Etalement urbain et géoprospective : apports et limites des modèles de spatialisation

The aim of this paper is to assess the advantages and drawbacks of using the SLEUTH, LCM and NEDUM-2D models according to their ability to translate narrative user-defined urban planning scenarios into quantitative land use and land cover change simulations. SLEUTH and LCM, which are land use and co...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Rahim Aguejdad, Omar Doukari, Thomas Houet, Paolo Avner, Vincent Viguié
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	DE EN FR IT PT
Publicado:	Unité Mixte de Recherche 8504 Géographie-cités 2016
Materias:	urban sprawl prospective scenario model simulation Geography (General) G1-922
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/a75b2545977b48cbac66dc8d0619a3ea
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:a75b2545977b48cbac66dc8d0619a3ea
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:a75b2545977b48cbac66dc8d0619a3ea2021-12-02T11:11:48ZEtalement urbain et géoprospective : apports et limites des modèles de spatialisation1278-336610.4000/cybergeo.27668https://doaj.org/article/a75b2545977b48cbac66dc8d0619a3ea2016-06-01T00:00:00Zhttp://journals.openedition.org/cybergeo/27668https://doaj.org/toc/1278-3366The aim of this paper is to assess the advantages and drawbacks of using the SLEUTH, LCM and NEDUM-2D models according to their ability to translate narrative user-defined urban planning scenarios into quantitative land use and land cover change simulations. SLEUTH and LCM, which are land use and cover change models, are spatially explicit and inductive pattern-based models while NEDUM-2D is an economic processes-based model. Applied to the Toulouse metropolitan area (France), SLEUTH and LCM are calibrated based on past urban growth dynamics observed between 1990 and 2006. After a detailed description of the methodology utilized to build contrasted, coherent and plausible urban development scenarios, the modeling framework and hypothesis of each model are presented. Then, a comparative analysis of the SLEUTH and LCM outcomes is conducted based on a baseline scenario for 2025 constructed using past trend extrapolation. The results show important differences between the LCM and SLEUTH models’ outcomes. The influence of models on the simulation results concerns both the amount of change and its spatial allocation. The findings also highlight that, based on a scenario-oriented approach, none of these empirical models is suitable by itself to deal with contrasted and anticipatory scenarios assuming the absence of path-dependency. Based on this analysis, we suggest developing a new hybrid and dynamic spatially explicit economic model that should be used in a fully controlled forecasting mode and combine economic processes and spatial patterns of urban growth.Rahim AguejdadOmar DoukariThomas HouetPaolo AvnerVincent ViguiéUnité Mixte de Recherche 8504 Géographie-citésarticleurban sprawlprospectivescenariomodelsimulationGeography (General)G1-922DEENFRITPTCybergeo (2016)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	DE EN FR IT PT
topic	urban sprawl prospective scenario model simulation Geography (General) G1-922
spellingShingle	urban sprawl prospective scenario model simulation Geography (General) G1-922 Rahim Aguejdad Omar Doukari Thomas Houet Paolo Avner Vincent Viguié Etalement urbain et géoprospective : apports et limites des modèles de spatialisation
description	The aim of this paper is to assess the advantages and drawbacks of using the SLEUTH, LCM and NEDUM-2D models according to their ability to translate narrative user-defined urban planning scenarios into quantitative land use and land cover change simulations. SLEUTH and LCM, which are land use and cover change models, are spatially explicit and inductive pattern-based models while NEDUM-2D is an economic processes-based model. Applied to the Toulouse metropolitan area (France), SLEUTH and LCM are calibrated based on past urban growth dynamics observed between 1990 and 2006. After a detailed description of the methodology utilized to build contrasted, coherent and plausible urban development scenarios, the modeling framework and hypothesis of each model are presented. Then, a comparative analysis of the SLEUTH and LCM outcomes is conducted based on a baseline scenario for 2025 constructed using past trend extrapolation. The results show important differences between the LCM and SLEUTH models’ outcomes. The influence of models on the simulation results concerns both the amount of change and its spatial allocation. The findings also highlight that, based on a scenario-oriented approach, none of these empirical models is suitable by itself to deal with contrasted and anticipatory scenarios assuming the absence of path-dependency. Based on this analysis, we suggest developing a new hybrid and dynamic spatially explicit economic model that should be used in a fully controlled forecasting mode and combine economic processes and spatial patterns of urban growth.
format	article
author	Rahim Aguejdad Omar Doukari Thomas Houet Paolo Avner Vincent Viguié
author_facet	Rahim Aguejdad Omar Doukari Thomas Houet Paolo Avner Vincent Viguié
author_sort	Rahim Aguejdad
title	Etalement urbain et géoprospective : apports et limites des modèles de spatialisation
title_short	Etalement urbain et géoprospective : apports et limites des modèles de spatialisation
title_full	Etalement urbain et géoprospective : apports et limites des modèles de spatialisation
title_fullStr	Etalement urbain et géoprospective : apports et limites des modèles de spatialisation
title_full_unstemmed	Etalement urbain et géoprospective : apports et limites des modèles de spatialisation
title_sort	etalement urbain et géoprospective : apports et limites des modèles de spatialisation
publisher	Unité Mixte de Recherche 8504 Géographie-cités
publishDate	2016
url	https://doaj.org/article/a75b2545977b48cbac66dc8d0619a3ea
work_keys_str_mv	AT rahimaguejdad etalementurbainetgeoprospectiveapportsetlimitesdesmodelesdespatialisation AT omardoukari etalementurbainetgeoprospectiveapportsetlimitesdesmodelesdespatialisation AT thomashouet etalementurbainetgeoprospectiveapportsetlimitesdesmodelesdespatialisation AT paoloavner etalementurbainetgeoprospectiveapportsetlimitesdesmodelesdespatialisation AT vincentviguie etalementurbainetgeoprospectiveapportsetlimitesdesmodelesdespatialisation
_version_	1718396176910254080

Etalement urbain et géoprospective : apports et limites des modèles de spatialisation

Ejemplares similares