integrating urban planning and ecological sustainability 22

8/6/2019 Integrating Urban Planning and Ecological Sustainability 22

1/16

In

S

tegrating urban planning and Ecological

ustainability:A Multidimensional Framework

Malm University

Department of Urban StudiesSustainable Urban Management

Global Urban Challenges, BY603E, 15 credits

NikodmosTakeleGeberetsadikAutumnSemester,2010


2/16

Abstract An ecologically sound sustainable urban development pattern has been highlighted as a major

principle in urban development in recent years which was followed by a concern regarding the

sufficiency of urban planning in delivering sustainable urban development. Consequently many

authors have proposed planning frameworks that integrate urban planning and ecological

sustainability. However there is still need for an all-encompassing and comprehensive framework to

integrate urban planning and ecological sustainability. Based on a synthesis of desirable

characteristics of prior integrated planning frameworks, various planning paradigms and case studies

a comprehensive framework is proposed to integrate urban planning and ecological sustainability. A

case study on the city of Malm has also provided interesting aspects that empower the framework

proposed.

Keywords: Urban planning, ecological sustainability, Integrated planning

1. IntroductionUnrestrained urban growth constrains sustainable urban development (UN-Habitat 2009)

giving rise to unsustainable patterns such as over exploitation of natural resources, ecosystem

destruction and environmental pollution. The widely accepted 1987 Brundtland report Our

Common Future which calls for sustainable development - development that meets the needs

of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs

imply the need for adopting sustainable development paths in urbanization, where much of

the global environmental problems can be traced back to.

Intensifying environmental problems and the global need for sustainable urban development

has led some practitioners and authors to question the sufficiency of urban planning indelivering sustainable urban development. The UN-Habitat global report on human

settlements (2009) views mainstream urban planning as narrow and too procedural to contend

with the multi-faceted contemporary urban problems and echo the need for planning

approaches that respond to urban sustainability concerns. Similarly many authors (Slocombe

1992 and 1993, Campbell 1996, He et al. 2010) have recognized the apparent shortcomings in

urban planning to tackle contemporary environmental concerns and consequently proposed

different frameworks to address the shortcomings through integrating urban planning and

ecological sustainability.

2


3/16

Planning is a complex task simply because the subject matter involved is multitemporal,

multivariate and multidimensional (Lein 2003). Urban planning is no different and

integrating it with ecological sustainability, i.e. integrated planning, will add to the

dimensions and variables of planning. Previous integrated planning frameworks proposed do

not wholly capture the variables and dimensions associated with integrating ecological

sustainability and urban planning. Hence there is still need for an all-encompassing and

comprehensive framework that can capture all the dimensions and variables associated with

integrating urban planning and ecological sustainability.

2. Purpose of the StudyThe aim of this study is to present a comprehensive framework for integrating urban planning

and ecological sustainability that captures all the associated variables and dimensions.

3. MethodThe study comprises of two parts. The first part is the presentation of the framework which

will be achieved through a review and synthesis of desirable characteristics of prior

integrating frameworks, urban planning paradigms and case studies.

Fainstein (2000) and Bulkely (2005) also suggested empiricism and best practices provide the

basis for policy transfer and learning for sustainable urban development, hence, the second

part will be a case study on the city of Malm with the aim of exploring additional aspects tothe framework to better operationalize the integration of ecological sustainability with urban

planning. A case study is an empirical investigation of a real life phenomenon (Yin 2003).

Semi-structured interviews (see A1) and review of relevant articles and publications are the

methods used to conduct the case study.

3.1. ProcessAfter the preparation of semi-structured questions, the questions were communicated to the

city planning office via email with purposes clearly stated and elaborated. Semi-structured

questions are preferred in situations where it is desired for the interviewee to take a leadingrole and provide in-depth information about the phenomenon being researched without being

bounded (see Yin 2003), which was desired in this study. The questions were soon replied

with the required information and additional documents providing in-depth information on the

questions raised. A second and final group of questions were also communicated to the

Environment department (see A2) which was replied in the same manner. A separate

questionnaire was prepared to the environment department since it was important to have a

look on some of the issues from the vantage point of the environment department.

3


4/16

4. Theory4.1. Urban Planning

Planning is the intervention to alter existing course of events (Campbell et al. 2008). It is the

gathering and analysis of information to forward the general welfare through guiding a broadrange of human, economic and other development activities (Friedmann 1987).

Correspondingly urban planning is regarded as a category of spatial planning that gives

geographical expressions to the economic, social, cultural and ecological will of a society

guided by a scientific orientation, an administrative technique and a policy (He J. et al. 2010,

Campbell 1996, Slocombe 1992). Scholars usually identify two elements of urban planning:

Master planning and comprehensive planning. Master plans also referred to as end-state and

blue-print plans are spatial or physical plans that depict on a map future state of an urban

area when the plan is realized (UN-Habitat 2009). Comprehensive plans based on the

requirements of master plans propone that planning system should plan towns as a whole and

in detail through regulating land use and the design and construction of buildings (ibid). In its

most detailed stage comprehensive planning is referred as regulatory planning.

The fixation of urban planning on space mainly dominated by engineering and economic

perspectives and rigid administrative boundaries has led to its criticism. Urban planning is

criticized to neglect interdisciplinary approaches halting the examination of substantive issues

critical to urban development. Particularly ecologists have criticized urban planning for lack

of consideration of the links and trade-offs between economic and social variables and

ecological sustainability.

4.2. Ecological sustainabilityThe environmental concerns on our planet have expanded dramatically in recent decades and

are now among the most serious challenges affecting peoples well- being around the globe.

Addressing environmental degradation and ensuring ecological sustainability are inseparably

linked to reducing poverty and improving peoples lives (WDR 2007).Ecological

sustainability is defined as the capacity of ecosystems to maintain their essential services and

processes and to preserve biodiversity in the long run. More on a sustainable development

approach, Callicott et al. (1997) defines ecological sustainability as meeting human needswithout compromising the health of the environment. In the current study the latter definition

is adopted in the context of ecologically sustainable urban development.

A scalar classification of land-uses made by Forman and Godron (1986) spanning from the

most pristine to the most modified landscape based on the intensity of human intervention

puts the urban landscape at the most modified with proportionate pressure and degradation on

the physical environment which is also manifested in the ecological footprints of many cities.

The ecological footprint analysis (Wackernagel et al. 1996) is a comprehensive measurement

tool to estimate the pressure of a defined human settlement (e.g. a city) on the physical

environment in terms of resource consumption and waste generation. The ecological footprint

4


5/16

Table 1: Aspects of ecologically sustainable urbanization

greenhouse gas emissions are reduced and serious climate change mitigation and adaptation

actions are implemented;

urban sprawl is minimized and more compact towns and cities served by public transport

are developed;

non-renewable resources are sensibly used and conserved;

renewable resources are not depleted;

the energy used and the waste produced per unit of output or consumption is reduced;

the waste produced is recycled or disposed of in ways that do not damage the wider

environment; and

the ecological footprint of towns and cities is reduced.

Adopted from UN-Habitat report (2009)

of a city indicates the land area necessary to sustain current levels of resource consumption

and waste discharged by the population in the city. Subsequently different authors (Newman

et al. 2008 Rees et al. 1996) have computed ecological footprint analysis for various cities.

Vancouver was estimated to require more than 19 times larger than its home territory to

support its consumption on 1996 levels. Londons ecological footprint on 2000 consumption

levels was calculated to be 42 times the citys bio capacity and 293 times its geographicalarea. Similarly on a national level the Netherlands ecological footprint was calculated to be 15

times larger than its territory. Conversely developing countries like India had smaller

footprint than it could support within its geographical boundaries. In general Humanities

ecological footprint was calculated to exceed natures supportive capacity by 30% on 1996

consumption levels and it is plausible that these figures has continued to increase given

increasing population and economic growth.

Ecological footprints are much higher in urban areas (or societies) where constant input of

material and energy from nature is required to feed their citizens and to build and operate theirproduction and infrastructure facilities that continuously cater them with goods and services

(Wackernagel et al. 1996). This is also accompanied by a proportionate increase in waste

load. The pressure on green spaces and forests that is caused as a result of expansion of cities

also challenges natures assimilative capacity leading to further ecological degradation. The

ecological consequences of these are profound both for urban residents and beyond (Turner

1994).

Consequently many authors in the field (Scolombe 1992, Ziperer 2000, Wacernagel and Rees

1996) and international documents (UN-Habitat 2009) have called for sustainable urban

development patterns. The materialization of sustainable urbanization entails sustainable

5


6/16

patterns in land use, consumption and waste management. Aspects of sustainable urbanization

are presented in table 1. Authors like Scolombe (1991 and 1992), Campbell (1996), Simons

and Staalduine (2004) and Niemel (1999) argue that the materialization sustainable

urbanization requires the effective integration of ecological sustainability with urban

planning. Staalduine and Simons (2004) identify three main advantages of integration: Firstly,

both policy areas need each other. This point is also enforced by Niemel (1999) in the

authors argument that both research and practice of urban sustainability would benefit from

the integration, as ecology would benefit from the social science roots in urban planning and

urban planning would benefit from better understanding of urban ecosystems. Secondly,

experiences in the implementation of urban spatial policy and environmental policy indicate

that benefits can only be achieved through good cooperation. Thirdly, it is argued that

separate production of urban and environmental plans would result in a great deal of

professional and political effort, time and money. Subsequently integrating frameworks were

proposed by many authors to beget sustainable urbanization.

5. Integration FrameworkA framework is a structure of possible courses of action or a preferred approach towards a

notion or a phenomenon. In this study integration framework or integrated planning

framework refers to preferred approaches towards integrating urban planning and ecological

sustainability.

In section 1 it is argued that integrated planning is multitemporal, multivariate andmultidimensional. Hence a framework for integrated planning should embrace similar

attributes. Based on a review of case studies, urban planning paradigms and previous

integrated planning frameworks a framework is proposed that portrays the temporal

dimensions of integrating urban planning and ecological sustainability. The temporal

dimensions are pre-integration conditions, in-integration dimensions and post-integration

dimensions. Such a temporal framework is argued to capture all the variables and dimensions

associated with integrating urban planning and ecological sustainability. For instance pre-

integration conditions capture the pre-condition variables imperative to integrated planning.

While in-integration dimensions capture the procedural and substantive variables necessary

for integrated planning. Post-integration dimensions are about monitoring and evaluation ofthe integrated planning and are also about the framework itself in that they create a feedback

and self-improvement mechanism for the framework.

As it is argued in section 1, previous integration frameworks do not wholly capture the

variables and dimensions associated with integrated planning. For instance Wackernagel et al.

(1996) and Slocombes (1993) integration frameworks only addresses in-integration

dimensions. Similarly Campbells (1996) framework only captures procedural and substantive

paths in in-integration neglecting pre-integration and post-integration dimensions. He J. et al.

(2010) could be the most comprehensive integration framework so far but it still misses

important in-integration dimensions and pre-integration conditions which are found to be

6


7/16

relevant in the case studies reviewed. Hence a framework that is argued to be comprehensive

and can capture all the variables and dimensions of integrating urban planning and ecological

sustainability is proposed in the next section.

5.1. Integration framework ProposedPre-integration Conditions

The possibilities of achieving integration are to a considerable extent, a function of certain

pre-integration conditions. These conditions mainly represent contextual and institutional

factors that determine integration which are also posited as policy level integration of urban

planning and ecological sustainability.

Legislative and political Support: integration of ecological sustainability with urban

development at the decision (or planning) stage requires a legitimate base to channel plansand policies towards integration. Different authors/practitioners (Berg 2004, Staalduine and

Simons 2004, Piro 2004) identify four areas of policy level integrations or legislative support

towards integrated planning i.e. legislations at the regional (for e.g. EU), national, provincial

and municipal levels with their respective opportunities and obstacles for integration.

Staalduine and Simons (2004) argue that both horizontal (e.g. spatial planning with

environmental planning) and vertical (e.g. regional level planning with municipal planning)

integration are facilitated by appropriate rules and procedures to guide them. Case studies in

Australia and Canada (Slocombe 1993) show that competing interests of various government

and private agencies and lack of policy to guide their relationship to hinder integrated

planning and management efforts of forests in the Alps and Alberta. These hindrances were

also rendered to be manifestations of lack of political attention given to ecological

sustainability. Similarly He J. et al. (2010) identify lack of legislative support and government

attention as the major bottlenecks towards integrated planning in china and propose

institutional collaboration of urban planning and environmental planning agencies and the

promotion of issues of ecological sustainability to gain more public support and political

ground. Similar types of problems were avoided to a limited extent in The United States

(Miller et al. 2004) and The Netherlands (Berg et al. 2004) due to early efforts to accompany

environmental concerns with appropriate legislations. However problems related to vertical

integration were apparent in The United States giving rise to the recognition that regional,state and urban planning are interdependent and the essence of finding means to create

meaning for regional and state legislations and policies at the municipal level.

Authors like Campbell (1996) view legislative and political support as direct correlate of

public awareness and concern. Campbell envisions that if the public is concerned and aware

about environment issues, they will vote for candidates with the best environmental records

and promised legislation. These implies that efforts to enhance awareness among the public to

potentially result in legislative and political support towards integrated planning.

7


8/16

Financial support: given the limited availability of resources; planners and policy makers are

taken to prioritize short-term and local benefits of the economy rather than the long-term and

global benefits of ecologically sustainable urban planning. Studies (Oosterveld 2004 and

Gibbs 1996) in Canada and Britain reveal that the political viability of short-term gains of

economic aspects secure financial precedence of politicians resulting in limited finance to

incorporate ecological sustainability in decision making. Coenen (2004) frames lack of

finance as one of the major factors halting the incorporation of ecological planning in urban

planning in The Netherlands. Gibbs argues that making integrated planning the blueprint for

approving grants and budgets would ensure integrated planning. Staalduine and Simons

(2004) go deeper to suggest an integration of environment and urban planning budgets and

recommend laws and regulations to be flexible enough to warrant the usage of funds in a

wider sense.

In-integration Dimensions

In-integration dimensions represent substantive and procedural approaches necessary to

realize the integration of urban planning and ecological sustainability.

Ecological knowledge of the city1: integrating ecological sustainability and urban planning

requires an ecological knowledge of the urban area the planning activity is intended for.

Efforts towards integration in Western Europe were mainly halted or limited in scope due to

lack of such information and knowledge (Stren et al. 1992). In The Netherland studies

(Staalduine et al. 2004, Berg 2004) show that problems related to incorporating environmental

concerns into urban planning emanate from lack of ecological knowledge. Similarly inFinland, Niemel (1999) highlights that scarcity of ecological knowledge weakened integrated

planning.Lack of ecological knowledge intricate finding explanations for ecological

phenomenon and predicting changes as urbanization proceeds limiting possibilities of

integration (ibid).

Moreover integration of regional and state environmental planning and policies into city

planning is dependent on ecological knowledge of the city. Slocombe (1993) argues that

planning and management frameworks should be locally developed and locally relevant. An

area specific documentation and research of ecology examining its interrelationship with the

economy and societal way of life in the area is necessity for the production of city relevant

integration framework of city planning and ecological sustainability (Campbell 1996,

Slocombe 1992 and 1993 and He J. et al. 2010) and translating regional and national policies

to the municipal context (Coenen 2004). Ecological knowledge of the city is also a

precondition for ecosystem approaches, which is presented as an in-integration dimension in

the present study.

Ecosystem approaches2: integration of urban planning and ecological sustainability requires

the understanding of the interaction of socioeconomic aspects with the environment within a

city and the method to reflect it in planning. An ecosystem approach is a methodology ofanalyzing an entity (a system), its environment and the interactions between them

8


9/16

(Slocombe 1992). The ecosystem approach brings a systematic, holistic approach to analyze

complex set of interrelationships providing higher clarity and a wide set of factors in

analyzing the prospects of decisions. An urban ecosystem approach yields knowledge and

information for policy makers regarding trade-offs and synergy between socioeconomic and

ecological values at various spatial, temporal and management scales (UNU/IAS 2003). Such

information and knowledge will aid planners in visualizing and guiding planning activities

towards optimal and healthy interdependence between socioeconomic values and ecological

values and limits. Furthermore ecosystem approaches mandate better integration of

environmental information in planning and facilitate locally appropriate, self-reliant

sustainable action (Slocombe 1992).

The nature of ecosystem approaches warrants methodologies such as participatory

approaches and multidisciplinary data collection and analysis. This has led some scholars to

redefine the role of the planner in the face of dealing with a wide range of actors and

disciplines in the planning and decision making process. In the face of dealing with variousactors and disciplines Campbell (1996) identifies the role of the planner as a translator, in

which the planner translates professional languages across various disciplines to create an

understanding of each others language, reasoning and priority. Related to participatory

approaches, the communicative model (Healey 1996) proposes that planning practices should

enable purposes to be communicatively discovered. In this model the role of the planner is to

provide information, listen to peoples stories and assist in forging consensus among differing

views. Consensus decision making is particularly important in the prevalence of actors with

disparate viewpoints (e.g. economists and ecologists), since it enables disparate viewpoints to

work toward a mutually acceptable and politically supportable position (Mackenzie 1993).

Post-Integration Dimensions

Post-integration dimensions mainly represent evaluation and monitoring activities of plans to

continuously enable an incremental integration of urban planning and ecological

sustainability.

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA): SEA evaluates the environmental impacts of

policies, plans, and programs and their alternatives (Therivel et al. 1992 cited from Shepered

et al. 1996).SEA is a post-integration pre-implementation exercise that is implemented to

ensure the compliance of plans and policies with sustainability principles i.e. SEA is aimed at

comparing various policy alternatives before major project level decisions take place. He J. et

al. (2010) argue that SEA should be fully incorporated in the whole process of planning

providing ecological sustainability relevant information at each stage of planning which is

labeled as full integration of SEA and planning (Partidario 2004). Similarly case studies in

Britain, United States, Sweden and Canada (Shepered 1996) and China (HE J. et al. 2010)

revealed that SEA enabled early examination of estimated impacts of policies and plans on

the urban environment and consideration of sustainability principles through providing a

systematic integrated framework. In the current integrated planning framework SEA can befully integrated into planning or it can assume the state of staple integration carried out only

9


10/16

Table 2: A multidimensional integration framework

Pre-integration

Conditions

In-integration

Dimensions

Post-integration

DimensionsLegislative support Ecological knowledge

of the city

Strategic environmental

assessment

Financial support Ecosystem approaches Sustainability indicators

Participatory approach

Determining the right

role of the planner

Consensus decision

making

once after the plan is defined. Either way its role will be to aid a better and locally relevant

integration of urban planning and ecological sustainability.

Sustainability indicators: sustainability indicators in general measure the movement towardsor away from sustainability. In the urban planning context, sustainability indicators serve as

an evaluation tool to inform and improve planning. A case study in three North American

cities (Miller 2004) reveals that sustainability indicators were used in these cities to measure

changes over time and convey information to facilitate monitoring the effectiveness of plans

and policies. In these cities sustainability indicators were aggregated to inform plans and

policies. Bell and Morse (1999) also support the aggregation of indicators to obtain a general

picture of sustainability. Sustainability indicators, particularly ecological sustainability

indicators, can create a feedback structure in which the effectiveness of integration of

ecological sustainability and urban planning can be measured and inform improved

integration of urban planning and ecological sustainability. Improved integration can bematerialized in terms of restructuring the pre-integration conditions or adopting a more locally

relevant in-integration dimension or both. The integration framework is summarized in Table

2.

6. Case: The city of Malm6.1. Background

Malm is the third largest city in Sweden, located in the southern tip of Skne with

approximately 295, 000 habitants. It is the capital of the region of Skne and at the centre ofthe resund region. Historically known as an industrial city, Malm has undergone structural

10


11/16

changes to transform to a sustainable knowledge based city. The structural changes came

about as a result of closure of industries and businesses which was followed by high

unemployment and budget deficits faced by the municipality in the 1990s. By the mid 1990s

the city put in place a vision to become a centre for knowledge and sustainable urban

development in the overall Skne and resund region and has been working (and is working)

tirelessly towards realizing that vision.

Malm has won international attention and recognition for its commitment towards

sustainable urban development particularly for its efforts towards creating a climate friendly

urban development structure. It is considered as an example of sustainable urban development

and it has been awarded the UN Habitat Scroll of Honour in 2009 (see unhabitat.org). The

leading role that the city is playing in sustainable urban development is the main reason why

it was chosen as a case study here.

6.2. Integrating City Planning and Ecological Sustainability in MalmReinventing Malm as a sustainable knowledge based city and discovering its role in the

resund and Skne region has provided unique opportunities for integrating urban planning

and ecological sustainability in Malm. The municipality has a vision of branding the city as a

centre of innovation and sustainable urban development in the resund and Skne region and

has many plans and ongoing projects to its effect. For the year 2020, Malm has committed

itself to become climate neutral and, for 2030, to run on 100 percent renewable energy.

Moreover long-term compact and mixed development, promotion of an environmentallyadapted traffic system, and strengthening biological diversity are targeted for. In the face of

defining the competitive edge of the city as a centre of knowledge and sustainable

development in the region, such efforts are hoped to attract and stimulate similar investments

in the city and associated employment providing the economic base of the city.

In the case of Malm, ecological sustainability is not only something to be integrated with

urban planning; it is also a vision in which the citys future is founded upon. Such a

phenomenon has provided unique opportunities to intertwine urban planning and ecological

sustainability in Malm.

The case study has also revealed specific issues that are of relevance to the framework

proposed which are presented below. However the case study was not exhaustive in the sense

that some aspects that are of relevance to the framework might have been overlooked.

An interesting pre-integration phenomenon in Malm is how Legislative and political

support for integrated planning is framed. European Union and state environmental

legislations are available but as the planning office pointed out, their role in influencing urban

planning is minimal and it is the municipals policies and goals that are often referred during

urban planning. This is also in par with the findings in The Netherlands (Coenen 2004) and

The United States (Piro 2004) in which there was much appeal to local policies and prioritiesrather than state and/or regional environmental policies. Apparently in Malm integration of

11


12/16

ecological sustainability and urban planning is mandated mainly due to the fact that it

coincides with the vision of the city. This conveys important information regarding the

effectiveness of regional policies and laws in influencing integration of urban planning and

ecological sustainability at the local or city level. It also empowers Slocombes (1993)

argument that a framework to integrate urban planning and ecological sustainability should be

locally relevant. Hence procedural and substantive paths proposed in the current framework to

better integrate regional and state environmental policies into urban planning could prove to

be necessary. Another interesting pre-integration phenomenon being practiced in Malm is

awareness creation. Malm works on various environmental awareness creation programs.

As Campbell (1999) highlighted this could help create public support (and hence vote) for

candidates with the best environmental records, paving the way towards legislative and

political support for integration of urban planning and ecological sustainability.

An interesting in-integration aspect that is being practiced in Malm is multidisciplinary

planning: The planning team in Malm comprises of architects, engineers, sociologists,economists, statisticians, biologists and others. This has enabled a multidisciplinary data

collection and analysis of phenomenon facilitating integrated planning.

Post-integrated planning activities are also conducted in Malm mainly by the environment

department. However as evidences suggest monitoring and evaluation activities conducted by

the environment department mainly relate to operations rather than plans and finding the best

environmentally sound ways of implementing plans.

7. ConclusionThe integration framework proposed is a contribution to the efforts towards exploring a

framework to integrate urban planning and ecological sustainability and it should provide a

general and comprehensive approach and ease the integration of urban planning and

ecological sustainability. The framework could also stimulate ideological and institutional

fusion of various disciplines and sectors and further pave the way towards holism in urban

planning.

As the relevance of much of the variables and dimensions adopted in the framework camefrom case studies, a similar case study was initiated on the city of Malm. The case study

revealed some new pre-integration and in-integration dimensions that were relevant to the

purpose of this study. Environmental awareness creation was an important pre-integration

variable that was identified, that attempts to alter the context in which the urban planning

takes place to a more auspicious one for integrated planning. An in-integration variable that

was identified is multidisciplinary planning which entails the communication and dealing of

actors with different views from various departments representing different interests. In such

cases in-integration dimensions like consensus decision making provided in the framework

could prove to be useful. Analogous to the framework, the case study on the city of Malm

also enforces the need for a locally relevant policy and framework to locally materialize theintegration of urban planning and ecological sustainability.

12


13/16

Notes

1. For more on ecological data collection and analysis see biotope mapping (Tripathi etal. 1993), ecological footprint analysis (Wackernagel et al. 1996), state of the

environment reporting (Jonet 1990)

2. For a review of ecosystem approaches including advantages and disadvantages seeSlocombe (1992 and 1993)

References

1. Bell S. and Morse S. Sustainability Indicators: Measuring the Immeasurable,EarthscanPublications Ltd., 1999.2. Berg M. D. Towards Urban Environmental Quality in The Netherlands. In Miller D.and Roo G.D, Integrating City Planning and Environmental Improvement: Practicable

Strategies for Sustainable Urban Development, Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 2004.

3. Bulkeley Harriet, Urban sustainability: learning from best practice? Environment andPlanning A, volume 38, 2006

4. Campbell Scott, Green Cities, Growing Cities, Just Cities? Urban Planning and theContradictions of Sustainable Development, Journal of the American Planning

Association, 1996.

5. Callicott J.B and Mumford K., Ecological Sustainability as a Conservation Concept,Conservation Biology Vol. 11 No. 11, 1997

6. Coenen F.H.J.M. Urban Development and the Role of Strategic Environmental PolicyPlanning: Experiences with the First Generation of Plans in The Netherlands. In MillerD. and Roo G.D, Integrating City Planning and Environmental Improvement:Practicable Strategies for Sustainable Urban Development, Ashgate Publishing Ltd.,2004.

7. Fainstein Susan S., New Directions in Planning Theory, 2000. In Scott Campbell andSusan Fainstein, Readings in Planning Theory, Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2003

8. Forman RTT and Godron M, Landscape Ecology. John Wiley and Sons, New York,1986

9. He J, et al, Framework for integration of urban planning, strategic environmentalassessment and ecological planning for urban sustainability within the context ofChina, Environ Impact Asses Rev, 2010.

10.Healey P. The Communicative Turn in Planning Theory and its Implications forSpatial Strategy Formation. In Campbell S. and Fainstein S., Readings in PlanningTheory, Blackwell Publishing, 1996.

11.Jonet W. C. Environmental indicators for state of the environment reporting,Information paper (Centre for Resource Management) Lincoln University, 1990. Canbe accessed online at http://hdl.handle.net/10182/1107

12.Lein, James K. Integrated Environmental Planning, Blackwell Publishing Company,2003.

13.Miller D. Design and Use of Urban Sustainability Indicators in Physical Planning: Aview From Cascadia. In Miller D. and Roo G.D, Integrating City Planning and13
http://hdl.handle.net/10182/1107http://hdl.handle.net/10182/1107http://hdl.handle.net/10182/1107


14/16


15/16

32.Yin Robert K. Applications of Case Study Research second edition, Sage PublicationsInc., 2003.

33.Zipperer W., Wu J., Pouyat R. and Steward, The Application of Ecological Principlesto Urban and Urbanizing Landscapes, Ecological Applications, Vol. 10, No. 3, 2000.

15


16/16

16

Annexes

A1. First Group Questions

- How are the urban planning and environmental management bodies setup in the municipality?Do they exist as separate entities?

- How do you compromise between different economic, social and political priorities andecological standards while planning?

- How would you characterize the legislative and political support for ecological planning?- How would you characterize the autonomy of the planning department and the city in general

to set forward ecological plans and standards?- Do you make use of current and up to date research and information in your planning?- What are the backgrounds of the planning team (sociologists, environmentalists, economists,

anthropologists etc) This is to find out whether there is a multidisciplinary approach inplanning

- Do you have a clear vision that every planning activity should pertain to?- Do you advocate stakeholder participation in planning?-

What methods do you use to influence the public attitude towards environmentally sustainablechoices?

A2. Second Group Questions

- Is there any legislation that supports the incorporation of environment sustainability variablesinto urban planning or is it just up to the will of the urban planners to consider environmentalvariables?Legislations could include European Union legislations, state legislations and

Municipality or regional legislations/agreements

- How is the financial commitment of the municipality in executing environmental agendas?- How much power and say does the environment department have in the urban planning of the

city of Malm?

- How much power and say does the environment department have in the urban planning of thecity of Malm?

- Can an urban plan be approved without the consent of the environment department?

integrating urban planning and ecological sustainability 22

Documents