IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirb/v40y2013i3p550-568.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Model of Conflict Resolution in Public Participation GIS for Land-Use Planning

Author

Listed:
  • Yongjun Zhang

    (NavInfo Company Limited, Beijing 100028, People's Republic of China; Satellite Environment Center, and Ministry of Environmental Protection, Beijing 100029, People's Republic of China)

  • Tung Fung

    (Department of Geography and Resource Management, Institute of Environment, Energy and Sustainability, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, NT, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China)

Abstract

On the basis of the principle of sustainable development, land-use planning often requires a compromise between economic development and environmental conservation with social justice advocated. Given that values, perceptions, and ideas vary among stakeholders, land-use planning often involves a variety of conflicts with advocating public participation. In this paper we focus on extending the decision-support capabilities of public participation GIS (PPGIS) to facilitate conflict resolution. In the proposed model, conflicts are designated to be investigated and resolved from two levels, namely the value level and the specifics level. From the value level, a consensus-building process is proposed to help participants promote mutual understanding and achieve group agreement. At the specifics level, participants are asked to search for compromise space through discussions over particular concerns. The ultimate goal of the model is to help participants to work out the most acceptable land-use plan. Moreover, a PPGIS prototype with the conflict-resolution model was designed and implemented in the context of Lantau Island, Hong Kong. The study could contribute to PPGIS research and land-use planning by developing the methodology of conflict resolution. The challenges that we encountered and some future directions are also covered in the paper.

Suggested Citation

  • Yongjun Zhang & Tung Fung, 2013. "A Model of Conflict Resolution in Public Participation GIS for Land-Use Planning," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 40(3), pages 550-568, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:40:y:2013:i:3:p:550-568
    DOI: 10.1068/b37033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/b37033
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/b37033?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Van Den Honert, R. C. & Lootsma, F. A., 1997. "Group preference aggregation in the multiplicative AHP The model of the group decision process and Pareto optimality," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 363-370, January.
    2. Andrew J. Evans & Richard Kingston & Steve Carver, 2004. "Democratic input into the nuclear waste disposal problem: The influence of geographical data on decision making examined through a Web-based GIS," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 117-132, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. S. Lipovetsky, 2009. "Global Priority Estimation in Multiperson Decision Making," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 140(1), pages 77-91, January.
    2. Nixon, J.D. & Dey, P.K. & Davies, P.A., 2010. "Which is the best solar thermal collection technology for electricity generation in north-west India? Evaluation of options using the analytical hierarchy process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 5230-5240.
    3. Baudry, Gino & Macharis, Cathy & Vallée, Thomas, 2018. "Range-based Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis: A combined method of Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis and Monte Carlo simulation to support participatory decision making under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(1), pages 257-269.
    4. Mesa, Pascual & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Berbel, Julio, 2008. "Análisis multicriterio de preferencias sociales en gestión hídrica bajo la Directiva Marco del Agua," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 8(02), pages 1-22.
    5. Bernasconi, Michele & Choirat, Christine & Seri, Raffaello, 2014. "Empirical properties of group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: Theory and evidence," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(3), pages 584-592.
    6. María Teresa Escobar & José María Moreno-jiménez, 2007. "Aggregation of Individual Preference Structures in Ahp-Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 287-301, July.
    7. Dong, Qingxing & Cooper, Orrin, 2016. "A peer-to-peer dynamic adaptive consensus reaching model for the group AHP decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 521-530.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:40:y:2013:i:3:p:550-568. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.