Treść głównego artykułu

Abstrakt

Upowszechnienie mediów społecznościowych i rosnące zasoby danych typu big data tworzą zarówno nowe możliwości dla analiz przestrzeni zurbanizowanej, jak i wyzwania dla współczesnego procesu stanowienia polityki publicznej. Wśród źródeł użytecznych z tego punktu widzenia są między innymi zdjęcia publikowane na Instagramie. Mogą one łatwo się stać przedmiotem behawioralnej analizy jakości życia w przestrzeni miejskiej na podstawie próby złożonej z całej populacji i być wykonywane w formule desk research. Artykuł używa fotografii publikowanych na Instagramie w celu analizy eksploracyjnej użytkowania przestrzeni na przykładzie pięciu parków zlokalizowanych w Nowym Jorku. Umożliwia to określenie charakteru i sposobów postrzegania wybranych przestrzeni.

Słowa kluczowe

media społecznościowe big data badania jakościowe metoda Nowy Jork social media big data qualitative research method New York

Szczegóły artykułu

Jak cytować
Drozda, Łukasz . (2020) „Behawioralna analiza danych zastanych w badaniu przestrzeni zurbanizowanej jako narzędzie polityki publicznej: przypadek Instagrama”, Studia z Polityki Publicznej, 6(4(24), s. 61–77. doi: 10.33119/KSzPP/2019.4.3.

Metrics

Referencje

  1. Andrews, L. (2019). Public administration, public leadership and the construction of public value in the age of the algorithm and ‘big data’. Public Administration, 97 (2): 296–310.
  2. Appleton, J. (1975). Landscape Evaluation: The Theoretical Vacuum. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 66: 120–123.
  3. Appleyard, D. (1970). Styles and Methods of Structuring a City. Enviroment and Behavior, 2 (1): 100–117.
  4. Asongu, S., Odhiambo, N. M. (2017). Mobile Banking Usage, Quality of Growth, Inequality and Poverty in Developing Countries. AGDI Working Paper WP/17/046. Online: SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3070048 (accessed: 2.11.2019).
  5. Auer, M. R. (2011). The Policy Sciences of Social Media. The Policy Studies Journal, 39 (4): 709–736.
  6. Augé, M. (1995). Non-Places: Introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity. London: Verso.
  7. Bekkers, V., Edwards, A. (2013). Social media monitoring: Responsive governance in the shadow of surveillance? Government Information Quarterly, 30 (4): 335–342.
  8. Boy, J. D., Uitermark, J. (2016). How to Study the City on Instagram. PLoS ONE 11 (6): e0158161.
  9. Boyd, D. (2008). Facebook’s Privacy Trainwreck Exposure, Invasion, and Social Convergence.
  10. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 14 (1): 13–20.
  11. Ciesiółka, P. (2018). Urban Regeneration as a New Trend in the Development Policy in Poland. Quaestiones Geographicae, 37 (2): 109–123.
  12. Colley, A., Thebault-Spieker, J., Lin, Y. A., Degraen, D., Fischman, B., Häkkilä, J., Kuehl, K., Nisi, V., Nunes, N. J., Wenig, N., Wenig, D., Hecht, B., Schöning, J. (2017). The Geography of Pokémon GO: Beneficial and Problematic Effects on Places and Movement. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems: 1179–1192.
  13. David, J. (2002). Reclaiming the High Line. New York: Design Trust for Public Space.
  14. David, J., Hammond, R. (2011). High Line. The Inside Story of New York City’s Park in the Sky. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
  15. Davis, M. (2006). Planet of Slums. London: Verso.
  16. Drozda, Ł. (2017). Economic or social capital? Uberisation as an exemplification of the rent gap theory on the example of Poland. Warsaw Forum of Economic Sociology, 8 (2): 75–85.
  17. Drozda, Ł. (2018). The Gentrification Approach as an Analytical Tool in Assessing the Effects of Participatory Urban Policy. Urban Development Issues, 60 (1): 15–22.
  18. Drozda, Ł. (2019). Urbanistyka oddolna: Koszmar partycypacji a wytwarzanie przestrzeni. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.
  19. Fischer, E. (2010). The Geotaggers’ World Atlas. Online: http://bit.ly/33rlOuf (accessed: 2.11.2019).
  20. Fitch, R. (1993). The Assassination of New York. London: Verso.
  21. Frias-Martinez, V., Frias-Martinez E. (2014). Spectral clustering for sensing urban land use using Twitter activity. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 35: 237–245.
  22. Frias-Martinez, V., Soto, V., Hohwald, H., Frias-Martinez, E. (2012). Characterizing urban landscapes using geolocated Tweets. In: International Conference on Social Computing (SocialCom). Amsterdam, The Nederlands: 239–248.
  23. Gehl, J., Svarre, B. (2013). How to Study Public Life?. Washington: Island Press.
  24. Goldsmith S., Crawford S. (2014). The Responsive City: Engaging Communities Through Data-Smart Governance. San Fransisco: John Wiley & Sons.
  25. Gould, P., White, R. (2002). Mental Maps. London: Routledge.
  26. Harvey, D. (2010). The Enigma of Capital and the Crises of Capitalism. New York: Oxford University Press.
  27. Hendriks, C. M. (2012). Policy evaluation and public participation. In: Routledge Handbook of Public Policy. E. Araral Jr., S. Fritzen, M. Howlett, M Ramesh, W. Xun (Eds.). Abingdon: Routledge, 434–448.
  28. Hochman, N., Manovich, L. (2017). Zooming into an Instagram City: Reading the local through social media. First Monday. Online: www.firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4711/3698> (accessed: 2.11.2019).
  29. Hyle, M. A. (2016). Conceptual Reflection on Responsive Environmental Governance. International Journal of Public Administration, 39 (8): 610–619.
  30. James, J. (2012). Institutional and societal innovations in information technology for developing countries. Information Development, 28 (3): 183–188.
  31. Kayden, J. S. (2000). Privately Owned Public Space: The New York City Experience. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
  32. Kostkova, P. (2018). Disease surveillance data sharing for public health: the next ethical frontiers.
  33. Life Sciences, Society and Policy 14 (1). Online: https://bit.ly/2qi4 wR9 (accessed: 2.11.2019).
  34. Latour, B. (1996). Aramis or the Love of Technology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  35. Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.
  36. Malesińska, A. (2016). Twitter jako źródło wiedzy o stanie zdrowia polskiego społeczeństwa – ujęcie infomediologiczne. Kultura Popularna, 49 (3): 120–135.
  37. Marans, R. W., Stimson, R. J. (2011). Introduction In: Investigating Quality of Urban Life. Theory, Methods and Empirical Research. R. W. Marans, R. J. Stimson (Eds.). Dordrecht: Springer.
  38. Martin, R. (2001). Geography and public policy: the case of the missing agenda. Progress in Human Geography, 25 (2): 189–210.
  39. Mayer-Schönberger, B., Cukier, K. (2013). Big Data: A Revolution That Will Transform How We Live, Work, and Think. New York: Eamon Dolan/Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
  40. Millington, N. (2015). From urban scar to ‘park in the sky’: terrain vague, urban design, and the remaking of New York City’s High Line Park. Environment and Planning A 47 (11): 2324–2338.
  41. Moss, M. R., Nickling, W. G. (1980). Landscape evaluation in environmental assessment and land use planning. Environmental Management, 4 (1): 57–72.
  42. Ombler, K. (2018). Privacy – Getting it right. Public Sector, 41 (2): 22–23.
  43. Pang, B., Lee, L. (2008). Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval, 2 (1–2): 1–135.
  44. Paul, M. J., Dredze, M. (2011). You are what you Tweet: Analyzing Twitter for public health. The International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 20: 265–272.
  45. Pauwels, L. (2010). Visual sociology reframed: An analytical synthesis and discussion of visual methods in social and cultural research. Sociological Methods and Research, 38 (4): 545–581.
  46. Pearce, K. E. (2013). Phoning it in: Theory in mobile media and communication in developing countries. Mobile Media & Communication, 1 (1): 76–82.
  47. Polyák, L. (2017). A bundle of rights and obligations: Privately Owned Public Spaces. Cooperative City. Online: www.cooperativecity.org/2017/11/01/privately-owned-public-spaces/print/ (accessed: 2.11.2019).
  48. Roberts, H., Sadler, J., Chapman, L. (2018). The value of Twitter data for determining the emotional responses of people to urban green spaces: A case study and critical evaluation. Urban Studies, 56 (4): 818–835.
  49. Schwartz, R., Hochman, N. (2014). The Social Media Life of Public Spaces: Reading Places
  50. Through the Lens of Geo-Tagged Data. In: Locative Media. R. Wilken, G. Goggin (Eds.). New York: Routledge.
  51. Statistics Poland (2019). Household budget survey in 2018. Warsaw: Statistics Poland, Social Surveys Department.
  52. Sztompka, P. (2015). Visual sociology. In: International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. J. Wright (Ed.). Amsterdam: Elsevier: 191–196.
  53. Vanolo, A. (2014). Smartmentality: The Smart City as Disciplinary Strategy. Urban Studies, 51 (5): 883–898.
  54. Vasudevan, A. (2017). The Autonomous City: A History of Urban Squatting. London: Verso.
  55. Whyte, W. H. (2001). The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. New York: Project for Public Spaces.
  56. Zappavigna, M. (2016). Social media photography: construing subjectivity in Instagram images. Visual Communication, 15 (3): 271–292.