This paper ventures an examination of the linkages among three worlds—those of land-use theorizing and modeling, and that of policy making and planning—which, despite historical and recent advances, remain comparatively poor and haunted by defective communication and problematic translation between them. It is motivated by shifts that have taken place since the late 1980s in all three worlds, away from ‘classical’ thinking (positivism, reductionism, and linear and static worldviews) and towards complex systems (CS) thinking (alternative epistemologies, holism, and nonlinear and dynamic worldviews). The principal question is whether or not CS thinking, compared to classical thinking, addresses more satisfactorily key policy and planning issues, thus holding the potential to improve communication and bridge the gaps between the three worlds. The issues examined are the representation of the sociospatial system, the land-use change process, and policy and planning intervention. After delimiting each world and the diffusion of CS thinking, the paper investigates how the classical approach and the CS approach fare in handling these issues. The analysis suggests that it is not yet possible to determine which approach is superior. The main points are summarized and CS specific and more general future research directions are indicated.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AgarwalCGreenG MGroveJ MEvansT PSchweikC M, 2002, “A review and assessment of land-use change models: dynamics of space, time, and human choice”, General Technical Report NE-297, Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA
2.
AlexanderE R, 1992Approaches to Planning (Gordon and Breach, Philadelphia, PA)
3.
AlexanderE R, 2002, “The public interest in planning: From legitimation to substantive plan evaluation”Planning and Theory1226–249
4.
ArthurW BDurlaufS NLaneD A (Eds), 1997The Economy an as Evolving Complex System II (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA)
5.
BalmannA, 2000, “Modeling land-use and multi-agent systems: Perspectives for the analysis of agricultural policies”, in IIFET 2000: Microbehavior and Macroresults proceedings of the International Institute of Fisheries Economics and Trade, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/392946.html
6.
BattenD F, 2001, “Complex landscapes of spatial interaction”The Annals of Regional Science3581–111
7.
BattyM, 1994, “A chronicle of scientific planning: The Anglo-American modelling experience”Journal of the American Planning Association607–16
8.
BattyMTorrensP M, 2005, “Modelling and prediction in a complex world”Futures37745–766
9.
BattyMFotheringhamA SLongleyP A, 1989, “Urban growth and form: Scaling, fractal geometry, and diffusion-limited aggregation”Environment and Planning A211447–1472
10.
BergerT, 2001, “Agent-based spatial models applied to agriculture. A simulation tool for technology diffusion, resource use changes, and policy analysis”Agricultural Economics25245–260
11.
BerkesFFolkeC (Eds), 1998Linking Social and Ecological Systems: Management Practices and Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
12.
BibbyPShepherdJ, 2000, “GIS, land use and representation”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design27583–598
13.
BourneL S, 1976, “Urban structure and land use decisions”Annals of the Association of American Geographers66531–547
14.
BourneL S, 1979, “On the complexity of land use change: Or, what theoretical models leave in the dust”Papers of the Regional Science Association4175–100
15.
BriassoulisH, 2000, “Analysis of land use change: Theoretical and modeling approaches”, in Web Book of Regional Science Ed. LoveridgeS, Regional Research Institute, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, http://www.rri.wvu.edu/WebBook/Briassoulis/contents.htm
16.
ByrneD, 2003, “Complexity theory and planning theory: A necessary encounter”Planning Theory2171–178
17.
CilliersP, 1998Complexity and Postmodernism: Understanding Complex Systems (Routledge, London)
18.
ClarkeK CHoppenSGaydosILeonardJ, 1997, “A self-modifying cellular automaton model of historical urbanization in the San Francisco Bay area”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design24247–261
19.
CouclelisH, 1985, “Cellular worlds: A framework for modeling micro-macro dynamics”Environment and Planning A17585–596
20.
CouclelisH, 1989, “Macrostructure and microbehavior in a metropolitan area”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design16141–154
21.
CouclelisH, 2005, “Where has the future gone? Rethinking the role of integrated land-use models in spatial planning”Environment and Planning A371353–1371
22.
CrawfordT WMessinaJ PMansonS MO'SullivanD, 2005, “Complexity science, complex systems, and land-use research”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design32792–798
23.
DryzekJ S, 1987Rational Ecology, Environment and Political Economy (Blackwell, Oxford)
24.
EngelenGWhiteRUljeeIDrazanP, 1995, “Using cellular automata for integrated modeling of socio-environmental systems”Environmental Monitoring and Assessment34203–214
25.
EngelenGWhiteRde NijsT, 2003, “Environment Explorer: Spatial support system for the integrated assessment of socio-economic and environmental policies in the Netherlands”Integrated Assessment497–105
26.
EvansT PKelleyH, 2004, “Multi-scale analysis of a household level agent-based model of land cover change”Journal of Environmental Management7257–72
27.
FaludiA, 2000, “The performance of spatial planning”Planning Practice and Research15299–318
28.
FischerFForesterJ, 1993The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning (Duke University Press, London)
29.
ForesterJ, 1989Planning in the Face of Power (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA)
30.
FormW H, 1954, “The place of social structure in the determination of land use: Some implications for a theory of urban ecology”Social Forces32317–323
31.
GeogheganJVillarS CKlepeisPMendozabP MOgneva-HimmelbergerYChowdhuryR RTurnerB LIIVanceC, 2001, “Modeling tropical deforestation in the southern Yucatán peninsular region: Comparing survey and satellite data”Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment8525–46
32.
GiddensA, 1984The Constitution of Society (Polity Press, Cambridge)
33.
GundersonL HHollingC S (Eds), 2002Panarchy; Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems (Island Press, Washington, DC)
34.
HajerM, 2003, “Policy without polity; policy analysis and the institutional void”Policy Sciences36175–195
35.
HealeyP, 1991, “Urban regeneration and the development industry”Regional Studies2597–110
HealeyP, 2003, “Collaborative planning in perspective”Planning Theory2101–123
38.
HeritierA, 2002, “New modes of governance in Europe: Policy-making without legislating?” in Common Goods: Reinventing European and International Governance Ed. HeritierA (Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, MD) pp 185–206
39.
HollingC S, 2001, “Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological and social systems”Ecosystems4390–405
HoweJLangdonC, 2002, “Towards a reflexive planning theory”Planning Theory1209–225
42.
HuigenM G A, 2004, “First principles of the Mameluke multi-actor modeling framework for land use change, illustrated with a Philippine case study”Journal of Environmental Management725–21
43.
HuxleyMYiftachelO, 2000, “New paradigm or old myopia? Unsettling the communicative turn in planning theory”Journal of Planning Education and Research19333–342
44.
IJGIS, 2005, “Special issue: Spatial modeling to explore land use dynamics”International Journal of Geographic Information Science19(2)
45.
IrwinE GGeogheganJ, 2001, “Theory, data, methods: Developing spatially explicit models of land use change”Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment857–23
46.
JacobsJ, 1961The Death and Life of Great American Cities (Random House, New York)
47.
JacobsJ, 2000The Nature of Economies (Random House Canada, Toronto)
48.
JanssenM AWalkerB HLangridgeJAbelN, 2000, “An adaptive agent model for analysing co-evolution of management and policies in complex rangelands systems”Ecological Modelling131249–268
49.
JAPA, 1994, “Large-scale urban models: Twenty years later”, Ed. KlostermanR EJournal of the American Planning Association603–44
50.
JEM, 2004, “Special issue: Modeling land use change and environmental impact”Journal of Environmental Management72 (1 and 2)
51.
KlepeisPTurnerB LII, 2001, “Integrated land history and global change science: The example of the southern Yucatan peninsular region project”Land Use Policy1827–39
52.
KlostermanR E, 1994, “An introduction to the literature on large-scale urban models”Journal of the American Planning Association6041–44
53.
KrugmanP, 1997, “How the economy organizes itself in space: A survey of the new economic geography”, in The Economy as an Evolving Complex System II Eds ArthurW BDurlaufS NLaneD A (Perseus Books, Reading, MA) pp 239–262
54.
LambinE EGeistH JLepersE, 2003, “Dynamics of land-use and land-cover change in tropical regions”Annual Review of Environmental Resources28205–241
55.
LauS S YGiridharanRGanesanS, 2005, “Multiple and intensive land use: Case studies in Hong Kong”Habitat International29527–546
56.
LeeD B, 1973, “Requiem for large-scale models”Journal of the American Institute of Planners May, 163–178
57.
LeeD B, 1994, “Retrospective on large-scale urban models”Journal of the American Planning Association6035–40
58.
LigtenbergAWachowiczMBregtA KBeulensAKettinisD L, 2004, “A design and application of a multi-agent system for simulation of multi-actor spatial planning”Journal of Environmental Management7243–55
59.
LindblomC, 1973, “Incrementalism and environmentalism” in Managing the Environment final conference report, Environmental Research Center, US Environment Protection Agency, Washington, DC
60.
LUP, 2001, “Special issue: Using and shaping the land: A long-term perspective”Land Use Policy18(1)
61.
LyonsM, 2005, “Knowledge and the modeling of complex systems”Futures37711–719
62.
McGinnisM D (Ed.), 1999Polycentric Governance and Development (University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI)
63.
MansonS M, 2005, “Agent-based modeling and genetic programming for modeling land change in the southern Yucatan peninsular region of Mexico”Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment11147–62
64.
MansonS M, 2006, “Land use in the southern Yucatan peninsular region of Mexico: Scenarios of population and institutional change”Computers, Environment and Urban Systems30230–253
65.
MansonSO'SullivanD, 2006, “Complexity theory in the study of space and place”Environment and Planning A38677–692
66.
MasseyD, 1984Spatial Divisions of Labour (Macmillan, London)
67.
MasseyD, 1999, “Space – time, ‘science’ and the relationship between physical geography and human geography”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series24261–276
68.
MoranE FOstromE, 2005Seeing the Forest and the Trees: Human – Environment Interactions in Forest Ecosystems (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
NakamuraR TSmallwoodF, 1980The Politics of Policy Implementation (St Martin's Press, New York)
71.
NelsonA, 2001, “Analysing data across geographic scales in Honduras: Detecting levels of organisation within systems”Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment85107–131
72.
OlsonM, 1973The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
73.
OstromE, 1990Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions of Collective Action (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
74.
OstromEDietzTDolsakNSternPStonichSWeberE (Eds), 2002The Drama of the Commons. Committee on the Human Dimensions of Global Change (National Academy Press, Washington, DC)
75.
O'SullivanD, 2004, “Complexity science and human geography”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series29282–295
76.
O'SullivanDHaklayM, 2000, “Agent-based models and individualism: Is the world agent-based?”Environment and Planning A321409–1425
77.
O'SullivanDMansonSMessinaJCrawfordT C, 2006, “Space, place, and complexity science”Environment and Planning A38611–617
78.
ParkerD CMansonS MJanssenM AHoffmannM JDeadmanP, 2003, “Multi-agent systems for the simulation of land-use and land-cover change: A review”Annals of the Association of American Geographers93314–337
79.
PerzS GWalkerR, 2002, “Household life cycles and secondary forest cover among small farm colonists in the Amazon”World Development301009–1027
80.
PijanowskiB CPithadiaSShellitoB AAlexandridisK, 2005, “Calibrating a neural network-based urban change model for two metropolitan areas of the Upper Midwest of the United States”International Journal of Geographical Information Science19197–215
81.
PortugaliJ, 2006, “Complexity theory as a link between space and place”Environment and Planning A38647–664
82.
PressmanJ LWildavskyA, 1992Implementation: How Great Expectations in Washington are Dashed in Oakland (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA)
83.
Rothenberg-PackJ, 1978Urban Models: Diffusion and Policy Application Monograph Series Number 7, Regional Science Research Institute, Philadelphia, PA
84.
SabatierP (Ed.), 1999Theories of the Policy Process (Westview Press, Boulder, CO)
85.
SawyerR K, 2003, “Artificial societies: Multiagent systems and the micro-macro link in sociological theory”Sociological Method and Research31325–363
86.
SayerA, 1979a, “Understanding urban models versus understanding cities”Environment and Planning A11853–862
87.
SayerA, 1979b, “Philosophical bases of the critique of urban modeling: A reply to Wilson”Environment and Planning A111055–1069
88.
SayerA, 1984Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach (Hutchinson, London)
89.
SayerA, 1985, “The difference that space makes”, in Social Relations and Spatial Structures Ed. GregoryD (St Martin's Press, New York) pp 49–66
90.
StermanJ D, 2002, “All models are wrong: Reflections on becoming a system scientist”System Dynamics Review18501–531
91.
SzantonP, 2001Not Well Advised (Author's Choice Press, San Jose, CA)
92.
TurnerB L, 2002, “Contested identities: Human-environment geography and disciplinary implications of a restructuring academy”Annals of the Association of American Geographers9252–74
93.
TurnerB LIIGeogheganJFosterD (Eds), 2004Integrated Land-change Science and Tropical Deforestation in the Southern Yucatán: Final FrontiersOxford Geographical and Environmental Studies (Clarendon Press, Oxford)
94.
UprichardEByrneD, 2006, “Representing complex places: A narrative approach”Environment and Planning A38665–676
95.
VerburgP HSchotP PDijstM AVeldkampA, 2004, “Land use change modelling: Current practice and research priorities”Geo Journal61309–324
96.
WalkerR, 2004, “Theorizing land use and land cover change: The case of tropical deforestation”International Regional Science Review27247–270
97.
WalkerRSoleckiW, 2004, “Theorizing land-cover and land-use change: The case of the Florida Everglades and its degradation”Annals of the Association of American Geographers94311–328
98.
WhiteL, 2001, “Effective governance through complexity thinking and management science”Systems Research and Behavioral Science18241–257
99.
WhiteREngelenG, 1993, “Cellular automata and fractal urban form: A cellular modeling approach to the evolution of urban land use patterns”Environment and Planning A251175–1199
100.
WilsonA G, 2000Complex Spatial Systems: The Modelling Foundations of Urban and Regional Analysis (Prentice-Hall, London)
101.
YoungO, 2002The Institutional Dimensions of Environmental Change. Fit, Interplay, and Scale (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
102.
ZahariadisN, 2003, “Complexity, coupling, and the future of European integration”Review of Policy Research20285–310
