Participatory Mapping and PGIS

Applications of participatory mapping (PMapping) and PGIS to the mapping of local spatial knowledge are expanding; therefore, updated ethics and good practice improvements are needed. The intention here is to secern, or distinguish between, two pairs of concepts essential to PMapping – between ‘facts' and ‘values' in the knowledge being mapped and between ‘representation' and ‘representativity in the Pmapping processes. Local spatial knowledge is not homogeneous; facts and values are distinct although intrinsically related. In a world of ‘fake news´ and attacks on science, it is even more essential to distinguish facts from values in maps and other media. Concerning representation of both facts and values, the questions are how to represent local knowledge. Concerning representativity in the process, whose local spatial knowledge is being presented, and why? PMapping is not democratic; it is exceptionalist and informed – that should be acknowledged as a strength, not a deficiency.