IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v32y2014i2p263-282.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Utilisation of Environmental Knowledge in Land-Use Planning: Drawing Lessons for an Ecosystem Services Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Richard Cowell

    (School of Planning and Geography, Cardiff University, Glamorgan Building, King Edward VII Avenue, Cardiff CF10 3WA, Wales)

  • Mick Lennon

    (School of Geography, Planning and Environmental Policy, Planning Building, University College Dublin, Richview, Clonskeagh, Dublin 14, Ireland)

Abstract

Proponents of ecosystem services approaches to assessment claim that it will ensure the environment is ‘properly valued’ in decision making. Analysts seeking to understand the likelihood of this could usefully reexamine previous attempts to deploy novel assessment processes in land-use planning and how they affect decisions. This paper draws insights from a meta-analysis of three case studies: environmental capital, ecological footprinting, and green infrastructure. Concepts from science and technology studies are used to interpret how credibility for each new assessment process was assembled, and the ways by which the status of knowledge produced becomes negotiable or prescriptive. The influence of these processes on planning decisions is shown to be uneven, and depends on a combination of institutional setting and problem framing, not simply knowledge content. The analysis shows how actively cultivating wide stakeholder buy-in to new assessment approaches may secure wider support, but not necessarily translate into major influence on decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard Cowell & Mick Lennon, 2014. "The Utilisation of Environmental Knowledge in Land-Use Planning: Drawing Lessons for an Ecosystem Services Approach," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 32(2), pages 263-282, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:32:y:2014:i:2:p:263-282
    DOI: 10.1068/c12289j
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/c12289j
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/c12289j?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.
    2. Simon Shackley & Éric Darier, 1998. "Seduction of the Sirens: Global climate change and modelling," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(5), pages 313-325, October.
    3. Wiedmann, Thomas & Minx, Jan & Barrett, John & Wackernagel, Mathis, 2006. "Allocating ecological footprints to final consumption categories with input-output analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 28-48, January.
    4. Shove, Elizabeth, 1998. "Gaps, barriers and conceptual chasms: theories of technology transfer and energy in buildings," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(15), pages 1105-1112, December.
    5. Richard Cowell, 2013. "The Greenest Government Ever? Planning and Sustainability in England after the May 2010 Elections," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 27-44, February.
    6. Kitschelt, Herbert P., 1986. "Political Opportunity Structures and Political Protest: Anti-Nuclear Movements in Four Democracies," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 57-85, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wilker, Jost & Rusche, Karsten & Benning, Alexander & MacDonald, Michael A. & Blaen, Phillip, 2016. "Applying ecosystem benefit valuation to inform quarry restoration planning," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 44-55.
    2. Thompson, Kate & Sherren, Kate & Duinker, Peter N., 2019. "The use of ecosystem services concepts in Canadian municipal plans," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Saarikoski, Heli & Primmer, Eeva & Saarela, Sanna-Riikka & Antunes, Paula & Aszalós, Réka & Baró, Francesc & Berry, Pam & Blanko, Gemma Garcia & Goméz-Baggethun, Erik & Carvalho, Laurence & Dick, , 2018. "Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 579-598.
    4. Suresh Chaudhary & Yukuan Wang & Amod Mani Dixit & Narendra Raj Khanal & Pei Xu & Kun Yan & Qin Liu & Yafeng Lu & Ming Li, 2019. "Eco-Environmental Risk Evaluation for Land Use Planning in Areas of Potential Farmland Abandonment in the High Mountains of Nepal Himalayas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Alonso Roldán, Virginia & Galván, David E. & Lopes, Priscila F.M. & López, Jaime & Sanderson Bellamy, Angelina & Gallego, Federico & Cinti, Ana & Rius, Pía & Schröter, Barbara & Aguado, Mateo & M, 2019. "Are we seeing the whole picture in land-sea systems? Opportunities and challenges for operationalizing the ES concept," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    6. Pienaar, Elizabeth F. & Soto, José R. & Lai, John H. & Adams, Damian C., 2019. "Would County Residents Vote for an Increase in Their Taxes to Conserve Native Habitat and Ecosystem Services? Funding Conservation in Palm Beach County, Florida," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 24-34.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrea Collins & Richard Cowell & Andrew Flynn, 2009. "Evaluation and Environmental Governance: The Institutionalisation of Ecological Footprinting," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 41(7), pages 1707-1725, July.
    2. Jung-In Jo & Hyun Jin Choi, 2019. "Enigmas of grievances about inequality: Effects of attitudes toward inequality and government redistribution on protest participation," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 22(4), pages 348-368, December.
    3. Grégoire Wallenborn & Catherine Rousseau & Karine Thollier, 2006. "Détermination de profils de ménages pour une utilisation plus rationnelle de l’energie," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/192217, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Newton, Kenneth & Giebler, Heiko, 2008. "Patterns of participation: Political and social participation in 22 nations," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Democracy and Democratization SP IV 2008-201, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    5. Brown, Christopher J. & Markusson, Nils, 2019. "The responses of older adults to smart energy monitors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 218-226.
    6. Hendrawan, Dienda C P & Musshoff, Oliver, 2022. "Oil Palm Smallholder Farmers' Livelihood Resilience and Decision Making in Replanting," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322441, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Teixidó Figueras, Jordi & Duro Moreno, Juan Antonio, 2012. "Ecological Footprint Inequality: A methodological review and some results," Working Papers 2072/203168, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    8. Johann Audrain & Mateo Cordier & Sylvie Faucheux & Martin O’Connor, 2013. "Écologie territoriale et indicateurs pour un développement durable de la métropole parisienne," Revue d'économie régionale et urbaine, Armand Colin, vol. 0(3), pages 523-559.
    9. Basem Ertimi & Tamat Sarmidi & Norlin Khalid & Mohd Helmi Ali, 2021. "The Policy Framework of Natural Resource Management in Oil-Dependence Countries," Economies, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, February.
    10. Simelton, Elisabeth & Viet Dam, Bac, 2014. "Farmers in NE Viet Nam rank values of ecosystems from seven land uses," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 133-138.
    11. Michael Nye & Yvonne Rydin, 2008. "The Contribution of Ecological Footprinting to Planning Policy Development: Using REAP to Evaluate Policies for Sustainable Housing Construction," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 35(2), pages 227-247, April.
    12. Yulei Xie & Ling Ji & Beibei Zhang & Gordon Huang, 2018. "Evolution of the Scientific Literature on Input–Output Analysis: A Bibliometric Analysis of 1990–2017," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-17, September.
    13. Sierra, Jazmin & Hochstetler, Kathryn, 2017. "Transnational activist networks and rising powers: transparency and environmental concerns in the Brazilian National Development Bank," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 79089, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. David Gibbs & Kirstie O'Neill, 2014. "Rethinking Sociotechnical Transitions and Green Entrepreneurship: The Potential for Transformative Change in the Green Building Sector," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(5), pages 1088-1107, May.
    15. Minihan, Erin S. & Wu, Ziping, 2011. "The Potential Economic and Environmental Costs of GHG Mitigation Measures for Cattle Sectors in Northern Ireland," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108779, Agricultural Economics Society.
    16. Bossink, Bart A.G., 2017. "Demonstrating sustainable energy: A review based model of sustainable energy demonstration projects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 1349-1362.
    17. Everard, Mark & Longhurst, James & Pontin, John & Stephenson, Wendy & Brooks, Joss, 2017. "Developed-developing world partnerships for sustainable development (1): An ecosystem services perspective," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 241-252.
    18. Livia Johannesson & Noomi Weinryb, 2021. "How to blame and make a difference: perceived responsibility and policy consequences in two Swedish pro-migrant campaigns," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 41-62, March.
    19. van Alphen, Klaas & Hekkert, Marko P. & van Sark, Wilfried G.J.H.M., 2008. "Renewable energy technologies in the Maldives--Realizing the potential," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 162-180, January.
    20. Ansari, Mohd Arshad, 2022. "Re-visiting the Environmental Kuznets curve for ASEAN: A comparison between ecological footprint and carbon dioxide emissions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:32:y:2014:i:2:p:263-282. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.