Lessons for developing a planning support system infrastructure: The case of Southern California's Scenario Planning Model

Although planning support systems are being more widely adopted by professional planners, there are very few examples of planning support system infrastructures designed to support planning practices on an ongoing basis. This paper reports the result of an exploratory qualitative study of the Southern California Association of Governments' Scenario Planning Model, an innovative new planning support system infrastructure. Interviews with professionals who served as participants in a two-year development process were conducted to explore the six dimensions that theories from the planning support systems, innovation diffusion, and organizational information technology fields suggest are important to understanding the adoption and use of a planning support system infrastructure: user considerations, perceived benefits, technical details, the development process, jurisdiction characteristics, and planning style. Drawing on these interviews, the article proposes seven lessons for the creation of planning support system infrastructures: utilize participatory design, support a variety of planning practices, address indirect costs to users, encourage collaboration among multiple users within each organization, ensure that all stakeholders have appropriate access, be mindful of the framing of new technologies, and embrace their transformational potential. Although the Scenario Planning Model has benefited from California's unique planning mandates, advances in web-based geospatial technologies mean that many regions may draw on these lessons to create similar planning support system infrastructures, which have the potential to improve local and regional planning practices through enhanced information, analysis, and communication.

[1]  J. Pinto,et al.  Information Sharing in an Interorganizational GIS Environment , 2000 .

[2]  E. Davidson.  A Technological Frames Perspective on Information Technology and Organizational Change , 2006 .

[3]  John Stillwell,et al.  Planning Support Systems in Practice , 2003 .

[4]  Paul Schot,et al.  Bottlenecks Blocking Widespread Usage of Planning Support Systems , 2005 .

[5]  Gustavo A. Arciniegas,et al.  Planning Support Systems and Task-Technology Fit: a Comparative Case Study , 2015 .

[6]  Marie-Claude Boudreau,et al.  Accounting for the Contradictory Organizational Consequences of Information Technology: Theoretical Directions and Methodological Implications , 1999, Inf. Syst. Res..

[7]  Doug Walker,et al.  The Planners Guide to CommunityViz: The Essential Tool for a New Generation of Planning , 2011 .

[8]  Barbara Wejnert.  Integrating models of diffusion of innovations: a Conceptual Framework. , 2002 .

[9]  Subhrajit Guhathakurta,et al.  Urban Modeling and Contemporary Planning Theory: Is There a Common Ground? , 1999 .

[10]  John Stillwell,et al.  Planning Support Systems Best Practice and New Methods , 2009 .

[11]  Richard E. Klosterman,et al.  An Update on Planning Support Systems , 2005 .

[12]  N. Calavita,et al.  Inclusionary Housing in California: The Experience of Two Decades , 1998 .

[13]  John Stillwell,et al.  Planning Support Systems: An Introduction , 2003 .

[14]  J. Hamerlinck.  Planning Support Technology Implementation by Local Governments in the U.S. Mountain West , 2010 .

[15]  Karen Ruhleder,et al.  Steps towards an ecology of infrastructure: complex problems in design and access for large-scale collaborative systems , 1994, CSCW '94.

[16]  Cory P. Knobel,et al.  Understanding Infrastructure: Dynamics, Tensions, and Design , 2007 .

[17]  S. Ventura.  The Use of Geographic Information Systems in Local Government , 1995 .

[18]  C. J. Gabbe,et al.  Opening accessto scenario planning tools , 2012 .

[19]  J. Pinto,et al.  GIS Database Development and Exchange: Interaction Mechanisms and Motivations , 2011 .

[20]  Joseph Ferreira,et al.  Planning Support Systems and Smart Cities , 2015 .

[21]  Amanda E. Cravens,et al.  Negotiation and Decision Making with Collaborative Software: How MarineMap ‘Changed the Game’ in California’s Marine Life Protected Act Initiative , 2016, Environmental Management.

[22]  Lewis D. Hopkins.  Planning support systems for cities and regions , 2011, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[23]  Sundeep Sahay,et al.  Transforming Work Through Information Technology: A Comparative Case Study of Geographic Information Systems in County Government , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[24]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Technological frames: making sense of information technology in organizations , 1994, TOIS.

[25]  Stan Geertman,et al.  PSS: Beyond the implementation gap , 2017 .

[26]  Robert Goodspeed,et al.  Applying design thinking methods to ecosystem management tools: Creating the Great Lakes Aquatic Habitat Explorer , 2016 .

[27]  Stan Geertman,et al.  Potentials for Planning Support: A Planning-Conceptual Approach , 2006 .

[28]  R. Goodspeed.  The Death and Life of Collaborative Planning Theory , 2016 .

[29]  P. Healey.  Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies , 1997 .

[30]  Richard E. Klosterman,et al.  Planning Support Systems: Integrating Geographic Information Systems,Models,and Visualization Tools , 2001 .

[31]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of innovations , 1964, Encyclopedia of Sport Management.

[32]  Elizabeth Deakin,et al.  Smart Growth Planning for Climate Protection , 2012 .

[33]  Richard K. Brail,et al.  Planning Support Systems Evolving: When the Rubber Hits the Road , 2006 .

[34]  Judith E. Innes,et al.  Implementing GIS for Planning Lessons from the History of Technological Innovation , 1993 .

[35]  Arend Ligtenberg,et al.  Socio-technical PSS development to improve functionality and usability—Sketch planning using a Maptable , 2010 .

[36]  Diane M. Strong,et al.  Assessing software maintenance tool utilization using task-technology fit and fitness-for-use models , 1998, J. Softw. Maintenance Res. Pract..

[37]  Na Phelps,et al.  Planning with complexity: an introduction for collaborative rationality for public policy , 2011 .

[38]  Donald A. Schön.  Beyond the stable state , 1971 .

[39]  R. Klosterman.  Planning Support Systems: A New Perspective on Computer-Aided Planning , 1997 .

[40]  Elizabeth Davidson,et al.  26 MAKING SENSE OF TECHNOLOGICAL FRAMES: Promise, Progress, and Potential , 2005 .

[41]  Karsten Jørgensen,et al.  A Framework for Geodesign: Changing Geography by Design , 2012 .