BazEkon - Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie

BazEkon home page

Meny główne

Autor
Moura Ana Clara (Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil), Marino Tiago (Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil), Ballal Hrishikesh (Geodesign Hub Pvt. Ltd, Ireland), Ribeiro Suellen (Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil), Motta Silvio (Pontifical Catholic University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil)
Tytuł
Interoperability and Visualization as a Support for Mental Maps to Face Differences in Scale in Brazilian Geodesign Processes
Interoperacyjność i wizualizacja jako wsparcie dla map mentalnych w różnych skalach przestrzennych. Przykłady zastosowań Geodesignu z Brazylii
Źródło
Rozwój Regionalny i Polityka Regionalna / Instytut Geografii Społeczno-Ekonomicznej i Gospodarki Przestrzennej Uniwersytetu im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu, 2016, nr 35, s. 89-102, rys., bibliogr. 31 poz.
Słowa kluczowe
Partycypacja społeczna, Planowanie przestrzenne, Wizualizacja komputerowa
Social participation, Spatial planning, Computer visualization
Uwagi
streszcz., summ.
Kraj/Region
Brazylia
Brazil
Abstrakt
The paper presents case studies of geodesign and collaborative planning in the context of important cultural areas in Minas Gerais state, Brazil, "Pampulha" and "Iron Quadrangle". The first area is at urban scale and has recently received UNESCO recognition due to Oscar Niemeyer's work, and the second is at regional scale and of qualified landscape, important historical and cultural values, in addition to abundant natural resources (mainly minerals). The results allow a reflection on the role of interoperability and visualization applications to favor mental maps and better conditions in participatory planning, based on the methodology of Geodesign. (abstrakt oryginalny)

The paper presents case studies of geodesign and collaborative planning in the context of important cultural areas in Minas Gerais state, Brazil, "Pampulha" and "Iron Quadrangle". The first area is at urban scale and has recently received UNESCO recognition due to Oscar Niemeyer's work, and the second is at regional scale and of qualified landscape, important historical and cultural values, in addition to abundant natural resources (mainly minerals). The results allow a reflection on the role of interoperability and visualization applications to favor mental maps and better conditions in participatory planning, based on the methodology of Geodesign. (original abstract)
Pełny tekst
Pokaż
Bibliografia
Pokaż
  1. Abukhater A., Walker D. 2010. Making Smart Growth Smarter with GeoDesign. In.: Changing Geography by design: selected readings in geodesign. ESRI, Redlands, CA, pp. 25-32.
  2. Andrienko G., Andrienko N., Keim, D., MacEachren, A., Wrobel, S. 2011. Challenging problems of geospatial visual analytics. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing. 22(4): 251-256.
  3. Ballal H. 2015. Collaborative planning with digital design synthesis. Doctoral dissertation, UCL (University College London).
  4. Bishr Y. 1998. Overcoming the semantic and other barriers to GIS interoperability. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 12(4): 299-314. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/136588198241806.
  5. Brodeur J., Bedard Y., Edwards G., Moulin B. 2003. Revisiting the Concept of Geospatial Data Interoperability within the Scope of Human Communication Processes. Transactions in GIS, 7(2): 243-265. http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/1467-9671.00143
  6. Campagna M. 2013. Geodesign, sistemi di supporto al piano and metapianificazione. DisegnareCon, Università di Bologna, 6(11): 133-140.
  7. Ferreti V., Bottero M., Mondini G. 2014. Decision making and cultural heritage: An application of the Multi-Attribute Value Theory for the reuse of historical buildings. Journal of Cultural Heritage. Springer, pp. 1-12.
  8. Ferreti V., Mondini G., Bottero M. 2015. How to support strategic decisions in territorial transformation processes. International Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Information Systems. IGI Global. 6(4): 40-50.
  9. Fielding R.T. 2000. Architectural Styles and the Design of Network-based Software Architectures. PhD Thesis, University of California http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/.
  10. Goodchild M., Egenhofer M., Fegeas R., Kottman C. (Eds.).1999. Interoperating Geographic Information Systems. Springer US, Boston MA.
  11. Goodchild M.F. 2010. Towards Geodesign: Repurposing Cartography And Gis? Cartographic Perspectives, 66: 55-69.
  12. Gordon Cullen T. 1961. Townscape. Reinhold Publishing Corporation, New York.
  13. Kingston R. 2007. Public participation in local policy decision-making: the role of web-based mapping. The Cartographic Journal, 44(2): 138-144.
  14. Lynch K. 1960. The Image of the City. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
  15. Lynch K. 1972. What Time is this Place?. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
  16. Lynch K. 1976. Managing the Sense of a Region. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
  17. Lynch K. 1981. A Theory of Good City Form. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
  18. MacEachren A., Gahegan M., Pike W., Brewer I., Lengerich E., Hardistry F. 2004. Geovisualization for knowledge construction and decision-support. Computer Graphics & Applications. 24(1): 13-17.
  19. Manovich L. 2004. Visualização de dados como uma nova abstração e anti-sublime. [In]: Leão, Lúcia (org.) Derivas: cartografias do ciberespaço. Annablume, São Paulo, pp. 135-143.
  20. Miller W. 2012. Introducing Geodesign: The Concept Director of GeoDesign Services. Esri Press, Redlands.
  21. Moura A. C. 2014. Geoprocessamento na gestão e planejamento urbano. Rio de Janeiro, Ed. Interciência, 3a. ed. (1st edition 2003).
  22. Moura A. C. 2015. Geodesign in Parametric Modeling of urban landscape. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 42 (4): 323-332.
  23. Moura A.C., Ribeiro S., Guadalupe D., Motta S. 2016. Visualisation Tools in Grasshopper+Rhino3D to Improve Multi-Criteria Analysis in Urban Policies - Case Study of Pampulha, Brazil.. INPUT 2016 - 9th International Conference on Innovation in Urban and Regional Planning. Torino, Italy. pp. 404-410.
  24. Norberg-Schulz C. 1980. Genius loci. Towards a phenomenology of architectureAcademy Editions, London.
  25. Nyerges T., Ballal H., Steinitz C., Canfield T., Roderick M., Ritzman J., Thanatemaneerat W. 2016. Geodesign dynamics for sustainable urban watershed development. Sustainable Cities and Society, 25:13-24.
  26. Pensa S., Masala E., Marina O. 2013. E se la forma seguisse la funzione? L'esplorazione della desiderabilità nella città di Skopje. DisegnareCon, Università di Bologna, 6(11): 141-148.
  27. Rivero R., Smith A., Ballal H., Steinitz C. Promoting Collaborative Geodesign in a Multidisciplinary and Multiscale Environment: Coastal Georgia 2050, USA. Digital Landscape Architecture 2015 - Landscape Architecture and Planning, pp. 42-58.
  28. Steinitz C., McDowell S. 2001. Alternative futures for Monroe County, Pennsylvania: a case study in applying ecological principles. In: Applying ecological principles to land management. New York: Springer, pp. 165-193.
  29. Steinitz C. 1990. Toward a sustainable landscape with high visual preference and high ecological integrity: the loop road in Acadia National Park, USA. Landscape and urban planning, 19(3): 213-250.
  30. Steinitz C., Binford M., Cote P., Edwards Jr T., Ervin S. 1996. Biodiversity and landscape planning: alternative futures for the region of Camp Pendleton, California. Harvard Univ Cambridge MA.
  31. Steinitz C. 2012. A Framework for Geodesign: Changing Geography by Design. ESRI Press, Redlands.
Cytowane przez
Pokaż
ISSN
2353-1428
Język
eng
Udostępnij na Facebooku Udostępnij na Twitterze Udostępnij na Google+ Udostępnij na Pinterest Udostępnij na LinkedIn Wyślij znajomemu