|
Highway Corridor Routing using the Enhanced Participatory Analytic Minimum Impedance Surface (EP-AMIS) methodology
Keiron Bailey Assistant Professor Organisation: University of Arizona USA This paper describes the adaptation and development of the Analytic Minimum Impedance Surface (AMIS) methodology for participatory highway corridor evaluation. The AMIS methodology was introduced by Grossardt, Bailey and Brumm (2001). It features the combination of hybrid Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and a Geographic Information System (GIS) that is used to identify and evaluate input criteria, to compute trade-offs and from these factors to generate a decision landscape. The AMIS decision landscape consists of a GIS-generated surface representing a decision criterion, such as cost or desirability. It is generated by means of a two-stage process: first, the specification and quantification of a decision criterion for a wide variety of physical, environmental and socioeconomic attributes and second, assigning them a geographical location. Physical attributes include features of the built environment, such as airports, cemeteries and archaeological sites. Environmental attributes include not only the location of endangered species, but also their range and habitat. These also include air and water quality indices and ecosystem evaluations. Socioeconomic attributes are modeled in the form of social and community impacts. The decision landscape is computed and displayed by means of a raster-based GIS (ArcInfo / ArcView®). The input from these phases is then processed into a Spatial Decision Support System or SDSS (Densham 1991). The decision landscape paradigm is an extremely powerful and flexible means of assessing environmental factors in a dynamic social context. First, it provides a graphical summary of all development features that facilitates comment and feedback at public meetings and other forums. Second, it offers an exceptionally powerful analytic tool that can be used in a number of ways to examine any type of development and its impact on this landscape. Various operations can be performed on this decision landscape: such as point-to-point route cost minimization, buffer zone impact minimization, net areal pollution mitigation and so on. Because the methodology is quantitative, the benefits of specific strategies may be analyzed closely and compared with a strong degree of confidence. The technical details of the AMIS methodology and its mathematical specification have been detailed previously (see Grossardt et. al. 2001).  Figure 1 AMIS Isocost Surface showing least cost paths from origin to three destinations. This paper discusses the operationalization of AMIS in a context of Structured Public Involvement or SPI. The cultural and regulatory context of highway development in the U.S. is outlined and placed in a framework of broader civil infrastructure development and public involvement. The public involvement protocols that are used to solicit and evaluate the input factors are described. These protocols include the use of the SharpeDecisions® electronic polling system and the use of Distributed Outreach to ensure that minority and non-elite stakeholder views are taken into account when generating the decision landscape. This process allows communities and other local groups more input into public processes that are often perceived as opaque and inaccessible. This structured public involvement protocol assists the State Highway Agency in determining which environmental factors are important, and it allows public participants to add and weight other factors. The conjunction of the enhanced participation protocols and the AMIS method leads to the nomenclature Enhanced Participatory-AMIS, or EP-AMIS. Context for Participation Although it is increasingly regarded as essential, public involvement in infrastructure decision making in the United States has a highly problematic history. Public skepticism about the activities and motivations of transportation planning, design and engineering professionals remains high. Arnstein’s (1969) famous “Ladder of Citizen Participation” is still a useful way of characterizing levels of public involvement, ranging from the ideal of citizen control to creeping manipulation by officials and powerful interest groups (Figure 2).  Figure 2: Ladder of Citizen Participation
Page 1 of 3
| Next | |