Advertisement

Landscape Ecology

, Volume 29, Issue 8, pp 1287–1300 | Cite as

Integration of ecosystem services in spatial planning: a survey on regional planners’ views

  • André MascarenhasEmail author
  • Tomás B. Ramos
  • Dagmar Haase
  • Rui Santos
Research Article

Abstract

Spatial plans shape land-use changes, which in turn are main drivers of anthropogenic ecosystem alterations, therefore influencing the ecosystem services (ES) delivered by a given territory. However, integration of the ES concept in policies and plans is reported as poor in literature. The main goal of this research is to gain insight on the views and perceptions of Portuguese regional spatial planners regarding the ES concept and its integration in spatial plans. For that we designed and administered a questionnaire survey aimed at practitioners and decision-makers from Portuguese regional spatial planning authorities. The survey focused on issues such as the level of awareness and knowledge of the ES concept among planners, the perceived level of current ES integration in regional spatial plans and corresponding strategic environmental assessments, the main factors that either facilitate or obstruct that integration, or the level of importance given to ES integration in the planning process. Findings show that planners know the ES concept, they consider it as important to be integrated in spatial planning and, interestingly, that it is already rather integrated in existing plans. They believe that planning teams and authorities have skilled human resources for ES integration. However, they revealed a low knowledge on the main initiatives intended to push ecosystem services into the political agenda, like for example the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. The questionnaire used can be easily transferred into other spatial planning contexts to draw, e.g. a broader European picture on ES integration in spatial planning.

Keywords

Ecosystem services Spatial planning Strategic environmental assessment Governance Stakeholder survey 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank all the planners who dedicated their time to fill-in the questionnaire and helped making this research possible. We also thank two anonymous reviewers whose comments helped improving the article. This work was financially supported by Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, through grant SFRH/BD/79353/2011 (to André Mascarenhas).

Supplementary material

10980_2014_12_MOESM1_ESM.docx (66 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 66 kb)

References

  1. Adger WN, Brown K, Fairbrass J, Jordan A, Paavola J, Rosendo S, Seyfang G (2003) Governance for sustainability: towards a ‘thick’ analysis of environmental decision making. Environ Plan A 35(6):1095–1110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkinson R, Flint J (2001) Accessing hidden and hard-to-reach populations: snowball research strategies. Social research update, vol 33. University of SurreyGoogle Scholar
  3. Bennet K, Ranganathan J, West P, Irwin F, Perrings C, Timmer D (2008) Introduction. In: Mlot C (ed) Ecosystem services: a guide for decision makers. World Resources Institute, pp 80Google Scholar
  4. Bhattacherjee A (2012) Social science research: principles, methods, and practices. University of South Florida, TampaGoogle Scholar
  5. Biernacki P, Waldorf D (1981) Snowball sampling: problems and techniques of chain referral sampling. Soc Methods Res 10(2):141–163Google Scholar
  6. Birkmann J (2003) Measuring sustainable spatial planning in Germany: indicator-based monitoring at the regional level. Built Environ 29:296–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyd J, Banzhaf S (2007) What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecol Econ 63(2–3):616–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boynton PM, Greenhalgh T (2004) Selecting, designing, and developing your questionnaire. Br Med J 328(13):1312–1315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burkhard B, Petrosillo I, Costanza R (2010) Ecosystem services—bridging ecology, economy and social sciences. Ecol Complex 7(3):257–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cherp A, Watt A, Vinichenko V (2007) SEA and strategy formation theories: from three Ps to five Ps. Environ Impact Assess Rev 27(7):624–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Costanza R, d’Arge R, de Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Naeem S, Limburg K, Paruelo J, O'Neill, RV, Raskin R, Sutton P, van den Belt M (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387(6630):253–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cowling RM, Egoh B, Knight AT, O'Farrell P, Reyers B, Rouget M, Roux D (2008) An operational model for mainstreaming ecosystem services for implementation. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105(28):9483–9488PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Daily GC (1997) What are ecosystem services. In: Daily GC (ed) Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  14. de Groot RS, Alkemade R, Braat L, Hein L, Willemen L (2010) Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol Complex 7(3):260–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Elo S, Kyngäs H (2008) The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs 62(1):107–115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Faludi A (2000) The performance of spatial planning. Plan Pract Res 15(4):299–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ferrão J (2011) O Ordenamento do Território como Política Pública. Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian, LisboaGoogle Scholar
  18. Fisher B, Turner RK, Morling P (2009) Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol Econ 68(3):643–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Geneletti D (2011) Reasons and options for integrating ecosystem services in strategic environmental assessment of spatial planning. Int J Biodivers Sci Ecosyst Serv Manage 7(3):143–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Glaves P, Egan D, Smith S, Heaphy D, Rowcroft P, Fessey M (2010) Valuing ecosystem services in the east of England, phase two: regional pilot technical report. Sustainability East, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  21. Gómez-Baggethun E, de Groot R, Lomas PL, Montes C (2010) The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: from early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecol Econ 69(6):1209–1218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. GSEOTC (2005) Orientações Gerais para a Elaboração dos Planos Regionais de Ordenamento do Território. Gabinete do Secretário de Estado do Ordenamento do Território e das Cidades, LisboaGoogle Scholar
  23. Haase D, Nuissl H (2010) Assessing the impacts of land use change on transforming regions. J Land Use Sci 5(2):67–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hauck J, Görg C, Varjopuro R, Ratamäki O, Jax K (2013) Benefits and limitations of the ecosystem services concept in environmental policy and decision making: some stakeholder perspectives. Environ Sci Policy 25:13–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hobbs J, Ghanime L, Paris R, Levine T, Wang S, Dalal-Clayton B (2010) Strategic environmental assessment and ecosystem services. OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  26. Honrado JP, Vieira C, Soares C, Monteiro MB, Marcos B, Pereira HM, Partidário M, do R (2013) Can we infer about ecosystem services from EIA and SEA practice? A framework for analysis and examples from Portugal. Environ Impact Assess Rev 40:14–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hsieh HF, Shannon SE (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res 15(9):1277–1288PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kelley K, Clark B, Brown V, Sitzia J (2003) Good practice in the conduct and reporting of survey research. Int J Qual Health Care 15(3):261–266PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Koschke L, Fürst C, Frank S, Makeschin F (2012) A multi-criteria approach for an integrated land-cover-based assessment of ecosystem services provision to support landscape planning. Ecol Ind 21:54–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lamarque P, Quétier F, Lavorel S (2011) The diversity of the ecosystem services concept and its implications for their assessment and management. CR Biol 334(5–6):441–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lietz P (2010) Research into questionnaire design. Int J Market Res 52(2):249–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. MA (2003) Ecosystems and human well-being: a framework for assessment. Island Press, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  33. MA (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  34. MAOTDR (2006) Programa Nacional da Política de Ordenamento do Território – Programa de Acção. Ministério do Ambiente, do Ordenamento do Território e do Desenvolvimento RegionalGoogle Scholar
  35. Mascarenhas A, Ramos TB, Haase D, Santos R (2012a) Ecosystem services in regional spatial plans and SEA. In: 32nd Annual meeting of the international association for impact assessment. IAIA, PortoGoogle Scholar
  36. Mascarenhas A, Ramos TB, Nunes L (2012b) Developing an integrated approach for the strategic monitoring of regional spatial plans. Land Use Policy 29(3):641–651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Morphet J (2011) Effective practice in spatial planning. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  38. Müller F, de Groot RS, Willemen L (2010) Ecosystem services at the landscape scale: the need for integrative approaches. Landscape Online 23:11Google Scholar
  39. Nadin V (2007) The emergence of the spatial planning approach in England. Plann Pract Res 22(1):43–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Nadin V, Stead D (2008) European spatial planning systems, social models and learning. disP Plan Rev 44(172):35–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Neuendorf KA (2002) The content analysis guidebook. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  42. Noy C (2008) Sampling knowledge: the hermeneutics of snowball sampling in qualitative research. Int J Soc Res Methodol 11(4):327–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Partidário MR, Gomes RC (2013) Ecosystem services inclusive strategic environmental assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev 40:36–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Perdicoúlis A (2011) Building competences for spatial planners. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  45. Pereira HM, Domingos T, Vicente L, Proença V (eds) (2009) Ecossistemas e Bem-Estar Humano - Avaliação para Portugal do Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. Escolar EditoraGoogle Scholar
  46. Portugal BCSD (2013) Integrar a Biodiversidade e os Serviços dos Ecossistemas na Estratégia Corporativa. Conselho Empresarial para o Desenvolvimento Sustentável, LisboaGoogle Scholar
  47. Primmer E, Furman E (2013) Operationalising ecosystem service approaches for governance: do measuring, mapping and valuing integrate sector-specific knowledge systems? Ecosyst Serv. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.008
  48. Rea L, Parker R (1997) Designing and conducting survey research: a comprehensive guide. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  49. Reyers B, O’Farrell PJ, Cowling RM, Egoh BN, Le Maitre DC, Vlok JHJ (2009) Ecosystem services, land-cover change, and stakeholders: finding a sustainable foothold for a semiarid biodiversity hotspot. Ecol Soc 14(1):38Google Scholar
  50. Rockstrom J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson Å, Chapin FS, Lambin EF, Lenton TM, Scheffer M, Folke C, Schellnhuber HJ, Nykvist B, de Wit CA, Hughes T, Van Der Leeuw, H (2009) Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecol Soc 14(2):32Google Scholar
  51. Rodríguez JP, Beard JTD, Bennett EM, Cumming GS, Cork S, Agard J, Dobson AP, Peterson GD (2006) Trade-offs across space, time, and ecosystem services. Ecol Soc 11(1):28Google Scholar
  52. Rosenström U (2006) Exploring the policy use of sustainable development indicators: interviews with Finnish politicians. J Transdiscipl Environ Stud 5(1–2):1–13Google Scholar
  53. Seppelt R, Dormann CF, Eppink FV, Lautenbach S, Schmidt S (2011) A quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead. J Appl Ecol 48(3):630–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Slootweg R, van Beukering P (2008) Valuation of ecosystem services and strategic environmental assessment—lessons from influential cases. Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment, UtrechtGoogle Scholar
  55. TEEB (2010) The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity. Mainstreaming the economics of nature: a synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB.Google Scholar
  56. von Haaren C, Albert C (2011) Integrating ecosystem services and environmental planning: limitations and synergies. Int J Biodivers Sci Ecosyst Serv Manag 7(3):150–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Weber RP (1990) Basic content analysis. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • André Mascarenhas
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Tomás B. Ramos
    • 1
  • Dagmar Haase
    • 2
    • 3
  • Rui Santos
    • 1
  1. 1.CENSE – Center for Environmental and Sustainability ResearchDepartamento de Ciências e Engenharia do Ambiente, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade Nova de LisboaCaparicaPortugal
  2. 2.Lab of Landscape Ecology, Department of GeographyHumboldt-Universität zu BerlinBerlinGermany
  3. 3.Department of Computational Landscape EcologyHelmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZLeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations