In several conversations in the past couple weeks, the question arises of the potential for dis-empowering communities through mapping and open data. It’s a very deep issue, and these are just some quick thoughts.
To me, it all depends on how it’s undertaken. If you map a slum using remote sensing techniques, from govt offices, for sure, that’s a tool of state control. If you go into the slum, ask residents if they want to map, and allow them to choose what they map, and make every effort for residents to have access and use that map in their agenda … well I’m of the strong opinion that it’s just the opposite.
It could easily be said that my position is a Cop Out, that going into the slum, I can not help but bring an agenda, and residents may not initially clearly see all the ramifications of open data. So yes, we need to take responsibility, and be sure that what we are doing is not harmful. The dilemma of Open Data is very tough, yes. But I simply can’t see this point on informal areas, if the project is executed correctly. What slum residents lack most of all is representation and a voice. “Hiding” by not mapping is not going to protect them.
The attitude of fear may be down to lack of experience of citizen driven cartography. And it’s also dependent on the kind of data. We’re debating this actively now in Kibera, as we start to focus on the theme of Security. Mapping brothels and places to use drugs are simply going to be harmful to already vulnerable people. Mapping the refugee routes from Burma into India, openly, would be sheer stupidity. Mapping where lighting is present, and where it’s needed, that is helpful. So we need to constantly judge, and as you say, every situation is unique. I suppose it’s another recapitulation of the Shirky-Morozov debate.