Discussion and Conclusions

Discussion

The hand-drawn map illustrations from Phase Four varied quite a bit. Some depicted plants, animals, or a building in the community, some represented Muhuru Bay as a landform, and others drew Kenya amongst many other countries. These maps are useful because they serve as visual illustrations of the community and offer a different perspective than verbal explanations. It was this part of the project that I found most interesting because it was the one in which my questions about cultural spatial truths were most directly addressed…

Analyzing the maps drawn by the children brings to the surface something that was not readily apparent during the focus groups and photo collection phase and speaks to my research questions concerning the cultural context of the mapping project, how this context both shapes and is shaped by the use of PGIS technology, and whether or not this technology is capable of capturing cultural spatial truths.

The hand drawn maps make it clear that though our digital map includes much of what Muhuru youths think defines their community, the format is different: Our digital map represents the community narrative using lines and points on a representative landform. The children tell their community narrative in terms of things they encounter on the landform.

The children’s maps may indicate a disjuncture between our map—which told a story about Muhuru using a geographical lexicon—and their understandings of the community. The fact that their maps seems to use objects to taxonomize space, rather than lines and points, brings up an issue of medium specificity that was not obvious during analysis of the focus group phase or photo data collection phase because the participants were not granted the same freedom to visualize their version of the community narrative: They had to work within already established procedural frameworks (There are not that many ways to place stickers on a map or push a camera button.). Despite the fact that community members approved the final map as “accurate” in a community gathering we held at the end of the project, it is quite possible that the geographical map form is incapable of truly expressing Muhuru’s narrative. In the same way that it is difficult to depict lightness and fluffiness in a carved stone, it may be that the geographic map is not the ideal medium for manifesting the Muhurian story.

Conclusions

When considering what kind of cultural exchange occurred during the project, it seems that though our resulting PGIS map was based on and expressed Muhurian conceptions of their community, it translated these understandings into a foreign framework. This is not necessarily negative,—local residents seemed to enjoy having a new metaphor for making sense of their surroundings—but it does corroborate the idea that we were not able to avoid imposing our Western ideal of space on the Muhurians.

Initially, the idea of using Western ideas about mapping and GPS technology to launch a “participatory mapping” initiative in Muhuru Bay seemed a little scary to me. I was worried the project would end up as yet another example of Western imperialism, but now I realize it was never that simple. The citizens of Muhuru Bay seemed eager to learn about maps as a new way of looking at their environment to improve community health and are even continuing to map independently with the GPS units we left behind. PGIS technology was shared with, not forced upon the community. For this reason, in my view, the project functioned as a form of cultural sharing, not imperialism (Of course, one must not forget that I am biased by my own cultural lens.).

Despite its general success, the project would have been improved if we had spent more time talking with community members about the history of mapping and cartographic theory. As an illustration of what I mean, consider the following: It is one thing to know that 3x3=9, but it is quite another to be able to explain why. In the same way, emphasizing a conceptual understanding of maps would most likely result in the participatory mapping initiative being sustained and extended by local community members even more effectively, translating into long-term positive impacts.

Now that the data collected in focus groups, research games, and interviews is being displayed on a multi-layered map of Muhuru Bay, community leaders Broverman, Green, and Puffer will be able to discuss where HIV intervention programs could be placed to best serve females. I, however, am using my knowledge differently. As a pre-service teacher at Central Park School for Children, I applied what I learned about participatory mapping and culture to teach my 2nd graders how to use maps and new media for social action.