IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i3p833-d203757.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating GeoDesign with Landscape Sustainability Science

Author

Listed:
  • Lu Huang

    (Smart City Research Center of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou Dianzi University, Hangzhou 310012, China)

  • Weining Xiang

    (Department of Geography and Earth Sciences, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC 28223, USA)

  • Jianguo Wu

    (School of Life Sciences & School of Sustainability, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287, USA)

  • Christoph Traxler

    (VRVis Zentrum für Virtual Reality und Visualisierung Forschungs-GmbH, 1220 Vienna, Austria)

  • Jingzhou Huang

    (Smart City Research Center of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou Dianzi University, Hangzhou 310012, China)

Abstract

With an increasing world population and accelerated urbanization, the development of landscape sustainability remains a challenge for scientists, designers, and multiple stakeholders. Landscape sustainability science (LSS) studies dynamic relationships among landscape pattern, ecosystem services, and human well-being with spatially explicit methods. The design of a sustainable landscape needs both landscape sustainability–related disciplines and digital technologies that have been rapidly developing. GeoDesign is a new design method based on a new generation of information technology, especially spatial information technology, to design land systems. This paper discusses the suitability of GeoDesign for LSS to help design sustainable landscapes. Building on a review of LSS and GeoDesign, we conclude that LSS can utilize GeoDesign as a research method and the designed landscape as a research object to enrich and empower the spatially explicit methodology of LSS. To move forward, we suggest to integrate GeoDesign with LSS from six perspectives: strong/weak sustainability, multiple scales, ecosystem services, sustainability indicators, big data application, and the sense of place. Toward this end, we propose a LSS-based GeoDesign framework that links the six perspectives. We expect that this integration between GeoDesign and LSS will help advance the science and practice of sustainability and bring together many disciplines across natural, social, and design sciences.

Suggested Citation

  • Lu Huang & Weining Xiang & Jianguo Wu & Christoph Traxler & Jingzhou Huang, 2019. "Integrating GeoDesign with Landscape Sustainability Science," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:3:p:833-:d:203757
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/833/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/833/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ekins, Paul, 2003. "Identifying critical natural capital: Conclusions about critical natural capital," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2-3), pages 277-292, March.
    2. Solow, Robert M., 1997. "Georgescu-Roegen versus Solow-Stiglitz," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 267-268, September.
    3. Tessa Eikelboom & Ron Janssen, 2015. "Comparison of Geodesign Tools to Communicate Stakeholder Values," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(6), pages 1065-1087, November.
    4. Ekins, Paul & Folke, Carl & De Groot, Rudolf, 2003. "Identifying critical natural capital," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2-3), pages 159-163, March.
    5. Daly, Herman E., 1997. "Georgescu-Roegen versus Solow/Stiglitz," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 261-266, September.
    6. Duque, José & Panagopoulos, Thomas, 2010. "Urban Planning throughout environmental quality and human well-being," Spatial and Organizational Dynamics Discussion Papers 2010-5, CIEO-Research Centre for Spatial and Organizational Dynamics, University of Algarve.
    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. Tianjie Li & Yan Huang & Chaoguang Gu & Fangbo Qiu, 2022. "Application of Geodesign Techniques for Ecological Engineered Landscaping of Urban River Wetlands: A Case Study of Yuhangtang River," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-21, November.
    2. Yoonshin Kwak & Brian Deal & Grant Mosey, 2021. "Landscape Design toward Urban Resilience: Bridging Science and Physical Design Coupling Sociohydrological Modeling and Design Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-17, April.
    3. Duy X. Tran & Diane Pearson & Alan Palmer & David Gray, 2020. "Developing a Landscape Design Approach for the Sustainable Land Management of Hill Country Farms in New Zealand," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-29, June.
    4. Angélica Valencia Torres & Chetan Tiwari & Samuel F. Atkinson, 2022. "Sustaining Human Nutrition in an Increasingly Urban World," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-16, June.
    5. Daniel Cronan & E. Jamie Trammell & Andrew (Anaru) Kliskey & Paula Williams & Lilian Alessa, 2022. "Socio-Ecological Futures: Embedded Solutions for Stakeholder-Driven Alternative Futures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-19, March.
    6. Stuhlmacher, Michelle & Andrade, Riley & Turner II, B.L. & Frazier, Amy & Li, Wenwen, 2020. "Environmental Outcomes of Urban Land System Change: Comparing Riparian Design Approaches in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    7. Sonali Sharma & Pawan Kumar Joshi & Christine Fürst, 2022. "Exploring Multiscale Influence of Urban Growth on Landscape Patterns of Two Emerging Urban Centers in the Western Himalaya," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-23, December.
    8. Wei Gao & Gengyu Chen & Fanying Jiang & Jiake Shen & Yuncai Wang, 2021. "To Act or Not to Act: Are Natural Landscapes a Key Force in the Resilience of Historic Urban Landscapes?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-33, September.

    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. Mircea Saveanu, 2014. "Sustainability as a Resource Distribution Constraint," Acta Universitatis Danubius. OEconomica, Danubius University of Galati, issue 10(2), pages 139-151, April.
    2. Herwig Winkler, 2010. "Sustainability through the implementation of sustainable supply chain networks," International Journal of Sustainable Economy, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(3), pages 293-309.
    3. Klauer, Bernd & Bartkowski, Bartosz & Manstetten, Reiner & Petersen, Thomas, 2017. "Sustainability as a Fair Bequest: An Evaluation Challenge," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 136-143.
    4. Kronenberg, Tobias, 2010. "Finding common ground between ecological economics and post-Keynesian economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1488-1494, May.
    5. 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.
    6. Roma, Antonio & Pirino, Davide, 2009. "The extraction of natural resources: The role of thermodynamic efficiency," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2594-2606, August.
    7. Bergquist, Ann-Kristin & Cole, Shawn A. & Ehrenfeld, John & King, Andrew A. & Schendler, Auden, 2019. "Understanding and Overcoming Roadblocks to Environmental Sustainability: Past Roads and Future Prospects," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 93(1), pages 127-148, April.
    8. Sousa, Tania & Domingos, Tiago, 2006. "Is neoclassical microeconomics formally valid? An approach based on an analogy with equilibrium thermodynamics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 160-169, June.
    9. Stefan Baumgärtner & Moritz A. Drupp & Martin F. Quaas, 2017. "Subsistence, Substitutability and Sustainability in Consumption," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(1), pages 47-66, May.
    10. Rezai, Armon & Taylor, Lance & Mechler, Reinhard, 2013. "Ecological macroeconomics: An application to climate change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 69-76.
    11. Germain, Marc, 2019. "Georgescu-Roegen versus Solow/Stiglitz: Back to a controversy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 168-182.
    12. Cook, David & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur, 2021. "An appraisal of interlinkages between macro-economic indicators of economic well-being and the sustainable development goals," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    13. Jean-Louis Combes & Pascale Combes Motel & Philippe Delacote, 2014. "Public expenses, credit and natural capital: Substitution or complementarity?," Working Papers halshs-00979191, HAL.
    14. Bartus, Gábor, 2008. "Van-e a gazdasági tevékenységeknek termodinamikai korlátja? [Is there a thermodynamic constraint on economic activity?]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(11), pages 1010-1022.
    15. Mircea Sˇveanu, 2014. "Energy and the Economics of Sustainability. The Entropy Paradox," Management of Sustainable Development, Sciendo, vol. 6(1), pages 1-5, August.
    16. Tisdell, Clem, 2001. "Globalisation and sustainability: environmental Kuznets curve and the WTO," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 185-196, November.
    17. Teixidó-Figueras, Jordi & Duro, Juan Antonio, 2015. "The building blocks of International Ecological Footprint inequality: A Regression-Based Decomposition," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 30-39.
    18. Combes, Jean-Louis & Delacote, Philippe & Combes Motel, Pascale & Yogo, Thierry Urbain, 2018. "Public spending, credit and natural capital: Does access to capital foster deforestation?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 306-316.
    19. Larch, Mario & Löning, Markus & Wanner, Joschka, 2018. "Can degrowth overcome the leakage problem of unilateral climate policy?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 118-130.
    20. Egoh, Benis & Rouget, Mathieu & Reyers, Belinda & Knight, Andrew T. & Cowling, Richard M. & van Jaarsveld, Albert S. & Welz, Adam, 2007. "Integrating ecosystem services into conservation assessments: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 714-721, September.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:3:p:833-:d:203757. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.