Multimedia and Urban Planning

  • Cristina Gouveia
  • António Câmara
Part of the Advances in Spatial Science book series (ADVSPATIAL)


Until recently, the representation of spatial information using computer tools in urban planning was limited to the use of maps. As Parsons (1992) has pointed out, maps represent a three dimensional (3-d) reality in two dimensions (2-d), use fixed scales of representation and have difficulty in representing dynamic features. The use of other data types such as images, video and sound in multimedia spatial information systems overcomes such limitations. In addition, multimedia systems allow for a high degree of interaction. Thus, the application of spatial multimedia to planning supports key actions within the planning process, such as description, analysis and communication of relevant data.


Public Participation Environmental Impact Assessment Multimedia Application Environmental Impact Assessment Multimedia System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Blat J., Delgado A., Ruiz M. and Segui J.M. 1995. Designing multimedia GIS for territorial planning: the ParcBIT case, Environment and Planning B, 22: 665–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cassetari S. and Parsons E. 1993. Sound as a data type in a spatial information system, in Harp J., Ottens H. and Scholten H. (eds.) Proceedings of the European GIS Conference, Genoa: 194–202.Google Scholar
  3. Ferreira F., Seixas J. and Nunes C. 1995. A spatial-based comparison between air pollution modelling and monitoring data, in Proceedings of the First Joint European Conference and Exhibition on Geographical Information, The Hague: 448–453.Google Scholar
  4. Fonseca A., Fernandes J., Gouveia C., Silva J.P., Pinheiro A., Sousa M., Aragâo D. and Gonçalves C. 1996. Environmental multimedia exploratory systems, in Proceedings of the Second Joint European Conference and Exhibition on Geographic Information, Barcelona, Volume 1: 147–166.Google Scholar
  5. Fonseca A., Gouveia C., Câmara A.S. and Silva J.P. 1995. Environmental impact assessment using multimedia spatial information systems, Environment and Planning B, 22: 637–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fonseca A., Gouveia C., Raper J.F., Ferreira F. and Câmara A. 1993. Adding video and sound to GIS, in Proceedings of the European GIS Conference, Genoa: 187–193.Google Scholar
  7. Ferraz de Abreu P. and Chito B. 1997. Current challenges in Environmental Impact Assessment evaluation in Portugal, and the role of new information technologies: the case of S.Joâo da Talha’s incinerator for solid urban waste, in Reis Machado J. and Ahern J. (eds.) Environmental Challenges in and Expanding World and the Role of Emerging Technologies, National Centre for Geographical Information, Lisbon: 1–11.Google Scholar
  8. Gouveia C. 1996. Augmenting public participation with information technology in a Portuguese environmental assessment context, Paper submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an MA in City Planning.Google Scholar
  9. Geodan. 1997. European Spatial Metadata Infrastructure, Report to the European Commission, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
  10. Gordon T., Karacapilidis N.I. and Vob H. 1996. ZENO -a mediation system for spatial planning, in Busbach U., Kerr D. and Sikkel K. (eds.) CSCW and the Web, Proceedings of the Fifth ERCIM/W4G Workshop, Sankt Augustin: 55–61.Google Scholar
  11. Kemp Z. 1995. Multimedia and Spatial Information Systems,IEEE Multimedia Volume 2 (1): 68–76.Google Scholar
  12. Parsons E. 1992. The development of a multimedia hypermap, in Proceedings of AGI 92, 2 (24): 1–3.Google Scholar
  13. Raper J. 1997. Progress in spatial multimedia, in Craglia M. and Couclelis H. (eds.) Geographic Information Research, Taylor Francis, London: 525–543.Google Scholar
  14. Raper J. and Bundock M. 1993. Development of a generic spatial language interface for GIS, in Mather P.M. (ed.) Geographical Information Handling, Wiley, Chichester: 113–143.Google Scholar
  15. Raper J. and Livingstone D. 1995. The development of a spatial data explorer within an environmental hyperdocument, Environment and Planning B, 22: 679–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Raper J. and McCarthy T. 1994. Virtually GIS: the new media arrive, in Proceedings of the AGI’93 Conference, Birmingham, AGI, London: 18.1.1–18. 1. 6.Google Scholar
  17. Rhind D.W., Armstrong P. and Openshaw S. 1988. The Domesday machine: a nationwide GIS, Geographical Journal, 154: 56–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Romäo T., Câmara A., Molendijk M. and Scholten H. 1995. Coastal management with aerial photograph based mosaics, Paper at the First Conference on Spatial Multimedia and Virtual Reality, Lisbon.Google Scholar
  19. Shiffer M. 1993. Implementing multimedia collaborative planning techniques, in Proceedings of the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association Conference, 86–97.Google Scholar
  20. Shiffer M. 1995. Interactive multimedia planning support: moving from standalone systems to the World Wide Web, Environment and Planning B, 22: 649–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Smith T. and Frew J. 1995. Alexandria digital library, Communications of the ACM, 38 (4): 61–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cristina Gouveia
    • 1
  • António Câmara
    • 2
  1. 1.Centro Nacional Informaçao GeográfiaLisbonPortugal
  2. 2.Departamento Ciências e Technologia, Faculdade de Ciências e TecnologiaUniversidade Nova de LisboaMonte de CaparicaPortugal

Personalised recommendations