Advertisement

The Wisdom of Looking Forward Through Ecological Design and Planning

  • Frederick SteinerEmail author
Chapter
Part of the EcoWISE book series (EcoWISE)

Abstract

Ecosystem services are presented as a framework for design and planning in the current geological age, the Anthropocene. This time is defined by human modifications of the earth’s biophysical processes. Four types of ecosystem services are discussed: those which provide, regulate, support, and contribute to human health and welfare. Eight examples illustrate how ecosystem services concepts can be applied in the built environment. These applications underscore the necessity of ecological wisdom for regenerative design and planning for resilience. Wisdom is grounded in knowledge, experience, and sound judgement. The application of ecological wisdom certainly has practical benefits for people but extends to concern for all life with advantages for other species and our shared futures on this planet.

Keywords

Sustainable Sites SITES Ecosystem Services The Anthropocene Green Infrastucture 

References

  1. American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (2013) Water and Wastewaters. https://aceee.org/topics/water-and-wastewater. Accessed 28 Oct 2016
  2. Benedict MA, McMahon ET (2006) Green infrastructure: linking landscapes and communities. Island Press, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  3. Berkooz CB (2011) Green infrastructure storms ahead. Planning 77(3):19–24Google Scholar
  4. Birch EL, Wachter SM (eds) (2008) Growing greener cities: urban sustainability in the twenty-first century. University of Pennsylvania Press, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  5. Buell L (2001) Writing for an endangered world. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Canfield J (2013) Blue hole regional park. In: Landscape performance series. Landscape Architecture Foundation, Washington, D.C., Feb 2013Google Scholar
  7. Dunn AD (2010) Siting green infrastructure: legal and policy solutions to alleviate urban poverty and promote healthy communities. Boston College Environ Aff Law Rev 37:41Google Scholar
  8. Drake SC, Kim Y (2011) Gowanus canal sponge park. Ecol Restor 4:392–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fiksel J (2006) Sustainability and resilience: toward a systems approach. Sustain Sci Pract Policy 2(2):14–21Google Scholar
  10. Foderaro LW (2015) A park to sop up pollutants before they flow into the Gowanus canal. The New York Times, 15 Dec 2015Google Scholar
  11. Forman RTT, Wu J (2016) Where to put the next billion people. Nature 537:608–611, 29 Sept 2016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gill SE, Handley JF, Ennos AR, Pauleit S (2007) Adapting cities for climate change: the role of the green infrastructure. Built Environ 33(1):115–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Green Building Certification Institute (2010) Professional credentialing. http://www.gbci.org/org-nav/about-gbci/about-gbci.aspx, 24 Apr 2010
  14. Hirsch DD (2008) Ecosystem services and the green city. In: Birch EL, Wachter Susan M (eds) Growing greener cities. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp 281–293Google Scholar
  15. Klein J (2016) Filling the texas sky by the millions. The New York Times, 30 Aug 2016Google Scholar
  16. Kweon B-S, Ellis CD (2012) Sidwell friends middle school. In: Landscape performance series. Landscape Architecture Foundation, Washington, D.C., Oct 2012Google Scholar
  17. Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center, The University of Texas at Austin; United States Botanic Garden; and American Society of Landscape Architects (2014) SITES v2 reference guide: for sustainable land design and development. Sustainable SITES Initiative, AustinGoogle Scholar
  18. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being. Island Press, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  19. Moore D (1995) The Pantheon. http://www.romanconcrete.com
  20. Parker F (2009) The Pantheon—Rome—126AD. More about monolithic domes, 12 May 2009Google Scholar
  21. Pieranunzi D, Steiner FR, Reiff S (2017) Advancing green infrastructure and ecological security through the SITES rating system. Landscape Archit Frontiers 5(1):22–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pope Francis (2015) Laudato Si’. The Vatican, Vatican CityGoogle Scholar
  23. Rizzo J (2013) Waste not. Nat Geogr 224(5):20–21Google Scholar
  24. Rosenfield K (2013) Brooklyn to transform canal into ‘sponge park’. Arch Daily. http://www.archdaily.com/?p=417816, 20 Aug 2013. Accessed 14 Dec 2013
  25. Rouse D, Bunster-Ossa I (2013) Green infrastructure: a landscape approach. APA Planning Advisory Service, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  26. Salazar J (2015) Canal park. Landscape Perform Ser. Landscape Architecture Foundation, Washington, D.C., Apr 2015Google Scholar
  27. Simon H (1996) The sciences of the artificial (Third Edition). MIT Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  28. Smithson R (1996) In: Flam J (ed) Robert Smitshon: the collected writings. University of California Press, Berkeley, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  29. Steiner F (1990) Soil conservation in the United States: policy and planning. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore MarylandGoogle Scholar
  30. Taylor R (2003) Roman builders: a study of architectural progress. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  31. Windhager S, Steiner F, Simmons MT, Heymann D (2010) Toward ecosystems as a basis for design. Landscape J 29(2):107–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Winslow JF (2015) Linking health and community design through green infrastructure. Ph.D. diss., University of Texas at Austin, School of ArchitectureGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of DesignUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations