Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Geodesign by Integrating Design and Geospatial Sciences pp 331–344Cite as

Geodesign in Practice: What About the Urban Designers?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: GeoJournal Library ((GEODES,volume 111))

Abstract

This paper acknowledges the great potential of Geodesign. It notes, however, that barriers exist for urban designers to use GIS-based tools. An experiment we conducted with students and interviews with practitioners seem to confirm this claim. We identify four main barriers for the usage of GIS-based tools by urban designers: (1) impotence to handle unquantifiable issues, (2) (perceived) restriction of creativity, (3) limited possibility for fuzziness, and (4) existing habits need to be changed. Based on the interviews, we provide tentative solutions to overcome these barriers. The paper concludes by pointing out future research directions, in particular into a holistic user perspective of GIS-based tools in combination with Geodesign.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    A full list of quotes from the interviewees is available upon request.

  2. 2.

    We are not providing a judgment as to whether or not this notion is true, since the famous Thomas-theorem states: ‘If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences’.

References

  • Carton, L. (2007). Map making and map use in a multi-actor context: Spatial visualizations and frame conflicts in regional policymaking in the Netherlands. Dissertation, TU Delft.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carver, S., Watson, A., Waters, T., Matt, R., Gunderson, K., & Davis, B. (2009). Developing computer-based participatory approaches to mapping landscape values for landscape and resource management. In S. Geertman & J. Stillwell (Eds.), Planning support systems: Best practices and new methods (pp. 47–60). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dangermond, J. (2010). Geodesign and GIS—Designing our futures. In E. Buhmann, M. Pietsch, & E. Kretzler (Eds.), Digital landscape architecture (pp. 502–514). Offenbach/Berlin: Wichmann/VDE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dias, E., Kuipers, M., Rafiee, A., Koomen, E., & Scholten, H. (2013). Beauty and brains: Integrating easy spatial design and advanced urban sustainability models. In S. Geertman, J. Stillwell, & F. Toppen (Eds.), Planning support for sustainable urban development (pp. 469–484). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Flaxman, M. (2010). Fundamentals in Geodesign. In E. Buhmann, M. Pietsch, & E. Kretzler (Eds.). Peer reviewed proceedings digital landscape architecture 2010, Anhalt University of Applied Sciences (pp. 28–41). Berlin: Wichmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geertman, S. (2008). Planning support systems: A planner’s perspective. In R. Brail (Ed.), Planning support systems for cities and region (pp. 213–230). Cambridge: Lincoln Institute for Land Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geertman, S. & Stillwell, J. (Eds.). (2009). Planning support systems: Best practices and new methods. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper Colophon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healey, P. (2007). Urban complexity and spatial strategies. Towards a relational planning for out times. Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahila M., & Kyttä, M. (2009). SoftGIS as a bridge-builder in collaborative urban planning. In S. Geertman & J. Stillwell (Eds.), Planning support systems: Best practices and new methods (pp. 389–412). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • McElvaney, S. (2012). Geodesign: Case studies in regional and urban planning. Redlands: ESRI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., Vogt, N., Nijnik, M., Brondizio, E., & Fiorini, S. (2009). Integrating analytical and participatory techniques for planning the sustainable use of land resources and landscapes. In S. Geertman & J. Stillwell (Eds.), Planning support systems: Best practices and new methods (pp. 317–345), Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouter, N., & Pelzer, P. (2013). Zwemles voor Planners. In F. Filius, E. Vanempten, C. Uittenbroek, G. Bouma, & S. Reniers (Eds.), Planning is niet waarde-n-loos, Papers for the Plandag 2013 in Antwerp, Belgium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelzer, P., Arciniegas, G., Geertman, S., & de Kroes, J. (2013). Using map table® to learn about sustainable urban development. In S. Geertman, J. Stillwell, & F. Toppen (Eds.), Planning support for sustainable urban development (pp. 167–186). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rowley, A. (1994). Definitions of urban design: The nature and concerns of urban design. Planning Practice and Research, 9, 179–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rydin, Y. (2007). Re-examining the role of knowledge within planning theory. Planning Theory, 6(1), 52–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, H., Wall, G., & Blackstock, K. (2013). The role of map-based environmental information in supporting integration between river basin planning and spatial planning. Environmental Science & Policy, 30, 81–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinitz, C. (1990). A framework for theory applicable to the education of landscape architects and other environmental design professionals. Landscape Journal, 9, 136–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • te Brömmelstroet, M. (2010). Making planning support systems matter: Improving the use of planning support systems for integrated land use and transport strategy-making. Dissertation, University of Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • te Brömmelstroet, M. (2013a). Different process strategies for PSS: Influence of process strategies on added value of Urban Strategy (trial No5), CESAR working document series, no. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • te Brömmelstroet, M. (2013b). Performance of planning support systems: What is it, and how do we report on it? Computers Environment and Urban Systems, 41, 299–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • te Brömmelstroet, M. (2014). Drawing versus calculating. The difference in added value between a drawing PSS (Phoenix) and a calculating PSS (Urban Strategy) (trial No. 6), CESAR working document series, no. 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Aken, J. (2004). Management research based on the paradigm of the design sciences: The quest for field-tested and grounded technological rules. Journal of Management Studies, 41(2), 219–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Rossem, V. (1993). Het algemeen uitbreidingsplan van amsterdam. Rotterdam/Den Haag: NAI Uitgevers/EFL-stichting.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vonk, G., Geertman, S., & Schot, P. (2005). Bottlenecks blocking the widespread usage of planning support systems. Environment and Planing A, 37, 909–924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vonk, G., Geertman, S., & Schot, P. (2007). New technologies stuck in old hierarchies; an analysis of diffusion of geo-information technologies in Dutch public organizations. Public Adminstration Review, 67(4), 745–756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zwick, P. (2010). The world beyond GIS, planning, July 2010, pp. 20–23.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the students and interviewees for participating in our research. This research has been made possible by the ‘Connecting Sustainable Cities’ (VerDuS) knowledge initiative of the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Urban and Regional research centre Utrecht (URU), Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 2, 3508 TC, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Peter Pelzer & Stan Geertman

  2. Amsterdam Institute for Social Science Research (AISSR), University of Amsterdam, Plantage Muidergracht 14, 1018 TV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Marco te Brömmelstroet

Authors
  1. Peter Pelzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marco te Brömmelstroet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stan Geertman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Pelzer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Spatial Economics, SPINlab, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Danbi J. Lee

  2. Department of Spatial Economics, SPINlab, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Eduardo Dias

  3. Department of Spatial Economics, SPINlab, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Henk J. Scholten

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pelzer, P., te Brömmelstroet, M., Geertman, S. (2014). Geodesign in Practice: What About the Urban Designers?. In: Lee, D., Dias, E., Scholten, H. (eds) Geodesign by Integrating Design and Geospatial Sciences. GeoJournal Library(), vol 111. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08299-8_21

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation