Kristina L. Nilsson

Stormwater management and urban planning: Lessons from 40 years of innovation

Urban planning is widely advocated as an important way to encourage the more sustainable management of urban stormwater, using alternatives to piped systems. This paper explores the way in which Swedish water professionals have opportunities to influence stormwater planning and the barriers that limit their participation in this process. Empirical evidence has been obtained from in-depth semi-structured interviews with urban water professionals from nine Swedish municipalities. The paper shows that there is a perception of the legal requirements related to the provision of drainage services that inhibits the utilisation of non-piped solutions. There are also reservations about a dichotomy that inhibits actions – is stormwater an issue for the planning department or for the water department? It is concluded that water professionals have unique opportunities to integrate stormwater management approaches within wider urban planning practice and, hence, are able to encourage the use of alternative systems that are more sustainable than using traditional pipes or sewers.

Legitimacy of Informal Strategic Urban Planning-Observations from Finland, Sweden and Norway

Abstract In Finnish, Swedish and Norwegian cities and urban regions, strategic approaches in urban planning have been developed by introducing different kinds of informal strategic plans. The means of improving the strategic quality of urban and regional planning have thus been searched from outside the statutory land use planning system, determined by the national planning laws. Similar development has also taken place elsewhere. When strategic plans are prepared outside the statutory planning system, these processes also lack the legal guarantee for openness, fairness and accountability. This is a serious legitimacy problem. In this article, the problem is examined theoretically and conceptually by combining democracy- and governance-theoretical perspectives. With this framework, four different approaches to legitimacy are derived: accountability, inclusiveness, liberty and fairness. The article concludes that strategic urban planning must find a balance between the four approaches to legitimacy. Concerning political processes, this requires agonistic acknowledgement of different democracy models, excluding neither deliberative nor liberalist arguments. Concerning administrative processes, it requires acknowledgement of the interdependence of statutory and informal planning instruments and the necessity of developing planning methods for their mutual complementarity—thus avoiding the detachment of informal strategic planning into a parallel planning “system”.

Expected benefits and drawbacks of Baltic Sea European transport corridors—Implications for complementary governance of TEN-T Core network corridors

Abstract In this paper, stakeholders’ expected benefits and concerns are presented regarding the development of Core Network Corridors (CNCs) within the European transport initiative, the Trans-European Network for Transports. An interview study was conducted with 23 stakeholders from different parts of the society in the Baltic Sea area. The results show that stakeholders have a range of expectations, both positive and negative, for the development of the CNC. Stakeholders’ views were sorted into three categories based on the gathered data: matters that are already regulated; unregulated matters that often include vaguely defined responsibilities and require diverse stakeholder engagement for improvement; and matters for which there are concerns about negative outcomes. The results indicate (a) a need for cost-effective complementary governance, here described as additional governance measures to those regulated in the initial framework, (b) that a wider group of stakeholders than is currently involved is needed in the on-going implementation process. Additional regional and local level stakeholders, within and outside of the CNC, and private businesses, would enhance the benefits and/or mitigate negative implications of the developed CNCs, (c) an openness for complementary governance in the on-going CNC implementation process. This openness needs to be considered when developing models for policy packaging.