43808_Course_6_Evaluation Method Spatial Planning Intro and Rating Method

8/20/2019 43808_Course_6_Evaluation Method Spatial Planning Intro and Rating Method

1/44

Evaluation Methods ofEvaluation Methods of

Spatial Planning:Spatial Planning:

Overlay/RatingOverlay/RatingMethodsMethods

Dr. Doni Prakasa E. PutraDr. Doni Prakasa E. Putra


2/44

Multi Criteria EvaluationMulti Criteria Evaluation


3/44

Multi Criteria Analysis

Multi Criteria Evaluation (MCE)

Multi Criteria Preference Analysis

Multi Criteria Decision Making

Multi Objective Evaluation

These methods are essentially one and thesame!

MCE = Multi-criteria evaluation ispriarily concerne! "it# #o" to cobinet#e inforation fro several criteria to

for a single in!e$ of evaluation


4/44

BackgroundBackground

• Early methods (pre computers):

• Ian McHarg (1969)Design with Nature• Used for suitability analysis

• Tracing paper overlays

• Limited to simple Boolean analysis: AND, OR, NOT


5/44

Maps as a Planning ToolMaps as a Planning Tool

Coputers #ave ai!e! plannersCoputers #ave ai!e! planners %nforation re&uire! by planners is voluinous%nforation re&uire! by planners is voluinous Coputers #ave playe! an increasing role forCoputers #ave playe! an increasing role for

planners to anipulate large volues ofplanners to anipulate large volues of

&uantitative inforation&uantitative inforation

Geographic Information Systems GIS!Geographic Information Systems GIS! allo" planners to anipulate t#e !ata to seeallo" planners to anipulate t#e !ata to see

an! use "#at !ata is useful to a planning taskan! use "#at !ata is useful to a planning task

"#ile inii'e or obscuring uniportant !ata"#ile inii'e or obscuring uniportant !ata

%* can allo" a planner to see !istinct +layers,%* can allo" a planner to see !istinct +layers,of inforation t#at are iportant to t#eof inforation t#at are iportant to t#e

!ecision aking process!ecision aking process


6/44

Evaluation MethodEvaluation Method


7/44

Post computers: Basic GISPost computers: Basic GIS

Approaches Approaches

• Polygon overlay (Boolean logic)


8/44"igiti#ed maps can represent data"igiti#ed maps can represent data


9/44a composite map for land$use planninga composite map for land$use planning


10/44

The Basics


11/44

Principles of MCEPrinciples of MCE• Methodology:

1.Determine criteria(factors/constraints) to be included

2.Determining the weights for eachfactor

3.Sensitivity analysis of results


12/44

11stst Step: Determine theStep: Determine the

criteria to be includedcriteria to be included

•Criteria determine the alternatives

1.Oversimplification of the decision problem could lead to toofew criteria being used

2.Using a large number of criteria reduces the influence of anyone criteria

3.Often proxies must be used since the criteria of interest may

not be determinable


13/44

PO/

An application t#at acts as an intere!iary forre&uests fro clients seeking resources froot#ers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Client_%28computing%29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Client_%28computing%29


14/44

Example: Case study of a suitabledam and reservoir site

Criteria used: River

Urban Forest Accumulated water flow Existing reservoir Watershed boundary City ydraulic head

Undulation


15/44


16/44


17/44

Determine the weightsDetermine the weights

• A decision is the result of a comparison of oneor more alternatives with respect to one or morecriteria that we consider relevant for the task at

hand.

• Among the relevant criteria we consider some asmore important and some as less important;this is equivalent to assigning weights to thecriterion according to their relative importance.


18/44

2nd stage, assigning weights


19/44

Weights assigned using the

an! "rder method


20/44


21/44

Sensitivity analysisSensitivity analysis

sensitivity analysis: vary the scores/weights of the factors todetermine the sensitivity of the solution to minor changes

• Choice of criteria (e.g. why included?)

•

Assesses the reliability of data: how stable is the final result?• Choice for weighting factors is subjective

• Will the overall solution change if you use other weighingfactors?


22/44

%&SE ST'"( ): Ran*ing/Rating Methods%&SE ST'"( ): Ran*ing/Rating Methods

Selecting Relocation of +and 'se in ,ot MudSelecting Relocation of +and 'se in ,ot Mud"isaster &rea -y &pplying Geo$Environmental"isaster &rea -y &pplying Geo$Environmental

EvaluationEvaluation

%ase Study: Sidoar.o East 0ava Indonesia%ase Study: Sidoar.o East 0ava Indonesia


23/44

1lo2 up an eruptionof hot mud )34 mfrom 1an.ar Pan.i ) 2ell 10P$)! an oile5ploration of PT6+apindo 1rantas

78 May

7449


24/44


25/44

AC0%1E M2D 1O3CA4O(5le!ug 6u"uP27ODAD%)

5A46A3A4

. A4/A

025A4

*A4%A4 POO4MO8O6E0O 6. A4/A

E*%6

+ocation of the Study &rea+ocation of the Study &rea


26/44


27/44

O-.ectivesO-.ectives

Potential geo-#a'ar! in t#is !isaster areaPotential geo-#a'ar! in t#is !isaster areacoes frocoes fro

(9) t#e u! over:o"s(9) t#e u! over:o"s

(;) t#e poisonous gases(;) t#e poisonous gases

(


28/44

Methodology Methodology

Evaluation of eo-environental =actors toEvaluation of eo-environental =actors to

De>ne t#e suitable places for relocation areaDe>ne t#e suitable places for relocation area

eo-Environental =actorseo-Environental =actors 9. eology incl. engineering properties9. eology incl. engineering properties

;. ?y!rogeology;. ?y!rogeology


29/44

Geology of The StudyGeology of The Study

&rea &rea


30/44

Engineering GeologyEngineering Geology

MapMap The homogenietyThe homogenietycondition used tocondition used to

divide the Eng6divide the Eng6Geology units areGeology units are

the characteristic ofthe characteristic of

the su-surfacethe su-surface

lithologieslithologies

geologicalgeological

discontinuitydiscontinuity

vertical vertical

displacementdisplacement

/su-sidence and/su-sidence and

depth todepth to

ground2ater6ground2ater6

A

5

C


31/44

,ydrogeology "epth to,ydrogeology "epth to

Ground2ater Ground2ater


32/44

,ydrogeology Ground2ater,ydrogeology Ground2ater

salinity salinity


33/44

hot mud over;o2shot mud over;o2s

ha#ardha#ard


34/44

,a#ard of poisonous,a#ard of poisonous

gasesgases


35/44

,a#ard of su-sidence,a#ard of su-sidence?a'ar! of

subsi!ence


36/44

EvaluationEvaluation


37/44

ResultResult


38/44

%onclusion%onclusion

5ase! on suitability ap of5ase! on suitability ap of

relocation area it is reasonable ifrelocation area it is reasonable if

t#e #ig# risk infrastructures (rail"ayt#e #ig# risk infrastructures (rail"ay

an! priary roa!s) a@ecte! by t#ean! priary roa!s) a@ecte! by t#e#ot u! blast s#oul! be relocate to#ot u! blast s#oul! be relocate to

t#e "est-part of t#e stu!y area.t#e "est-part of t#e stu!y area.


39/44


40/44


41/44


42/44


43/44


44/44

Than* you for yourThan* you for yourattentionattention

43808_Course_6_Evaluation Method Spatial Planning Intro and Rating Method

Documents

Transcript of 43808_Course_6_Evaluation Method Spatial Planning Intro and Rating Method