Journal
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND PROJECT APPRAISAL
Volume 38, Issue 6, Pages 449-463Publisher
ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2019.1617517
Keywords
Green infrastructure; discourse coalitions; advocacy; consensus; terminology
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Growing recognition has developed between policy-makers and practitioners that green infrastructure (GI) provides an approach to planning for effectively integrating ecosystems, biodiversity, socio-economic and political factors into a coherent framework for environmental management. While there has been progressive development of the concept, a deeper analysis demonstrates that this process has been disjointed. We identify four factors or 'axes' related to: temporal, geographic, scalar and disciplinary variation, which have shaped how GI is promoted and implemented. This paper traces coalescence and divergence across GI planning, using these four axes to map the concept's development. It also questions whether the lack of alignment between GI research and Impact Assessment (IA) is grounded in existing disciplinary mentalities or related to governance or geographical variation. From this analysis, we identify that these factors interact with socio-political and economic drivers shaping the terminology used, but this is not translated into effective evaluative practice. Although flexibility is one of the main strengths of GI, we argue that some degree of harmonisation will help advance the use of GI in environmental planning and assessment.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available