Planners’ views on cumulative effects. A focus-group study concerning transport infrastructure planning in Sweden

Folkeson, Lennart; Antonson, Hans; Helldin, Jan Olof

doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.03.025

Cited by 34 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Many municipalities today use consultancies for executing several tasks of spatial planning. This can be observed in different aspects of urban planning in Sweden and elsewhere, for example, in planning larger infrastructure projects or in comprehensive planning projects (see [34][35][36]). In Sweden, the planning departments are often assisted in their work by consultancies, especially in smaller municipalities that do not have the manpower to carry out all the planning tasks [27].…”

Section: The Hidden Structures Of the 3rd Dimension Of Powermentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes, Problems, and Challenges in Swedish Spatial Planning—An Analysis of Power Dynamics

Koglin

Pettersson

2017

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:During the past few decades, the Swedish spatial planning system has experienced numerous problems and challenges. In particular, there have been changes in legislation and an increased neoliberalisation of planning that gives private actors a larger influence over the planning processes in Sweden. In this article, we analyse these changes through the lenses of collaborative and neoliberal planning in order to illuminate the shifting power relations within spatial planning in Sweden. We analyse the changes of power relations from three dimensions of power based on interviews with different kinds of planners throughout Sweden. We show that power relations in the Swedish spatial planning system have shifted and that neoliberalisation and an increased focus on collaborative planning approaches have made spatial planning more complex in recent decades. This has led to a change of role for planners form actual planners to collaborators. We conclude that market-oriented planning (neoliberal planning) and collaborative planning have made it more difficult for spatial planners in Sweden to work towards sustainable urban futures.

show abstract

Section: The Hidden Structures Of the 3rd Dimension Of Powermentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes, Problems, and Challenges in Swedish Spatial Planning—An Analysis of Power Dynamics

Koglin

Pettersson

2017

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Unfortunately, no better model has come to light (Owens et al 2004;: more political views of the decision-making process, for example, are called out as being naive because their proponents expect a difficult, time-consuming, expensive, and potentially inconclusive process of deliberation to result in clear recommendations and actions (Owens et al 2004). Regardless, informationbased appraisals, and appraisals that stress the deliberative process, are not mutually exclusive, and providence calls for CEA to derive its knowledge-based products from a process that is as inclusive as possible, and seeks to maximize creativity and opportunities for collaboration and open dialogue among its participants (e.g., Bartlett and Kurian 1999;Adelle and Weiland 2012;Folkeson et al 2013;Ball et al 2013). Novel forms of "ad hoc delib- 40 Johnson (2013) defined regulatory limit as "the magnitude or extent of human disturbance that is permitted, after which unacceptable ecological change or ….…”

Section: Consider Environmental Appraisal and Planning To Be Tools Fomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…eration" have been advocated as one promising approach to complement regulated consultation and boost deliberative outcomes (i.e., Folkeson et al 2013). …”

Section: Consider Environmental Appraisal and Planning To Be Tools Fomentioning

confidence: 99%

Cumulative effects assessment: theoretical underpinnings and big problems

Jones

2016

Environ. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cumulative effects assessment (CEA) is a sub-discipline of environmental impact assessment that is concerned with appraising the collective effects of human activities and natural processes on the environment. Aspirations for CEA have been expressed by many authors since 1969, when the foundation of environmental appraisal was laid by the US National Environmental Policy Act. This paper's purposes are (i) to review aspirations for CEA, relative to current practice; and (ii) to fully explain and critique the logic that connects CEA's operational steps and underlying philosophies. A literature review supports the following statements: Some conceptualizations emphasize the delivery of information to support decision making as the key purpose of CEA; others deem collaboration, debate, and learning as most important. Consensus on CEA's operational steps has been reached, but each step requires practitioners to make analytical decisions (e.g., about the scope of issues to include or the time horizon to consider) and objective rules for how to approach those decisions are lacking. Numerical methods for assessing cumulative effects are largely available, meaning that CEA's biggest problems are not scientific. CEA cannot succeed without substantive public engagement, monitoring, and adaptive management. CEA is best undertaken regionally, rather than project-byproject. CEA and planning are complementary, and should be merged. In its most enlightened form, CEA is a useful tool for ensuring that human undertakings ultimately conform to Earth's finite biosphere, but current practice falls short of the ideal, and CEA's logical derivation is not entirely sound. As regards CEA's big problems, sustainability has not been defined clearly enough to make criteria for judging the significance of cumulative effects indisputable; legal, regulatory, and institutional frameworks are poorly aligned for CEA; and objective criteria for judging the adequacy of CEA's scope, scale, and thresholds do not exist, which makes the question of how to provide general guidance to practitioners intractable. Recommendations call for sustainability goals to be clearly expressed as measurable targets. Furthermore, precaution in human enterprise should be exercised by avoiding, minimizing, restoring, and offsetting negative cumulative effects. CEA can assist by quantifying and optimizing trade-offs.Key words: environmental impact assessment, planning, environmental management, sustainability, conceptual model, precautionary principle.Résumé : L'évaluation des effets cumulatifs (EEC) est une sous-discipline de l'évaluation de l'impact sur l'environnement qui porte sur l'évaluation des effets collectifs des activités humaines et des processus naturels sur l'environnement. De nombreux auteurs ont exprimé leurs aspirations quant à l'EEC depuis 1969, le moment où les fondements de l'évaluation environnementale ont été jetés par le « National Environmental Policy Act » aux États-Unis. Les buts de cette étude sont (i) d'examiner les aspirations quant à...

show abstract

“…Numerous authors have described procedural and substantive shortcomings of CEA including: ill-defined scope, scale and methodologies (Benson 2003;Duinker & Greig 2006;Gunn & Noble 2011Morgan 2012); inadequate data to support analysis and conclusions (Cancer & Kamath 1995;Johnson et al 2011;Noble & Gunn 2013); superficial interpretations of the nature of cumulative effects (Canter & Ross 2010;Duinker & Greig 2006;Folkeson et al 2013) and gaps between predicted and actual cumulative effects (Johnson et al 2011). The anxiety over CEA performance is just one facet of a broader and deeper concern for IA effectiveness worldwide; something that has been called into question by a past president for International Association for Impact Assessment (Fuggle 2005) as well as IA academics and practitioners (e.g.…”

Section: Why Study Valued Ecosystem Component Selection?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Selection of valued ecosystem components in cumulative effects assessment: lessons from Canadian road construction projects

Olagunju

Gunn

2015

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Planners’ views on cumulative effects. A focus-group study concerning transport infrastructure planning in Sweden

Cited by 34 publications

References 41 publications

Changes, Problems, and Challenges in Swedish Spatial Planning—An Analysis of Power Dynamics

Changes, Problems, and Challenges in Swedish Spatial Planning—An Analysis of Power Dynamics

Cumulative effects assessment: theoretical underpinnings and big problems

Selection of valued ecosystem components in cumulative effects assessment: lessons from Canadian road construction projects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About