Abstract
Sustainable urban development is a critical issue in the Netherlands. The country is densely populated, which causes conflicts between environmental concerns and spatial development. Environmental policy integration is proposed as a way to improve the integration of environmental values into spatial planning with the help of learning processes. This chapter evaluates the extent to which the combination of a map-based touch table and an area-specific environmental profile are of added value to environmental policy integration. The case study is the application of the map-based touch table, called MapTable® for the development of a sustainable neighborhood in the region of Utrecht, the Netherlands. It was found that MapTable® facilitates learning processes by providing a platform for communication among stakeholders from different backgrounds. Nonetheless, it must be ensured that all stakeholders are equally included, and that the process suits the application of a map-based touch table in combination with an area-specific environmental profile.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Since the use of specific jargon, brand names, and abbreviations might be somewhat confusing, the following table presents the central terms.
Generic term
In the Rijnenburg case study
Map-based touch table
MapTable®
GIS software
ArcGIS® and CommunityViz®
Area-specific environmental profile
Sustainability profile of the location (SPL)
References
Alexander KA, Janssen R, Arciniegas GA, O’Higgins TG, Eikelboom T, Wilding TA (2012) Interactive marine spatial planning: siting tidal energy arrays around the mull of Kintyre. PLoS ONE 7(1):e30031. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0030031
Arciniegas G (2012) Map-based decision support tools for collaborative land use planning. Free University Amsterdam PhD thesis
Benford R, Snow D (2000) Framing processes and social movements: an overview and assessment. Ann Rev Sociol 26:611–639
Brundtland GH (1987) Our common future. World Commission on Environment and Development, Brussels
Campbell S (1996) Green cities, growing cities, just cities? Urban planning and the contradictions of sustainable development. J Am Plan Assoc 62(3):296–312
Carton L (2007) Map making and map use in a multi-actor context: spatial visualizations and frame conflicts in regional policymaking in the Netherlands. PhD thesis, TU Delft
De Roo G, Visser J, Zuidema C (2012) Smart Methods for Environmental Externalities. Ashgate, Farnham
Dieber M (2003) Paint the town: lessons learned. 2nd annual conference on PPGIS, urban and regional information systems association. In: Proceedings of the conference on public participation GIS (PPGIS), Portland, 20–22 July 2003
Geertman S (2006) Potentials for planning support: a planning-conceptual approach. Environ Plan B: Plan Des 33:863–880
Geertman S (2008) Planning support systems: a planner’s perspective. In: Brail (2008, ed) Planning support systems for cities and regions. Lincoln Institute of Land Use Policy, Cambridge, pp 213–30
Geertman S, Stillwell J (2009) Planning support systems: best practices and new methods. Springer/GeoJournal Library, Berlin, p 95
Goffman E (1974) Frame analysis: an essay on the organization of experience. Harper Colophon, New York
Healey P (1992) Planning through debate. The communicative turn in planning theory. Town Plan Rev 63(2):143–162
Healey P (2007) Urban complexity and spatial strategies. Towards a relational planning for our times. Routledge, Oxon/New York
Hoeven der EJ, van der Aarts JH, van der Klis, Koomen E (2009) An integrated discussion support system for new Dutch flood risk management strategies, in planning support systems: best practices and new methods. In: Geertman S, Stillwell J (eds) (Springer/GeoJournal Library 95, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York), pp 74–159
Hofstra H, Scholten H, Zlatanova S, Scotta A (2008) Multi-user tangible interfaces for effective decision-making in disaster management. In: Nayak S, Zlatanova S (eds) Remote sensing and GIS technologies for monitoring and prediction of disasters. Springer, Heidelberg/Berlin, pp 243–266
Innes J, Booher D (2010) Planning with complexity. An introduction to collaborative rationality for public policy. Routledge, Oxon
Lafferty W, Hovden E (2003) Environmental policy integration: towards an analytical framework. Environ Polit 12(1):1–22
McElvaney S (2012) Geodesign: case studies in regional and urban planning. ESRI Press, Redlands
Nilsson M, Persson A (2003) Framework for analyzing environmental policy integration. J Environ Policy Plan 5(4):333–359
Nilsson M (2005) Learning, frames and environmental policy integration: the case of Swedish energy policy. Environ Plan C: Gov Policy 23(2):207–226
Pelzer P (2012) Planning knowledge through technology: potentials for PSS from the knowledge debate. Paper presented at the 12th international conference on design and decision support systems in architecture and urban planning, Eindhoven, The Netherlands 27–29 Aug 2012
Rein M, Schön D (1994) Frame reflection. Toward the resolution on intractable policy controversies. Basic Books, New York
Rydin Y (2010) Governing for sustainable urban development. Earthscan, London
Schön DA (1983) The reflective practitioner. How Professionals Think in Action. Temple Smith, London
Simeonova V, Van der Valk A (2009) The need for a communicative approach to improve environmental policy integration in urban land use. J Plan Lit 23(2):241
Te Brömmelstroet M (2010) Making planning support systems matter: improving the use of planning support systems for integrated land use and transport strategy-making. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam
Uittenbroek C Runhaar H, Janssen-Jansen L (2013) Mainstreaming climate adaptation into urban planning: overcoming barriers, seizing opportunities and evaluating the results in two Dutch case studies. Reg Environ Change 13:399–411. doi:10.1007/s10113-012-0348-8
Weber M, Driessen P (2010) Environmental policy integration: the role of policy windows in the integration of noise and spatial planning. Environ Plan C Gov Policy 28:1120–1134
Zanon B (2010) Planning small regions in a larger Europe: spatial planning as a learning process for sustainable local development. Eur Plan Stud 18(2):2049–2072
Websites
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Dymph Hoffmans from the Municipality of Utrecht, Joop Machielse from the Province of Utrecht, Mattijs Gevers from the urban design company Juurling & Geluk, and former MAPSUP owner Sjoerd Verhagen for sharing their valuable insights about the use of MapTable® in Rijnenburg and the two anonymous reviewers for their valuable and constructive comments. This study has partly been made possible by the knowledge initiative Connecting Sustainable Cities of the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pelzer, P., Arciniegas, G., Geertman, S., de Kroes, J. (2013). Using MapTable® to Learn About Sustainable Urban Development. In: Geertman, S., Toppen, F., Stillwell, J. (eds) Planning Support Systems for Sustainable Urban Development. Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography, vol 195. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37533-0_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37533-0_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-37532-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-37533-0
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)