Planning support systems (PSSs) are intended to facilitate relevant steps in planning processes; however, the academic evaluation of PSSs reveals many bottlenecks precluding a widespread use of these systems. A central weakness is the lack of communication between PSS developers (focusing on technical issues) and potential PSS users. Other academic fields such as knowledge management and technological innovation recognised similar bottlenecks years ago. On the basis of methods proposed in these fields, a new process architecture for the development of a PSS is proposed. Through a dialogue in which PSS developers and potential users discuss and use the PSS, existing tools, instruments, and models are refined and improved to be more useful to their potential users. The focus shifts away from the development of a technically more sophisticated support system, towards a process of PSS development which is intertwined with the planning process itself. This process architecture is called mediated planning support (MPS). We explore what can be learned from other academic domains and enquire about the applicability of these findings to PSS development. In Amsterdam the Department of Transport wanted to transform their transportation model into a land-use and transport PSS and their work illustrates how such a process architecture can link PSS developers and users in planning practice. We discuss the concepts behind MPS and use the case of Amsterdam to visualise its workings, lastly offering hypotheses on the method and suggestions for further research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AckermannFEdenCBrownI, 2005The Practice of Making Strategy: A Step-by-step Guide (Sage, London)
2.
ArgyrisC, 2005, “Double-loop learning in organizations: A theory of action perspective”, in Great Minds in Management: The Process of Theory Development Eds SmithKGHittMA (Oxford University Press, Oxford) pp 261–279
BattyM, 2003, “Planning support systems: Techniques that are driving planning”, in Planning Support Systems in Practice Eds GeertmanSStillwellJ (Springer, Heidelberg) pp v–viii
5.
BishopID, 1998, “Planning support: Hardware, software in search of a system”Computers, Environment and Urban Systems22189–202
6.
BrailRK, 2005, “Planning support systems evolving: When the rubber hits the road”, in Complex Artificial Environments Ed. PortugaliJ (Springer, New York) pp 307–317
7.
BrailRK (Ed.), 2008Planning Support Systems for Cities and Regions (Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA)
8.
ChecklandP, 2001, “Soft Systems Methodology”, in Regional Analysis for a Problematic World Revisited: Problem Structuring Methods for Complexity, Uncertainty and Conflict Eds RosenheadJMingersJ (John Wiley, New York) pp 61–90
9.
ChecklandPScholesJ, 1990Soft Systems Methodology in Action (John Wiley, Chichester, Sussex)
10.
CouclelisH, 2005, “‘Where has the future gone?’ Rethinking the role of integrated land-use models in spatial planning”Environment and Planning A371353–1371
11.
DealB, 2001, “Ecological urban dynamics: The convergence of spatial modelling and sustainability”Building Research and Information29381–393
12.
DealBPallathucherilV, 2008, “Simulating regional futures: The land-use evolution and impact assessment model (LEAM)”, in Planning Support Systems for Cities and Regions Ed. BrailR K (Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA) pp 61–84
13.
DonovanMSBransfordJDPellegrinoJW, 2000How People Learn: Bridging Research and Practice (National Academic Press, Washington, DC)
14.
DriscollM, 2000Psychology of Learning for Instruction (Allyn and Bacon, Needham Heights, MA)
FriedmannJ, 1973Retracking America, A Theory of Transactive Planning (Anchor Press/Doubleday, Garden City, NY)
18.
GeertmanS, 2006, “Potentials for planning support: A planning-conceptual approach”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design33863–880
19.
GeertmanSStillwellJ (Eds), 2003Planning Support Systems in Practice (Springer, Berlin)
20.
GeertmanSStillwellJ, 2004, “Planning support systems: An inventory of current practice”Computers, Environment and Urban Systems28291–310
21.
GergenK, 1985, “The social constructionist movement in modern psychology”American Psychologist40266–275
22.
GredlerME, 2001, “Games and simulations and the relationships to learning”, in Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology Ed. JonasenD H (Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ)
23.
GuhathakurtaS, 1999, “Urban modeling and contemporary planning theory: Is there a common ground?”Journal of Planning Education and Research18281–292
24.
HansenS, 2006Enhancing Effective Implementation and Adoption of Web Information Systems Applications Based on Adoption Theories (University of Western Sydney, Sydney)
25.
HareAPBlumbergHHDaviesMF, 1994Small Group Research: A Handbook (Ablex, Norwood, NJ)
26.
HealeyP, 2007Urban Complexity and Spatial Strategies: Towards a Relational Planning for Our Times (Routledge, London)
27.
KlostermanRE, 1997, “Planning support systems: A new perspective on computer-aided planning”Journal of Planning Education and Research1745–54
28.
KlostermanRE, 1999, “The What if? collaborative planning support system”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design26393–408
29.
KlostermanRE, 2001, “Planning support systems: A new perspective on computer-aided planning”, in Planning Support Systems: Integrating Geographical Information Systems, Models and Visualization Tools Eds BrailRKKlostermanRE (ESRI, New Brunswick, NJ) pp 1–23
30.
KlostermanRE, 2007, “Deliberating about the future”, in Engaging the Future: Forecasts, Scenarios, Plans and Projects Eds HopkinsLDZapataMA (Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA) pp 199–219
31.
KolbDA, 1984Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ)
LeeDB, 1973, “Requiem for large-scale models”Journal of the American Planning Association39163–178
34.
LeeDB, 1994, “Retrospective on large-scale urban models”Journal of the American Planning Association6035–40
35.
MartinJ, 1991Rapid Application Development (Macmillan, New York)
36.
MeadowsDHRobinsonJM, 2002, “The electronic oracle: Computer models and social decisions”System Dynamics Review18271–308
37.
NonakaI, 1994, “A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation”Organization Science514–37
38.
NonakaIKonnoN, 1998, “The concept of ‘Ba’: Building a foundation for knowledge creation”California Management Review4040–54
39.
NonakaITakeuchiH, 1995The Knowledge-creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation (Oxford University Press, New York)
40.
OttensH, 1990, “The application of geographical information systems in urban and regional planning”, in Geographical Information Systems for Urban and Regional Planning Eds ScholtenHJStillwellJ (Kluwer, Dordrecht) pp 15–22
41.
PhillipsLDPhillipsMC, 1993, “Facilitated work groups: Theory and practice”Journal of the Operational Research Society44533–549
42.
PolanyiM, 1967The Tacit Dimension (Doubleday, New York)
43.
RamírezR, 1983, “Action learning: A strategic approach for organizations facing turbulent conditions”Human Relations36210–215
44.
RobertsEB, 1978Managerial Applications of System Dynamics (Productivity Press, Cambridge)
45.
RosenheadJMingersJ, 2001Rational Analysis for a Problematic World Revisited: Problem Structuring Methods for Complexity, Uncertainty and Conflict (John Wiley, Chichester, Sussex)
46.
RouwetteEAJAVennixJAMFellingAJA, 2007, “On evaluating the performance of problem structuring methods: An attempt at formulating a conceptual framework”Group Decision and Negotiation DOI: 10.1007/S10726-007-9100-Z
47.
ScholtenHJStillwellJ, 1990Geographical Information Systems for Urban and Regional Planning (Kluwer, Dordrecht)
48.
SchonD, 1983The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action (Temple Smith, London)
49.
SchrijnenPM, 2005, “Training professional for cross-boundary planning”Transportation Research Record number 1931, 1–7
50.
SengeP, 1990The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of Organizational Learning (Random House, Milsons Point, NSW)
SimonsR-Jvan der LindenJDuffyT, 2000New Learning (Kluwer, Dordrecht)
53.
StapletonJ, 2003DSDM: Business Focused Development (DSDM Consortium, Addison-Wesley, London)
54.
StapletonJConstableP, 1997DSDM: A Framework for Business Centered Development (Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA)
55.
SteinMKSilverEASmithSchwan M, 1998, “Mathematics reform and teacher development: A community of practice perspective”, in Thinking Practices in Mathematics and Science Learning Eds GreenoJGGoldmanSV (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ) pp 17–52
56.
StepichDANewbyTJ, 1988, “Analogizing as an instructional strategy”Performance and Instruction2721–23
57.
Te BrömmelstroetMCG, 2009, “The relevance of research in planning support systems: A response to Janssen et al”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design364–7
58.
Te BrömmelstroetMCGBertoliniL, 2008, “Developing land use and transport PSS: Meaningful information through a dialogue between modelers and planners”Transport Policy15251–259
59.
Van AkenJE, 2005, “Management research as a design science: Articulating the research products of mode 2 knowledge production in management”British Journal of Management1619–36
60.
van den BeltM, 2004Mediated Modeling: A System Dynamics Approach to Environmental Consensus Building (Island Press, Washington, DC)
61.
VennixJAM, 1996Group Model Building: Facilitating Team Learning Using System Dynamics (John Wiley, Chichester, Sussex)
62.
VennixJAMRouwetteEAJA, 2000, “Group model building: What does the client think of it now?”, in Proceedings of the 2000 International System Dynamics Conference Bergen, http://www.systemdynamics.org/conferences/2000/index.htm
63.
VennixJAMAndersenDFRichardsonGP, 1997a, “Forward: Group model building, art, and science”System Dynamics Review13103–106
64.
VennixAMAndersenDFRichardsonGP, 1997b, “Group model building: Adding more science to the craft”System Dynamics Review13187–201
65.
VonkG, 2006Improving Planning Support: The Use of Planning Support Systems for Spatial Planning (Nederlandse Geografische Studies, Utrecht)
66.
VonkGGeertmanSSchotP, 2005, “Bottlenecks blocking widespread usage of planning support systems”Environment and Planning A37909–924
67.
WaddellP, 2002, “UrbanSim: Modeling urban development for land use, transportation and environmental planning”Journal of the American Planning Association68297–314
68.
WilsonKMorrenGEB, 1990Systems Approaches for Improvements in Agriculture and Resource Management (Macmillan, New York)
