Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Balancing Consensus and Conflict with a GIS-Based Multi-Participant, Multi-Criteria Decision Support Tool

  • Chapter
Modelling Geographical Systems

Part of the book series: The GeoJournal Library ((GEJL,volume 70))

Abstract

Many land use decision problems are sufficiently complex, controversial and non-routine in nature that their resolution requires not only knowledge, expertise and data drawn from several distinct domains, but also debate of multiple and often conflicting viewpoints, objectives and solution strategies. Despite the promise of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) technology for examining a wide variety of land use issues, it has been criticised for its lack of decision support capabilities in this and other application areas (Hendriks and Vriens, 2000; Towers, 1997; Heywood et al., 1994). In particular, the capacity of commercial GIS to facilitate debate and achieve some measure of balance among different viewpoints has been identified as a major weakness. This capability is constrained by several factors in commercial software, foremost of which is an intrinsic single-user perspective that disregards the multi-interest character of the decision making process and the socially constructed nature of data and analytical methods (Pickles, 1999; Flowerdew, 1998; Jones et al., 1997; Goodchild, 1995).

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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

  • Arrow, K.J. (1963), Social Choice and Individual Values. Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banai, R. (1993), ‘Fuzziness in Geographical Information Systems: Contributions from the analytic hierarchy process.’ International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 7 (4), 315–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodini, A. and G. Giavelli (1992), ‘Multicriteria analysis as a tool to investigate compatibility between conservation and development on Salina Island, Aeolian Archipelago, Italy.’ Environmental Management, 16 (5), 633–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bojórquez-Tapia, L., S. Díaz-Mondragón and E. Ezcurra (2001), ‘GIS-based approach for participatory decision making and land suitability assessment.’ International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 15 (2), 129–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borda, J.C. (1781), ‘Mémoire sur les Elections au Scrutin.’ Histoire de l’Académie Royale des Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carver, S.J. (1991), ‘Integrating multi-criteria evaluation with geographical information systems.’ International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 5 (3), 321–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CIA World Factbook (2002). Last accessed April 15, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Couclelis, H. and J. Gottsegen (1997), ‘What maps mean to people: Denotation, connotation, and geographic visualization in land-use debates.’ In S. Hirtle and A.U. Frank (eds.), Spatial Information Theory: A Theoretical Basis for GIS. International Conference COSIT ‘87, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, No. 1329. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 151–162.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, G.W. (1997), Making Votes Count: Strategic Co-ordination in the World’s Electoral Systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Densham, P.J. (1991) ‘Spatial decision support systems.’ In D.J. Maguire, M.F. Goodchild and D.W. Rhind (eds.), Geographical Information Systems: Principles and Applications, Volume 1. John Wiley, New York, pp. 403–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feick, R. and G.B. Hall (1999), ‘Consensus-building in a multi-participant spatial decision support system.’ URISA Journal, 11 (2), 17–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feick, R. and G.B. Hall (2000), ‘The application of a spatial decision support system to tourismbased land management in Small Island States.’ Journal of Travel Research, 39 (2), 163–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishburn, P.C. (1971), ‘A comparative analysis of group decision methods.’ Behavioural Science 16, 538–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flowerdew, R. (1998), ‘Reacting to ground truth.’ Environment and Planning A, 30(2), 289–301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodchild, M.F. (1995) ‘Geographic information systems and geographic research.’ In J. Pickles (ed.), Ground Truth: The Social Implications of Geographic Information Systems. Guilford Press, New York, pp. 31–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harker, P.T. (1989), ‘The art and science of decision making: The analytical hierarchy process.’ In G.L. Golden, E.A. Wasil and P.T. Harker (eds.), The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Applications and Studies. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 3–36.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hendriks, P. and D. Vriens (2000), ‘From geographical information systems to spatial group decision support systems: A complex itinerary.’ Geographical and Environmental Modelling 4 (1), 83–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heywood, 1., J. Oliver and S. Tomlinson (1994), ‘Building an exploratory multi criteria modelling environment for spatial decision support.’ Proceedings of EGIS/MARI ‘84, Vol. 1., Paris, pp. 632–639.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs, B.F., V. Chankong and W. Hamadeh (1992), ‘Does choice of multicriteria method matter? An experiment in water resources planning.’ Water Resources Research, 28 (7), 1767–1779.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, C-L. and K. Yoon (1981), Multi Attribute Decision Making. Springer-Verlag, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, C-L. and M-J. Lin (1987), Group Decision Making Under Multiple Criteria: Methods and Applications. Springer-Verlag, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jankowski, P. and L. Richard (1994), ‘integration of GIS-based suitability analysis and multicriteria evaluation in a spatial decision support system for route selection.’ Environment and Planning B, 21, 323–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jankowski, P. and M. Stasik (1997), ‘Design considerations for space and time distributed collaborative spatial decision making.’ Journal of Geographic Information and Decision Analysis, 1(1), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jankowski, P., T.L. Nyerges, A. Smith, T.J. Moore and E. Horvarth (1997), ‘Spatial group choice: A SDSS tool for collaborative spatial decision-making’ International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 11 (6), 577–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, R.M., C.V. Copas and E.A. Edmonds (1997), ‘GIS support for distributed group-work in regional planning.’ International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 11 (1), 53–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joerin, F., M. Thériault and A. Musy (2001), ‘Using GIS and outranking multicriteria analysis for land-use suitability analysis.’ International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 15 (2), 153–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kingston, R. S. Carver, A. Evans and 1. Turton (2000), ‘Web-based public participation geographical information systems: an aid to local environmental decision-making.’ Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 24 (2), 109–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malczewski, J. (1996), ‘A G1S-based approach to multiple criteria group decision-making.’ International Journal of Geographical Information Systems 10 (8), 955–971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malczewski, J. (1999), GIS and Multicriteria Decision Analysis. John Wiley, Toronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malczewski, J., R. Moreno-Sanchez, L.A. Bojórquez-Tapia and E. Ongay-Delhumeau (1997), ‘Multicriteria group decision-making for environmental conflict analysis in the Cape Region, Mexico.’ Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 40 (3), 349–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massam, B.H. (1988), Multi-criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Techniques in Planning. Progress in Planning 30. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 1–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massam, B.H. (1993), The Right Place: Shared Responsibility and the Location of Public Facilities. John Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monnikhof, R.A.H. and P.W.G. Bots (2000), ‘On the application of MCDA in interactive spatial planning processes: Lessons learnt from two stories from the swamp.’ Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 9 (1), 28–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nyerges, T.L., R. Montejano, C. Oshiro, and M. Dadswell (1997), ‘Group-based geographic information systems for transportation improvement site selection.’ Transportation Research-C, 5(6), 349–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nijkamp, P. and A. van Delft (1977), Multi-criteria Analysis and Regional Decision Making. Martinus Nijhoff Social Sciences Division, Leiden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, D.L. (1996), Decision Aids for Selection Problems. Springer, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, C.A. (1990), ‘The use of information in organizational decision making: A model and some propositions.’ In L.L. Cummings and B.M. Staw (eds.), Information and Cognition in Organizations. JAI Press, Greenwich (Conn.), pp. 89–1255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pereira, J.M.C. and L. Duckstein (1993), ‘A multiple criteria decision-making approach to GIS-based land suitability evaluation.’ International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 7 (5), 407–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phaneuf, Y. (1990) EIS and Decision Making. Canadian Environmental Assessment Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickles, J. (1999) ‘Arguments, debates, and dialogues: the GIS-social theory debate and the concern for alternatives.’ In P.A. Longley, M.F. Goodchild, D.J. Maguire and D.W. Rhind (eds.), Geographical Information Systems: Principles and Technical Issues, Volume 1, 2nd Edition. Wiley, Toronto, pp. 49–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T.L. (1980), The Analytical Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T.L. (1989), ‘Group decision making and the AHP.’ In G.L. Golden, E.A. Wasil and P.T. Harker (eds.), The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Applications and Studies.’ Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 59–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, S. (1956), Nonparaenetric Statistics for the Behavioural Sciences. McGraw-Hill, New York. Silk, J. ( 1979 ), Statistical Concepts in Geography. George Allen and Unwin, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silver, M.S. (1991), Systems That Support Decision Makers: Description and Analysis. John Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H.A. (1976), Administrative Behaviour. Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Towers, G. (1997), ‘GIS versus the community: Siting power in West Virginia.’ Applied Geography, 17 (2), 111–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huylenbroeck, G. and A. Coppens (1995), ‘Multicriteria analysis of the conflicts between rural development scenarios in the Gordon District, Scotland.’ Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 38 (3), 393–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winterfeldt, D. and W. Edwards (1986), Decision Analysis and Behavioural Research. Cambridge University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinke, P. (1992), Multicriteria Decision Aid. Wiley, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voogd, H. (1983), Multicriteria Evaluation for Urban and Regional Planning. Pion, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, K.P. and C.L. Hwang (1995), Multiple Attribute Decision Making: An Introduction. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (California).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geography, School of Planning, Faculty of Environmental Studies, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 3G1, Canada

    Robert D. Feick & G. Brent Hall

Authors
  1. Robert D. Feick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. G. Brent Hall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Wilfrid Laurier University, Ontario, Canada

    Barry Boots

  2. Center for Spatial Information Science, University of Tokyo, Japan

    Atsuyuki Okabe

  3. University of Manchester, UK

    Richard Thomas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Feick, R.D., Hall, G.B. (2003). Balancing Consensus and Conflict with a GIS-Based Multi-Participant, Multi-Criteria Decision Support Tool. In: Boots, B., Okabe, A., Thomas, R. (eds) Modelling Geographical Systems. The GeoJournal Library, vol 70. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2296-4_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2296-4_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-6104-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-2296-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation