Comparison of Geodesign Tools to Communicate Stakeholder Values

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Tessa Eikelboom ; Ron Janssen
• 关键词：Geodesign ; Stakeholders ; Spatial planning
• 刊名：Group Decision and Negotiation
• 出版年：2015
• 出版时间：November 2015
• 年：2015
• 卷：24
• 期：6
• 页码：1065-1087
• 全文大小：2,938 KB
• 参考文献：Alexander KA, Janssen R, Arciniegas G, O鈥橦iggins TG, Eikelboom T, Wilding TA (2012) Interactive marine spatial planning: siting tidal energy arrays around the Mull of Kintyre. Plos One 7(1):1鈥?CrossRef
  Arciniegas GA, Janssen R, Omtzigt N (2011) Map-based multicriteria analysis to support interactive land use allocation. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 25:1931鈥?947CrossRef
  Arciniegas G, Janssen R, Rietveld P (2012) Effectiveness of collaborative map-based decision support tools: results of an experiment. Environ Model Softw 1鈥?7
  Batty M (2008) Progress, predictions, and speculations on the shape of things to come. In: Brail RK (ed) Planning support systems for cities and regions. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, pp 3鈥?0
  Belton V, Stewart TJ (2002) Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Springer, BerlinCrossRef
  Bertin J (1983) Semiology of graphics: diagrams, networks, maps. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison
  Boroushaki S, Malczewski J (2010) Measuring consensus for collaborative decision-making: a GIS-based approach. Comput Environ Urban Syst 34:322鈥?32CrossRef
  Borst J (2010) Urban strategy: interactive spatial planning for sustainable cities. Infrastructure systems and services: next generation infrastructure systems for Eco-Cities (INFRA) (2010) third international conference on, pp 1鈥?. IEEE
  Brouns K, Eikelboom T, Jansen PC, Janssen R, Kwakernaak C, Van den Akker JJH, Verhoeven JTA (2014) Spatial analysis of soil subsidence in peat meadow areas in Friesland in relation to land and water management, climate change and adaptation. J environ manag plan. doi:10.鈥?007/鈥媠00267-014-0392-x
  Budic IZ (1994) Effectiveness of geographic information systems in local planning. J Am Plan Assoc 60(2):244鈥?63CrossRef
  Carton LJ (2007) Map making and map use in a multi-actor context. Spatial visualizations and frame conflicts in regional policymaking in the Netherlands. PhD thesis, TU Delft, Delft
  Carton LJ, Thissen WAH (2009) Emerging conflict in collaborative mapping: towards a deeper understanding? J Environ Manag 90:1991鈥?001CrossRef
  Crossland MD, Wynne BE, Perkins WC (1995) Spatial decision support systems: an overview of technology and a test of efficacy. Decis Support Syst 14:219鈥?35CrossRef
  Densham PJ (1991) Spatial decision support systems. Geogr inf syst 1:403鈥?12
  Dias E, Linde M, Rafiee A, Koomen E, Scholten H (2013) Beauty and brains: integrating easy spatial design and advanced urban sustainability models. In: Geertman S, Toppen F, Stillwell J (eds) Planning support systems for sustainable urban development. Springer, Berlin, pp 469鈥?84CrossRef
  Dong W, Ran J, Wang J (2012) Effectiveness and efficiency of map symbols for dynamic geographic information visualization. Cartogr Geogr Inf Sci 39:98鈥?06CrossRef
  Duhr S (2004) The form, style, and use of cartographic visualisations in European spatial planning: examples from England and Germany. Environ Plan A 36:1961鈥?989CrossRef
  Duhr S (2007) The visual language of spatial planning. Routledge, London
  Eikelboom T, Janssen R (2013) Interactive spatial tools for the design of regional adaptation strategies. J Environ Manag 127:S6鈥揝14CrossRef
  Eikelboom T, Janssen R (2015) Collaborative use of geodesign tools to support adaptation planning. J Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change (in press)
  Flaxman M (2010) Fundamentals of geodesign. In: Buhmann E, Pietsch M, Kretzler E (eds) Proceedings of digital landscape architecture conference 2010. Wichmann Verlag, Berlin Wichmann, pp 28鈥?1
  Fuchs S, Spachinger K, Dorner W, Rochman J, Serrhini K (2009) Evaluating cartographic design in flood risk mapping. Environ Hazards 8:52鈥?0CrossRef
  Garlandini S, Fabrikant S (2009) Evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of visual variables for geographic information visualization. In: Hornsby K, Claramunt C, Denis M, Ligozat G (eds) Spatial information theory. Springer, Berlin, pp 195鈥?11CrossRef
  Geertman S, Stillwell J (2004) Planning support systems: an inventory of current practice. Comput Environ Urban Syst 28:291鈥?10CrossRef
  Geertman S, Stillwell J (2009) Planning support systems: best practices and new methods. Springer, BerlinCrossRef
  Geertman S, Toppen F, (2013) Planning support systems for sustainable urban development. Springer, BerlinCrossRef
  Goodhue DL, Thompson RL (1995) Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS Q 213鈥?36
  Gudmundsson H (2011) Analysing models as a knowledge technology in transport planning. Transp Rev 31(2):145鈥?59CrossRef
  Herwijnen M (1999) Spatial decision support for environmental management. PhD thesis VU University, Amsterdam
  Inman D, Blind M, Ribarova I, Krause A, Roosenschoon O, Kassahun A, Scholten H, Arampatzis G, Abrami G, McIntosh B, Jeffrey P (2011) Perceived effectiveness of environmental decision support systems in participatory planning: evidence from small groups of end-users. Environ Model Softw 26:302鈥?09CrossRef
  Jankowski P, Andrienko N, Andrienko G (2001) Map-centred exploratory approach to multiple criteria spatial decision making. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 15:101鈥?27CrossRef
  Janssen R, Uran O (2003) Presentation of information for spatial decision support A survey on the use of maps by participants in quantitative water management in the IJsselmeer region, The Netherlands. Phys Chem Earth Parts A/B/C 28:611鈥?20CrossRef
  Janssen R, Eikelboom T, Brouns K, Verhoeven JTA (2014) Using geodesign to develop a spatial adaption strategy for south east Friesland. In: Dias E, Lee D, Scholten HJ (eds) Geodesign for land use planning. Springer, New York, pp 103鈥?16
  Jonsson D, Berglund S, Almstr枚m P, Algers S (2011) The usefulness of transport models in Swedish planning practice. Transp Rev 31(2):251鈥?65CrossRef
  Kraak M (2004) The role of the map in a Web-GIS environment. J Geogr Syst 6:83鈥?3CrossRef
  McCall MK, Dunn CE (2012) Geo-information tools for participatory spatial planning: fulfilling the criteria for 鈥檊ood鈥檊overnance? Geoforum 43:81鈥?4CrossRef
  Meng Y, Malczewski J (2009) Usability evaluation for a web-based public participatory GIS: a case study in Canmore, Alberta. Cartographie, Imagerie, SIG 483
  Nyerges T, Jankowski P, Tuthill D, Ramsey K (2006) Collaborative water resource decision support: results of a field experiment. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 96(4):699鈥?25CrossRef
  Ozimec AM, Natter M, Reutterer T (2010) Geographical information systems-based marketing decisions: effects of alternative visualizations on decision quality. J Mark 74:94鈥?10CrossRef
  Pelzer P, Geertman S, van der Heijden R, Rouwette E (2014) The added value of planning support systems: a practitioner鈥檚 perspective. Comput Environ Urban Syst 48:16鈥?7
  Pettit C, Klosterman R, Nino-Ruiz M, Widjaja I, Russo P, Tomko M, Sinnott R, Stimson R (2013) The online what if? Planning support system. In: Geertman S, Toppen F, Stillwell J (eds) Planning support systems for sustainable urban development, 195th edn. Springer, Berlin, pp 349鈥?62CrossRef
  Salter JD, Campbell C, Journeay M, Sheppard SRJ (2008) The digital workshop: exploring the use of interactive and immersive visualisation tools in participatory planning. J Environ Manag 90(6):2090鈥?101CrossRef
  Sidlar CL, Rinner C (2009) Utility assessment of a map-based online geo-collaboration tool. J Environ Manag 90(6):2020鈥?026CrossRef
  Slocum TA, McMaster RB, Kessler FC, Howard HH (2009) Thematic cartography and geovisualization. Pearson Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, New York
  Steinitz C (2012) A framework for geodesign: changing geography by design. ESRI Press, Redmond
  Te Br枚mmelstroet M (2012) Performance of planning support systems: what is it, and how do we report on it? Comput Environ Urban Syst 41:299鈥?08
  Vonk G, Geertman S, Schot P (2005) Bottlenecks blocking widespread usage of planning support systems. Environ Plan A 37:909鈥?24CrossRef
  Vonk G, Ligtenberg A (2010) Socio-technical PSS development to improve functionality and usability-sketch planning using a Maptable. Landsc Urban Plan 94:166鈥?74CrossRef
  Waddell P (2002) UrbanSim: modeling urban development for land use, transportation, and environmental planning. J Am Plan Assoc 68:297鈥?14CrossRef
  Xiao N, Armstrong MP (2012) Towards a multiobjective view of cartographic design. Cartogr Geogr Inf Sci 39:76鈥?7CrossRef
  
• 作者单位：Tessa Eikelboom (1)
  Ron Janssen (2)
  
  1. Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  2. Department of Spatial Economics, Faculty of Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  
• 刊物类别：Business and Economics
• 刊物主题：Economics
  Operation Research and Decision Theory
  Social Sciences
  
• 出版者：Springer Netherlands
• ISSN：1572-9907

文摘

Geodesign tools are increasingly used in collaborative planning. An important element in these tools is the communication of stakeholder values. As there are many ways to present these values it is important to know how these tools should be designed to communicate these values effectively. The objective of this study is to analyse how the design of the tool influences its effectiveness. To do this stakeholder values were included in four different geodesign tools, using different ways of ranking and aggregation. The communication performances of these tools were evaluated in an online survey to assess their ability to communicate information effectively. The survey assessed how complexity influence user performance. Performance was considered high if a user is able to complete an assignment correctly using the information presented. Knowledge on tool performance is important for selecting the right tool use and for tool design. The survey showed that tools should be as simple as possible. Adding ranking and aggregation steps makes the tools more difficult to understand and reduces performance. However, an increase in the amount of information to be processed by the user also has a negative effect on performance. Ranking and aggregation steps may be needed to limit this amount. This calls for careful tailoring of the tool to the task to be performed. For all tools it was found maybe the most important characteristic of the tools is that they allow for trial and error as this increases the opportunity for experimentation and learning by doing. Keywords Geodesign Stakeholders Spatial planning