No. 2 (2023): Ecosystem-based Planning. The contribution of ecosystem services to Urban and Regional Planning innovation
Editoriale

Ecosystem-based planning. : The contribution of ecosystem services to urban and regional planning innovation

PDF
  • Silvia Ronchi,
  • Claudia De Luca,
  • Chiara Cortinovis
Silvia Ronchi
DAStU Politecnico di Milano

Published 2024-05-07

How to Cite

Ronchi, S., De Luca, C., & Cortinovis, C. (2024). Ecosystem-based planning. : The contribution of ecosystem services to urban and regional planning innovation. Contesti. Città, Territori, Progetti, (2), 4–13. Retrieved from https://oajournals.fupress.net/index.php/contesti/article/view/15228

Copyright (c) 2024 Silvia Ronchi, Claudia De Luca, Chiara Cortinovis

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Abstract

L’urbanistica ecosistemica può essere definita come un nuovo approccio alla disciplina che integra conoscenze e metodi scientifici per supportare i processi di pianificazione nel riconoscere il ruolo centrale della natura nella trasformazione urbana sostenibile e resiliente, tenendo conto del carattere dinamico della città e delle sue relazioni con il territorio. La special issue di Contesti rappresenta una prima occasione di confronto e scambio di conoscenze, esperienze e ragionamenti a partire da buone pratiche, metodi, e casi studio che si rifanno all’ecosystem-based planning. Il contributo propone delle riflessioni a partire da questo concetto e dai contributi raccolti, evidenziando potenzialità, innovazioni e aspetti critici nell’integrazione dell’approccio basato sui servizi ecosistemici nel processo di pianificazione urbanistica e territoriale.

PDF

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Albert C., Aronson J., Fürst C., Opdam P. 2014, Integrating ecosystem services in landscape planning: requirements, approaches, and impacts. «Landscape Ecology», vol. 29(8), pp. 1277–1285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-014-0085-0
  2. Babí Almenar J., Elliot T., Rugani B., Philippe B., Navarrete Gutierrez T., Sonnemann G., & Geneletti D. 2021, Nexus between nature-based solutions, ecosystem services and urban challenges. «Land Use Policy», vol. 100. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2020.104898
  3. Basnou C., Baró F., Langemeyer J., Castell C., Dalmases C., Pino J. 2020, Advancing the green infrastructure approach in the Province of Barcelona: integrating biodiversity, ecosystem functions and services into landscape planning. «Urban Forestry and Urban Greening», vol. 55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126797
  4. Bennett E.M., Chaplin-Kramer R. 2016, Science for the sustainable use of ecosystem services. «F1000Research», vol. 5, pp. 1–13. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.9470.1
  5. Cortinovis C., Alzetta C., Geneletti D. 2021, Mapping Ecosystem Services, Disservices, and Ecological Requirements to Enhance Urban Forest Planning and Management in Padova. In: Arcidiacono, A., Ronchi, S. (a cura di) Ecosystem Services and Green Infrastructure. Cities and Nature. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54345-7_13
  6. Cortinovis C., Geneletti D. 2018. Ecosystem services in urban plans: What is there, and what is still needed for better decisions. «Land Use Policy», vol. 70, pp. 298–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.10.017
  7. Cortinovis C., Geneletti D. 2019, A framework to explore the effects of urban planning decisions on regulating ecosystem services in cities. «Ecosystem Services», vol. 38 (100946). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100946
  8. Daily G.C., Söderqvist T., Aniyar S., Arrow K., Dasgupt, P., Ehrlich P.R., Folke C., Jansson A., Jansson B., Levin S., Lubchenco J., Mäler K:G., Simpson D., Starrett D., Tilman D., Walker B. 2000,. The Value of Nature and the Nature of Value. «Science», vol. 289(5478), pp. 395–396. https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.289.5478.395
  9. Esmail B. A., Suleiman L. 2020, Analyzing Evidence of Sustainable Urban Water Management Systems: A Review through the Lenses of Sociotechnical Transitions. «Sustainability», Vol. 12(11),. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12114481
  10. European Commission 2015, Towards an EU Research and Innovation policy agenda for Nature-Based Solutions & Re-Naturing Cities. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2777/765301
  11. Galler C., Albert C., von Haaren C. 2016, From regional environmental planning to implementation: Paths and challenges of integrating ecosystem services. «Ecosystem Services», vol. 18, pp. 118–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.02.031
  12. Geneletti D. 2011, Reasons and options for integrating ecosystem services in strategic environmental assessment of spatial planning, «International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management», vol. 7(3), pp. 143–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2011.617711
  13. Haines-Young R., Potschin-Young M.B. 2018. Revision of the Common International Classification for Ecosystem Services (CICES V5.1): A Policy Brief. «One Ecosystem» 3: E27108, 3, e27108-. https://doi.org/10.3897/ONEECO.3.E27108
  14. Kubiszewski I., Concollato L., Costanza R., Stern D.I. 2023, Changes in authorship, networks, and research topics in ecosystem services. «Ecosystem Services», vol. 59(101501). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOSER.2022.101501
  15. Lennon M., Scott M. 2014, Delivering ecosystems services via spatial planning: Reviewing the possibilities and implications of a green infrastructure approach. «Town Planning Review», vol. 85(5), pp. 563–587. https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2014.35
  16. Mascarenhas A., Ramos T.B., Haase D., Santos R. 2014, Integration of ecosystem services in spatial planning: a survey on regional planners’ views. «Landscape Ecology», vol. 29(8), pp. 1287–1300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-014-0012-4
  17. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005, Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Washington, DC, USA: Island Press.
  18. Posner S.M., McKenzie E., Ricketts T.H. 2016, Policy impacts of ecosystem services knowledge. «Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America», vol. 113(7), pp. 1760–1765. https://doi.org/10.1073/PNAS.1502452113/SUPPL_FILE/PNAS.201502452SI.PDF
  19. Ronchi S., Arcidiacono A., Pogliani L. 2020, Integrating green infrastructure into spatial planning regulations to improve the performance of urban ecosystems. Insights from an Italian case study. «Sustainable Cities and Society», vol. 53(101907). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101907
  20. Rozas-Vásquez D., Fürst C., Geneletti D. 2019, Integrating ecosystem services in spatial planning and strategic environmental assessment: The role of the cascade model. «Environmental Impact Assessment Review», vol. 78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2019.106291
  21. Saarikoski H., Primmer E., Saarela S.R., Antunes P., Aszalós R., Baró F., Berry P., Garcia Blanko G., Goméz-Baggethun E., Carvalho L., Dick J, Dunford R., Hanzu M., Harrison P.A., Izakovicova Z., Kertész M., Kopperoinen L., Köhler B., Langemeyer J., Lapola D., Young, J. 2018, Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice. «Ecosystem Services», vol. 29, pp. 579–598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.019
  22. Schägner J. P., Brander L., Maes J., Hartje V. 2013, Mapping ecosystem services’ values: Current practice and future prospects. «Ecosystem Services», vol. 4, pp. 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.02.003
  23. Wellmann T., Lausch A., Andersson E., Knapp S., Cortinovis C., Jache J., Scheuer S., Kremer P., Mascarenhas A., Kraemer R., Haase A., Schug F., Haase D. 2020, Remote sensing in urban planning: Contributions towards ecologically sound policies?. «Landscape and Urban Planning», vol. 204(103921). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDURBPLAN.2020.103921
  24. Woodruff S.C., BenDor T.K. 2016, Ecosystem services in urban planning: Comparative paradigms and guidelines for high quality plans. «Landscape and Urban Planning», vol. 152, pp. 90–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.04.003