The Technopolitics of Mapping Dar es Salaam: An examination of the technological and political motivations of the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team
La tecnopolítica de la cartografía de Dar es Salaam: Un examen de las motivaciones tecnológicas y políticas del equipo humanitario OpenStreetMap
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5944/etfvi.14.2021.30644Keywords:
Participatory mapping; international development; OpenStreetMap; Dar es SalaamAbstract
Mapping has long formed a key part of development work, from recording household surveys, participatory mapping exercises, and PRA projects. Now though the sector is full of new actors- mapping and tech companies as well as NGOs- monitoring through drones and satellite images, alongside employing more traditional methods. Many of these new players were born from NGOs and companies who started as ‘crisis mappers. Short-term ‘crisis mapping’ projects have become a regular part of humanitarian response following a disaster. The short-term nature of such actions, and the need for stable employment/profits, has led to an increasing trend for the same organizations and companies to either remain on the ground producing maps or to move into new areas as part of a pre-emptive mapping practice, inserting themselves into the wider international development ecosystem. This research, centered on Tanzania, examines how HOTOSM has attempted to pivot towards working as a development organization that creates maps for prevention of crisis, but also wider socio-economic outputs. The research used interviews to explore the interplay between technology and micro/macro politics around the mapping of Dar es Salaam. Examining how HOTOSM its role, and how they position their map-making within the context of Dar es Salaam. Findings suggest that HOTOSM is still underdeveloped as an organization and lacks the maturity to create true participatory models of working.
Downloads
References
Adams, P.C. & Jansson, A. (2012). Communication geography: a bridge between disciplines. Communication Theory, 22, 299-318.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2012.01406.x
Adinani, H. (2018). Newly-revealed Shina boundaries offer unprecedented hyperlocal data for decisionmakers. Medium. Available from:
Brovelli, M., Ilie, C. M., & Coetzee, S. (2019). Openness and community geospatial science for monitoring SDGs—an example from Tanzania. Sustainable Development Goals Connectivity Dilemma: Land and Geospatial Information for Urban and Rural Resilience, 313-324.
https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429290626-20
Bryan, J. (2011). Walking the line: participatory mapping, indigenous rights, and neoliberalism. Geoforum, 42 (1), 40-50.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2010.09.001
Shum, S. B., Aberer, K., Schmidt, A., Bishop, S., Lukowicz, P., Anderson, S., ... & Helbing, D. (2012). Towards a global participatory platform: democratising open data, complexity science and collective intelligence. European Physical Journal Special Topics, 214 (1), 109-152.
https://doi.org/10.1140/epjst/e2012-01690-3
Burns, R. (2019). New frontiers of philanthro‐capitalism: Digital technologies and humanitarianism. Antipode, 51(4), 1101-1122. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12534
Castells, M. (1983). The city and the grassroots: a cross-cultural theory of urban social movements (No. 7). University of California Press.
Chambers, R., Howes, M., Belsaha, D., Richards, D., Swift, J., & O’Keefe, L. (1979). Rural development: whose knowledge counts. IDS Bulletin, 10(2).
Collier, D. (2016). Repainting the Walls of Lunda: Information Colonialism and Angolan Art. University of Minnesota Press.
https://doi.org/10.5749/minnesota/9780816694440.001.0001
Couldry, N., & Mejias, U. A. (2019). Data colonialism: Rethinking big data’s relation to the contemporary subject. Television & New Media, 20 (4), 336-349.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476418796632
Crawford, K. (2013). The hidden biases in big data. Harvard Law Review, 1
Crooks, A.T. & Wise, S. (2013). GIS and agent-based models for humanitarian assistance. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 41, 100-111.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2013.05.003
Digital Globe (n.d.). Transforming Our World: Geospatial Information – Key to Achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Geospatial Media and Communications.
Edney, M.H. (2019). Cartography: the ideal and its history. University of Chicago Press.
https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226605715.001.0001
Edwards, D. (2015). Is tech-enabled citizen-engagement a game changer for development. Hivos People Unlimited, 20 March.
https://knowledge.hivos.org/tech-enabled-citizen-engagement-game-changer-development
Elwood, S. & Leszczynski, A. (2013). New spatial media, new knowledge politics. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 38 (4), 544-559.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2012.00543.x
Escobar, A. (1992). Imagining a post-development era: critical thought, development and social movements. Social Text, 31/32, 20-56.
https://doi.org/10.2307/466217
Feenberg, A. (1991). Critical theory of technology. Oxford University Press.
Fonte, C. C., Minghini, M., Patriarca, J., Antoniou, V., See, L., & Skopeliti, A. (2017). Generating up-to-date and detailed land use and land cover maps using OpenStreetMap and GlobeLand30. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 6(4), 125.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi6040125
Gopal, S., Sarkar, R., Banda, K., Govindarajan, J., Harijan, B. B., Jeyakumar, M. B., ... & Balraj, V (2009). Study of water supply & sanitation practices in India using geographic information systems: some design & other considerations in a village setting. Indian Journal of Medical Research, 129 (3), 233-241.
Graham, M. (2013). Geography/internet: ethereal alternate dimensions of cyberspace or grounded augmented realities. The Geographical Journal, 179 (2), 177-182.
https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12009
Haklay, M., Singleton, A. & Parker, C. (2008). Web mapping 2.0: The neogeography of the
GeoWeb. Geography Compass, 2 (6), 2011-2039.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-8198.2008.00167.x
Harley, J.B. (1988). Silences and secrecy: the hidden agenda of cartography in early modern Europe. Imago mundi, 40(1), 57-76.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03085698808592639
Hart, G. (2001). Development critiques in the 1990s: culs de sac and promising paths. Progress in Human Geography, 25 (4), 649-658.
https://doi.org/10.1191/030913201682689002
HOT. (2018). Annual Report.
https://www.hotosm.org/downloads/2018-Annual-Report.pdf
HOT. (2020). What we do. Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team.
https://www.hotosm.org/what-we-do
Hunt, A., & Specht, D. (2019). Crowdsourced mapping in crisis zones: collaboration, organisation and impact. Journal of International Humanitarian Action, 4(1), 1-11.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41018-018-0048-1
Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology, 35 (2), 441-456.
https://doi.org/10.1177/S0038038501000219
Jordan, T. (2015). Information politics: liberation and exploitation in the digital society. Pluto Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt183p2xf
Kennedy, H., Hill, R. L., Aiello, G., & Allen, W. (2016). The work that visualisation conventions do. Information, Communication & Society, 19 (6), 715-735.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1153126
Kidd, J. (2016). Representation. Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315666785
Kim K. (1998). Using GIS technologies to empower community based organizations in Hawaii. Position paper presented at the Project Varenius Specialist Meeting: Empowerment, marginalization, and public participation GIS, Santa Barbara, CA.
Kitchin, R., Perkins, C.& Dodge, M. (2009). Thinking about maps. Rethinking Maps: New Frontiers in Cartographic Theory, 1-25.
Kleine, D., Hollow, D., & Poveda Villalba, S. C. (2014). Children, ICTs and development: capturing the potential, meeting the challenges.
Kyem, P.A.K. (2001). Public participation GIS applications and the community empowerment process: A review of concerns and challenges (published 2004). Cartographica, 38 (3&4), 5–17.
https://doi.org/10.3138/2J31-4648-6P62-6P78
Lee, P.G. & Global Forest Watch Canada. (2003). Canada’s large intact forest landscapes. Global Forest Watch Canada.
Mesmar, S. , Talhouk, R., Akik, C., Olivier, P., Elhajj, I. H., Elbassuoni, S., ... & Ghattas, H. (2016). The impact of digital technology on health of populations affected by humanitarian crises: recent innovations and current gaps. Journal of Public Health Policy, 37 (2), 167-200.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41271-016-0040-1
Mohan, G. (2002). The disappointments of civil society: the politics of NGO intervention in Northern Ghana. Political Geography, 21,125-54.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0962-6298(01)00072-5
Moore, R., Bhide, N., & Verity, A. (2016). Humanitarian information management failures: survey report. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Geneva.
Mosse, D. (2001). People’s knowledge’, participation and patronage: Operations and representations in rural development. Participation: The New Tyranny, 16-35.
O’Hara, K. (2004). Ontologies and technologies: knowledge representation or misrepresentation. ACM SIGIR Forum, 38, (2), 11-17.
https://doi.org/10.1145/1041394.1041397
Paglen, T. (2008). Mapping Ghosts. In: Mogel, L. and Bhagat, A. (eds.) An atlas of radical cartography. Los Angeles: Journal of Aesthetics and Protest Press, 39-50
Parker, B. (2006). Constructing community through maps? Power and praxis in community
mapping. The Professional Geographer, 58 (4), 470-484.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9272.2006.00583.x
Popping R., & Roberts C.W. (1997). Network Approaches in Text Analysis. In Klar R., Opitz O. (eds) Classification and Knowledge Organization. Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-59051-1_40
Potts, J. (2015). The new time and space. Palgrave Macmillan.
https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137494382
Quijano, A. (2007). Coloniality and modernity/rationality. Cultural Studies, 21 (2-3), 168-178.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380601164353
Radford, T. (2019) Community Q&A: Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team. Interview conducted by Wood, E. for Centre for HumData. Available from:
https://reliefweb.int/report/world/community-qa-humanitarian-openstreetmap-team [Accessed 30 January 2020]
Radil, S.M. & Jiao, J. (2016). Public participatory GIS and the geography of inclusion. The Professional Geographer, 68 (2), 202-210.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00330124.2015.1054750
Rekha, B. (2016). Geospatial data: key to achieve SDGs. Geospatial World. Available from :
https://www.geospatialworld.net/article/geospatial-data-sustainable-development-goals [Accessed 1 May 2017]
Said, E. W. (1985). Orientalism reconsidered. Race & class, 27(2), 1-15.
https://doi.org/10.1177/030639688502700201
Scott, G. & Rajabifard, A. (2015). Integrating geospatial information into the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. In: Twentieth United Nations Regional Cartographic Conference for Asia and the Pacific. Jeju, Korea. 6 – 9 October 2015
Sieber, R. (2006). Public participation geographic information systems: a literature review and framework. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 96 (3), 491-507.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.2006.00702.x
Sletto, B.I. (2009). Indigenous people don’t have boundaries: reborderings, fire management, and productions of authenticities in indigenous landscapes. Cultural Geographies, 16 (2), 253-277.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1474474008101519
Specht, D. & Feigenbaum, A. (2018). From cartographic gaze to contestatory cartographies. In: Pol Bargués-Pedreny, P., Chandler, D. and Simon, E. (eds.) Mapping and politics in the digital age. Routledge Global Cooperation Series, 39-55.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351124485-3
Verplanke, J., McCall, M. K., Uberhuaga, C., Rambaldi, G., & Haklay, M. (2016). A shared perspective for PGIS and VGI. The Cartographic Journal, 53 (4), 308-317.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00087041.2016.1227552
Wainwright, J. & Bryan, J. (2009). Cartography, territory, property: postcolonial reflections on indigenous counter-mapping in Nicaragua and Belize. Cultural Geographies, 16 (2), 153-178.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Doug Specht
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of the first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a license Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial 4.0 Internacional that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as to earlier and greater citation of the published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
