Visualization in environmental policy and planning: a systematic review and research agenda

Abstract

Visualizations are increasingly important for environmental policy and planning. They have great impact on how we perceive environmental problems, their solutions, and if we consider policies legitimate. The systematic review in this paper brings together 20 years of studies in visualization in environmental policy and planning. This review shows that over the last two decades, more and more studies have demonstrated that visualization plays a role in data-communication, influences decision making, public perception, public participation, and knowledge cocreation. Based on the systematic review, three research lines are developed that aim to better take into account the challenges of a global and active public that through internet and social media is formed around environmental and planning issues. We can do this by (1) moving beyond a knowledge deficit model (2) pay more attention to the material dimensions of visualizations and their role in opening up spaces for cocreation, and (3) include the study of found images as these contain information on public sentiment, and are a form of public accountability.

Mapping online visuals of shale gas controversy: a digital methods approach

“…More recent studies indicate that pro-shale framing has become prevalent in the policy debate. Most UK governments have supported shale development over the last years (Williams & Sovacool, 2019, 2020. Nonetheless, the authors also found a high level of anti-shale framings, which suggests an ongoing contest at formal national political sites.…”

“…Within this data-profusion, visual content is essential as it engages the public by telling a story about the policy issue, which can significantly affect the public's interpretation and alignment to sides of the contest (Hullman & Diakopoulos, 2011). As digital objects and networked content, visuals cross boundaries, influencing the problem definition and pointing to specific positions and solutions (Metze, 2020;Niederer, 2018;van Beek et al, 2020). For instance, images of flames from tap water from the documentary Gasland circulated online and can be considered an essential element in how the debate about shale gas exploration evolved.…”

“…For instance, in the United States, visuals strengthened the association with risk (Gommeh et al, 2021;Mazur, 2016). In the Netherlands, visualisations contributed to a frame-shift and possibly to the debate's evolution until the technology was banned (Metze, 2017(Metze, , 2018b(Metze, , 2020.…”

Visual discourse coalitions: visualization and discourse formation in controversies over shale gas development

“…At the same time, our map examples show how visual supplements can offer proof of different types of truths which are dependent on interpretationboth of the visualization and of the reality it represents. This makes visualizations a particular type of boundary object (see also An & Powe, 2015;Morseletto, 2017, p. 41;Metze, 2020Metze, , 2010. Their evidential nature and their multi-interpretability make them objects that are 'weakly structured in common use, and become strongly structured in individual use' (Star & Griesemer, 1989, p. 393).…”

21 years of research for the twenty-first century: revisiting the journal of environmental policy and planning

“…They call for more collaborative work between learning scholars and practitioners that can inform learning research design and ultimately, shape environmental policy design. For Metze et al (2020) visual methods in environmental policy and planning are considered important tools for knowledge co-creation, collaborative planning and participatory decision making. They direct academics to take into account the visualizations that different types of stakeholders use and (re)produce to better understand what societal actors deem important in environmental policy and planning.…”