Agent-Based Simulation in Geospatial Analysis



There is a wide array of simulation methods that mimic the mechanisms of human intelligence to achieve one or more objectives. Analytical simulation approaches basically use equations that explain data, while statistical ones work primarily with probabilities. An iterative combination of any or both of the above uses feedback options to answer problems which are too complex to be solved by one equation. Most of these equation-based mathematical models identify system variables, and evaluate or integrate sets of equations relating to these variables. A variant of such equation-based models are based on linear programming (Howitt 1995; Weinberg et al. 1993), and are potentially linked to geographical information science (GIS) information (Chuvieco 1993; Cromley and Hanink 1999; Longley et al. 1994). However, in practice there are limited levels of complexity that can be built into these models (Parker et al. 2003).


Cellular Automaton Cellular Automaton Emergent Phenomenon Geographical Information Science Iterative Combination 
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.


  1. Auyung SY (1998) Foundations of complex-systems theories in economics, evolutionary biology, and statistical physics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  2. Axelrod R, Cohen MD (2000) Harnessing complexity: organizational implications of a scientific frontier. Basic Book, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker WL (1989) A review of models in landscape change. Landsc Ecol 2(2):111–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balmann A (1997) Farm-based modelling of a region structural change: a cellular automata approach. Eur Rev Agric Econ 24:85–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balmann A, Happe K, Kellermann K, Kleingarn A (2002) Adjustment costs of agri-environment policy switching: an agent-based analysis of the German region Hohenlohe. In: Janssen M (ed) Complexity and ecosystem management: the theory and practice of multi-agent systems. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 127–157Google Scholar
  6. Balzter H, Braun PW, Kohler W (1998) Cellular automata models for vegetation dynamics. Ecol Model 107(2/3):113–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bandini S, Manzoni S, Vizzari G (2009) Agent based modeling and simulation: an informatics perspective. J Artif Soc Soc Simulat 12(4):4. Accessed 14 Apr 2011Google Scholar
  8. Becu N, Perez P, Walker B, Barreteau O, Le Page C (2003) Agent-based simulation of a small catchment water management in northern Thailand: description of the Catchscape model. Ecol Model 170:319–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berger T (2001) Agent-based spatial models applied to agriculture: a simulation tool for technology diffusion, resource use changes and policy analysis. Agr Econ 25:245–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Berger T, Ringler C (2002) Trade-offs, efficiency gains, and technical change: modelling water management and land use within a multiple-agent framework. Q J Int Agr 41(1/2):119–144Google Scholar
  11. Bonabeau E (2002) Agent-based modelling: methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proc Natl Acad Sci 99(3):7280–7287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bousquet F, Le Page C (2004) Multi-agent simulations and ecosystem management: a review. Ecol Model 176(3–4):313–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brown DG, Page SE, Riolo R, Rand W (2004) Agent-based and analytical modelling to evaluate the effectiveness of green belts. Environ Model Softw 19:1097–1109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Buchta C, Meyer D, Ster AP, Mild A, Taudes A (2003) Technological efficiency and organizational inertia: a model of the emergence of disruption. Comput Math Organ Theor 9:127–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Casti JL (1995) Complexication: explaining a paradoxical world through the science of surprise, 1st edn. Harper Perennial, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Chuvieco E (1993) Integration of linear programming and GIS for land-use modeling. Int J Geogr Inform Syst 7(1):71–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Collier N (2000) RePast: an extensible framework for agent simulation. Accessed 14 Jun 2011
  18. Conte R, Hegselmann R, Terna P (eds) (1997) Simulating social phenomena. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  19. Couclelis H (2001) Modeling frameworks, paradigms, and approaches. In: Clarke KC, Parks BE, Crane MP (eds) Geographic information systems and environmental modeling. Longman and Co, New York, pp 33–48Google Scholar
  20. Cromley RG, Hanink DM (1999) Coupling land-use allocation models with raster GIS. J Geogr Syst 1:137–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dawid H, Dermietzel J (2006) How robust is the equal split norm? Responsive strategies, selection mechanisms and the need for economic interpretation of simulation parameters. Comput Econ 28:371–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Deadman P, Robinson D, Moran E, Brondizo E (2004) Colonist household decision-making and land-use change in the Amazon Rainforest: an agent based simulation. Environ Plann Plann Des 31:693–709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dean JS, Gumerman GJ, Epstein JM, Axtell RL, Swedlund AC, Parket MT, McCarroll S (2000) Understanding Anasazi cultural change through agent-based modelling. In: Kohler TA, Gumerman GJ (eds) Dynamics in human and primate studies: agent-based modeling of social and spatial processes. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 179–206Google Scholar
  24. Deffuant G, Huet S, Bousset JP, Henriot J, Amon G, Weisbuch G (2002) Agent-based simulation of organic farming conversion in Allier department. In: Janssen M (ed) Complexity and ecosystem management: the theory and practice of multi-agent systems. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 158–187Google Scholar
  25. Epstein JM (1999) Agent-based models and generative social science. Complexity 4(5):41–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Epstein JM, Axtell R (1996) Growing artificial societies: social science from the bottom up. Brookings Institute, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  27. Evans TP, Kelley H (2004) Multi-scale analysis of a household-level agent-based model of land cover change. J Environ Manag 72:57–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Geoghegan J et al (1998) Socializing the pixel and pixelizing the social in land-use and land-cover change. In: Liverman D, Moran EF, Rindfuss RR, Stern PC (eds) People and pixels: linking remote sensing and social science. National Academy Press, Washington, pp 51–69Google Scholar
  29. Gilbert N, Troitzsch KG (1999) Simulation for the social scientist. Open University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  30. Gleick J (1987) Chaos: making a new science. Viking, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Happe K (2004) Agricultural policies and farm structures. Agent-based modelling and application to EU-policy reform. Studies on the agricultural and food sector in central and eastern Europe, 30, IAMO. Accessed 23 June 2011
  32. Heath BL (2010) The history, philosophy, and practice of agent-based modeling and the development of the conceptual model for a simulation diagram. Ph.D. Thesis, School of Graduate Studies, Wright State University. Accessed 8 Jun 2011
  33. Hoffmann M, Kelley H, Evans T (2002) Simulating land-cover change in South-Central Indiana: an agent-based model of deforestation and afforestation. In: Janssen M (ed) Complexity and ecosystem management: the theory and practice of multi-agent systems. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 218–247Google Scholar
  34. Hogeweg P (1988) Cellular automata as a paradigm for ecological modelling. Appl Math Comput 27(1):81–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Howitt RE (1995) Positive mathematical programming. Am J Agr Econ 77(2):329–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Huigen MGA (2004) First principles of the MameLuke multi-actor modelling framework for land use change, illustrated with a Philippine case study. J Environ Manag 72:5–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Janssen MA (2001) An exploratory integrated model to assess management of lake eutrophication. Ecol Model 140:111–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Janssen MA, Jager W (2000) The human actor in ecological economic models. Ecol Econ 35(3):307–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Janssen MA, Walker BH, Langridge J, Abel N (2000) An adaptive agent model for analysing ­co-evolution of management and policies in a complex rangeland system. Ecol Model 131:249–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Judd KL (1997) Computational economics and economic theory: substitutes or complements. J Econ Dyn Control 21(6):907–942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kamusoko C, Masamu A, Bongo A, Munyaradzi M (2009) Rural sustainability under threat in Zimbabwe: simulation of future land use/cover changes in the Bindura district based on the Markov-cellular automata model. Appl Geogr 29:435–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kohler TA, Kresl J, West CV, Carr E, Wilshusen RH (2000) Be there then: a modelling approach to settlement determinants and spatial efficiency among late ancestral populations of the Mesa Verde region, US Southwest. In: Kohler TA, Gumerman GJ (eds) Dynamics in human and primate studies: agent-based modeling of social and spatial processes. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 145–178Google Scholar
  43. Langton CG (1989) Artificial life. In: Langton CG (ed) Artificial life. Addison-Wesley, Redwood City, pp 1–48Google Scholar
  44. Lempert R (2002) Agent-based modeling as organizational and public policy simulators. Proc Natl Acad Sci 99:7195–7196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Levy S (1992) Artificial life: a report from the frontier where computers meet biology. Vintage Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  46. Li H, Reynolds JF (1997) Modelling effects of spatial pattern, drought, and grazing on rates of rangeland degradation: a combined Markov and cellular automaton approach. In: Quattrochi DA, Goodchild MF (eds) Scale in remote sensing and GIS. Lewis Publishers, New York, pp 211–230Google Scholar
  47. Liebrand WBG, Nowak A, Hegselmann R (eds) (1988) Computer modeling of social processes. SAGE Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  48. Ligtenberg A, Wachowicz M, Bregt AK, Beulens A, Kettenis DL (2004) A design and application of a multi-agent system for simulation of multi-actor spatial planning. J Environ Manag 72(1–2):43–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Loibl W, Toetzer T (2003) Modeling growth and densification processes in suburban regions: simulation of landscape transition with spatial agents. Environ Model Softw 18(6):553–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Longley P, Higgs G, Martin D (1994) The predictive use of GIS to model property valuations. Int J Geogr Inform Syst 8(2):217–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ludeke AK, Maggio RC, Reid LM (1990) An analysis of anthropogenic deforestation using logistic regression and GIS. J Environ Manag 31:247–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Luke S, Cioffi-Revilla C, Panait L, Sullivan K, Balan G (2005) MASON: a multiagent simulation environment. Simulation 81:517–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Malleson N (2010) Agent-based modelling of burglary. Ph.D. Thesis, School of Geography, University of Leeds. Accessed 10 Mar 2011
  54. Manson SM (2005) Agent-based modeling and genetic programming for modeling land change in the Southern Yucatan Peninsular Region of Mexico. Agr Ecosyst Environ 111:47–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mathews RB, Gilbert NG, Roach A, Polhill J, Gotts NM (2007) Agent-based land-use models: a review of applications. Landsc Ecol 22:1447–1459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Mertens B, Lambin EF (1997) Spatial modelling of deforestation in southern Cameroon. Appl Geogr 17(2):143–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Minar N, Burkhart R, Langton C, Askenazi M (1996) The Swarm simulation system: a toolkit for building multi-agent simulations, June. Report No.: 96-06-042. Santa Fe Institute, Santa FeGoogle Scholar
  58. O’Sullivan D, Haklay M (2000) Agent-based models and individualism: is the world agent-based? Environ Plann 32(8):1409–1425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Otter HS, van der Veen A, de Vriend HJ (2001) ABLOoM: location behaviour, spatial patterns, and agent-based modelling. J Artif Soc Soc Simulat 4(4):2. Accessed 1 Jun 2011
  60. Parker DC, Meretsky V (2004) Measuring pattern outcomes in an agent-based model of edge-effect externalities using spatial metrics. Agr Ecosyst Environ 101:233–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Parker DC, Manson SM, Janssen MA, Hoffmann M, Deadman P (2003) Multi-Agent systems for the simulation of land-use and land-cover change: a review. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 93:314–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Railsback SF, Lytinen SL, Jackson SK (2006) Agent-based simulation platforms: review and development recommendations. Simulation 82:609–623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Rajan KS, Shibasaki R (2000) A GIS based integrated land use/cover change model to study human–land interactions. Int Arch Photogramm 13, Part B7Google Scholar
  64. Rindfuss RR, Walsh SJ, Mishra V, Fox J, Dolcemascolo GP (2003) Linking household and remotely sensed data; methodological and practical problems. In: Fox J, Rindfuss RR, Walsh SJ, Mishra V (eds) People and the environment: approaches for linking household and ­community surveys to remote sensing and GIS. Kluwer Academic, Boston, pp 1–31Google Scholar
  65. Russel S, Norvig P (1995) Artificial intelligence: a modern approach. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  66. Sanders L, Pumain D, Mathian H, Guerin-Pace F, Bura S (1997) SIMPOP: a multi-agent system for the study of urbanism. Environ Plann Plann Des 24:287–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schreinemachers P, Berger T (2006) Land use decisions in developing countries and their representation in multi-agent systems. J Land Use Sci 1(1):29–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sengupta R, Lant C, Kraft S, Beaulieu J, Peterson W, Loftus T (2005) Modeling enrolment in the conservation reserve program by using agents within spatial decision support systems: an example from southern Illinois. Environ Plann Plann Des 32(6):821–834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Simon HA (1957) Models of man. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  70. Siqueira AD, McCracken SD, Brondizo ES, Moran EF (2002) Women in a Brazilian agricultural frontier. In: Clark G (ed) Gender at work in economic life. University Press of America, Lanham, pp 243–267Google Scholar
  71. Sklar FH, Costanza R (1991) The development of dynamic spatial models for landscape ecology: a review and prognosis. In: Tuner MG, Gardner RH (eds) Quantitative methods in landscape ecology. Springer, New York, pp 239–288Google Scholar
  72. Stephens W, Middleton T (2002) Why has the uptake of decision-support systems been so poor? In: Matthews RB, Stephens W (eds) Crop-soil simulation models: applications in developing countries. CAB Internationa, Wallingford, pp 129–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Tobias R, Hofmann C (2004) Evaluation of free Java-libraries for social-scientific agent-based simulation. J Artif Soc Soc Simulat 7. Accessed 3 May 2011
  74. Torrens P, Alberti M (2000) Measuring sprawl. Working Paper 27. CASA, University College London, LondonGoogle Scholar
  75. Verburg PH (2006) Simulating feedbacks in land use and land cover change models. Landsc Ecol 21:1171–1183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Verburg P, Kok K, Veldkamp T (2005) Pixels or agents? Modelling land-use and land-cover change. IHDP Update 03(2005):8–9Google Scholar
  77. von Neumann J (1966) Theory of self-reproducing automata. University of Illinois Press, UrbanaGoogle Scholar
  78. Wada Y, Rajan KS, Shibasaki R (2007) Modelling the spatial distribution of shifting cultivation in Luangprabang, Lao PDR. Environ Plann Plann Des 34:261–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Walker R (1999) The structure of uncultivated wilderness: land use beyond the extensive margins. J Reg Sci 39:387–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Weinberg M, Kling CL, Wilen JE (1993) Water markets and water quality. Am J Agr Econ 75(2):278–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Weisbuch G, Boudjema G (1999) Dynamical aspects in the adoption of agri-environmental measures. Adv Complex Syst 2:11–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Weiss G (ed) (1999) Multi-agent systems: a modern approach to distributed artificial intelligence. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  83. Weyns D, Omicini A, Odell J (2007) Environment as a first class abstraction in multiagent systems. Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst 14(1):5–30Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Spatial Information Science, Graduate School of Life and Environmental SciencesUniversity of TsukubaTsukubaJapan

Personalised recommendations