Strategic and Practical Implications in Decision Making and Planning for Sustainability

Abstract

This paper describes how the competence of decision makers and those involved in the decision making process might profit by using supportive decision making tools for sustainability in practice. Based on the analysis of several case studies and a collection of tools, suggestions for different approaches in decision making have been analysed to describe both advantages and obstacles in planning and decision making. Following a holistic view on the subject of decision making, the EU financed project Practical Evaluation Tools for Urban Sustainability (PETUS) aimed to describe important necessities — the interaction between stakeholders, requirements for trying to understand each others situation, being prepared for new arrangements, being ready to collect and deal with new information and the usefulness of support through instruments. The development of the Decision Support System that includes a matrix and a checklist is presented.

Keywords

Decision making Planning Sustainability Tools Frameworks Participation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Landry C. : The creative city: a toolkit for urban innovators. London , Earthscan Publications Ltd, 2000 .

Simon HA : The new science of management decision. New York, Harper and Row, 1960.

Power D. : How does planning differ from decision-making? Decision Support System News 2004;5(11).

Schwartz P. : The art of the Long view: planning in the future in an uncertain world. John Wiley & Sons, 1996.

Bruntland, G (ed): Our common future: The World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford , Oxford University Press, 1987.

Kelly ED , Becker B. : Community planning: an introduction to the comprehensive plan. Washington, DC, Island Press, 2000 .

Robinson J. , Tinker J. : Reconciling ecological, economic and social imperatives: Towards an analytical framework. Paper prepared for the International Development Research Centre. Sustainable Development Research Institute, University of British Columbia, 1996.

Commission of the European Communities (2002 ): Communication from the Commission on Impact Assessment, COM (2002) 276 final, Brussels, 2002.

Commission of the European Communities (2001 a): European Governance: A White Paper, Brussels, CEC, 2001.

10.

Berger G. : Environmental governance: Issues of power and policy making in sustainable regional development. ICCR Working Paper 301, Vienna, 2002.

11.

Pierre J. , Peter G. : Governance, politics and the state. London, Macmillan, 2000.

12.

Commission of the European Communities (2002 ): Communication from the commission on the collection and use of expertise by the commission: Principles and Guidelines, COM (2002) 713 final, Brussels, 2002.

13.

Kerr DH : The logic of policy and successful policies. Policy Sciences 1976;7(3):351—363.

14.

Baer WC : General plan evaluation criteria: An approach to making better plans. J Am Planning Assoc 1997;63(3):329—344.

15.

Mastop H. , Faludi A. : Evaluation of strategic plans: The performance principle. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 1997;24:815—832.

16.

Hopkins LD : Urban development: The logic of making plans. Island Press , 2001.

17.

Ascher W. : Forecasting: An appraisal for policy makers and planners. Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978.

18.

Walker RA : The planning function in government, 2nd ed. Chicago, University of Chicago Press , 42, 1950 .

19.

UVP-report 17 (5): Kommunale Nachhaltigkeitsindikatorensysteme.-17 . Jahrgang, 2003 UVP-Gesellschaft, www.uvp.de.

20.

Plummer J. : Municipalities and community participation: A strategic framework for municipal capacity building. Earthscan, 2000: 7—11.

21.

ÖGUT (Österreichische Gesellschaft für Umwelt und Technik) : Das Handbuch Öffentlichkeitsbeteiligung — Zukunft gemeinsam gestalten. Wien, 2005 .