438
R. Canessa and C. P. Keller
notes that “Success stories of actual [SDSS] use in the debate and policy-making
process, such as water resource management, are somewhat more rare, in particular at
the societal rather than commercial end of the spectrum of possible applications”.
Several explanations can be proposed.
SDSS primarily have been designed for single users usually experienced in
GIS. It is now generally accepted that public planning and resource management,
including coastal management, should be undertaken by multi-party task forces
involving non-scientist decision makers and in some cases the general public. The
decision-making process involving multiple parties tends to be less structured
involving more oral exchange. In many cases decision-makers do not have access or
cannot operate GIS due to inadequate experience or interface complexity. To address
some of these issues, a new generation of GIS-based DSS are being developed, namely
collaborative spatial decision making systems (CSDMS) aimed at converging the
divergent views of decision makers towards an agreeable solution to a specific problem
in an often iterative and interactive process (Densham et al., 1995).
While GIS technology has been advancing, this has not been matched by an
ability to integrate non-GIS specialists and their expectations. The need to consult and
involve decision-makers in the development of GIS decision support technology has
been emphasised by several researchers (Green, 1995; Raal et al., 1995; Basta, 1990).
As part of a study to develop Coastal SDSS (Canessa, 1997), it was thus recognised
that one of the key factors would be to consult with intended Coastal SDSS users. A
questionnaire survey was undertaken to answer this call and ascertain from likely users
of Coastal SDSS an assessment of technical and implementation factors.
This
included decision making, analytical and inventory components, and the attitudes and
expectations of respondents to using a GIS-based Coastal SDSS. Results of this survey
formed the basis for the development, implementation and evaluation of a pilot Coastal
SDSS in an actual community-based coastal management initiative (Canessa and
Keller, 1997).
Questionnaire Design
A two-phased mailed questionnaire was undertaken to elicit information from potential
users of Coastal SDSS. The objective of the first phase questionnaire was to gain
general information on the coastal management process and the manner in which
decisions and strategies are derived. In addition, respondents were also questioned
about their knowledge, experience and expectations of GIS. The purpose of the second
questionnaire was to follow up on some of the themes emerging from Phase I and to
focus on tools and techniques used in coastal management, and to explore the
implementation of coastal decision support systems. Because of the exploratory nature
of the questionnaire, open-ended questions were primarily employed. Responses were
evaluated using content analysis to narrow and consolidate them into categories that
could be reported and summarised using descriptive statistics.
Participants were selected from the literature, conference proceedings, coastal
management programs and personal contacts. The emphasis was to seek coastal
R. Canessa and C. P. Keller
notes that “Success stories of actual [SDSS] use in the debate and policy-making
process, such as water resource management, are somewhat more rare, in particular at
the societal rather than commercial end of the spectrum of possible applications”.
Several explanations can be proposed.
SDSS primarily have been designed for single users usually experienced in
GIS. It is now generally accepted that public planning and resource management,
including coastal management, should be undertaken by multi-party task forces
involving non-scientist decision makers and in some cases the general public. The
decision-making process involving multiple parties tends to be less structured
involving more oral exchange. In many cases decision-makers do not have access or
cannot operate GIS due to inadequate experience or interface complexity. To address
some of these issues, a new generation of GIS-based DSS are being developed, namely
collaborative spatial decision making systems (CSDMS) aimed at converging the
divergent views of decision makers towards an agreeable solution to a specific problem
in an often iterative and interactive process (Densham et al., 1995).
While GIS technology has been advancing, this has not been matched by an
ability to integrate non-GIS specialists and their expectations. The need to consult and
involve decision-makers in the development of GIS decision support technology has
been emphasised by several researchers (Green, 1995; Raal et al., 1995; Basta, 1990).
As part of a study to develop Coastal SDSS (Canessa, 1997), it was thus recognised
that one of the key factors would be to consult with intended Coastal SDSS users. A
questionnaire survey was undertaken to answer this call and ascertain from likely users
of Coastal SDSS an assessment of technical and implementation factors.
This
included decision making, analytical and inventory components, and the attitudes and
expectations of respondents to using a GIS-based Coastal SDSS. Results of this survey
formed the basis for the development, implementation and evaluation of a pilot Coastal
SDSS in an actual community-based coastal management initiative (Canessa and
Keller, 1997).
Questionnaire Design
A two-phased mailed questionnaire was undertaken to elicit information from potential
users of Coastal SDSS. The objective of the first phase questionnaire was to gain
general information on the coastal management process and the manner in which
decisions and strategies are derived. In addition, respondents were also questioned
about their knowledge, experience and expectations of GIS. The purpose of the second
questionnaire was to follow up on some of the themes emerging from Phase I and to
focus on tools and techniques used in coastal management, and to explore the
implementation of coastal decision support systems. Because of the exploratory nature
of the questionnaire, open-ended questions were primarily employed. Responses were
evaluated using content analysis to narrow and consolidate them into categories that
could be reported and summarised using descriptive statistics.
Participants were selected from the literature, conference proceedings, coastal
management programs and personal contacts. The emphasis was to seek coastal