N N N N

Empowerment of actors

Actors empowered by: Manipulation or use of Y Y Y Y Y N

indigenous spatial
knowledge
Learning from process Y Y Y Y Y Y
Involvement in geo- Y N Y Y Y Y
information training
(mainly GPS)

Key: Y = significantly positive, N = negative, P = partial access.

Table 4 Equity changes in resource control and access

Tinto
Committee Chiefs Farmers Hunters Women MINEF NGO

Shifts in power Changes in Gained control Gained No change No change

relations (after resource powers control powers
community control powers powers
forest designation) Changes in No No No Lost access Lost access No N/A
resource change change change rights rights change
access rights

and to the interactions along various PGIS inter-

Effectiveness and competence: delivery of map prod-
ucts An assessment was made of actors' satisfaction
faces applied to community-based natural resource
with the maps delivered during the PGIS process.management.
Table 5 shows the degree to which the main actors
were satisfied that the three map products - the
Geographic information technology/GIS issues
sketch maps, the community forest boundary map,
When participatory mapping and PGIS interven-
and the final management plan - met their specific
interests and needs. Their interests were elicited tions are aimed at mediation and empowerment
from policy documents and through interviews.
purposes, the outcome from combining insider and
outsider knowledge of the problems and potential
solutions should be expected to lead to greater
Emerging issues for 'good governance' enhancement
competence, fewer wasted efforts and increased
through PGIS
efficiency. The results in this case demonstrated
Analysis of the findings reveals significant govern- reasonably good achievements along these lines,
ance issues relating to planning PGIS processes, but also revealed a number of problematic issues.

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
352 Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resource management

Table 5 Meeting the geo-information needs

Satisfaction of needs by
Three main actors Geo-information needs geoinformation outputs

MINEF's geo-information External and internal boundaries Final Management Plan

of community forest (FMP) map J J
Boundary map /
Requirements 1:50 000 or 1:200 000 Boundary map /J
Major natural features Boundary map J J
FMP map /
Socio-economical features: e.g. protected forests, settlements Boundary map J J
FMP map /

Compartment (zone) descriptions FMP map /J

Location of plant/animal species None
Tinto community's Community forest and farm zone boundaries 0 Boundary map /
mapping needs Sketch map /
Area under indigenous control Boundary map /J
Sketch map / /
Potential landmark areas: 0, e.g. tourist sites and eco-trails None
Area reserved for farm extension 0 Boundary map /
Foot-paths 0 Boundary map J
Monitoring information on: Boundary map J
farm expansion, exploited areas Sketch map /
NGO (Living Earth) Conservation area Boundary map J /
needs map of: FMP map / /

Key: /J = largely meets the need, J =

Overall, the there should have been

maps and caves and GIS
other special p
between halfsitesand
marked on the
a maps, because they believe
two-thirds
them to be ecotourism sites with potential. Beyond
regarding geo-information.
this is the vision of
Firstly, the scales that the recording
the of the
mapcommu-
input maps of 1:50 000 and aerial photos of nity's indigenous spatial knowledge, and the
1:20 000, and output maps of 1:50 000 and participatory mapping, are pre-conditions for the
1:200 000 - were not appropriate for discussions
community to make broader claims for global or
and knowledge exchange between community national compensation for resource rights and
stakeholders working in large groups. Scales environmental
of values, including biodiversity and/or
between 1:12 500 and 1:1000 are found to be endangered species conservation, watershed
protection, landscape values and carbon sequestra-
more appropriate for participatory local planning
(Eagles 1984; Groten 1997), whereas the scales of
tion funds.
these maps are more suited to regional or national Thirdly, the access, use and storage of the
planning levels. Moreover, a strength of PGIS in
geographic information influenced the efficiency of
such processes should be the production of maps participatory mapping and PGIS interventions in
of varied scales and content related to different their contributions to good governance. Informa-
actor and process purposes. In this case, however,tion access and use are highly relevant for issues of
the process was tied to the requirements specifiedpower, advocacy, institutionalization and decision-
for community forest planning in Cameroon by the making in community-based natural resource
Ministry's prescriptions for maps of 1:50 000 and management (Alcorn 2000). From the results (as
1:200 000 (MINEF 1998). seen in Figures 2 and 3), a positive relationship can
be established between the activities in which the
Secondly, it is the community and its actors that
should be the agents to decide on, and thus 'own',highest intensities of participation and purpose are
the map contents (cf. Rambaldi 2004). For achieved, and those activities in which most use of
instance, many interviewees in Tinto argued that geo-information is made. This supports findings,

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resource management 353

such as those of Kyem (2002), that improved demographic equity within the community, is
communication and more robust relationship build- appropriate when it comes to benefit sharing,
ing are achieved with a greater use of geo- because basic forest resources are part of a
information. Taking advantage of improvements in common property system.
analytical and presentation/visualization facilities It is also useful to consider a user group
in future PGIS would help promote deeper levels of approach alongside popular representative partici-
decision-making in communities. In the Tinto case, pation, since these groups are the day-to-day users
it was primarily just the location and descriptive and real beneficiaries of the forest and its products,
uses of GIS that were taken up. and therefore should be involved in the manage-
Whilst the hard copies of maps were stored by ment plans of the different compartments. User
the Tinto community, and therefore accessible to group representation has been found beneficial in
most members, access to digital geo-information other community-based natural resource manage-
was the exclusive preserve of the consultant, and, ment cases (Springate-Baginski et al. 2003; Jordan
to some extent, the NGO that facilitated the process. 2002). Taken together, representation by village
Although this can be explained by the lack of basic units and resource user groups in PGIS and
GIS technology in the community, the issue was community forest management processes both
not addressed at any point in the development of accommodates the political necessity of popular
the PGIS. Upon reflection, it would have served representation in communities, and also caters for
a good purpose for the Tinto community to keep the skilled user management of indigenous spatial
the digital data on disk, since they have access to knowledge and indigenous technical knowledge on
the influential elite in the country that could help the ground, crucial to sustainable resource
access and process this information when required management.
for management plan reviews and monitoring.
Digital geodata would also be cost-effective for
Equity and gender
base map development. Currently, updating and
use for advocacy purposes are inhibited by the Overall, the expected positive gains in equity did
inaccessibility of these data. This issue leaves the not appear. The majority of stakeholders neither
real ownership of the products questionable, as no gained, nor lost, much in terms of powers of
such restrictions apply to the use of this informa- control or access to forest resources. The Tinto
tion by the consultants or the NGO involved in the Community Forest Management Council and the
processes. Chiefs gained some control over the forest domin-
ion, but this was an inevitable result of the
changed legal status, rather than from the PGIS
Participation in PGIS and its organization
process itself.
These are key factors helping to determineSome
the gender-related deficiencies remain,
contribution of PGIS to good governance, independent of either user group or settlement
especially with respect to legitimacy. In Tinto, the
unit-based participation. Women and other under-
participation was structured in terms of village
privileged or under-represented groups deserve
representatives relating to the various process activ-
specific attention in negotiations and decision-making,
ities, notably, forest demarcation, inventories and not only for equity and justice reasons. In Tinto,
field zoning where geo-information tools werealthough there is evidence that some effort was
used. People's participation was most common andmade to include women in the village meetings,
widespread in traditional participatory rural only two women were present for the mapping of
appraisal tools, such as sketch mapping. indigenous technical knowledge and indigenous
Despite the fact that meaningful levels of stake-spatial knowledge in the forest. Considering that a
holder participation were reached in this case, community survey (Minang 2000) showed women
to be the main collectors of non-timber forest
there can be no guarantee for long-term sustainable
community forest management, because some products, it implies that women were badly under-
forest user groups could have been missed out or represented in this part of the PGIS process, putting
were not actively represented in the process, andin doubt the long-term sustainability of the
thus would not be well informed or in agreementmanagement plans for various forest compartments.
with decisions reached. However, the approach
adopted by the Tinto community should not be Conclusions
discredited, since it comes out of a reliable village
representation system that has effectively managed The implicit assumptions addressed by the paper
a common water system for the three-clan villages are that articulating PGIS at the local level is more
for over 20 years. This approach, based on effective than relying on conventional mapping and

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
354 Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resource management

GIS. PGIS is believed to have the capacity to wasted effort and greater efficiency. A key element
simultaneously meet the content needs, answer the is that a genuine participatory approach enables
questions asked of the geo-information, and respect for, and the integrity of, indigenous know-
address and satisfy the local stakeholders' underly- ledge, by eliciting, analysing, and presenting
ing interests. Thus there is the often-made assump- conceptualizations of space and spatial values. In
tion that PGIS is a tool for better governance. this case, the community felt empowered by the
The case study was an ex-post assessment of the PGIS usage and deep consultations to protect a
effectiveness of a PGIS approach in strengthening sacred area of forest, demonstrating the capacity of
good governance in a community forestry determi-'working with maps' for engaging debate on sensi-
nation process in Tinto, Cameroon. Good tive issues and enhancing accountability.
governance is initially interpreted as the empower- The study demonstrates that, when it is the good
ing of community members' participation in
governance criterion, chiefly participation, which is
decision-making and actions. Other governance recognized as the primary concern and goal, both
dimensions and indicators, relating to legitimiza- underlaying and overriding the specific objectives
tion, promoting respect for local people andof producing precise or detailed maps and GIS
their
ownership of indigenous knowledge, strengthening products, then participatory mapping and PGIS are
equity and improving effectiveness, were also
acceptable, productive, reliable and effective tools
employed. to support and strengthen participatory spatial
The study found that the PGIS and participatory planning and management.
mapping processes contributed - positively, though
not comprehensively - to good governance, by References
improving dialogue, legitimizing and using local
knowledge, generating some redistribution of re- Abbott ), Chambers R, Dunn C, Harris T, de Merode E, Porter
source access and control rights, and enabling local G, Townsend j and Weiner D 1998 Participatory GIS" oppor-
community groups by means of new skills training in tunity or oxymoron? Participatory Learning & Action, PLA
geospatial analysis. PGIS further empowered people Notes 33 27-34

by supporting community members' participation Aitken S C 2002 Public participation, technological discours
in decision-making and mapping actions, and by and the scale of GIS in Craig W J, Harris T M and Weiner
enabling land use planning decisions beyond com- eds Community participation and geographic information
munity forestry itself. There were, however, only systems Taylor & Francis, London 357-66
slightly progressive impacts on equity within the Alcorn J B 2000 Borders, rules and governance: mapping to
community, either in terms of differential resource catalyse changes in policy and management IIED Gatekeepe
access rights, or of full ownership of digital GIS Series, London
outputs. Arnstein S R 1969 A ladder of citizen participation journal
In general, the intensive and enlightening the American Institute of Planners 35 216-24
process of developing a GIS in a participatory Aubut J 2004 The good governance agenda: who wins and
manner is itself capacity building and empowering. who loses. Some empirical evidence for 2001. LSE Develop-
Essentially, the more community geo-information ment Studies Institute DESTIN Working Paper No. 04-48,
users who participate in the mapping processes, London (http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/DESTIN/pdf/
and the more local applications there are of the WP48.pdf) Accessed 20 November 2004
geo-information, the more robust the decision- Barrera-Bassols N and Zinck J A 2000 Ethnopedology in a
making processes and, by extension, the more worldwide perspective. An annotated bibliography ITC,
vigorous 'good governance'. Central to this are Enschede

the improved transparency and visibility of the Brazenor C A 2000 The spatial dimensions of Native Title
relationships between the people and the state (and Unpublished MSc thesis Department of Geomatics, Univer-
commercial interests) that are exposed by the map sity of Melbourne, Melbourne
and GIS outputs. PGIS and participatory mapping Brown D, Vabi M B and Nkwinkwa R 2003 'Governance
create opportunities to visualize the interests and reform in the forest sector: a role for community forestry?'
potentials of disparate groups in and around the Paper presented at 12th World Forestry Congress September
community. Thus, the 'governed' see the spatial 2003, Quebec ODI, London (http://www.odifpeg.org.uk/
implications of policies and actions, and the activities/environmental_governance/S65/Eng-
'governing' can recognize and appreciate the legit- Iish%20gov%20reform.pdf) Accessed 20 November 2004
imacy of local interests. Carver S 2003 The future of participatory approaches using
When participatory mapping and PGIS interven- geographic information: developing a research agenda for the
tions are aimed towards mediation, to combine 21st century URISA Journal 15 61-71
outsider and insider knowledge of the problemsCatley A 1999 Participatory approaches to veterinary epidemiol-
and potential solutions, the result should be less ogy IIED, Sustainable Agriculture & Rural Livelihoods, London

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resource management 355

Chambers R 1994 Participatory rural appraisal (PRA): analysis
of experience World Development 22 1253-68
Clary-Meuser Research Network MapCruzin website (http://
www.mapcruzin.com/) Accessed 28 November 2004
Craig W J and Elwood S A 1998 How and why community
groups use maps and geographic information Cartography &
Geographic Information Systems 25 95-104
Craig W J, Harris T M and Weiner D eds 2002 Community
participation and geographic information systems Taylor &
Francis, London
Eagles P F J 1984 The planning and management of environ-
mentally sensitive areas Longman, London
Egenhofer M J and Mark D M 1995 Naive geography in Frank
A U and Kuhn W eds Spatial information theory: a theoreti-
cal basis for GIS Lecture Notes in Computer Sciences No.
988 Springer, Berlin 1-15
Kyem P A K 2002 Promoting local community participatio
forest management through a PPGIS application in South
Ghana in Craig W J, Harris T M and Weiner D eds 2
Community participation and geographic information syst
Taylor & Francis, London 218-31
Marozas B A 1991 The role of GIS in American Indian land
and water rights litigation American Indian Culture &
Research Journal 15 77-93
McCall M K 1988 The implications of Eastern African rural
social structure for local-level development: the case for
participatory development based on indigenous knowledge
systems Regional Development Dialogue 9 41-69
McCall M K 2003 Seeking good governance in participatory-
GIS: a review of processes and governance dimensions in
applying GIS to participatory spatial planning Habitat Inter-
national 27 549-73

Eghenter C 2000 Mapping peoples' forests: the role of mapping McCall M K 2004 Participatory-GIS-participatory spati
in planning community-based management of conservation planning-indigenous technical knowledge-community-base
areas in Indonesia WWF Biodiversity Support Program PeFoR natural resource management. A bibliography ITC, Ensched
Discussion Paper No. 71, Washington DC (httpV/www.iapad.org/p/pdf/_bibliomccall_sept04.pdf) Accessed
Fortmann L 1996 Gendered knowledge: rights and space in 30 November 2004
two Zimbabwe villages. Reflections on methods and findings McConchie J A and McKinnon J M 2002 MIGIS. Using GIS to
in Rocheleau D, Thomas-Slayter B and Wangari E eds Femi- produce community-based maps to promote collaborative
nist political ecology. Global issues and local experiences natural resource management ASEAN Biodiversity January-
Routledge, London 211-23 March 27-34
Furbee L 1989 A folk expert system: soils classification in the Mehta M 1996 'Our lives are no different from that of our buf-
Colca Valley, Peru Anthropological Quarterly 62 83-102 faloes': agricultural change and gendered spaces in a central
Goetz A M and Gaventa J with Cornwall A, Crook R, Ehrichs Himalayan valley in Rocheleau D, Thomas-Slayter B and
L, Hamilton K, Howard j, Jenkins R, John P, Lewis J, Powis Wangari E eds 1996 Feminist political ecology: global issues
B, McGarvey N, Speight M, Stewart E and Stoker G 2001 and local experiences Routledge, London 180-280
Governance: bringing citizen voice and client focus into Minang P A 2000 Baseline survey report for the South West
service delivery IDS Working Paper No. 138 University of Province, Cameroon Community Forestry Support Project
Sussex, Brighton Living Earth, Buea, Cameroon
Griffiths T 2002 Guyana: empowerment of indigenous peoples Minang P A 2003 Assessing participatory geographic informa-
through participatory mapping. World Rainforest Movement tion systems for community forestry planning in Cameroon: a
Bulletin No. 62 local governance perspective Unpublished MSc thesis ITC,
Groten S 1997 Aerial photographs as means of communication Enschede
in land use planning Agriculture and Rural DevelopmentMINEF 1998 Manual of the procedures for the attribution, and
(GTZ) 4 11-14 norms for the management of community forest Ministry of
Hall C 1996 Gender and GIS in Harris T M and Weiner D Environment and Forestry, Yaounde
compilers GIS and society: the social implications of how T L, Jankowski P and Drew C 2002 Data-gathering
Nyerges
people, space, and environment are represented in GIS
strategies for social-behavioural research about participatory
NCGIA Varenius Technical Report No. 96-7, Santa Barbara, CA
geographical information system use International journal of
Geographical Information Science 16 1-22
120-2 (httpV/www.geo.wvu.edu/www/il 9/hall.html) Accessed
20 November 2004 OECD 2001 Citizens as partners: information, consultation and
Harmsworth G 1997 Maori values for land use planning New
public participation in policy making Governance Organization
of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris
Zealand Association of Resource Management (NZARM) Broad-
sheet 97 37-52 (http V/wwwl .oecd.org/publ ications/e-book/4201131 E.PDF)
Ingles A W, Musch A and Qwist-Hoffmann H 1999 The parti- Accessed 20 November 2004
Patrick
cipatory process for supporting collaborative management of E 2002 Using remote sensing and indigenous know-
natural resources: an overview FAO, Forests, Trees & People,
ledge for management of ephemeral surface water Arid Lands
Rome Newsletter 51
Jordan G 2002 GIS for community forestry user groups in Peluso N L 1995 Whose woods are these? Counter-mapping
Nepal: putting people before the technology in Craig W J, forest territories in Kalimantan, Indonesia Antipode 27 383-
Harris T M and Weiner D eds Community participation and406
Poole P ed 1995 Geomatics: who needs it? Cultural Survival
geographic information systems Taylor & Francis, London
232-45 Quarterly (special issue) 18 (4)

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
356 Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resource management

Porteous D 1990 Landscapes of the mind: worlds of sense and Sedogo L G 2002 Integration of participatory local and regional
metaphor University of Toronto, Toronto planning for resources management using remote sensing
Rambaldi G 2004 'Who owns the legend?' Paper presented at and GIS Unpublished PhD thesis Wageningen University,
P-GIS Workshop of the 7th International Conference on GIS Wageningen and ITC Dissertation No. 92, Enschede
for Developing Countries (GISDECO 2004) May 2004, Johor Sirait M T, Prasodjo S, Podger N, Flavelle A and Fox J 1994
(http /www.iapad.org/publications/ppgis/Who owns_the legend Mapping customary land in East Kalimantan, Indonesia: a
_urisa.pdf) Accessed 20 November 2004 tool for forest management Amblo 23 411-17
Rambaldi G and Callosa-Tarr J 2002 Participatory 3-dimensional Springate-Baginski O, Yadav N P, Dev 0 P and Soussan 1 2003
modelling: guiding principles and applications ASEAN Regional Institutional development of Forest User Groups in Nepal:
Centre for Biodiversity Conservation (ARCBC), Los Bafos processes and indicators Journal of Forest & Livelihood 3
21-36
Rocheleau D, Ross L, Morrobel J and Hernaindez, R 1996 From
forest gardens to tree farms: women, men and timber in Tabor I A and Hutchinson C F 1994 Using indigenous know
Zambrana-Chacuey, Dominican Republic in Rocheleau D,
ledge, remote sensing and GIS for sustainable developmen
Indigenous Knowledge & Development Monitor 2 2-6
Thomas-Slayter B and Wangari E eds Feminist political ecol-
UNDP 1997 Defining core characteristics of good governan
ogy. Global issues and local experiences Routledge, London
224-50 United Nations Development Programme Management
Development and Governance Division, New York (http:/
Rundstrom R A 1995 GIS, indigenous peoples and epistemo-
logical diversity Cartography & GIS 22 45-57 magnet.undp.org/policy/) Accessed 20 November 2004
Scott M and Cutter S 1996 GIS and environmental van equity:
Kersbergen K and van Waarden F 2001 Shifts in governan
problems
an analysis of the assumptions in Harris T M and Weiner D of legitimacy and accountability Social Scienc
compilers GIS and society: the social implicationsResearch
of howCouncil NWO Strategic Plan 2002-2005, The Hagu
people, space, and environment are represented in GIS
Weiner D, Harris T M and Craig W J 2002 Community parti
NCGIA Varenius Technical Report No. 96-7, Santa Barbara,
pation and geographic information systems in Craig W J
Harris T M and Weiner D eds Community participation an
CA 160-74 (http://www.geo.wvu.edu/il9/papers/scott.html)
Accessed 25 November 2004 geographic information systems Taylor & Francis, London, 3-16

This content downloaded from

196.216.165.210 on Thu, 07 Mar 2024 13:50:23 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms