Authors: Julie Minde*, GMU
Topics: Geographic Theory, Applied Geography
Keywords: map, perceptions, legitimacy, conflict resolution, Chesapeake Bay watershed
Session Type: Paper
Start / End Time: 10:00 AM / 11:40 AM
Room: Grand Chenier, Sheraton, 5th Floor
Presentation File: No File Uploaded
This presentation discusses ongoing research on the relationship between stakeholders' perceptions of each other's maps/ mapping and the conflict resolution environment itself. Maps and mapping have long been an integral component of conflict resolution, albeit in various ways and to varying degrees. Although some research has been done on the use of maps and mapping as they relate to conflict and conflict resolution, one significant area that has not received adequate attention is legitimacy. Evaluation of perceptions of legitimacy in maps and mapping as part of conflict resolution can manifest as questions or judgments about who has the authority or right to map, what information sources and ways of knowing are legitimate, and what mapping processes and methods are legitimate. The case study environment used in this research is the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement. Methodology includes interviews, focus groups, participant observation, and document review.