Ecosystem services in urban planning: Comparative paradigms and guidelines for high quality plans

Sierra C. Woodruff, Todd K. BenDor

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  • 11 Citations

Abstract

Ecosystem services are a powerful tool for land-use and environmental planning, which can help decision makers better understand the tradeoffs between different development scenarios. However, there is limited guidance about how ecosystem services should be used in the land-use and environmental planning context. While existing plan quality guidance for sustainability recognizes benefits of ecosystems by promoting conservation and green infrastructure, it fails to provide specific direction on the type of ecosystem service information to collect and how it should be incorporated into land-use planning processes. We explore this gap by using criteria from American Planning Association (APA) Sustaining Places guidance to analyze two comprehensive plans: Damascus, Oregon, which uses ecosystem services as an organizing framework, and Cincinnati, Ohio, which has received recognition for advancing the science and art of planning. In addition, we compare the extent to which the plans incorporate ecosystem services (both concepts and language) into their goal setting, fact base, policies, and public participation process. We find that incorporating ecosystem services into land-use planning may help achieve sustainability goals by elevating the importance of conservation and providing a lens to link multiple community objectives. APA rewards these attributes of Damascus' plan, but fails to identify the plan's strong ecosystem service strategies or weak analysis of ecosystem service information. Based on these findings, we propose additional metrics to help practitioners incorporate ecosystem services into comprehensive plans.

LanguageEnglish (US)
Pages90-100
Number of pages11
JournalLandscape and Urban Planning
Volume152
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2016

Fingerprint

urban planning
ecosystem service
land use planning
environmental planning
sustainability
plan
planning process
art
infrastructure
ecosystem

Keywords

  • Ecosystem services
  • Environmental planning
  • Land use planning
  • Plan quality guidance
  • Sustainability

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

Ecosystem services in urban planning : Comparative paradigms and guidelines for high quality plans. / Woodruff, Sierra C.; BenDor, Todd K.

In: Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 152, 01.08.2016, p. 90-100.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{5554d0aa08314a6086b5e3bf2c3134ed,
title = "Ecosystem services in urban planning: Comparative paradigms and guidelines for high quality plans",
abstract = "Ecosystem services are a powerful tool for land-use and environmental planning, which can help decision makers better understand the tradeoffs between different development scenarios. However, there is limited guidance about how ecosystem services should be used in the land-use and environmental planning context. While existing plan quality guidance for sustainability recognizes benefits of ecosystems by promoting conservation and green infrastructure, it fails to provide specific direction on the type of ecosystem service information to collect and how it should be incorporated into land-use planning processes. We explore this gap by using criteria from American Planning Association (APA) Sustaining Places guidance to analyze two comprehensive plans: Damascus, Oregon, which uses ecosystem services as an organizing framework, and Cincinnati, Ohio, which has received recognition for advancing the science and art of planning. In addition, we compare the extent to which the plans incorporate ecosystem services (both concepts and language) into their goal setting, fact base, policies, and public participation process. We find that incorporating ecosystem services into land-use planning may help achieve sustainability goals by elevating the importance of conservation and providing a lens to link multiple community objectives. APA rewards these attributes of Damascus\{textquoteleft} plan, but fails to identify the plan\{textquoteleft}s strong ecosystem service strategies or weak analysis of ecosystem service information. Based on these findings, we propose additional metrics to help practitioners incorporate ecosystem services into comprehensive plans.",
keywords = "Ecosystem services, Environmental planning, Land use planning, Plan quality guidance, Sustainability",
author = "Woodruff, {Sierra C.} and BenDor, {Todd K.}",
year = "2016",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.04.003",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "152",
pages = "90--100",
journal = "Landscape and Urban Planning",
issn = "0169-2046",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ecosystem services in urban planning

T2 - Landscape and Urban Planning

AU - Woodruff,Sierra C.

AU - BenDor,Todd K.

PY - 2016/8/1

Y1 - 2016/8/1

N2 - Ecosystem services are a powerful tool for land-use and environmental planning, which can help decision makers better understand the tradeoffs between different development scenarios. However, there is limited guidance about how ecosystem services should be used in the land-use and environmental planning context. While existing plan quality guidance for sustainability recognizes benefits of ecosystems by promoting conservation and green infrastructure, it fails to provide specific direction on the type of ecosystem service information to collect and how it should be incorporated into land-use planning processes. We explore this gap by using criteria from American Planning Association (APA) Sustaining Places guidance to analyze two comprehensive plans: Damascus, Oregon, which uses ecosystem services as an organizing framework, and Cincinnati, Ohio, which has received recognition for advancing the science and art of planning. In addition, we compare the extent to which the plans incorporate ecosystem services (both concepts and language) into their goal setting, fact base, policies, and public participation process. We find that incorporating ecosystem services into land-use planning may help achieve sustainability goals by elevating the importance of conservation and providing a lens to link multiple community objectives. APA rewards these attributes of Damascus' plan, but fails to identify the plan's strong ecosystem service strategies or weak analysis of ecosystem service information. Based on these findings, we propose additional metrics to help practitioners incorporate ecosystem services into comprehensive plans.

AB - Ecosystem services are a powerful tool for land-use and environmental planning, which can help decision makers better understand the tradeoffs between different development scenarios. However, there is limited guidance about how ecosystem services should be used in the land-use and environmental planning context. While existing plan quality guidance for sustainability recognizes benefits of ecosystems by promoting conservation and green infrastructure, it fails to provide specific direction on the type of ecosystem service information to collect and how it should be incorporated into land-use planning processes. We explore this gap by using criteria from American Planning Association (APA) Sustaining Places guidance to analyze two comprehensive plans: Damascus, Oregon, which uses ecosystem services as an organizing framework, and Cincinnati, Ohio, which has received recognition for advancing the science and art of planning. In addition, we compare the extent to which the plans incorporate ecosystem services (both concepts and language) into their goal setting, fact base, policies, and public participation process. We find that incorporating ecosystem services into land-use planning may help achieve sustainability goals by elevating the importance of conservation and providing a lens to link multiple community objectives. APA rewards these attributes of Damascus' plan, but fails to identify the plan's strong ecosystem service strategies or weak analysis of ecosystem service information. Based on these findings, we propose additional metrics to help practitioners incorporate ecosystem services into comprehensive plans.

KW - Ecosystem services

KW - Environmental planning

KW - Land use planning

KW - Plan quality guidance

KW - Sustainability

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84973154931&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84973154931&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.04.003

DO - 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.04.003

M3 - Article

VL - 152

SP - 90

EP - 100

JO - Landscape and Urban Planning

JF - Landscape and Urban Planning

SN - 0169-2046

ER -