Vertaile menetelmiä
Tarkastele valitsemiasi menetelmiä rinnakkain; eroavat rivit korostetaan.
| Suitability Analysis× | Multi-Criteria Site Selection× | |
|---|---|---|
| Tieteenala | Urban Studies | Urban Studies |
| Menetelmäperhe≠ | Process / pipeline | MCDM |
| Syntyvuosi≠ | 1969 | 2006 |
| Kehittäjä≠ | Ian L. McHarg | Jacek Malczewski (GIS-MCDA synthesis); Thomas Saaty (AHP weighting) |
| Tyyppi≠ | Spatial multi-criteria mapping of land suitability for a given use | Spatial multi-criteria decision analysis for siting facilities or land uses |
| Alkuperäislähde≠ | McHarg, I. L. (1969). Design with Nature. Natural History Press. ISBN: 9780471114604 | Malczewski, J. (2006). GIS-based multicriteria decision analysis: a survey of the literature. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 20(7), 703–726. DOI ↗ |
| Rinnakkaisnimet | Land Suitability Mapping, Overlay Suitability Analysis, Weighted Overlay Analysis, Suitability Modelling | GIS-MCDA, Weighted Overlay Suitability, AHP Site Suitability, Spatial Multi-Criteria Evaluation |
| Liittyvät | 4 | 4 |
| Tiivistelmä≠ | Suitability analysis maps how well each parcel of land supports a proposed use — housing, conservation, a highway, a landfill — by combining the relevant physical, ecological and accessibility factors into a single composite score. In the tradition established by Ian McHarg's 1969 Design with Nature, each factor is captured as a map layer, reclassified onto a common suitability scale, and overlaid so that places good on many factors stand out from places that are not. The result is a suitability surface that makes the trade-offs in a land-use decision explicit, transparent and defensible. | Multi-criteria site selection combines multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) with geographic information systems to choose where to locate a facility or land use when many, often conflicting, spatial criteria matter at once. Synthesized as GIS-based MCDA by Jacek Malczewski, it standardizes each criterion layer to a common scale, assigns the criteria importance weights — frequently via Saaty's Analytic Hierarchy Process — and combines them through weighted overlay to produce a suitability surface that ranks every candidate location. The method makes an inherently messy, value-laden siting decision explicit, reproducible, and auditable. |
| ScholarGateAineisto ↗ |
|
|