Marco te Brömmelstroet

From Planning Support Systems to Mediated Planning Support: A Structured Dialogue to Overcome the Implementation Gap

Planning support systems (PSSs) are intended to facilitate relevant steps in planning processes; however, the academic evaluation of PSSs reveals many bottlenecks precluding a widespread use of these systems. A central weakness is the lack of communication between PSS developers (focusing on technical issues) and potential PSS users. Other academic fields such as knowledge management and technological innovation recognised similar bottlenecks years ago. On the basis of methods proposed in these fields, a new process architecture for the development of a PSS is proposed. Through a dialogue in which PSS developers and potential users discuss and use the PSS, existing tools, instruments, and models are refined and improved to be more useful to their potential users. The focus shifts away from the development of a technically more sophisticated support system, towards a process of PSS development which is intertwined with the planning process itself. This process architecture is called mediated planning support (MPS). We explore what can be learned from other academic domains and enquire about the applicability of these findings to PSS development. In Amsterdam the Department of Transport wanted to transform their transportation model into a land-use and transport PSS and their work illustrates how such a process architecture can link PSS developers and users in planning practice. We discuss the concepts behind MPS and use the case of Amsterdam to visualise its workings, lastly offering hypotheses on the method and suggestions for further research.

Performance of planning support systems: what is it, and how do we report on it?

Planning Support Systems (PSSs) are a family of computer based instruments specifically designed to support actors in their complex tasks in the field of planning. There is a gap between the high expectations that PSS developers have about the usefulness of their instruments and the instruments’ application in daily planning practice. PSS academics have proposed several ways to close this so-called implementation gap through a range of software, hardware and orgware approaches. Several of these approaches have been applied in practical planning settings. There is however a lack of consistent and structured reporting on the effectiveness of these approaches in improving PSS performance. Therefore, it is hard to distinguish between successful and less successful strategies, and it is difficult to draw overall lessons. This paper (1) proposes a comprehensive multidimensional framework that operationalizes PSS performance, and (2) analyses how recent PSS implementation studies have reported on this performance. The developed framework, based on literature from Group Model Building and group psychology, is sensitive to a wide variety of performance dimensions and therefore forms a useful guideline for assessing PSS implementation strategies. Studying these in a common framework supports the potential transfer of lessons to other PSS implementations. Most of the analyzed studies only posed hypotheses about which dimensions are improved through a specific strategy, but did not report on measuring impacts. By structurally measuring the effectiveness of a range of strategies to improve PSS implementation, lessons can be exchanged and a consistent body of knowledge can be built.

An Experiential Approach to Research in Planning

Most planning research seeks to understand how current planning practices influence (and are influenced by) the processes and institutional contexts of decision making and the transformation of spaces. Typically, analytical methods borrowed from other social sciences are employed for this purpose. However, if one wants to know how new planning practices can be generated, a different research approach seems to be needed. Relevant innovations do not originate in an academic vacuum, but have to be developed in coproduction with intended users and in the context of their intended use. Only then can a reciprocal learning process between research and practice be activated in which original hypotheses about possible planning innovations are developed through iterative testing, reflection, and adaptation. In our opinion, carrying out research into possible planning innovations thus requires a different type of research methodology from the one typically applied. Because of its static nature, a traditional comparative case-study analysis—as often used in planning research—does not allow for such an iterative, evolutionary process. In this paper we propose a new methodology, which we have labelled ‘experiential case-study analysis’. In this approach each case study provides learning experiences that fuel theory building, but also serve as input for the next case study. We have used this approach to develop and test different planning innovations in three case studies in the field of transport and urban planning in The Netherlands.

Transparency, flexibility, simplicity: from buzzwords to strategies for real PSS improvement

There is a growing body of academic literature that deals with the gap between Planning Support Systems (PSS) and daily urban planning practices. Although there are many theoretical ideas about how to improve this situation, there is only limited academic attention for testing these in real world applications. This article discusses the importance of such testing and how this can be done. Four central PSS hypothesized improvement mechanisms are translated into a grounded intervention and tested in three settings of land use and transport strategy-making in the Netherlands. I utilised workshop specific questionnaires, a general ex-post survey and participatory observation. Although small-N, the results seem to indicate a tentative pattern that the hypothesized improvement mechanisms did improve several of the bottlenecks of PSS implementation defined in other studies: it provided a better fit between the PSS characteristics and the strategy-making processes, it increased understanding of the possibilities (and limitations) of PSS and it fostered acceptance (awareness and transparency were only marginally influenced). Important mechanisms for promoting these outcomes include an open constructive critical attitude of both PSS developers and planners, a prototyping process, and placing emphasis on externalisation and internalisation of knowledge. This research example illustrates both the added value of the findings and the methodological problems of a practice oriented research approach. The paper closes with a discussion on the implications for PSS research methods, PSS development and planning and will provide directions for further research.

Forty years after Lee’s Requiem: are we beyond the seven sins?

This paper ended an initial period of wide enthusiasm in attempting to realise the potential of computer innovations to revolutionise urban planning (Harris, 1960). It was an era when both the planning and the computer domains were strongly influenced by strong positivist ideas about the nature of scientific progress. Planning was mainly a comprehensive�rational, linear but also cyclical process in which experts examined all possible (or politically defined) problems and relevant solutions, which in turn would lead to optimal decisions (Faludi, 1973). Even then this was extensively questioned in academic research that emphasised the limits of human cognitive capacity: that is, information processing (Simon, 1969).

Strengths and weaknesses of accessibility instruments in planning practice : Technological rules based on experiential workshops

ABSTRACT Accessibility instruments can play a valuable role in urban planning practice by providing a practical framework for exploring and testing relationships between land use and transport infrastructure. Despite many available accessibility instruments, they are still not widely used in planning practice. This paper explores the background of this problem by examining the findings of a EU-funded study on the usability and usefulness of existing accessibility instruments. The study applied 16 instruments in local planning contexts according to a standardized process protocol. The outcomes of these so-called experiential workshops were analysed through a standardized measurement protocol, which included participant observation along with pre- and post-workshop practitioner questionnaires. This broad investigation presents a rich analytical tool for understanding how different types of accessibility measures, spatial resolutions of output and levels of comprehensiveness affect usability and usefulness. Based on this we propose 10 technological rules that (a) can be used directly in practice to improve usability of accessibility instruments and (b) can provide hypotheses to be examined in further academic studies. Our results suggest that instead of striving for the ultimate accessibility measure, it would be more effective to identify which measures could successfully serve different user needs in accessibility planning.

What Curriculum for Mobility and Transport Studies? A Critical Exploration

To understand the complex meanings of mobility and to engage in transport planning and management processes, a variety of disciplines, skills, and tools are potentially useful. Universities have a limited amount of time and resources to train future professionals though. This poses a problem: where should the teaching priorities be? By means of a web-survey, this study has asked academics based at a number of universities what the disciplines, skills, and tools that — according to their personal viewpoints — are the most relevant for practitioners in the mobility and transport sector. The respondents generally support curricula that facilitate a holistic, non-specialised, understanding of mobility and transport issues.

Facilitating PSS Workshops: A Conceptual Framework and Findings from Interviews with Facilitators

Recent research has emphasized the importance of workshops as a venue where planning support systems (PSS) are used in planning processes. Empirical studies of these workshops have previously largely overlooked facilitation, in particular the role of a moderator (steering the discussion) and/or a chauffeur (steering the PSS). Drawing on existing facilitation research, we identify four main categories of facilitation interventions: substantive, procedural, relational, and tool-related. We use these categories to develop a novel conceptual framework for facilitation at PSS workshops. We test and develop this framework through semi-structured interviews with eight experienced facilitators of PSS workshops in the US and the Netherlands . The interviews confirm the validity of the intervention categories, but also revealed a wider range of PSS-specific workshop outcomes. We conclude that successful facilitation of PSS workshops requires two different types of facilitation interventions: some to encourage PSS use, and others to prevent PSS domination of the group discussion. Facilitating PSS workshops is mainly about finding the delicate and context-dependent balance between these two extremes.

Beyond the Dilemma of Mobility: Exploring New Ways of Matching Intellectual and Physical Mobility

Mobility has become a central aspect of many peoples lives. This is the natural result of the massive investments made in the transport sector throughout the world. These investments were made because the benefits provided by mobility are many. However, the negative effects resulting from mobility cannot be ignored when sustainability is considered. This poses a question: how can we experience the positive effects of mobility without experiencing the negative ones as well? Through the use of an unorthodox paper structure we facilitate the exploration of multiple directions of academic scrutiny which might provide solutions for this question.

Travelling together alone and alone together: mobility and potential exposure to diversity

Abstract Quantity and quality of social relations correlate with our happiness and physical health. Our (feeling of) connectedness also matters for the efficacy and functioning of communities and societies as a whole. Different mobility practices offer different conditions for being exposed to other people and the environment. Such exposure influences a sense of being connected to places, communities and societies. In transport planning practice and research, these relations are slowly getting attention. In this paper, we develop an analytical framework that offers a comprehensive understanding on if and how one’s experiences of being on the move influence the ability of an individual to develop a sense of connectedness. We develop hypotheses about these possible relations, that link literatures from mobilities research and sociology to advance transport planning research and practice. First, we discuss how the experiences of being mobile using different transport modes set different stages for the potential exposure to a diversity of socio-spatial environments. Second, we translate this into an analytical framework for understanding the relationships between connectedness and using different mobility modes. In the final part of the paper, we illustrate this by operationalising a number of potential indicators of connectedness (as dependent variables).