Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating the role of spatial landscape literacy in public participation processes and opinions on environmental issues and ecosystem services

  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Little is known about how spatial literacy influences mapping and decision-making related to environmental management and ecosystem services. We assessed the role of spatial landscape literacy in participatory environmental management and ecosystem service assessments in peri-urban Bogota, Colombia. Spatial landscape literacy (SL) was evaluated by testing stakeholder’s ability to locate specific landscapes and landmarks. We then assessed if opinions on environmental decisions and ecosystem services were significantly related to SL. We used an online instrument to capture 2,397 respondent’s socioeconomic characteristics, SL, ecosystem service perceptions, and opinions concerning relevant environmental issues. We evaluated and measured respondents’ self-perceived SL and ability to locate four landscapes in an integrated online map. Positional accuracy was calculated using a Spatial Landscape Literacy Index (SLI). We then tested for effects of socio-demographics on SLI, modeled the relationship between socio-demographics and SL, and tested the relationship between respondents’ SL and their opinions on relevant environmental issues and ecosystem services. We found that about 75% of the respondents correctly located 2 of the 4 landscapes. The SLI model was also poorly predicted by socio-demographic variables. However, we found significant relationships between SLI and opinions concerning the environment. No relationship was found between respondents’ levels of active participation in local governance and SLI. Overall, SL was little affected by education levels. Participatory processes using maps should ideally measure SL and not assume a priori that participants are spatially literate. Further research is needed to evaluate how spatial technologies and understanding stakeholder’s values towards the environment can democratize participatory-based decision-making.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Aggrey JJ, Ros-Tonen MA, Asubonteng KO (2021) Using participatory spatial tools to unravel community perceptions of land-use dynamics in a mine-expanding landscape in Ghana. Environ Manage 68:1–18

  • Agresti A (2013) Categorical data analysis, 3rd edn. John Wiley & Sons Inc., Hoboken, United States

  • Bagstad KJ, Reed JM, Semmens DJ, Sherrouse BC, Troy A (2016) Linking biophysical models and public preferences for ecosystem service assessments: A case study for the Southern Rocky Mountains. Reg Environ Chang 16(7):2005–2018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G (2012) An empirical evaluation of the spatial accuracy of public participation GIS (PPGIS) data. Appl Geogr 34:289–294

  • Brown G, Montag JM, Lyon K (2012) Public Participation GIS: A method for identifying ecosystem services. Soc Nat Resour 25:633–651

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown G, Kangas K, Juutinen A, Tolvanen A (2017) Identifying environmental and natural resource management conflict potential using participatory mapping. Soc Nat Resour 30(12):1458–1475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown G, Kyttä M (2018) Key issues and priorities in participatory mapping: Toward integration or increased specialization? Appl Geogr 95:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown G, Weber D, De Bie K (2014) Assessing the value of public lands using public participation GIS (PPGIS) and social landscape metrics. Appl Geogr 53:77–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkhard B, Kroll F, Nedkov S, Müller F (2012) Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecol Indic 21:17–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CAR (2017) Evaluación Regional del Agua Cuenca Alta río Bogotá. Corporación Autónoma Regional de Cundinamarca. https://www.car.gov.co/uploads/files/5ae21dac0e581.pdf (Accessed: June 2020)

  • Clerici N, Cote-Navarro F, Escobedo F, Rubiano K, Villegas JC (2019) Spatio-temporal and cumulative effects of land use-land cover and climate change on two ecosystem services in the Colombian Andes. Sci Total Environ 685:1181–1192

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cortés-S SP, Van der Hammen T, Rangel-Ch JO (1999) Comunidades vegetales y patrones de degradación y sucesión en la vegetación de los Cerros Occidentales de Chía-Cundinamarca-Colombia. Rev Acad Colomb Cienc 23:529–554

    Google Scholar 

  • Damastuti E, de Groot R (2019) Participatory ecosystem service mapping to enhance community-based mangrove rehabilitation and management in Demak, Indonesia. Reg Environ Change 19:65–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-018-1378-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DANE Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística de Colombia (2018). Censo Nacional 2018. https://sitios.dane.gov.co/cnpv/app/views/informacion/perfiles/11_infografia.pdf (Accessed: May 2020)

  • Darvill R, Lindo Z (2015) Quantifying and mapping ecosystem service use across stakeholder groups: Implications for conservation with priorities for cultural values. Ecosyst Serv 13:153–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Do TH, Vu TP, Catacutan D, Nguyen VT (2020). Governing Landscapes for Ecosystem Services: A Participatory Land-Use Scenario Development in the Northwest Montane Region of Vietnam. Environ Manage 68(5):1–18

  • Ernst A (2019) How participation influences the perception of fairness, efficiency and effectiveness in environmental governance: An empirical analysis. J Environ Manag 238:368–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Escobedo FJ, Bottin M, Cala D, Montoya DLS (2020) Spatial literacy influences stakeholder’s recognition and mapping of peri-urban and urban ecosystem services. Urban Ecosyst 23:1039–1049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernstson H (2013) The social production of ecosystem services: A framework for studying environmental justice and ecological complexity in urbanized landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan 109(1):7–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagerholm N, Käyhkö N (2009) Participatory mapping and geographical patterns of the social landscape values of rural communities in coastal Zanzibar, Tanzania. Fennia 187:43–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagerholm N, Eilola S, Kisanga D, Arki V, Käyhkö N (2019a) Place-based landscape services and potential of participatory spatial planning in multifunctional rural landscapes in Southern highlands, Tanzania. Landsc Ecol 34(7):1769–1787

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagerholm N, Torralba M, Moreno G, Girardello M, Herzog F, Aviron S, Burgess P, Crous-Duran J, Ferreiro-Domínguez N, Graves A, Hartel T (2019b) Cross-site analysis of perceived ecosystem service benefits in multifunctional landscapes. Glob Environ Chan 56:134–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaillard JC, Monteil C, Perrillat-Collomb A, Chaudhary S, Chaudhary M, Chaudhary O et al. (2013) Participatory 3-dimension mapping: A tool for encouraging multi-caste collaboration to climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction. Appl Geogr 45:158–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García-Díez V, García-Llorente M, González JA (2020) Participatory mapping of cultural ecosystem services in Madrid: Insights for landscape planning. Land 9:244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham M (2014) Inequitable distributions in internet geographies: The global south is gaining access but lags in local content. Innovations 9(3–4):17–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Golledge RG (1993): Geographical perspectives on spatial cognition. In: Gärling T, Golledge RG (eds) Behaviour and environment: psychological and geographical approaches, Elsevier Press, North Holland, 16–46

  • Hair J, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE (2010) Multivariate data analysis. 7th edn. Pearson Education International, Upper saddle River, New Jersey

  • Heikinheimo V, Tenkanen H, Bergroth C, Järv O, Hiippala T, Toivonen T (2020) Understanding the use of urban green spaces from user-generated geographic information. Landsc Urban Plan 201:103845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hui R, Wescoat Jr JL (2019) Visualizing peri-urban and rurban water conditions in Pune district, Maharashtra, India. Geoforum 102:255–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt LM (2015) Monitoring changes in forest resource advisory groups’ composition and evaluations of perceptions of public participation effectiveness: A case of Ontario’s Local Citizens Committees. Can J For Res 45(12):1866–1872

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahriman-Ozturk D, Olgan R, Tuncer G (2012) A qualitative study on Turkish preschool children’s environmental attitudes through ecocentrism and anthropocentrism. Int J Sci Educ 34(4):629–650

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu J, Opdam P (2014) Valuing ecosystem services in community-based landscape planning: introducing a wellbeing-based approach. Landsc Ecol 29(8):1347–1360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza JE, Etter A (2002) Multitemporal analysis (1940–1996) of land cover changes in the southwestern Bogotá High-plain. Landsc Urban Plan 59:147–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCall MK, Dunn CE (2012) Geo-information tools for participatory spatial planning: Fulfilling the criteria for ‘good’governance? Geoforum 43(1):81–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mosso CE, Hostetler M, Ecobedo FJ (2020). Urban expansion into native forests in Patagonia, Argentina: Assessing stakeholders’ perceptions regarding spatial planning. J Environ Plann Man 64:1–22

  • Ooms K, De Maeyer P, Dupont L, Van der Veken N, Van de Weghe N, Verplaetse S (2016) Education in cartography: what is the status of young people’s map-reading skills? Cartogr Geogr Inf Sci 43(2):134–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palomo I, Martín-López B, Zorrilla-Miras P, Del Amo DG, Montes C (2014) Deliberative mapping of ecosystem services within and around Doñana National Park (SW Spain) in relation to land use change. Reg Environ Chang 14(1):237–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perez A (2019). Landscape Literacy: Teaching to Read the World through a Curricular-Spatial Analysis. Int. J. Crit. Pedagogy, 10(1):141–158

  • Priego C, Breuste JH, Rojas J (2008) Perception and value of nature in urban landscapes: A comparative analysis of cities in Germany, Chile, and Spain. Landsc Online 7(1):22

    Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2019) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramadier T, Bronner AC (2006) Knowledge of the environment and spatial cognition: JRS as a technique for improving comparisons between social groups. Environ Plan B: Plan Des 33(2):285–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rambaldi G, Kyem PAK, McCall M, Weiner D (2006) Participatory spatial information management and communication in developing countries. Electron J Inf Syst Developing Ctries 25(1):1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reilly K, Adamowski J, John K (2018) Participatory mapping of ecosystem services to understand stakeholders’ perceptions of the future of the Mactaquac Dam, Canada. Ecosyst Serv 30:107–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.01.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubiano K, Clerici N, Norden N, Etter A (2017) Secondary forest and shrubland dynamics in a highly transformed landscape in the Northern Andes of Colombia (1985–2015). Forests 8:216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sironen S, Leskinen P, Kangas A, Hujala T (2014) Variation of preference inconsistency when applying ratio and interval scale pairwise comparisons. J Multi‐Crit Decis Anal 21:183–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shim D (2014) Remote sensing place: Satellite images as visual spatial imaginaries. Geoforum 51:152–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trimble M, Lázaro M (2014) Evaluation criteria for participatory research: Insights from coastal Uruguay. Environ Manag 54(1):122–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tu Huynh N, Doherty ST (2007) Geographical perspectives on spatial cognition. Cartographica: Int J Geographic Inf Geovisualization 42(4):285–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vlami V, Zogaris S, Djuma H, Kokkoris IP, Kehayias G, Dimopoulos PA (2019) Field method for landscape conservation surveying: The landscape assessment protocol (LAP). Sustainability 11(7)

  • Whiston Spirn A (2005) Restoring mill creek: Landscape literacy, environmental justice, and city planning and design. Land Res 30(3):395–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willock J, Deary IJ, Edwards‐Jones G, Gibson GJ, McGregor MJ, Sutherland A et al. (1999) The role of attitudes and objectives in farmer decision making: business and environmentally‐oriented behaviour in Scotland. J Agr Econ 50(2):286–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xie M, Vacher HL, Reader S, Walton E (2018) Quantitative map literacy: A cross between map literacy and quantitative literacy. Numeracy 11(1):4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu-Jen H (2010) Understanding anthropocentric/biocentric orientations toward natural parks. A survey of student at Oklahoma State University (Master dissertation), Oklahoma State University, USA

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by the Colombian Administrative Department of Science, Technology, and Innovation (COLCIENCIAS; Grant 122274558511). This research was approved by Universidad del Rosario Committee of Ethics. Informed consent to participate in the study was obtained for all participants in this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. US Forest Service Pacific Southwest Research Station, 4955 Canyon Crest Dr, Riverside, CA, 90012, USA

    Francisco J. Escobedo

  2. Independent researcher, Bogotá, Colombia

    Marius Bottin

  3. Department of Biology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Universidad del Rosario, Bogotá, D.C., Colombia

    Nicola Clerici

  4. Facultad de economía, Universidad del Rosario, Bogotá, Colombia

    Salamanca Guibor Camargo

  5. Facultad de Estudios Internacionales, Políticos y Urbanos, Universidad del Rosario, Bogotá, Colombia

    Alejandro Feged-Rivadeneira

Authors
  1. Francisco J. Escobedo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marius Bottin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nicola Clerici
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Salamanca Guibor Camargo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Alejandro Feged-Rivadeneira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: FJE, GC, AF; methodology: FJE, MB, and GC; formal analysis and investigation: MB, FJE, and NC; writing—original draft preparation: FJE, NC, and MB; writing—review and editing: FJE, NC, MB, AF, GC.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francisco J. Escobedo.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix A. Aerial and on site photos of Cerro La Conejera (A1 and A2) and Humedal Torca Guaymaral (A3 and A4). Note: in Spanish “Cerro” means mount or hill while “Humedal” means wetland

Appendix A. Aerial and on site photos of Cerro La Conejera (A1 and A2) and Humedal Torca Guaymaral (A3 and A4). Note: in Spanish “Cerro” means mount or hill while “Humedal” means wetland

Figures 3–6

Fig. 3
figure 3

Cerro de la Conejera (Photo: Google Earth)

Full size image
Fig. 4
figure 4

Cerro de la Conejera (With permission from Humedalesbogota.com; Photo: J.E.Escobar)

Full size image
Fig. 5
figure 5

Humedal Torca Guaymaral (Photo: Google Earth)

Full size image
Fig. 6
figure 6

Humedal Torca Guaymaral (Photo: With permission from Humedalesbogota.com; Photo: J.E.Escobar)

Full size image

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Escobedo, F.J., Bottin, M., Clerici, N. et al. Evaluating the role of spatial landscape literacy in public participation processes and opinions on environmental issues and ecosystem services. Environmental Management 69, 244–257 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-021-01591-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-021-01591-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation