Transportation systems are being put under increasing pressure in urban areas. These systems are concentrated, highly used and vulnerable to rainfall-induced disruptions. Improving the resilience of infrastructure systems to these disruptions has become a vital aspect of managing an urban area that is both economically viable as well as liveable. Studies show that disruptions disproportionally impact low-income and minority groups and with that lead to increased inequalities. Cities have increased their focus on resilience assessments but have stopped short of how different societal groups are affected by a disruption, and how interventions can impact societal groups differently. In this research the effect of different equity principles in the context of decision-making for resilient transport infrastructure is being addressed. Three different equity principles, namely Equal Sharing, Rawl’s Theory of Justice, and Utilitarianism, are being compared to understand how the benefits that arise from possible interventions are being distributed over society. To do so, a methodology has been developed and applied to the case study of The Hague. This research studied the accessibility in business-as-usual conditions, accessibility after a rainfall-induced disruption and accessibility for different societal groups after interventions are placed based on the three equity principles. The results show that i) depending on the underlying equity principle a different intervention location is prioritized. Simply changing the underlying assumptions on which the interventions are placed, changes the impact significantly for the most socially vulnerable group and the general population. To reduce inequalities in accessibility, it is important to increase awareness amongst policymakers and researchers that the most common (sometimes unconsciously) used equity principle underlying decision making is the Utilitarian principle. As is being illustrated in this research, there are other options that could greatly influence the preferred intervention and with that the impact to different societal groups.

There are bidirectional interactions between land-use and environmental systems: the way land is used has impacts on the environment, while changes in the environment have impacts on the way land is used. The use of Land Use Change models enables policy makers to gain insights into possible developments of the land-use system, the possible causes of these developments, and their consequences. Due to assumptions, simplifications, or lack of data many uncertainties remain concerning these forces and how they could play out in the future. Currently, a deductive scenario approach is the main method used to deal with these uncertainties. Using this approach, normally two to six scenarios are developed, for which values of the uncertain driving forces vary in accordance with the different scenarios. However, such a deductive approach only characterizes a small part of the uncertainty space, and therefore increases the chance of overlooking certain regions of the uncertainty space, corresponding with the real future, which were not characterized by any of the scenarios considered. This research aims to explore the use of Scenario Discovery with the aid of land use change models. To answer this research question, the Land Use Scanner model is used. This model was used in earlier research in the simulation of future land use patterns using the so-called Delta Scenarios. These Delta Scenarios and their corresponding future land use patterns simulated with the Land Use Scanner model are used to compare to the results of this research. This research resulted in six scenarios which differ from the Delta Scenarios in the narrative and the corresponding land-use patterns. However, the Scenario Discovery scenarios differ in other ways as well. Firstly, the development of the Scenario Discovery scenarios makes the analyst aware of under which conditions a combination of similar driving forces lead to different land-use patterns. Also, this approach makes the analyst aware under which conditions combinations of different driving forces still yield similar land-use patterns. Next to this, the Scenario Discovery scenarios show which driving forces are most important. Overall, this means that the scenarios identified with Scenario Discovery differ from the Delta Scenarios in the way that they provide analysts and policymakers with several insights, which can support sufficient informed decision making, which are overlooked when with the development and use of the Delta Scenarios. As this research demonstrated the potential of Scenario Discovery in the land-use change modelling field, it is recommended for land-use change model users, such as LUS model users, to use Scenario Discovery for the development of scenarios. As for the decision-makers in spatial planning, it is recommended to involve land-use change models more into the decision-making process. Lastly, on a more general note, the use of story and simulation approaches in model-based decision making should be reconsidered, and instead, it is recommended to research the possibilities of Scenario Discovery in various modelling fields.