IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirb/v42y2015i4p615-637.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Land-use pattern scenario analysis using planner agents

Author

Listed:
  • Ying Long
  • Yongping Zhang

Abstract

Land-use pattern is one of the key issues in the compilation of urban master plans. In China, government, planners, and residents, all with various requirements and preferences, are the main agents participating in this process. Among them, planners play a role in negotiating with related agents and then establishing land-use patterns. In this paper we propose a planner agent framework to support land-use pattern scenario analysis (LUPSA), based on existing planning support system (PSS) research. Planner agents are divided into three types: nonspatial planner agent (NPA), spatial planner agent (SPA), and chief planner agent (CPA). The NPA is responsible for formulating special plans (such as transport, municipal public facilities, or nature reserve plans) that correspond to available data (such as road network, public facilities, and nature reserve patterns) from LUPSA. The SPA is responsible for establishing land-use patterns. The SPA considers constraints of local development conditions and communicates and coordinates with the NPAs to confirm formulated special plans that can support the implementation of the established land-use pattern. The CPA is responsible for negotiating with the government agent to ensure the reasonability of comprehensive constraints, establishing the final land-use pattern based on an evaluation of established scenarios by several SPAs, then determining it after a public participation process involving local residents. We initially tested this framework in a hypothetical city, then did an experiment in Beijing. Results show that the proposed planner agent framework is suitable for LUPSA.

Suggested Citation

  • Ying Long & Yongping Zhang, 2015. "Land-use pattern scenario analysis using planner agents," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 42(4), pages 615-637, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:42:y:2015:i:4:p:615-637
    DOI: 10.1068/b130012p
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/b130012p
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/b130012p?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. Nina Schwarz & Daniel Kahlenberg & Dagmar Haase & Ralf Seppelt, 2012. "ABMland - a Tool for Agent-Based Model Development on Urban Land Use Change," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 15(2), pages 1-8.
    2. Richard E. Klosterman & Loren Siebert & Jung-Wook Kim & Mohammed Ahmadul Hoque & Aziza Parveen, 2006. "What if evaluation of growth management strategies for a declining region," International Journal of Environmental Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(1/2), pages 79-95.
    3. Helen Couclelis, 2005. "“Where has the Future Gone?†Rethinking the Role of Integrated Land-Use Models in Spatial Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 37(8), pages 1353-1371, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Seyed Morsal Ghavami & Mohammad Taleai, 2017. "Towards a conceptual multi-agent-based framework to simulate the spatial group decision-making process," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 109-132, April.

    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. te Brömmelstroet, Marco, 2017. "Towards a pragmatic research agenda for the PSS domain," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 77-83.
    2. Stan Geertman & John Stillwell, 2020. "Planning support science: Developments and challenges," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(8), pages 1326-1342, October.
    3. Marco Te Brömmelstroet & Luca Bertolini, 2010. "Integrating land use and transport knowledge in strategy-making," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 85-104, January.
    4. Stephen M McCauley & John Rogan & James T Murphy & Billie L Turner & Samuel Ratick, 2015. "Modeling the Sociospatial Constraints on Land-Use Change: The Case of Periurban Sprawl in the Greater Boston Region," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 42(2), pages 221-241, April.
    5. James Derbyshire, 2020. "Answers to questions on uncertainty in geography: Old lessons and new scenario tools," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(4), pages 710-727, June.
    6. Sohl, Terry L. & Wimberly, Michael C. & Radeloff, Volker C. & Theobald, David M. & Sleeter, Benjamin M., 2016. "Divergent projections of future land use in the United States arising from different models and scenarios," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 337(C), pages 281-297.
    7. Pelzer, Peter, 2017. "Usefulness of planning support systems: A conceptual framework and an empirical illustration," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 84-95.
    8. Lei, Yayuan & Flacke, Johannes & Schwarz, Nina, 2021. "Does Urban planning affect urban growth pattern? A case study of Shenzhen, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    9. Yajun Ma & Ping Zhang & Kaixu Zhao & Yong Zhou & Sidong Zhao, 2022. "A Dynamic Performance and Differentiation Management Policy for Urban Construction Land Use Change in Gansu, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-31, June.
    10. Yoonshin Kwak & Brian Deal & Grant Mosey, 2021. "Landscape Design toward Urban Resilience: Bridging Science and Physical Design Coupling Sociohydrological Modeling and Design Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-17, April.
    11. Vitor Vieira Vasconcelos & Sandra Momm, 2020. "Rapid Environmental Planning Methodology: Developing Strategies for the Planners’ Education," Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, , vol. 14(2), pages 271-296, September.
    12. Peter Pelzer & Stan Geertman & Rob van der Heijden, 2015. "Knowledge in communicative planning practice: a different perspective for planning support systems," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 42(4), pages 638-651, July.
    13. Abdus Samie & Xiangzheng Deng & Siqi Jia & Dongdong Chen, 2017. "Scenario-Based Simulation on Dynamics of Land-Use-Land-Cover Change in Punjab Province, Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-17, July.
    14. Katarzyna Pukowiec-Kurda & Hana Vavrouchová, 2020. "Land Cover Change and Landscape Transformations (2000–2018) in the Rural Municipalities of the Upper Silesia-Zagłębie Metropolis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-16, November.
    15. Isabelle Reginster & Mark Rounsevell, 2006. "Scenarios of Future Urban Land Use in Europe," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 33(4), pages 619-636, August.
    16. Gerber, Pierre J. & Carsjens, Gerrit J. & Pak-uthai, Thanee & Robinson, Timothy P., 2008. "Decision support for spatially targeted livestock policies: Diverse examples from Uganda and Thailand," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 96(1-3), pages 37-51, March.
    17. Hemati, Touraj & Pourebrahim, Sharareh & Monavari, Masoud & Baghvand, Akbar, 2020. "Species-specific nature conservation prioritization (a combination of MaxEnt, Co$ting Nature and DINAMICA EGO modeling approaches)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 429(C).
    18. Cayo Costa & Sugie Lee, 2019. "The Evolution of Urban Spatial Structure in Brasília: Focusing on the Role of Urban Development Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-21, January.
    19. Ying Long & Zhenjiang Shen & Qizhi Mao, 2012. "Retrieving Spatial Policy Parameters from an Alternative Plan Using Constrained Cellular Automata and Regionalized Sensitivity Analysis," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 39(3), pages 586-605, June.
    20. René Ulloa-Espíndola & Susana Martín-Fernández, 2021. "Simulation and Analysis of Land Use Changes Applying Cellular Automata in the South of Quito and the Machachi Valley, Province of Pichincha, Ecuador," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-25, August.

    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:42:y:2015:i:4:p:615-637. 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.