Table 2. Overview of the results of the one-time survey.
Questions and alternatives Number of answers Ranking
(A2) Which are the most important application fields you believe need to be supported? Please clarify.
 
• other: communication and conflict negotiation in participatory processes
15 1
• landscape management planning (intersectoral)
11 2
• policy support/consulting
11
• impact assessment/estimation of potentials and risks in planning
7 3
• operational management and decision support (intrasectoral)
3 4
• other: further education and training
3
 
(B2) On which features should the development focus?
 
output type • qualitative results (visualized results, e.g., maps, diagrams, trends for different planning alternatives)
21 1
• quantitative results (data (sets) or indicator sets as output to evaluate planning alternatives)
14 2
 
user insight into results generation • free design of decision and management planning alternatives, user can generate rules and criteria and modify the evaluation basis
18 1
• modeling based results/simulation of landscape development, user input restricted to environmental data
12 2
• multicriteria decision making (MCDM), user input: decision criteria and data, optional choice between different MCDM methods
4 3
 
style of user guidance to decisions • visualization of the relative benefit of different alternatives by using maps and information on positive/negative trends
17 1
• Geographic Information Systems-oriented tool, which allows user to visualize planning alternatives and integrate multiple environmental information in decisions but is not too complex in handling and focuses on evaluation of scenarios
16 2
• comparison of different planning alternatives by (selected) indices
11 3
• proposition of the “best” alternative (decision making)
7 4
• decision tree
5 5

multiple answers were permitted; consequently, the number of answers given by the 32 participants in the study is > 32