Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
approach) through plan-making for land use, and that correspond with
the bottom-line of policy-making (i.e., sunsetting)
2
by preventing devel-
opment that could undermine the resilience of ecosystems.
The framework would not provide a simple top-down vehicle for
giving effect to policy. An approach to governance in which policy-
making is divorced from an analysis of the possible could in no sense
be called strategic. Rather, the exploration of means by which an eco-
logical transition might be pursued and the monitoring against plans of
its progress would feed back into the rolling policy-making process.
Accordingly, a third respect in which the legal framework would impart
strategic direction is by generating information based on which the
government can review its policies, re
ne strategies for their implemen-
tation, and give further consideration to how the ecological goals of the
system of governance can be advanced. For example, information
obtained through planning will enable assessment of whether the use
of policy options that would otherwise not be employed because of their
potentially negative effects should be considered in order to replace, or
prevent recourse to, possibilities that present greater threats of harm.
3
I am conscious that, in proposing comprehensive structures for stra-
tegic ecological planning, I am swimming against strong currents in
planning and governance theory. The rational comprehensive approach
to planning in which actors consider the full range of means of achieving
a given end, evaluate the consequences of each alternative, and select one
that provides the best result has come to be regarded as unrealistic, both
in view of the complexity of dynamic socioeconomic systems and the
many practical constraints on decision-makers
abilities to identify ideal
outcomes.
4
Public planning processes are also seen as incapable of
setting a course in the face of private sector domination of economic
activity and the decline of public sector involvement with carrying out
major development schemes.
5
The implication is that the decline of state
'
2
Chapter 3,
Section 3.3.2.4
.
3
Chapter 3,
Section 3.3.3
.
4
Lang,
1; B. Cullingworth and V. Nadin, Town and
Country Planning in the United Kingdom, 14th edn (London: Routledge, 2006),
pp. 4
'
Achieving Integration
'
,pp.30
-
-
7; S. Davoudi,
'
Sustainability: A New Vision for the British Planning System
'
(2000) 15 Planning Perspectives,124
-
5; Jay,
'
BuiltatSea
'
, 186; Wheeler,
'
Planning for
Sustainability
'
,pp.43
-
4; Giddens,
'
The Politics of Climate Change
'
,pp.98
-
9.
5
B. Evans,
in A. Blowers and B. Evans
(eds) Town Planning into the 21st Century (London: Routledge, 1997), pp. 10
'
From Town Planning to Environmental Planning
'
-
11;
Stallworthy,
'
Sustainability, Land Use
'
, p. 102; Cullingworth and Nadin,
'
Town and
Country Planning
'
,p.12;Davoudi,
'
Sustainability
'
,127;M.Gunder,
'
Sustainability:
