Squaring the Circle? Combining Models, Indicators, Experts and End-Users in Integrated Land-Use Management Support Tools

The most important challenges faced in the field of integrated land-use management are (i) harmonizing and integrating different datasets, (ii) selecting appropriate indicators, (iii) fitting suitable models to adequate scales, and finally (iv) integrating data, indicators and models into systems that allow both a high level of participation and flexibility with the adaptation to a variety of questions and applications. The articles of this special issue “Squaring the Circle? Combining Models, Indicators, Experts and End-Users in Integrated Land-Use Management Support Tools” demonstrate the challenges that are related to this topic. The case studies present examples of such integrated systems in order to recommend best practices to support land-use management and to reveal existing shortcomings. As a conclusion, seven features of a successful applicable integrated land-use management support system are derived: (1) ability to deal with discontinuity in information and datasets, (2) contribution to solve the problem of indicator diversity, (3) structuring the decision-making process, (4) support of participation processes in generating decisions, (5) development, comparison and evaluation of land-use alternatives, (6) assessment of the efficiency and trade-offs of management options, and (7) assistance of stakeholders in group communication processes.

[1]  Jacek Malczewski,et al.  GIS-based land-use suitability analysis: a critical overview , 2004 .

[2]  R. L. McCown,et al.  Changing systems for supporting farmers' decisions: problems, paradigms, and prospects , 2002 .

[3]  Oliver Zwirner,et al.  Participation in multi-criteria decision support for the resolution of a water allocation problem in the Spree River basin , 2006 .

[4]  Andre Botequilha Leitão,et al.  Applying landscape ecological concepts and metrics in sustainable landscape planning , 2002 .

[5]  Brian S. McIntosh,et al.  A review of the factors which influence the use and usefulness of information systems , 2009, Environ. Model. Softw..

[6]  Timothy O'Riordan,et al.  Nature conservation for future sustainable shorelines: Lessons from seeking to involve the public , 2009 .

[7]  Caspar J. M. Hewett,et al.  A multi-scale framework for strategic management of diffuse pollution , 2009, Environ. Model. Softw..

[8]  Don Wijewardana,et al.  Criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management: The road travelled and the way ahead , 2008 .

[9]  Lachlan T. H. Newham,et al.  Stakeholder participation in modelling for integrated catchment assessment and management: An Australian case study , 2007 .

[10]  Sarah Davis,et al.  Complexity, land-use modeling, and the human dimension: Fundamental challenges for mapping unknown outcome spaces , 2008 .

[11]  T. Lynch,et al.  Success and failure of decision support systems: Learning as we go , 2000 .

[12]  Carlo Giupponi,et al.  Environmental decision support systems: Current issues, methods and tools , 2007, Environ. Model. Softw..

[13]  Branislav Vrana,et al.  A "toolbox" for biological and chemical monitoring requirements for the European Union's Water Framework Directive. , 2006, Talanta.

[14]  J. Farman,et al.  Late lessons from early warnings: the precautionary principle 1896-2000 , 2002 .

[15]  Enrique G. Zapatero,et al.  A quality assessment instrument for multi‐criteria decision support software , 1996 .

[16]  Sedat Keleş,et al.  Spatial forest planning: A review , 2005 .

[17]  Brian S. McIntosh,et al.  Tools to think with? Towards understanding the use of computer-based support tools in policy relevant research , 2007, Environ. Model. Softw..

[18]  E. Gaddis,et al.  Lessons for successful participatory watershed modeling: A perspective from modeling practitioners , 2008 .

[19]  E. Hobson,et al.  Squaring The Circle - A History Of The Problem , 2007 .

[20]  Carlo Giupponi,et al.  Decision Support Systems for implementing the European Water Framework Directive: The MULINO approach , 2007, Environ. Model. Softw..

[21]  Justyna Czemiel Berndtsson,et al.  Influence of different activities on water quality in a small basin , 2006 .

[22]  J. Kros,et al.  Towards integrated national modelling with particular reference to the environmental effects of nutrients , 1998 .

[23]  M. Janssen,et al.  Multi-Agent Systems for the Simulation of Land-Use and Land-Cover Change: A Review , 2003 .

[24]  Nicolas Becu,et al.  Participatory computer simulation to support collective decision-making: Potential and limits of stakeholder involvement , 2008 .

[25]  Ron Janssen,et al.  Why are spatial decision support systems not used? Some experiences from the Netherlands , 2003, Comput. Environ. Urban Syst..

[26]  Hedwig van Delden,et al.  Integration of multi-scale dynamic spatial models of socio-economic and physical processes for river basin management , 2007, Environ. Model. Softw..

[27]  Jeroen P. van der Sluijs,et al.  Uncertainty and precaution in environmental management: Insights from the UPEM conference , 2007, Environ. Model. Softw..

[28]  Anthony J. Jakeman,et al.  Progress in integrated assessment and modelling , 2002, Environ. Model. Softw..

[29]  François Bousquet,et al.  Using Self-Designed Role-Playing Games and a Multi-Agent System to Empower a Local Decision-Making Process for Land Use Management: The SelfCormas Experiment in Senegal , 2003, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[30]  Martin K. van Ittersum,et al.  Land use models in complex societal problem solving: Plug and play or networking? , 2009, Environ. Model. Softw..

[31]  Martin Volk,et al.  Integrated ecological-economic modelling of water pollution abatement management options in the Upper Ems River Basin , 2008 .

[32]  H. G. Wind,et al.  From Design to Application of a Decision-support System for Integrated River-basin Management , 2009 .