Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
However, Lange (2001) points out constraints in the use of the produced images,
in that “even the best simulation is only a representation of the real world. A vir-
tual walk-through is not the same and will never be the same as a real walk in na-
ture” (Lange 2001, p. 179). Nevertheless, Lange argues, visualisation techniques
could support “better and more informed decisions about the spatial organisation
of the landscape” (Lange 2001, p. 180) and facilitate “improved communication
among experts and lay persons, i.e. among planners and the persons affected by
planning” (ibid.). A critical point for Lange and other scholars is the timing of im-
age distribution, since at that time project simulations were only published after
public negotiations and environmental impact assessments took place. Lange ar-
gues that project simulation should be available from the start of the procedure
(Lange 1994: 103). In the case of nuclear power licensing in Finland, manipulated
images have been distributed through websites, bulk mail and newspapers from an
early stage of the assessment procedure. In the case of the company Fennovoima,
several candidate sites have been assessed, and all sites have been clipped in sepa-
rate images. However, there have been no opportunities for residents to influence
the choice of a site or the choice of plant design.
Al-Kodmany (1999) presents a rather different approach developed in small-
scale urban planning. Al-Kodmany (1999, p. 38) agrees that “visualization is the
key to effective public participation because it is the only common language to
which all participants - technical and non-technical - can relate”
1
. However, he
refers to a rather different use of imaging technology, when simulations are a re-
sult of collaborative planning rather than a pre-produced sketch to be fed into the
process at some point of time. In his study, Al-Kodmany reviews several different
visualisation methods applied in a collaborative planning scheme. He concludes
that interactive planning with different methods (GIS, artist's free-hand sketches,
and photo-manipulation using computer imaging) required a range of sometimes
expensive technological devices, and their failures often slowed down the creative
process. Nevertheless, seeing their own suggestions become visible almost imme-
diately after proposing them encouraged residents to continue participation. Al-
Kodmany concludes, “[t]he designs that were created by the planners and design-
ers reflected the community's wishes and respected their cultural heritage” (Al-
Kodmany 1999, p. 45). Notwithstanding these potential benefits, few project de-
velopments may be able or willing to include a procedure as presented by Al-
Kodmany due to time, cost and personnel constraints.
1
Merlau-Ponty (1989) discusses how blind people perceive the environment. In contrast to
Al-Kodmany (1999), who does not mention the possibility of not being able to see, Mer-
leau-Ponty uses the example of blind persons to support his argument of interacting
senses.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search