Ecosystem Services for Spatial Planning by Silvia Ronchi

Author:Silvia Ronchi
Language: eng
Format: epub, pdf
ISBN: 9783319901855
Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Mapping and assessments ES have increased significantly in the last few years producing knowledge, especially on ecological functions and economic values, useful for decision makers. ES assessments are increasingly used in decision oriented processes, including environmental assessments (both EIA and SEA).

What is questioned is the final use of that “new” knowledge and its influence in the decision-making process. Stakeholder involvement is a key aspect of successful implementation of ecosystem-based management. In fact, generally, consensus in the decision process depends on their understood as “Any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization’s objective” (Freeman 1984) that includes groups of interest such as representatives of locally affected communities, national or local government authorities, politicians, civil society organizations and businesses.

The issue of stakeholder’s involvement is crucial in order to gain traction in science and policy arenas, facilitating closer engagement between scientists and stakeholders. The closer collaboration and mutual learning between researchers, communities and policy makers contribute to building trust for the achievement of broad acceptance of planning decisions (Fürst et al. 2014).

Regarding that, two main issues emerged: the first is on how stakeholders need to be involved, and the second on how targeting the ES assessment/mapping to be relevant for decision making.

During the experiences elaborated by the author, in the assessment of CES (Recreation potential of natural based areas) the stakeholder involvement was based on their territorial competences and knowledge information essential for this kind of mapping. In fact, cultural benefits such as aesthetic values and sense-of-place are irreplaceable in a landscape (Plieninger et al. 2013), often linked to geographic features and LULC, moreover CES are the ES more important to people than those from other categories and potentially leading to enhanced sustainability of local communities and their overall wellbeing (Plieninger et al. 2015). In mapping recreation potential, the stakeholder involvement was useful not only in acquiring “better” information and knowledge regarding the criteria pointed out but also for a richer awareness, due to the experiential knowledge/familiarity that stakeholders bring to the context. The participants have different background experiences including landscape ecology, tourism and recreation, planning, nature and biodiversity. Considering the different sources of knowledge and experiences and the diverse impact on direct inputs for policy improvement, the starting point of the participatory activity was to set common definitions in order to have a common language with shared concepts and reference systems. Beyond the participatory method (types, modalities and tools), the question matter is based primarily on sharing crucial elements of ES (such as the definition, the classification, the methodologies adopted for mapping) in order to have common ES knowledge.

The knowledge sharing on ES was the major hurdle to overcome in order to continue with the later stages of the participatory activity. Without a common language, the participatory process has no reason to exist. As an example a conceptual dilemma on what is the phenomenon of LULC changes (Soil sealing or Land take process?) was one of the trivial issues that various disciplines have faced in recent years causing considerable difficulties.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.