Performance of Planning Support Systems: What is it, and how do we report on it?

Planning Support Systems (PSSs) are a family of computer based instruments specifically designed to support actors in their complex tasks in the field of planning. There is a gap between the high expectations that PSS developers have about the usefulness of their instruments and the instruments’ application in daily planning practice. PSS academics have proposed several ways to close this so-called implementation gap through a range of software, hardware and orgware approaches. Several of these approaches have been applied in practical planning settings. There is however a lack of consistent and structured reporting on the effectiveness of these approaches in improving PSS performance. Therefore, it is hard to distinguish between successful and less successful strategies, and it is difficult to draw overall lessons. This paper (1) proposes a comprehensive multidimensional framework that operationalizes PSS performance, and (2) analyses how recent PSS implementation studies have reported on this performance. The developed framework, based on literature from Group Model Building and group psychology, is sensitive to a wide variety of performance dimensions and therefore forms a useful guideline for assessing PSS implementation strategies. Studying these in a common framework supports the potential transfer of lessons to other PSS implementations. Most of the analyzed studies only posed hypotheses about which dimensions are improved through a specific strategy, but did not report on measuring impacts. By structurally measuring the effectiveness of a range of strategies to improve PSS implementation, lessons can be exchanged and a consistent body of knowledge can be built.

[1]  R. Sieber Public Participation Geographic Information Systems: A Literature Review and Framework , 2006 .

[2]  P. Waddell Integrated Land Use and Transportation Planning and Modelling: Addressing Challenges in Research and Practice , 2011 .

[3]  J. Aken Management Research Based on the Paradigm of the Design Sciences: The Quest for Field-Tested and Grounded Technological Rules , 2004 .

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

[5]  Thomas Lee Rodgers,et al.  Identifying Quality, Novel, and Creative Ideas: Constructs and Scales for Idea Evaluation , 2006, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[6]  Laura E. Jackson,et al.  Models for Assessing the Effects of Community Change on Land Use Patterns , 2003 .

[7]  Stan Geertman,et al.  Flowmap: A Support Tool for Strategic Network Analysis , 2003 .

[8]  Marco te Brömmelstroet The Relevance of Research in Planning Support Systems: A Response to Janssen Et Al: , 2009 .

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

[10]  A. Bryman Social Research Methods , 2001 .

[11]  Robin Liggett,et al.  An Integrated Environment for Urban Simulation , 1995 .

[12]  Ian D. Bishop,et al.  Planning support : Hardware and software in search of a system , 1998 .

[13]  Harry Geerlings,et al.  Exposing weaknesses in interactive planning: the remarkable return of comprehensive policy analysis in The Netherlands , 2003 .

[14]  Douglass B. Lee Requiem for Large-Scale Models , 1973 .

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

[16]  Nabil Amara,et al.  New Evidence on Instrumental, Conceptual, and Symbolic Utilization of University Research in Government Agencies , 2004 .

[17]  Marco te Brömmelstroet,et al.  Equip the warrior instead of manning the equipment: Land use and transport planning support in the Netherlands , 2010 .

[18]  Tracy Miller,et al.  Community Engagement in Land Use Planning Through Web-based Technologies , 2003 .

[19]  Nassim Nicholas Taleb,et al.  The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable , 2007 .

[20]  Jac A. M. Vennix,et al.  Group model building effectiveness: a review of assessment studies † , 2002 .

[21]  Michele Campagna,et al.  PSS design: a general framework perspective , 2006 .

[22]  Jeffrey D. Hamerlinck,et al.  Enhancing Comprehensive Planning with Public Engagement and Planning Support Integration , 2009 .

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

[24]  Paul Pfaffenbichler Modelling with Systems Dynamics as a Method to Bridge the Gap between Politics, Planning and Science? Lessons Learnt from the Development of the Land Use and Transport Model MARS , 2011 .

[25]  N. Kaza Planning Support Systems for Cities and Regions , 2009 .

[26]  Jean-Luc de Kok,et al.  Elbe DSS: a planning support system for strategic river basin planning , 2009 .

[27]  Henrik Gudmundsson,et al.  Analysing Models as a Knowledge Technology in Transport Planning , 2011 .

[28]  Michael Batty,et al.  Planning Support Systems: Technologies that are Driving Planning , 2002 .

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

[30]  P. Waddell UrbanSim: Modeling Urban Development for Land Use, Transportation, and Environmental Planning , 2002 .

[31]  T. Straatemeier How to plan for regional accessibility , 2008 .

[32]  Douglass B. Lee Retrospective on Large-Scale Urban Models , 1994 .

[33]  K. Christensen Coping with Uncertainty in Planning , 1985 .

[34]  Michael Batty,et al.  NCGIA National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis Locational Models , Geographic Information , and Planning Support Systems , 2022 .

[35]  R. Sieber,et al.  GIS Implementation in the Grassroots , 2000 .

[36]  Donald A. Sch The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action , 1983 .

[37]  Maria Nijnik,et al.  Integrating Analytical and Participatory Techniques for Planning the Sustainable Use of Land Resources and Landscapes , 2009 .

[38]  Luca Bertolini,et al.  An Experiential Approach to Research in Planning , 2010 .

[39]  H. Couclelis “Where has the Future Gone?” Rethinking the Role of Integrated Land-Use Models in Spatial Planning , 2005 .

[40]  Jac A. M. Vennix,et al.  On Evaluating the Performance of Problem Structuring Methods: An Attempt at Formulating a Conceptual Model , 2009 .

[41]  M Tewdwr-Jones Personal dynamics, distinctive frames and communicative planning , 2002 .

[42]  Paul M. Torrens,et al.  Cellular Automata and Multi-agent Systems as Planning Support Tools , 2003 .

[43]  Carey Curtis Integrating Land Use with Public Transport: The Use of a Discursive Accessibility Tool to Inform Metropolitan Spatial Planning in Perth , 2011 .

[44]  D. Schoen,et al.  The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action , 1985 .

[45]  Stan C. M. Geertman,et al.  Planning support systems: an inventory of current practice , 2004, Comput. Environ. Urban Syst..

[46]  James Reilly,et al.  The New Jersey (USA) Growth Allocation Model: Development, Evaluation and Extension , 2003 .

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

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

[49]  J.A.M. Vennix,et al.  Group model building: what does the client think of it now? , 2000 .

[50]  Ta Theo Arentze,et al.  GRAS: A Spatial Decision Support System for Green Space Planning , 2009 .

[51]  Luca Bertolini,et al.  Urban Transportation Planning in Transition , 2008 .

[52]  Richard A. Guzzo,et al.  Teams in organizations: recent research on performance and effectiveness. , 1996, Annual review of psychology.

[53]  I. Turton,et al.  Web-based public participation geographical information systems: an aid to local environmental decision-making , 2000 .

[54]  Hedwig van Delden,et al.  New Ways of Supporting Decision Making: Linking Qualitative Storylines with Quantitative Modelling , 2009 .

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

[56]  J. Innes Planning Theory's Emerging Paradigm: Communicative Action and Interactive Practice , 1995 .

[57]  R. Stimson,et al.  An On-line Planning Support System to Evaluate Urban and Regional Planning Scenarios , 2003 .

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

[59]  Richard E. Klosterman,et al.  The What If? Collaborative Planning Support System , 1999 .

[60]  Luca Bertolini,et al.  Integrating land use and transport knowledge in strategy-making , 2009 .

[61]  Guido Antonius Vonk,et al.  Improving Planning Support : The use of planning support systems for spatial planning , 2006 .

[62]  Britton Harris,et al.  Computing in Planning: Professional and Institutional Requirements , 1999 .

[63]  H. Rittel,et al.  Dilemmas in a general theory of planning , 1973 .

[64]  Hjp Harry Timmermans,et al.  Transport Models and Urban Planning Practice: Experiences with Albatross , 2011 .

[65]  John E. Abraham,et al.  Microsimulating urban systems , 2004, Comput. Environ. Urban Syst..

[66]  Christian Wagner,et al.  Stimulating ideas through creativity software , 1994 .

[67]  Marco te Brömmelstroet,et al.  From Planning Support Systems to Mediated Planning Support: A Structured Dialogue to Overcome the Implementation Gap , 2010 .

[68]  野中 郁次郎,et al.  The Knowledge-Creating Company: How , 1995 .

[69]  Patsy Healey Obe Urban Complexity and Spatial Strategies: Towards a Relational Planning for Our Times , 2007 .