IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i13p5287-d378453.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Co-Creation of Knowledge for Ecosystem Services Approach to Spatial Planning in the Basque Country

Author

Listed:
  • Lorena Peña

    (Department of Plant Biology and Ecology, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), 48940 Leioa, The Basque Country, Spain)

  • Beatriz Fernández de Manuel

    (Department of Plant Biology and Ecology, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), 48940 Leioa, The Basque Country, Spain)

  • Leire Méndez-Fernández

    (Department of Plant Biology and Ecology, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), 48940 Leioa, The Basque Country, Spain)

  • María Viota

    (Department of Plant Biology and Ecology, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), 48940 Leioa, The Basque Country, Spain)

  • Ibone Ametzaga-Arregi

    (Department of Plant Biology and Ecology, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), 48940 Leioa, The Basque Country, Spain)

  • Miren Onaindia

    (Department of Plant Biology and Ecology, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), 48940 Leioa, The Basque Country, Spain)

Abstract

Sustainable development has to be based on scientific knowledge, social agreements, and political decisions. This study aimed to analyse the implementation of the ecosystem services approach (ESA) in the spatial planning of the Basque Country, via the co-creation of knowledge. This paper uses a proposal for a regional green infrastructure (GI) to examine the co-creation of knowledge process. It addresses the community of practice; a process of co-creation of knowledge through workshops and meeting, SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis using an online survey, and mapping and identification of the multifunctional areas that provide ecosystem services (ES) to develop a GI. Results indicate that ESA has been included in spatial planning actions at different scales (biosphere reserve, metropolitan area, and region). This subsequently created an avenue for understanding the political necessities at play, so that scientists can develop useful tools for sustainable development. The findings also draw attention to the importance of establishing a constructive and mutually comprehensible dialogue between politicians, technical experts and scientists. For ES to be part of spatial planning, ESA has to be taken into account at the beginning of the planning process. We conclude that building bridges between science and spatial planning can help establish science-based management guidelines and tools that help enhance the sustainability of the territory.

Suggested Citation

  • Lorena Peña & Beatriz Fernández de Manuel & Leire Méndez-Fernández & María Viota & Ibone Ametzaga-Arregi & Miren Onaindia, 2020. "Co-Creation of Knowledge for Ecosystem Services Approach to Spatial Planning in the Basque Country," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-18, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:13:p:5287-:d:378453
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/13/5287/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/13/5287/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert W. Kates, 2011. "From the Unity of Nature to Sustainability Science: Ideas and Practice," CID Working Papers 218, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    2. Rozas-Vásquez, Daniel & Fürst, Christine & Geneletti, Davide & Almendra, Osvaldo, 2018. "Integration of ecosystem services in strategic environmental assessment across spatial planning scales," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 303-310.
    3. Carmen, Esther & Watt, Allan & Carvalho, Laurence & Dick, Jan & Fazey, Ioan & Garcia-Blanco, Gemma & Grizzetti, Bruna & Hauck, Jennifer & Izakovicova, Zita & Kopperoinen, Leena & Liquete, Camino & Ode, 2018. "Knowledge needs for the operationalisation of the concept of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 441-451.
    4. Cortinovis, Chiara & Geneletti, Davide, 2018. "Ecosystem services in urban plans: What is there, and what is still needed for better decisions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 298-312.
    5. Lorena Peña & Miren Onaindia & Beatriz Fernández de Manuel & Ibone Ametzaga-Arregi & Izaskun Casado-Arzuaga, 2018. "Analysing the Synergies and Trade-Offs between Ecosystem Services to Reorient Land Use Planning in Metropolitan Bilbao (Northern Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, November.
    6. Onaindia, Miren & Peña, Lorena & de Manuel, Beatriz Fernández & Rodríguez-Loinaz, Gloria & Madariaga, Iosu & Palacios-Agúndez, Igone & Ametzaga-Arregi, Ibone, 2018. "Land use efficiency through analysis of agrological capacity and ecosystem services in an industrialized region (Biscay, Spain)," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 650-661.
    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. 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.
    2. Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Rechciński, Marcin & Tusznio, Joanna & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2022. "Divergent or convergent? Prioritization and spatial representation of ecosystem services as perceived by conservation professionals and local leaders," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    3. González-García, Alberto & Palomo, Ignacio & González, José A. & López, César A. & Montes, Carlos, 2020. "Quantifying spatial supply-demand mismatches in ecosystem services provides insights for land-use planning," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    4. Rosa, Josianne Claudia Sales & Geneletti, Davide & Morrison-Saunders, Angus & Sánchez, Luis Enrique & Hughes, Michael, 2020. "To what extent can mine rehabilitation restore recreational use of forest land? Learning from 50 years of practice in southwest Australia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    5. Nijhum, Farzana & Westbrook, Cherie & Noble, Bram & Belcher, Ken & Lloyd-Smith, Patrick, 2021. "Evaluation of alternative land-use scenarios using an ecosystem services-based strategic environmental assessment approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    6. Rémi Jaligot & Jérôme Chenal, 2019. "Integration of Ecosystem Services in Regional Spatial Plans in Western Switzerland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, January.
    7. Spyra, Marcin & La Rosa, Daniele & Zasada, Ingo & Sylla, Marta & Shkaruba, Anton, 2020. "Governance of ecosystem services trade-offs in peri-urban landscapes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    8. 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).
    9. Heiskanen, Aleksi & Hurmekoski, Elias & Toppinen, Anne & Näyhä, Annukka, 2022. "Exploring the unknowns – State of the art in qualitative forest-based sector foresight research," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    10. Miroshnyk, N.V. & Likhanov, A.F. & Grabovska, T.O. & Teslenko, I.K. & Roubík, H., 2022. "Green infrastructure and relationship with urbanization – Importance and necessity of integrated governance," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    11. Adams, Clare & Frantzeskaki, Niki & Moglia, Magnus, 2023. "Mainstreaming nature-based solutions in cities: A systematic literature review and a proposal for facilitating urban transitions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    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. Oscar Reicher & Verónica Delgado & José-Luis Arumi, 2021. "Use of Indicators in Strategic Environmental Assessments of Urban-Planning Instruments: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-18, November.
    14. Jennifer Hodbod & Emma Tebbs & Kristofer Chan & Shubhechchha Sharma, 2019. "Integrating Participatory Methods and Remote Sensing to Enhance Understanding of Ecosystem Service Dynamics Across Scales," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-30, August.
    15. Antonio Ledda & Marta Kubacka & Giovanna Calia & Sylwia Bródka & Vittorio Serra & Andrea De Montis, 2023. "Italy vs. Poland: A Comparative Analysis of Regional Planning System Attitudes toward Adaptation to Climate Changes and Green Infrastructures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-18, January.
    16. Przemysław Śleszyński & Adam Kowalewski & Tadeusz Markowski & Paulina Legutko-Kobus & Maciej Nowak, 2020. "The Contemporary Economic Costs of Spatial Chaos: Evidence from Poland," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-28, July.
    17. Menzori, Ivan Damasco & Sousa, Isabel Cristina Nunes de & Gonçalves, Luciana Márcia, 2021. "Urban growth management and territorial governance approaches: A master plans conformance analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    18. Fatemeh Mohammadyari & Ardavan Zarandian & Mir Mehrdad Mirsanjari & Jurate Suziedelyte Visockiene & Egle Tumeliene, 2023. "Modelling Impact of Urban Expansion on Ecosystem Services: A Scenario-Based Approach in a Mixed Natural/Urbanised Landscape," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-24, January.
    19. Ainscough, Jacob & Wilson, Meriwether & Kenter, Jasper O., 2018. "Ecosystem services as a post-normal field of science," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 93-101.
    20. Angela Colucci, 2023. "Resilience Practices Contribution Enabling European Landscape Policy Innovation and Implementation," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-15, March.

    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:12:y:2020:i:13:p:5287-:d:378453. 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.