Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Spatial Game for Negotiations and Consensus Building in Urban Planning: YouPlaceIt!

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Geogames and Geoplay

Part of the book series: Advances in Geographic Information Science ((AGIS))

Abstract

Striving to reach consensus about the use of resources is crucial in spatial planning. Civic engagement and participatory planning support activities of negotiation and consensus building. Negotiation, as considered in this work, is a process of communication in which parties exchange their messages, opinions, or statements in order to influence the other party (Fisher 1991). In simple terms, negotiation is a discussion between two or more disputants who are trying to work out a solution to their problem. Many situations in urban and regional planning require negotiations and consensus building. Some examples may include questions like where to locate a new road; how to design the newly created park; and what is the best location for a new shopping mall. A negotiation can be interpersonal where several individuals negotiate, or inter-group in which groups negotiate among themselves. It can include different stakeholders: the residents of the planned area, various government departments, real-estate developers, industry, and non-governmental organizations (NGO’s). Reaching a consensus among different stakeholders is a challenging task which often needed to involve compromises among all involved parties. These negotiations take place because the stakeholders and individuals wish to create something new or resolve a problem or dispute. The problem usually arises when there are conflicting interests involved on how to use natural resources, land, buildings and/or how to revitalize and further develop cities and landscapes. One of the big challenges faced by planners that facilitate participatory planning and civic engagement represents the process of consensus building in which the parties can present their conflicting points of view with the goal of arriving at an agreement.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abt CC (1970) Serious games. University Press of America, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahlqvist O (2011) Converging themes in cartography and computer games. Cartogr Geogr Inf Sci 38(3):278–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahlqvist O, Ramanathan J, Loffing T, Kocher A (2012) Geospatial human-environment simulation through integration of massive multiplayer online games and geographic information systems. Trans GIS 16(3):331–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Kodmany K (2001) Online tools for public participation. Gov Inf Q 18:329–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arputham J, Patel S (2010) Recent developments in plans for Dharavi and for the airport slums in Mumbai. Environ Urban 22(2):501–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basedow S, Pundt H (2001) Braucht bürgerbeteiligung in der planung GIS-funktionalitäten?, CORP conference, Vienna, Austria

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks MP (2002) Planning theory for practitioners. Planners Press, Chicago, IL

    Google Scholar 

  • Carver S (2001) The future of participatory approaches using geographic information: developing a research agenda for the 21st century. ESF-NSF meeting on access and participatory approaches in using geographic information, Spoleto, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark HH, Brennan SE (1991) Grounding in Communication Excerpt: from Perspectives on Socially shared Cognition, Resnick LB, Levine JM, Teasley SD (eds) American Psychological Association, p. 127–149

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig WJ, Harris TM, Weiner D (2002) Community participation and geographic information systems. Taylor and Francis, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Camerer CF, Ho TH, Chong JK (2004) A cognitive hierarchy model of games. Q J Econ 119(3):861–898

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandan V (2014) Dharavi: not a slum, but Asia’s largest small-scale industry, Web. http://www.thealternative.in/society/photo-story-dharavi-not-a-slum-but-asias-largest-small-scale-industry/, 22 Jan 2014. Accessed 8 March 2016

  • Costa-Gomes M, Crawford VP, Broseta B (2001) Cognition and behavior in normal-form games: an experimental study. Econometrica 69(5):1193–1235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devisch O (2011) Sollten Stadtplaner Computerspielespielen? In: Bauwelt 24.11, Hasselt. p 26–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Donohue WA, Dies ME, Hamilton M (1984) Coding naturalistic negotiation interaction, Human Communication Research 10(3):403–425

    Google Scholar 

  • DRA n.a. Dharavi redevelopment agency, Web. www.sra.gov.in/pgeDharaviUpcoming.aspx. Accessed 22 Feb 2016

  • Fant LM (1992) Analyzing negotiation talk – authentic data vs. role play in A. Grindsted A, Wagner J (eds) Communication for Specific Purposes, Tuebingen, Gunter Narr Verlag, p 164–175

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher R (1991) Negotiating power: getting and using influence. In: William Breslin J, Rubin JZ (eds) Negotiation theory and practice. Program on Negotiation Books, Cambridge, pp 127–140. 128

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer F (2006) Participatory governance as deliberative empowerment: the cultural politics of discursive space. Am Rev Public Admin 36(1):19–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gee JP (2004) Situated language and learning: a critique of traditional schooling. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee JP (2005) Why video games are good for your soul: pleasure and learning. Common Ground, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Georgiadou Y, Stoter J (2010) Studying the use of geoinformation in government—a conceptual framework. Comput Environ Urban Syst 34(1):70–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • E, Manosevitch E (2010) Augmented deliberation: merging physical and virtual interaction to engage communities in urban planning. New Media Soc 13(1):75–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Innes J (1995) Planning theory’s emerging paradigm: communicative action and practice. J Plann Educ Res 14(3):183–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Innes J (1996) Planning through consensus building: a new view of the comprehensive planning ideal. J Am Plann Assoc 62(4):460–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Innes JE, Booher DE (2002) Collaborative planning as capacity building: changing the paradigm of governance. Paper prepared for the Association of European Schools of Planning Conference

    Google Scholar 

  • Jankowski P, Nyerges T (2001) Geographic information systems for group decision making. Taylor and Francis, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Kardan K (2006) Computer role-playing games as a vehicle for teaching history, culture and language. Sandbox Symposium Proceedings, July. Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingston R, Carver S, Evans A, Turton I (2000) Web-based public participation geographical information systems: an aid to local environmental decision-making. Comput Environ Urban Syst 24:109–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemke JL (1998) Metamedia literacy: transforming meanings and media. In: Reinking D, Labbo L, McKenna M, Kiefer R (eds) Handbook of literacy and technology: transformations in a post-typographic world. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 283–301

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehta M (2010) Dharavi redevelopment project. World conference—India, remaking sustainable cities in the vertical age, CTBUH 2010 conference, Mumbai, India, February 2010, presentation slides

    Google Scholar 

  • McKelvey RD, Palfrey TR (1995) Quantal response equilibria for normal form games. Games Econ Behav 10(1):6–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagel R (1995) Unraveling in guessing games: an experimental study. Am Econ Rev 85(5):1313–1326

    Google Scholar 

  • Naquin CE, Kurtzberg TR, Belkin LY (2010) The finer points of lying online: E-mail versus pen and paper. Journal of Applied Psychology 95:387–394

    Google Scholar 

  • NSDO n.a. National slum dwellers organization, Web. www.sdinet.org. Accessed 13 Jan 2016

  • Pickles J (1995) Representations in an electronic age: geography, GIS, and democracy. In: Pickles J (ed) Ground truth: the social implications of geographic information systems. Guilford Press, New York, pp 1–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Poplin A (2015) How user-friendly are online interactive maps? Survey based on experiments with heterogeneous users. Cartogr Geogr Inf Sci 42(4):358–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/15230406.2014.991427. Taylor & Francis, ISSN: 1545-0465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poplin A (2014) Digital serious game for urban planning: B3—design your marketplace! Environ Plann B Plann Des 41(3):493–511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poplin A (2012a) Web-based PPGIS for Wilhelmsburg, Germany: an integration of interactive GIS-based maps with an online questionnaire. Special Issue J Urban Regional Inf Syst Assoc (URISA) 25(2):71–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Poplin A (2012b) Playful public participation in urban planning: a case study for online serious games. Comput Environ Urban Syst (CEUS) 36(3):195–206. Elsevier, Web. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0198971511001116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam LL, Jones TS (1982) The Role of Communication in Bargaining, Human Communication Research 8(3):262–280

    Google Scholar 

  • Rinner C (1999) Argumentation maps—GIS-based discussion support for online planning. GMD research series No. 22. GMD German National Research Center for Information Technology, Sankt Augustin, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  • Rinner C (2001) Argumentation maps—GIS-based discussion support for online planning. Environ Plann B Plann Des 28(6):847–863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rinner C (2005) Computer support for discussions in spatial planning. In: Campagna M (ed) GIS for sustainable development. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 16–80

    Google Scholar 

  • Rinner C (2006) Argumentation mapping in collaborative spatial decision making. In: Balram S, Dragicevic S (eds) Collaborative geographic information systems. Idea Group, Hershey, PA, pp 85–102

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ritterfeld U, Cody M, Vorderer P (eds) (2009) Serious games: mechanisms and effects. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Roseland M (2005) Toward sustainable communities: resources for citizens and their governments. New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlossberg M, Shuford E (2005) Delineating “Public” and “Participation” in PP GIS. URISA Journal 16(2):16–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlieder C, Kiefer P, Matyas S (2006) Geogames—designing location-based games from classic board games. IEEE Intell Syst 21(5):40–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder P (1996) Report on Public Participation GIS Workshop, NCGIA Technical Report 96–97, Scientific Report for Initiative 19 Specialist Meeting

    Google Scholar 

  • Sieber R (2006) Public participation geographic information systems: a literature review and framework. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 96(3):491–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sokolova M, Lapalme G (2012) How much do we say? Using informativeness of negotiation text records for early prediction of negotiation outcomes, Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer Netherlands, p. 363–379

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinmann R, Krek A, Blaschke T (2004) Can online map-based applications improve citizen participation? Lecture notes in computer science, TED on e-government 2004. Springer Verlag, Bozen, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson MM (2000) GIS technology and data sharing, planning into the next millennium. Cornell J Plann Urban Issues 15:20–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeng G, Takatsuka S (2009) Text-based peer–peer collaborative dialogue in acomputer-mediated learning environment in the EFL context, System 37, p. 434–446, Elsevier, Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors appreciate and acknowledge Karan Damle and Jayesh Lahori, undergraduate students at the International Institute of Information technology, Hyderabad, India who developed the complete game application. This research would have not been possible without their effort. A special thanks to the local NGO, be the locals, working in Dharavi for giving insights into locals’ perceptions or real-experiences when it comes to development and importantly for articulating the aspirations. The serious game development was partially funded by Department of Information Technology, Govt. of India under the National Program on Perception Engineering project Phase II, where the second author of this chapter is a principal investigator. Thank you to Brandon Klein, Iowa State University, for the language improvements of this text.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA

    Alenka Poplin

  2. International Institute of Information Technology, Hyderabad, India

    Kavita Vemuri

Authors
  1. Alenka Poplin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kavita Vemuri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alenka Poplin .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geography, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA

    Ola Ahlqvist

  2. Faculty of Information Systems and Applied Computer Sciences, University of Bamberg, Bamberg, Germany

    Christoph Schlieder

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Poplin, A., Vemuri, K. (2018). Spatial Game for Negotiations and Consensus Building in Urban Planning: YouPlaceIt!. In: Ahlqvist, O., Schlieder, C. (eds) Geogames and Geoplay. Advances in Geographic Information Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22774-0_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation