Over 25 years ago, as the web was emerging as a medium for distributing public information, it was promoted as a tool for increased democratisation. From the age of dial-up modem and PCs to the use of mobile phones and smartphones, concerns about digital divides and how they impact the ability of local participation in environmental decision making never resolved. These digital divides are creating a tapestry of marginalisation through different devices, skills, and communication potentials, and it is valuable to reflect on their dimensions – both technical and social, and consider how we can consider them in a systematic way. The talk will attempt to reflect on technological and social changes and the attempts to address them.

1. The Persistent Environmental Digital
Divide
Muki Haklay, Extreme Citizen Science group
Department of Geography, UCL
Twitter: @mhaklay / @ucl_excites

2. 40.1. In sustainable development, everyone is a user
and provider of information considered in the broad
sense. That includes data, information, appropriately
packaged experience and knowledge. The need for
information arises at all levels, from that of senior
decision makers at the national and international
levels to the grass-roots and individual levels.
Agenda 21, Chapter 40 - 1992

3. Environmental issues are best handled with the participation
of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level. At the national
level, each individual shall have appropriate access to
information concerning the environment that is held by public
authorities… and the opportunity to participate in decision-
making processes. States shall facilitate and encourage public
awareness and participation by making information widely
available. Effective access to judicial and administrative
proceedings, including redress and remedy, shall be provided.
Rio Declaration on Environment and
Development (1992)

4. 26 years on, are we there yet?
1992
• Mobile phone access (UK) – 5%
• Web users (World) - 10 million
• Data held by public authorities,
no data portals
• No easy online mapping
• No legal instruments in place
2018
• Mobile phone access (UK) – 95%
• Web users (World) – 3.2 billion
• Open data, and governmental
data portals
• Many easy to use online
mapping tools
• Aarhus convention, EU
directive, and local regulations
are in place

5. ArcInfo 7
SAS
CIESIN, EPA, Environment Canada
1994
1997 version, Archive.org

6. 1995
Sun Sparc 20
ArcInfo 7 (donated by ESRI)
Oracle 6
Susan Pipes, Leslie St. James

7. 1998

8. GIS software, access to data, know how
Aurigi, A., Batty, S., Bloomfield, D., Boott, R., Clark, J., Haklay, M., Harrison, C., Heppell, K., Moreley, J. and Thornton, C. (1999), UCL Brownfield Research Network, University
College London, London, UK, 42 pp
1998

9. 1999

10. • GIS software remain out of reach
• Data started to appear on the Web by data owners,
on their websites
• Home computers remain expensive (about £3000),
and access to dial-up services expensive, too
• Know-how issues: basic use of computers, access
to the internet, discovery (knowing where to look),
making sense of the data/information
1992-2002

11. 2003

12. 2006

13. 2008

14. Ellul, C., Haklay, M. Francis, L. And Rahemtulla, H., 2009, A Mechanism to Create Community Maps for Non-Technical users, The International Conference on Advanced
Geographic Information Systems & Web Services – GEOWS 2009
2009

15. • GIS possibly accessible through the GeoWeb
• Open data
• Wider adoption of home computers and
broadband access
• From 2007, rapid increase in smartphone use
• Know-how issues: basic use of smartphones, data
access costs, discovery (knowing where to look),
making sense of the data/information
2002-2012

16. Mapping for Change
2012

17. June 2012

18. 2016

19. 2016

20. 2017

21. 2017

22. 2018

23. • The GeoWeb continues to evolve
• Open data in peril – e.g. data salvage in the US
• Wider adoption of smartphones and prolifiraation
of network infrastructure
• Increase in DIY sensing, low costs sensors
• Know-how issues: basic use of smartphones, data
access costs, discovery (knowing where to look),
making sense of the data/information
2012-2018

24. • Divide 1: access to hardware – 1990s: PC, 2018:
Smartphones
• Divide 2: ability to access and use software – 1990s:
Desktop GIS, 2018: R “The next generation will
know how to do it, I’m too old to learn”
• Divide 3: network access – 1990s: dial-up vs.
universities T1 links, 2018: data access on mobile
plans
Persistence divides

25. • Divide 4: ability to access and use information –
1990s: libraries and supply side websites, 2018:
supply side data files (and demise of “open”)
• Divide 5: ability to make sense of the information
“this is not community information in a
community language”
• Divide 6: ageism. Community activists are in their
40-75, tech kids are 20-40.
• Divide 7: legal instruments and rights (Arhus,
Escazu)
Persistence divides

26. Follow us:
– http://www.ucl.ac.uk/excites
– Twitter: @UCL_ExCiteS
– Blog:
http://uclexcites.wordpress.com
The work of ExCiteS is supported by EPSRC, ERC, EU
FP7, EU H2020, RGS, Esri, Forest People Program,
Forests Monitor, WRI and all the people in communities
that we’ve worked with over the years