The Role of Diversified Geo-Information Technologies in Urban Governance: A Literature Review
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Research Methods
3. Bibliometric Analysis
3.1. Overview
3.2. Keyword Analysis
3.3. Co-Author Analysis
3.4. Country Analysis
3.5. Literature Categories and Journals Analysis
4. The Role and Challenges of Geo-Information Technologies in Urban Governance
4.1. PSSs: Simulation and Communication
PSS Tools | Simulation Forecasting Function | References |
---|---|---|
Land-use Evolution and impact Assessment Model (LEAM) | Simulates land use evolution, population growth, and infrastructure needs. | [66] |
What If? | Facilitates interactive user engagement and excels at comparing the impacts of multiple scenario planning proposals. | [67] |
ENVISION | Weighted parameter scenario planning, emphasizing sustainability. | [68] |
ENVISION Scenario Planner (ESP) | A web-based 3D visualization and assessment system that facilitates collaborative decision-making in urban infill development, supporting the preparation and exploration of redevelopment scenarios using 3D visualization and performance assessment techniques. | [69] |
ENVISION Tomorrow | Capable of conducting scenario planning assessments based on multiple indicators, primarily utilizing spreadsheets and GIS. | [70,71] |
CommunityViz | Data analysis and scenario construction adaptable for transportation planning, natural resource planning, land development suitability evaluation, and urban economic development analysis. | [72] |
UrbanSim | Integrated simulation planning model that comprehensively considers the interplay between land use, transportation, environmental quality, and economy. | [70,73] |
Cube Land | Land use assessment, evaluating changes in urban policies and transportation investments. | [74] |
CityEngine | Three-dimensional visualization of buildings, blocks, and cities. | [75] |
Urban growth models (UGM) | Simulates and predicts changes in land use or cover, analyzing interactions in urban space. | [65] |
Urban Strategy | Provides a wide range of computer models covering urban dynamics, from transportation to air quality and groundwater levels. | [57] |
4.2. PGISs: Empowering Public Participation in Planning Decisions
4.3. BIM: 3D Building Models for the Planning and Implementation Phase
4.4. CIM: City Information Integration Database for Urban Governance
4.5. Challenges and Strategic Responses
5. Discussion and Conclusions
- (1)
- Collectively, these information technologies offer significant advantages in data storage and visualization. PSSs, PGISs, BIM, and CIM each have unique and complementary strengths in data storage. PSSs provide detailed spatial planning data for planners [44]. PGISs leverage public input to offer locally unique spatial information for urban planning [56]. BIM consolidates spatial information during the construction phase, providing detailed building or project-level data [100]. Finally, CIM integrates urban data from various fields, offering city managers comprehensive data support [47]. Furthermore, the high visualization capability enhances the interpretability and utility of these data. In practical terms, these two advantages synergize, enabling city managers and planners to better comprehend and utilize urban spatial data.
- (2)
- Both PGISs and PSSs are widely used in GIS-based spatial planning. While both emphasize participation and cooperation, they exhibit similarities and differences in their specific applications and functions. PSSs primarily support urban planners, enhancing planning efficiency and quality, with a focus on simulating and forecasting different scenarios [50]. However, only some PSSs support public participation [97]. In contrast, PGISs are inherently designed to encourage public involvement [85]. The accessibility of PGISs makes them particularly effective in fostering community engagement, driving community development, and improving the urban environment.
- (3)
- BIM and CIM focus on 3D physical models and semantic information. BIM is primarily used during the construction phase, focusing on detailed building or project-level modeling [102]. Its application centers around collaborative efforts between the building team and relevant stakeholders, ensuring the efficient execution of the design and construction process. In contrast, CIM, managed by the government, serves as a repository for urban data, focusing on the holistic nature of the city. While CIM integrates some BIM data from a building or project, the overall level of detail is lower than that of BIM. It encompasses various city-related types of information like transport, environment, and energy, supporting cross-disciplinary urban planning. CIM helps planners understand the city’s operation, challenges, and development potential.
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- UN. World Urbanization Prospects. Demogr. Res. 2018, 11–20. [Google Scholar]
- da Cruz, N.F.; Rode, P.; McQuarrie, M. New urban governance: A review of current themes and future priorities. J. Urban Aff. 2019, 41, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hendriks, F. Understanding Good Urban Governance: Essentials, Shifts, and Values. Urban Aff. Rev. 2013, 50, 553–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Menzori, I.D.; de Sousa, I.C.N.; Gonçalves, L.M. Urban growth management and territorial governance approaches: A master plans conformance analysis. Land Use Policy 2021, 105, 105436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ye, C.; Pan, J.; Liu, Z. The historical logics and geographical patterns of rural-urban governance in China. J. Geogr. Sci. 2022, 32, 1225–1240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, Y.; Cartier, C. The grid process: Spatializing local governance in China. Eurasian Geogr. Econ. 2024, 65, 516–541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dadi, D.; Azadi, H.; Senbeta, F.; Abebe, K.; Taheri, F.; Stellmacher, T. Urban sprawl and its impacts on land use change in Central Ethiopia. Urban For. Urban Green. 2016, 16, 132–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gu, C.; Hu, L.; Zhang, X.; Wang, X.; Guo, J. Climate change and urbanization in the Yangtze River Delta. Habitat Int. 2011, 35, 544–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.-J.; Da, Y.-B. The decomposition of energy-related carbon emission and its decoupling with economic growth in China. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 41, 1255–1266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahluwalia, I.J. Urban governance in India. J. Urban Aff. 2019, 41, 83–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, J. Rapid urbanization in China: A real challenge to soil protection and food security. Catena 2007, 69, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bren d’Amour, C.; Reitsma, F.; Baiocchi, G.; Barthel, S.; Güneralp, B.; Erb, K.-H.; Haberl, H.; Creutzig, F.; Seto, K.C. Future urban land expansion and implications for global croplands. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, 8939–8944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liu, X.; Song, Y.; Wu, K.; Wang, J.; Li, D.; Long, Y. Understanding urban China with open data. Cities 2015, 47, 53–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mosadeghi, R.; Warnken, J.; Tomlinson, R.; Mirfenderesk, H. Comparison of Fuzzy-AHP and AHP in a spatial multi-criteria decision making model for urban land-use planning. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2015, 49, 54–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koroso, N.H.; Lengoiboni, M.; Zevenbergen, J.A. Urbanization and urban land use efficiency: Evidence from regional and Addis Ababa satellite cities, Ethiopia. Habitat Int. 2021, 117, 102437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, F.; Zhao, Z. The Research on the Spatial Governance Tools and Mechanism of Megacity Suburbs Based on Spatial Evolution: A Case of Beijing. Sustainability 2022, 14, 12384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Potts, R. Is a new ‘planning 3.0’paradigm emerging? Exploring the relationship between digital technologies and planning theory and practice. Plan. Theory Pract. 2020, 21, 272–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pérez-delHoyo, R.; Mora, H.; Nolasco-Vidal, J.M.; Abad-Ortiz, R.; Mollá-Sirvent, R.A. Addressing new challenges in smart urban planning using Information and Communication Technologies. Syst. Res. Behav. Sci. 2021, 38, 342–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Romanelli, M. Analysing the role of information technology towards sustainable cities living. Kybernetes 2020, 49, 2037–2052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shiode, N. Urban Planning, Information Technology, and Cyberspace. J. Urban Technol. 2000, 7, 105–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shin, Y.; Shin, D.-H. Community Informatics and the New Urbanism: Incorporating Information and Communication Technologies into Planning Integrated Urban Communities. J. Urban Technol. 2012, 19, 23–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alizadeh, T. Urban Digital Strategies: Planning in the Face of Information Technology? J. Urban Technol. 2017, 24, 35–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCann, E. Governing urbanism: Urban governance studies 1.0, 2.0 and beyond. Urban Stud. 2016, 54, 312–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deng, F. Stakes, stakeholders and urban governance: A theoretical framework for the Chinese city. Eurasian Geogr. Econ. 2018, 59, 291–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lund, D.H. Co-Creation in Urban Governance: From Inclusion to Innovation. Scand. J. Public Adm. 2018, 22, 3–17. [Google Scholar]
- Pettit, C.; Shi, Y.; Han, H.; Rittenbruch, M.; Foth, M.; Lieske, S.; van den Nouwelant, R.; Mitchell, P.; Leao, S.; Christensen, B.; et al. A new toolkit for land value analysis and scenario planning. Environ. Plan. B Urban Anal. City Sci. 2020, 47, 1490–1507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chahrour, R.; Hafeez, M.A.; Ahmad, A.M.; Sulieman, H.I.; Dawood, H.; Rodriguez-Trejo, S.; Kassem, M.; Naji, K.K.; Dawood, N. Cost-benefit analysis of BIM-enabled design clash detection and resolution. Constr. Manag. Econ. 2020, 39, 55–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, W.; Zlatanova, S.; Diakite, A.A.; Aleksandrov, M.; Yan, J. Towards Integrating Heterogeneous Data: A Spatial DBMS Solution from a CRC-LCL Project in Australia. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2020, 9, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; Wang, Y. Characteristic analysis and integration method of urban planning data based on GIS of internet of things. Sustain. Comput. Inform. Syst. 2022, 36, 100801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, H.; Geertman, S.; Witte, P. Avoiding the planning support system pitfalls? What smart governance can learn from the planning support system implementation gap. Environ. Plan. B Urban Anal. City Sci. 2020, 47, 1343–1360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bokolo, A.J. Data driven approaches for smart city planning and design: A case scenario on urban data management. Digit. Policy Regul. Gov. 2023, 25, 351–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malczewski, J. GIS-based land-use suitability analysis: A critical overview. Prog. Plan. 2004, 62, 3–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- González, A.; Donnelly, A.; Jones, M.; Chrysoulakis, N.; Lopes, M. A decision-support system for sustainable urban metabolism in Europe. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2013, 38, 109–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, H.; Geertman, S.; Witte, P. Planning First, Tools Second: Evaluating the Evolving Roles of Planning Support Systems in Urban Planning. J. Urban Technol. 2022, 29, 55–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Najafi, P.; Mohammadi, M.; van Wesemael, P.; Le Blanc, P.M. A user-centred virtual city information model for inclusive community design: State-of-art. Cities 2023, 134, 104203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dunn, C.E. Participatory GIS—A people’s GIS? Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2007, 31, 616–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brown, G.; Kyttä, M. Key issues and research priorities for public participation GIS (PPGIS): A synthesis based on empirical research. Appl. Geogr. 2014, 46, 122–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asiama, K.; Arko-Adjei, A. An experiment on the role of participatory GIS in the adjudication process of customary lands. Surv. Rev. 2023, 55, 178–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, H.; Lu, M.; Al-Hussein, M. Ontology-based semantic approach for construction-oriented quantity take-off from BIM models in the light-frame building industry. Adv. Eng. Inform. 2016, 30, 190–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hasannejad, A.; Sardrud, J.M.; Shirzadi Javid, A.A. BIM-based clash detection improvement automatically. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2023, 23, 2431–2437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xia, H.; Liu, Z.; Efremochkina, M.; Liu, X.; Lin, C. Study on city digital twin technologies for sustainable smart city design: A review and bibliometric analysis of geographic information system and building information modeling integration. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2022, 84, 104009. [Google Scholar]
- Lartey, D.; Glaser, M.A. Towards a Sustainable Transport System: Exploring Capacity Building for Active Travel in Africa. Sustainability 2024, 16, 1313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ndzabandzaba, C. Participatory Geographic Information System (PGIS): A Discourse toward a Solution to Traditional GIS Challenges. In Handbook of the Changing World Language Map; Brunn, S.D., Kehrein, R., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 1–11. [Google Scholar]
- Geertman, S.; Stillwell, J. Planning Support Systems: Content, Issues and Trends. In Planning Support Systems Best Practice and New Methods; Geertman, S., Stillwell, J., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2009; pp. 1–26. [Google Scholar]
- Geertman, S.; Stillwell, J. Planning support science: Developments and challenges. Environ. Plan. B Urban Anal. City Sci. 2020, 47, 1326–1342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venugopal, M.; Eastman, C.M.; Sacks, R.; Teizer, J. Semantics of model views for information exchanges using the industry foundation class schema. Adv. Eng. Inform. 2012, 26, 411–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dantas, H.; Sousa, J.; Melo, H. The Importance of City Information Modeling (CIM) for Cities’ Sustainability; IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2019; p. 012074. [Google Scholar]
- Souza, L.; Bueno, C. City Information Modelling as a support decision tool for planning and management of cities: A systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis. Build. Environ. 2022, 207, 108403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Geertman, S. Potentials for Planning Support: A Planning-Conceptual Approach. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 2006, 33, 863–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chimento, C.; Finio, N.; Hopkins, L.D.; Knaap, G.-J. PaRIT: A Planning Support System to Cope with a Network of Plans and Regulations. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pettit, C.; Bakelmun, A.; Lieske, S.N.; Glackin, S.; Hargroves, K.C.; Thomson, G.; Shearer, H.; Dia, H.; Newman, P. Planning support systems for smart cities. City Cult. Soc. 2018, 12, 13–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, H.; Geertman, S.; Zhang, H.; Zhou, S. Factors influencing the performance of virtual reality in urban planning: Evidence from a View corridor Virtual Reality project, Beijing. Environ. Plan. B Urban Anal. City Sci. 2022, 50, 814–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hooper, P.; Boulange, C.; Arciniegas, G.; Foster, S.; Bolleter, J.; Pettit, C. Exploring the potential for planning support systems to bridge the research-translation gap between public health and urban planning. Int. J. Health Geogr. 2021, 20, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UrbanSim BrisUrban—A Long-Term Solution for Brisbane’s Planning Challenges. Available online: https://www.urbansim.com/brisbane-mini-case-study (accessed on 20 December 2023).
- Pelzer, P. Usefulness of planning support systems: A conceptual framework and an empirical illustration. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2017, 104, 84–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flacke, J.; Shrestha, R.; Aguilar, R. Strengthening Participation Using Interactive Planning Support Systems: A Systematic Review. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2020, 9, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Champlin, C.; te Brömmelstroet, M.; Pelzer, P. Tables, Tablets and Flexibility: Evaluating Planning Support System Performance under Different Conditions of Use. Appl. Spat. Anal. Policy 2019, 12, 467–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, Y.; Benneker, K. Assessing collaborative planning and the added value of planning support apps in The Netherlands. Environ. Plan. B Urban Anal. City Sci. 2021, 49, 391–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pelzer, P.; Geertman, S.; van der Heijden, R.; Rouwette, E. The added value of Planning Support Systems: A practitioner’s perspective. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2014, 48, 16–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jankowski, P.; Czepkiewicz, M.; Młodkowski, M.; Zwoliński, Z.; Wójcicki, M. Evaluating the scalability of public participation in urban land use planning: A comparison of Geoweb methods with face-to-face meetings. Environ. Plan. B Urban Anal. City Sci. 2017, 46, 511–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bulens, J.; Ligtenberg, A. The MapTable 36, an interactive instrument for spatial planning design processes. In AGILE 2006; Shaping the Future of Geographic Information Science in Europe; College of Geoinformatics, University of West Hungary: Visegrád, Hungary, 2006; pp. 263–272. [Google Scholar]
- Vonk, G.; Ligtenberg, A. Socio-technical PSS development to improve functionality and usability—Sketch planning using a Maptable. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2010, 94, 166–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goodspeed, R. Sketching and learning: A planning support system field study. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 2016, 43, 444–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arciniegas, G.; Janssen, R. Spatial decision support for collaborative land use planning workshops. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2012, 107, 332–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Debnath, R.; Pettit, C.; Soundararaj, B.; Shirowzhan, S.; Jayasekare, A.S. Usefulness of an Urban Growth Model in Creating Scenarios for City Resilience Planning: An End-User Perspective. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2023, 12, 311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deal, B.; Pan, H.; Timm, S.; Pallathucheril, V. The role of multidirectional temporal analysis in scenario planning exercises and Planning Support Systems. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2017, 64, 91–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pettit, C.J.; Klosterman, R.E.; Delaney, P.; Whitehead, A.L.; Kujala, H.; Bromage, A.; Nino-Ruiz, M. The online what if? Planning support system: A land suitability application in Western Australia. Appl. Spat. Anal. Policy 2015, 8, 93–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Russo, P.; Lanzilotti, R.; Costabile, M.F.; Pettit, C.J. Adoption and Use of Software in Land Use Planning Practice: A Multiple-Country Study. Int. J. Hum.–Comput. Interact. 2018, 34, 57–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trubka, R.; Glackin, S.; Lade, O.; Pettit, C. A web-based 3D visualisation and assessment system for urban precinct scenario modelling. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 2016, 117, 175–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paracha, H.; Hussnain, M.Q.U.; Wakil, K.; Waheed, A.; Pettit, C. Attaining SDG-11 compliance in a rapidly growing urban region by employing Envision Tomorrow Planning Support System. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on CUPUM—Computational Urban Planning and Urban Management, Helsinki, Finland, 9–11 June 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Walker, D. The Planners Guide to Community Viz: The Essential Tool for a New Generation of Planning; Routledge: London, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Kazak, J.; Szewrański, S.; Decewicz, P. Indicator-Based Assessment of Land Use Planning in Wrocław Region with Community Viz. In Proceedings of the Real Corp, Rome, Italy, 20–23 May 2013; pp. 1248–1251. [Google Scholar]
- Waddell, P. UrbanSim: Modeling urban development for land use, transportation, and environmental planning. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 2002, 68, 297–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wegener, M. Are urban land-use transport interaction models planning support systems. In Handbook of Planning Support Science; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2020; pp. 153–160. [Google Scholar]
- Onyimbi, J.R.; Koeva, M.; Flacke, J. Public Participation Using 3D Web-Based City Models: Opportunities for E-Participation in Kisumu, Kenya. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2018, 7, 454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Geertman, S. PSS: Beyond the implementation gap. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2017, 104, 70–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vonk, G.; Geertman, S.; Schot, P. Bottlenecks Blocking Widespread Usage of Planning Support Systems. Environ. Plan. A Econ. Space 2005, 37, 909–924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, D.; Batty, M. Calibrating Cellular Automata Models for Simulating Urban Growth: Comparative Analysis of SLEUTH and Metronamica. Doc. Trab. 2011, 176. [Google Scholar]
- Chaudhuri, G.; Clarke, K. The SLEUTH land use change model: A review. Int. J. Environ. Resour. Res. 2013, 1, 88–105. [Google Scholar]
- Waddell, P.; Janowicz, E.; Blanchard, S.; Maurer, S. Chapter 27: UrbanCanvas: A collaborative platform for informed planning. In Handbook of Planning Support Science; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Koomen, E.; Hilferink, M.; Borsboom-van Beurden, J. Introducing Land Use Scanner; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Pelzer, P.; Geertman, S. From integrative to interdisciplinary: PSS to support frame reflection among disciplines. In Proceedings of the CUPUM 2013–13th International Conference on Computers in Urban Planning and Urban Management, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2–5 July 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Hussnain, M.Q.U.; Waheed, A.; Wakil, K.; Pettit, C.J.; Hussain, E.; Naeem, M.A.; Anjum, G.A. Shaping up the future spatial plans for urban areas in Pakistan. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, L.; Geertman, S.; Hooimeijer, P.; Lin, Y. The usefulness of a web-based participatory planning support system in Wuhan, China. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2019, 74, 208–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gyamera, E.; Arko-Adjei, A.; Duncan, E.; Kuma, J. Modelling participatory geographic information system for customary land conflict resolution. ISPRS Ann. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 2017, 4, 249–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harris, T.M. From PGIS to participatory deep mapping and spatial storytelling: An evolving trajectory in community knowledge representation in GIS. Cartogr. J. 2016, 53, 318–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, L.; Zhang, X.; He, F.; Liu, Y.; Wang, D. Participatory rural spatial planning based on a virtual globe-based 3D PGIS. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2020, 9, 763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Falco, E.; Zambrano-Verratti, J.; Kleinhans, R. Web-based participatory mapping in informal settlements: The slums of Caracas, Venezuela. Habitat Int. 2019, 94, 102038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mekonnen, A.D.; Gorsevski, P.V. A web-based participatory GIS (PGIS) for offshore wind farm suitability within Lake Erie, Ohio. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 41, 162–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brown, G. A review of sampling effects and response bias in internet participatory mapping (PPGIS/PGIS/VGI). Trans. GIS 2017, 21, 39–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mansourian, A.; Taleai, M.; Fasihi, A. A web-based spatial decision support system to enhance public participation in urban planning processes. J. Spat. Sci. 2011, 56, 269–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilson, A.; Tewdwr-Jones, M.; Comber, R. Urban planning, public participation and digital technology: App development as a method of generating citizen involvement in local planning processes. Environ. Plan. B Urban Anal. City Sci. 2017, 46, 286–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kahila-Tani, M.; Broberg, A.; Kyttä, M.; Tyger, T. Let the Citizens Map—Public Participation GIS as a Planning Support System in the Helsinki Master Plan Process. Plan. Pract. Res. 2016, 31, 195–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maurer, M.; Chang, P.; Olafsson, A.S.; Møller, M.S.; Gulsrud, N.M. A social-ecological-technological system approach to just nature-based solutions: A case of digital participatory mapping of meaningful places in a marginalized neighborhood in Copenhagen, Denmark. Urban For. Urban Green. 2023, 89, 128120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pozzebon, M.; Rozas, S.T.; Delgado, N.A. Use and consequences of participatory GIS in a Mexican municipality: Applying a multilevel framework. RAE-Rev. Adm. Empresas 2015, 55, 290–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brown, G.; Weber, D.; de Bie, K. Is PPGIS good enough? An empirical evaluation of the quality of PPGIS crowd-sourced spatial data for conservation planning. Land Use Policy 2015, 43, 228–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brown, G.; Fagerholm, N. Empirical PPGIS/PGIS mapping of ecosystem services: A review and evaluation. Ecosyst. Serv. 2015, 13, 119–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eilola, S.; Käyhkö, N.; Ferdinands, A.; Fagerholm, N. A bird’s eye view of my village—Developing participatory geospatial methodology for local level land use planning in the Southern Highlands of Tanzania. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2019, 190, 103596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zolkafli, A.; Brown, G.; Liu, Y. An evaluation of participatory GIS (PGIS) for land use planning in Malaysia. Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Ctries. 2017, 83, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- International Organization for Standardization. Organization and Digitization of Information about Buildings and Civil Engineering Works, including Building Information Modelling (BIM)-Information Management Using Building Information Modelling: Organisation et Numérisation des Informations Relatives aux Bâtiments et Ouvrages de Génie Civil, y Compris Modélisation des Informations de la Construction (BIM)-Gestion de L’information par la Modélisation des Informations de la Construction. Information Exchange. Échange D’informations; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Bryde, D.; Broquetas, M.; Volm, J.M. The project benefits of building information modelling (BIM). Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2013, 31, 971–980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alizadehsalehi, S.; Hadavi, A.; Huang, J.C. From BIM to extended reality in AEC industry. Autom. Constr. 2020, 116, 103254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johansson, M.; Roupé, M.; Bosch-Sijtsema, P. Real-time visualization of building information models (BIM). Autom. Constr. 2015, 54, 69–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faraji, A.; Homayoun Arya, S. Proposing an Integrated Time-Cost Management Model based on Building Information Modeling (BIM) and Blockchain Technology (BCT) Smart contract Development Approach in the Construction Industry. J. Model. Eng. 2023, 21, 191–206. [Google Scholar]
- Akponeware, A.O.; Adamu, Z.A. Clash detection or clash avoidance? An investigation into coordination problems in 3D BIM. Buildings 2017, 7, 75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, S.; Yao, J.; Wang, S.; Wang, Y.; Lu, G. A sustainable BIM-based multidisciplinary framework for underground pipeline clash detection and analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 374, 133900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carvalho, J.P.; Bragança, L.; Mateus, R. Automating building sustainability assessment using building information modelling: A case study. J. Build. Eng. 2023, 76, 107228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khanzode, A.; Fischer, M.; Reed, D.; Ballard, G. A Guide to Applying the Principles of Virtual Design & Construction (VDC) to the Lean Project Delivery Process; CIFE, Stanford University: Palo Alto, CA, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Davies, R.; Harty, C. Implementing ‘Site BIM’: A case study of ICT innovation on a large hospital project. Autom. Constr. 2013, 30, 15–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, B.J.; Jiang, S.H.; Qi, L.G.; Su, Y.W.; Mao, Y.F.; Wang, M.; Cha, H.S. Design and Implementation of Quantity Calculation Method Based on BIM Data. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bečvarovská, R.; Matějka, P. Comparative analysis of creating traditional quantity takeoff method and using a BIM tool. In Proceedings of the Construction Maeconomics Conference, Trondheim, Norway, 29–31 May 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Sacks, R.; Eastman, C.; Lee, G.; Teicholz, P. BIM Handbook: A Guide to Building Information Modeling for Owners, Designers, Engineers, Contractors, and Facility Managers; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Jiang, F.; Ma, L.; Broyd, T.; Chen, K.; Luo, H.; Du, M. Building demolition estimation in urban road widening projects using as-is BIM models. Autom. Constr. 2022, 144, 104601. [Google Scholar]
- Honic, M.; Ferschin, P.; Breitfuss, D.; Cencic, O.; Gourlis, G.; Kovacic, I.; De Wolf, C. Framework for the assessment of the existing building stock through BIM and GIS. Dev. Built Environ. 2023, 13, 100110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kang, T.W. Scan to BIM Mapping Process Description for Building Representation in 3D GIS. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 9986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barzegar, M.; Rajabifard, A.; Kalantari, M.; Atazadeh, B. An IFC-based database schema for mapping BIM data into a 3D spatially enabled land administration database. Int. J. Digit. Earth 2021, 14, 736–765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernandez-Alvarado, J.F.; Fernandez-Rodriguez, S. 3D environmental urban BIM using LiDAR data for visualisation on Google Earth. Autom. Constr. 2022, 138, 104251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marzouk, M.; Othman, A. Planning utility infrastructure requirements for smart cities using the integration between BIM and GIS. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020, 57, 102120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lian, M.Y.; Liu, X.W. Significance of Building Information Modeling in Modern Project Management for Sustainable Smart City Applications. J. Interconnect. Netw. 2022, 22 (Supp. S1), 2141007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cao, Y.; Huang, L.Y.; Aziz, N.M.; Kamaruzzaman, S.N. Building Information Modelling (BIM) Capabilities in the Design and Planning of Rural Settlements in China: A Systematic Review. Land 2022, 11, 1861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muller, M.F.; Garbers, A.; Esmanioto, F.; Huber, N.; Loures, E.R.; Canciglieri, O. Data interoperability assessment though IFC for BIM in structural design–a five-year gap analysis. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 2017, 23, 943–954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khemlani, L. Available online: http://www.aecbytes.com/newsletter/2007/issue_91.html (accessed on 27 December 2022).
- Gil, J.; Almeida, J.; Duarte, J. The backbone of a City Information Model (CIM): Implementing a spatial data model for urban design. In Proceedings of the Respecting Fragile Places: Education in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 21–24 September 2011; Volume 143, p. 151. [Google Scholar]
- Al Jurdi, M.; Wehbe, R.; Mroueh, H. Integration of citizens’ feelings and feedback into the city information modeling environment. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2023, 99, 104971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, S.; Cui, B.; Chi, Y.; Mao, Y. Preliminary Study on the Construction of ClM Holographic Backplane. Geospat. Inf. 2023, 21, 41–45. [Google Scholar]
- Akahoshi, K.; Ishimaru, N.; Kurokawa, C.; Tanaka, Y.; Oishi, T.; Kutzner, T.; Kolbe, T.H. I-Urban revitalization: Conceptual modeling, implementation, and visualization towards sustainable urban planning using CityGML. ISPRS Ann. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 2020, V-4-2020, 179–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Su, S.; Ju, J.; Guo, Q.; Li, X.; Zhu, Y. A temporally dynamic model for regional carbon impact assessment based on city information modeling. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2023, 173, 113076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harter, H.; Willenborg, B.; Lang, W.; Kolbe, T.H. Climate-neutral municipal building stock—Life cycle assessment of large residential building stocks based on semantic 3D city models. Energy Build. 2023, 292, 113141. [Google Scholar]
- Lawal, O.; Nawari, N. Blockchain and City Information Modeling (CIM): A New Approach of Transparency and Efficiency. J. Inf. Technol. Constr. 2023, 28, 711–734. [Google Scholar]
- Reitz, T.; Schubiger-Banz, S. The Esri 3D city information model. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2014, 18, 012172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Padsala, R.; Coors, V. Conceptualizing, Managing and Developing: A Web Based 3D City Information Model for Urban Energy Demand Simulation. In Proceedings of the Eurographics Workshop on Urban Data Modelling and Visualisation, Delft, The Netherlands, 23 November 2015; pp. 37–42. [Google Scholar]
- Dall’O’, G.; Zichi, A.; Torri, M. Green BIM and CIM: Sustainable Planning Using Building Information Modelling. In Green Planning for Cities and Communities: Novel Incisive Approaches to Sustainability; Dall’O, G., Ed.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 383–409. [Google Scholar]
- Shi, J. Exploration of Intelligent Application of Guangzhou CIM Platform. China’s Constr. Informatiz. 2021, 24, 36–39. [Google Scholar]
- Han, Q.; Yuan, C.; Zhou, Q.; Mou, Q.; Yan, S. Application scenarios of CIM+urban old community renovation. China’s Constr. Informatiz. 2022, 14, 54–56. [Google Scholar]
- Shi, X.; Zhong, L.; Liu, X. The Application of Urban Information Model (CIM) Platform in Guangzhou Urban Renewal and Renovation: Taking Jinzhou and Chongwei Natural Village Renewal and Renovation as Examples. Urban Archit. 2020, 17, 9–12. [Google Scholar]
- Shi, J.; Pan, Z.; Jiang, L.; Zhai, X. An ontology-based methodology to establish city information model of digital twin city by merging BIM, GIS and IoT. Adv. Eng. Inform. 2023, 57, 102114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feuerriegel, S.; Hartmann, J.; Janiesch, C.; Zschech, P. Generative ai. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 2024, 66, 111–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Keywords | Number | |
---|---|---|
Search 1 | (TS = (Information technology OR Geo-information technology OR Information and Communication technologies)) AND TS = (Urban governance OR Urban planning OR City Planning OR Urban Design and Planning OR Urban construction OR City construction OR Urban renewal OR Urban regeneration OR Urban Redevelopment) | 2144 |
Search 2 | (TS = (“Building information model” OR “Building information modelling” OR “Building information management” OR “BIM” OR “Planning support systems” OR “PSS” OR “City information modelling” OR “City information model” OR “CIM” OR “Participatory geographic information system” OR “PGIS” OR “PPGIS” OR “Public participation geographic information system”)) AND TS = (Urban governance OR Urban planning OR City planning OR Urban design and planning OR Urban construction OR City construction OR Urban renewal OR Urban regeneration OR Urban redevelopment) | 462 |
Numbers | Clusters | Nodes |
---|---|---|
1 | BIM | “integration”, “interoperability”, “management”, “construction”, “clash detection”, “coordination”, “IFC”, “3D city model”, “CIM”, “CityGML”, “generation”, “3d cadastre”, “models” |
2 | PSS | “scenario planning”, “transportation”, “land use planning”, “land use”, “practitioners”, “usability”, “challenges”, “health”, “built environment”, “projects”, “impact” |
3 | PGIS | “GIS”, “PPGIS”, “citizen”, “participation”, “vgi”, “governance”, “community”, “knowledge” |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Li, Y.; Lai, Y.; Lin, Y. The Role of Diversified Geo-Information Technologies in Urban Governance: A Literature Review. Land 2024, 13, 1408. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13091408
Li Y, Lai Y, Lin Y. The Role of Diversified Geo-Information Technologies in Urban Governance: A Literature Review. Land. 2024; 13(9):1408. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13091408
Chicago/Turabian StyleLi, Ying, Yani Lai, and Yanliu Lin. 2024. "The Role of Diversified Geo-Information Technologies in Urban Governance: A Literature Review" Land 13, no. 9: 1408. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13091408