Using a multi‐lens framework for landscape decisions
Using a multi‐lens framework for landscape decisions
复制标题
使用多镜头框架进行景观决策
DOI：
10.1002/pan3.10474
复制
发表时间：
2023
影响因子：
6.1
通讯作者：
Mick Whelan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Beth Cole;A. Bradley;S. Willcock;Emma Gardner;E. Allinson;A. Hagen‐Zanker;Adam Calo;J. Touza;S. Petrovskii;Jingyan Yu;Mick Whelan
1.景观决策是多方面的。将景观决策框架定为一个需要集体方法的治理过程，可以鼓励关键利益攸关方走到一起，共同为关于其优先事项和什么是善治的讨论提供信息，从而导致更全面的景观决策。2.在本文中，我们认识到，一套互补和多维度的方法在实践中被用来通知和评估土地利用决策。我们称这些方法为“透镜”，因为它们各自对同一问题提供了不同的视角。这四个镜头是（i）权力和市场收益，（ii）生态系统服务，（iii）基于地点的身份和（iv）生态中心。每一种都为决策过程带来了一套不同的证据和观点（叙述性、定性和经验性，以及货币等定量指标），并可能揭示其他人所没有的问题和解决方案。3.综合考虑所有的视角，可以进行对话，从而揭示景观决策的真正复杂性，并促进更有效和更全面的决策。采用这些镜头需要治理结构对所有镜头给予同等重视，实现自上而下和自下而上方法之间的对话和共存，并允许适应本地和细粒度的地方细节，而不是开发“一刀切”的解决方案。4.我们建议，正式确定平衡所有镜头的过程需要公众参与，并且应该使用透镜方法来支持景观决策，同时制定一份清单，以促进对话的透明度，显示如何考虑和严格评估所有证据。
1. Landscape decisions are multi- faceted. Framing landscape decision- making as a governance process that requires a collective approach can encourage key stakeholders to come together to co- inform a discussion about their priorities and what constitutes good governance, leading to more holistic landscape decisions. 2. In this paper, we recognise that a suite of complementary and multi- dimensional approaches are in practice used to inform and evaluate land use decisions. We have called these approaches ‘lenses’ because they each provide a different perspective on the same problem. The four lenses are (i) power and market gain, (ii) ecosystem services, (iii) place- based identity and (iv) ecocentric. Each brings a different set of evidence and viewpoints (narrative, qualitative and experiential, as well as quantitative metrics such as monetary) to the decision- making process and can potentially reveal problems and solutions that others do not. 3. Considering all lenses together allows dialogue to take place which can reveal the true complexities of landscape decision- making and can facilitate more effective and more holistic decisions. Employing the lenses requires governance structures that give equal weight to all lenses, enable dialogue and coexistence between top down and bottom- up approaches, and permit adaptation to local and granular place- specifics rather than developing “one- size- fits- all” solutions. 4. We propose that formalising the process of balancing all the lenses requires public participation, and that a lens approach should be used to support landscape decisions alongside a checklist that facilitates transparency in the conversation, showing how all evidence has been considered and critically assessed.
劳特利奇景观研究伴侣
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2019
期刊：
--
影响因子：
--
作者：
Turner S
通讯作者：
Turner S
影响因子：
6.9
作者：
Lowe, Philip;Phillipson, Jeremy;Gkartzios, Menelaos
通讯作者：
Gkartzios, Menelaos