4 Theorising regional planning
4.4 Sustainable regional development
of being used to describe an existing or emerging reality, the concept is coming to determine that reality’ (Davoudi 2002).
it is particularly appropriate at the regional level, and the emerging nature of sustainable regional development. The promotion, application and evaluation of the approach in regional planning are covered in later chapters, and espe- cially in Chapter 11.
The previous discussion in section 4.2 noted the importance of the supply side attributes of a region, including the quality of life, as an element in com- petitiveness. Geographers have experimented over the years with rankings of relative urban and regional quality of life (see Hall 1986; Findlay 1988; DEFRA 2004).The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) high- lighted the link between the natural environment and economic development.
The oft-quoted reminder from the IUCN (1980) that ‘we have inherited the earth from our parents; we have borrowed it from our children’ was taken a step further in the Brundtland Report (UN World Commission on Environment and Development 1987). Brundtland rejected the argument that economic growth and good environmental quality were mutually exclusive. But converting good intentions into good practice is more difficult. The ‘ends’ and ‘means’ of sustain- able development have generated considerable debate, including the relative merits of weak and strong sustainability, social and environmental justice and inter- and intra-generational equity. International conferences such as Rio (1992), and Johannesburg a decade later, have made some limited progress, but more than anything have highlighted the enormity of the challenge. Interest- ingly Wang et al. (1993) noted that this challenge was of particular relevance for the regional level.
The regional level may have a central role to play in the ‘territorial integra- tion’ between the natural and socio-economic systems. Friedmann and Weaver (1979) showed that in the evolution of US regional planning there were some innovative, although not always successful, examples of integration, such as the river-based regional development Tennessee Valley scheme. The 1990s regional revival in the UK has refuelled interest in the regional level as the most appro- priate level for delivering sustainable development (see Campbell 1991; Roberts 1994; Glasson 1995; Benneworth et al. 2002; Roberts 2006). In Australia, Jenkinset al. (2003), drawing on US activity (US National Research Council 2002), note that:
After a decade of trying to implement Agenda 21 at a national level, a number of recent reviews of how to progress sustainability are concluding that the appropriate scale to address the concept is at the regional or sub- national level. These reviews suggest that regions are an appropriate basis for considering sustainability.
The regional level may, for example, demonstrate some contiguity of socio-eco- nomic systems, such as commuting zones, and natural environmental systems, such as river basin catchment areas.
Theorising regional planning: substantive 81
4.4.2 Dimensions of sustainability and sustainable regional development
Globally the term ‘sustainability’ has become increasingly preferred as it empha- sises the stance needed to achieve ‘sustainable development’; but the terms are often used interchangeably. However, despite the global acceptance of the concept, its scope and nature is a contested and confused territory (Faberet al.
2005). There are numerous definitions, but a much-used one is that of the
‘triple bottom line’ (TBL), reflecting the importance of environmental, social and economic factors in decision making. Figure 4.5 shows how the three dimensions are separate but overlap, and it is the integration and synergies which are particularly important. The aim is to minimise trade-offs (for example, not sacrificing an important wetland for a marina development) by seeking to increase synergies providing mutually reinforcing solutions.
Figure 4.6(a) and (b) illustrates some different perspectives, and modifica- tions, of the TBL approach. Figure 4.6(a) seeks to stress the holistic nature of sustainability within the borders of the triangle and the need to advance on several fronts to achieve the green, just and growing region. The relative pace of advance usually varies between the fronts, and this is a key implementation challenge for sustainable regional development. Figure 4.6(b) provides another perspective which emphasises that within the elements of sustainability there is an important hierarchy. The environment and its natural systems are the
Economic prosperity
Ecological economics
Environmental protection
Sense of place Sustainability
Community health
Social advancement
Figure 4.5 Integrating the dimensions of sustainability.
Environmental (green regions)
Social (just regions)
Economic (growing regions) Sustainable
regions
Natural and physical systems Social systems Economic systems
ECONOMIC
SOCIAL ENVIRONMENTAL
Figure 4.6 Alternative perspectives on the dimensions of sustainability. (a) Adapted from Campbell (2003). (b) Adapted from MacNaughton (1997), Pope et al.(2004).
(a)
(b)
foundation of any concept of sustainability. We cannot survive without the ‘goods and services’ provided by those systems – breathable air, drinkable water and food.
The international recognition of the threat of climate change highlights the importance of the environmental foundation to life. We then need social systems to provide social justice, security, cultural identity and a sense of place. Without a well-functioning social system, an economic system cannot be productive.
Another important modification is the movement from TBL to TBL+1, with the addition of sustainable governance to the other dimensions (DEFRA 2005).
Whatever the perspective, there is a generally accepted recognition of the holistic nature of sustainability, although the balance between the elements is contested territory. A holistic approach implies more integration which, besides bringing synergies, can also reduce duplication and waste, and lead to a more efficient use of resources. In regional development, such integration can include policy areas (e.g. employment and housing); institutions and agencies (e.g.
between levels of government); and plans (e.g. integrated regional development frameworks). There can also be integration of methodologies, for example, using sustainability assessment, and above all, integration of visions and prin- ciples for development. The UK South East Plan (SEP; SEERA 2006a) encom- passed the dimensions of sustainability in its vision of ‘The Healthy Region’.