Anthropocentric problem solving in planning and design, with analytic hierarchy process

Journal of Architectural and Planning Research

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 107-120

  Banai, Reza ^a  

^a University of Memphis   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS; PLANNING METHOD; PLANNING THEORY;

EID: 20444446649     PISSN: 07380895     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Ackoff R (1979a) Resurrecting the future of operational research. Journal of the Operational Research Society 30:189-199.
2. Ackoff R (1979b) The future of operational research is past. Journal of the Operational Research Society 30:93-104.
3. Banai R (1998) Transit-oriented development suitability analysis by the analytic hierarchy process and a geographic information system: A prototype procedure. Journal of Public Transportation 2(1):45-67.
4. Banai-Kashani R (1988) Toward a synthetic measure of good settlement form. Planning and Design 15:399-412.
5. Banai-Kashani R (1989) A new method for site suitability analysis: The analytic hierarchy process. Environmental Management 13(6):685-693.
6. Bennett RJ (1985) Quantification and relevance. In RJ Johnson (Ed.), The future of geography. New York: Routledge, pp. 211-224.
7. Berry BJL (1978) Notes on an expedition to Planland. In RW Burchell and G Sternlieb (Eds.), Planning theory in the 1980s. New Brunswick: Center for Urban Policy Research, pp. 201-208.
8. Bhaskar R (1989) Reclaiming reality: A critical introduction to contemporary philosophy. London: Verso.
9. Calthorpe P (1993) The next American metropolis. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
10. Churchman CW (1979) The systems approach and its enemies. New York: Basic Books.
11. Collins MG, Steiner FR, Rushman MJ (2001) Land-use suitability analysis in the United States: Historical development and promising technological achievements. Environmental Management 28(5):611-621.
12. Dandekar HC (1988) Qualitative methods. In A Cathanese and J Snyder (Eds.), Urban planning. Chicago: McGraw-Hill, pp. 75-92.
13. Dandekar H, Clark GR (1992) Integrating communication skills and planning techniques. Journal of Planning Education and Research 11:141-150.
14. Davidoff P, Reiner T (1962) A choice theory of planning. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 31:331-338.
15. Erkut E, Moran SR (1991) Locating obnoxious facilities in the public sector: An application of the analytic hierarchy process to municipal landfill siting decisions. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 25(2):89-102.
16. Expert Choice (2000) Advanced decision support software. Arlington, VA: Expert Choice.
17. Forester J (1980) Critical theory and planning practice. Journal of the American Planning Association 46:275-286.
18. Forman EH (1993) Facts and fictions about the analytic hierarchy process. Mathematical and Computer Modelling 17(4/5):19-26.
19. Healey P (1992) Planning through debate: The communicative turn in planning theory. Town Planning Review 63(2):143-162.
20. Innes JE (1998) Challenge and creativity in post-modern planning. Town Planning Review 69(2):v-ix.
21. Katz P (Ed.) (1994) The new urbanism: Toward an architecture of community. New York: McGraw-Hill.
22. Landis J, Zhang M (1998a) The second generation of the California urban futures model: Part I. Environment and Planning B 25:795-824.
23. Landis J, Zhang M (1998b) The second generation of the California urban futures model: Part II. Environment and Planning B 30:657-666.
24. Levine J, et al. (1999) Stakeholder preferences in advanced public transportation system planning. Journal of Public Transportation 2(2):25-45.
25. Linstone H, Turrof M (Eds.) (1975) The Delphi method. New York: Addison-Wesley.
26. Lynch K (1984) Good city form. Cambridge: MIT Press.
27. Malczewski J (1996) AGIS-based approach to multiple criteria group decision-making. International Journal of Geographic Information Systems 10(8):955-971.
28. Miller GA (1956) The magical number seven plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychology Review 13:81-97.
29. Saaty RW (1987) The analytic hierarchy process - What it is and how it is used. Mathematical Modelling 9:161-176.
30. Saaty TL (1977a) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 15(3):234-281.
31. Saaty TL (1977b) Scenarios and priorities in transport planning: Application to the Sudan. Transportation Research 11:343-350.
32. Saaty TL (1990) Physics as a decision theory. European Journal of Operational Research 48:98-104.
33. Saaty TL (1994) Highlights and critical points in the theory and application of the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research 74:426-447.
34. Saaty TL (1996) Multicriteria decision making. Pittsburgh: RWS Publications.
35. Saaty TL (1998) Reflections and projections on creativity in operations research and management science: A pressing need for a shift in paradigm. INFORMS 46(1):9-16.
36. Saaty TL, Vargas LG (1979) Estimating technological coefficients by the analytic hierarchy process. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 13(6):333-336.
37. Saaty TL, Vargas LG (1991) Prediction, projection and forecasting. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
38. Saaty TL, Vargas LG (2001) Models, methods, concepts & applications of the analytic hierarchy process. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
39. Schmoldt DL, et al. (Eds.) (2001) The analytic hierarchy process in natural resource and environmental decision making. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
40. Simon H (1981) The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge: MIT Press.
41. Simon H (1983) Reason in human affairs. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
42. Srisoepardani KP (2000) Evaluation of group decision making methods. Pittsburgh: Expert Choice.
43. Vargas LG (1987) Priority theory and utility theory. Mathematical Modelling 9:381-385.
44. Wegener M (1998) GIS and spatial planning. Environment and Planning B 25(Anniversary Issue):48-52.