Research Monograph: Constructing online collaborative environmental decision making systems

The use of computing to support environmental planning and the development of land use models dates back to the late 1950s. The main thrust of computing applications, which by the early 1980s increasingly included the use of geospatial technologies, is their contribution to better planning and decision making. The computing tools and technologies are designed to enhance the planners’ capability to deal with complex environments and to plan for prosperous and livable communities. This paper examines the role of Information Technologies (IT) and particularly Internet Based Geographic Information Systems (Internet GIS) as spatial decision support systems to aid community based local decision making. The paper also covers the advantages and challenges of these internet based mapping applications and tools for collaborative decision making on the environment.

Research monograph : emergence of smart urban ecosystems : application of ICT for capacity building in environmental decision making

Since the industrial revolution, our world has experienced rapid and unplanned industrialization and urbanization. As a result, we have had to cope with serious environmental challenges. In this context, explanation of how smart urban ecosystems can emerge, gains a crucial importance. Capacity building and community involvement have always been the key issues in achieving sustainable development and enhancing urban ecosystems. By considering these, this paper looks at new approaches to increase public awareness of environmental decision making. This paper will discuss the role of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), particularly Web-based Geographic Information Systems (Web-based GIS) as spatial decision support systems to aid public participatory environmental decision making. The paper also explores the potential and constraints of these web-based tools for collaborative decision making.

Procurement Case Study and Decision-making Strategies

Objectives The procurement research of Sydney Opera House FM Exemplar Project aims to develop innovative methods and guidelines for the procurement of FM services, applicable to iconic and / or performing arts centre facilities, or facilities with similar FM functions. The initial procurement report in June 2005 analysed the strategic objectives and operational requirements that provide ‘demand statements’ as evaluation criteria in the service procurement process. The subsequent interim procurement report in September 2005 discussed the elements contributing to the criteria for decision-making in the service procurement process. This procurement report concentrates on the research on procurement strategies and innovative methods using a case study approach. The objectives of this report are: • to investigate service procurement methods and process in iconic and/or performing arts centre facilities; • to showcase FM innovation in Sydney Opera House through a case study; • to establish a preliminary decision-making framework and guidelines for selection of appropriate FM procurement routes to provide a useful model for FM community. Findings Findings from this procurement research are presented as follows. • FM innovation and experience of Sydney Opera House • Innovative procurement methods and processes, drawn from a case study of Sydney Opera House as exemplar • An integrated performance framework to link maintenance service functions to high level organisational objective and strategies • Procurement methods and contract outcomes, focusing on building maintenance and cleaning services of Sydney Opera House • Multi-dimensional assessment of Service Providers • General decision-making strategies and guidelines for selection of appropriate FM procurement routes Further Research Whilst the Sydney Opera House case study emphasises the experience of Sydney Opera House, a study of procurement strategies and methods from published research and FM good practice will supply facilities managers with alternative procurement routes. Further research on the procurement theme will develop a final decision-making model for the procurement of FM services, drawn from the evaluation of the case study outcomes, as well as FM good practice and findings from current published research.

Strategy for the development of investment decision-making framework for road asset management for queensland department of main roads

The aim of this project is to develop a systematic investment decision-making framework for infrastructure asset management by incorporation economic justification, social and environmental consideration in the decision-making process. This project assesses the factors that are expected to provide significant impacts on the variability of expenditures. A procedure for assessing risk and reliability for project investment appraisals will be developed. The project investigates public perception, social and environmental impacts on road infrastructure investment. This research will contribute to the debate about how important social and environmental issues should be incorporated into the investment decision-making process for infrastructure asset management.

International practices in investment decision making in road sector

This document provides the findings of an international review of investment decision-making practices in road asset management. Efforts were concentrated on identifying the strategic objectives of agencies in road asset management, establishing and understanding criteria different organisations adopted and ascertaining the exact methodologies used by different countries and international organisations. Road assets are powerful drivers of economic development and social equity. They also have significant impacts on the natural and man-made environment. The traditional definition of asset management is “A systematic process of maintaining, upgrading and operating physical assets cost effectively. It combines engineering principles with sound business practices and economic theory and it provides tools to facilitate a more organised, logical approach to decision-making” (US Dept. of Transportation, 1999). In recent years, the concept has been broadened to cover the complexity of decision making, based on a wider variety of policy considerations as well as social and environmental issues rather than is covered by Benefit-Cost analysis and pure technical considerations. Current international practices are summarised in table 2. It was evident that Engineering-economic analysis methods are well advanced to support decision-making. A range of tools available supports performance predicting of road assets and associated cost/benefit in technical context. The need for considering triple plus one bottom line of social, environmental and economic as well as political factors in decision-making is well understood by road agencies around the world. The techniques used to incorporate these however, are limited. Most countries adopt a scoring method, a goal achievement matrix or information collected from surveys. The greater uncertainty associated with these non-quantitative factors has generally not been taken into consideration. There is a gap between the capacities of the decision-making support systems and the requirements from decision-makers to make more rational and transparent decisions. The challenges faced in developing an integrated decision making framework are both procedural and conceptual. In operational terms, the framework should be easy to be understood and employed. In philosophical terms, the framework should be able to deal with challenging issues, such as uncertainty, time frame, network effects, model changes, while integrating cost and non-cost values into the evaluation. The choice of evaluation techniques depends on the feature of the problem at hand, on the aims of the analysis, and on the underlying information base At different management levels, the complexity in considering social, environmental, economic and political factor in decision-making is different. At higher the strategic planning level, more non-cost factors are involved. The complexity also varies based on the scope of the investment proposals. Road agencies traditionally place less emphasis on evaluation of maintenance works. In some cases, social equity, safety, environmental issues have been used in maintenance project selection. However, there is not a common base for the applications.

National practices in investment decision making in road sector

This document provides the findings of a national review of investment decision-making practices in road asset management. Efforts were concentrated on identifying the strategic objectives of agencies in road asset management, establishing and understanding criteria different organisations adopted and ascertaining the exact methodologies used by different sate road authorities. The investment objectives of Australian road authorities are based on triple-bottom line considerations (social, environmental, economic and political). In some cases, comparing with some social considerations, such as regional economic development, equity, and access to pubic service etc., Benefit-Cost Ratio has limited influence on the decision-making. Australian road authorities have developed various decision support tools. Although Multi-Criteria Analysis has been preliminarily used in case by case study, pavement management systems, which are primarily based on Benefit Cost Analysis, are still the main decision support tool. This situation is not compatible with the triple-bottom line objectives. There is need to fill the gap between decision support tools and decision-making itself. Different decision criteria should be adopted based on the contents of the work. Additional decision criteria, which are able to address social, environmental and political impacts, are needed to develop or identify. Environmental issue plays a more and more important role in decision-making. However, the criteria and respective weights in decision-making process are yet to be clearly identified. Social and political impacts resulted from road infrastructure investment can be identified through Community Perceptions Survey. With accumulative data, prediction models, which are similar as pavement performance models, can be established. Using these models, the decision-makers are able to foresee the social and political consequences of investment alternatives.

Framework for investment decision-making under risk and uncertainty for infrastructure asset management

A study has been conducted to investigate current practices on decision-making under risk and uncertainty for infrastructure project investments. It was found that many European countries such as the UK, France, Germany including Australia use scenarios for the investigation of the effects of risk and uncertainty of project investments. Different alternative scenarios are mostly considered during the engineering economic cost-benefit analysis stage. For instance, the World Bank requires an analysis of risks in all project appraisals. Risk in economic evaluation needs to be addressed by calculating sensitivity of the rate of return for a number of events. Risks and uncertainties of project developments arise from various sources of errors including data, model and forecasting errors. It was found that the most influential factors affecting risk and uncertainty resulted from forecasting errors. Data errors and model errors have trivial effects. It was argued by many analysts that scenarios do not forecast what will happen but scenarios indicate only what can happen from given alternatives. It was suggested that the probability distributions of end-products of the project appraisal, such as cost-benefit ratios that take forecasting errors into account, are feasible decision tools for economic evaluation. Political, social, environmental as well as economic and other related risk issues have been addressed and included in decision-making frameworks, such as in a multi-criteria decisionmaking framework. But no suggestion has been made on how to incorporate risk into the investment decision-making process.

Cross-cultural differences in self-reported decision-making style and confidence

The Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire (Mann, Burnett, Radford, & Ford, 1997) measures selfreported decision-making coping patterns. The questionnaire was administered to samples of University students in the US (N = 475), Australia (N = 262), New Zealand (N = 260), Japan (N = 359), Hong Kong (N = 281), and Taiwan (N = 414). As predicted, students from the three Western, individualistic cultures (US, Australia, and New Zealand) were more con® dent of their decision-making ability than students from the three East Asian, group-oriented cultures (Japan, Hong Kong, Taiwan). No cross-cultural differences were found in scores on decision vigilance (a careful decision-making style). However, compared with Western students, the Asian students tended to score higher on buck-passing and procrastination (avoidant styles of decision making) as well as hypervigilance (a panicky style of decision making). Japanese students scored lowest on decision self-esteem and highest on procrastination and hypervigilance. It was argued that the con¯ ict model and its attendant coping patterns is relevant for describing and comparing decision making in both Western and Asian cultures.

The Melbourne Decision-Making Questionnaire : an instrument for measuring patterns for coping with decisional conflict

A study was conducted to examine the factorial validity of the Flinders Decision Making Questionnaire (Mann, 1982), a 31-item self-report inventory designed to measure tendencies to use three major coping patterns identified in the conflict theory of decision making (Janis and Mann, 1977): vigilance, hypervigilance, and defensive avoidance (procrastination, buck-passing, and rationalization). A sample of 2051 university students, comprising samples from Australia (n=262), New Zealand (n=260), the USA (n=475), Japan (n=359), Hong Kong (n=281) and Taiwan (n=414) was administered the DMQ. Factorial validity of the instrument was tested by confirmatory factor analysis with LISREL. Five different substantive models, representing different structural relationships between the decision-coping patterns had unsatisfactory fit to the data and could not be validated. A shortened instrument, containing 22 items, yielded a revised model comprising four identifiable factors-vigilance, hypervigilance, buck-passing, and procrastination. The revised model had adequate fit with data for each country sample and for the total sample, and was confirmed. It is recommended that the 22-item instrument, named the Melbourne DMQ, replace the Flinders DMQ for measurement of decision-coping patterns.