Integrating Knowledge about Land Use and the Environment Through the Use of Multiple Models

  • Lewis D. Hopkins


My fundamental premise is that reaching focused disagreements and then explaining them is fundamental to crafting research agendas and to using urban and environmental models. We should seek neither one integrated research agenda nor one integrated model. We should, instead, create computer modeling envi­ronments in which disagreements can emerge and be used to advance knowledge and be used to solve problems. The first use is a way to organize research about land use, environment, and the use of models. The second use is a way to decide what to do in specific situations—to apply the knowledge and models. We should view models and computing tools as additional participants in conversa­tions—interactions about discovering and using knowledge.


Modeling Environment Multiple Model Land Suitability Land Conversion Plan Design 
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. Anas, Alex, Richard J. Arnott, and Kenneth A. Small. 1998. Urban spatial structure. Journal of Economic Literature 36 (3): 1426–1464.Google Scholar
  2. Brill, E. Downey Jr., Shoou-Yuh Chang, and Lewis D. Hopkins. 1982. Modeling to gener­ate alternatives: The HS Japproach and an illustration using a problem in land use planning. Management Science 28 (3):221–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brill, E. Downey Jr., John M. Flach, Lewis D. Hopkins, and S. Ranjithan. 1990. MGA: A decision support system for complex, incompletely defined problems. IEEE Transac­tions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 20 (4):745–757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Foot, David. 1981. Operational urban models. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  5. Hopkins, Lewis D. 1979. Quadratic versus linear models for land use plan design. Envi­ronment and Planning A 11 (3):291–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hopkins, Lewis D. 1977a. Land use plan design: Quadratic assignment and central facility models. Environment and Planning A 9 (6):625–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hopkins, Lewis D. 1977b. Methods for generating land suitability maps: A comparative evaluation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 43 (4):386–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hopkins, Lewis D., E. Downey Brill Jr., and Benedict Wong. 1982. Generating alternative solutions for dynamic programming models of water resources problems. Water Resources Research 18 (4):782–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hopkins, Lewis D., and Marc Los. 1979. Location-allocation algorithms for land use plan design with fixed and substitutable interactions. Journal of Regional Science 19 (3):345–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lai, Shih-Kung, and Lewis D. Hopkins. 1995. Can decision makers express multiattribute preferences using AHP and MUT? An Experiment. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 22 (1):21–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lai, Shih-Kung, and Lewis D. Hopkins. 1989. The meanings of tradeoffs in multi-attribute evaluation methods: A compari­son. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 16 (2): 155–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lee, Insung, and Lewis D. Hopkins. 1995. Procedural expertise for efficient multiattribute evaluation: A procedural support strategy for CEA. Journal of Planning Education and Research 14 (4):255–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Verma, Niraj. 1998. Similarities, connections, and systems: The search for a new rational­ity for planning and management. Lanham, Md.: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  14. Waddell, Paul. 2000. A behavioral simulation model for metropolitan policy analysis and planning: Residential location and housing market components of UrbanSim. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 27 (2): 247–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Wegener, Michael. 1994. Operational urban models: State of the art. Journal of the Ameri­can Planning Association 60 (1): 17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Westervelt, James. 2001. Simulation modeling for watershed management. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lewis D. Hopkins

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations