PLANNING TOOLS & GIS PRESENTATION

Mr. Ian Hamilton

Senior Planning Advisor

Introduction

This presentation is about the general approach that is used to prepare the Spatial Plan, and also a number of selected planning tools. The approach and tools that we used have been determined largely by the resources (time and manpower) that are available. Task Force 4 has accomplished the Spatial Plan so far by carrying out a number of co-ordinating and training meetings and also individual training. This has been a part time activity in which the representatives of Task Force 4 are from government departments, academic institutions and the private sector. The Plan has been prepared with minimum data because time was limited, and done in simplicity so that all members from various backgrounds can be involved.

Overall Approach

shows the flowchart of activities for the preparation of the Spatial Plan. We start with 2005 trend framework based on the 1980-1991 population growth. This is a population driven model. We took the population growth between 1980 and 1991 in each district and projected it forward at the same rate to the year 2005. This is not a prediction but it is an exercise of ‘what if? What if the trend from 1980 to 1991 continues to the year 2005? What are we left with in terms of population?

There were 1.7 million people in Sabah in 1991 and the projection of population based on the growth rate between 1980 and 1991 would be 3.9 million by the year 2005, an increase of 2.1 million. The annual growth rate is 5.5 %. We think that 50% of that would be of a natural growth and the rest due to migration.

There is also a need to generate goals and objectives for deciding what we really want. From the goals and objectives, we generate alternative ways the future may look based on different development approaches. The alternatives are Agro-industry, Tourism and Manufacturing. We considered each alternative individually and the population was reassigned to each alternative based on whether they are urban or rural and in which districts the activities would be concentrated. Evaluation was undertaken to find the best of these approaches. The tool used was GAM (Goals Achievement Matrix). This is then used as a base for adding the best bits of all other strategies to produce a preferred strategy which will score highest in the GAM.

Essentially, the ICZM Spatial Plan is designed in a logical sequential format to include the following items:

But to be pro-active, we must understand linkages and dynamics of relationships between Settlements, Natural Resources and Infrastructure.

Figure 1: Flow Chart of Activities

shows the linkages between settlement planning, natural resources and infrastructure. The questions shown in Figure 2 are the questions being considered for in preparing the plan. The rapid population growth in urban areas could be due to high centrality, political centre, employment opportunities, improved accessibility and migration. On the other hand, the decline of rural population growth could be due to rural under employment, decline in mining/forestry activities and decline in agricultural productivity. Some of the reasons why rural population might be increasing are the growth of agro-industry and eco-tourism.

If these growth trends are allowed to continue, it might be due to the availability of space to expand, the growth of dynamic industries creating employment, strategic location, potential to increase agricultural production, that increased urbanisation causes efficient services and the availability of exploitable resources. However, in terms of natural resources, the growth trends might be exerting pressure on good agricultural land or forests/hillsides near towns, destruction of fish habitats, conflicts between sea users (oil exploration and fishing activities), groundwater pollution, expensive infrastructure to service fast growing centres, over-reliance on one centre and adverse cultural influences.

There is a need to assess which settlements should be encouraged to grow and where we should try to restrict or redirect growth. There is also a need to assess which urban facilities or services are needed, for example tertiary education, piped water and public housing. In the rural area, we need to assess which rural facilities or services are needed, for example, reservoirs, irrigation, solid waste and recreation; and assess the need for new transport links between settlements and to the other districts, for example national roads.

Figure 2: Linkages Between Settlement Planning, Natural Resources And Infrastructure

Planning Tools

There are many techniques used as planning tools, for example, settlement hierarchy analysis looking at aspects of centrality through Central Place theory, Growth Poles and Scalogram, Accessibility Analysis. In this paper, four planning tools presented namely SWOT, Sustainability analysis, Criteria and GAM.

SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats)

The SWOT matrix is presented in Table 2 . Table 3 presents an example of the usage of SWOT matrix. The example is related to the tourism industry in a theoretical place. The strengths of this particular place are great scenery, beaches and cultural centres. The weakness is limited infrastructure. The opportunity in this place is to declare the province a tourist zone. The threats are land degradation, depletion of coral and no preservation of historical sites. The SO strategies could be to produce a tourism plan to market the province to developers and visitors, and to ease the planning process for approved projects. The WO strategies could be to provide new infrastructure to attract tourists and serve local people, and also introduce replanting programs. For the ST strategies, the mining companies could involve to reinstate spoils heaps and beautify man-made lakes, give alternative leisure jobs for fishermen, and encourage use and conversion of historic buildings to attract tourists. The WT strategies could be to prevent further mining/logging in selected areas and to promote tourism away from erosion prone areas.

Table 2: SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) Matrix


STRENGTHS
list Strengths
WEAKNESSES
list Weaknesses
OPPORTUNITIES
list Opportunities
SO STRATEGIES
list Strengths to take advantage of Opportunities
WO STRATEGIES
overcome Weaknesses by taking advantage of Opportunities
THREATS
list Threats
ST STRATEGIES
use Strengths to avoid Threats

WT STRATEGIES

minimise Weaknesses and avoid Threats

Table 3: Tourism using SWOT



S
W


Scenery, Beaches Cultural centres
Limited infrastructure
O
Declare Province a Tourist zone
Tourism plan to market Province to developers & visitors.
Ease planning process for approved projects.
New infrastructure to attract tourists & serve local people.
Replanting programs
T
Land Degradation
Depletion of coral.
No preservation of
Historic sites
Mining companies to reinstate spoils heaps & beautify man-made lakes
Alternative leisure jobs for fishermen.
Encourage use & conversion of historic buildings to attract tourists
Prevent further mining/logging in selected areas.
Promote tourism away from erosion prone upland areas.

Sustainability of Land Use

The land use and suitability classes of land need to be combined . Figure 3 shows the land suitability map. Each area of land has been categorised as suitable for various purposes. Each category is broadly explained, as details could not be dealt with at this level.

Figure 4 shows the sustainability of land use map. These two maps could be compared and one could conclude that there are areas that are overused according to their suitability, land that has development opportunity and also land with sustainable land use. A very broad idea can be derived from the comparison for the sustainability of land use for the future.

Figure 3: Land Suitability Map

Sample Land Suitability Map based on Land Management Unit Map.

SUITABILITY CATEGORIES

Sr - Suitable for irrigated rice or freshwater fish-ponds

S cc - Suitable for cultivated annual crops

S tv - Suitable for perennial tree and vine crops

S p - Suitable for pastures

Figure 4: Sustainability of Land Use Map

Criteria

Planning standard is a very useful technique. It is useful to have some ideas about the use of facilities by people. However, in Sabah, standards are not used widely. The example below shows typical standards or guidelines used in the Philippines. They are generalised but give guidance about what should be aimed for.

Typical Standards or Guidelines to be aimed for: Philippines

Roads: Agricultural Areas : 1.5 km per 100 hectares arable land

Urban Areas 2.4 km per 1000 urban population

Average 1.0 km per 100 hectares

Hospitals: 1 bed per 1000 population

Within 35 kms/30 minutes of every residence

Solid Waste: Daily range : 0.23 to 0.60 kg per capita

On the basis of 0.40 kg/person/day with a density of 500 kg/per m 3 in the landfill and 20% cover, one hectare one metre high will provide for some 30,000 persons.

Landfill Area required (ha.):

= Population Served = No. of hectares of landfill one metre deep per annum

30,000

Parks: Municipal park: 500m2 per 1000 population

Athletics Field: 0.5 ha per 1000 population

Picnic Areas: 1.6 ha per 1000 population

Indoor Sports: 0.4 ha per 1000 population

Industry: Light 0.8 ha per 1000 population

Medium 2.5 ha per 1000 population

Heavy 4.0 ha per 1000 population

Water: Residential Demand 75 litres/capita/day

Commercial 1 – 1.3 m 3/connection/day

Industry 85 – 260 m 3/hectare/day

Table 4 shows the number of hospital beds in Sabah for 1991 and the projected trend for 2005. By the year 2005, if the population growth continues and if beds are not provided, there would not be enough beds for everyone, for example in Semporna, the ratio of people to beds would be 3089:1.

The availability of standards is important for planning as guidance in Sabah.

Table 4: Hospital beds

Hospital Beds








1991


2005 Trend

Extra beds required
District
Beds
Population
Pop/Bed
Population
Pop/Bed
1 bed/250
1 bed/1000
Beaufort
275
48,700
177
70,700
257
8
(204)
Kudat
180
56,000
311
90,700
504
183
(89)
Keningau
150
88,000
587
233,900
1,559
786
84
Kota Belud
128
58,300
455
79,800
623
191
(48)
Semporna
61
91,800
1,505
188,400
3,089
693
127
Lahad Datu
112
118,000
1,054
337,300
3,012
1,237
225








Hospital Doctors







1991


2005 Trend

Extra doctors required
District
Doctors
Population
Pop/Doc
Population
Pop/Doc.
1 doc/5000
1 doc/15000
Beaufort
5
48,700
9,740
70,700
14,140
9
(0)
Kudat
4
56,000
14,000
90,700
22,675
14
2
Keningau
24
88,000
3,667
233,900
9,746
23
(8)
Kota Belud
6
58,300
9,717
79,800
13,300
10
(1)
Semporna
3
91,800
30,600
188,400
62,800
35
10
Lahad Datu
5
118,000
23,600
337,300
67,460
62
17
Note: total people per doctor in Malaysia 2,063 (Asiaweek May 22, 1998)

Evaluation

This is a process of testing alternatives to assist decision-makers to choose the most appropriate solution. The evaluation should be on a quantified basis. There are a number of techniques available for this purpose such as:

  1. Check List of Criteria (involves qualitative statements about the extent to which broad objectives are met);
  2. Goals Achievement Matrix (GAM) which involves quantified statements about achievement of specific objectives using measurable criteria;
  3. Social Cost Benefit Analysis (SCBA) involves full cost/benefit analysis for all aspects of a plan; and
  4. Planning Balance Sheet Analysis (PBSA) which involves cost/benefit analysis and identification of who loses and wins.

Due to limited time and resources available the GAM is most appropriate for a simple but effective means of displaying preferences. The GAM consists of Rating and Weighting.

GAM

Rating

The GAM rating is either +1, 0 or –1. If the alternative strategy has a strong positive impact (i.e. it is essential to the realisation of the evaluation criterion and attainment of its objective) it scores +1. If the strategy has a slight positive impact = 0. If the strategy does not impact upon the criteria it scores –1.

Weighting

Each criterion is scored and the total adds to 100. Scoring is based on the perceived importance of firstly, Settlements (e.g. 40), Natural Resources (40) & Infrastructure (20) and then the individual objective within the 3 major headings.

There is a need to generate the goals and objectives we want to evaluate. Both are technical and political processes. A goal in a broad sense is what we would like to aspire to or an ideal. The objectives are steps on the way to achieving these goals. Evaluation criteria are ways of measuring in numbers or in a quantifiable way whether or not we are achieving these objectives. Table 5 shows the sample goals statemen t

Table 6 shows the sample of GAM criteria sheet.

Table 5: Sample Goals Statement

Goals
Spatial Objectives
Evaluation Criteria
Settlements
Provide a high level of access to economic opportunities & community services
Higher level of urbanisation.
% of urban population.
Increased share of employment in secondary/tertiary sectors.
% of workforce in industry & commerce sector.
Improved accessibility to higher level centres.
Average travel time in minutes.
Natural Resources
Ensure sustainability use of resources and protection of critical environmental values
Minimise conversion of prime agricultural land for urban development.
% of prime agricultural land required for urban development.
Minimise population pressure on protection land.
% increase in rural Population within 5 km of protection lands.
Minimise population pressure on overused production land.
% increase in rural population within overused lands.
Infrastructure
Allow for the efficient provision of, and access to, infrastructure and community services.
Maximise access to major roads.
% of population living within 5 km of a major road.
Maximise effectiveness of hospital coverage.
% increase in tertiary level hospital beds required by 2005.
Minimise costs of government infrastructure investment
RM/head to be spent on government infrastructure.

Note that the above goals, objectives and evaluation criteria are for training purposes only. The Task Force should determine how appropriate they are for the use in the ICZM Spatial Plan. When generating Objectives they must have a commensurate Evaluation Criterion to be able to measure the performance of each Alternative strategy. Criteria must be quantifiable based on data collected so far (or which can be easily collected in the future).

Table 7 presents the alternative strategies of land required for urban development.

Table 6: Sample of GAM Criteria Sheet

GAM RATINGS: ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES











Sample Evaluation Criteria
2005 Trend

Alternative 1

Alternative 2

Alternative 3


Rate
Weight
Score
Rate
Weight
Score
Rate
Weight
Score
Rate
Weight
Score
SETTLEMENTS

40


40


40


40

1. Urbanisation
-1
15
-15

15


15


15

2. Employment
0
15
0

15


15


15

3. Accessibility
-1
10
-10

10


10


10














NATURAL RESOURCES

40


40


40


40

4. Land for Urban Development
0
15
0

15


15


15

5. Pressure on Protected Land
-1
10
-10

10


10


10

6. Pressure on Over-used Land
-1
15
-15

15


15


15














INFRASTRUCTURE

20


20


20


20

7. Proximity to Major Roads
0
10
0

10


10


10

8. Hospital Coverage
1
5
5

5


5


5

9. Infrastructure Cost












OTHER

0
0

0


0


0

TOTAL SCORE

100
-45

100


100


100

RANKING (1,2,3 or 4)
?











Table 7: Alternative Strategies of Land required for Urban Development

LAND REQUIRED FOR URBAN DEVELOPMENT: ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES





Criteria 4













District
2005 Trend


Alternative 1

Alternative 2

Alternative 3


Change 91-05
Land Need
Prime Land
Change 91-05
Land Need
Prime Land
Change 91-05
Land Need
Prime Land
Change 91-05
Land Need
Prime Land

Urban Pop
(hectares)
(hectares)
Urban Pop
(hectares)
(hectares)
Urban Pop
(hectares)
(hectares)
Urban Pop
(hectares)
(hectares)
Tawau
+357,815
2,147

-+124,943
-750

-+124,943
-750

-+124,943
-750

Lahad Datu
+134,960
810

-+44,614
-268

-+44,614
-268

-+44,614
-268

Semporna
+29,697
178

-+28,246
-169

-+28,246
-169

-+28,246
-169

Sandakan
+276,858
1,661

-+156,675
-940

-+156,675
-940

-+156,675
-940

Kinabatangan
+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

Labuk Sugut
+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

K. Kinabalu
+320,870
1,925

-+160,184
-961

-+160,184
-961

-+160,184
-961

Ranau
+13,471
81

-+12,791
-77

-+12,791
-77

-+12,791
-77

Kota Belud
+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

Tuaran
+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

Penampang
+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

Papar
+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

Kudat
+13,551
81

-+21,918
-132

-+21,918
-132

-+21,918
-132

Kota Marudu
+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

Pitas
+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

Beaufort
+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

Kuala Penyu
+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

Sipitang
+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

Tenom
+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

Pensiangan
+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

Keningau
+26,249
157

-+15,966
-96

-+15,966
-96

-+15,966
-96

Tambunan
+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

+0
0

Kunak
+33,242
199

-+10,989
-66

-+10,989
-66

-+10,989
-66

Total
+1,206,715
7,240
0
-+576,326
-3,458

-+576,326
-3,458

-+576,326
-3,458

GAM Rating












Note: Urban land requirement based on the following hectarage per 1000 population:
6





GIS Presentation

Example
Title & Layers
1
Papar: Soil Suitability with Population Density
Layer 1
Class 2 & 3 Soil Suitability
Layer 2
Roads on Layer 1
Layer 3
Population Density 1991
2
Tuaran: Land Use & Protected Areas
Layer 1
Land Uses & Roads
Layer 2
Protected Areas
3
Road Buffers
Layer 1
State Population Density 1991
Layer 2
5 Kilometre buffer along main roads
Layer 3
Detail of polygons
4
Kota Kinabalu: Overused Land
Layer 1
Land Uses 2,3 & 4 (Agricultural uses)
Layer 2
Soil Suitability 5 (Unsuitable for Agriculture)
Layer 3
Overused Land
Layer 4
Population Density in Overused Land
Layer 5
Protected land
5
Sabah: Hospitals
Layer 1
Towns with Hospitals
Layer 2
Towns with 35 kilometre radius
Layer 3
Population density in buffer
6
Sandakan: Population Pressure
Layer 1
Soil Suitability classes 2 & 3
Layer 2
Population density in areas 2 & 3