Improving Planning Support : The use of planning support systems for spatial planning

Abstract

Spatial planning is one of the most complex activities of public organizations. Since approximately halfway the 1990s a new generation of geo-information technologies has become available to support those involved in planning in handling the complexity: Planning Support Systems (PSS). PSS consist of a combination of planning related theory, data, information, knowledge, methods and instruments, that take the form of an integrated environment with a shared interface. Many see PSS as promising support tools to handle complexity of planning, however usage in planning practice stays far behind of supply, which is problematic regarding this assumed potential. This project aims to explain the relative under-use of PSS in planning practice and formulate guidelines for enhanced PSS application in spatial planning. For this purpose the study combines insights of PSS users, PSS experts and PSS system developers. The problem has been studied from three approaches that each emphasize specific aspects of usage of PSS. Results of an analysis of instrumental quality of the existing PSS show that PSS technology is still in an early stage of development. The analysis also shows that there exists a dichotomy between the demands of planning practice and the supply of PSS: practice demands in particular simple systems, while many developers provide advanced systems. Results of an analysis of acceptance of PSS show that the main causes for the limited acceptance of PSS are: the lack of awareness of the existence and potential of PSS, the lack of experience with PSS, and the lack of intention to start using PSS among the intended users. Results of an analysis of diffusion of PSS show that diffusion is most likely to take place bottom-up. Geo-information specialists are the most suitable employees in practice to take the PSS from the extra organizational environment. However, bottom-up diffusion is often blocked by managers who perceive investments in ICT such as PSS as a risk. The instrument, user and transfer approach were subsequently applied to explain differences in usage of PSS types. Results show that PSS with the primary aim of informing the actors involved in planning are applied widely, while PSS with the primary aim of supporting communication and analysis are much less widely used. The primary causes of less wide usage of PSS for communication and analysis are lack of experience with these PSS, lack of awareness of their existence and potential, and lack of instrumental quality of many of these PSS. Secondary causes are hampered acceptance and diffusion. To enhance usage of PSS in planning practice, we recommend to the actors involved in PSS development and application of PSS start improving their communication and cooperation in development and application of PSS. Interactive learning processes in which PSS developers, researchers and practitioners are involved can constitute the right combination of knowledge and experience to come to successful applications. These can furthermore lead to the availability of examples that may convince others of the use of applying PSS. This can stimulate awareness, experience, instrumental quality, acceptance and diffusion of PSS.