Just Accepted Manuscripts
SPECIAL ISSUE: Bioregionalism

The bioregional leap. A collaborative pact for the watersheds of Los Angeles

PDF
  • Giulia Luciani,
  • William Allen,
  • Claire Robinson
Giulia Luciani
University of Florence

Published 2026-06-25

Keywords

  • bioregional planning,
  • metropolitan areas,
  • green infrastructure,
  • pact-based governance ,
  • soft planning

How to Cite

Luciani, G., Allen, W., & Robinson, C. (2026). The bioregional leap. A collaborative pact for the watersheds of Los Angeles. Contesti. Città, Territori, Progetti. Retrieved from https://oajournals.fupress.net/index.php/contesti/article/view/16930

Copyright (c) 2026 Giulia Luciani, William Allen, Claire Robinson

Creative Commons License

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

Abstract

The Emerald Necklace Expanded Vision Plan reimagines the green infrastructure of Los Angeles County through a bioregional lens, interpreting the watershed as the living structure underlying the urban environment. The vision is brought to life through a mosaic of projects, partnerships, and programs, revealing how a coherent regional framework can emerge even in highly fragmented governance settings. The initiative shows, on one side, how green infrastructures can become strategic instruments if integrated into a bioregional perspective. On the other side, the Emerald Necklace Accord, a voluntary agreement among diverse agencies and actors for the implementation of the vision, exemplifies at the same time the promises of collaborative governance approaches and the limits inherent in soft governance.

PDF

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Allmendinger P., Haughton G. 2007, ‘Soft Spaces’ in planning, «Town and Country Planning», n. 76, pp. 306–308.
  2. Amigos de los Rios, The Conservation Fund, 2014, Emerald Necklace: Forest to Ocean Expanded Vision Plan, <https://amigosdelosrios.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/ADLR-Emerald-Necklace-Forest-to-Ocean-Expanded-Vision-Plan.pdf> (10/25).
  3. Amigos de los Rios, n.d., The Emerald Necklace Coalition, <https://amigosdelosrios.org/emerald-necklace-coalition/> (10/25).
  4. Bastiani M. 2011, Contratti di fiume: Pianificazione strategica e partecipata dei bacini idrografici. Flaccovio Editore.
  5. Beatley T. 2010, Biophilic cities, Island Press, Washington DC.
  6. Berg P. 1978, Re-inhabiting a Separate Country. A Bioregional Anthology of Northern California, Planet Drum, San Francisco.
  7. Calace F., Paparusso O. G., Angelastro C. 2023, Praticare la governance nei territori dell’acqua: operatività e attuazione dei Contratti di Fiume, «BDC», n. 1, pp. 177-190.
  8. Carena E. 2005, Nuove forme di partecipazione nella riqualificazione urbana. Tutor A. Ronchetta, A. Mela, Politecnico di Torino, Degree in Architecture.
  9. Cavaco C., Mourato J., Costa J.P., Ferrão J. 2023, Beyond soft planning: Towards a soft turn in planning theory and practice?, «Planning Theory», vol. 22, n. 1, pp. 3–26.
  10. Center for Landscape Conservation Planning – University of Florida, The Florida Ecological Greenways Network, https://conservation.dcp.ufl.edu/fegn/ (11/25).
  11. Chatzimentor A., Apostolopoulou E., Mazaris A.D. 2020. A review of green infrastructure research in Europe: Challenges and opportunities, «Landscape and Urban Planning», n. 198.
  12. Chicago Wilderness Alliance, About Us, <https://www.chicagowilderness.org/page/aboutus> (11/25).
  13. Davies I.P., Christensen J., Kareiva P. 2019, Assessing the flow to low-income urban areas of conservation and environmental funds approved by California’s Proposition 84, «PLoS ONE», vol. 14, n. 2. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211925
  14. Emerald Necklace Coalition, 2012, Emerald Necklace Accord. <https://amigosdelosrios.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Emerald-Necklace-Accord-Agreement-2013-FINAL.pdf> (11/25).
  15. Faludi A. 2013, Territorial cohesion, territorialism, territoriality, and soft planning: a critical review, «Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space», vol. 45, n. 6, pp. 1302–1317. https://doi.org/10.1068/a45299
  16. FSG, The Greater Cincinnati Foundation, 2012, Backbone Effectiveness: 27 Indicators, <https://www.fsg.org/resource/understanding-value-backbone-organizations-collective-impact/>
  17. Grabowski Z.J., Hess D.J. 2022, What is green infrastructure? A study of definitions in U.S. city plans, «Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment», vol. 20, n. 6, pp. 403–411, https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.2445.
  18. Goldin G. 2000, Paradise Lost, «Los Angeles Times», <https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2000-jul-16-bk-53685-story.html> (11/25).
  19. Hlady N. 2014, The Emerald Necklace Vision for a Healthier L.A. County, «PBS SoCal», <https://www.pbssocal.org/shows/departures/the-emerald-necklace-vision-for-a-healthier-l-a-county> (04/26).
  20. Hise G., Deverell W. 2000, Eden by Design: The 1930 Olmsted–Bartholomew Plan for the Los Angeles Region, University of California Press, Berkeley.
  21. Hise G., Deverell W. 2001, ‘The art political’ and Los Angeles park planning, «Planning Perspectives», n. 16, pp. 329–331.
  22. Houston Wilderness, Our Mission, <https://houstonwilderness.org/> (11/25).
  23. Kania J., Kramer M. 2011, Collective Impact, «Stanford Social Innovation Reviews», vol. 9, n. 1, pp. 36–41. https://doi.org/10.48558/5900-KN19
  24. Lyle J. T. 1994, Regenerative design for sustainable development, Wiley.
  25. Loukaitou-Sideris A., Gottlieb R. 2004, The day that people filled the freeway, «disP – The Planning Review», vol. 40, n. 159, pp. 13–19, https://doi.org/10.1080/02513625.2004.10556895.
  26. Malcevschi S. 2025, Ecosistemi e reti ecologiche in evoluzione. Implicazioni per un approccio eco-territorialista, in Barbanente A., Pazzagli R., Poli D. (eds.), Il territorio soggetto vivente: La figura e l’opera di Alberto Magnaghi, Firenze University Press, pp. 87-92, https://doi.org/10.36253/979-12-215-0781-2.26.
  27. Magnaghi A. 2014, La biorégion urbaine. Petit traité sur le territoire bien commun, Eterotopia France, Paris.
  28. Magnaghi A. 2020a, Il principio territoriale, Bollati Boringhieri, Torino.
  29. Magnaghi A. 2020b, The Territorialist Approach to Urban Bioregions, in D. Fanfani and A. Matarán Ruiz (eds.), Bioregional Planning and Design: Volume I. Perspectives on a Transitional Century, Springer, Cham, pp. 33-61. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45870-6
  30. Paquot T. 2018, De la Biorégion Urbaine, «Contesti. Città, Territori, Progetti», n. 1, pp. 72–89. https://doi.org/10.13128/contest-10632
  31. Pedersen Zari M., Hecht K. 2020, Biomimicry for regenerative built environments: Mapping design strategies for producing ecosystem services, «Biomimetics», vol. 5, n. 2, https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics5020018.
  32. Poli D., Luciani G. 2024, Urban bioregional world in the making: The territorialist approach to bioregional planning and design, «Desenvolvimento em Questão», n. 61, pp. 1–14.
  33. Poli D., Bolognesi M., Luciani G., Nurihana E. 2025, Dalla metropoli alla bioregione urbana. Un progetto per la Città metropolitana di Roma Capitale, Sdt Edizioni, Roma.
  34. Saragosa C. 2001, L’ecosistema territoriale e la sua base ambientale, in A. Magnaghi (ed.) Rappresentare i luoghi. Metodi e tecniche, Alinea, Firenze, pp. 55–138.
  35. Schurch T. 2018, An ecology of urban form: The imperative of the bioregion, «Landscape Research Report», n. 7.
  36. State of California – Department of Finance, 2007, California Strategic Growth Plan. <https://dof.ca.gov/media/docs/reports/other/SGP2007Final.pdf> (10/25).
  37. Stappers P., Giaccardi E. 2014, Research through design, «Interaction Design Foundation», <https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/book/the-encyclopedia-of-human-computer-interaction-2nd-ed/research-through-design>
  38. Swyngedouw E. 2005, Governance innovation and the citizen: The Janus face of governance-beyond-the-state, «Urban Studies», vol. 42, n. 11, pp. 1991–2006.
  39. Thayer R.L. Jr. 2003, LifePlace: Bioregional Thought and Practice, University of California Press, Berkeley.
  40. The Intertwine Alliance, Mission & Vision, <https://www.theintertwine.org/alliance/mission-vision> (11/25).
  41. Turner S., Merchant K., Kania J., Martin E. 2012, Understanding the value of backbone organizations in collective impact, FSG.
  42. Uribe J. 2024, Excluding through inclusion: managerial practices in the era of multistakeholder governance, «Review of International Political Economy», 24 June 2024.