IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enscpo/v62y2016icp139-144.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Advancing urban ecosystem governance in Rotterdam: From experimenting and evidence gathering to new ways for integrated planning

Author

Listed:
  • Tillie, Nico
  • van der Heijden, Roland

Abstract

To improve quality of life as well as the adaptive capacity in the city of Rotterdam over the past 15 years there has been a lot of focus on improving green infrastructure and finding new ways for integrated planning. As many cities face similar challenges they are looking for novel approaches in urban ecosystem governance. The Rotterdam case can be an interesting example but can also reveal new questions to be researched.Before local policies and projects where developed a regional and urban green blue vision of how to improve overall quality of life using green infrastructure were developed. This provided policy frameworks for politicians, policymakers and other actors. Later on the same was done with Urban Waterplan 2, using the Rotterdam Watercity 2030 vision document as a basis. This vision was the result of a stakeholder based planning process which was made for the International Architecture Biennale 2005. Within these frameworks many interesting projects have been built and tested in the city and city region; ranging from a) a roof park over a railway yard to connect neighbourhoods to the waterfront, to b) water squares and c) digging new waterways with connected walking and biking routes. To go from projects to an overall implementation at city level required tools and approaches for better decision making. For the ‘Dakpark’ project as well as for the Zomerhofkwartier, the first climate proof neighbourhood in the city, stakeholder sessions were held and plans were drawn together with urban planners and landscape architects. To feed these processes even better and to know what would be an optimal solution for certain challenges, city data were studied and linked to scalable GIS mapping in the ‘smart city planner’. This tool gives the decision maker the possibility to quickly have an overview of an area and can be used in a stakeholder process to provide relevant additional information and to define joint projects. The tool makes it possible to do this for all 90 neighbourhoods in the city.Overall the urban ecosystem governance in the city of Rotterdam has – with trial and error- lead to a series of innovative projects. The next steps are acceleration and scaling up to city and regional level. Valuing the crucial role of green blue infrastructure for several aspects of the quality of life in cities are paramount.

Suggested Citation

  • Tillie, Nico & van der Heijden, Roland, 2016. "Advancing urban ecosystem governance in Rotterdam: From experimenting and evidence gathering to new ways for integrated planning," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 139-144.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:62:y:2016:i:c:p:139-144
    DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2016.04.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901116301009
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.04.016?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Martí, Pablo & García-Mayor, Clara & Nolasco-Cirugeda, Almudena & Serrano-Estrada, Leticia, 2020. "Green infrastructure planning: Unveiling meaningful spaces through Foursquare users’ preferences," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    2. Vidya Anderson & Manavvi Suneja & Jelena Dunjic, 2023. "Sensing and Measurement Techniques for Evaluation of Nature-Based Solutions: A State-of-the-Art Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-39, July.

    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:eee:enscpo:v:62:y:2016:i:c:p:139-144. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/environmental-science-and-policy/ .

    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.