This thesis examines the role that various practices with geospatial data, ranging from expert-led approached to participatory mapping, play in shaping the understanding and governance of inequality in cities. In contrast to the increasing use of participatory Geographic Information Systems (GIS), the production of spatial knowledge is still predominantly led by technical expertise. The research question that is pursued in this study is: what is the impact that participatory mapping processes and expertise-guided mapping processes have on spatial injustices in cities? To respond to these questions, the research employs a systematic literature review according to the PRISMA protocol, selecting fifty-one case studies that combine GIS mapping with concepts such as participation and spatial justice. The findings reveal a pronounced imbalance as nearly four-fifths (78%) of the documented practices are expert-led, while genuinely participatory processes are significantly fewer and often limited to consultation rather than actually influencing how spatial data are produced, interpreted or mobilised for decision making. This thesis argues that this persistent ’participatory deficit’ is not merely a methodological issue but a failure of procedural justice as such patterns risk perpetuating unequal power relations and constraining the potential of geospatial technologies to address spatial injustices. By applying a conceptual model that links participation levels to the principles of procedural justice, the findings show that the field’s expert-led dominance systematically excludes local knowledge, creating ’epistemic deserts’. This approach ultimately undermines the pursuit of genuine spatial justice, as it focuses on diagnosing inequality without empowering the communities affected by it.
La presente tesi esamina il ruolo che diverse pratiche di utilizzo dei dati geospaziali, spaziando dagli approcci expert-led alla mappatura partecipativa, svolgono nel modellare la comprensione e la governance delle disuguaglianze urbane. Nonostante la crescente diffusione dei Sistemi Informativi Geografici (GIS) partecipativi, la produzione di conoscenza spaziale rimane prevalentemente dominata da competenze tecniche specialistiche. La domanda di ricerca che orienta lo studio è la seguente: quale impatto hanno i processi di mappatura partecipativa e quelli guidati dagli esperti sulle ingiustizie spaziali nelle città? Per rispondere a tale interrogativo, la ricerca adotta una revisione sistematica della letteratura conforme al protocollo PRISMA, selezionando cinquantuno casi studio che integrano la mappatura GIS con i concetti di partecipazione e giustizia spaziale. I risultati evidenziano un marcato squilibrio: quasi i quattro quinti (78%) delle pratiche documentate sono guidate da esperti, mentre i processi autenticamente partecipativi risultano significativamente più rari e spesso limitati alla mera consultazione, anziché influenzare concretamente le modalità di produzione, interpretazione o mobilitazione dei dati spaziali ai fini decisionali. La tesi sostiene che tale persistente "deficit partecipativo" non costituisca una mera questione metodologica, bensì un fallimento della giustizia procedurale, in quanto tali dinamiche rischiano di perpetuare rapporti di potere diseguali e di limitare il potenziale delle tecnologie geospaziali nel contrastare le ingiustizie spaziali. Applicando un modello concettuale che correla i livelli di partecipazione ai principi di giustizia procedurale, i risultati dimostrano che il predominio degli approcci expert-led nel settore esclude sistematicamente il sapere locale, generando "deserti epistemici". Tale approccio finisce per compromettere il perseguimento di un’autentica giustizia spaziale, poiché si focalizza sulla diagnosi delle disuguaglianze senza conferire reale potere d’azione alle comunità che ne sono colpite.
Mapping justice through data: a systematic review of participatory and expert-led GIS in urban inequality research
Nuzzo, Alberto
2024/2025
Abstract
This thesis examines the role that various practices with geospatial data, ranging from expert-led approached to participatory mapping, play in shaping the understanding and governance of inequality in cities. In contrast to the increasing use of participatory Geographic Information Systems (GIS), the production of spatial knowledge is still predominantly led by technical expertise. The research question that is pursued in this study is: what is the impact that participatory mapping processes and expertise-guided mapping processes have on spatial injustices in cities? To respond to these questions, the research employs a systematic literature review according to the PRISMA protocol, selecting fifty-one case studies that combine GIS mapping with concepts such as participation and spatial justice. The findings reveal a pronounced imbalance as nearly four-fifths (78%) of the documented practices are expert-led, while genuinely participatory processes are significantly fewer and often limited to consultation rather than actually influencing how spatial data are produced, interpreted or mobilised for decision making. This thesis argues that this persistent ’participatory deficit’ is not merely a methodological issue but a failure of procedural justice as such patterns risk perpetuating unequal power relations and constraining the potential of geospatial technologies to address spatial injustices. By applying a conceptual model that links participation levels to the principles of procedural justice, the findings show that the field’s expert-led dominance systematically excludes local knowledge, creating ’epistemic deserts’. This approach ultimately undermines the pursuit of genuine spatial justice, as it focuses on diagnosing inequality without empowering the communities affected by it.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
2025_12_Nuzzo.pdf
solo utenti autorizzati a partire dal 19/11/2026
Descrizione: testo della tesi
Dimensione
2.71 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
2.71 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
|
2025_12_Nuzzo_Executive Summary.pdf
solo utenti autorizzati a partire dal 19/11/2026
Descrizione: executive summary
Dimensione
339.4 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
339.4 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in POLITesi sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
https://hdl.handle.net/10589/246406