Discursive Relationships Between Landscape Science, Policy and Management Practice: Concepts, Issues and Examples - Landscape Ecology for Sustainable Environment and Culture - page 227

12.4 Deliberative Spatial Strategy Making in Place
12.4.1 Spatial Strategy
The distinguishing feature of landscape ecology is its concern for spatial relations
in ecology, (Forman and Godron 1986 ) and how such spatial knowledge can be
translated into practical land management and planning outcomes (Dramstad et al.
1996 ). In an ever more resource constrained world, knowing how best to act
spatially—where to invest, where to protect, how to resolve competing demands
on particular places, and how to build communities in place—is a critical role for
landscape science. The recent growth of landscape ecology and its concern for
relevance has paralleled the re-emergence of spatial strategy as a dimension of
planning more generally.
Spatial plans were a key feature of town and regional planning as it developed in
the mid 20th century, reflecting both the driving motivations- including manage-
ment of land use conflicts, redevelopment of regions following wartime damage,
and direction of new urban growth—and the practical implementation tools,
particularly land use controls (Hall et al. 1973 ). Spatial relationships were also
fundamental to the emergence of environmental planning in the 1960s, with its
focus upon resource assessment and protection (McHarg 1969 ), and the develop-
ment of spatial planning tools such as green belts and green ways (Ahern 2002 ).
The dominance of spatial thinking declined in many planning constituencies
during the latter part of the 20th century as a result of two outwardly opposing
dynamics- the emergence of participatory and advocacy planning (Davidoff 1965 ),
and the ascendancy of more neoliberal planning paradigms that emphasised market
processes (Friedmann 1987 ). However, several factors have now reversed this
trend. They include: first, the realisation that participatory planning depends for
much of its power and legitimacy upon the location of constituencies in particular
places; second, the recognition that planning mechanisms based primarily upon
non spatial market processes fail to deal with the cumulative consequences of
development; third, that space is an increasingly scarce resource in urbanising
regions; and fourth, that place itself is of great economic value—as technology
overcomes the friction of distance for production, the quality of particular places
becomes a major driver of economic success, as both workers and consumers seek
out distinctive places to live, shop and work. Hence space has re—emerged as a
key focus of strategic and place based planning.
Strategy has a number of interpretations. According to Shearer ( 2005 ), strategy
can be summarised as having three possible dimensions: it may be a pre-active
process, anticipating uncertain futures and establishing strategies to maintain
profitability or viability of businesses or communities in the face of such uncer-
tainty; it may be directive, guiding resources through strategic policy towards
some given end; or it may be pro-active, actually making futures through strategic
interventions. Strategy of all three kinds may also be seen as the combination of