SUMMARY

Visualization for Public Involvement

Visualization, in its many forms, has long been recognized as essential to public involvement in transportation decision-making. As visualization technologies have matured and become more readily available, their potential to increase public understanding and inform dialog during planning and project development has expanded. Current trends in public involvement practice and technological advances have made it easier for state departments of transportation (DOTs) to show visualization products to a broad public audience.

An increased focus on meeting the needs of participants with limited English proficiency or lesser literacy has also prompted greater reliance on visual communications. However, technological advancements in how this information is communicated and accessed may have created limitations for some populations. Visualization strategies may limit access to or affect how materials are accessed by phone, tablet, computer, or in person (e.g., printed material and monitor displays).

Regardless of the transformative potential of newer visualization methods for public involvement, state DOT adoption of these methods has been uneven. This synthesis grew from the need to better understand the current state of the practice. The synthesis study included a review of pertinent literature and research (Chapter 2), an examination of current practice through a survey of state DOTs (Chapter 3), and follow-on in-depth interviews with four selected DOTs (Chapter 4). The resulting document describes current knowledge and practice.

The objective of this synthesis study was to document state DOT practices of visualization for public involvement throughout the life cycles of plans, programs, and projects. The synthesis study focused on the visualization methods used with the public, the role of these methods in the engagement process, and barriers to using advanced visualization technologies. Thirteen visualization methods were explored:

1. Conceptual sketches
2. Infographics
3. Videos
4. Drone imagery
5. 360-degree panoramic images
6. Photo simulations
7. Animated graphics/motion graphics
8. Three-dimensional (3D) static rendering
9. 3D animations
10. Four-dimensional (4D) sequential rendering
11. Real-time interactive 3D
12. Augmented reality (AR)
13. Virtual reality immersive (VR)

Specific information gathered during the synthesis included the following:

• The types of visualization products currently used by state DOTs in public involvement for plans, programs, and projects, including the extent and uses of interactive and immersive methods.
• The points in the project development sequence when these products are typically used and/or updated.
• State DOT objectives for using visualization in public involvement.
• How visualizations are presented to the public (e.g., in-person meetings, virtual meetings, websites, videos, printed materials or displays, and field-based use).
• Strategies for gathering feedback from participants (e.g., a website with visual products and comment form).
• Strategies to provide equitable access to and encourage engagement with visualization products.
• Plans for implementing those visualization strategies not currently being used.
• Accessibility features or accommodation provided to achieve ADA or Section 508 compliance.
• State DOT policies and procedures for the use of visualization for public involvement.
• Organizational structures and capabilities for visualization, the resources required, and the role of consultant versus in-house efforts.
• Methods to evaluate the effectiveness of visualizations.
• Barriers to the use of innovative forms of visualization.

The study method for this synthesis consisted of a literature review, an online survey sent to the 50 state DOTs and the District of Columbia DOT, and one-on-one interviews with practitioners at four DOTs. Few topic-related publications from the past 10 years were found during the literature review, so assessing what is known and not known about this topic was achieved primarily from the survey and in-depth interviews. Of the 50 state DOTs (plus the District of Columbia) surveyed, 39 responded to the survey, a 76% response rate. Although most respondents answered all survey questions, not every DOT answered each question; therefore, statistics shown in this report reflect the percentage of the DOTs answering the question.

Four state DOTs (i.e., California, Michigan, North Carolina, and Utah) were selected for case examples, with an in-depth interview to discuss current practices, tools, and methods used across the project life cycle. The interviews covered institutional and organizational policies that guide practice, as well as the practices themselves. The literature review results, a summary of survey responses, and highlights of the interviews are contained in Chapters 2, 3, and 4 of this synthesis, respectively. Complete, aggregated survey responses are provided in Appendix B.

The literature review (Chapter 2) uncovered limited published research on visualization for public involvement; most information on this topic was found in conference papers and webinars with case examples of visualization practices. Further, no single comprehensive reference on current practice for using visualization in transportation-related public involvement has been published in the past decade.

Notable findings from the survey (discussed in detail in Chapter 3), which explored 13 visualization methods of varying degrees of complexity, include the following:

• DOTs are using a combination of visualization methods, with limited plans for using more advanced technologies (e.g., 3D/4D renderings, AR, and VR) in the future.
• Visualization use with the public is most prevalent in the design phase, closely followed by the environmental review and concept development phases, and then the planning phase.

• The highest rated visualization objectives were “to gather public feedback on an initial concept or design” and “to help the public compare and provide feedback on alternatives.”
• The most common strategies used to gather feedback on information provided in visualizations included comment forms, formal testimony, and discussions with staff.
• Few DOTs have specific guidelines for visualization in public involvement, and nearly one-half of the 51 DOTs surveyed report that they have “no specific guidelines or procedures.”
• Methods used to evaluate the effectiveness of visualization for public involvement are primarily behavioral and qualitative, and informal processes are most common.
• Cost and funding availability and staff technical capabilities are the primary deterrents to using complex visualization methods.

As indicated in the online survey and interviews, state DOTs face the following challenges in their efforts to use visualization methods for public involvement:

• Funding limitations.
• Staff skills and capacity limits.
• Equity and accessibility constraints.
• Software and hardware procurement challenges.
• Organizational and institutional challenges, including decentralized public involvement and visualization staff.

To address the challenges identified and fill knowledge gaps, suggestions for future research are included in Chapter 5 and are highlighted here:

• Research to document the effectiveness of visualization in public involvement, with a focus on how well various forms of visualization or presentation methods help participants understand transportation conditions and choices and affect their ability to provide meaningful input.
• Development of guidance and training on visualization for public involvement, including information on cost-effective strategies and accessibility guidelines.
• Research on institutional factors affecting the implementation of visualization.
• Research on the implications of emerging trends in technology, information access, and public participation for visualization in public involvement, including artificial intelligence, generational shifts in information use, and new opportunities for collaborative development of visualizations.