Functional ecological infrastructures: the need for regional spatial planning,

but by whom?

Per Angelstam et al.

INCLUDE’s four questions

• What characterizes a sustainable landscape, and how can it be evaluated?

• What are the critical impacts of infrastructure and traffic on environmental qualities, and are there critical limits in this impact?

• How can this impact be assessed and communicated to users?

• What are the remedies, and how can the planning process be improved

Nature values

Critical habitat lossP

rob

abil

ity

of

surv

ival

(%

)

Amount of habitat (%)

• Land cover data base

• The land cover providing resources (=habitat quality)

• Sufficiently large patches

• Sufficiently close together

• Habitat models for focal species– Generalists

• All forest

– Specialists• Coniferous• Deciduous• Mixed

a) b) c)

d) e) f)

g) h) i)

j) k) l)

0.4 1.00.6 0.8

Habitat suitability

There are SEVERAL

habitat networks

Scale and planning levels

• Strategic

• Tactical

• Operational

micro meso macroSpatial scale

Spatial scale

Informal planning process

Formal planning process

Strategic Tactical Opera-tional

National

Regional

Local

Governance arrangement

LobbyingEducationSocial learningThink-tank

Spatial planning GIS models

EIA

SEARegional governance

and assessment

?

Rospuda(Poland)

E 18 (Sweden)

Sustainable Forest Management

Water Framework Directive

Regional spatial planning

The social system• Stakeholder represent

sectors and level

• Multi-level governance

• Participation

The ecological system• Species of interest

(small and large area requirements)

• Land cover themes (representative)

• Analyses of which areas to protect, manage and restore

Promoting adaptive capacity

• Sector representation– Public - Private - Civil/NGO

• Multi-level governance– Local, regional, national, international

• Participation– A ladder with many steps from partnership to

information

Information

One-way communi-cation

Consultation

TokenismCommunity input heard but not heeded

Communi-cation

Two-way information exchange

Advisory committees

Local actors have advisory power; non-binding decisions

Cooperation

Local actors have input in management; are involved as assistants or guides; limited by management agencies

Joint management boards

Local actors participate in developing and implementing plans; local input plays more than just an advisory role

Partnership

Partnership of equals; joint decision-making institutiona-lised and formally recognised; control delegated to the local actors where feasible

Stakeholder participation ladder (Arnstein 1996)

Secondary

Primary

Principal

What do different sectors do?

• Planning levels– Strategic– Tactical– Operational

• Scale– Macro– Meso– Micro

• Spatial extent– Regional– Local

Sector Planning levels? Extent Scale

Strategic Tactical Operatio-nal

Transport + + + macro region

Forest + + + meso local

Agriculture - - + micro local

Catchment + - - macro region

Municipality + + - meso local

Europe’s West and East as a laboratory

Integration and networking among multiple “hubs”, each with:

• Management units (=landscape)– Infrastructure, agriculture/forestry,

conservation

• Research units– Humanities, social and natural sciences

• Education units– University and training

Levels of ambition

• Preservation

• Conservation

• Mitigation/restoration

• Adaptation