Advertisement

Landscape as Method and Medium for the Ecological Design of Cities

  • Joan Iverson NassauerEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Future City book series (FUCI, volume 3)

Abstract

“Landscape” refers both to a conceptual field that examines how humans affect geographic space and to real places, and the word has both analytical and experiential implications. Pairing the analytical and the experiential enables landscape to be a catalyst for synthesis in science and for insight in urban ecological design. Emphasizing that science is fundamental to ecological design, this essay broadly interprets urban ecological design to include intentional change of landscapes in cities, their megaregions, and resource hinterlands. The essay offers two laws and two related principles for employing landscape as a medium and a method for urban ecological design. The laws observe that landscapes integrate environmental processes and that landscapes are visible. Two related principles explain how these inherent characteristics can be used to effect sustainability by using landscape as a medium for synthesis and in a method that invites creative invention.

Keywords

Ecosystem Service Landscape Pattern Boundary Object Landscape Change Green Infrastructure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Work on this essay was supported by funds from the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center, a Center funded by NSF (Grant #DBI-1052875) and the University of Maryland. A revised version was published in Landscape and Urban Planning 106: 3. I thank Joshua Newell, Paul Gobster and Wei-Ning Xiang for their thoughtful review of this work.

References

  1. Ahern J (1999) Spatial concepts, planning strategies, and future scenarios: a framework method for integrating landscape ecology and landscape planning. In: Klopatek J, Gardner R (eds) Landscape ecological analysis: issues and applications. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Albert C, Zimmermann T, Kneilling J, von Haaren C (2012) Social learning can benefit decision-making in landscape planning: Gartow case study on climate change adaptation, Elbe Valley Biosphere Reserve. Landsc Urban Plan 105:347–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen TFH, Hoekstra TW (1987) Problems of scaling in restoration ecology: a practical application. In: Jordan WR III, Gilpin ME, Aber JD (eds) Restoration ecology: a synthetic approach to ecological research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  4. Allen TFH, Hoekstra TW (1992) Toward a unified ecology. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Barton J, Haslett T (2007) Analysis, synthesis, systems thinking and the scientific method: rediscovering the importance of open systems. Syst Res Behav Sci 24:143–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berkes F (2009) Evolution of co-management: role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning. J Environ Manage 90:1692–1702PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bohnet IC (2010) Integrating social and ecological knowledge for planning sustainable land-and sea-scapes: experiences from the Great Barrier Reef region, Australia. Landsc Ecol 25:1201–1218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bohnet I, Smith DM (2007) Planning future landscapes in the Wet Tropics of Australia: a social-ecological framework. Landsc Urban Plan 80:137–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brauman KA, Daily GC, Duarte TK, Mooney HA (2007) The nature and value of ecosystem ­services: an overview highlighting hydrologic services. Annu Rev Env Resour 32:67–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carpenter S, Folke C (2006) Ecology for transformation. Trends Ecol Evol 21:309–315PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carpenter S, Armbrust EV, Arzberger PW, Chapin FS, Elser JJ, Hackett EJ, Ives AR, Kareiva PM, Leibold MA, Lundberg P, Mangel M, Merchant N, Murdoch WW, Palmer MA, Peters DPC, Pickett STA, Smith KK, Wall DH, Zimmerman AS (2009) Accelerate synthesis in ecology and environmental sciences. Bioscience 59:699–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cash DW, Clark WC, Alcock F, Dickson NM, Eckley N, Guston DH, Jager J, Mitchell RB (2003) Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 100:8086–8091PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cronon W (1992) Nature’s metropolis: Chicago and the Great West. W. W. Norton & Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Dewar M, Epstein D (2007) Planning for ‘megaregions’ in the United States. J Plan Lit 22:108–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Doering OC, Kling CL, Nassauer JI, Scavia D (2007) Agricultural policy choices. In: Nassauer JI, Santelmann MV, Scavia D (eds) From the Corn Belt to the Gulf: societal and environmental implications of alternative agricultural futures. Resources for the Future Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  16. Dramstad WE, Fjellstad WJ (2011) Landscapes: bridging the gaps between science, policy and people. Landsc Urban Plan 100:330–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ford CM, Gioia DA (2000) Factors influencing creativity in the domain of managerial decision making. J Manage 26:705–732Google Scholar
  18. Fry G (2001) Multifunctional landscapes: towards transdisciplinary research. Landsc Urban Plan 57:159–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gilson LL, Shalley CE (2004) A little creativity goes a long way: an examination of teams engagement in creative processes. J Manage 30:453–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gobster PH, Nassauer JI, Daniel TC, Fry G (2007) The shared landscape: what does aesthetics have to do with ecology? Landsc Ecol 22:959–972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hein L, Vankoppen K, Degroot R, Vanierland E (2006) Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 57:209–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hill K (2009) Urban design and urban water ecosystems. In: Baker LA (ed) The water environment of cities. Springer Science  +  Business Media/LLC, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Hulse DW, Branscomb A, Payne SG (2004) Envisioning alternatives: using citizen guidance to map future land and water use. Ecol Appl 14:325–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Innes JE, Booher DE, Di Vittorio S (2010) Strategies for megaregion governance. J Am Plann Assoc 77:55–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jackson JB (1984) Discovering the vernacular landscape. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  26. Lewis JL, Sheppard SRJ (2006) Culture and communication: can landscape visualization improve forest management consultation with indigenous communities? Landsc Urban Plan 77:291–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Liu J, Dietz T, Carpenter SR, Alberti M, Folke C, Moran E, Pell AN, Deadman P, Kratz T, Lubchenco J, Ostrom E, Ouyang Z, Provencher W, Redman CL, Schneider SH, Taylor WW (2007) Complexity of coupled human and natural systems. Science 317(5844):1513–1516PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lyle J (1985) Design for human ecosystems. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Mahmoud M, Liu Y, Hartmann H, Stewart S, Wagener T, Semmens D, Stewart R, Gupta H, Dominguez D, Dominguez F, Hulse D, Letcher R, Rashleigh B, Smith C, Street R, Ticehurst J, Twery M, van Delden H, Waldick R, White D, Winter L (2009) A formal framework for scenario development in support of environmental decision-making. Environ Modell Softw 24:798–808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McAlpine C, Seabrook L, Rhodes J, Maron M, Smith C, Bowen M, Butler S, Powell O, Ryan J, Fyfe C, Adams-Hosking C, Smith A, Robertson O, Howes A, Cattarino L (2010) Can a problem-solving approach strengthen landscape ecology’s contribution to sustainable landscape planning? Landsc Ecol 25:1155–1168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Meinig DW (1979) The beholding eye: ten versions of the same scene. In: Meinig DW (ed) The interpretation of ordinary landscapes: geographical essays. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Meinke H, Nelson R, Kokic P, Stone R, Selvaraju R, Baethgen W (2006) Actionable climate knowledge: from analysis to synthesis. Clim Res 33:101–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nassauer JI (1992) The appearance of ecological systems as a matter of policy. Landsc Ecol 6:239–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nassauer JI (1997) Cultural sustainability: aligning aesthetics and ecology. In: Nassauer JI (ed) Placing nature: culture in landscape ecology. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  35. Nassauer JI (1999) Culture as a means of experimentation and action. In: Weins JA, Moss MR (eds) Issues in landscape ecology. International Association for Landscape Ecology, GuelphGoogle Scholar
  36. Nassauer JI, Corry RC (2004) Using normative scenarios in landscape ecology. Landsc Ecol 19:343–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nassauer JI, Opdam P (2008) Design in science: extending the landscape ecology paradigm. Landsc Ecol 23:633–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nassauer JI, Santelmann MV, Scavia D (eds) (2007) From the Corn Belt to the Gulf: societal and environmental implications of alternative agricultural futures. Resources for the Future Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  39. Nassauer JI, Wang Z, Dayrell E (2009) What will the neighbors think? Cultural norms and ecological design. Landsc Urban Plan 92:282–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Palmer M, Bernhardt E, Chornesky E, Collins S, Dobson A, Duke C, Gold B, Jacobsen R, Klingsland S, Kranz R, Mappin M, Martinez ML, Michelli F, Morse J, Pace M, Pascual M, Palumbi S, Reichman OJ, Townsend A, Turner M (2004) Ecology for a crowded planet. Science 304:1251–1252PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Palmer MA, Bernhardt ES, Allan JD, Lake PS, Alexander G, Brooks S, Carr J, Clayton S, Dahm CN, Follstad Shah J, Galat DL, Loss SG, Goodwin P, Hart DD, Hassett B, Jenkinson R, Kondolf GM, Lave R, Meyer JL, O’Donnell TK, Pagano L, Sudduth E (2005) Standards for ecologically successful river restoration. J Appl Ecol 42:208–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Peters DPC (2010) Accessible ecology: synthesis of the long, deep, and broad. Trends Ecol Evol 25:592–601PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pickett STA, Cadenasso ML, Grove JM, Nilon CH, Pouyat RV, Zipperer WC, Costanza R (2001) Urban ecological systems: linking terrestrial ecological, physical, and socioeconomic components of metropolitan areas. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 32:127–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pickett STA, Cadenasso ML, Grove JM (2004) Resilient cities: meaning, models, and metaphor for integrating the ecological, socio-economic, and planning realms. Landsc Urban Plan 69:369–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. PlaNYC (2008) Sustainable stormwater management plan. City of New York, Office of the Mayor, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  46. Potschin MB, Klug H, Haines-Young RH (2010) From vision to action: framing the Leitbild ­concept in the context of landscape planning. Futures 42:656–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Santelmann M, Freemark K, White D, Nassauer J, Clark M, Danielson B, Eilers J, Cruse R, Galatowitsch S, Polasky S, Vache K, Wu J (2001) Applying ecological principles to land-use decision-making in agricultural watersheds. In: Dale VH, Haeuber RA (eds) Applying ecological principles to land management. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  48. Scavia D, Nassauer JI (2007) Introduction: policy insights from integrated assessments and alternative futures. In: Nassauer JI, Santelmann MV, Scavia D (eds) From the Corn Belt to the Gulf: societal and environmental implications of alternative agricultural futures. Resources for the Future Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  49. Schoonenboom IJ (1995) Overview and state of the art of scenario studies for the rural environment. Environ Policy 5:15–24Google Scholar
  50. Shearer AW, Mouat DA, Bassett SD, Binford MW, Johnson CW, Saarinen JA (2006) Examining development-related uncertainties for environmental management: strategic planning scenarios in Southern California. Landsc Urban Plan 77:359–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sheppard SRJ (2005) Participatory decision support for sustainable forest management: a framework for planning with local communities at the landscape level in Canada. Can J Forest Res 35:1515–1526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Spirn A (1998) The language of landscape. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  53. Star SL (2010) This is not a boundary object: reflections on the origin of a concept. Sci Technol Hum Val 35:601–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Steinitz C, Arias H, Bassett S, Flaxman M, Goode T, Maddock T, Mouat D, Peiser R, Shearer A (2003) Alternative futures for changing landscapes: the Upper San Pedro River Basin in Arizona and Sonora. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  55. Swanwick C (2009) Society’s attitudes to and preferences for land and landscape. Land Use Policy 26:S62–S75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Termorshuizen J, Opdam P (2009) Landscape services as a bridge between landscape ecology and sustainable development. Landscape Ecol 24:1037–1052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Treib M (1995) Must landscapes mean? Approaches to significance in recent landscape architecture. Landscape J 14:46–62Google Scholar
  58. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2010) Partnership for sustainable communities: a year of progress for American communities, Report No. EPA 231-K-10-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Sustainable Communities, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  59. Walker B, Holling CS, Carpenter SR, Kinzig A (2004) Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social-ecological systems. Ecol Soc 9(2):art No. 5Google Scholar
  60. Walsh CJ, Roy AH, Feminella JW, Cottingham PD, Groffman PM, Morgan RP II (2005) The urban stream syndrome: current knowledge and the search for a cure. J N Am Benthol Soc 24:706–723Google Scholar
  61. White DD, Wutich A, Larson KL, Gober P, Lant T, Senneville C (2010) Credibility, salience, and legitimacy of boundary objects: water managers’ assessment of a simulation model in an immersive decision theater. Sci Public Policy 37:219–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Zhou W, Troy A, Grove M (2008) Modeling residential lawn fertilization practices: integrating high resolution remote sensing with socioeconomic data. Environ Manage 41:742–752PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Natural Resources and EnvironmentUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations