Search

Das Konzept der Ökosystemleistungen bietet eine Möglichkeit, um Natur und Landschaft zu schützen und nachhaltig zu nutzen. In Planungsprozessen kann es genutzt werden, um die Leistungen des Naturhaushaltes zu bewerten, mit anderen Interessen abzuwägen und transparentere Grundlagen für Entscheidungen bereitzustellen. Wenn Ökosystemleistungen als zentrale Bestandteile in Strategien der räumlichen Planung aufgenommen würden, könnten sie die Umsetzung und Wirkung der Planungen im Sinne des Ressourcenschutzes verbessern. Das vorliegende Positionspapier verdeutlicht anhand von zehn Thesen, wie das Konzept der Ökosystemleistungen in der räumlichen Planung genutzt werden kann. Der Arbeitskreis "Ökosystemleistungen in der räumlichen Planung" der ARL hat diese Empfehlungen erarbeitet und benennt zu den Themen "Nutzen", "Einsatzoptionen" und "Handlungsbedarfe" konkrete Ansätze für einen besseren Schutz von Natur und Landschaft. Die Thesen sollen dazu motivieren, das Konzept der Ökosystemleistungen in der Raumplanung einzusetzen und so Transformationsprozesse zu einer nachhaltigen räumlichen Entwicklung anzustoßen. The concept of ecosystem services represents an approach to support the protection and sustainable use of nature and landscapes. In planning processes, it can be used to assess the contributions ecosystems provide to human well-being, to weigh them against other interests, and to support transparent decision-making. If ecosystem services were central in spatial planning, they could improve the protection of natural resources. This position paper presents ten propositions that illustrate how the concept of ecosystem services can be used in spatial planning. The ARL working group "Ecosystem Services in Spatial Planning" has developed these recommendations and suggests specific approaches for better protection of nature and landscape. They address three topics: Benefits, Implementation options, and Actions required. The propositions shall motivate the implementation of the ecosystem services concept in spatial planning and initiate transformative processes towards sustainable spatial development.

Das Konzept der Ökosystemleistungen bietet eine Möglichkeit, um Natur und Landschaft zu schützen und nachhaltig zu nutzen. In Planungsprozessen kann es genutzt werden, um die Leistungen des Naturhaushaltes zu bewerten, mit anderen Interessen abzuwägen und transparentere Grundlagen für Entscheidungen bereitzustellen. Wenn Ökosystemleistungen als zentrale Bestandteile in Strategien der räumlichen Planung aufgenommen würden, könnten sie die Umsetzung und Wirkung der Planungen im Sinne des Ressourcenschutzes verbessern. Das vorliegende Positionspapier verdeutlicht anhand von zehn Thesen, wie das Konzept der Ökosystemleistungen in der räumlichen Planung genutzt werden kann. Der Arbeitskreis "Ökosystemleistungen in der räumlichen Planung" der ARL hat diese Empfehlungen erarbeitet und benennt zu den Themen "Nutzen", "Einsatzoptionen" und "Handlungsbedarfe" konkrete Ansätze für einen besseren Schutz von Natur und Landschaft. Die Thesen sollen dazu motivieren, das Konzept der Ökosystemleistungen in der Raumplanung einzusetzen und so Transformationsprozesse zu einer nachhaltigen räumlichen Entwicklung anzustoßen. The concept of ecosystem services represents an approach to support the protection and sustainable use of nature and landscapes. In planning processes, it can be used to assess the contributions ecosystems provide to human well-being, to weigh them against other interests, and to support transparent decision-making. If ecosystem services were central in spatial planning, they could improve the protection of natural resources. This position paper presents ten propositions that illustrate how the concept of ecosystem services can be used in spatial planning. The ARL working group "Ecosystem Services in Spatial Planning" has developed these recommendations and suggests specific approaches for better protection of nature and landscape. They address three topics: Benefits, Implementation options, and Actions required. The propositions shall motivate the implementation of the ecosystem services concept in spatial planning and initiate transformative processes towards sustainable spatial development.

Transdisciplinary sustainability science (TSS) is a prominent way of scientifically contributing to the solution ofsustainability problems. Little is known, however, about the practice of scientists in TSS, especially those early in their career. Ourobjectives were to identify these practices and to outline the needs and challenges for early career scientists in TSS. To that end, wecompiled 10 key characteristics of TSS based on a literature survey. We then analyzed research groups with 81 early career scientistsagainst these characteristics. All of these research groups are funded by an ongoing federally funded German program for socialecologicalresearch whose main feature is to promote sustainability-oriented inter- and transdisciplinary research. We found that thepractices of the 12 groups generally correspond with the characteristics for TSS, although there is ample variation in how they wereaddressed. Three major challenges were identified: (1) TSS demands openness to a plurality of research designs, theories, and methods,while also requiring shared, explicit, and recursive use of TSS characteristics; (2) researchers in TSS teams must make decisions abouttrade-offs between achievements of societal and scientific impact, acknowledging that focusing on the time-consuming former aspectis difficult to integrate into a scientific career path; and (3) although generalist researchers are increasingly becoming involved in suchTSS research projects, supporting the integration of social, natural, and engineering sciences, specialized knowledge is also required. Transdisciplinary sustainability science (TSS) is a prominent way of scientifically contributing to the solution of sustainability problems. Little is known, however, about the practice of scientists in TSS, especially those early in their career. Our objectives were to identify these practices and to outline the needs and challenges for early career scientists in TSS. To that end, we compiled 10 key characteristics of TSS based on a literature survey. We then analyzed research groups with 81 early career scientists against these characteristics. All of these research groups are funded by an ongoing federally funded German program for social-ecological research whose main feature is to promote sustainability-oriented inter- and transdisciplinary research. We found that the practices of the 12 groups generally correspond with the characteristics for TSS, although there is ample variation in how they were addressed. Three major challenges were identified: (1) TSS demands openness to a plurality of research designs, theories, and methods, while also requiring shared, explicit, and recursive use of TSS characteristics; (2) researchers in TSS teams must make decisions about trade-offs between achievements of societal and scientific impact, acknowledging that focusing on the time-consuming former aspect is difficult to integrate into a scientific career path; and (3) although generalist researchers are increasingly becoming involved in such TSS research projects, supporting the integration of social, natural, and engineering sciences, specialized knowledge is also required.

Although spatial planning is considered as crucial for climate change adaption, e.g. in the EU White Paper on Adaptation, there are uncertainties regarding the role of adaptation strategies in spatial planning practices. In this paper the potential role of spatial planning for climate change adaption is investigated by distinguishing between two adaptation strategies: avoidance and minimisation. A case study in Stockholm, Sweden, serves to analyse the implementation of these ways of adaptation in the strategic and detailed planning stages. Spatial planning documents reveal a mix of avoidance and minimisation strategies. Expert interviews were used for further analyses of the spatial planning processes around these documents. It was found that minimisation measures prevail, and that only under extraordinary circumstances, avoidance measures could be implemented. A conclusion is that a more prominent focus on avoidance measures is needed to utilise the full potential of spatial planning and to ensure more robust adaptation measures. In order to achieve this, a normative adaption hierarchy is proposed as a guiding spatial planning principle in decision making about adaptation to the effects of climate change., The paper is published by the European Journal of Spatial Development (EJSD). The previous version of the journal was host by Nordregio.

Anhand europäischer und nationaler Strategien wird das Ziel des räumlichen Zusammenhaltes diskutiert. Ausgangspunkt bildet das Konzept der territorialen Kohäsion innerhalb der Europäischen Union, dessen aktuelle Einordnung in den europapolitischen Kontext und seine Auswirkungen auf die Regionen. Im Zusammenhang mit der Betrachtung der europäischen Strukturpolitik wird die Frage aufgeworfen, inwiefern das Ziel einer räumlich ausgewogenen und nachhaltigen Entwicklung der Europäischen Union erreicht wird bzw. erreicht werden kann. Dem Ziel des räumlichen Zusammenhaltes wird der Wachstumsdiskurs der Raumentwicklungspolitik gegenübergestellt, ausgehend von einer zunehmenden Abkehr von der traditionellen Diskussion um Kohäsion hin zur modernen Diskussion um Wettbewerb innerhalb der Raumentwicklungsdiskurse um Kohäsion und Entwicklung. Abschließend werden die Ziele und Strategien sowohl auf europäischer als auch auf nationaler Ebene diskutiert und Vorschläge zu einer differenzierten Kohäsionspolitik benannt. This paper draws on both national and European-level strategies as a basis to discuss the objective of establishing territorial cohesion. It begins by considering the concept of territorial cohesion within the European Union, its current position within the context of European policy, and its impacts on Europe’s regions. In the context of examining European structural policy, the authors raise the question as to whether the EU objective of establishing spatially balanced and sustainable development throughout the European Union is being achieved, or indeed is capable of being achieved. The territorial cohesion objective is compared and contrasted with the discourse on growth within the context of spatial-development policy; here the authors proceed from the increasing retreat from the traditional discussion on cohesion in favour of the current competitionoriented discussion on cohesion and development within spatial development. The paper closes with a discussion of aims and strategies at both the European and national levels and with proposals for a more nuanced cohesion policy.

Integrating the ecosystem services (ES) concept into land-use planning has been the focus of researchers in recent years. Forwarding this objective in order to foster human well-being, urban and regional planning became the focus of research efforts. Furthermore, governance research has been beneficial in studying the coupling of ecosystem services and planning processes. Thus, in this explorative case study we have analysed the governance of urban and regional planning in two case studies – Rostock and Munich – in order to gain insights about the role and value of ecosystem services among planning actors. We conducted semi-structured interviews to identify relevant parameters to facilitate integrational approaches of ecosystem services into decision-making in the context of cross-sectoral urban and regional planning. Based on our results, we argue for a change of the perspective of ES within planning practice. Instead of ecological or economic endeavours, the contribution of ES to human well-being should be in the centre of attention. Human well-being as an overarching aspiration may have the potential to shift ecosystem services from sectoral to cross-sectoral planning.