Ten years of experience with ecological connectivity analysis and urban planning in Sweden

IF 1.8 4区 社会学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal Pub Date : 2022-02-04 DOI:10.1080/14615517.2022.2031551
Mårten Karlsson, Ö. Bodin
{"title":"Ten years of experience with ecological connectivity analysis and urban planning in Sweden","authors":"Mårten Karlsson, Ö. Bodin","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2031551","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The use of quantitative analysis and related metrics has traditionally been unusual for assessment of ecological impacts in urban planning. Since 2010, however, quantitative modelling has been increasingly used in such contexts in Sweden to analyze ecological connectivity. The study reviews and analyses 21 connectivity analysis reports (CAR) based on 17 criteria. Despite the use of quantitative analysis, CARs primarily leverage qualitative aspects of modelling results. Most CARs comply with about 50% of the proposed criteria and close to 90% of the reports fail to address some issues related to modelling transparency and therefore jeopardize an adequate ecological interpretation of the results. The results demonstrate that the primary accomplishment during the last decade is an increase in awareness and acceptance of ecological connectivity among practitioners and decisionmakers. Results point to that an increased use of quantitative methods per se will not deliver more sustainable outcomes, and that an increased use of quantitative methods for ecological impact assessment in urban planning needs to be accompanied by guidelines, standards, and a continuous science – practice knowledge exchange.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"40 1","pages":"146 - 155"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2031551","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

ABSTRACT The use of quantitative analysis and related metrics has traditionally been unusual for assessment of ecological impacts in urban planning. Since 2010, however, quantitative modelling has been increasingly used in such contexts in Sweden to analyze ecological connectivity. The study reviews and analyses 21 connectivity analysis reports (CAR) based on 17 criteria. Despite the use of quantitative analysis, CARs primarily leverage qualitative aspects of modelling results. Most CARs comply with about 50% of the proposed criteria and close to 90% of the reports fail to address some issues related to modelling transparency and therefore jeopardize an adequate ecological interpretation of the results. The results demonstrate that the primary accomplishment during the last decade is an increase in awareness and acceptance of ecological connectivity among practitioners and decisionmakers. Results point to that an increased use of quantitative methods per se will not deliver more sustainable outcomes, and that an increased use of quantitative methods for ecological impact assessment in urban planning needs to be accompanied by guidelines, standards, and a continuous science – practice knowledge exchange.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
瑞典十年生态连通性分析和城市规划经验
摘要传统上,在城市规划中使用定量分析和相关指标来评估生态影响是不常见的。然而,自2010年以来,瑞典越来越多地在这种情况下使用定量建模来分析生态连通性。该研究基于17个标准对21份连通性分析报告(CAR)进行了回顾和分析。尽管使用了定量分析,CAR主要利用建模结果的定性方面。大多数CAR符合约50%的拟议标准,近90%的报告未能解决与建模透明度有关的一些问题,因此危及对结果的充分生态解释。研究结果表明,在过去十年中,主要成就是从业者和决策者对生态连通性的认识和接受度提高。结果表明,更多地使用定量方法本身不会带来更可持续的结果,在城市规划中更多地使用量化方法进行生态影响评估需要伴随着指导方针、标准和持续的科学与实践知识交流。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
22.70%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: This is the international, peer-reviewed journal of the International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA). It covers environmental, social, health and other impact assessments, cost-benefit analysis, technology assessment, and other approaches to anticipating and managing impacts. It has readers in universities, government and public agencies, consultancies, NGOs and elsewhere in over 100 countries. It has editorials, main articles, book reviews, and a professional practice section.
期刊最新文献
A game theoretic decision-making approach to reduce mine closure risks throughout the mine-life cycle Consideration of risks to people and the environment related to accidents on natural gas transmission pipelines in LUP and SEA processes in Poland Landscape, EIA and decision-making. A case study of the Vistula Spit Canal, Poland SEA and EIA: uncertain boundaries in Spain Influence factors on the quality of regulatory impact analysis in Brazil
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1