IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/urbpla/v6y2021i4p122-134.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Closing the Gap Between Urban Planning and Urban Ecology: A South African Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Burné van Zyl

    (Unit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North-West University, South Africa)

  • E. Juaneé Cilliers

    (Unit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North-West University, South Africa / School of Built Environment, University of Technology Sydney, Australia)

  • Louis G. Lategan

    (Unit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North-West University, South Africa)

  • Sarel S. Cilliers

    (Unit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North-West University, South Africa)

Abstract

Ecological considerations should be an integral part of the decision-making processes of urban planners. Specifically, ecological aspects used in urban ecology, such as green infrastructure and ecosystem services, are substantiated by literature as strategies for improving quality of life, human health, and well-being. Studies dealing with such concepts in the Global South recently gained interest; however, these lack empirical evidence on the integration thereof in mainstream South African urban planning practice. This article conducts a preliminary investigation into the knowledge of ecological aspects of a sample of South African urban planners and their willingness to implement ecological aspects in urban planning practice. The new environmental paradigm scale is employed to determine the environmental worldview (ecocentric or anthropocentric) among respondent and how this relates to their knowledge of ecological aspects. The initial research sample consisted of a total of 283 questionnaires distributed. Although findings of this article are based on a low response rate (15%) of 42 documented responses, it did not affect the validity of the data collected in this context. The initial findings indicated that the environmental worldview of the sample of planners is only one factor influencing their perspective on incorporating ecological considerations. Low to moderate knowledge and awareness regarding ecological aspects such as ecosystem services, green infrastructure, and multi-functionality are argued to be main factors preventing integration in urban planning practice. Findings emphasize the need for context-based implementation strategies and broad recommendations are made for the planning profession as a point of departure to introduce or ingrain ecological considerations.

Suggested Citation

  • Burné van Zyl & E. Juaneé Cilliers & Louis G. Lategan & Sarel S. Cilliers, 2021. "Closing the Gap Between Urban Planning and Urban Ecology: A South African Perspective," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(4), pages 122-134.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:urbpla:v:6:y:2021:i:4:p:122-134
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/4456
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel L. Childers & Mary L. Cadenasso & J. Morgan Grove & Victoria Marshall & Brian McGrath & Steward T. A. Pickett, 2015. "An Ecology for Cities: A Transformational Nexus of Design and Ecology to Advance Climate Change Resilience and Urban Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-18, March.
    2. Di Marino, Mina & Tiitu, Maija & Lapintie, Kimmo & Viinikka, Arto & Kopperoinen, Leena, 2019. "Integrating green infrastructure and ecosystem services in land use planning. Results from two Finnish case studies," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 643-656.
    3. Vera Toepoel & Matthias Schonlau, 2017. "Dealing with nonresponse: Strategies to increase participation and methods for postsurvey adjustments," Mathematical Population Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 79-83, April.
    4. Marita Wallhagen & Peter Magnusson, 2017. "Ecological Worldview among Urban Design Professionals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-13, March.
    5. Mwazvita TB Sachikonye & Tatenda Dalu & Ashley Gunter, 2016. "Sustainable livelihood principles and urban greening in informal settlements in practice: A case of Zandspruit informal settlement, South Africa," Development Southern Africa, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(4), pages 518-531, July.
    6. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Barton, David N., 2013. "Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 235-245.
    7. Gunilla Lindholm, 2017. "The Implementation of Green Infrastructure: Relating a General Concept to Context and Site," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-13, April.
    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. Louis Gerhardus Lategan & Zene Steynberg & Elizelle Juanee Cilliers & Sarel Stephanus Cilliers, 2022. "Economic Valuation of Urban Green Spaces across a Socioeconomic Gradient: A South African Case Study," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-23, March.

    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. Clara García-Mayor & Pablo Martí & Manuel Castaño & Álvaro Bernabeu-Bautista, 2020. "The Unexploited Potential of Converting Rail Tracks to Greenways: The Spanish Vías Verdes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-25, January.
    2. Silvia Ronchi, 2021. "Ecosystem Services for Planning: A Generic Recommendation or a Real Framework? Insights from a Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-17, June.
    3. Giulia Capotorti & Eva Del Vico & Ilaria Anzellotti & Laura Celesti-Grapow, 2016. "Combining the Conservation of Biodiversity with the Provision of Ecosystem Services in Urban Green Infrastructure Planning: Critical Features Arising from a Case Study in the Metropolitan Area of Rome," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, December.
    4. Tapio Riepponen & Mikko Moilanen & Jaakko Simonen, 2023. "Themes of resilience in the economics literature: A topic modeling approach," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 326-356, April.
    5. Drakou, E.G. & Crossman, N.D. & Willemen, L. & Burkhard, B. & Palomo, I. & Maes, J. & Peedell, S., 2015. "A visualization and data-sharing tool for ecosystem service maps: Lessons learnt, challenges and the way forward," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 134-140.
    6. Conway, Tenley M. & Khan, Aliza & Esak, Nasra, 2020. "An analysis of green infrastructure in municipal policy: Divergent meaning and terminology in the Greater Toronto Area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    7. Tandarić, Neven & Ives, Christopher D. & Watkins, Charles, 2022. "From city in the park to “greenery in plant pots”: The influence of socialist and post-socialist planning on opportunities for cultural ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    8. Veerkamp, Clara J. & Schipper, Aafke M. & Hedlund, Katarina & Lazarova, Tanya & Nordin, Amanda & Hanson, Helena I., 2021. "A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    9. Irina Tumini & Paula Villagra-Islas & Geraldine Herrmann-Lunecke, 2017. "Evaluating reconstruction effects on urban resilience: a comparison between two Chilean tsunami-prone cities," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 85(3), pages 1363-1392, February.
    10. Yangang Xing & Phil Jones & Iain Donnison, 2017. "Characterisation of Nature-Based Solutions for the Built Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-20, January.
    11. Nikodinoska, Natasha & Paletto, Alessandro & Pastorella, Fabio & Granvik, Madeleine & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2018. "Assessing, valuing and mapping ecosystem services at city level: The case of Uppsala (Sweden)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 368(C), pages 411-424.
    12. Chiara Cortinovis & Grazia Zulian & Davide Geneletti, 2018. "Assessing Nature-Based Recreation to Support Urban Green Infrastructure Planning in Trento (Italy)," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-20, September.
    13. Evans, Nicole M. & Carrozzino-Lyon, Amy L. & Galbraith, Betsy & Noordyk, Julia & Peroff, Deidre M. & Stoll, John & Thompson, Aaron & Winden, Matthew W. & Davis, Mark A., 2019. "Integrated ecosystem service assessment for landscape conservation design in the Green Bay watershed, Wisconsin," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    14. Sirakaya, Aysegül & Cliquet, An & Harris, Jim, 2018. "Ecosystem services in cities: Towards the international legal protection of ecosystem services in urban environments," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 205-212.
    15. Zengzeng Fan & Yuanyang Wang & Yanchao Feng, 2021. "Ecological Livability Assessment of Urban Agglomerations in Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-16, December.
    16. Massoni, Emma Soy & Barton, David N. & Rusch, Graciela M. & Gundersen, Vegard, 2018. "Bigger, more diverse and better? Mapping structural diversity and its recreational value in urban green spaces," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 502-516.
    17. Bertram, Christine & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2015. "The role of urban green space for human well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 139-152.
    18. Dennis, Matthew & James, Philip, 2017. "Ecosystem services of collectively managed urban gardens: Exploring factors affecting synergies and trade-offs at the site level," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 17-26.
    19. Donatella Valente & María Victoria Marinelli & Erica Maria Lovello & Cosimo Gaspare Giannuzzi & Irene Petrosillo, 2022. "Fostering the Resiliency of Urban Landscape through the Sustainable Spatial Planning of Green Spaces," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-13, March.
    20. Vahid Amini Parsa & Esmail Salehi & Ahmad Reza Yavari & Peter M van Bodegom, 2019. "An improved method for assessing mismatches between supply and demand in urban regulating ecosystem services: A case study in Tabriz, Iran," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-22, August.

    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:v:6:y:2021:i:4:p:122-134. 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 (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.