• Journal of Cadastre & Land InformatiX
• /
• v.47 no.2
• /
• pp.5-18
• /
• 2017

The AMOEBA approach in this study supplements the Hotspot method that had not been fully capable of dealing with the ecotone issues in designating the Development Impact Fee (DIF) zones as had been seen in the preceding study by Kim and Choei (2017). The AMOEBA procedure shares the common Getis-Ord statistic with the Hotspot technique but is more adequate to figure out the ecotones. For the comparative purpose, simulations are run by both methods for a series of different scenarios in terms of analytic spatial units (here, the square grids) from 100m up to 400m; and the zonal outcomes by both methods are compared using a set of evaluative indicators. In terms of the numerical scores, the performances by the two methods are much comparable except that the former is slightly superior with respect to the avoidance of the oversized spread of the selected zones whereas so is the latter with respect to the ease of infrastructure installation. It remains yet to be investigated by the extended studies that include in-depth field surveys to figure out the causes as well as the meanings of such differences in zonal determinations.