IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jenpmg/v63y2020i3p415-432.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Framing fragmentation in strategic policy documents in spatial planning and environmental domains: differences and similarities

Author

Listed:
  • Eva Semančíková
  • Simona R. Grădinaru
  • Tereza Aubrechtová
  • Anna M. Hersperger

Abstract

Fragmentation is a complex issue and the way it is framed will impact on policy decisions. The Czech Republic has adopted several strategic policy documents in spatial planning and environmental domains that address fragmentation. However, these documents differ in how they frame fragmentation. Our goal was to evaluate the differences in 1) framing the problem of fragmentation and 2) suggested solutions. We performed a content analysis of the strategic policy documents by coding text using the key fragmentation aspects - biological organization, land cover, and connectivity. Next, we categorized data either to species-oriented, pattern-oriented, or ecosystem service frames and suggested criteria to evaluate the quality of the framing. This method was useful to show the divergence in the framing of fragmentation as a problem between two policy domains. The results show that the pattern-oriented frame and mitigation solutions are the most prominent aspects, and also fragmentation is not well framed.

Suggested Citation

  • Eva Semančíková & Simona R. Grădinaru & Tereza Aubrechtová & Anna M. Hersperger, 2020. "Framing fragmentation in strategic policy documents in spatial planning and environmental domains: differences and similarities," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 63(3), pages 415-432, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:63:y:2020:i:3:p:415-432
    DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2019.1589433
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09640568.2019.1589433
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09640568.2019.1589433?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:jenpmg:v:63:y:2020:i:3:p:415-432. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20 .

    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.