Skip to main content

Descriptive Tools for Analysis

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Location Theory and Decision Analysis
  • 2417 Accesses

Abstract

A distinction is made in our discussion between descriptive versus prescriptive analysis techniques. A descriptive model is one that replicates the location and land use decisions made in a study area, while a prescriptive model starts out with a premise of existing practice and concentrates on the steps to arrive at a recommended course of action. Put in another way, a descriptive model sum marizes the set of observed data and tries to explain these observations in a systematic manner. A prescriptive model, on the other hand, takes the view that the model has been constructed, and the model is used to choose a desirable course of action. In Chapters 3 and 4, we will review these analysis tools, paving the way for further analyses. The discussions here are geared toward problem solving; the development is therefore more intuitive than algorithmic or axiomatic in nature. We supplement these discussions with more methodological background materials attached as appendices of this book, where the readers will find self-contained reviews on optimization, stochastic process, statistics, and systems theory.

“Most of the fundamental ideas of science are essentially simple and may, as a rule, be expressed in a language comprehensive to anyone.”

Albert Einstein

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Ahituv, N.; Berman, O. (1988). Operations management of distributed service networks: A practical approach. New York: Plenum Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Mosaind, M. A.; Ducker, K. J.; Strathman, J. G. (1993). “Light rail transit stations and property values. A hedonic price approach.” (Presentation Paper 930806). Paper presented at the 72nd meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington D. C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, W. R. (1991). “A note on the use of correlation coefficients for assessing goodness-of-fit in spatial interaction models.” Transportation 18:199–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cesario, F. J. (1975). “A primer on entropy modeling.” AIP Journal (January):40–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, Y. (2005). Location, transport and land-use: Modeling spatial-temporal information. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Claunch, E.; Goehring, S.; Chan, Y. (1992). Airport location problem: Three and four city cases. Working Paper. Department of Operational Sciences. Air Force Institute of Technology. Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemen, R. T. (1996). Making hard decisions: An Introduction to decision analysis, 2nd ed. Pacific Grove, California: Duxbury Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cliff, A. D.; Ord, J. K. (1975). “Space-time modeling with an application to regional forecasting.” Transactions—Institute of British Geographers 66:119–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Congressional Office of Technology Assessment (1982). Global models, world futures, and public policy. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Congress.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Neufville, R: Stafford, J. (1971). Systems analysis for engineers and managers. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickey, J. W. (1983). Metropolitan transportation planning, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duann, L-S.; Chang, C-C. (1992). “A study of the development of disaggregate residential location choice models.” Transportation Planning Journal (Taiwan, Republic of China) 21, No. 4:401–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fanueff, R.; Sterle, T.; Chan, Y. (1992). A warehouse location, inventory allocation problem. Working Paper. Department of Operational Sciences. Air Force Institute of Technology. Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldt, A. G. (1972). CLUG: Community Land Use Game. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foot, D. (1981). Operational urban models: An introduction. New York: Methuen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golan, A. (1998). “Maximum entropy likelihood and uncertainty: A comparison.” In Maximum entropy and Bayesian methods, edited by G. J. Erikson. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez, R. C.; Woods, R. E. (1992). Digital image processing. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guy, C. M. (1991). “Spatial interaction modelling in retail planning practice: the need for robust statistical methods.” Environment and Planning B 18: 191–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heller, M.; Cohon, J. L.; Revelle, C. S. (1989). “The use of simulation in validating a multiobjective EMS location model.” Annals of Operations Research 18: 303–322.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hurter, A. P.; Martinich, J. S. (1989). Facility location and the theory of production. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalaba, R.; Moore, J. E.; Xu, R.; Chen, G. (1995). A new perspective on calibrating spatial interaction models: An application to shopping centers. Working Paper. School of Urban and Regional Planning. University of Southern California. Los Angeles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanafani, A. (1983). Transportation demand analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lapin, L. (1975). Quantitative methods for business decisions with cases, 4th ed. Orlando, Florida: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S-Y.; Haghani, A. E.; Byun, J. H. (1995). Simultaneous determination of land use and travel demand with congestion: A system dynamics modeling approach. (Presentation Paper 950716). Paper presented at the 74th meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington D. C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meadows, D. H.; Meadows, D. L.; Randers, J.; Behrens, W. W., III (1972). The limits to growth. New York: Signet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheim, N. (1980). Applied urban and regional models. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheim, N. (1995). Urban travel: Demand modeling. New York: Wiley-Interscience.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pritsker, A. B. (1986). Introduction to simulation and SLAM, 3rd ed. New York: Halsted Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putman, S. (1978). The integrated forecasting of transportation and land use. In Emerging transportation planning methods, edited by W. Brown. Washington D. C.: Office of University Research. Research and Special Programs Administration. U. S. Department of Transportation, 119–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Repede, J. F.; Bernardo, J. J. (1994). “Developing and validating a decision support system for location emergency medical vehicles in Louisville, Kentucky.” European Journal of Operational Research 75:567–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubenstein, B.; Zandi, I. (1998). An evaluative tool for solid waste management. Working Paper. Department of Information Systems. University of Maryland at Baltimore County. Baltimore, Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rue, H. (1995). “New loss functions in Bayesian imaging.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 90:900–908.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Senior, M. S. (1973). “Approaches to residential location modeling 1: Urban ecological and spatial interaction models (a review).” Environment and Planning 5:165–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, G. L.; Weller, B.; Terrie, E. W. (1993). New perspectives on highway investment and economic growth. (Presentation Paper 930597). Paper presented at the 72nd meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington D. C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsoukias, A. (2008). “From decision theory to decision aiding methodology.” European Journal of Operational Research 187:138–161.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Webber, M. J. (1984). Explanation, prediction and planning: The Lowry model. London: Pion.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wikipedia (2010). “Influence diagram.” Website as last modified on 9 December 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willemain, T. R. (1981). Statistical methods for planners. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winston, W. L. (1994). Operations research: Applications and algorithms, 3rd ed. Belmont, California: Duxbury Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yupo Chan .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer- Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Chan, Y. (2011). Descriptive Tools for Analysis. In: Location Theory and Decision Analysis. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15663-2_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15663-2_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-15662-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-15663-2

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics