2.1) There are different opinions, how far a GIS can support a community based land use planning approach. From the conceptual point, in a land use planning approach, community orientation and GIS are complementary.
2.2) A completely community based approach involves, that the community, in particular the local community including all interest and needs groups and all level of the society, will be involved on the decision-making process and will aim at consensus on the final form and content of the plan.
2.3) The other extreme is a technical, expert-based approach, where the GIS functions in a decision-making process, based on ranking or weighting of parameters, given to the system. Often, such systems are very simplistic, not incorporating all input parameters, which are required for land use planning. For a holistic approach, careful research is required in a lengthy process to draw up the optimal solution or plan.
One serious disadvantage of such a weighting system is the complexity of the system, which can be difficult to understand. It might run as a 'black box', without being understood by most planners, at least all IS laymen, why the computer selected one land use option, and not another.
2.4) The right approach will be to use the best of both techniques. The GIS should be used not as an expert-based decision-making process, but as a decision-support tool to deliver all required information and analyses for the community-based decision makers. This conclusion will help to define the output of the LIS, as discussed in the next chapter, i.e. primarily to focus on information made available in the most user friendly and 'useful' way to the planners and the decision makers in the community ( comment about participatory GIS, external reference).
New technologies, for example the transparency possible through web dissemination of maps or land use plans, will enhance the community orientation (see also Chapter 7.2 and 10).
The proposed decision making process will look like this:
| 1. | Base maps | In the office | |
| 2. | Identification of land use problems | In the field | |
| 3. | Spatial identification of land use problems | In the field | |
| 4. | Definition of alternative land use scenarios | Planner, in the field and in the office | |
| 5. | Analytical, quantitative and spatial analysis of land use scenarios (options) | In the office | |
| 6. | Decision making, based on analytical GIS data | In the field (e.g. Assembly) | |
| 7. | Implementation, with GIS for documentation | In the field | |
| 8. | Monitoring, with GIS as monitoring tool | In the field | |
It can be concluded from this figure, that the optimal output from the IS can be expected in the activities of providing information (raw and processed) to the community, planners and decision makers. GIS for advanced modeling and decision-making would require more accurate data and highly developed models with high complexity and thorough testing, despite its non-integration into above explained community integration. Only at the end of the Project, it might be possible to have a test case of an expert-based GIS approach of land use optimization.
