National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Acronyms
Suggested Citation:"Index." National Research Council. 2002. Community and Quality of Life: Data Needs for Informed Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10262.
×
Page 177
Suggested Citation:"Index." National Research Council. 2002. Community and Quality of Life: Data Needs for Informed Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10262.
×
Page 178
Suggested Citation:"Index." National Research Council. 2002. Community and Quality of Life: Data Needs for Informed Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10262.
×
Page 179
Suggested Citation:"Index." National Research Council. 2002. Community and Quality of Life: Data Needs for Informed Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10262.
×
Page 180
Suggested Citation:"Index." National Research Council. 2002. Community and Quality of Life: Data Needs for Informed Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10262.
×
Page 181
Suggested Citation:"Index." National Research Council. 2002. Community and Quality of Life: Data Needs for Informed Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10262.
×
Page 182
Suggested Citation:"Index." National Research Council. 2002. Community and Quality of Life: Data Needs for Informed Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10262.
×
Page 183
Suggested Citation:"Index." National Research Council. 2002. Community and Quality of Life: Data Needs for Informed Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10262.
×
Page 184
Suggested Citation:"Index." National Research Council. 2002. Community and Quality of Life: Data Needs for Informed Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10262.
×
Page 185
Suggested Citation:"Index." National Research Council. 2002. Community and Quality of Life: Data Needs for Informed Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10262.
×
Page 186
Suggested Citation:"Index." National Research Council. 2002. Community and Quality of Life: Data Needs for Informed Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10262.
×
Page 187
Suggested Citation:"Index." National Research Council. 2002. Community and Quality of Life: Data Needs for Informed Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10262.
×
Page 188
Suggested Citation:"Index." National Research Council. 2002. Community and Quality of Life: Data Needs for Informed Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10262.
×
Page 189
Suggested Citation:"Index." National Research Council. 2002. Community and Quality of Life: Data Needs for Informed Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10262.
×
Page 190
Suggested Citation:"Index." National Research Council. 2002. Community and Quality of Life: Data Needs for Informed Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10262.
×
Page 191

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Index A Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), 138, 156 Accessibility Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 138, 157 assessment factors, 110-111 Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 78, measurement, 92-96 80, 144, 149, 164 ACS. See American Community Survey Bureau of the Census, 82, 138, 153-155, 164 American Association of State Highway American Community Survey, 138-139, and Transportation Officials, 109 155 American Community Survey (ACS), 138- decennial Census, 138, 141, 154 139, 155 Small Area Income and Poverty American FactFinder, 146, 155 Estimates, 163 Areal interpolation, 90 Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), 1, Areal weighting, 90 138, 157-158 Attachment to place, 65 Aurora Partnership, 108 Authority constraints, 61-62 C Autocorrelation, spatial, 91 Availability, of data, 48 Cadastral data, 139, 164 California, Smart Investment plan in, 24 Capability constraints, 18, 61 B Capacity constraints, 18 Census 2000, 146. See also Bureau of the BEA. See Bureau of Economic Analysis Census BLM. See Bureau of Land Management Chicago, Illinois, early transportation BLS. See Bureau of Labor Statistics studies in, 104 Bruntland Commission, 23 City of Richmond, British Columbia, BTS. See Bureau of Transportation Statistics Pedestrian Friendly Streets, 39 Built environments, structure, institutions, Community and agency in, 64-65 as three integrated spheres, 34 177

178 INDEX as three interconnected spheres, 33 decisions resolving conflicting ideas, as three separate spheres, 33 113-114 as a web of relations among spheres, 35 information needs of decision makers, community demonstration projects, 122-125 NSDI, 164-165 long-range planning, 106-107 objectives and associated indicators, 43 project planning, 107 Competitive connections, economic trade promoting cross-organizational and, 72 planning, 14 Complementary connections, economic regional basis for decision making, 114- trade and, 72 119 Connectedness, 55-74 role of public involvement in decision between places, 71-74 process, 119-120 Constraints, 18 Decision-support tools, 120-122 authority, 61 basic information handling support, 121 capability, 61 decision analysis support, 121 coupling, 61 designing for the diverse stakeholders, Control zones, 91 8 Cost, of state and local government data, group reasoning support, 121 143 micro, decision strategy phases, 122 Coupling constraints, 18, 61 Dependence Cross-organization decision making, 14 spatial, 91 Crosscutting measures of livability temporal, 91 ecological footprint, 27 Design Center for American Urban mutual interdependence of livability Landscape, 134-135 dimensions, 6 Livable Community tool, 136 Detroit, Michigan, early transportation studies in, 104 D Digital Aerial Images, 135 Digital Line Graph (DLG) hydrography Data data, 165 access to data and analytical tools, 146- Digital Orthophotos, 135 148 Disenfranchisement, 51 analysis tools, 131-150 DLG. See Digital Line Graph hydrography availability, 137-148 data cadastral data, 139, 164 DOC. See U.S. Department of Commerce collected by communities and smaller- Dodge-Polk, 145 level governments, 146 DOI. See U.S. Department of the Interior data needed by communities, 1-5 DOL. See U.S. Department of Labor data sharing among federal agencies, 8- DOT. See U.S. Department of 9 Transportation federal data for local decision making, 133 federal government data, 138-143 E private data, 145-146 reliability constraints, 48 Eastern Planning Initiative (EPI), 40-42 state and local government data, 143-146 Ecological fallacy, 88 Decision-support process, 103-127 Ecological footprint, 27 changes in the transportation planning Ecological framework methodology, 116-118 process, 107-112 Economic trade current transportation planning and competitive connections, 72 process, 106 and complementary connections, 72 decision process framework, 112-113

INDEX 179 Eisenhower Interstate Highway System, Federal Transit Administration (FTA), 107, 104 111 Elevation, 139, 164 FedStat Task Force, 138, 163 Employee Statistics 202 (ES202 ), 143-144, MapStats, 163 149 Small Area Income and Poverty EnviroMapper, 160 Estimates, 163 Environmental accidents, 49 FEMA. See Federal Emergency Environmental quality of life, 6 Management Agency with changes in the transportation FGDC. See Federal Geographic Data planning process, 111 Committee Environmental Systems Research Institute FHWA. See Federal Highways (ESRI), 135 Administration Envision Utah, 28-30 FirstGov, 164 EPA. See U.S. Environmental Protection Fort Collins, Colorado, geographic units in, Agency 82-83 EPI. See Eastern Planning Initiative Freedom of Information Act, 142 Errors, in measurement, 47 “Freeway revolts,” 5 ESRI. See Environmental Systems Research FTA. See Federal Transit Administration Institute FWS. See U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service European Sustainability Index Project, 32 Expectation-maximation algorithm, 90 Exurban expansion, 25 G GASB. See Government Accounting F Standards Board Gateway to Global Change Information, Fannie Mae Location Efficient Mortgage, 38 163 Federal Emergency Management Agency GDP. See Gross Domestic Product (FEMA), 135 Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI), 36 Federal Geographic Data Committee GeoData Alliance, 7, 141 (FGDC), 78, 141, 153, 164 Geodetic control, 139, 164 Federal government data, 7, 138-143 Geographic boundaries, arbitrary, 82-83 lack of appreciation for sources of, 133 Geographic Information System (GIS) data, limited availability of, 141 8, 12-13, 51, 62, 78, 80-81, 88-89, 107, missing, 142 125, 135-136 obtaining reliable, 133 Maps Overlay and Statistical System, 80 organization of federal statistical Geographic units, arbitrary, 83-92 system, 133 ecological fallacy, 88 paradox of state and local government incompatible data units, 90-91 data, 144-145 multiple areal unit problem, 84-88 provision programs, 153-165 Geography Network, 146-147 restricted access to, 142 GIS. See Geographic Information System scales of, 140 Global Change Information, 163 timeliness of, 141-142 Globalization, 64 uncoordinated, 142-143 “Golden triad,” 32-34 understanding, 133 Government Accounting Standards Board using for local decision making, 133 (GASB), 124-125 Federal Highways Administration Government roles in transportation (FHWA), 107, 109, 111, 116, 118, 142 planning, 8-9 Federal Railroads Administration, 142 Governmental units, 139, 164 Federal statistical system, organization of, GPI. See Genuine Progress Indicator 133

180 INDEX Grand Staircase-Escalante National National Hydrography Dataset, 162, Monument, 78-81 165 Gross Domestic Product (GDP), 6, 35, 49 National Spatial Data Infrastructure, 78, Group reasoning support, 121 139, 141, 164 U.S. Interagency Working Group on Sustainable Development Indicators, H 165 Intermodal Surface Transportation Heterogeneity, spatial, 91-92 Efficiency Act (ISTEA), 105, 109, 116 History and place, 17, 57 Intermodal Transportation Database Home, importance in identifying place, 60 (ITDB), 157-158 Horizontal characteristics of place, 56 Transportation Data Links option, 158 HUD. See U.S. Department of Housing and Internet, 12, 78, 146 Urban Development communication via, 18 Hydrography, 139, 164 Interpolation, areal, 90 Interstate Highway System, 5, 104 IRIS. See Integrated Risk Information I System Incompatible data units, 90-91 ISTEA. See Intermodal Surface Indicators of livability, 3-4, 34-52 Transportation Efficiency Act appropriate scale of analysis, 44-46 ITDB. See Intermodal Transportation associated with community objectives, Database 43 data availability and reliability constraints, 48 L historical lessons about selecting, 45-46 Lackawanna Watershed, Pennsylvania, in practice, 43-52 flood mitigation and environmental interpretation of, 48-50 management in, 165 new-generation, 37 Large scale, 140 politics of use, 51-52 “Legibility,” 69-71 single sphere versus crosscutting LEM. See Location Efficient Mortgage measures, 47-48 Limited availability, of federal government selection, 45-46 data, 141 social, economic, and environmental, 49 Linkages between places, 71 statistical measurement errors, 47 common experience of political places, traditional place-based, 36 73 weighted, 50-51 economic trade and competitive Individualistic fallacy, 88 connections, 72 Inferential statistics, spatial-temporal data economic trade and complementary and, 91-92 connections, 72 Information handling, 121 movement of capital, 72-73 Information needs of decision makers, 122- personal travel, 72 125 Livability, 3, 23-52, 110-111 Institutions, in natural, built, and social concept of, 23-27 environments, 64-65 the economy, 32-34 Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), the environment, 32-34 160 environment and quality of life, 111 Interagency sources “golden triad,” 32-34 Federal Geographic Data Committee, indicators of, 27-32, 34-52 78, 141, 153, 164 key dimensions of, 5-6, 32-34 FedStat Task Force, 138, 163 measurement and analysis of, 77-97

INDEX 181 mobility and access for people and in and out, 67-68 goods, 110 in time and space, 60-62 new generation indicators, 37 of capital, 72-73 social well-being, 32-34 through places, 19 system performance and preservation, space-time paths, 61 110-111 MPO. See Metropolitan planning why livability matters, 23-32 organizations Livability Communities Initiative, 24, 34 Multiplicity of places and scales, 59 Livability planning and scale, 7 “Lived-in” territories, 70 Local government. See State and local N government data Location Efficient Mortgage (LEM), 38 National Atlas, 161-162 National Cooperative Soil Survey Program Long-range planning, 106-107 (NRCS), 158-159 National Environmental Policy Act M (NEPA), 14, 105, 107 National Geodetic Survey, 164 Major investment study (MIS), 111 National Geographic, 147 Maps Overlay and Statistical System, 80 National Hydrography Dataset (NHD), MapStats, 163 162, 165, 176 MAUP. See Modifiable area unit problem National Partnership for Reinventing Measurement errors, 47 Government, 141, 164 Measurement of accessibility, 92-96 National Spatial Data Infrastructure space-time accessibility, 93-96 (NSDI), 78, 139, 141, 164 space-time prism, 94 cadastral data, 139, 164 Measurement of livability, 77-97 Community Demonstration Projects, developing place-based indicators, 81- 164-165 92 elevation, 139, 164 single sphere versus crosscutting, 47-48 executive order, 142 Measurement, time of, 89-90 geodetic control, 139, 164 Metadata, 148 governmental units, 139, 164 Metamodels, 148 hydrography, 139, 164 MetroGIS, 135 ortho-imagery, 139, 164 Metropolitan planning organizations transportation, 139, 164 (MPO), 14, 107, 114, 132 National Water Information System Miami-Dade, Florida, 79th Street corridor (NWIS), 162 revitalization in, 24 National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), 139, Minnesota’s North Metro I-35W Corridor 161 Coalition, 134-137 “Natural Amenities” Index, 35 Minority communities, 26 Natural environments MIS. See Major investment study role of, 16-17 Mississippi Delta, 116-118 structure, institutions, and agency in, Mobility in the transportation planning 64-65 process, 110 Natural Resources Conservation Service Modifiable area unit problem (MAUP), 84- (NRCS), 141, 158-159, 164 85 Natural Resources Defense Council, 38 Moline, Illinois, Renew Moline, 27 NCSS. See National Cooperative Soil Movement Survey Program (NRCS) authority constraints, 61-62 NEPA. See National Environmental Policy capability constraints, 61 Act coupling constraints, 61 Networks, nodes in, 57-60

182 INDEX Nodes, in place networks, 59-60 kinds of linkages between, 71 North Metro I-35W Corridor Coalition, and livability at multiple scales, 19 134-137 pace of change in, 17 NSDI. See National Spatial Data reading and using, 18 Infrastructure role of history in, 17, 57 role of structure, institutions, and agency in, 17 O role of the natural environment in, 16- 17 Occupancy at different scales, 18 and scale, 16 Office of Management and Budget, 133 and space connections between places, “OneDOT” program, 142 71-74 Ortho-imagery, 139, 164 spatial dependence, 16 as territory, 55-57 and time, 67-71 P Place-based indicators, 81-92 Pace of place change, 17 arbitrary geographic boundaries, 82-83 “Paralysis by analysis,” 51 arbitrary geographic units, 83-92 Partnerships with state and local Political jurisdictions, 62-63 governments, 8-9 common experience of, 73 Path dependence, 17 Population Pedestrian Friendly Streets, 39 choice, 69 People and place, 55-67 movement, 67-68 interactions between, 18-19 Position-aware technologies, 89 moving through places, 19 Potential path area, 94 natural, built, and social environments, Potential path space, 94 63-65 Potential path tree, 95 place and community, 18-19, 66-67 Private data, 145-146 place as territory and place as people, Project planning, 107 55-57 Public data, useful for decision making, 8 places as groups of nodes in networks, Public involvement in decision process, 57-60 role of, 119-120 political places, 62-63 reading and using places, 18 rural places, 65-66 Q sense of place, 18 Quality, of state and local government occupancy at different scales, 18 data, 144 time geography and movement in time Quality Growth Efficiency Tools (QGET), and space, 60-62 29 time-geography and place-scale Quality Growth Strategy, 29-30 definition, 18 “Quality of life,” 23-24 Place, 16-18, 55-74 Query Mapper, 160 attachment to, 65 QuickFacts, 155 and boundaries, 17-18 and community, 18-19, 66-67 connections between places, 71-74 R defining, 16 as groups of nodes in networks, 57-60 “Reading” places, 18 horizontal and vertical characteristics Refusal, of state and local government of, 56 data, 143-144

INDEX 183 Regional decision making, 84, 114-119 Standards, for state and local government actors in transportation decision data, 144 making, 115-119 State and local government data, 143-145 ecological framework methodology, cost, 143 116-118 federal paradox, 144-145 the Mississippi Delta, 116-118 inability, 144 Regional Economic Information System lack of standards, 144 (REIS), 156 no data, 144 Regional identity, 73-74 quality, 144 Reliability refusal, 143-144 of data, 48 standards, 144 of federal data, 133 State Departments of Transportation, 14 Remediation, 36 Statistics Remote sensing, 91 inferential, spatial-temporal data and, Restricted access, to federal government 91-92 data, 142 and measurement errors, 47 Rio Earth Summit, 31 Structures and institutions, 64-65 Rural places, 65-66 Suburban expansion, 25 Sustainability, 23 local agenda 21 projects, 31 S measures of, 24 System performance and preservation to Santa Monica, California, “sustainable assess livability impacts, 110-111 cities” program, 27 Scales of analysis, 44-46 T of federal government data, 140 of livability assessment, 4-5 TEA-21. See Transportation and Equity Act Seattle, Washington, Sustainable Seattle, 39 for the Twenty-First Century Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates, Technological developments, 12 163 Technologies, position-aware, 89 Small scale, 140 Temporal dependence, 91 Smart Growth, 24, 165 time of measurement, 89-90 “Social capital,” 18 spatial-temporal data and inferential Social Indicators Movement, 23 statistics, 91-92 Social well-being, 11, 32-34 Thomas Jefferson District Planning Soil Survey Geographic database (NRCS), Council, 39 159 Thomas Jefferson Sustainability Council, 39 Space connections between places, 71-74 Eastern Planning Initiative kinds of linkages between places, 71 Tiebout Model, 114-115 regional identity, 73-74 Time and place, 67-71 Space-time changing populations changing minds accessibility, 93-96 over time, 69 paths, 61 changing populations moving in and prism, 94 out over time, 67-68 Spatial autocorrelation, 91 legal interactions between time and Spatial dependence, 16, 91 place, 69-71 Spatial heterogeneity, 91-92 Time geography Spatial-temporal data, and inferential authority constraints, 61-62 statistics, 91-92 capability constraints, 61 Species endangerment, 31 coupling constraints, 61

184 INDEX and movement in time and space, 60-62 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and place-scale definition, 18 (EPA), 39, 116, 118, 159-160 space-time paths, 61 Envirofacts database, 160 Timeliness, of federal government data, Information Resources Center, 159 141-142 Integrated Risk Information System, 160 Trade-offs, 6, 11 Window to My Environment, 160 Transportation and Equity Act for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), 161 Twenty-First Century (TEA-21), 109, National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), 118 139, 161 Transportation planning, 139, 164 U.S. Forest Service (USFS), 176 actors in decision making, 115-119 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 141-142, assessing impacts on livability, 110-111 161-162 changes in process, 107-112 Digital Aerial Images, 135 current process employed, 106 Digital Line Graph hydrography data, environment and quality of life, 111 165 government roles in, 8-9 Hydrology Division, 162 Travel, personal, 72 National Atlas, 161-162 Tucson, Arizona, pedestrian-oriented, National Water Information System, mixed-use development in, 27 162 U.S. Global Charge Research Program (USGCRP), 163 U U.S. Interagency Working Group on Sustainable Development Indicators Uncoordinated data, 142-143 (SDI Group), 165 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), U.S. White House Task Force on Livable 35, 158-159 Communities, 24, 27, 34 “Natural Amenities” Index, 35 Natural Resources Conservation Service, 141, 158-159, 164 V U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC), 154- 156 Vertical characteristics of place, 56 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), 156-157 Research Maps, 156 W Urban Research Monitor, 157 Weighted indicators, 50-51 USER database, 157 U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), 157 Weighting, areal, 90 U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), 161- Western Governors’ Association, 144, 149 Wilderness Society, The, 80 162 U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), Window to My Environment, 160 1, 14, 118, 142, 149, 157-158, 164 Intermodal Transportation Database, 157-158 Z Zoning, 5

PLATES 1 Single family Commercial Lawn residential related use Forest & Multifamily Cultural Trees residential Valley/ Mobile Institutional Fields homes Roads & Professional offices Governmental Parking PLATE 1 Thomas Jefferson Planning District EPI community element diagram— urban mixed use. SOURCE: Chris Sinclair, Renaissance Planning Group, Charlottesville, Virginia.

2 PLATES Single family Commercial Lawn residential related use Forest & Multifamily Cultural Trees residential Valley/ Mobile Institutional Fields homes Roads & Professional offices Governmental Parking PLATE 2 Thomas Jefferson Planning District EPI community element diagram— suburban mixed use. SOURCE: Chris Sinclair, Renaissance Planning Group, Char- lottesville, Virginia.

PLATES 3 PLATE 3 Grand Staircase-Escalante Land Status GIS Map. Data were gathered from a variety of sources and integrated to provide a planning context. Data shown outside the monument may not have been verified. The map represents available information and should not be interpreted to alter existing authorities or management responsibilities. SOURCE: Produced by Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument (1999).

4 PLATES PLATE 4 Grand Staircase-Escalante, Alternative E. Data were gathered from a variety of sources and integrated to provide a planning context. Data shown outside the monument may not have been verified. The map represents available information and should not be interpreted to alter existing authorities or manage- ment responsibilities. SOURCE: Produced by Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument (1999).

PLATES 5 Principal Communities Monument Boundary Highways 89 & 12 Administrative Roads Open Roads Open/ATV Roads Other Roads Frontcountry Zone Outback Zone Passage Zone Primitive Zone PLATE 5 Grand Staircase-Escalante, Management Zones and Transportation System. The Frontcountry Zone (78, 056 acres) is intended to be the focal point for visitation by providing day use opportunities close to adjacent communities and to Highways 12 and 89. This zone would accommodate the primary interpreta- tion, overlooks, trails, and associated facilities necessary to feature monument resources. The Passage Zone (38, 316 acres) includes secondary travel routes that receive use as throughways and recreation destinations. Rudimentary facilities necessary to protect resources, to educate visitors about monument resources, or for public safety would be provided. The Outback Zone (537,662 acres) is intended to provide an undeveloped primitive and self-directed visitor experience while continued

6 PLATES accommodating motorized and mechanized access on designated routes. Facili- ties would be rare and provided only where essential for resource protection. The Primitive Zone (1,211,386 acres) provides an undeveloped, primitive, and self- directed visitor experience without motorized or mechanized access. Some administrative routes are included in the zone, which could allow very limited motorized access to authorized users. Facilities would be virtually nonexistent. Data were gathered from a variety of sources and integrated to provide a plan- ning context. Data shown outside the Monument may not have been verified. The map represents available information and should not be interpreted to alter existing authorities or management responsibilities. SOURCE: Produced by Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument (1999).

PLATES 7 PLATE 6 City of Arden Hills, Minnesota, comprehensive development plan map.

Community and Quality of Life: Data Needs for Informed Decision Making Get This Book
×
Buy Hardback | $61.00 Buy Ebook | $48.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

"Quality of life"..."livability"..."sense of place." Communities across America are striving to define these terms and to bring them to life, as they make decisions about transportation systems and other aspects of planning and development.

Community and Quality of Life discusses important concepts that undergird community life and offers recommendations for collaborative planning across space and time. The book explores:

  • Livability as an ensemble concept, embracing notions such as quality of place and sustainability. It discusses how to measure the "three legs" of livability (social, economic, ecological) while accounting for politics and personal values. And the book examines how to translate broad ideas about livability into guidelines for policymaking
  • Place as more than location, including the natural, human-built, and social environments. The book discusses the impact of population changes over time, the links between regional and local identity, and other issues
  • Tools for decision making in transportation and community planning. It reviews a variety of decision models and tools such as geographic information systems (GIS)—as well as public and private sources of relevant data.

Including several case examples, this book will be important to planners, planning decision makers, planning educators and students, social scientists, community activists, and interested individuals.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!