Urban green space: the incorporation of environmental values in a decision support system

This paper provides an overview of work undertaken on measuring the environmental values of green spaces, coupled with spatial analysis tools for aiding decision relating to the planning of urban green spaces. The work involved a complex array of data collection and analysis packages, including a case study inventory, public participation, methodological design, visualisation, and the analysis of survey results. A central aspect of the research aimed at providing the decision maker with data that combined the visualisation of open public green space with environmental economics. As part of a methodology using contingent rating which aimed to establish the values placed on specific green space sites, three dimensional computer models were used to produce visualisations of particular environmental conditions. The study demonstrates that visualisation tools are appropriate to represent a range of attributes for inclusion within environmental economic surveys, and that the resulting datasets can be used within GIS-based decision support models to indicate levels of preference and patterns of use. The focus of this paper is on the integration of the visualisations of green spaces, a contingent rating survey and the compilation of an open space inventory, as part of a GIS-based decision support system. Results from the study and its potential implications for future study and practice are discussed.

[1]  M. Phua,et al.  A GIS-based multi-criteria decision making approach to forest conservation planning at a landscape scale : a case study in the Kinabalu Area, Sabah, Malaysia , 2005 .

[2]  O. Newman,et al.  Defensible Space; Crime Prevention Through Urban Design. , 1973 .

[3]  Kazunori Hanyu,et al.  VISUAL PROPERTIES AND AFFECTIVE APPRAISALS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS AFTER DARK , 1997 .

[4]  H. Timmermans,et al.  Choice Experiments versus Revealed Choice Models: A Before-After Study of Consumer Spatial Shopping Behavior , 1992 .

[5]  Robert G. Hershberger,et al.  Environmental aesthetics: Predicting user responses to buildings , 1988 .

[6]  David Pearce,et al.  Environmental Policy Benefits: Monetary Valuation , 1989 .

[7]  Hjp Harry Timmermans,et al.  Assessing the Impact of School Marketing: Conjoint Choice Experiments Incorporating Availability and Substitution Effects , 1999 .

[8]  Richard Laing Stone cleaning: a value assessment. , 1999 .

[9]  A. T. Purcell,et al.  Environmental Perception and Affect , 1986 .

[10]  D. Canter,et al.  The Development of Central Concepts during Professional Education: An Example of a Multivariate Model of the Concept of Architectural Style , 1990 .

[11]  Lawrence A. West,et al.  Geographic information systems as a marketing information system technology , 2004, Decis. Support Syst..

[12]  Margaret Wilson,et al.  THE SOCIALIZATION OF ARCHITECTURAL PREFERENCE , 1996 .

[13]  B. Berger Popular Culture and High Culture: An Analysis and Evaluation of Taste , 2018, Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews.

[14]  Fausto Cavallaro,et al.  A multicriteria approach to evaluate wind energy plants on an Italian island , 2005 .

[15]  Arnold R. Alanen,et al.  INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR PEOPLE-ENVIRONMENT STUDIES , 1993, Landscape Journal.

[16]  Richard Laing,et al.  Assessing teh acceptability of alternative cladding materials in housing: theoretical and methodological challenges , 2005 .

[17]  H. Gans Planning and Social Life: Friendship and Neighbor Relations in Suburban Communities , 1961 .

[18]  W. Greene,et al.  Discrete Choice Models and Valuation Experiments An Application to Cultural Heritage , 2001 .

[19]  Cabe Space Green space strategies : a good practice guide , 2004 .

[20]  Hjp Harry Timmermans,et al.  Modeling Consumer Perception of Public Space in Shopping Centers , 1999 .

[21]  H. Sanoff Community Participation Methods in Design and Planning , 1999 .

[22]  Massimiliano Mazzanti,et al.  Discrete Choice Models and Valuation Experiments , 2003 .

[23]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  Modeling Hierarchical Conjoint Processes with Integrated Choice Experiments , 1994 .

[24]  S. Herrmann,et al.  Planning sustainable land use in rural areas at different spatial levels using GIS and modelling tools , 1999 .

[25]  Jack L. Nasar,et al.  A Post-Jury Evaluation , 1989 .

[26]  Hjp Harry Timmermans,et al.  Pairwise Conjoint Analysis of Activity Engagement Choice , 2000 .

[27]  Neighborhood Planning , 1990 .

[28]  H. Gans,et al.  The Urban Villagers: Group and Class in the Life of Italian-Americans , 1965 .

[29]  Kiyotaka Fukahori,et al.  The role of design elements on the cost-effectiveness of streetscape improvement , 2003 .

[30]  Matthew G. R. Holmes,et al.  A catchment-based water resource decision-support tool for the United Kingdom , 2005, Environ. Model. Softw..

[31]  Avijit Ghosh,et al.  Hierarchical Models of Store Choice , 1989 .

[32]  Hjp Harry Timmermans,et al.  Mother logit analysis of substitution effects in consumer shopping destination choice , 1991 .

[33]  T. Hudspeth Urban Waterfront Revitalization , 1985 .

[34]  Andrew A. Lovett,et al.  GIS-based visualisation of development proposals: reactions from planning and related professionals , 2005, Comput. Environ. Urban Syst..

[35]  Richard Laing,et al.  The application of 3D modelling techniques in built environment evaluation. , 2004 .

[36]  Andrew Chadwick,et al.  Socio-economic Impacts: Are They Still the Poor Relations in UK Environmental Statements? , 2002 .

[37]  Anna Jorgensen,et al.  Woodland spaces and edges: their impact on perception of safety and preference , 2002 .