Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Published in:
GIScience, Spatial Analysis, and Decision Support Read chapter Read first chapter

2015 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

8. GIS-MCDA for Group Decision Making

Authors : Jacek Malczewski, Claus Rinner

Published in: Multicriteria Decision Analysis in Geographic Information Science

Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This chapter provides a discussion of the most often used GIS-MCDA approaches for group decision making It focuses on two distinctive classes of GIS-MCDA procedures for groups: conventional methods for aggregating preferences and geosimulation-based modeling. The former includes conventional GIS-MCDA methods that have been adapted for tackling conflicting preferences in a group decision-making setting. This class of methods is based on the traditional notion of decision makers and tends to focus on prescriptive-constructive modeling. Unlike the conventional approaches, geosimulation involves the concept of decision-making agents and descriptive-normative modeling. It provides a platform for spatially explicit analysis of multicriteria decision problems.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
previous chapter Dealing with Uncertainties
next chapter Scale Issues and GIS-MCDA
Literature
Andrienko, G. L., Andrienko, N. V., & Jankowski, P. (2003). Building spatial decision support tools for individuals and groups. Journal of Decision Systems, 12(2), 193–208.CrossRef
Armstrong, M. P., & Densham, P. J. (2008). Cartographic support for locational problem-solving by groups. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 22(7), 721–749.CrossRef
Arrow, K. J. (1951). Social choice and individual values. New York: Wiley.
Arrow, K. J., & Raynaud, H. (1986). Social choice and multicriterion decision making. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Arsanjani, J. J., Helbich, M., & Vaz, E. (2013). Spatiotemporal simulation of urban growth patterns using agent-based modeling: The case of Tehran. Cities, 32, 33–42.CrossRef
Batty, M., & Xie, Y. (1994). Modelling inside GIS: Part 1. Model structures, exploratory spatial data analysis and aggregation. International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 8(3), 291–307.CrossRef
Bone, C., & Dragićević, S. (2009). GIS and intelligent agents for multiobjective natural resource allocation: A reinforcement learning approach. Transactions in GIS, 13(3), 253–272.CrossRef
Bone, C., & Dragićević, S. (2010). Simulation and validation of a reinforcement learning agent-based model for multi-stakeholder forest management. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 34(2), 162–174.CrossRef
Bone, C., Dragićević, S., & White, R. (2011). Modeling-in-the-middle: Bridging the gap between agent-based modeling and multi-objective decision making for land use change. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 25(5), 717–737.CrossRef
Boroushaki, S., & Malczewski, J. (2010a). Measuring consensus for collaborative decision-making: AGIS-based approach. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 34(4), 322–332.CrossRef
Boroushaki, S., & Malczewski, J. (2010b). ParticipatoryGIS: A web-based collaborative GIS and multicriteria decision analysis. URISA Journal, 22(1), 23–32.
Boroushaki, S., & Malczewski, J. (2010c). Using the fuzzy majority approach for GIS-based multicriteria group decision-making. Computers & Geosciences, 36(3), 302–312.CrossRef
Cao, K., Huang, B., Li, M., & Li, W. (2014). Calibrating a cellular automata model for understanding rural–urban land conversion: A Pareto front-based multi-objective optimization approach. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 28(5), 1028–1046.CrossRef
Carver, S. (1999). Developing web-based GIS/MCE: Improving access to data and spatial decision support tools. In J. C. Thill (Ed.), Spatial multicriteria decision-making and analysis (pp. 49–75). Aldershot: Ashgate.
Castella, J. C., Kam, S. P., Quang, D. D., Verburg, P. H., & Hoanh, C. T. (2007). Combining top-down and bottom-up modelling approaches of land use/cover change to support public policies: Application to sustainable management of natural resources in northern Vietnam. Land Use Policy, 24(3), 531–545.CrossRef
Chen, K., Blong, R., & Jacobson, C. (2001). MCE-RISK: Integrating multicriteria evaluation and GIS for risk decision-making in natural hazards. Environmental Modelling and Software, 16(4), 387–397.CrossRef
Chen, Y., Li, X., Liu, X., & Liu, Y. (2010). An agent-based model for optimal land allocation (AgentLA) with a contiguity constraint. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 24(8), 1269–1288.CrossRef
Chow, T. E., & Sadler, R. (2010). The Consensus of Local Stakeholders and Outside Experts in Suitability Modeling for Future Camp Development. Landscape and Urban Planning, 94(1), 9–19.CrossRef
Demircan, S., Aydin, M., & Durduran, S. S. (2011). Finding optimum route of electrical energy transmission line using multi-criteria with Q-learning. Expert Systems with Applications: An International Journal, 38(4), 3477–3482.CrossRef
Dyer, R. F., & Forman, E. H. (1992). Group decision support with the analytic hierarchy process. Decision Support Systems, 8(2), 99–124.CrossRef
Engelen, G., White, R., & Uljee, I. (1997). Integrating constrained cellular automata models, GIS and decision support tools for urban planning and policy making. In H. P. J. Timmermans (Ed.), Decision support systems in urban planning (pp. 125–155). London: E. & F.N. Spon.
Estoque, R. C. (2012). Analytic hierarchy process in geospatial analysis. In Y. Murayama (Ed.), Progress in geospatial analysis (pp. 157–182). Tokyo: Springer.CrossRef
Feick, R. D., & Hall, G. B. (2002). Balancing consensus and conflict with a GIS-based multi-participant, multi-criteria decision support tool. GeoJournal, 53(4), 391–406.CrossRef
Feick, R. D., & Hall, B. G. (2004). A method for examining the spatial dimension of multi-criteria weight sensitivity. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 18(8), 815–840.CrossRef
Feng, Y., & Liu, Y. (2013). A heuristic cellular automata approach for modelling urban land-use change based on simulated annealing. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 27(3), 449–466.CrossRef
Forman, E., & Peniwatib, K. (1998). Aggregating individual next term judgments and previous term priorities next term with the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 108(1), 165–169.
Fotakis, D., & Sidiropoulos, E. (2012). A new multi-objective self-organizing optimization algorithm (MOSOA) for spatial optimization problems. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 218(9), 5168–5180.CrossRef
Gorsevski, P. V., Cathcart, S. C., Mirzaei, G., Jamali, M. M., & Ye, X., Gomezdelcampo, E. (2013). A group-based spatial decision support system for wind farm site selection in Northwest Ohio. Energy Policy, 55(C), 374–385.
Hossain, M. S., Chowdhury, S. R., Das, N. G., Sharifuzzaman, S. M., & Sultana, A. (2009). Integration of GIS and multicriteria decision analysis for urban aquaculture development in Bangladesh. Landscape and Urban Planning, 90(3), 119–133.CrossRef
Hwang, C. L., & Lin, M. J. (1987). Group decision making under multiple criteria. Berlin: Springer.CrossRef
Ishizaka, A., & Nemery, P. (2013). A multi-criteria group decision framework for partner grouping when sharing facilities. Group Decision and Negotiation, 22(4), 773–799.CrossRef
Jankowski, P., Andrienko, N., & Andrienko, G. (2001). Map-centred exploratory approach to multiple criteria spatial decision making. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 15(2), 101–127.CrossRef
Jankowski, P., Ligmann-Zielinska, A., & Swobodzinski, M. (2008). Choice modeler: A web-based spatial multiple criteria evaluation tool. Transactions in GIS, 12(4), 541–561.CrossRef
Jankowski, P., & Nyerges, T. (2001). Geographic information systems for group decision making: Towards a participatory geographic information science. London: Taylor & Francis.
Jankowski, P., Nyerges, T. L., Smith, A., Moore, T. J., & Horvath, E. (1997). Spatial group choice: A SDSS tool for collaborative spatial decision-making. International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 11(6), 566–602.
Janssen, R., Goosen, H., Verhoeven, M. L., Verhoeven, J. T. A., Omtzigt, A. Q. A., & Maltby, E. (2005). Decision support for integrated wetland management. Environmental Modelling and Software, 20(2), 215–229.CrossRef
Jiao, J., & Boerboom, L. (2006). Transition rule elicitation methods for urban cellular automata models. In J. P. van Leeuwen & H. J. P. Timmermans (Eds.), Innovations in design and decision support systems in architecture and urban planning (pp. 53–68). Berlin: Springer.CrossRef
Joerin, F., & Musy, A. (2000). Land management with GIS and multicriteria analysis. International Transactions in Operational Research, 7(1), 67–78.CrossRef
Joerin, F., Theriault, M., & Musy, A. (2001). Using GIS and outranking multi-criteria analysis for land-use suitability assessment. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 15(2), 153–174.CrossRef
Kamusoko, C., Aniya, M., Adi, B., & Manjoro, 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. Applied Geography, 29(3), 435–447.CrossRef
Kangas, A., Kangas, J., & Kurttila, M. (2008). Decision support for forest management. Berlin: Springer.
Kangas, J., Pukkala, T., & Kangas, A. S. (2001). HERO: heuristic optimisation for multi-criteria forestry decision analysis. In D. Schmoldt, J. Kangas, G. A. Mendoza, & M. Pesonen (Eds.), The analytic hierarchy process in natural resource and environmental decision making, managing forest ecosystems 3 (pp. 51–65). Kannus: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRef
Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1976). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs. New York: Wiley.
Lai, T., Dragićević, S., & Schmidt, M. (2013). Integration of multicriteria evaluation and cellular automata methods for landslide simulation modelling. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 4(4), 355–375.CrossRef
Levy, J. K., Hartmann, J., Li, K. W., An, Y., & Asgary, A. (2007). Multi-criteria decision support systems for flood hazard mitigation and emergency response in urban watersheds. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 43(2), 346–358.CrossRef
Li, X., & Liu, X. (2007). Defining agents’ behaviors to simulate complex residential development using multicriteria evaluation. Journal of Environmental Management, 85(4), 1063–1075.CrossRef
Li, X., Lao, C., Liu, X., & Chen, Y. (2011a). Coupling urban cellular automata with ant colony optimization for zoning protected natural areas under a changing landscape. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 25(4), 575–593.CrossRef
Li, X., Shi, X., He, J., & Liu, X. (2011b). Coupling simulation and optimization to solve planning problems in a fast-developing area. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 101(5), 1032–1048.CrossRef
Li, X., & Yeh, A. G. O. (2000). Modelling sustainable urban development by the integration of constrained cellular automata and GIS. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 14(2), 131–152.CrossRef
Ligmann-Zielinska, A. (2009). The impact of risk-taking attitudes on a land use pattern: an agent based model of residential development. Journal of Land Use Science, 4(4), 215–232.CrossRef
Ligmann-Zielinska, A., & Jankowski, P. (2010). Exploring normative scenarios of land use development decisions with an agent-based simulation laboratory. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 34(5), 409–423.CrossRef
Ligtenberg, A., Bregt, A. K., & van Lammeren, R. (2001). Multi-actor-based land use modelling: spatial planning using agents. Landscape and Urban Planning, 56(1–2), 21–33.CrossRef
Ligtenberg, A., Lammeren, R. J. A., & Bregt, A. K. (2000). Cellular automata and multi-agent simulation for dynamic land use planning. In Proceedings of greenwich international symposium digital creativity, Greenwich (pp. 393–402).
Ligtenberg, A., Wachowicz, M., Bregt, A. K., Beulens, A., & Kettenis, D. L. (2004). A design and application of a multi-agent system for simulation of multi-actor spatial planning. Journal of Environmental Management, 72(1–2), 43–55.CrossRef
Liu, Y. (2009). Modelling urban development with geographical information systems and cellular automata. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Long, Y., & Shen, Z. (2012). Reaching consensus among stakeholders on planned urban form using constrained CA. In Z. Shen (Ed.), Geospatial techniques in urban planning (pp. 91–106). Berlin: Springer.CrossRef
Macary, F., Ombredane, D., & Uny, D. (2010). A multicriteria spatial analysis of erosion risk into small watersheds in the low Normandy bocage (France) by ELECTRE III method coupled with a GIS. International Journal of Multicriteria Decision Making, 1(1), 25–48.CrossRef
Macharis, C., Brans, J. P., & Mareschal, B. (1998). The GDSS PROMETHEE procedure: A PROMETHEE-GAIA based procedure for group decision support. Journal of Decision Systems, 7, 283–307.
Malczewski, J. (1996). A GIS-based approach to multiple criteria group decision-making. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 10(8), 955–971.CrossRef
Malczewski, J. (2006). Multicriteria decision analysis for collaborative GIS. In S. Balram & S. Dragićević (Eds.), Collaborative geographic information systems (pp. 167–185). Hershey: Idea Group Publishing.CrossRef
Martin, N. J., St Onge, B., & Waaub, J. P. (2003). An integrated decision aid system for the development of Saint Charles River alluvial plain, Quebec, Canada. International Journal of Environment and Pollution, 12(2–3), 264–279.
Massam, B. H. (1988). Multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) techniques in planning. Progress in Planning, 30(1), 1–84.CrossRef
Meeks, W. L., & Dasgupta, S. (2004). Geospatial information utility: An estimation of the relevance of geospatial information to users. Decision Support Systems, 38(1), 47–63.CrossRef
Meng, Y., & Malczewski, J. (2010a). Pre-decisional engagement, decision-making outcomes and Web-PPGIS usability: A case study in Canmore, Alberta. International Journal of the Internet and Management, 18(1), 51–60.
Meng, Y., & Malczewski, J. (2010b). Web-PPGIS usability and public engagement: A case study in Canmore, Alberta. Journal of URISA, 22(1), 55–64.
Moeinaddini, M., Khorasani, N., Danehkar, A., Darvishsefat, A. A., & Zienalyan, M. (2010). Siting MSW land fill using weighted linear combination and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) methodology in GIS environment (case study: Karaj). Waste Management, 30(5), 912–920.CrossRef
Munda, G. (2008). Social multi-criteria evaluation for a sustainable economy. New York: Springer.CrossRef
Munday, P., Jones, A. P., & Lovett, A. A. (2010). Utilising scenarios to facilitate multi-objective land use modelling for Broadland, UK, to 2100. Transactions in GIS, 14(3), 241–263.CrossRef
Myint, S. W., & Wang, L. (2006). Multicriteria decision approach for land use land cover change using Markov chain analysis and a cellular automata approach. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing, 32(6), 390–404.CrossRef
Nekhay, O., Arriaza, M., & Boerboom, L. (2009). Evaluation of soil erosion risk using analytic network process and GIS: A case study from Spanish mountain olive plantations. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(10), 3091–3104.CrossRef
Norese, M. F., & Toso, F. (2004). Group decision and distributed technical support. International Transactions in Operational Research, 11(4), 395–417.CrossRef
Nyerges, T. L., & Jankowski, P. (2010). Regional and urban GIS a decision support approach. New York: Guilford.
O’Sullivan, D., & Unwin, D. J. (2010). Geographic information analysis. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.CrossRef
Ozah, A. P., Dami, A., & Adesina, F. A. (2012). A deterministic cellular automata model for simulating rural land use dynamics: A case study of Lake Chad Basin. Journal of Earth Science and Engineering, 2(1), 22–34.
Parker, D. C., Manson, S. M., Janssen, M. A., Hoffmann, M., & Deadman, P. (2003). Multi-agent systems for the simulation of land-use and land-cover change: A review. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 93(2), 314–337.CrossRef
Rajabi, M., Mansourian, A., & Bazmani, A. (2012). Susceptibility mapping of visceral leishmaniasis based on fuzzy modelling and group decision-making methods. Geospatial Health, 7(10), 37–50.CrossRef
Rinner, C. (2001). Argumentation maps: GIS-based discussion support for online planning. Environment and Planning B, 28(6), 847–863.CrossRef
Rinner, C., Keßler, C., & Andrulis, S. (2008). The use of Web 2.0 concepts to support deliberation in spatial decision-making. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 32(5), 386–395.CrossRef
Roy, B. (1991). The outranking approach and the foundations of ELECTRE methods. Theory and Decision, 31, 49–73.CrossRef
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Sabri, S., Ludin, A. N. M. M., & Ho, C. S. (2012). Conceptual design for an integrated geosimulation and analytic network process (ANP) in gentrification appraisal. Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy, 5(3), 253–271.CrossRef
Schmoldt, D. L., Peterson, D. L., & Smith, R. L. (1994). The analytic hierarchy process and participatory decision making. In J. M. Power & M. Strome (Eds.), Proceedings of the 17th Annual Geographic Information Seminar on Decision Support—2001, (Vol. 1) Toronto, Ontario, September 12–16, 1994.
Shafizadeh Moghadam, H., & Helbich, M. (2013). Spatiotemporal urbanization processes in the megacity of Mumbai, India: A Markov chains-cellular automata urban growth model. Applied Geography, 40, 140–149.CrossRef
Sharifi, M., Hadidi, M., Vessali, E., Mosstafakhani, P., Taheri, K., Shahoie, S., et al. (2009). Integrating multi-criteria decision analysis for a GIS-based hazardous waste landfill sitting in Kurdistan Province, western Iran. Waste Management, 29(10), 2740–2758.CrossRef
Strager, M. P., & Rosenberger, R. S. (2006). Incorporating stakeholder preferences for land conservation: Weights and measures in spatial MCA. Ecological Economics, 58(1), 79–92.CrossRef
Torrens, P. M. (2002). Cellular automata and multi-agent systems as planning support tools. In S. S. Geertman & J. Stillwell (Eds.), Planning support systems in practice (pp. 205–222). London: Springer.
Trunfio, G. A. (2006). Exploiting spatio-temporal data for the multiobjective optimization of cellular automata models. In E. Corchado, H. Yin, V. Botti, C. Fyfe (Eds.), Intelligent data engineering and automated learning—IDEAL 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science No. 4224 (pp. 81–89), Burgos, Spain, September 20–23, 2006. Heidelberg: Springer.
Vaz, E., Caetano, M., & Nijkamp, P. (2011). Trapped between antiquity and urbanism – a multi-criteria assessment model of the greater Cairo Metropolitan area. Land Use Science, 6(4), 283–299.CrossRef
Ward, D. P., Murray, A. T., & Phinn, S. R. (2003). Integrating spatial optimization and cellular automata for evaluating urban change. The Annals of Regional Science, 37(1), 131–148.CrossRef
Wu, F. (1998). SimLand: A prototype to simulate land conversion through the integrated GIS and CA with AHP-derived transition rules. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 12(1), 63–82.CrossRef
Wu, F., & Webster, C. J. (1998). Simulation of land development through the integration of cellular automata and multicriteria evaluation. Environment and Planning B, 25(1), 103–126.CrossRef
Yager, R. R. (1996). Quantifier guided aggregation using OWA operators. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 11(1), 49–73.CrossRef
Ying, X., Guang-Ming, Z., Gui-Qiu, C., Lin, T., Ke-Lin, W., & Dao-You, H. (2007). Combining AHP with GIS in synthetic evaluation of eco-environment quality: A case study of Hunan Province, China. Ecological Modeling, 209(2–4), 97–109.CrossRef
Yu, J., Chen, Y., & Wu, J. (2011). Modeling and implementation of classification rule discovery by ant colony optimisation for spatial land-use suitability assessment. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 35(4), 308–319.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
GIS-MCDA for Group Decision Making
Authors
Jacek Malczewski
Claus Rinner
Copyright Year
2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Book
Multicriteria Decision Analysis in Geographic Information Science

Print ISBN: 978-3-540-74756-7

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-540-74757-4

Copyright Year: 2015

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74757-4_8

Premium Partner

    Image Credits