Tarja Söderman

Using the ecosystem services approach for better planning and conservation of urban green spaces: a Finland case study

Ecosystem services are vital for humans in urban regions. However, urban development poses a great risk for the ability of ecosystems to provide these services. In this paper we first address the most important ecosystem services in functional urban regions in Finland. Well accessible and good quality recreational ecosystem services, for example, provided by urban nature, are an important part of a high-quality living environment and important for public health. Vegetation of urban regions can have a role in carbon dioxide sequestration and thus in climate change mitigation. For instance, estimates of carbon sinks can be compared to total CO2 emissions of an urban region, and the municipality can aim at both increasing carbon sinks and decreasing CO2 emissions with proper land-use planning. Large and contiguous core nature areas, smaller green areas and ecological connections between them are the essence of regional ecological networks and are essential for maintaining interconnected habitats for species and thus biological diversity. Thus, both local and regional level ecological networks are vital for maintaining ecosystem services in urban regions. The impacts of climate change coupled with land-use and land cover change will bring serious challenges for maintaining ecosystem services in urban areas. Although not yet widely used in planning practices, the ecosystem services approach can provide an opportunity for land-use planning to develop ecologically sustainable urban regions. Currently, information on ecosystem services of urban regions is lacking and there is a need to improve the knowledge base for land-use planning.

The use, non-use and misuse of indicators in sustainability assessment and communication

Sustainability assessments and indicators aim to produce and communicate information needed for evidence-based policymaking, strategic planning or learning. It has been assumed that in order to induce the desired effects, indicators must be relevant and reliable and they must be communicated to the right audience in the right way at the right moment. However, following the criteria for a good indicator does not guarantee that the indicator will be used, nor does it guarantee that the use will produce the desired effects. Various unintended side effects of indicator communication may emerge, particularly with sustainability issues characterised by various actors and multiple temporal, functional and spatial scales. We propose a comprehensive typology summarising different forms of sustainability indicator usage, namely use, non-use and misuse. This typology helps to identify potential positive or negative side effects of indicator usage. We discuss the implications of indicator-based communication, based on insights gathered in four research projects and a literature review. Attention given to potential unintended effects of indicator usage may be the key to increasing the effectiveness of sustainability communication.

Ecosystem Services Criteria For Sustainable Development In Urban Regions

The ecosystem services criteria for strategic decision-making combine conceptualisation and concretisation of ecologically sustainable development. A concrete basis for the measurement, valuation, and assessment of ecological sustainability was created through the development of two-level criteria for ecosystem services, which were linked to indicators based on spatial and statistical data from the Monitoring System of Spatial Structure (MSSS) and the CORINE Land Cover database. The criteria were designed for middle-sized urban regions because urban areas face the greatest land changes, threats, and management and co-operation needs related to maintenance of ecosystem services. Two urban regions were piloting the criteria in an iterative process between researchers and project groups of urban planners. Data availability and poor capacity to deliver data for the regions affected the choice of final indicators. This highlights the need for development of planning tools for practical planning and impact assessment for ecological sustainability of all urban regions.

Treatment of biodiversity issues in Finnish environmental impact assessment

Finnish biodiversity impact assessment practices between 1995 and 2001 were evaluated using qualitative document analysis and an ecological and biodiversity index. The 38 reports reviewed represented project types that usually cause the most severe impacts on flora, fauna and habitats. The results demonstrate a number of shortcomings that are very similar to those reported in earlier reviews but there are also some findings in contrast with earlier studies from the UK. The most severe shortcomings are too few new surveys, weak connection between baseline studies and impact prediction, and neglect of indirect and cumulative impacts on biodiversity. Compared to earlier reviews, the proposed mitigation measures were more ecological and detailed. Also, the need for monitoring was addressed more often than in the UK. Proposals for monitoring programmes were proposed, but were very vague. To improve the quality of treatment of ecological issues, the Finnish Environment Institute is preparing national guidelines for biodiversity impact assessment.

STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT IN FINLAND: AN EVALUATION OF THE SEA ACT APPLICATION

Experiences from the Finnish Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Act were studied by surveying 35 SEA processes. Integration of plan or programme preparation and assessment, organisation of assessment, public participation and consultation, treatment of alternatives, scoping, impact assessment methods, effectiveness, environmental reporting, follow-up, effects on plan or programme preparation, assessment costs and consistency of the assessment were examined and evaluated. The results suggest that SEA is not yet used properly in decision-making. Several shortcomings characterised assessment practices in public participation, establishment and comparison of alternatives, definition of environmental problems, recognition of significant impacts and readiness to use SEA as a planning tool to integrate environmental considerations into the planning. In consequence, the assessments had only minor effects on the adopted plans and programmes. The most critical challenges in Finnish SEA practise are focusing on the most significant environmental issues and strengthening the links between planning, participation and decision-making.

Biodiversity in strategic environmental assessment (SEA) of municipal spatial plans in Finland

This article examines the current practices of Finnish SEA with regard to inclusion of biodiversity issues in land use planning. The study of local master planning revealed that impact predictions have a limited influence on final plans due to a missing link between baseline studies and impact prediction. Land use SEA is very baseline oriented. It overemphasizes certain narrow biodiversity elements in studies and consequently in the whole planning process in order to avoid legal appeals for approved plans. There is also a tension between the proactive, opportunities constraints approach and the reactive approach in assessing impacts of a drafted plan. A strong need was expressed by consultants, planners and authorities for more holistic data and assessment regarding ecosystem functions and ecological connections and networks, but this need has not been realized in practice. To change assessment practices, holistic approaches and tools, such as ecosystem services type and green infrastructure planning, should be used in SEAs of spatial planning.