As planners we may identify ourselves or be described as 'change-makers'. Planning and planners often get bad press about specific planning decisions or being too slow in coming forward with, and approving, new housing, for example. These labels and press coverage may however be more like rose-tinted glasses or a smoke screen than reality. So let's consider some facts, figures and recent events from the local to the national to the global.
The coal energy sector in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) represents both a significant economic hope and a considerable environmental threat for the country. One of the major problems of the coal industry is the disposal of large amounts of coal combustion residues. RECOAL was an EU-supported project (2005-7) whose objective was to develop remediation solutions for coal ash disposal (CAD) sites in BiH. Most of RECOAL's environmental fieldwork was based around TEP in the municipality of Tuzla, one of the biggest thermo-electric power plants in the country. Qualitative research was carried out to understand the environmental governance structure of the area and inform and test the acceptance of different remediation solutions proposed by RECOAL. Interviews with institutional stakeholders showed a highly complex institutional structure, where government institutions and industry are involved in complicated negotiations about the distribution of the liabilities resulting from TEP's pollution. Interviews among local residents show that locally organised action could help steer the policy-making process towards more sustainable solutions. Adapted from the source document.
This paper develops a framework for improved mainstreaming of ecosystem science in policy and decision-making within a spatial planning context. Ecosystem science is advanced as a collective umbrella to capture a body of work and approaches rooted in social-ecological systems thinking, spawning a distinctive ecosystem terminology: ecosystem approach, ecosystem services, ecosystem services framework and natural capital. The interface between spatial planning and ecosystem science is explored as a theoretical opportunity space to improve mainstreaming processes adapting Rogers' (2003) diffusion model. We introduce the twin concepts of hooks (linking ecosystem science to a key policy or legislative term, duty or priority that relate to a particular user group) and 'bridges' (linking ecosystem science to a term, concept or policy priority that is used and readily understood across multiple groups and publics) as translational mechanisms in transdisciplinary mainstreaming settings. We argue that ecosystem science can be embedded into the existing work priorities and vocabularies of spatial planning practice using these hooks and bridges. The resultant framework for mainstreaming is then tested, drawing on research funded as part of the UK National Ecosystem Assessment Follow-On programme (2012-2014), within 4 case studies; each reflecting different capacities, capabilities, opportunities and barriers. The results reveal the importance of leadership, political buy in, willingness to experiment outside established comfort zones and social learning as core drivers supporting mainstreaming processes. Whilst there are still significant challenges in mainstreaming in spatial planning settings, the identification and use of hooks and bridges collectively, enables traction to be gained for further advances; moving beyond the status quo to generate additionality and potential behaviour change within different modes of mainstreaming practice. This pragmatic approach has global application to help improve the way nature is respected and taken account of in planning systems nationally and globally.
This paper develops a framework for improved mainstreaming of ecosystem science in policy and decision-making within a spatial planning context. Ecosystem science is advanced as a collective umbrella to capture a body of work and approaches rooted in social-ecological systems thinking, spawning a distinctive ecosystem terminology: ecosystem approach, ecosystem services, ecosystem services framework and natural capital. The interface between spatial planning and ecosystem science is explored as a theoretical opportunity space to improve mainstreaming processes adapting Rogers' (2003) diffusion model. We introduce the twin concepts of hooks (linking ecosystem science to a key policy or legislative term, duty or priority that relate to a particular user group) and 'bridges' (linking ecosystem science to a term, concept or policy priority that is used and readily understood across multiple groups and publics) as translational mechanisms in transdisciplinary mainstreaming settings. We argue that ecosystem science can be embedded into the existing work priorities and vocabularies of spatial planning practice using these hooks and bridges. The resultant framework for mainstreaming is then tested, drawing on research funded as part of the UK National Ecosystem Assessment Follow-On programme (2012–2014), within 4 case studies; each reflecting different capacities, capabilities, opportunities and barriers. The results reveal the importance of leadership, political buy in, willingness to experiment outside established comfort zones and social learning as core drivers supporting mainstreaming processes. Whilst there are still significant challenges in mainstreaming in spatial planning settings, the identification and use of hooks and bridges collectively, enables traction to be gained for further advances; moving beyond the status quo to generate additionality and potential behaviour change within different modes of mainstreaming practice. This pragmatic approach has global application to help improve the way nature is respected and taken account of in planning systems nationally and globally.
