Strategic Spatial Planning in Berlin–Brandenburg: A Requiem for Balanced Development?

This practice review examines Berlin–Brandenburg’s new strategic spatial planning framework and considers, in particular, whether balanced development in this context is now simply a neoliberal fig leaf and mantra acting as policy cover for more pragmatic accommodations in harsh times. The article concludes that such a judgement would be too harsh with the concept continuing to mould creative engagement by decision-makers.

Deriving lessons relating to marine spatial planning from Canada's Eastern Scotian Shelf Integrated Management Initiative

Stakeholder participation is viewed as a key element of ecosystem-based marine spatial planning (MSP). There is much debate over the effectiveness of stakeholder participation in ecosystem-based management (EBM) in general and over the form it should take. Particular challenges relating to participation in the marine environment are highlighted. A study of the Eastern Scotian Shelf Integrated Management initiative, which uses a collaborative planning model to implement EBM, is presented in order to explore these issues further. Criteria derived from a review of collaborative planning literature are employed to evaluate the effectiveness of this model, which is found to be a useful consensus-building tool. Although a strategic-level plan has been adopted, the initiative has encountered difficulties transitioning from plan development to plan implementation. These are attributable in large measure to deficiencies in the design of the collaborative model. Useful lessons relating mainly to stakeholder engagement, the role of the lead agency, and implementation strategies are advanced for those engaging in MSP processes.

Synergies and goal conflicts for climate change policy and spatial planning

The purpose of this paper is to identify goal conflicts – both actual and potential – between climate and social policies in government strategies in response to the growing significance of climate change as a socioecological issue (IPCC 2007). Both social and climate policies are political responses to long-term societal trends related to capitalist development, industrialisation, and urbanisation (Koch, 2012). Both modify these processes through regulation, fiscal transfers and other measures, thereby affecting conditions for the other. This means that there are fields of tensions and synergies between social policy and climate change policy. Exploring these tensions and synergies is an increasingly important task for navigating genuinely sustainable development. Gough et al (2008) highlight three potential synergies between social and climate change policies: First, income redistribution – a traditional concern of social policy – can facilitate use of and enhance efficiency of carbon pricing. A second area of synergy is housing, transport, urban policies and community development, which all have potential to crucially contribute towards reducing carbon emissions. Finally, climate change mitigation will require substantial and rapid shifts in producer and consumer behaviour. Land use planning policy is a critical bridge between climate change and social policy that provides a means to explore the tensions and synergies that are evolving within this context. This paper will focus on spatial planning as an opportunity to develop strategies to adapt to climate change, and reviews the challenges of such change. Land use and spatial planning involve the allocation of land and the design and control of spatial patterns. Spatial planning is identified as being one of the most effective means of adapting settlements in response to climate change (Hurlimann and March, 2012). It provides the instrumental framework for adaptation (Meyer, et al., 2010) and operates as both a mechanism to achieve adaptation and a forum to negotiate priorities surrounding adaptation (Davoudi, et al., 2009). The acknowledged role of spatial planning in adaptation however has not translated into comparably significant consideration in planning literature (Davoudi, et al., 2009; Hurlimann and March, 2012). The discourse on adaptation specifically through spatial planning is described as ‘missing’ and ‘subordinate’ in national adaptation plans (Greiving and Fleischhauer, 2012),‘underrepresented’ (Roggema, et al., 2012)and ‘limited and disparate’ in planning literature (Davoudi, et al., 2009). Hurlimann and March (2012) suggest this may be due to limited experiences of adaptation in developed nations while Roggema et al. (2012) and Crane and Landis (2010) suggest it is because climate change is a wicked problem involving an unfamiliar problem, various frames of understanding and uncertain solutions. The potential for goal conflicts within this policy forum seem to outweigh the synergies. Yet, spatial planning will be a critical policy tool in the future to both protect and adapt communities to climate change.

Review : "Spatial planning and climate change" by Elizabeth Wilson and Jake Piper

This timely and thorough book seeks to provide evidence-based assessments of ways in which spatial planning may develop and deliver new strategies for addressing both the causes and impacts of climate change. The authors state that much of the analysis is informed by experiences and learning from their own involvements with climate change projects. The book aims to be relevant to a wide audience and nominates its intended readership to include planning practitioners, scholars, post-graduate students of built environment courses, politicians and the ‘interested’ public. In this regard, the authors skilfully deliver with a comprehensive and accessible dissemination of the nexus between spatial planning and climate change...

Integration of natural hazards, risk and climate change into spatial planning practices

Most countries of Europe, as well as many countries in other parts of the world, are experiencing an increased impact of natural hazards. It is often speculated, but not yet proven, that climate change might influence the frequency and magnitude of certain hydro-meteorological natural hazards. What has certainly been observed is a sharp increase in financial losses caused by natural hazards worldwide. Eventhough Europe appears to be a space that is not affected by natural hazards to such catastrophic extents as other parts of the world are, the damages experienced here are certainly increasing too. Natural hazards, climate change and, in particular, risks have therefore recently been put high on the political agenda of the EU. In the search for appropriate instruments for mitigating impacts of natural hazards and climate change, as well as risks, the integration of these factors into spatial planning practices is constantly receiving higher attention. The focus of most approaches lies on single hazards and climate change mitigation strategies. The current paradigm shift of climate change mitigation to adaptation is used as a basis to draw conclusions and recommendations on what concepts could be further incorporated into spatial planning practices. Especially multi-hazard approaches are discussed as an important approach that should be developed further. One focal point is the definition and applicability of the terms natural hazard, vulnerability and risk in spatial planning practices. Especially vulnerability and risk concepts are so many-fold and complicated that their application in spatial planning has to be analysed most carefully. The PhD thesis is based on six published articles that describe the results of European research projects, which have elaborated strategies and tools for integrated communication and assessment practices on natural hazards and climate change impacts. The papers describe approaches on local, regional and European level, both from theoretical and practical perspectives. Based on these, passed, current and future potential spatial planning applications are reviewed and discussed. In conclusion it is recommended to shift from single hazard assessments to multi-hazard approaches, integrating potential climate change impacts. Vulnerability concepts should play a stronger role than present, and adaptation to natural hazards and climate change should be more emphasized in relation to mitigation. It is outlined that the integration of risk concepts in planning is rather complicated and would need very careful assessment to ensure applicability. Future spatial planning practices should also consider to be more interdisciplinary, i.e. to integrate as many stakeholders and experts as possible to ensure the sustainability of investments.