Finally, decision models ask, “should the study area be changed?” Like evaluation models, this step involves participation and feedback from stakeholders to evaluate the proposed alternatives and decide if the plan should move forward to implement change, or go back to make revisions. As such, this step produces the knowledge required to move forward or back in the geodesign process.
Stakeholders and decision makers weigh the pros and cons, and, making the most informed decision possible, ideally arrive at a preferred solution. If this is the case, the decision makers say, “yes, proceed”, and the team proceeds to iteration 2 to define the methods for implementing the change. However, it is possible that the decision makers say, “no, we don’t approve of an of these alternatives” in which case, the team must return to the drawing board. A third answer is also possible. Decision makers may say “maybe” to one or more alternatives, on the condition that certain aspects be addressed. If this is the case, the team must then decide which model to return to to incorporate new information or make corrections.
The intervention models will be covered in more depth in the next lesson.