Adoption and Use of Software in Land Use Planning Practice: A Multiple-Country Study

International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2018, Pages 57-72

  Russo, Patrizia ^a,b   Lanzilotti, Rosa ^c   Costabile, Maria Francesca ^c   Pettit, Christopher James ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^b Global Spatial Network Board   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BARI   (Italy)

^d UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; USER INTERFACES;

AUSTRALIA; COMPUTER BASED TOOLS; CURRENT SITUATION; FOCUS GROUPS; LAND USE PLANNING; PLANNING SUPPORT SYSTEMS; RELEVANT FEATURES; SWITZERLAND;

LAND USE;

EID: 85019675652     PISSN: 10447318     EISSN: 15327590     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10447318.2017.1327213     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Ackerman, M. S., (2000). The intellectual challenge of CSCW: The gap between social requirements and technical feasibility. Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 15(2), 179–203.
2. Allen, E., (2008). Clicking toward better outcomes: Experience with INDEX. In R. K., Brail (Ed.), Planning support systems for cities and regions (pp. 139–166). Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
3. Arciniegas, G., Janssen, R., & Rietveld, P., (2013). Effectiveness of collaborative map-based decision support tools: Results of an experiment. Environmental Modelling & Software, 39, 159–175.
4. Ardito, C., Buono, P., Caivano, D., Costabile, M. F., & Lanzilotti, R., (2014). Investigating and promoting UX practice in industry: An experimental study. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 72 (6), 542–551.
5. Ardito, C., Buono, P., Costabile, M. F., Lanzilotti, R., & Piccinno, A., (2012). End users as co-designers of their own tools and products. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 23 (2), 78–90.
6. Bak, J. O., Nguyen, K., Risgaard, P., & Stage, J., (2008). Obstacles to usability evaluation in practice: A survey of software development organizations. In Proceedings of 5th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction (NordiCHI ’08) (pp. 23–32), New York, NY.
7. Batty, M., (1995). Planning support systems and the new logic of computation. Regional Development Dialogue, 16, 1–17.
8. Bonner, K. (2002). Understanding placemaking: Economics, politics and everyday life in the culture of cities. Canadian Journal of Urban Research, 11(1), 1–16.
9. Brail, R. K., (2006). Planning support systems evolving: When the rubber hits the road. In J. Portugali (Ed.), Complex artificial environments (pp. 307–317). Berlin Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
10. Brits, A., Burke, M., & Li, T., (2014). Improved modelling for urban sustainability assessment and strategic planning: Local government planner and modeller perspectives on the key challenges. Australian Planner, 51 (1), 76–86.
11. Brömmelstroet, M. T., (2013). Performance of planning support systems: 1355 What is it, and how do we report on it? Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 41, 299–308.
12. Brömmelstroet, M. T., & Bertolini, L., (2012). Transparency, flexibility, simplicity: From buzzwords to strategies for real PSS improvement. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 36 (1), 96–104.
13. Cabitza, F., Fogli, D., & Piccinno, A., (2014a). “Each to His Own”: Distinguishing activities, roles and artifacts in EUD practices. In L., Caporarello, B., Di Martino, & M., Martinez (Eds.), Smart organizations and smart artifacts (pp. 193–205). Lucerne, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
14. Cabitza, F., Fogli, D., & Piccinno, A., (2014b). Fostering participation and co-evolution in sentient multimedia systems. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 25 (6), 684–694.
15. Cabitza, F., & Gesso, I., (2011). Web of active documents: An architecture for flexible electronic patient records. Communications in Computer and Information Science, 127, 44–56.
16. Cabitza, F., & Simone, C., (2010). WOAD: A framework to enable the end-user development of coordination-oriented functionalities. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 22 (2), 1–20.
17. Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory. London, UK: Sage.
18. Choe, P., Kim, C., Lehto, M., Lehto, X., & Allebach, J., (2006). Evaluating and improving a self-help technical support web site: Use of focus group interviews. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 21 (3), 333–354.
19. Clarke, K., Gazulis, N., Dietzel, C., & Goldstein, N., (2007). A decade of SLEUTHing: Lessons learned from applications of a cellular automation land use change model. In P., Fisher (Ed.), Classics from IJGIS. Twenty years of the international journal of geographical information systems and science (pp. 413–425). Boca Raton, FL: Taylor and Francis, CRC.
20. Costabile, M. F., Fogli, D., Mussio, P., & Piccinno, A., (2007). Visual interactive systems for end-user development: A model-based design methodology. IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part A-Systems and Humans, 37 (6), 1029–1046.
21. Couclelis, H., (2005). “Where has the future gone?” Rethinking the role of integrated land-use models in spatial planning. Environment and Planning A, 37 (8), 1353–1371.
22. Cruzes, D. F., & Dybå, T., (2011). Recommended steps for thematic synthesis in software engineering. In International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM 2011), Banff, Alberta, Canada.
23. Dawkins, C., (2016). Preparing planners: The role of graduate planning education. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 2, 1–13.
24. Diaz, P., Pipek, V., Ardito, C., Jensen, C., Aedo, I., & Boden, A., (2015). End-user development. In Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium, (IS-EUD 2015) (Vol. 9083), Berlin Heidelberg, Germany.
25. Dittrich, Y., John, M., Singer, J., & Tessem, B., (2007). For the special issue on qualitative software engineering research. Information and Software Technology, 49 (6), 531–539.
26. Edwards, M., & Bates, L., (2011). Planning’s core curriculum: Knowledge, practice, and implementation. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 31 (2), 172–183.
27. Fischer, G., Piccinno, A., & Ye, Y., (2008). The ecology of participants in co-evolving socio-technical environments. In P., Forbrig & F., Paterno’ (Eds.), Engineering interactive systems (pp. 279–286). Berlin Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
28. Fogli, D., & Piccinno, A., (2013). Co-evolution of end-user developers and systems in multi-tiered proxy design problems. In Y., Dittrich, M., Burnett, A., Morch, & D., Redmiles (Eds.), End-user development (pp. 153–168). Berlin Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
29. Greenlee, A., Edwards, M., & Anthony, J., (2015). Planning skills: An examination of supply and local government demand. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 35 (2), 161–173.
30. Guzman, E., & Maalej, W., (2014). How do users like this feature? A fine grained sentiment analysis of app reviews. In 22nd International Requirements Engineering Conference IEEE (pp. 153–162), Karlskrona, Sweden.
31. Houghton, K., Miller, E., & Foth, M., (2014). Integrating ICT into the planning process: Impacts, opportunities and challenges. Australian Planner, 51 (1), 24–33.
32. ISO, 9241. (2010). ISO/IEC 9241-210: Ergonomics of Human-System Interaction - Part 210: Human-Centred Design for Interactive Systems.
33. Ji, Y. G., & Yun, M. H., (2006). Enhancing the minority discipline in the IT industry: A survey of usability and user-centered design practice. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 20 (2), 117–134.
34. Kim, J., Giacomin, R., & Macredie, R., (2014). A qualitative Study of Stakeholders’ perspectives on the social network service environment. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 30 (12), 965–976.
35. Klosterman, R. E., (1999). The what if? Collaborative planning support system. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 26 (3), 393–408.
36. Kunze, A., Burkhard, R., Gebhardt, S., & Tuncer, B., (2012). Visualization and decision support tools. Urban Planning, 279–298.
37. Lieberman, H., Paternò, F., & Wulf, W., (Eds). (2006). End user development. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
38. Linders, D., (2012). From e-government to we-government: Defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of social media. Government Information Quarterly, 29 (4), 446–454.
39. Nielsen, J., (1993). Usability engineering. Boston, MA: Academic Press.
40. Pelzer, P., (2015). Usefulness of Planning Support Systems: Conceptual perspectives and practitioners’ experiences (PhD thesis). Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning. Retrieved March 17, 2017, from https://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/1874/312867/Pelzer.pdf%3Bsequence=1
41. Pelzer, P., Geertman, S., van der Heijden, R., & Rouwette, E., (2014). The added value of planning support systems: A practitioner’s perspective. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 48, 16–27.
42. Pettit, C. J., Glackin, S., Trubka, R., Ngo, T., Lade, O., Newton, P., & Newman, P., (2014). A co-design prototyping approach for building a precinct planning tool. ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 2(2), 47.
43. Pettit, C. J., Klosterman, R. E., Delaney, P., Whitehead, A. L., Kujala, H., Bromage, A., & Nino-Ruiz, M., (2015). The online what if? Planning support system: A land suitability application in Western Australia. Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy, 8 (2), 93–112.
44. Pettit, C. J., Widjaja, I., Russo, P., Sinnott, R., Stimson, R., & Tomko, M., (2012). Visualisation support for exploring urban space and place. ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, I-2, 153–158.
45. Preece, J., Sharp, H. & Rogers, Y. (2015). Interaction design: beyond human-computer. West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
46. Raskin, J., (2000). The humane interface: New directions for designing interactive systems. New York, NY: Addison-Wesley Professional.
47. Rosenbaum, S., Rohn, J. A., & Humburg, J., (2000). A toolkit for strategic usability: Results from workshops, panels, and surveys. In Proceedings of SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 00), The Hague, The Netherlands (pp. 337–344), New York, NY.
48. Russo, P., (2017). Usability of Planning Support Systems: Analysing Adoption and Use in Planning Practice (PhD Thesis). University of Melbourne (under Review).
49. Russo, P., Costabile, M. F., Lanzilotti, R., & Pettit, C. J., (2015). Usability of planning support systems: An evaluation framework. In S., Geertman, J., Ferreira, R., Goodspeed, & J., Stillwell (Eds.), Planning support systems and smart cities (pp. 337–353). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
50. Russo, P., Lanzilotti, R., & Pettit, C. J., (2017). Towards satisfying practitioners in using planning support systems. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems (Under Review).
51. Salter, J. D., Campbell, C., Journeay, M., & Sheppard, S. R. J., (2009). The digital workshop: Exploring the use of interactive and immersive visualisation tools in participatory planning. Journal of Environmental Management, 90 (6), 2090–2101.
52. Schoen, D. A., (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.
53. Seaman, C. B., (1999). Qualitative methods in empirical studies of software engineering. Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions, 25 (4), 557–572.
54. Sinnott, R., Bayliss, C., Bromage, A., Galang, G., Grazioli, G., Greenwood, P., … Widjaja, I., (2014). The Australia urban research gateway. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 27 (2), 358–375.
55. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J., (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
56. Sutcliffe, A., (2000). Requirements analysis for socio-technical system design. Information Systems, 25 (3), 213–233.
57. Vonk, G., (2006). Improving Planning Support. The use of Planning Support Systems for spatial planning. Faculty of Geosciences, University of Utrecht. Retrieved March 17, 2017, from, https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/8576
58. Vonk, G., & Geertman, S., (2008). Improving the adoption and use of planning support systems in practice. Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy, 1 (3), 153–173.
59. Vonk, G., Geertman, S., & Schot, P., (2005). Bottlenecks blocking widespread usage of planning support systems. Environment and Planning A, 37 (5), 909–924.
60. Vonk, G., Geertman, S., & Schot, P., (2007). New technologies stuck in old hierarchies: The diffusion of geo-information technologies in Dutch public organizations. Public Administration Review, 67 (4), 745–756.
61. Vonk, G., & Ligtenberg, A., (2010). Socio-technical PSS development to improve functionality and usability — Sketch planning using a Maptable. Landscape and Urban Planning, 94, 166–174.
62. Vredenburg, K., Mao, J.-Y., Smith, P. W., & Carey, T., (2002). A survey of user-centered design practice. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 02), Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA (pp. 471–478), New York, NY.
63. Waddell, P., (2002). UrbanSim: Modeling urban development for land use, transportation, and environmental planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 68 (3), 297–314.
64. Walker, D., & Daniels, T. L., (2011). The planners guide to CommunityViz: The essential tool for a new generation of planning. American Planning Association. Chicago, IL: Planners Press.
65. Williamson, W. E., (2012). Information and communication technology adoption and use in the New South Wales planning system: A socio-technical approach. Sydney, Australia: The University of New South Wales.