Planning support: From systems to science

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Urban Design and Planning

Volumn 166, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 50-59

  Geertman, Stan ^a  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Design methods aids; Knowledge management; Planning and scheduling

Indexed keywords

SCHEDULING;

DESIGN METHOD; EXPLOSIVE GROWTH; PLANNING AND SCHEDULING; PLANNING SUPPORT; PLANNING SUPPORT SYSTEMS; PLANNING TASKS; PRIME-FOCUS; RESEARCH AGENDA;

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT;

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; DESIGN METHOD; INFORMATION MANAGEMENT; KNOWLEDGE; PLANNING PRACTICE;

EID: 84878021811     PISSN: 17550793     EISSN: 17550807     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1680/udap.11.00045     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Batty M (1995) Planning support systems and the new logic of computation. Regional Development Dialogue 16(1): 1-17.
2. Batty M (2004) Dissecting the streams of planning history: technology versus policy through models. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 31(3): 326-330.
3. Beaudry A and Pinsonneault A (1999) Advancing the Theory of Infusion: An Appropriation Model of the Infusion Process. Ecole des Hautes Etudes des Commerciales de Montreal, Montreal, Canada, Cahier du GreSI no 99-06.
4. Beaudry A and Pinsonneault A (2001) IT-induced adaptation and individual performance: a coping acts model. Proceedings of 22nd International Conference on Information Systems, New Orleans. See http://aisel.aisnet.org//icis2001/58 (accessed 07/12/2012).
5. Beaudry A and Pinsonneault A (2005) Understanding user responses to information technology: a coping model of user adaptation. MIS Quarterly 29(3): 493-524.
6. Bertolotto M, Carswell JD, McLoughlin E, O'Sullivan D and Wilson D (2006) Using sketches and knowledge bases for geospatial image retrieval. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 30(1): 29-53.
7. Biermann S (2003) An infrastructure potential cost model for integrated land use and infrastructure planning. In Planning Support Systems in Practice (Advances in Spatial Sciences) (Geertman S and Stillwell J (eds)). Springer, Berlin, Germany, pp. 465-486.
8. Brail R (ed.) (2008) Planning Support Systems for Cities and Regions. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA, USA.
9. Brail R and Klosterman R (eds) (2001) Planning Support Systems: Integrating Geographic Information Systems, Models, and Visualization Tools. ESRI Press, Redlands, CA, USA.
10. Brinberg D and McGrath JE (1985) Validity and the Research Process. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA, USA.
11. Carsjens GJ, van Lammeren RJA and Ligtenberg A (2003) STEPP: A strategic tool for integrating environmental aspects into planning procedures. In Planning Support Systems in Practice (Advances in Spatial Sciences) (Geertman S and Stillwell J (eds)). Springer, Berlin, Germany, pp. 139-154.
12. Carver S (2003) The future of participatory approaches using geographic information: developing a research agenda for the 21st century. URISA Journal 15(1): 61-71.
13. Chapin TS (2003) Revolutionizing the core: GIS in the planning curriculum. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 30(4): 565-573.
14. Davis F (1986) A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-user Information Systems: Theory and Results. PhD thesis, MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA.
15. Deal B and Pallathucheril V (2009) A use-driven approach to large-scale urban modelling and planning support. In Planning Support Systems: Best Practice and New Methods (Advances in Spatial Sciences) (Geertman S and Stillwell J (eds)). Springer, Berlin, Germany, pp. 29-52
16. Delden H Van and Hagen-Zanker A (2009) New ways of supporting decision making: linking qualitative storylines with quantitative modelling. In Planning Support Systems: Best Practice and New Methods (Advances in Spatial Sciences) (Geertman S and Stillwell J (eds)). Springer, Berlin, Germany, pp. 347-368.
17. DeSanctis G and Poole MS (1994) Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science 5(2): 121-147.
18. Dishaw M and Strong D (1999) Extending the technology acceptance model with task-technology fit constructs. Information & Management 36(1): 9-21.
19. Geertman S (2006) Potentials for planning support: a planningconceptual approach. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 33(6): 863-881.
20. Geertman S and Stillwell J (eds) (2003) Planning Support Systems in Practice (Advances in Spatial Sciences). Springer, Berlin, Germany.
21. Geertman S and Stillwell J (2004) Planning support systems: an inventory of current practice. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 28(4): 291-310.
22. Geertman S and Stillwell J (eds) (2009) Planning Support Systems: Best Practice and New Methods (Advances in Spatial Sciences). Springer, Berlin, Germany.
23. Getis A, Drummy P, Gartin J et al. (2000) Geographic information science and crime analysis. URISA Journal 12(2): 7-14.
24. Göçmen ZA and Ventura SJ (2010) Barriers to GIS use in planning. Journal of the American Planning Association 76(2): 172-183.
25. Goodchild M (1999) Future directions in geographic information science. Geographic Information Sciences 5(1): 1-8.
26. Goodchild M (2004) GIScience, geography, form, and process. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 94(4): 709-714.
27. Goodhue DL and Thompson RL (1995) Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS Quarterly 19(2): 213-235.
28. Hamby A, Piercea M and Brinberg D (2010) A conceptual framework to structure research in strategic and social entrepreneurship. Journal of Asia-Pacific Business 11(3): 166-178.
29. Harris B (1989) Geographic information systems: research issues for URISA. Proceedings of the 1989 Annual Conference of the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association, Boston, MA, USA IV: 1-14.
30. Hopkins LD and Knaap GJ (2000) Portland, Oregon: an inventory approach and its implications for database design. In Monitoring Land Supply with Geographic Information Systems; Theory, Practice, and Parcel-Based Approaches (Vernez-Moudon A and Hubner M (eds)). Wiley, New York, NY, USA, pp. 67-88.
31. Jankowski P and Nyerges T (2003) Towards a framework for research on geographic information-supported participatory decision-making. URISA Journal 15(1): 9-17.
32. Klosterman RE (1998) Computer applications in planning. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design Anniversary issue, 32-36.
33. Klosterman RE (2001) Planning support systems: a new perspective on computer-aided planning. In Planning Support Systems: Integrating Geographic Information Systems, Models, and Visualization Tools (Brail RK and Klosterman RE (eds)). ESRI Press, Redlands, CA, USA, pp. 1-23.
34. Lee DR (1973) Requiem for large-scale models. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 39(3): 163-178.
35. MacEachren AM and Brewer I (2004) Developing a conceptual framework for visually-enabled geocollaboration. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 18(1): 1-34.
36. Moore T (2008) Planning support systems: What are practicing planners looking for? In Planning Support Systems for Cities and Regions Brail R (ed.). Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA, USA, pp. 231-256.
37. Nedovic-Budic Z (2000) Geographic information science implications for urban and regional planning. URISA Journal 12(2): 81-93.
38. Obermeyer NJ and Pinto JK (1994) Managing Geographic Information Systems. Guilford Press, New York, NY, USA.
39. Pettit C, Shyy TK and Stimson R (2003) An on-line planning support system to evaluate urban and regional planning scenarios. In Planning Support Systems in Practice (Advances in Spatial Sciences) (Geertman S and Stillwell J (eds)). Springer, Berlin, Germany, pp. 331-348.
40. Poole SM and DeSanctis G (2002) Structuration theory in information systems research: methods and controversies. In The Handbook for Information Systems Research (Whitman ME and Woszczynski AB (eds)). Idea Group Publishing, London, UK.
41. Radke J, Cova T, Sheridan M et al. (2000) Application challenges for geographic information science: implications for research, education, and policy for emergency preparedness and response. URISA Journal 12(2): 15-30.
42. Rainis R, Shamsudin K, Jaafar MN and Shah HH (2003) Development of the Klang Valley regional planning support system. In Planning Support Systems in Practice (Advances in Spatial Sciences) (Geertman S and Stillwell J (eds)). Springer, Berlin, Germany, pp. 391-408.
43. Reilly J (2003) The New Jersey (USA) growth allocation model: development, evaluation and extension. In Planning Support Systems in Practice (Advances in Spatial Sciences) (Geertman S and Stillwell J (eds)). Springer, Berlin, Germany, pp. 373-390.
44. Rogers E (2003) Diffusion of Innovations. Free Press, New York, NY, USA.
45. Snyder K (2003) Tools for community design and decisionmaking. In Planning Support Systems in Practice (Advances in Spatial Sciences) (Geertman S and Stillwell J (eds)). Springer, Berlin, Germany, pp. 99-120.
46. UCGIS (University Consortium for Geographic Information Science) (2002) GIS and Society. http://ww.ucgis.org/priorities/research/2002researchagenda.htm (accessed 25/ 06/2012).
47. Uran O and Janssen R (2003) Why are spatial decision support systems not used? Some experiences from the Netherlands. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 27(5): 511-526.
48. Venkatesh V, Morris M, Davis G and Davis F (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly 27(3): 425-478.
49. Vonk GA, Geertman S and Schot P (2005) Bottlenecks blocking widespread usage of planning support systems. Environment and Planning A 37(5): 909-924.
50. Vonk G, Geertman S and Schot P (2007) A SWOT analysis of planning support systems. Environment and Planning A 39(7): 1699-1714.
51. Voss AI, Denisovich P, Gatalsky K et al. (2004) Evolution of a participatory GIS. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 28(6): 635-651.
52. Wenger E (1998) Communities of Practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
53. Wiggins L, Deuker K, Ferreira J et al. (2000) Application challenges for geographic information science: implications for research, education and policy for transportation planning and management. URISA Journal 12(2): 51-59.