## 5 Discussion, Conclusion and Recommendations  
### Discussion  
Access to and integration of information was improved by using virtual globes and their data. Data access was obviously an issue in the two grassroots examples, because they had limited access to the data of the challenged projects. In the \"Vancouver Views\" case, user-generated content was modeled, referencing the City's Open Data, and then placed into Google's 3D Vancouver city model. Incomparison, the collaboration with Kimberley provided the KCAP with straight forward data access. In the KCAP, non GIS spatial data from the city and modeling outputs from diverse external experts, including PCIC, consultants, and UBC, were brought together, with virtual globes as the shared 3D platform [3, 51]. It may be suggested that this integrative power is one of the biggest potentials of virtual globes as tools in landscape planning. However, such integration also requires more interdisciplinary work among various environmental research disciplines, as [PERSON] and [PERSON] [26] have argued. Furthermore, it is difficult to assess the quality and the origin of the various data due to the lack of metadata and data quality tools in most virtual globes. However, the visualizations were not made available in an interactive form online due to unsolved issues of data ownership and liability, as well as concerns about unmediated use and potential misunderstandings. The challenge now is to build reciprocal processes that validate data, to develop collaborative networks of institutional, business, and community stakeholders, and to solve the related legal issues [3]. The landscape visualization literature, e.g., [PERSON] [29], had previously shown that 3D landscape visualizations can raise interest and awareness. The quantitative ranking in the KCAP showed that this is particularly true for virtual globes: Virtual globes caught the interest of most people, but it also evoked a bimodal response, with people either ranking it very high or very low. Qualitative data from the KCAP shows that the virtual globe visualization made intangible issues such as future climate change impacts tangible and helped the understanding of complex relationships between different themes, e.g. between mountain pine beetle spread and the risk of debris floods [51]. The qualitative interviews provide hints that some participants ranked virtual globes significantly lower because they found the underlying assumptions and explanations easier to understand from the posters. Previous research by [PERSON] [17] has also suggested that users with expert map reading skills prefer maps and rank realistic landscape visualizations such as the virtual globe imagery lower than lay people do. Future research is suggested to further investigate group differences and the possible impact of different learning styles and the cognitive load of virtual globes [20, 21]. In the KCAP case study, affective and evaluative responses have been documented through observations and interviews. In the KCAP, the animated output of the fire spread model evoked a perceptible reaction among the audience at the public open house. Although the data had been known before, the clarification of the visual data, and \"seeing\" the possible wildfire, symbolized through red color, and animated over time, increased the dramatic impact. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [1] and [PERSON] [14] raise concerns that such drama could lead to value-laden responses that potentially overwhelm cognitive responses. In this case, the animation was embedded in a wider public discussion with the fire chief at the table so that people were not left alone but could learn more about possible solutions such as fire-smart building improvements. The issue of representativeness has to be broken down to different scales.