IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/cjutxx/v24y2017i1p29-45.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Urban Resilience and Planning Support Systems: The Need for Sentience

Author

Listed:
  • Brian Deal
  • Haozhi Pan
  • Varkki Pallathucheril
  • Gale Fulton

Abstract

Developing resilience in built human environments is a complex undertaking. It requires decision support tools that can convey complexities in meaningful and understandable ways. Building smart cities and generating big data, however, is not enough. In order to improve decision-making and ultimately inform resilient communities we need to be able to translate big data at scales and in ways that are useful and approachable. In this paper we argue that creating more resilient communities calls for planning support systems (PSSs) that go beyond the ones we have today. We call for PSSs that possess a greater degree of sentience—that (a) possess a greater awareness of application context and user needs; (b) are capable of iterative learning; (c) are capable of spatial and temporal reasoning; (d) understand rules; and (e) are accessible and interactive. We consider the questions: How might intelligent or sentient information delivery systems allow for more strategic, context-aware, resilient, and ultimately sustainable communities? What primary design considerations would make such a system possible and useful given that, as of yet, no technology exists that is fully “sentient?”

Suggested Citation

  • Brian Deal & Haozhi Pan & Varkki Pallathucheril & Gale Fulton, 2017. "Urban Resilience and Planning Support Systems: The Need for Sentience," Journal of Urban Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 29-45, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:cjutxx:v:24:y:2017:i:1:p:29-45
    DOI: 10.1080/10630732.2017.1285018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10630732.2017.1285018
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10630732.2017.1285018?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andy Van den Dobbelsteen & Craig Lee Martin & Greg Keeffe & Riccardo Maria Pulselli & Han Vandevyvere, 2018. "From Problems to Potentials—The Urban Energy Transition of Gruž, Dubrovnik," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Xin Fu & Xinhao Wang, 2018. "Developing an integrative urban resilience capacity index for plan making," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 367-378, September.
    3. Huaxiong Jiang & Stan Geertman & Patrick Witte, 2020. "Avoiding the planning support system pitfalls? What smart governance can learn from the planning support system implementation gap," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(8), pages 1343-1360, October.
    4. Shahtahmassebi, Amir Reza & Wu, Chun & Blackburn, George Alan & Zheng, Qing & Huang, Lingyan & Shortridge, Ashton & Shahtahmassebi, Golnaz & Jiang, Ruowei & He, Shan & Wang, Ke & Lin, Yue & Clarke, Ke, 2018. "How do modern transportation projects impact on development of impervious surfaces via new urban area and urban intensification? Evidence from Hangzhou Bay Bridge, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 479-497.
    5. Olga Tzanni & Paraskevas Nikolaou & Stella Giannakopoulou & Apostolos Arvanitis & Socrates Basbas, 2022. "Social Dimensions of Spatial Justice in the Use of the Public Transport System in Thessaloniki, Greece," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-26, November.
    6. Si Chen & Yoonshin Kwak & Le Zhang & Grant Mosey & Brian Deal, 2021. "Tightly Coupling Input Output Economics with Spatio-Temporal Land Use in a Dynamic Planning Support System Framework," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-17, January.
    7. Kwak, Yoonshin & Deal, Brian & Heavisides, Tom, 2021. "A large scale multi criteria suitability analysis for identifying solar development potential: A decision support approach for the state of Illinois, USA," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 554-567.
    8. Chul Sue Hwang & Seong-Yun Hong & TaeKeon Hwang & Byungyun Yang, 2020. "Strengthening the Statistical Summaries of Economic Output Areas for Urban Planning Support Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-21, July.
    9. Mahya Ghouchani & Mohammad Taji & Amirhassan Yaghoubi Roshan & Mohammad Seifi Chehr, 2021. "Identification and assessment of hidden capacities of urban resilience," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 3966-3993, March.
    10. Christina Kakderi & Eleni Oikonomaki & Ilektra Papadaki, 2021. "Smart and Resilient Urban Futures for Sustainability in the Post COVID-19 Era: A Review of Policy Responses on Urban Mobility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-21, June.
    11. Yanliu Lin & Kasper Benneker, 2022. "Assessing collaborative planning and the added value of planning support apps in The Netherlands," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 49(2), pages 391-410, February.
    12. Yoonshin Kwak & Brian Deal & Grant Mosey, 2021. "Landscape Design toward Urban Resilience: Bridging Science and Physical Design Coupling Sociohydrological Modeling and Design Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-17, April.
    13. Ana Louro & Nuno Marques da Costa & Eduarda Marques da Costa, 2019. "Sustainable Urban Mobility Policies as a Path to Healthy Cities—The Case Study of LMA, Portugal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-32, May.
    14. Rounaq Basu & Joseph Ferreira, 2020. "A LUTI microsimulation framework to evaluate long-term impacts of automated mobility on the choice of housing-mobility bundles," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(8), pages 1397-1417, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:cjutxx:v:24:y:2017:i:1:p:29-45. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/cjut20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.