A critical review of MCDA practices in planning of urban green spaces and NBS

IF 2.3 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Morgane Bousquet, Martijn Kuller, Sandrine Lacroix, Peter A. Vanrolleghem
{"title":"A critical review of MCDA practices in planning of urban green spaces and NBS","authors":"Morgane Bousquet, Martijn Kuller, Sandrine Lacroix, Peter A. Vanrolleghem","doi":"10.2166/bgs.2023.132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Green spaces and nature-based solutions (NBS) are increasingly considered by land-use planning policies to respond to the multiple challenges related to sustainable development. The multiple benefits brought by NBS make the use of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) essential to optimally balance their use. MCDA offers a catalog of methods allowing to structure problems with multiple objectives and to help adopt the optimal solution. However, NBS planning is a recent discipline and research is still ongoing to make this practice more common. We carried out a critical literature review on MCDA-NBS tools and practices. We conducted our literature research following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) method on the Web of Science database and we selected 124 papers on the subject between 2000 and 2022. We present a state-of-the-art MCDA approach for NBS and green space planning by looking at where these practices are applied, why and how this process is conducted, and who is involved in it. We found that studies are usually conducted in the global North on a single case study with the help of experts involved in the criteria weighting phase and the help of GIS-MCDA tools often integrating a direct ranking method or the AHP method.","PeriodicalId":9337,"journal":{"name":"Blue-Green Systems","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Blue-Green Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2166/bgs.2023.132","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Green spaces and nature-based solutions (NBS) are increasingly considered by land-use planning policies to respond to the multiple challenges related to sustainable development. The multiple benefits brought by NBS make the use of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) essential to optimally balance their use. MCDA offers a catalog of methods allowing to structure problems with multiple objectives and to help adopt the optimal solution. However, NBS planning is a recent discipline and research is still ongoing to make this practice more common. We carried out a critical literature review on MCDA-NBS tools and practices. We conducted our literature research following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) method on the Web of Science database and we selected 124 papers on the subject between 2000 and 2022. We present a state-of-the-art MCDA approach for NBS and green space planning by looking at where these practices are applied, why and how this process is conducted, and who is involved in it. We found that studies are usually conducted in the global North on a single case study with the help of experts involved in the criteria weighting phase and the help of GIS-MCDA tools often integrating a direct ranking method or the AHP method.
MCDA在城市绿地规划和国家统计局中的实践评述
为了应对与可持续发展相关的多重挑战,土地利用规划政策越来越多地考虑绿色空间和基于自然的解决方案。国家统计局带来的多重好处使得使用多标准决策分析(MCDA)对其使用的最佳平衡至关重要。MCDA提供了一个方法目录,允许构建具有多个目标的问题,并帮助采用最佳解决方案。然而,国家统计局规划是一门新学科,研究仍在进行中,以使这种做法更普遍。我们对MCDA-NBS工具和实践进行了重要的文献回顾。我们根据Web of Science数据库中系统评价和元分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)方法进行了文献研究,我们选择了2000年至2022年间关于该主题的124篇论文。我们通过研究这些实践在哪里应用,为什么和如何实施,以及谁参与其中,为NBS和绿色空间规划提供了最先进的MCDA方法。我们发现,在全球北方,研究通常是在参与标准加权阶段的专家的帮助下,在GIS-MCDA工具的帮助下,对单个案例进行研究,通常集成直接排名方法或AHP方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Blue-Green Systems
Blue-Green Systems Multiple-
CiteScore
8.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信