IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/urbpla/v6y2021i1p49-62.html

The Eco-Techno Spectrum: Exploring Knowledge Systems’ Challenges in Green Infrastructure Management

Author

Listed:
  • A. Marissa Matsler

    (Department of Environmental Science and Technology, University of Maryland, College Park, USA)

  • Thaddeus R. Miller

    (School of Public Policy, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, USA)

  • Peter M. Groffman

    (Advanced Science Research Center at the Graduate Center, City University of New York, USA / Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, USA)

Abstract

Infrastructure crises are not only technical problems for engineers to solve—they also present social, ecological, financial, and political challenges. Addressing infrastructure problems thus requires a robust planning process that includes examination of the social and ecological systems supporting infrastructure, alongside technical systems. An integrative Social, Ecological, and Technological Systems (SETS) analysis of infrastructure solutions can complement the planning process by revealing potential trade-offs that are often overlooked in standard procedures. We explore the interconnected SETS of the infrastructure problem in the US through comparative case studies of green infrastructure (GI) development in Portland and Baltimore. Currently a popular infrastructure solution to a wide variety of urban ills, GI is the use and mimicry of ecological components (e.g., plants) to perform municipal services (e.g., stormwater management). We develop the ecological-technological spectrum—or ‘eco-techno spectrum’—as a framing tool to bridge all three SETS dimensions. The eco-techno spectrum becomes a platform to explore the institutional knowledge system dynamics of GI development where social dimensions are organized across ecological and technological aspects of GI, exposing how governance differs across specific forms of ecological and technological hybridity. In this study, we highlight the knowledge system challenges of urban planning institutions as a key consideration in the realization of innovative infrastructure crisis ‘fixes.’ Disconnected definition and measurement of GI emerge as two distinct challenges across the knowledge systems examined. By revealing and discussing these challenges, we can begin to recognize—and better plan for—gaps in municipal planning knowledge systems, promoting decisions that address the roots of infrastructure crises rather than treating only their symptoms.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Marissa Matsler & Thaddeus R. Miller & Peter M. Groffman, 2021. "The Eco-Techno Spectrum: Exploring Knowledge Systems’ Challenges in Green Infrastructure Management," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 49-62.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:urbpla:v6:y:2021:i:1:p:49-62
    DOI: 10.17645/up.v6i1.3491
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/3491
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/up.v6i1.3491?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. Haas, Peter M., 1992. "Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 1-35, January.
    2. Trevor Pinch, 2010. "On making infrastructure visible: putting the non-humans to rights," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(1), pages 77-89, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. A. Marissa Matsler & Thaddeus R. Miller & Peter M. Groffman, 2021. "The Eco-Techno Spectrum: Exploring Knowledge Systems’ Challenges in Green Infrastructure Management," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 49-62.
    2. Claude Paraponaris, 2017. "Plateformes numériques, conception ouverte et emploi," Post-Print halshs-01614430, HAL.
    3. Büthe Tim, 2010. "Engineering Uncontestedness? The Origins and Institutional Development of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 1-64, October.
    4. Andrew B. Whitford & Derrick Anderson, 2021. "Governance landscapes for emerging technologies: The case of cryptocurrencies," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1053-1070, October.
    5. Barry Eichengreen and Fabio Ghironi., 1997. "European Monetary Unification and International Monetary Cooperation," Center for International and Development Economics Research (CIDER) Working Papers C97-091, University of California at Berkeley.
    6. Roland Königsgruber, 2010. "A political economy of accounting standard setting," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 14(4), pages 277-295, November.
    7. Jeanie Bukowski, 2017. "A “new water culture†on the Iberian Peninsula? Evaluating epistemic community impact on water resources management policy," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(2), pages 239-264, March.
    8. Mateos-Garcia, Juan & Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2008. "The institutions of open source software: Examining the Debian community," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 333-344, December.
    9. Catherine Long, 2017. "Delegated Service Authority: Institutional Evolution of PEPFAR Health-Based Program Implementing Units in Tanzania," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8(3), pages 303-312, September.
    10. White, Joseph, 2013. "Budget-makers and health care systems," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 163-171.
    11. Creplet, F. & Dupouet, O. & Kern, F. & Mehmanpazir, B. & Munier, F., 2001. "Consultants and experts in management consulting firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1517-1535, December.
    12. Katzenstein, Peter J., 2022. "Worldviews in World Politics," EconStor Open Access Book Chapters, in: Uncertainty and Its Discontents: Worldviews in World Politics, pages 1-69, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    13. Federico Maria Ferrara & Jörg S Haas & Andrew Peterson & Thomas Sattler, 2022. "Exports vs. Investment: How Public Discourse Shapes Support for External Imbalances," Post-Print hal-02569351, HAL.
    14. Resnik, Danielle & Okumo, Austen, "undated". "Institutional Limits To Land Governance Reform: Federal-State Dynamics In Nigeria," Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Papers 259578, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security (FSP).
    15. Vitale, Tommaso Prof, 2022. "Temporary Shelters and Roma Housing Inclusion: Policy Learning in Implementation," SocArXiv 72ruz_v1, Center for Open Science.
    16. Sandberg, Kristin Ingstad & Andresen, Steinar & Bjune, Gunnar, 2010. "A new approach to global health institutions? A case study of new vaccine introduction and the formation of the GAVI Alliance," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(7), pages 1349-1356, October.
    17. May-Britt Stumbaum, 2015. "The diffusion of norms in security-related fields: views from China, India and the EU," Asia Europe Journal, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 331-347, September.
    18. Romanova, Tatiana, 2014. "Russian energy in the EU market: Bolstered institutionsand their effects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 44-53.
    19. Paul J. Stephenson, 2010. "The Role of Working Groups of Commissioners in Co‐ordinating Policy Implementation: The Case of Trans‐European Networks (TENs)," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 709-736, June.
    20. Muriel Figuié & Tristan Fournier, 2010. "Risques sanitaires globaux et politiques nationales : la gestion de la grippe aviaire au Vietnam," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 91(3), pages 327-343.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:cog:urbpla:v6:y:2021:i:1:p:49-62. 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: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    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.