Advertisement

Introducing Land Use Scanner

  • Eric KoomenEmail author
  • Maarten Hilferink
  • Judith Borsboom-van Beurden
Chapter
First Online:
Part of the GeoJournal Library book series (GEJL, volume 101)

Abstract

The PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency has a long tradition in land-use modelling. Indeed, the PBL has been putting spatially explicit models of land-use change into practice for almost 15 years The agency manages the Land Use MOdelling System (LUMOS) toolbox, which currently consists of two well-known models for simulating land-use change: Land Use Scanner and Environment Explorer; as well as a set of tools for pre- and post-processing of the modelling results, of the latter of which the Map Comparison Kit is an example.

Keywords

Spatial Planning Local Suitability Regional Demand Scanner Model Business Park 
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Borsboom-van Beurden, J. A. M., Bakema, A., & Tijbosch, H. (2007). A land-use modelling system for environmental impact assessment; Recent applications of the LUMOS toolbox. Chapter 16. In E. Koomen, J. Stillwell, A. Bakema, & H. J. Scholten (Eds.), Modelling land-use change; Progress and applications (pp. 281–296). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Borsboom-van Beurden, J. A. M., Boersma, W. T., Bouwman, A. A., Crommentuijn, L. E. M., Dekkers, J. E. C., & Koomen, E. (2005). Ruimtelijke Beelden; Visualisatie van een veranderd Nederland in 2030. RIVM report 550016003. Bilthoven: Milieu- en Natuurplanbureau.Google Scholar
  3. Borsboom-van Beurden, J. A. M., Van Lammeren, R. J. A., & Bouwman, A. A. (2006). Linking land use modelling and 3D visualisation: A mission impossible? In J. Van Leeuwen & H. Timmermans (Eds.), Innovations in design and decision support systems in architecture and urban planning (pp. 85–102). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bouwman, A. A., Kuiper, R., & Tijbosch, H. (2006). Ruimtelijke beelden voor Zuid-Holland. Rapportnummer 500074002.2006. Bilthoven: Milieu- en Natuurplanbureau.Google Scholar
  5. Bubeck, P., & Koomen, E. (2008). The use of quantitative evaluation measures in land-use change projections; An inventory of indicators available in the land use scanner. Spinlab Research Memorandum SL-07. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam/SPINlab.Google Scholar
  6. CBS (2002). Productbeschrijving Bestand Bodemgebruik. Voorburg: Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek.Google Scholar
  7. CPB, MNP and RPB (2006). Welvaart en Leefomgeving. Een scenariostudie voor Nederland in 2040. Den Haag: Centraal Planbureau, Milieu- en Natuurplanbureau en Ruimtelijk Planbureau.Google Scholar
  8. Dekkers, J. E. C. (2005). Grondprijzen, geschiktheidkaarten en parameterinstelling in de Ruimtescanner. Technisch achtergrondrapport bij Ruimtelijke Beelden. MNP report 550016005. Bilthoven: Milieu- en Natuurplanbureau.Google Scholar
  9. Dekkers, J. E. C., & Koomen, E. (2006). De rol van sectorale inputmodellen in ruimtegebruiksimulatie; Onderzoek naar de modellenketen voor de LUMOS toolbox. SPINlab research memorandum SL-05. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  10. Dekkers, J. E. C., & Koomen, E. (2007). Land-use simulation for water management: Application of the land use scanner model in two large-scale scenario-studies. Chapter 20. In E. Koomen, J. Stillwell, A. Bakema, & H. J. Scholten (Eds.), Modelling land-use change; progress and applications (pp. 355–373). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Groen, J., Koomen, E., Ritsema, van E. J., & Piek, M. (2004). Scenario’s in kaart; model- en ontwerpbenaderingen voor toekomstig ruimtegebruik. NAi Uitgevers/Ruimtelijk Planbureau, Rotterdam/Den Haag.Google Scholar
  12. Hartje, V., Ansmann, T., Blazejczak, J., Gomann, H., Gornig, M., Grossman, M., et al. (2008). Szenarioanalyse der Regionalisierung der Driving Forces und Pressures des globalen Wandels in einem mittleren Flusseinzugsgebiet. Chapter 2. In: Wirkungen des globalen Wandels auf den Wasserkreislauf im Elbegebiet – Risiken und Optionen. Schlussbericht zum BMBF-Vorhaben GLOWA-Elbe II.Google Scholar
  13. Hilferink, M., & Rietveld, P. (1999). Land use scanner: An integrated GIS based model for long term projections of land use in urban and rural areas. Journal of Geographic Systems, 1(2), 155–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hoymann, J. (2010). Spatial allocation of future residential land use in the Elbe river basin. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 37(5), 911–928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. IPCC (2001). Climate change 2001: Synthesis report. A contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Third Assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Koomen, E., & Buurman, J. J. G. (2002). Economic theory and land prices in land use modeling. In M. Ruiz, M. Gould, & J. Ramon (Eds.), 5th AGILE conference on geographic information science proceedings (pp. 265–270). Palma (Illes Balears), Spain: Universitat de les Illes Balears.Google Scholar
  17. Koomen, E., Kuhlman, T., Groen, J., & Bouwman, A. A. (2005). Simulating the future of agricultural land use in The Netherlands. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie (Journal of Economic and Social Geography), 96(2), 218–224.Google Scholar
  18. Koomen, E., Loonen, W., & Hilferink, M. (2008). Climate-change adaptations in land-use planning; A scenario-based approach. In L. Bernard, A. Friis-Christensen, & H. Pundt (Eds.), The European information society; Taking geoinformation science one step further (pp. 261–282). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  19. Lloret, J. R., Omtzigt, N., Koomen, E., & De Blois, F. (2008). 3D visualisations in simulations of future land use: Exploring the possibilities of new, standard visualisation tools. International Journal of Digital Earth, 1(1), 148–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Loonen, W., Heuberger, P., & Kuijpers-Linde, M. (2007). Spatial optimisation in land-use allocation problems. Chapter 9. In E. Koomen, J. Stillwell, A. Bakema, & H. J. Scholten (Eds.), Modelling land-use change; progress and applications (pp. 147–165). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Loonen, W., & Koomen, E. (2009). Calibration and validation of the land use scanner allocation algorithms. Bilthoven: PBL-report. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.Google Scholar
  22. McFadden, D. (1978). Modelling the choice of residential location. In A. Karlqvist, L. Lundqvist, F. Snickars, & J. W. Weibull, (Eds.), Spatial interaction theory and planning models (pp. 75–96). Amsterdam: North Holland Publishers.Google Scholar
  23. MNP (2004). Kwaliteit en toekomst. Verkenning van de duurzaamheid. RIVM report. Bilthoven: Milieu- en Natuurplanbureau.Google Scholar
  24. MNP (2007). Nederland Later; Tweede Duurzaamheidsverkenning deel fysieke leefomgeving Nederland. MNP-publicatienr.500127001/2007. Bilthoven: Milieu- en Natuurplanbureau.Google Scholar
  25. PBL (2010). The Netherlands in the Future. Second Sustainability Outlook: The physical living environment in The Netherlands. Bilthoven: Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL).Google Scholar
  26. Ritsema, van E. J., & Koomen, E. (2008). Characterising urban concentration and land-use diversity in simulations of future land use. Annals of Regional Science, 42(1), 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Scholten, H. J., Van de Velde, R. J., Rietveld, P., & Hilferink, M. (1999). Spatial information infrastructure for scenario planning: The development of a land use planner for Holland. In J. Stillwell, S. Geertman, & S. Openshaw (Eds.), Geographical information and planning (pp. 112–134). Berlin/Heidelberg/New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Schotten, C. G. J., Goetgeluk, R., Hilferink, M., Rietveld, P., & Scholten, H. J. (2001). Residential construction, land use and the environment. Simulations for The Netherlands using a GIS-based land use model. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 6, 133–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schotten, C. G. J., & Heunks, C. (2001). A national planning application of Euroscanner in The Netherlands. Chapter 17. In J. C. H. Stillwell & H. J. Scholten (Eds.), Land use simulation for Europe (pp. 245–256). Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schotten, C. G. J., Heunks, C., Wagtendonk, A. J., Buurman, J. J. G., de Zeeuw, C. J., Kramer, H., Boersma, W. T. (2001). Simulating Europe in the 21th century. NRSP-2 report 00-22. BCRS, Delft.Google Scholar
  31. Schreuder, A. (2005). Doemscenario’s over natuurbehoud. NRC-Handelsblad January, 15, p. 2.Google Scholar
  32. Schrijver, A. (2003). Combinatorial optimization – polyhedra and efficiency. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  33. Thunissen, H. A. M., & De Wit, A. J. W. (2000). The National land cover database of the Netherlands. Amsterdam: ISPRS XXXIII.Google Scholar
  34. Tokuyama, T., & Nakano, J. (1995). Efficient algorithms for the Hitchcock transportation problem. SIAM Journal on Computing, 24(3), 563–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Van de Velde, R. J., Schotten, C. G. J., Van der Waals, J. F. M., Boersma, W. T., Ouwersloot, H., & Ransijn, M. (1997). Ruimteclaims en ruimtelijke ontwikkelingen in de zoekgebieden voor de toekomstige nationale luchtinfrastructuur (TNLI). Quickscan met de Ruimtescanner. RIVM-rapport 711901024. RIVM, Bilthoven.Google Scholar
  36. Van der Hoeven, E., Aerts, J., Van der Klis, H., & Koomen, E. (2008). An integrated discussion support system for new Dutch flood risk management strategies. Chapter 8. In S. Geertman & J. C. H. Stillwell (Eds.), Planning support systems: Best practices and new methods (159–174). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  37. Van Eupen, M., & Nieuwenhuizen, W. (2002). NatuurPlanGenerator: Gebruikershandleiding (Versie 1.0). Werkdocument Natuurplanbureau. Wageningen: Alterra.Google Scholar
  38. Visser, H., & De Nijs, T. (2006). The map comparison kit. Environmental Modelling & Software, 21(3), 346–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Volgenant, A. (1996). Linear and semi-assignment problems: A core oriented approach. Computers and Operations Research, 23(10), 917–932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wagtendonk, A. J., Julião, R. P., & Schotten, C. G. J. (2001). A regional planning application of Euroscanner in Portugal. Chapter 18. In J. C. H. Stillwell & H. J. Scholten (Eds.), Land use simulation for Europe (pp. 257–291). Amsterdam: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Xiang, W. N., & Clarke, K. C. (2003). The use of scenarios in land-use planning. Environment and Planning B, 30, 885–909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eric Koomen
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Maarten Hilferink
    • 3
  • Judith Borsboom-van Beurden
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Spatial Economics/SPINlabVU University AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.GeodanAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Object Vision, c/o VU University AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  4. 4.TNO Behavioural and Societal SciencesDelftThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options