1 / 28

Improving Planning Support The use of planning support systems in spatial planning

Improving Planning Support The use of planning support systems in spatial planning. Guido Vonk, Henk Ottens, Stan Geertman, Paul Schot Geo-Information – Environmental Sciences Utrecht University g.vonk@geo.uu.nl. Contents. Introduction Theoretical approach Methods Results

koren
Download Presentation

Improving Planning Support The use of planning support systems in spatial planning

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Improving Planning SupportThe use of planning support systems in spatial planning Guido Vonk, Henk Ottens, Stan Geertman, Paul Schot Geo-Information – Environmental Sciences Utrecht University g.vonk@geo.uu.nl

  2. Contents • Introduction • Theoretical approach • Methods • Results • Instrumental quality approach • User acceptance approach • Diffusion approach • Interpretation • Conclusions • Recommendations

  3. What is spatial planning? • Planning is the activity that connects knowledge to action in the public domain” (Friedman, 1987) • Spatial planning concerns issues of land use • Many kinds of knowledge (tacit, explicit, experience, formal, informal etc.) • Mix of content, process, context analysis action

  4. Planning and complexity • Planning is very complex • multi objective and multi dimensional (Hall, 1975) • amount and diversity of information • political and power related aspects (Forester, 1989) • organize communication with stakeholders • Demand for support! (e.g. Van Rooy et al, 2004; Dammers et al, 2004, Stillwell et al, 1999)

  5. Planning Support Systems • Geo-information technology based instruments; • For storage and retrieval, visualization, communication, analysis and/or modelling of planning information; • Usually within a software package with a shared user interface • Dedicated to support those involved in planning to handle the complexity of their planning tasks • Examples:Environment Explorer, UrbanSim, CommunityViz, Index, Maptalk

  6. Problem • Ample supply of PSS • But PSS are in general not widely used in spatial planning practice • While planners do demand support to handle complexity of planning PSS Planning Practice

  7. Why PSS for support? • Common motive: belief in technology and rationality • Common objection: policy process too dynamic for technology, society too complex for rationalization Better motives for PSS: • Human cognitive capabilities are limited (e.g. Simon, 1958) • Empirical studies show an important role for rational analytical methods in policy in general (e.g. Amara et al, 2004) • Many communicative planning processes fail due to problems with knowledge handling (e.g. In ‘t Veld, 2001) • PSS support communicative and rational aspects of planning

  8. Research Aim: • To find explanations for the relatively small degree of application of PSS in spatial planning practice • Based upon this, make suggestions that could enhance application, assuming that the use of PSS could improve spatial planning

  9. PSS PSS Planningspraktijk Planningpractice Instrument Instrument Communicatie Gebruikers Communication User benadering benadering benadering approach approach approach quality kwaliteit diffusie diffusion acceptatie acceptance Theoretical approaches to the problem

  10. Research questions • Which instrumental quality related factors hamper practical application of PSS in spatial planning practice? • Which factors explain the limited acceptance of PSS in spatial planning practice? • Which factors explain the limited diffusion of PSS in spatial planning practice?

  11. Methods • Worldwide Web-based Surveys among experts • 90, resp. 30 respondents • Interviews and survey among intended users • 43 Planners, geo-info specialists, executives of provinces • Literature survey for system developer views • 58 PSS involved

  12. PSS PSS Planningpractice Planningspraktijk Instrument Instrument Communicatie Gebruikers Communication User benadering benadering benadering approach approach approach kwaliteit quality diffusie diffusion acceptance acceptatie Instrument approach: quality Which instrumental quality related factors hamper practical application of PSS in spatial planning practice?

  13. fit? fit? Planning task PSS-technology User Theoretical specificationof the instrument approach Instrument quality: Task-technology-user fit (Goodhue&Thompson, 1995)

  14. PSS Planning practice Results PSS in general applied infrequently because: • Instrument quality of PSS needs improvement: • Supply does not match demand (advanced vs simple) • Usefulness and Userfriendliness of advanced systems now insufficient

  15. PSS PSS Planningpractice Planningspraktijk Instrument Instrument Communicatie Gebruikers Communication User benadering benadering benadering approach approach approach kwaliteit quality diffusie diffusion acceptance acceptatie User approach: acceptance Which factors explain the limited acceptance of PSS in spatial planning practice?

  16. Awareness Consideration acceptance process Evaluation Decision Usage Theoreticalspecification user approach Technology Acceptance Model (Davis, 1986; Frambach&Schillewaert, 2002; Rogers, 2005) • Acceptance • Influence factors • Properties of: • Instrument • User • Organisation • Social environment • Externalenvironment • Facilitation

  17. PSS Planning practice Results PSS in general applied infrequently because: • Acceptanceof PSS in planning practice is limited: • Many different factors hinder acceptance • Little awareness of the existence and potential of PSS • Little experience with application of PSS • Little intention to start using PSS

  18. PSS PSS Planningspraktijk Planningpractice Instrument Instrument Communicatie Gebruikers Communication User benadering benadering benadering approach approach approach quality kwaliteit diffusie diffusion acceptatie acceptance Communication approach: diffusion

  19. Theoretical specification communication approach (Crossan et al, 1996)

  20. PSS Planning practice Results PSS in general applied infrequently because: • Diffusionof PSS hampered: • PSS are difficultly taken up by planning organizations • Bottom-up diffusionof PSS is most promising but often blocked • Miscommunication GI-specialists - planners • Mainly management supported strategies, fear of ICT investments

  21. InterpretationRefinement of the problem

  22. InterpretationPSS usage model

  23. Conclusions • Differences in degree of PSS usage: • Informing PSS are rather widely used • Communicating PSS are less widely used • Analyzing PSS are hardly used • Primary causes for less widespread usage are: • lack of experience • lack of awareness of existence and potential • lack of instrumental quality • Secundary causes for less widespread usage are: • hampered acceptance • hampered diffusion

  24. Recommendations Usage recommendations: • More attention is needed for the application environment instead of technology drive • The application environment should incorporate characteristics of the learning organization Development recommendations: • Incremental development of PSS, expanding from applications that are already used • Dedication to planning tasks and users e.g. through flexible toolboxes • Enhanced communication and cooperation with users in PSS development Research recommendations: • Study best-practices of PSS usage • Study benefits of PSS usage • Develop a planning model for PSS supported planning

  25. Discussion

  26. Why PSS II • Empirical studies show that rational analytical methods do have an important role in policy in general (Amara et al., 2004; Caplan, 1979; Merry, 1995). Rational analytical knowledge can provide explanations with quality and permanence. • Experiences show that many communicative planning processes suffer from: • excessive use of power; • uncritical use of experience knowledge; • insufficient attention for planning as a learning process; • insufficient use of scientific knowledge; often leading to ineffective plans, strong criticism towards governments and demands for more evidence-based policies

  27. Why PSS III • Communicative planning methods tend to overestimate human cognitive capabilities to handle societal complexity ad hoc in communicative processes. Most people can only deal with only three or four variables at a time, through only one or two iterations. To compensate, decision makers typically assume simple cause/effect relationships, rather than multiple interactions; simple and independent systems instead of strongly interlinked systems; and no time delays in the system (De Geus, 1988; Lyons, 2005).

  28. Methods • Developer perspectives  literature survey • 58 systems • Scored on intended planning task, information function, user • Main sources: Brail&Klosterman 2001, Geertman&Stillwell 2004 • User perspectives  group interviews & quick scan • 43 employees of 12 Dutch regional planning organizations • 12 interviews with 2-4 interviewees, 1½ hr per interview • Planners, geo-info specialists, executives • Expert perspectives  worldwide web-survey • 90, resp. 30 respondents • Open questions and closed questions • On the current status of PSS technology, its potential and on bottlenecks blocking the potential from being achieved

More Related