Planning for broad-based environmental protection: A look back at the Chicago Wilderness Biodiversity Recovery Plan
Tóm tắt
In 1994 a collaboration of environmental interests formed in the Chicago region, U.S.A. Composed of representatives of environmental organizations, government agencies, citizen and neighborhood groups, private interests, and university representatives, the consortium provides a forum for communication, advocacy, policy, and sharing ideas and knowledge about biodiversity issues and the various activities of each organization. The specific mission of the Chicago Wilderness Consortium is to protect, restore, and manage natural lands, plants, and animals in the Chicago region. Shortly after forming the Chicago Wilderness Consortium, the idea of creating a region-wide biodiversity recovery plan emerged, in order to provide a blueprint for how the consortium would accomplish its mission. Within a few years, the group began work on the Chicago Wilderness Biodiversity Recovery Plan, and it is now among the first regional biodiversity plans in the United States. While using collaborative planning processes to solve environmental problems is not unique, the Biodiversity Recovery Plan and the process through which it was created were innovative in the U.S. for having a broad and ambitious scope, extensive use of some kinds of data and analysis (particularly on natural communities), the large number of participants in the planning process (over 200), and the dispersed organizational structure in which the consortium operates. Another innovation was adoption of the plan by three regional planning commissions in three different states. The Chicago Wilderness Biodiversity Recovery Plan was one of the first major departures from traditional (single-medium based) environmental planning by a region in the United States. These innovations warrant research and reflection, 8 years after completion of the plan, and are the focus of this article.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Abram SA (2000) Planning the public: some comments on empirical problems for planning theory. J Plann Educ Res 19:351–357
Adams J, Stein BA, Kutner LS (2002) Biodiversity: Our Precious Heritage. In: Nagle JC, Ruhl JB (eds) The law of biodiversity and ecosystem management. Foundation Press, New York, pp 14–19]
Alario M (2000) Urban and ecological planning in Chicago: science, policy, and dissent. J Environ Plan Manag 43:489–504
Alexander ER (2001) The planner-prince: interdependence, rationalities, and post-communicative practice. Planning Theory and Practice 2:311–324
Applied Ecological Services (2004) Biodiversity: a plan for the village of Schaumberg. Village of Schaumberg, Schaumberg, IL
Baumgartner FR, Jones BD (1993) Agendas and instability in American politics. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Baydack RK, Campa HI, Haufler JB (1999) Practical approaches to the conservation of biological diversity. Island Press, Washington D.C.
Beatley T (1995) Preserving biodiversity through the use of habitat conservation plans. In: Porter DR, Salvesen DA (eds) Collaborative planning for wetlands and wildlife, Island Press, Washington, D.C. pp 35–74
Beatley T (2000) Preserving biodiversity: challenges for planners. J Am Plan Assoc 66:5–20
Beatley T (2004) Native to nowhere: sustaining home and community in a global age. Island Press, Washington D.C.
Bennett J (1998) State biodiversity planning. Environ Forum 15:18–27
Bidwell R, Clare R (2006) Collaborative partnership design: the implications of organizational affiliation for watershed partnerships. Soc Nat Resour 19:827–843
Booher DE (2004) Collaborative governance practices and democracy. Natl Civic Rev 32–46
Campbell S (1996) Green cities, growing cities, just cities? Urban planning and the contradictions of sustainable development. J Am Plan Assoc 62:296–313
Chicago Region Biodiversity Council (1999) Biodiversity recovery plan. Chicago Biodiversity Council, Chicago, IL
Chicago Wilderness Consortium (2006a) Chicago Wilderness Consortium members. Chicago Wilderness, Chicago, IL
Chicago Wilderness Consortium (2006b) The state of our Chicago Wilderness: A Report card on the ecological health of the region. Chicago Wilderness Consortium, Chicago, IL
Chicago Wilderness Consortium (2005a) Chicago Wilderness project pipeline. unkown, (Ed.)
Chicago Wilderness Consortium (2005b) Strategic plan for the Chicago Wilderness Consortium, A. Chicago Wilderness, Chicago, IL
Chicago Wilderness Consortium (n.d.a) The biodiversity kit for educators. Chicago Wilderness Consortium, Chicago
Chicago Wilderness Consortium (n.d.b) Sustainable development principles: protecting nature in the Chicago Wilderness Region. Chicago Wilderness Consortium, Chicago. http://www.chicagowilderness.org/pubprod/miscpdf/DESIGNPRINCIPLES1.pdf
Clark FH (2000) SuAsCo biodiversity protection and stewardship plan. Massachusetts Riverways Program, Massachusetts
Connick S, Innes J (2001) Outcomes of Collaborative Water Policy Making: Applying Complexity thinking to Evaluation. University of California at Berkeley, Institute of Urban and Regional Development, Berkeley, CA
Dunster J, Dunster K (1996) Dictionary of natural resources management. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver, BC, Canada
Environmental Law Institute (2003a) Planning for biodiversity: authorities in state land use laws. Environmental Law Institute, Washington D.C. 1-58576-063-3
Environmental Law Institute (2003b) Planning with nature: biodiversity information in action. Environmental Law Institute, Washington D.C.
Faith DP, Walker PA (2002) The role of trade-offs in biodiversity conservation planning: linking local management, regional planning, and global conservation efforts. J Biosci 27:393–407
Foley J, Lauria M (2000) Plans, planning, and tragic choices. Planning theory and practice 1:219–233
Grumbine ER (1990) Protecting biodiversity through the greater ecosystem concept. Nat Areas J 10
Gunningham N, Young MD (1997) Toward optimal environmental policy: the case of biodiversity conservation. Ecol Law Q 24:243–298
Huxley M (2000) The limits to communicative planning. J Plann Educ Res 19:369–377
Innes JE, Booher DE (1999) Consensus building and complex adaptive systems: a framework for evaluating collaborative planning. J Am Plan Assoc 65:412–423
Kingdon JW (1995) Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers
Koontz TM (2005) We finished the plan, so now what? Impacts of collaborative stakeholder participation on land use policy. Policy Stud J 33:459–481
Korfmacher KS, Koontz TM (2003) Collaboration, information, and preservation: the role of expertise in farmland preservation task forces. Policy Sci 36:213–236
Krueger K (2005) Chicago wilderness congress: the power of partnership. Chic Wilderness J 3:2–4
Leach W, Pelkey N (2001) Making watershed partnerships work: a review of the empirical literature. J Water Resour Plan Manage 127:378–385
Leach W, Pelkey NW, Sabatier PA (2002) Stakeholder partnerships as collaborative policymaking: evaluation criteria applied to watershed management in California and Washington. J Policy Anal Manage 21:645–670
MacRae D Jr. (1993) Guidelines for policy discourse: consensual versus adversarial. In: Fischer F, Forester J, (eds) The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. Duke University Press, Durham, NC pp 291–318]
March JG (1994) A primer on decision making: how decisions happen. The Free Press, New York. 0-02-920035-0
Meadowcroft J (1999) Cooperative management regimes: collaborative problem solving to implement sustainable development. Int Negot 4:225–254
Miller NA, Klemens MW (2004) Croton-to-highlands biodiversity plan. Metropolitan Conservation Alliance, Wildlife Conservation Socety, Bronx, NY
Moore E, Koontz TM (2003) A typology of collaborative watershed groups: citizen-based, agency-based, and mixed partnerships. Soc Nat Resour 16:451–460
Moskovits DK, Fialkowski C, Mueller GM, Sullivan TA, Rogner J, McCance E (2004) Chicago Wilderness: a new force in urban Conservation. Ann N.Y. Acad Sci 1023:215–236
Nagle JC, Ruhl JB (2002) The law of biodiversity and ecosystem management. Foundation Press, New York
Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission (2000) Protecting nature in your community: a guidebook for preserving and enhancing biodiversity. Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, Chicago
Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission and Chicago Wilderness (2003) Conservation design resource manual. Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission and Chicago Wilderness, Chicago
Noss RF, Cooperrider AY (1994) Saving natures legacy: protecting and restoring biodiversity. Island Press, Washington D.C.
Oregon Chapter of the American Planning Association (1993) A guide to community visioning. Oregon Chapter of the American Planning Association, Portland, OR
Peck S (1998) Planning for biodiversity: issues and examples. Island Press, Washington D.C.
Perlman DL, Adelson G (1997) Biodiversity: exploring values and priorities in conservation. Blackwell Science, Malden, MA
Pima County, Arizona, Administrators Office. Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan. 2006. 2006
Pollock J (2000) Enjoying Chicago Wilderness with your family: an activity guide. Chicago Wilderness Magazine, Inc., Chicago
Reaka-Kudla ML, Wilson DE, Wilson EO (1997) Biodiversity II: understanding and protecting our biological resources. Joseph Henry Press, Washington D.C. 0-309-05584-9
Rogner JD (2003) Fertile ground. Chicago Wilderness Journal 1:2–5
Rolfe A (2001) Understanding the political realities of regional conservation plans. Fremontia 29:13–18
Schwartz MW (2006) How conservation scientists can help develop social capital for biodiversity. Conserv Biol 20:1550–1552
Selin S, Chavez D (1995) Developing a collaborative model for environmental planning and management. Environ Manage 19:189–195
Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project (1996) Wildland Resources Center Report No. 39, Davis, California: Centers for Water and Wildland Resources, University of California, Davis
Society for Conservation Biology (1999) Recovery Key, Final Version
Stein B, Kutner LS, Adams JS (2000) Precious heritage: the status of biodiversity in the United States. Oxford University Press, New York 0-19-512519-3
Stewart P (2003) Natural partners: Chicago Wilderness and asset based community development. Chicago Wilderness Journal 1:6–11
Stone D (1988) Policy paradox. W.W. Notron and Company, Inc., New York
Sullivan J (n.d.) Atlas of biodiversity. Chicago Wilderness Consortium, Chicago, IL. http://www.chicagowilderness.org/pubprod/atlas/index.cfm
Takacs D (1996) The idea of biodiversity: philosophies of paradise. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD
Theobald DM, Hobbs NT, Bearly T, Zack JA, Shenk T, Riebsame WE (2000) Incorporating biological information in local land-use decision-making: designing a system for conservation planning. Landsc Ecol 15:35–45
Trigg R (2007) Expanding horizons. Chicago Wilderness Magazine. Winter
Wang Y, Moskovits DK (2001) tracking fragmentation of natural communities and changes in land cover: applications of landstat data for conservation in an urban landscape (Chicago Wilderness). Conserv Biol 15:835–843
Wilson EO (1988) Biodiversity. National Academy Press, Washington D.C.
Yaffe SL, Wondolleck JM (2000) Making collaboration work: lessons from a comprehensive assessment of over 200 wide ranging cases of collaboration in environmental management. Conserv Pract 1:17–24