Functional ecological infrastructures: the need for regional spatial planning, but by whom?

1. Functional ecological infrastructures: the need for regional spatial planning, but by whom? Per Angelstam et al.

2. INCLUDE’s four questions • What characterizes a sustainable landscape, and how can it be evaluated? • What are the critical impacts of infrastructure and traffic on environmental qualities, and are there critical limits in this impact? • How can this impact be assessed and communicated to users? • What are the remedies, and how can the planning process be improved

3. Nature values

5. Critical habitat loss Probability of survival (%) Amount of habitat (%)

6. Land cover data base • The land cover providing resources (=habitat quality) • Sufficiently large patches • Sufficiently close together

7. Habitat models for focal species Generalists All forest Specialists Coniferous Deciduous Mixed a) b) c) Habitat suitability d) e) f) g) h) i) j) k) l) There are SEVERAL habitat networks 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

8. Scale and planning levels • Strategic • Tactical • Operational micro meso macro Spatial scale

9. Lobbying Education Social learning Think-tank Spatial planning GIS models SEA Regional governance and assessment Governance arrangement EIA

10. ?

12. Rospuda(Poland)

13. E 18(Sweden)

14. Sustainable Forest Management

15. Water Framework Directive

16. The social system Stakeholder represent sectors and level Multi-level governance Participation The ecological system Species of interest (small and large area requirements) Land cover themes (representative) Analyses of which areas to protect, manage and restore Regional spatial planning

17. Promoting adaptive capacity • Sector representation • Public - Private - Civil/NGO • Multi-level governance • Local, regional, national, international • Participation • A ladder with many steps from partnership to information

18. Partnership Partnership of equals; joint decision-making institutiona-lised and formally recognised; control delegated to the local actors where feasible Joint management boards Local actors participate in developing and implementing plans; local input plays more than just an advisory role Cooperation Local actors have input in management; are involved as assistants or guides; limited by management agencies Advisory committees Local actors have advisory power; non-binding decisions Communi-cation Two-way information exchange Consultation Tokenism Community input heard but not heeded Information One-way communi-cation Stakeholder participation ladder (Arnstein 1996) Principal Primary Secondary

19. What do different sectors do? • Planning levels • Strategic • Tactical • Operational • Scale • Macro • Meso • Micro • Spatial extent • Regional • Local

22. Europe’s West and East as a laboratory

23. Integration and networking among multiple “hubs”, each with: • Management units (=landscape) • Infrastructure, agriculture/forestry, conservation • Research units • Humanities, social and natural sciences • Education units • University and training

24. Levels of ambition • Preservation • Conservation • Mitigation/restoration • Adaptation