Urban Ecology
najme sadat mostafavi; parvin partovi; Zhara Asadolahi
Abstract
Highlight:
- Urban development plans offer numerous opportunities to incorporate the concept of ecosystem services into the urban planning process, yet their integration remains inconsistent.
- Scientific methods to evaluate the uptake and operationalization of ecosystem services in urban planning ...
Read More
Highlight:
- Urban development plans offer numerous opportunities to incorporate the concept of ecosystem services into the urban planning process, yet their integration remains inconsistent.
- Scientific methods to evaluate the uptake and operationalization of ecosystem services in urban planning include stakeholder interviews and content analysis of plans.
- Analyzing these plans provides a broader understanding of the potential, gaps, and limitations regarding ecosystem services.
- Cultural ecosystem services, followed by provisioning and some regulating services, receive the most attention in these plans.
- The survey and analysis phase, influenced by the scale of service studies, is the primary focus.
Introduction:
Urban areas, as human-environment systems, depend heavily on natural ecosystems for sustainability and well-being. Therefore, integrating ecosystem services into urban planning is essential for promoting sustainable urban development. Among the various decision-making processes impacting ecosystem services in cities, urban planning is arguably the most critical. Despite the increasing academic interest in ecosystem services, there are still significant knowledge gaps regarding their integration into urban planning. Incorporating ecosystem services into the management of urban land is crucial for the rational allocation of land and effective ecological management in urban areas.
However, several obstacles hinder this integration, including the inadequacies in the content and process of urban development plans, the limitations of current planning tools, the lack of knowledge about ecosystem services, the absence of relevant institutions and executive organizations, and the deficiency in the application of ecosystem services knowledge in practice and policy. Moreover, the necessary legal and regulatory frameworks are often lacking. This paper aims to examine both the current and potential utilization of ecosystem services in urban development plans, specifically focusing on the city of Arak.
Methods:
Two dominant scientific approaches are employed to evaluate the uptake and operationalization of ecosystem services in urban planning: interviewing stakeholders and analyzing the content of plans and policies. Content analysis of urban development plan documents provides a comprehensive understanding of the potential, gaps, and limitations related to the inclusion of ecosystem services in urban planning practices. To achieve this goal, a content analysis method with a directional approach (deductive method based on theory) was utilized. The study examined the extent to which 19 ecosystem services were addressed within three components of the Arak development and construction plan: the information base, vision/objectives, and actions.
A scoring protocol was developed to assess the quality of ecosystem services inclusion in urban plans. This protocol used a 3-point scale, with scores ranging from zero (no inclusion), one (implicit inclusion), to two (explicit inclusion).
Results:
Among the regulating services, air purification and local ventilation services were mentioned 109 times, with the highest frequency (34 times) in the analysis section (database). The content analysis revealed that healthy water production was referenced 99 times, while food production was mentioned 82 times. Regarding supporting services, soil quality was noted nine times in total, with the highest mention (four times) in the analysis section. Among cultural services, recreational services and mental experiences were mentioned 94 times, with the highest frequency (26 times) in the city survey and knowledge section.
The results indicate that the ecosystem services concept is partially integrated into the mentioned development document. However, the document lacks a holistic view of urban ecology and its benefits. In the three examined components, ecosystem services were mentioned 607 times, both implicitly (312 times - 51.4%) and explicitly (295 times - 48.6%), with the most attention given to the information base component (358 times - 59%). The significant difference in the score for cultural services (400) compared to provisioning (274), regulating (198), and supporting (30) services suggests that cultural services are more comprehensively included in the Arak metropolis plan.
Discussion:
The inconsistency in addressing each service or concept across the three components highlights a lack of significant correlation between data collection, analysis, goal formulation, vision development, plan preparation, and the establishment of rules and regulations. Another critical issue is the misalignment between the process and content of these plans with new concepts, as well as the weakness of the comprehensive rational process in integrating these concepts. To incorporate new ideas like ecosystem services into urban development plans, not only is there a need to strengthen content and process, but also to improve planning tools. Empirical studies suggest that tools such as Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) can help bridge this gap.
Conclusion:
Incorporating the concept of ecosystem services into new laws, guidelines, or revisions of existing plans and programs is a complex process that cannot be accomplished in the short term. The presence of informed stakeholders, public decision-makers, and experts is essential. Additionally, it is crucial to form interdisciplinary teams within both consulting engineering firms that prepare urban development plans and public institutions responsible for drafting and approving these plans. Tools such as Strategic Impact Assessment (SIA) are recommended to evaluate proposed alternatives and select the final options.
