Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Ecological Rationality in Spatial Planning pp 51–72Cite as

Bridging the Gaps: Connecting Spatial Planning with Land-Use Science and Political Ecology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 503 Accesses

Part of the book series: Cities and Nature ((CITIES))

Abstract

In this chapter, the concept and principles of ecological rationality are examined more specifically with regard to planning theory and practice. We discuss the inherent inability of current decision-making systems in general and planning systems, in particular, to effectively address complex ecological issues. To address this and to redefine planning under the paradigm of ecological rationality, we propose a deeper cross-fertilization between planning and two cognate disciplines: Land-Use Science and Political Ecology. We illustrate and discuss the main principles and concepts of these disciplines and the potential interplays with spatial planning theory. We also discuss potentialities and limitations of Landscape Ecology and put forward possible novel lines of research for mutual enhancement of these different disciplinary areas towards a holistic conceptual frame.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    We can note here that often, cases brought to court by environmental justice movements concern issues with a direct relevance for spatial planning, as the location of harmful facilities (dumps, source of pollution) and more in general the spatial distribution of negative environmental impacts.

  2. 2.

    As of October 2018, no papers are present in the Scopus database with “Political Ecology” and one of the following word in the title: “spatial planning” or “land-use planning” or “urban planning” or “landscape planning”. If the search is extended to title, abstract and keywords, only some 23 documents were returned.

  3. 3.

    The authors define landscape metrics and point out the difference with spatial statistics: the latter estimate the spatial structure of the value of a sampled variable, while landscape metrics characterize the geometric and spatial properties of a pact (a spatially homogeneous entity) or of a mosaic of patches (Fortin 1999, as cited in Botequilha Leitão and Ahern 2002).

References

  • Ahern J (1999) Integration of landscape ecology and landscape design: an evolutionary process. In Wiens, Moss (eds) Issues in landscape ecology. International association for landscape ecology, Guelph, Ontario, Canada, pp 119–123

    Google Scholar 

  • Albrechts L, Balducci A (2017) Introduction. In: Albrechts L, Balducci A, Hillier J (eds) Situated practices of strategic planning—an International Perspective. Routledge, New York, pp 15–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Almenar JB, Rugani B, Geneletti D, Brewer T (2018) Integration of ecosystem services into a conceptual spatial planning framework based on a landscape ecology perspective. Landsc Ecol 33(12):2047–2059. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-018-0727-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baber WF, Bartlett RV (2005) Deliberative environmental politics: democracy and ecological rationality. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, p 276

    Google Scholar 

  • Blaikie PM, Brookfield H (eds) (1987) Land degradation and society. Methuen, London and New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonifazi A (2009) Evaluation and the environmental democracy of cities. PhD dissertation, Politecnico di Bari—Facoltà di Ingegneria I (Bari, Italy), Ph.D. Programme in “Pianificazione Territoriale e Urbanistica”—Ciclo XXI

    Google Scholar 

  • Botequilha Leitão A, Ahern J (2002) Applying landscape ecological concepts and metrics in sustainable landscape planning. Landsc Urban Plan 59(2):65–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00005-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Botequilha Leitão A, Miller J, Ahern J, McGarigal K (2012) Measuring landscapes: a planner’s handbook. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Brannstrom C, Vadjunec J (eds) (2013) Land Change Science, Political Ecology, and Sustainability. Routledge, London. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203107454

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brannstrom C, Vadjunec JM (2014) Notes for avoiding a missed opportunity in sustainability science: integrating land change science and political ecology. In: Land change science, political ecology, and sustainability: synergies and divergences, pp 1–23. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203107454

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant RL (ed) (2015) The international handbook of political ecology. Edward Elgar Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • Corry RC, Nassauer J (2005) Limitations of using landscape pattern indices to evaluate the ecological consequences of alternative plans and designs. Landsc Urban Plan 72:265–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl RA (1973) Participation and opposition. Yale University Press, Polyarchy

    Google Scholar 

  • de Molina MG, Toledo VM (2014) The social metabolism: a socio-ecological theory of historical change, vol 3. Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Dramstad W, Olson JD, Forman RT (1996) Landscape ecology principles in landscape architecture and land-use planning. Island Press, Wasgington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek JS (1987) Rational ecology: the political economy of environmental choice. Basil Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek JS (2005) The politics of the earth. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek JS (2009) Democracy and earth system governance. Paper presented at symposium, Conference on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change “Earth System Governance: People, Places and the Planet”, Amsterdam, 2–4 December 2009

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek JS (2016) Institutions for the anthropocene: governance in a changing earth system. Br J Polit Sci 46(4):937–956. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123414000453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L (2005) When is a landscape perspective important? In Wiens J. Moss M (eds) Issues and Perspectives in Landscape Ecology (Cambridge Studies in Landscape Ecology, pp. 3–10). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511614415.002

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Faludi A (2014) Europeanisation or Europeanisation of spatial planning? Plan Theory Pract 15(2):155–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2014.902095

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fortin MJ (1999) Spatial statistics in landscape ecology. In: Klopatek JM, Gardner RH (eds) Landscape Ecological Analysis. Springer, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Gergel SE, Turner MG (eds) (2017) Learning landscape ecology: a practical guide to concepts and techniques. Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustafson EJ (1998) Quantifying landscape spatial pattern: what is the state of the art? Ecosystems 1(2):143–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s100219900011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutman G, Janetos AC, Justice CO, Moran EF, Mustard JF, Rindfuss RR, … Cochrane MA (eds) (2004) Land change science: observing, monitoring and understanding trajectories of change on the earth’s surface, vol 6. Springer Science & Business Media. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2F978-1-4020-2562-4.pdf

  • Hardin G (1968) The tragedy of the commons. Science 162:1243–1248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Healey P (2007) Urban complexity and spatial strategies: towards a relational planning for our times. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Hersperger AM, Oliveira E, Pagliarin S, Palka G, Verburg P, Bolliger J, Grădinaru S (2018) Urban land-use change: the role of strategic spatial planning. Glob Environ Change 51:32–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.05.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jongman RHG (2005) Landscape ecology in land use planning. In Wiens JA, Moss MR (eds) Issues and perspectives in landscape ecology. Cambridge University Press, pp 316–328

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambin E, Geist H (eds) (2006) Land-use and land-cover change: local processes to global impacts. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom CE (1965) The intelligence of democracy: decision making through mutual adjustment. Free Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Alier J, Muradian R (2015) (eds) Handbook of ecological economics. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783471416

  • Marull J, Cattaneo C, Gingrich S, de Molina MG, Guzmán GI, Watson A, MacFadyen J, Pons M, Tello E (2019) Comparative energy-landscape integrated analysis (ELIA) of past and present agroecosystems in North America and Europe from the 1830s to the 2010s. Agric Syst 175:46–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2019.05.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathews F (1995) Community and the ecological self. Environ Polit 4(4):66–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGarigal K (2014) Landscape pattern metrics. Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online

    Google Scholar 

  • McGarigal K, Marks BJ (1995) FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure. General technical report—US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, (PNW-GTR-351)

    Google Scholar 

  • Metternicht G (2018) Land use and spatial planning—enabling sustainable management of land resources. springer briefs in earth sciences. Springer Nature, Switzerland, 116 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller D, Munroe DK (2014) Current and future challenges in landuse science. J Land Use Sci 9(2):133–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/1747423x.2014.883731

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naess A (2005) What kind of democracy? The Trumpeter 21(2):10–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Nassauer JI, Opdam P (2008) Design in science: extending the landscape ecology paradigm. Landsc Ecol 23:633–644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opdam P, Foppen R, Vos C (2001) Bridging the gap between ecology and spatial planning in landscape ecology. Landsc Ecol 16(8):767–779

    Google Scholar 

  • Opdam P, Verboom J, Pouwels R (2003) Landscape cohesion: An index for the conservation potential of landscapes for biodiversity. Landsc Ecol 18(2):113–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action, Cambridge. University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Paulson S, Gezon LL, Watts M (2003) Locating the political in political ecology: an introduction. Human Organization 62:205–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perez AC, Grafton B, Mohai P, Hardin R, Hintzen K, Orvis S (2015) Evolution of the environmental justice movement: activism, formalization and differentiation. Environ Res Lett 10(10). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/10/105002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perreault T, Bridge G, McCarthy J (eds) (2015) The Routledge handbook of political ecology. Routledge

    Google Scholar 

  • Plumwood V (1995) Has democracy failed ecology? An ecofeminist perspective. Environ Polit 4(4):134–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popper K (2012) The open society and its enemies. Routledge

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbins P (2011) Political ecology: a critical introduction, vol 16. Wiley

    Google Scholar 

  • Rounsevell MDA, Pedroli B, Erb K, Gramberger M, Busck AG, Haberl H, … Wolfslehner B (2012) Challenges for land system science. Land Use Policy 29(4):899–910

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharifi A, Yamagata Y (2018) Resilience-oriented urban planning. In Sharifi A, Yamagata Y (eds) Resilience-oriented urban planning—theoretical and empirical insights. Springer, Cham, pp 3–27

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor LE, Hurley PT (eds) (2016) A comparative political ecology of exurbia: planning, environmental management, and landscape change. Springer, pp 1–310. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29462-9

    Google Scholar 

  • Tello E, Galán E, Sacristán V, Cunfer G, Guzmán GI, González de Molina M, Krausmann F, Gingrich S, Padró R, Marco I, Moreno-Delgado D (2016) Opening the black box of energy throughputs in farm systems: A decomposition analysis between the energy returns to external inputs, internal biomass reuses and total inputs consumed (the Vallès County, Catalonia, c.1860 and 1999). Ecol Econ 121:160–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Termorshuizen JW, Opdam P, van den Brink A (2007) Incorporating ecological sustainability into landscape planning. Landsc Urban Plan 79(3–4):374–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner II BL (2009) Land change (systems) science. In: Castree N, Demeritt D, Liverman D, Rhoads B (eds) A companion to environmental geography. A companion to environmental geography, pp 1–588. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444305722

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner II BL, Robbins P (2008) Land-change science and political ecology: similarities, differences, and implications for sustainability science. Annu Rev Environ Resour 33. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.environ.33.022207.104943

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner II BL, Lambin EF, Reenberg A (2007) The emergence of land change science for global environmental change and sustainability. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104(52):20666–20671. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0704119104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vayda AP, Walters BB (1999) Against political ecology. Human Ecol 27(1):167–179

    Google Scholar 

  • Verburg PH, Crossman N, Ellis EC, Heinimann A, Hostert P, Mertz O, Zhen L (2015) Land system science and sustainable development of the earth system: a global land project perspective. Anthropocene 12:29–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ancene.2015.09.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker PA (2005) Political ecology: where is the ecology? Prog Human Geo 29(1):73–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky A (1966) The political economy of efficiency: cost-benefit analysis, systems analysis, and program budgeting. Pub Admin Rev 292–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ITERAS - Research Centre for Sustainability and Territorial Innovation, Bari, Italy

    Carlo Rega

Authors
  1. Carlo Rega
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlo Rega .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Rega, C. (2020). Bridging the Gaps: Connecting Spatial Planning with Land-Use Science and Political Ecology. In: Ecological Rationality in Spatial Planning. Cities and Nature. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33027-9_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation