Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Land Resource Sustainability for Urban Development: Spatial Decision Support System Prototype

  • RESEARCH
  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Land resource sustainability for urban development characterizes the problem of decision-making with multiplicity and uncertainty. A decision support system prototype aids in the assessment of incremental land development plan proposals put forth within the long-term community priority of a sustainable growth. Facilitating this assessment is the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), a multicriteria evaluation and decision support system. The decision support system incorporates multiple sustainability criteria, weighted strategically responsive to local public policy priorities and community–specific situations and values, while gauging and directing desirable future courses of development. Furthermore, the decision support system uses a GIS, which facilitates an assessment of urban form with multiple indicators of sustainability as spatial criteria thematically. The resultant land-use sustainability scores indicate, on the ratio-scale of AHP, whether or not a desirable urban form is likely in the long run, and if so, to what degree. The two alternative modes of synthesis in AHP—ideal and distributive—provide assessments of a land development plan incrementally (short-term) and city-wide pattern comprehensively (long-term), respectively. Thus, the spatial decision support system facilitates proactive and collective public policy determination of land resource for future sustainable urban development.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure A.1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aczel J, T. L. Saaty. 1983. Procedures for synthesizing ratio scale judgments. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 27:93–102

    Google Scholar 

  • Anselin A., P. M. Meire, L. Anselin. 1989. Multicriteria techniques in ecological evaluation. Biological Conservation 49:215–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ArcView 3.2. GIS.1998. ESRI, Redlands, California

  • Banai R. 1993. Fuzziness in geographic information systems: Contributions from the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Geographical Information System 7:315–329

    Google Scholar 

  • Banai R. 2000. Transit station area land use/site assessment with multiple criteria: An integrated GIS-expert system prototype. Journal of Public Transportation 3:95–110

    Google Scholar 

  • Beatley T. 1994. Ethical land use: Principles of policy and planning. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland. 320

    Google Scholar 

  • Beatley T., 1995. Planning and sustainability: The elements of the new (improved?) paradigm. Journal of Planning Literature 9:383–395

    Google Scholar 

  • Beatley T., K. Manning. 1997. The ecology of place: Planning for environment, economy, and community. Island Press, Washington, DC. 265

    Google Scholar 

  • Berke P. R., M. M. Conroy. 2000. Are we planning for sustainable development? Journal of the American Planning Association 66:21–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Breheny M. J. (ed.) 1993. Sustainable development and urban form Pion Limited, London. 292

    Google Scholar 

  • Calthorpe P. 1993. The next American metropolis: Ecology, community, and the American dream. Princeton Architectural Press, New York. 176

    Google Scholar 

  • Calthorpe, P.,and Fulton W. 2001. The regional city Island Press, Washington, pp 304

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell S., 1996. Green cities, growing cities, just cities?: Urban planning and the contradictions of sustainable development. Journal of the American Planning Association 62:296–312

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins M. G., F. R. Steiner, M. J. Rushman. 2001. Land-use suitability analysis in the United States: Historical development and promising technological achievements. Environmental Management 28:611–621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Congress for New Urbanism (CNU). 2004. http://www.cnu.org. Retrieved June 9 2004

  • Eastman 1997. IDRISI for Windows, Version 2.0: tutorial exercises. Worcester, MA: Graduate School of Geography, Clark University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eastman J. R., W. Jin, P. A. K. Kyem, J. Toledano. 1995. Raster procedures for multi-criteria/multi-objective decisions. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 61:539–547

    Google Scholar 

  • El Nasser, H., and P. Overberg. 2001. What you don’t know about sprawl. Controlling development a big concern, but analysis has unexpected findings. USA Today. McLean, Virginia. February 22, Page 1a

  • Expert Choice 2000. Advanced decision support software. Pittsburgh, PA. http://www.expertchoice.com

  • Forman E. H. 1993. Facts and fictions about the analytic hierarchy process. Mathematical and Computer Modelling 17:19–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fulton, W., and others. 2002. Growth management ballot measures in California.http://www.lgc.org/freepub/PDF/Land_Use/reports/ca_growth_mgmt_report.pdf

  • Howard R. A., 2004 Speaking of decisions: precise decision language Decision Analysis 1:71–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IDRISI Killimanjaro. 2003. http://www.clarklabs.org

  • Jankowski, P., T. L. Nyerges, A. Smith, T. J. Moore, and E. Horvath. 1997. Spatial group choice. International Journal of Geographical Information Systems11, 6:566–602

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson M. P. 2001. Environmental impacts of urban sprawl: A survey of the literature and proposed research agenda. Environment and Planning A 33:717–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Juergensmeyer J. C., T. E. Roberts. 1998. Land use planning and control law. West Group, St. Paul, Minnesota, 795

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser E. J., D. R. Godschalk, F. S. Chapin. 1995. Urban land use planning. University of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago, 493

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz P. (ed.) 1994. The new urbanism: Toward an architecture of community. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, 288

    Google Scholar 

  • Krizek K. J., J. Power. 1996. A planners guide to sustainable development. PAS report number 467. APA, Washington, DC, 66

    Google Scholar 

  • Landis J., M. Zhang. 1998. The second generation of the California urban futures model: Parts I and II. Environment and Planning B 25:795–824

    Google Scholar 

  • Landis J., M. Zhang. 1998. The second generation of the California urban futures model: Parts I and II. Environment and Planning B 30:657–666

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch K. 1984. Good city form. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 524

    Google Scholar 

  • Malczewski J. 1999. GIS and multicriteria decision analysis. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, 408

    Google Scholar 

  • Malczewski J., 1996. A GIS-based approach to multiple criteria group decision making. International Journal of Geographic Information Systems 10:955–971

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rittel H. W. J., M. M. Webber. 1973. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 4:155–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T.L. 1990. Physics as a decision theory. European Journal of Operations Research 48:98–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty T. L. 1996. Multicriteria decision-making: The analytic hierarchy process. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 437

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty T. L. 1998. Reflections and projections on creativity in operations research and management science: A pressing need for a shift in paradigm. INFORMS 46:9–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty T. L., L. G. Vargas. 2001. Models, methods, concepts & applications of the analytic hierarchy process. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Massachusetts, 352 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmoldt D. L., J. Kangas, G. Mendoza, M. Pesonen (eds.) 2001.The analytic hierarchy process in natural resource and environmental decision making. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 328

    Google Scholar 

  • Schock, S. 2000. Projecting land-use change. US EPA (Washington, D.C.) http://www.geog.ucsb.edu/∼kclarke/ucime/Helens Sem/seminar2001/REPORTfinal2.pdf

  • Siddiqui M. Z., J. W. Everett, B. E. Vieux. 1996. Landfill siting using geographic information systems: A demonstration. Journal of Environmental Engineering 122:515–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon H. 1981. The sciences of the artificial. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 247 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart Growth Network (SGN). 2004. Getting to smart growth: Hundred policies for implementation. www.smartgrowth.org/pdf/gettosg.pdf. Retrieved June 9, 2004

  • Talen, E. 2002. GIS helps evaluate living patterns. Geo World. http://geoplace.com/gw/2002/0201/0201ss.asp. Retrieved March 25, 2002

  • US Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. EPA’s Smart Growth Index in 20 pilot communities: Using GIS sketch modeling to advance smart growth. http://WWW. epa.gov/smartgrowth

  • Wegener, M. 1998. GIS and spatial planning. Environment and Planning 25 Anniversary Issue 48–52

  • Wu F,. 1998. SimLand: A prototype to simulate land conversion through the integrated GIS and CA with AHP-derived transition rules. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 12:63–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoon K. P., C.-L. Hwang. 1995. Multiple attribute decision making: An introduction. Sage Publications, London, 83 pp

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The comments of the editor and reviewers on earlier version of this paper are gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Reza Banai.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Banai, R. Land Resource Sustainability for Urban Development: Spatial Decision Support System Prototype. Environmental Management 36, 282–296 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-004-1047-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-004-1047-0

Keywords

Navigation