It has always been one of my career and life goals to bridge the gap between ecology,

Transcription

1 Nikki Sacha NRS 534 Landscape Ecology Landscape Ecology and Spatial Planning Introduction It has always been one of my career and life goals to bridge the gap between ecology, conservation, best management practices and policy. I have often questioned to what extent scientific findings are actually incorporated into the decision making process; many policy makers and town planners do not have a background in ecology. Likewise, most ecologists do not have a handle on policy making. I have always been interested in methods that seek to integrate the two in order to bring about smart and sustainable landscape development; this is vital for our planet to support its ecosystems in the future. I understand that many people do not care about ecology for the sake of its non human inhabitants, but there are still many other reasons why it is in the best interest of the human race to support sustainable development. An example includes ecosystem services; coastal wetlands filter stormwater runoff that would otherwise infiltrate freshwater fisheries. They also serve as buffers to coastal storms, reducing property damage and the risk to public wellbeing. If our policy makers are informed of innovative and sustainable methods in spatial planning, preserving ecosystem features that benefit ourselves and other biota, we will be saving ourselves from vast problems in the future. Landscape ecology is finally being incorporated into some planning circles as a method to bridge the gap. However, its overall effectiveness in sustainable spatial planning is dependent on certain factors.

2 Landscape Ecology s Current Influence on Spatial Planning After reading a dozen peer reviewed articles on spatial planning and landscape ecology, a common theme emerged: landscape ecology has immense potential as a method for sustainable spatial planning, but it is widely under utilized. There are several potential reasons. One of the main reasons was a lack of communication between those who make up the landscape ecology field. Landscape ecologists come from diverse backgrounds which often have different philosophies regarding landscape conservation. This difference in ideologies and theories can cause landscape ecologists to disagree with each other. As a result, a great deal of effort is put into debating which theories should be adopted rather than trying to apply this interdisciplinary approach to spatial planning and real world applications. Several of the authors, especially R. Hobbs, express a great frustration with landscape ecology because of its inability to integrate different areas of study from differing viewpoints, rendering it an ineffective tool for spatial planning. Since its different fields have not been sufficiently integrated, land use planners have not been able to apply the approach to spatial planning. In essence, landscape ecology has been reduced to a pleasant academic pastime. A 2002 article by Odpam et al. mentions that part of this disagreement is because landscape ecology has not sufficiently integrated geography with ecology. This is one of the historical reasons that landscape ecology got off to a confusing start. This may still be true, but there is also the issue that none of the papers discussed: economics vs. ecology. One of the reasons that landscape ecology is not be influencing spatial planning may be because of economic reasons. Developers want to make as much profit as possible. Town planners decisions are often influenced by economic constraints. If a development that promotes

3 conservation and sustainability of a landscape is exorbitantly higher in cost than a traditional development, it is likely that planners will choose the latter. Therefore, economic planning should be a vital component of landscape ecology if it is to be useful in spatial planning. One of the papers (Odpam et al., 2006) alludes to this, stating that ecological, social and economic factors need to be balanced components for effective sustainable spatial planning. Proposed Methods for Sustainable Spatial Planning Some of the papers point out which concepts of landscape ecology are most important for sustainable spatial planning. Connectivity and examining larger spatial scales were discussed several times as a vital ways to support populations and maintain healthy ecosystems. These are relatively new concepts to landscape development. However, they are not incorporated often enough; after working in a planning department for two years, connectivity has never been mentioned, nor has large spatial scale. The 2006 Odpam et al. paper urges that spatial scale is very important in spatial planning; by examining a larger area, connectivity across a landscape can be included in the planning process. For example, if a developer and town planner were going to develop a large parcel of land, they may want to include corridors between established species populations. Otherwise, populations that are isolated may ultimately weaken or die off from lack of genetic diversity, or the inability to reach breeding sites and food sources. A great example of this was discussed in the 2008 Odpam et al. paper; woodpecker habitat was present across a vast a spatial scale, but the patches were small and widely distributed from utilizing a larger special scale, spatial planning should incorporate connectivity between these habitat sites in order for the landscape to be sustainable for the species. Examining larger spatial scales was also helpful in Sweden city planning as discussed by

4 the 2002 Lofvenhaft et al. paper; looking at a larger area of land helped planners better understand overarching ecological processes and identify areas with the most ecological value for conservation. Another common theme that the papers share is that effective sustainable spatial planning incorporates everyone into the planning process. This includes landowners, stakeholders, developers, concerned citizens, land use planners, conservationists, etc. Odpam et al. (2006) stresses the need for compromise between these parties. This would result in a balance between the ecological, social and economics components that should be integrated into sustainable spatial planning. Although there were a few repeated themes among these papers, there were also many diverging methods proposed for use in spatial planning; it was not as if one or two main methods had been identified as effective ways to apply landscape ecology. Many of these methods are similar to each other, but some lean more towards conservation biology and others towards economic value of landscape metrics. Despite workshops and conferences, there are still many differing ideas regarding how landscape ecology should be applied to spatial planning. These methods included: A four step approach that includes examining case studies, models that include studies across time and space, models to develop guidelines for landscape conditions, and landscape level methods that can be used in interdisciplinary settings. A two step approach that examines which metrics are most valuable to landscape planning

5 The Ecological Network Concept which integrates more biology into the planning process (spatial pattern of a landscape needs to support sufficient populations, landscapes are able to change without degrading conditions for species, and that landowners, policy makers and stakeholders are involved in the decision making process and that their needs/desires are integrated with ecological fact. Spatial Solution a pattern of ecosystems that conserve and protect most biodiversity and natural processes in a region An increase of courses in landscape ecology at the university level I have shown a negative light on the current effectiveness of landscape ecology on spatial planning and with good reason. Many landscape ecologists cannot agree on one encompassing philosophy to guide the field because of differing ideologies. Meanwhile, spatial planning continues on, often times in an unsustainable nature. The 1997 paper by Forman and Collinge points out that the sooner sustainable planning occurs on a landscape, the higher its economic and ecological value; in other words, landscape ecologists have wasted a lot of time trying to agree rather than developing a useful tool that spatial planners can apply to development. However, there have been many examples where landscape ecology has been successfully applied. Success Stories The 2003 paper by Jim and Chen discusses how using the concepts of landscape ecology, the city of Nanjing, China was able to integrate green space networks into the densely populated city. Planners examined the landscape at different spatial scales to create a threetiered system that included all different stakeholders in the planning process. They were able to identify areas where future growth could take place and areas where connected conservation

6 lands could be preserved. Lofvenhaft et al. (2002) discusses a model that was used in Sweden to look at spatial aspects of biodiversity in an urban environment. It made use of biotopes (areas of high ecological value) and landscape ecology strategies that focused on planning priorities while still incorporating conservation. They, too, examined larger spatial scales in order to better understand the overarching ecological processes of the landscape. As a result, they were able to make informed decisions towards sustainable development. Conclusion It is fairly obvious from many of these papers that in order for landscape ecology to be useful for sustainable spatial planning, landscape ecologists need to develop a universally accepted method for the application of their field instead of disagreeing about ideologies. Until this happens on a wider scale, landscape ecology will only be an interesting area of study and nothing more. As demonstrated by Sweden and China, landscape ecology can be applied and be immensely useful for future sustainable development of a landscape. Despite many different proposed methods of application, two main concepts were apparent in these papers: connectivity between ecologically valuable areas and the examination of a larger spatial scale to understand overarching ecological processes of a landscape. With the human population and need for resources ever increasing, a method for sustainable development is absolutely critical to preserve our ecosystems, the biota they support and the ecosystem services they provide. If landscape ecology can assert itself as a useful tool for sustainable development, spatial planning methodology could be completely transformed.

7 Annotated Bibliography Antrop, M The language of landscape ecologists and planners: a comparative content analysis of concepts used in landscape ecology. Landscape and Urban Planning, 55: This paper explores some of the reasons why landscape ecologists and planners have a difficult time finding common ground despite sharing similar areas of study and interest. The authors point out that communication is the key for landscape ecology to be effectively applied in the planning process; however this can difficult because often times ecologists and planners come from such different backgrounds with different philosophies and concepts causing them to follow different rules. The paper compares these different ideologies, concepts and theories and explores misunderstandings to develop an integrated interdisciplinary approach. As it turns out, overlapping concepts of interest include land use, land cover, spatial structure and pattern and changes in a landscape. Figure 4 in the paper perfectly illustrates this via a complex ven diagram. I was surprised that the paper boldly states that all planners encourage the involvement of all people involved and affected by landscape planning I am not sure that this can be applied to all planners, although I absolutely agree this should be the philosophy in mind. Botequilha, A. and J. Ahern Applying in landscape ecological concepts and metrics in sustainable landscape planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 59: This paper calls for a common framework that uses ecological knowledge in landscape planning and they make note of several quantitative methods from landscape ecology to do so. They give a two step sustainable landscape planning perspective that takes into account vertical and horizontal aspects that help to identify which landscape metrics are useful in effective and sustainable landscape planning. Specifically, they examine structure, function and change as these metrics and how it is in the best interest of planners to solidly understand how spatial structure can affect the processes within it and that management can affect that structure. One of the most important aspects that this paper points out is the importance of connectivity between landscapes in land use planning and conservation. I do not think this is taken into consideration nearly enough by planners our landscapes are extremely fragmented by roads, parking lots and large developments. I was encouraged to read that one of the metrics the authors propose is fragmentation Forman, R. and S. Collinge Nature conserved in changing landscapes with and without spatial planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 37: In a very interesting study, the authors of this paper compared landscapes that transformed randomly to those that were spatially planned. In other words, they compared landscapes where development occurred without any thought being given to sustainability to one that did.

8 They proposed spatial solution, a pattern of ecosystems that conserve and protect most biodiversity and natural processes in a region. They found that through spatial solution, with spatial planning, more ecologically valuable lands are protected. They also examined if the time period that spatial planning begins makes a difference. They found that the sooner it starts, the more high value land gets protected. At first I thought that this was all rather obvious, but this paper was written in 1997 so this may have been new ground at the time. One thing I really liked about this paper is that it provides a simple and effective solution that does not have to wait for time consuming extensive scientific research it can begin now. The spatial solution provides simple patterns and principles and is especially effective during the first 40% removal of landscape vegetation. Hobbs, R Future landscapes and the future of landscape ecology. Landscape and Urban Planning, 37: 1 9. This is a very interesting paper in which the author expresses frustration that landscape ecology has failed to live up to its potential as a useful tool in landscape planning because the different areas of study that comprise it have not been sufficiently integrated into a practical form that can be applied by land use planners. He feels that landscape ecologists have not applied themselves to the field on which they are supposed to have an impact; if it does not choose to apply itself, it will be reduced to a mere pleasant academic pastime. I liked this paper I could almost hear the annoyance in Hobbs writing. I agree with his assertions the fact that I am in a policy oriented graduate program and had not even heard about landscape ecology proves Hobbs point. Although it is difficult for people of such diverse backgrounds (landscape architecture, policy, ecology, etc.) to come together under the umbrella of one area of study, it is vital in order for planners to make informed decisions for our future. As Hobbs writes, the future is not somewhere we are going; it is something we are making. I am keeping in mind that this paper was written in 1997 I know that much progress has been made but I still think that this is a relevant issue. Jim, C.Y., and S.S. Chen Comprehensive greenspace planning based on landscape ecology principles in compact Nanjing city, China. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65: This paper explores the integration of landscape ecology in urban planning via integrated greenspace networks in the densely populated city of Nanjing, China. This method of planning took into consideration the imminent future growth of the city and made smart, sustainable choices in how to best manage critical habitat, recreation areas and the environmental benefits of the land. In other words, they identified areas that could be used for future growth and preserved ecologically important ones. I found it interesting that they considered three different scales: metropolis, city and neighborhood. This created a three tiered greenspace system that creates an alternative method to urban planning. I also like this because it

9 addresses large to small scale so that even everyday citizens are involved in this process. It was encouraging to finally read about an actual application of sustainable urban planning that utilized the principles of landscape ecology. Lofvenhaft, K., C. Bjorn, and M. Ihse Biotope patterns in urban areas: a conceptual model integrating biodiversity issues in spatial planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 58: In this paper, the authors present a model that incorporates spatial aspects of biodiversity into planning an urban environment (in Sweden) by utilizing information sources, biotopes and the presentation of strategies that incorporate priorities in planning. This type of model is really needed in Sweden because they have noticed a dramatic decline in species diversity because of fragmentation they decided to look a much larger spatial scale in order to better understand overarching ecological processes of the landscape. They also developed ways using IR imagery and aerial photographs to identify ecologically valuable biotopes which are described as crucial components of a functioning ecosystem. I found this to be quite a valuable tool with vast potential in the United States if this methodology were used, planners could look a larger spatial scale and identify areas that are environmentally valuable to the balance of an ecosystem and make development plans around those regions. Opdam, P., R. Foppen, and C. Vos Bridging the gap between ecology and spatial planning in landscape ecology. Landscape Ecology, 16: This paper presents a four part approach to integrating the study of ecology and landscape evaluation. The four components include case studies focusing on different scales and organisms, models that include studies across time and space, models to develop guidelines for landscape conditions, and landscape level methods that can be used in interdisciplinary settings. The authors feel that the last two parts are underrepresented in landscape ecology and call for the entire field to further mature so that it is a useful tool. I agree with the authors that it is necessary to aggregate ecological knowledge for spatial planning application. The authors back this up by stating that this is because geography and ecology have not adequately integrated disciplines. However, their reasoning is based on historical context. I understand how this may have put the founders of landscape ecology at odds, and even today to some extent, but it is more than that. I believe that although much of landscape ecology s ineffectiveness is due to lack of common ground between the disciplines that comprise it, much of it is because economic gain takes precedence in landscape planning. In other words, landscape ecology will be more effective when planners actually start using it in their work. It would do the field well if those who belong to it would stop bickering over semantics. The authors urge, and I agree, landscape planners to pay more attention to bridging the gap between ecology and planning; it is time for actual application.

10 Opdam, P., Steingrover, E., and S. van Rooij Ecological networks: A spatial concept for multi actor planning of sustainable landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 75: In this paper, the authors propose using the ecological network concept to integrate biological conservation into sustainable landscape development. They stand by its credibility because it meets three essential criteria: the spatial pattern of a landscape needs to support sufficient populations to maintain a healthy ecosystem (therefore promoting connectivity), landscapes are able to change without degrading conditions for target species and that landowners, policy makers and stakeholders are involved in the decision making process and that their needs/desires are integrated with ecological fact. I was in favor of this paper s stance that ecological, social and economic factors be balanced and that in order to be balanced there will need to be compromise. They also suggest that whenever possible, alternative solutions be proposed and considered in the decision making process. I was glad that this paper mentioned economics: a sustainable development planned will not be considered by spatial planners if it is extremely expensive. Therefore, economics needs to be incorporated for these sustainable landscape developments to be cost effective. Opdam, P., R. Foppen, R. Reijnen, and A. Schotman The landscape ecological approach in bird conservation: integrating the metapopulation concept into spatial planning. The International Journal of Avian Science, 137: The Netherlands claims that habitat fragmentation is a major cause of species decline but they do not have much evidence to support this. This paper shows that birds are affected by spatial distribution in their habitats. It addresses how landscape ecology principles can be used to address problems caused by habitat fragmentation. By studying patterns correlated with spatial characteristics, the authors discovered that patterns in local extinction frequency and recolonization were found to be related to habitat patch size. In other words, fragmentation is a threat to avian species depending on spatial scale. I found it very interesting that the study showed that it was actually the species ability to redistribute after fragmentation that determined success rates (or decline rates). Although fragmentation plays a huge role and is the reason the species need to redistribute in the first place, it is not the sole cause of species decline. In the case of the Spotted Woodpecker, there is plenty of suitable habitat, but it is very spread out and the patches are small the fate of this bird depends on its ability to adapt to its altered landscape. I think that incorporating corridors between sites would be a vital component of sustainable landscape planning in this situation because it would enhance connectivity.

11 Termorshuizen, J.W., and P. Opdam Landscape services as a bridge between landscape ecology and sustainable development. Landscape Ecology, 24: This paper presents two prerequisites for landscape ecology to meet before it can be an effective and useful tool in landscape planning. It needs to have a valuation system that shows how landscape values are related to changes to the physical landscape. The second is the need for a decentralized decision making process; that is, a process that involves all different areas of study to best plan for a landscape s future, also known as collaborative planning. I was intrigued by the authors development of what they refer to as the structure function value chain which connects spatial landscape characteristics, the level of landscape function and economic value as a framework for landscape ecological knowledge. Using this model, one can determine landscape services via collaborative methodology. Their hope is that this will get people in a sustainable development mindset. In my opinion, it might. I also think that it puts too much of an emphasis on economic value on our ecosystems and does not take into account environmental preservation economics is very important in this process, but the two need to be balanced. However, it may be a step in the right direction as far as getting decision makers to actually start thinking about sustainability, even if they do so solely for economic gain. Vos, W., and H. Meekes Trends in European cultural landscape development: perspectives for a sustainable future. Landscape and Urban Planning, 46: The authors explore the use of landscape ecology as a means to help deal with the problem they are having in Europe managing old cultural landscapes in a sustainable way that incorporates economics, farming and the environment they want a multi functioning landscape. They discuss how landscape ecology can incorporate numerous viewpoints into landscape planning and management. I appreciated the fact that the authors of this paper were in favor of incorporating environmental protection into their sustainable landscape model, as opposed to the Termonshuizen and Opdam (2009) paper which did not. However, this paper did not propose actual solutions or methodologies to acquire a sustainable multi purpose landscape. Regardless, this paper is a great start to getting the process started. The fact that it stresses that ecosystem loss and degradation needs to be addressed and that the importance of nature is not sufficiently addressed in economic and landscape planning is encouragingperhaps if enough papers recognize these missing links, spatial planners will start including them in development plans. Wu, J. and R. Hobbs Key issues and research priorities in landscape ecology: An idiosyncratic synthesis. Landscape Ecology, 17: This paper reviews the views of landscape ecologists from the US Regional Association of International Association of Landscape Ecology that hosted the 2001 session, Top 10 List for Landscape Ecology in the 21 st Century. This talk highlighted the issues and challenges facing

12 the field. The paper identified numerous issues and research topics that account for the various perspectives. One of the more interesting issues that arose during the symposium was the topic of integration between basic research and applications. Many landscape ecologists felt that landscape ecology was not being sufficiently applied to the planning process. They offered some potential solutions to this issue which included developing research projects that focus on real life issues, improving communication between ecologists and planners and incorporating landscape ecology into university level curriculums.