The capacities of institutions for the integration of ecosystem services in coastal strategic planning: The case of Jiaozhou Bay

This paper explains how the practice of integrating ecosystem-service thinking (i.e., ecological benefits for human beings) and institutions (i.e., organisations, policy rules) is essential for coastal spatial planning. Adopting an integrated perspective on ecosystem services (ESs) both helps understand a wide range of possible services and, at the same time, attune institution to local resource patterns. The objective of this paper is to identify the extent to which ESs are integrated in a specific coastal strategic planning case. A subsequent objective is to understand whether institutions are capable of managing ESs in terms of uncovering institutional strengths and weaknesses that may exist in taking ESs into account in existing institutional practices. These two questions are addressed through the application of a content analysis method and a multi-level analysis framework on formal institutions. Jiaozhou Bay in China is used as an illustrative case. The results show that some ESs have been implicitly acknowledged, but by no means the whole range. This partial ES implementation could result from any of four institutional weaknesses in the strategic plans of Jiaozhou Bay, namely a dominant market oriented interest, fragmented institutional structures for managing ESs, limited ES assessment, and a lack of integrated reflection of the social value of ESs in decision-making. Finally, generalizations of multi-level institutional settings on ES integration, such as an inter-organisational fragmentation and a limited use of ES assessment in operation, are made together with other international case studies. Meanwhile, the comparison highlights the influences of extensive market-oriented incentives and governments' exclusive responsibilities on ES governance in the Chinese context.

How coastal strategic planning reflects interrelationships between ecosystem services: a four-step method

Explicit and integrated inclusion of ecosystem services (ESs) and their interrelationships can improve the quality of strategic plans and decision-making processes. However, there is little systematic analysis of how ES interrelationships are framed in policy language, particularly in coastal planning discourse. The objective of this paper is therefore to present a four-step method, based on content analysis, to assess ES interrelationships in coastal strategic planning documents. The method consists of: 1) selecting strategic plans; 2) identifying ESs; 3) identifying drivers, ESs and their effects; and 4) constructing relational diagrams. The four-step method is applied to a case of Jiaozhou Bay in China, demonstrating its capacity of identifying which drivers and ES trade-offs and synergies are formulated in coastal strategic plans. The method is helpful to identify overlooked ES interrelationships, inform temporal and spatial issues, and assess the continuity of plans' attention to interrelationships. The main methodological contributions are discussed by emphasizing its broad scope of drivers and ESs and an explicit distinction among the cause of relationships. The developed method also has the potential of cross-fertilizing other kinds of approaches and facilitating practical planning processes.

Evaluation for Participation and Sustainability in Planning

‘Evaluation for Participation and Sustainability in Planning’ is the title of a new book edited by Johan Woltjer and his colleagues Angela Hull, Ernest Alexander, and Abdul Khakee. The book addresses the evaluation of planning interventions from several perspectives (social, economic, environmental). Specifically, the attention is focused on: - how evaluation is used in planning practice, including the choice of indicators or the criteria to evaluate participation; - the introduction of new kinds of information, such as measuring the cumulative effects or bringing criteria on capability and well-being into play; - alternative ways of collecting and presenting information, through using GIS or focusing on strategic environmental awareness and ‘hotspots’; and - understanding how strategic planning objectives are implemented in local practice.

Rules for the governance of coastal and marine ecosystem services: An evaluative framework based on the IAD framework

There is an increasing need for a comprehensive institutional understanding pertaining to ecosystem services (ESs) in coastal and marine fields. This paper develops a systematic framework to inform coastal and marine governance about the integration of ES concepts. First, as a theoretical basis, we analyze the generic rules that are part of the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework. Second, by an extensive literature review, we formulate a set of ES-specific rules and develop an evaluative framework for coastal and marine governance. Third, we examine this evaluative framework in a specific action situation, namely coastal strategic planning concerning Qingdao, China. Results from the literature review and the case study reveal that when designing ES-specific rules for coastal and marine governance, there are several socio-spatial and economic aspects that should be taken into account: (1) conceive of stakeholders as ES users, (2) capture the effect of ecological scaling, (3) understand ES interactions and clarify indirect impacts and causalities, (4) account for ES values, and (5) draw on economic choices for use rights to deal with ES issues.

Local strategic partnerships in England: the continuing search for collaborative advantage, leadership and strategy in urban governance

Local Strategic Partnerships are being established in England to provide an inclusive, collaborative and strategic focus to regeneration strategies at the local level. They are also required to rationalise the proliferation of local and micro-partnerships set up by a succession of funding initiatives over the last 25 years. This article explores their remit, resources and membership and discusses how this initiative relates to theoretical work on urban governance, community engagement and leadership. It concludes by debating whether urban policy in England is now entering a new and more advanced phase based on inter-organisational networks with a strategic purpose. But questions remain about whether the institutional capacity is sufficient to deliver strong local leadership, accountability and community engagement.