Ecosystem services in urban planning: Comparative paradigms and guidelines for high quality plans

Why is the inclusion of the ecosystem services concept in urban planning so limited? A knowledge implementation and impact analysis of the Italian urban plans

“…Unlike others works that have investigated the integration of ES in urban planning (Cortinovis and Geneletti 2018;Lam and Conway 2018;Lorence Rall et al 2015;Nordin et al 2017;Woodruff and BenDor 2016), this review evaluates the explicit use of the ES concept in urban municipal plans. Since there is no national database or other comprehensive reference source for urban plans available, this research opted for a content analysis of planning documents from grey literature.…”

Integration of the ecosystem services concept in planning documents from six municipalities in southwestern Sweden

“…However, there is often a conflict of interests between preserving urban green space and GI and exploitation for housing and industry, especially when cities are growing by means of densification (Haaland and Konijnendijk van den Bosch 2015). To steer urban development in a direction in which human and natural systems can coexist and the functions of ecosystems are maintained, there is a need for holistic policies with long-term perspective (Colding 2007, Woodruff andBenDor 2016). It is therefore increasingly important to understand how the ES concept is being considered in policy documents governing urban planning (Wilkinson et al 2013, Albert et al 2016.…”

“…Addressing ES explicitly in urban policies could possibly contribute to strengthen environmental aspects of urban planning, to the benefit of human health and well-being (Nin et al 2016). Research has shown that the explicit use of the ES concept is still a relatively new phenomenon, even though the concept is becoming more known (Colding 2011, Woodruff andBenDor 2016).…”

Pasteur’s quadrant: an appealing ecophronetic alternative to the prevalent Bohr’s quadrant in ecosystem services research

“…However, as revealed in the recent literature reviews (Albert et al 2014;Haase et al 2014;Hansen et al 2015;Luederitz et al 2015;Woodruff and BenDor 2016), the state of the ES scholarly enterprise in accomplishing its noble mission ''to inform and direct'' practitioners in planning and management (Egoh et al 2008, p. 135) could have been more effective should a missing link in its scholarly inquiry be identified and rectified: while huge amount of effort was devoted to improving instrumental effectiveness and efficiency of ES valuation and mapping, little dedicated to implementing the new ES knowledge in practice (Haase et al 2014, pp. 424-426;Woodruff and BenDor 2016, p. 91).…”