2. An outline of area planning on environmental lines

Contents - Previous - Next

2.1 Tools

The central tool for implementing spatial and regional planning decisions is a planning document with detailed explanations of major thematic and area problems to act as an 'information system' and as a basis for decision-making by other planning bodies and political representatives. However, attention should not be directed primarily towards this sort of 'end product' but much more, in sympathy with local institutional and information policy requirements, towards the priority implementation of the planning process and above all the performance of coordinating and regulatory functions as measures for environmental protection. The range of ecological planning tools (environmental information system, impact analysis, compatibility or risk assessment) is described in more detail in section 2.2.

Performance of regulatory function

Spatial and regional planning should have a positive formative influence on the economic and social development of a country; for example, this involves steering the process of land-use by developing appropriate area and community structure plans. The conceptual models used as a basis for decision-making ('axis models', 'locally centred multi-stage structure' or 'balanced functional area' models, attempts at decentralisation such as 'independent regional development') should be analysed not merely from the ecological point of view for their applicability or relevance to the case in hand.

There are both disadvantages and advantages in a locally centred multi-stage structure as the guiding element inherent in the structural development of an area: the former include a cluster effect on settlement and infrastructural measures resulting in the concentration of adverse environmental impacts in particular areas. The advantages relate to the promotion of medium-sized centres and sub-centres as lines of development primarily for major city centres which have hitherto suffered badly.

The basic principle however, should be to avoid and alleviate the consequences of urban concentration as a priority in the affected areas themselves⁶⁾ before attempting to spread the load. This applies particularly if the intended relief cannot be guaranteed and/or where geostructural development measures will impose a burden on previously unspoiled areas or those worthy of protection. Likewise in the planning of infrastructural measures for land development and energy supply, care must be taken to ensure that these areas worth protecting are kept as 'no-go areas' and not tampered with or broken up.

⁶⁾ e.g. through rehabilitation measures and technical environmental protection measures to reduce emissions

An improvement in the ability of densely-populated conurbations to function internally is the most environmentally relevant goal of regulatory and development concepts for the structure of settlements and communities. The primary aim is to improve living conditions and the quality of life by alleviating the worst consequences of population density. Ways of achieving this goal include:

- planning and/or repair/expansion of the transport infrastructure (confining it where applicable) with particular emphasis on public transport planned with the environment in mind (rail);
- planning, maintenance and expansion of the utilities infrastructure (particularly drinking water supply and public energy supply);
- planning and expansion of installations for refuse and waste water/sewage collection and treatment or dumping;
- preservation, development and rehabilitation of open spaces/parks bearing in mind their role as areas which compensate for overcrowded areas. In order to safeguard undeveloped open spaces it is vital to clarify questions of legal ownership of land, access and land price policy as well as functional development and, where applicable, the rehabilitation of polluted areas.

The principle of functional separation (geographical break-up) particularly in populated areas helps to avoid or reduce stresses arising from incompatible forms of use. In particular the separation of utility, residential and leisure functions from forms of use which generate pollution and noise (industrial production centres, roads, refuse tips) helps to achieve this goal. However the separation principle referred to above can also lead to increased infrastructural expenditure and above all increased traffic because of the greater distances between homes, workplaces and utilities. For this reason, major geographical separations are not desirable from the environmental point of view (concentration of functions increases utilisation of capacity of mains services, for example, and hence their effectiveness). From the ecological point of view close proximity of functions is in fact desirable whilst adhering to minimum distances and conditions of use (restrictions on emissions). The requisite minimum distances e.g. from industrial plants are indicated in the relevant literature⁷⁾. These distances should be increased by a safety margin (doubled if necessary) because very often compliance with environmental regulations is not guaranteed because of difficulties of enforcement. Minimum distances between areas for food production (agriculture, fisheries) and land-uses which generate emissions (traffic, refuse tips, mines, fossil fuel extraction) should also be adhered to in rural areas.

⁷⁾ cf. ARL 1982; MAGS 1982

In the case of new allocations, particularly of locations for individual projects, the suitability and sensitive characteristics of the area concerned must be considered in conjunction with any existing designated conservation areas. It may be helpful to draw up project-related 'exclusion criteria' during the search for a suitable location.

Furthermore, it is important from the ecological point of view - as with the procedure for designating priority areas (cf. DOMHARDT 1988) - to designate and demarcate areas reserved for major environmental uses (agriculture, forestry, water management, even recreation), avoiding overlaps wherever possible.

Demarcation should be based not only on productivity criteria (e.g. potential yield) but also on sensitivity criteria; for example, areas susceptible to erosion would not be given designated priority for agricultural use. The designation of priority areas should not merely be taken as a means of setting priorities to safeguard usage/exploitability but also as justification for the right to protection against environmental deterioration.

Performance of coordinating function

This function is greatly influenced by the relevant institutional structures and the nature of their involvement and is therefore difficult to describe in specific terms. The most important coordination task is the promotion of the flow of information between sectoral planning processes. In this it is important to focus attention on the congruence of different environmental objectives. For example, reduction of erosion is in the interest both of agriculture (preserving yield) and of water resources management (prevention of silting because of water erosion). Moreover the coordination function may also help resolve conflicts between the objectives of different sectors through the establishment of separate geographical objectives and, where applicable, by presenting development alternatives. Finally, central coordination in the planning of activities and programmes may help set geographical and chronological priorities based on a 'cross-sectoral' and cross-sectional approach.

The potential for coordination increases with growing powers to exert authority and take decisions in integrated area planning, as for example in the ability to test sector plans against established standards.

2.2 Incorporation of environmental aspects

In procedural terms, relatively costly procedures for the incorporation of ecological considerations by means of 'environmental relevance tests' or independent specialist planning, similar to Germany's environmental planning system, are unrealistic in many countries at the present time but should nevertheless be a long term goal.

'Secondary integration' of elements of general environmental planning into the regional planning system offers certain advantages from the ecological point of view:

- an independent specialist plan (in this case: general environmental plan) may perform the function of an 'environmental relevance test' and may examine area and regional planning objectives for their environmental relevance,
- the needs of nature and environmental conservation can be portrayed from the point of view of the specialist i.e. without making concessions or compromises at an early stage,
- the incorporation of ecological objectives and measures (e.g. inclusion of conservation area boundaries, restrictions on use, removal of planned developments from sensitive areas) is a political process in which political priorities have to be set. The ability to compare initial plans with the 'integration product' would improve transparency and comprehensibility (what is technically necessary and what is a political decision) to a significant degree.

However, against the background of the restrictions already quoted, 'primary integration' i.e. 'consideration of ecological factors in development planning' is a more practicable approach and ought to be looked at first of all, with the subsidiary aim of making cross-sectional planning approaches more generally acceptable.

Ecological questions are dealt with as a subsidiary task of regional planning and are incorporated into the individual processing stages (cf. Fig. 1). Objectives, priorities and requirements are harmonised within the administration; the aim should be to optimise the overall geographical development factors in terms of environmental conservation and alleviation of environmental damage.

As a form of integration some sort of "code of practice" may be incorporated into the planning process (mutual exchange of information and harmonisation and allowance for, i.e. adaptation and where applicable modification of, planners' findings).

In order to examine the compatibility of large-scale individual projects, procedures organised along the lines, for example, of German area planning or assessment procedures governing the conduct of investigations into environmental relevance, provide a framework for the incorporation (consideration) of environmental aspects in decision-making and approval procedures for large-scale projects.

The following chart shows the ideal typical stages in integrated planning alongside those of ecological planning and the required information and integration procedures.

Fig. 1 - Incorporation of ecological factors into integrated planning

2.3 Features and methodology of ecological planning

The aim of ecological planning is to preserve or restore the productive capacity of natural resources and to sustain them in the long term⁸⁾. With this in mind the existing and planned land-use pattern must be examined for its compatibility with the specific regional characteristics of the area. In areas of high population density, besides the objectives of safeguarding and developing or regenerating natural resources, the aspects of environmental hygiene and technical environmental protection, i.e. rehabilitation objectives to alleviate existing pollution and other problems, are particularly important.

⁸⁾ For aspects of 'ecological planning' cf. PIETSCH 1981, BMELF 1985;THÖNI et al 1990

An inventory of the overall ecological situation involves ascertaining and evaluating the protective functions and benefits of natural resources on the basis of their suitability and sensitivity characteristics as well as relevant land-uses and their environmental effects. Once the causal connections (originator - environmental impact - effects on the resource in question [environmental impact]) are known, the status quo i.e. the scale of existing problems ('initial loading') can be determined. This provides the basis for a forecast of future environmental threats from planned land-uses and individual projects. The methodological approach on which this procedure is based is known as ecological risk analysis (see Fig. 2)⁹⁾ .

⁹⁾ For methodology or ecological risk analysis cf. BACHFISCHER 1980; EBERLE 1984; for application cf LFU 1987

No generally applicable criteria can be identified for analysis of the environmental loading situation (degree of impairment); it is necessary to 'regionalise' the selection of natural resources affected and/or their suitability and sensitivity characteristics with reference to the natural regional characteristics of the planning area and specify these in concrete terms in relation to the problems/questions arising.

Fig.2 - Steps to determine ecological risks

Table 1: Analysis of the natural environment on the basis of suitability and sensitivity characteristics of natural resources

The following summary lists possible questions arising at the level of integrated area planning as elements of an ecological risk analysis. These must be tailored to each individual case, above all in terms of their weighting (relevance); the order in which they are listed is not necessarily indicative of the working procedure, indeed, analysis of the suitability and sensitivity characteristics of the natural resources and analysis of the usage pattern affecting these as a result of interactive relationships often overlap.

continue

Contents - Previous - Next