Governance of Ecosystem Services: A Plea for a New Perspective on Ecosystem Services for Land-use Planners

• Authors: Konrad Gray , Günden Savaşçı , Sonja Deppisch

Abstracts

EN

Integrating the ecosystem services (ES) concept into land-use planning has been the focus of researchers in recent years. Forwarding this objective in order to foster human well-being, urban and regional planning became the focus of research efforts. Furthermore, governance research has been beneficial in studying the coupling of ecosystem services and planning processes. Thus, in this explorative case study we have analysed the governance of urban and regional planning in two case studies – Rostock and Munich – in order to gain insights about the role and value of ecosystem services among planning actors. We conducted semi-structured interviews to identify relevant parameters to facilitate integrational approaches of ecosystem services into decision-making in the context of cross-sectoral urban and regional planning. Based on our results, we argue for a change of the perspective of ES within planning practice. Instead of ecological or economic endeavours, the contribution of ES to human well-being should be in the centre of attention. Human well-being as an overarching aspiration may have the potential to shift ecosystem services from sectoral to cross-sectoral planning.

Keywords

EN

urban ecosystem services; land use planning; urban and regional planning; ecosystem service integration; science-policy interface

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Łódzki. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
• Journal: European Spatial Research and Policy
• Year: 2022
• Volume: 29
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 53-78

Dates

published

2022

Contributors

author

Konrad Gray

• HafenCity Universität Hamburg, Universität für Baukunst und Metropolenentwicklung, Henning-Voscherau-Platz 1, 20457 Hamburg, Germany

• https://orcid.org/0000000217754103

author

Günden Savaşçı

• Institute for Environmental Planning and Spatial Development (ifuplan), Institut für Umweltplanung und Raumentwicklung, Amalienstraße 79, 80799 Munich, Germany

author

Sonja Deppisch

• HafenCity Universität Hamburg, Universität für Baukunst und Metropolenentwicklung, Henning-Voscherau-Platz 1, 20457 Hamburg, Germany

• https://orcid.org/0000000184735562

References

• ANDERSSON, E., BARTHEL, S., BORGSTRÖM, S., COLDING, J., ELMQVIST, T., FOLKE, C. and GREN, Å. (2014), ‘Reconnecting cities to the biosphere: stewardship of green infrastructure and urban ecosystem services’, Ambio, 43 (4), pp. 445–453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280- 014-0506-y
• ARKEMA, K. K., ABRAMSON, S. C. and DEWSBURY, B. M. (2006), ‘Marine ecosystem-based management: from characterization to implementation’, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 4 (10), pp. 525–532. https://doi.org/10.1890/1540-9295(2006)4[525:MEMFCT]2.0.CO;2
• BREUSTE, J. (2019), Die Grüne Stadt, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
• BURKHARD, B., KANDZIORA, M., HOU, Y. and MÜLLER, F. (2014), ‘Ecosystem service potentials, flows and demands-concepts for spatial localisation, indication and quantification’, Landscape Online, 34, pp. 1–32. https://doi.org/10.3097/LO.201434
• CONNOLLY, J. J. T., SVENDSEN, E. S., FISHER, D. R. and CAMPBELL, L. K. (2014), ‘Networked governance and the management of ecosystem services: The case of urban environmental stewardship in New York City’, Ecosystem Services, 10 (1), pp. 187–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.08.005
• DEPPISCH, S., GEISSLER, G., POSSER, C. and SCHRAPP, L. (2021), ‘Approaches to integrate ecosystem services in formal spatial planning’, Raumforschung und Raumordnung | Spatial Research and Planning. Online first. https://doi.org/10.14512/rur.66
• DEPPISCH, S., HEITMANN, A., SAVASCI, G. and LEZUO, D. (2022), ‘Ecosystem services in urban and regional planning instruments’, Raumforschung und Raumordnung | Spatial Research and Planning. Online first. https://doi.org/10.14512/rur.122
• DILLER, C. (2013), ‘Ein nützliches Forschungswerkzeug! Zur Anwendung des Akteurzentrierten Institutionalismus in der Raumplanungsforschung und den Politikwissenschaften’, pnd|online, 1.
• DROSTE, N., SCHRÖTER-SCHLAACK, C., HANSJÜRGENS, B. and ZIMMERMANN, H. (2017), ‘Implementing nature-based solutions in urban areas: financing and governance aspects’, [in:] KABISCH N., KORN, H., STADLER J. and BONN, A. (eds.). Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 307–321. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56091-5_18
• ERNSTSON, H., BARTHEL, S., ANDERSSON, E. and BORGSTRÖM, S. T. (2010), ‘Scale-crossing brokers and network governance of urban ecosystem services: the case of Stockholm’, Ecology and Society, 15 (4), https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-03692-150428
• EUROPÄISCHE METROPOLREGION MÜNCHEN e.V. (n.d.), Wirtschaftsstandort Metropolregion München, available online at: https://www.metropolregion-muenchen.eu/region/wirtschaftsstandort/ [accessed on: 20.09.2021].
• FARHAD, S., GUAL, M. A. and RUIZ-BALLESTEROS, E. (2015), ‘Linking governance and ecosystem services: The case of Isla Mayor (Andalusia, Spain)’, Land Use Policy, 46 (1), pp. 91–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.01.019
• FORKINK, A. (2017), ‘Benefits and challenges of using an Assessment of Ecosystem Services approach in land-use planning’, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 60 (11), pp. 2071–2084. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2016.1273098
• FÖRSTER, J., BARKMANN, J., FRICKE, R., HOTES, S., KLEYER, M., KOBBE, S., KÜBLER, D., RUMBAUR, C., SIEGMUND-SCHULTZE, M., SEPPELT, R., SETTELE, J., SPANGENBERG, J. H., TEKKEN, V., VÁCLAVÍK, T. and WITTMER, H. (2015), ‘Assessing ecosystem services for informing land-use decisions: a problem-oriented approach’, Ecology and Society, 20 (3). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07804-200331
• FÜRST, D. (2004), ‘Regional Governance’, [in:] BENZ, A. (eds). Governance – Regieren in komplexen Regelsystemen, Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, pp. 45–64.
• GAILING, L. and HAMEDINGER, A. (2019), ‘Neoinstitutionalismus und Governance’ [in:] WIECHMANN, T. (eds). ARL Reader Planungstheorie Band 1, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 167–354.
• GENELETTI, D., CORTINOVIS, C., ZARDO, L. and ADEM ESMAIL, B. (2020a), ‘Conclusions’ [in:] GENELETTI, D., CORTINOVIS, C., ZARDO, L. and ADEM ESMAIL, B. (eds.). Planning for Ecosystem Services in Cities, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 67–72.
• GENELETTI, D., CORTINOVIS, C., ZARDO, L. and ADEM ESMAIL, B. (eds) (2020b), Planning for Ecosystem Services in Cities, Cham: Springer International Publishing.
• GÓMEZ-BAGGETHUN, E. and BARTON, D. N. (2013), ‘Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning’, Ecological Economics, 86, pp. 235–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.08.019
• GÖRG, C., WITTMER, H., CARTER, C., TURNHOUT, E., VANDEWALLE, M., SCHINDLER, S., LIVORELL, B. and LUX, A (2016), ‘Governance options for science–policy interfaces on biodiversity and ecosystem services: comparing a network versus a platform approach’, Biodiversity and Conservation, 25 (7), pp. 1235–1252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-016-1132-8
• GRÊT-REGAMEY, A., ALTWEGG, J., SIRÉN, E. A., VAN STRIEN, M. J. and WEIBEL, B. (2017), ‘Integrating ecosystem services into spatial planning – A spatial decision support tool’, Landscape and Urban Planning, 165 (10), pp. 206–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.05.003
• GRUNEWALD, K. and BASTIAN, O. (2018), ‘Ökosystemdienstleistungen’ [in:] ARL – Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung (eds.). Handwörterbuch der Stadt- und Raumentwicklung, Hannover: ARL – Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung, pp. 1677–1683.
• HANSE- UND UNIVERSITÄTSSTADT ROSTOCK (2019), Neuaufstellung des Flächennutzungsplans (FNP) der Hanse- und Universitätsstadt Rostock. Festlegung des Untersuchungsrahmens (Scoping), https://i-k-rostock.de/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/19-08-21-FNP-2019.pdf [accessed on: 20.09.2021].
• HANSE- UND UNIVERSITÄTSSTADT ROSTOCK (2020), Statistische Nachrichten. Neue Bevölkerungsprognose bis 2035, https://rathaus.rostock.de/media/rostock_01.a.4984.de/datei/_Ber-icht%20Bev%C3%B6lkerungsprognose%202020.pdf [accessed on: 20.09.2021].
• HEILAND, S., KAHL, R., SANDER, H. and SCHLIEP, R. (2016), ‘Ökosystemleistungen in der kommunalen Landschaftsplanung – Möglichkeiten der Integration’, Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung, 48 (10), pp. 313–320.
• KACZOROWSKA, A., KAIN, J.-H., KRONENBERG, J. and HAASE, D. (2016), ‘Ecosystem services in urban land use planning: Integration challenges in complex urban settings – Case of Stockholm’, Ecosystem Services, 22 (2), pp. 204–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecos¬er.2015.04.006
• KETTUNEN, M., BRINK, P. T., MUTAFOGLU, K., SCHWEITZER, J.-P., PANTZAR, M., CLARET, C., METZGER, M. and PAVLOVA, D. (2017), Making green economy happen: Integration of ecosystem services and natural capital into sectoral policies. Guidance for policy- and decision-makers, https://oppla.eu/sites/default/files/uploads/kettunen-et-al-2017-guidance-ecosystem-service-policy-integration-final.pdf [accessed on: 30.09.2021].
• KOWARIK, I., BARTZ, R., BRENCK, M. and HANSJÜRGENS, B. (2017), Ökosystemleistungen in der Stadt. Gesundheit schützen und Lebensqualität erhöhen: Kurzbericht für Entscheidungträger, Leipzig: Naturkapital Deutschland – TEEB DE.
• KREKELER, M.and ZIMMERMANN, T.(2014), Politikwissenschaftliche Forschungsheuristiken als Hilfsmittel bei der Evaluation von raumbedeutsamen Instrumenten, Hannover: Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung.
• LANDKREIS ROSTOCK (n.d.), Wirtschaft und Verkehr, https://www.landkreis-rostock.de/regionales/wirtschaft_verkehr/ [accessed on: 20.09.2021].
• LOFT, L., MANN, C. and HANSJÜRGENS, B. (2015), ‘Challenges in ecosystem services governance: Multi-levels, multi-actors, multi-rationalities’, Ecosystem Services, 16 (4), pp. 150–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.11.002
• LONGATO, D., CORTINOVIS, C., ALBERT, C. and GENELETTI, D. (2021), ‘Practical applications of ecosystem services in spatial planning: Lessons learned from a systematic literature review’, Environmental Science & Policy, 119, pp. 72–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.02.001
• LUEDERITZ, C., BRINK, E., GRALLA, F., HERMELINGMEIER, V., MEYER, M., NIVEN, L., PANZER, L., PARTELOW, S., RAU, A.-L., SASAKI, R., ABSON, D. J., LANG, D. J., WAMSLER, C. and WEHRDEN, H. VON (2015), ‘A review of urban ecosystem services: six key challenges for future research’, Ecosystem Services, 14 (2), pp. 98–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.05.001
• MANN, C., LOFT, L. and HANSJÜRGENS, B. (2015), ‘Governance of Ecosystem Services: Lessons learned for sustainable institutions’, Ecosystem Services, 16 (4), pp. 275–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.11.003
• MASCARENHAS, A., RAMOS, T. B., HAASE, D. and SANTOS, R. (2014), ‘Integration of ecosystem services in spatial planning: a survey on regional planners’ views’, Landscape Ecology, 29 (8), pp. 1287–1300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-014-0012-4
• MAYNTZ, R. and SCHARPF, F. W. (1995), ‘Der Ansatz des akteurzentrierten Institutionalismus’, [in:] MAYNTZ, R. and SCHARPF, F. W. (eds). Gesellschaftliche Selbstregelung und Steuerung, Frankfurt am Main: Campus, pp. 39–72.
• MEA – MILLENNIUM ECOSYSTEM ASSESSMENT (2005), Ecosystem and Human Well-being. Synthesis, Washington DC.
• NEWIG, J. (2011), ‘Partizipation und neue Formen der Governance’, [in:] GROSS, M. (eds.), Handbuch Umweltsoziologie, VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften | Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, pp. 485–502. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-93097-8_23
• NUISSL, H. and HEINRICHS, D. (2011), ‘Fresh Wind or Hot Air – Does the Governance Discourse Have Something to Offer to Spatial Planning?’ Journal of Planning Education and Research, 31 (1), pp. 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X10392354
• PLANUNGSVERBAND ÄUSSERER WIRTSCHAFTSRAUM MÜNCHEN (2019), Landeshauptstadt München. Ausführliche Datengrundlage 2017, https://www.pv-muenchen.de/fileadmin/Medien_PV/Leistungen/Daten_und_Studien/Kreisdaten/LKR_Datengrund_2017/LHM_Datengrund_2017_Broschuere_frei.pdf [accessed on: 20.09.2021].
• PLANUNGSVERBAND REGION ROSTOCK (2020), Die Region Rostock – Fakten, https://www.planungsverband-rostock.de/region/fakten/ [accessed on: 20.09.2021].
• POTSCHIN-YOUNG, M., BURKHARD, B., CZÚCZ, B. and SANTOS-MARTÍN, F. (2018), ‘Glossary of ecosystem services mapping and assessment terminology’, One Ecosystem, 3. https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.3.e27110
• PRIMMER, E. and FURMAN, E., (2012), ‘Operationalising ecosystem service approaches for governance: Do measuring, mapping and valuing integrate sector-specific knowledge systems?’ Ecosystem Services, 1 (1), pp. 85–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.008
• REGIONALER PLANUNGSVERBAND MÜNCHEN (n.d.), Region München, https://www.region-muenchen.com/der-rpv/region [accessed on: 20.09.2021].
• RUCKELSHAUS, M., MCKENZIE, E., TALLIS, H., GUERRY, A., DAILY, G., KAREIVA, P., POLASKY, S., RICKETTS, T., BHAGABATI, N., WOOD, S. A. and BERNHARDT, J. (2015), ‘Notes from the field: Lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world decisions’, Ecological Economics, 115 (14), pp. 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.07.009
• RUNHAAR, H., DRIESSEN, P. P. J. and SOER, L. (2009), ‘Sustainable Urban Development and the Challenge of Policy Integration: An Assessment of Planning Tools for Integrating Spatial and Environmental Planning in the Netherlands’, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 36 (3), pp. 417–431. https://doi.org/10.1068/b34052
• SARKKI, S. (2017), ‘Governance services: Co-producing human well-being with ecosystem services’, Ecosystem Services, 27 (1), pp. 82–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.08.003
• SCHARPF, F. W. (1997), Games Real Actors Play: Actor-Centered Institutionalism in Policy Research, Boulder: Westview.
• SCHOLLES, F. (2008), ‘Abwägung, Entscheidung’, [in:] FÜRST, D. and SCHOLLES, F. (eds.). Handbuch Theorien und Methoden der Raum- und Umweltplanung, Dortmund: Rohn, pp. 309– 312.
• SPYRA, M., LA ROSA, D., ZASADA, I., SYLLA, M. and SHKARUBA, A. (2020), ‘Governance of ecosystem services trade-offs in peri-urban landscapes’, Land Use Policy, 95 (2), 104617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104617
• STATISTISCHES AMT MECKLENBURG-VORPOMMERN (2021), Bevölkerung nach Alter und Geschlecht in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Teil 2: Gemeindeergebnisse 2020. Schwerin, https://www.statistischebibliothek.de/mir/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/MVHeft_derivate_00005345/A133G%202020%2000.pdf [accessed on: 20.09.2021].
• TERZI, F., TEZER, A., TURKAY, Z., UZUN, O., KÖYLÜ, P., KARACOR, E., OKAY, N. and KAYA, M. (2020), ‘An ecosystem services-based approach for decision-making in urban planning’, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 63 (3), pp. 433–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2019.1591355
• THORÉN, H. and STÅLHAMMAR, S. (2018), ‘Ecosystem services between integration and economics imperialism’, Ecology and Society, 23 (4). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10520-230444
• TREIB, O. (2015), ‘Akteurzentrierter Institutionalismus’ [in:] WENZELBURGER, G. and ZOHLNHÖFER, R. (eds.), Handbuch Policy-Forschung, Wiesbaden, Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, pp. 277–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-01968-6_11
• UNEP (2014), Integrating Ecosystem Services in Strategic Environmental Assessment: A guide for practitioners. A report of Proecoserv, http://www.biofund.org.mz/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/1548141499-F2190.2014Guideline%20Es%20Into%20Sea-Unep-Proecoserv.Pdf [accessed on: 20.09.2021].
• WAHRHUSEN, N. (2021), Governance einer flächensparenden Siedlungsentwicklung durch die Regionalplanung – Eine Analyse in städtisch und ländlich geprägten Regionen, Technische Universität Kaiserslautern. https://doi.org/10.26204/KLUEDO/6261
• WILKINSON, C., SENDSTAD, M., PARNELL, S. and SCHEWENIUS, M. (2013), ‘Urban Governance of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services’, [in:] ELMQVIST, T., FRAGKIAS, M., GOODNESS, J., GÜNERALP, B., MARCOTULLIO, P. J., MCDONALD, R. I., PARNELL, S., SCHEWENIUS, M., SENDSTAD, M., SETO, K. C. and WILKINSON, K. (eds.). Urbanization, Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services: Challenges and Opportunities, Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, pp. 539–587. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7088-1_27
• WIMES (2015), Integriertes Stadtentwicklungskonzept. 2. Fortschreibung. Bad Doberan, http://stadt-dbr.de/ISEK/ISEK2015/ISEK-Fortschreibung-2015.pdf [accessed on: 20.09.2021].
• WIMES (2017), Bevölkerungsprognose für den Landkreis Rostock, https://www.landkreis-rostock.de/landkreis/daten_fakten/Bevxlkerungsprognose_2030_LK_Rostock.pdf [accessed on: 20.09.2021].

Identifiers

DOI

10.18778/1231-1952.29.1.03

Biblioteka Nauki

2130144