Download
slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
José Muñoz-Rojas (1) . Rosa M. Carrasco. Javier de Pedraza Gilsanz. PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
José Muñoz-Rojas (1) . Rosa M. Carrasco. Javier de Pedraza Gilsanz.

José Muñoz-Rojas (1) . Rosa M. Carrasco. Javier de Pedraza Gilsanz.

144 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

José Muñoz-Rojas (1) . Rosa M. Carrasco. Javier de Pedraza Gilsanz.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Contesting the role of regional geomorphology in spatial planning throughnon-eucledian geometries and fuzzy clustering methodologies. José Muñoz-Rojas (1). Rosa M. Carrasco. Javier de Pedraza Gilsanz. (1) The James Hutton Institute, Aberdeen, AB15 8QH, United Kingdom.

  2. Regional Geomorphology (RG);scientific discipline in charge of explaining the spatial distribution of landforms and land-units throughout both regional and sub-regional scales. Spatial Planning (SP); scientific discipline, administrative technique and political tool aimed at assigning the location and spatial distribution of human and natural land uses over territories and landscapes, across (nested) spatial/temporal scales. Traditional relationship (RG-SP);RG defines and delimits landforms and land-units useful for natural resource management, risk and hazard mitigation/alleviation and land-use “best-allocation” (SP).

  3. RECENT SHIFTS; Spatial Planning (SP); From assigning “optimal land-uses” to “creating places and mediating spaces”. Post-modern Socio-Environmental Sciences Nature-sphere Social-Environmental Systems Noosphere/ Anthroposphere UNCERTAINTY COMPLEXITY

  4. Is (Regional) Geomorphology (both epistemically and from a practitioner´s/scientist´s perspective) ready to act as a post-modern science, and thus contribute to the contemporary planning framework?. Probably not, so what is needed from this branch of science to be fully incorporated within the contemporary planning process?.

  5. New aims;contribute to unravelling the complexity of land-systems (real-world socio-environmental systems), and of their (non-linear) dynamics, with a particular focus on the sphere of interaction between society and the environment (land-forms and landscapes). • New epistemologies;from pursuing rational “optimality” in land-use decission making (e.g. risk mitigation), to coping with (acknowledging the inevitability of) uncertainty in the dynamics of earth systems and land-systems, and thus addressing the impact of this uncertainty over the decission-making process; • acceptance + identification + quantification. • New methods & techniques; drawing concepts, tools and techniques from established theories & models; fuzzy clustering, fractal geometry, resilience of complex systems.

  6. Action plan within the diverse stages of the planning process. i. Definition and delimitation of the region. ANALYSIS I. ii. Analysis and diagnosis of the diverse land-systems (including, amongst others, geology/geomorphology, hydrology, hazards, landscape and land-uses/land-covers). DIAGNOSIS I. iii. Integrated land-units (physiographic vs parametric). ANALYSIS II + DIAGNOSIS II. iv. Land-based decission-making (land alocation & further management strategies). PROGNOSIS + SYNTHERESIS.

  7. i. Definition and delimitation of the region. ANALYSIS I. * The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

  8. i. Definition and delimitation of the region. ANALYSIS I. * The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research. * The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

  9. i. Definition and delimitation of the region. ANALYSIS I. * The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research. * The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

  10. i. Definition and delimitation of the region. ANALYSIS I. * The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

  11. ii. Analysis and Diagnosis of Land-Systems. DIAGNOSIS I. * The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

  12. ii. Analysis and Diagnosis of Land-Systems. DIAGNOSIS I. * The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

  13. ii. Analysis and Diagnosis of Land-Systems. DIAGNOSIS I. * The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

  14. ii. Analysis and Diagnosis of Land-Systems. DIAGNOSIS I. * The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

  15. Integrated land-units (physiographic vs parametric). • ANALYSIS II + DIAGNOSIS II. * The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

  16. Integrated land-units (physiographic vs parametric). • ANALYSIS II + DIAGNOSIS II.

  17. iv. Land-based decission-making (land alocation & further management strategies). PROGNOSIS + SYNTHERESIS. * The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

  18. iv. Land-based decission-making (land alocation & further management strategies). PROGNOSIS + SYNTHERESIS. * The spatial information employed to produce this map was obtained and treated as part of the main author’s doctoral dissertation. The author would like to acknowledge the official institutions that provided with these original layers and also with the permission to use It as part of his research.

  19. CONCLUSSIONS & DISCUSSION • It is possible to reconduct the path of (Regional) Geomorphology towards post-normal science, and thus towards the core of (post-modern) Spatial Planning. • We have both tools and conceptual frameworks to do so, • but; • Both the scientific comunity, and most specially, the key decission-makers, need to acknowledge the inevitability of a certain degree of uncertainty when working within complex (such as land-based) systems. • There needs to be a futher, and intensive, testing, of the validility and applicability of both the conceptual and technical tools avaiable up-to-date. • Geomorphic systems are neither isolated, nor pure natural systems. They are social-environmental systems, and components of land-systems, thus characterized by a notable degree of uncertainty and complexity.

  20. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS * The author/s of this paper would like to acknowledge the diverse official institutions that provided with the layers of spatial information necessary to build on the maps and spatial indexes shown on this paper, and that were originally developed as part of the author’s Doctoral Dissertation. To this extent, he counted on specific and full permission of use and modification over this information.