Using Green Infrastructure As a Tool to Enhance Rural Land Use Planning
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Using Green Infrastructure as a Tool to Enhance Rural Land Use Planning by Paul Roy Kraehling A Thesis presented to The University of Guelph In partial fulfilment of requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Rural Studies Guelph, Ontario, Canada © Paul R. Kraehling, December 2018 ABSTRACT USING GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE AS A TOOL TO ENHANCE RURAL LAND USE PLANNING Paul R. Kraehling Advisor: University of Guelph, 2018 Dr. Wayne J. Caldwell This paper explores the use of nature, herein referred to as Green Infrastructure (GI), as a new asset to improve the rural condition of communities in southern Ontario. The exploration includes the formulation of a planning framework that can create new understanding around the systems use of nature to address needs and challenges of life in rural areas. The exploration is made through the life lens of a land use planner who is principally interested in looking at mechanisms to improve health and wellness, resiliency and sustainability conditions for rural communities. GI system planning uses nature to leverage beneficial attributes while minimizing risks and potential downsides. At a community level planning effort, matters of public and private interests are discussed, debated and prioritized in the overall formulation of a plan. A simple explanation for describing this planning effort might be described as identifying ways and means to more fully exploit the assets of nature for human endeavour. A subtler and preferred explanation would be aligned with the following - to utilize nature/natural assets in a symbiotic association that maximizes utility, multifunctionality and sustenance for both the human and natural worlds. The research employs a qualitative mixed methods approach to inquiry. GI planning as practiced in many other parts of the world may have application in the Canadian/Ontario context. The southern Ontario rural landscape was chosen as the case study investigation area. This landscape, while being richly endowed with natural land and water assets, also may be described as having a land use system that is conflicted/contested – multiple activities vying for prominence, with differing time horizons for achieving success as defined by various public and private interests. Rural planning leaders working within communities of this area provided inputs to this paper. A comprehensive research method comprising a literature review, surveys, key informant interviews, a focus group discussion and a research review meeting was conducted. Content analyses of the compiled information provided the principal data source. As a conclusion, land use planning with green infrastructure can assist in addressing the unique challenges and aspirations for various types of communities within rural Ontario. Keywords: living or natural infrastructure, Ontario, goods and services of nature, resiliency, sustainability, systems thinking, multifunctional, networked Acknowledgements I have many people to support in the completion of this momentous research project that in fact has taken me nearly a lifetime to complete. The research and dissertation document include thoughts of my mine over a professional planning career spanning 35 years in various municipalities and provinces in Canada. For my past career opportunities and formative experiences, I am most grateful. For assistance in completing the research for this dissertation, I am most grateful for the inspiring comments and thoughts from the various personnel who have helped me with this research: the survey respondents, the key informants, focus group participants and the research review committee members at the University of Guelph. Thanks to my friends, colleagues and staff at the School of Environmental Design and Rural Development who have had to put up with my philosophical planning bantering assertions and missed opportunity statements. Thanks to my fellow Rural Studies PhD students that I have had the pleasure to meet and to go to school with over the years, and especially the following who have helped me with this dissertation work – Sara Epp and Simon Berge. I would like to acknowledge the unwavering assistance of my advisor, Dr. Wayne Caldwell who has channeled me through the sometimes-treacherous waters of academia and guiding me along my meandering way to knowing. To my advisory committee members, Dr. Karen Landman, and Professor Jane Londerville, thank you for sticking it out with me along the way. In addition, I would also like to acknowledge the efforts of many other professors of the School who gave me knowledge and tools to complete my dissertation research. Lastly, in the academic world of things, I would like to acknowledge the efforts of my dissertation examination committee: David Guyadeen, SEDRD, Exam Chair; Pam Shaw, Department of Community Planning Vancouver Island University, External Examiner; Nathan Perkins, SEDRD Internal Examiner; Jane Londerville, CBE, Advisory Committee member; Wayne Caldwell, SEDRD, Advisor. iii I’m thankful to the leaders in our Ontario communities who participated in the various research instruments as a part of this dissertation. This interest and involvement has inspired and motivated me to explore the power and value of the nature/natural systems research topic. I would like to acknowledge the financial support provided to me during my PhD studies from a variety of sources: the Latornell Foundation, MITACS Canada, Ontario Public Health, and the OMAFRA-University of Guelph research partnership. Last but not least, I would like to thank my immediate family who have given me the love and support on my PhD journey – my dear wife, Zlata and our children Daniel and Laura. iv Table of Contents Acknowledgements iii Appendices ix List of Figures x List of Tables xi Abbreviations and Acronyms xii Chapter 1 – Introduction .............................................................................................. 1 1.1 Problem Statement ....................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Research Aim, Objectives and Methods ....................................................................... 4 1.3 Structure of Dissertation ............................................................................................... 7 1.4 Research Scope and Justification .................................................................................. 8 Chapter 2 – Literature Review .................................................................................... 11 2.1 Topic Areas .................................................................................................................. 11 2.1.1 What is Green Infrastructure (GI)? .............................................................. 11 2.1.2 Land Use Planning ........................................................................................ 14 2.1.2.1 Specific Challenging Topic Areas to Land Use Planners – Community Health and Wellness, Sustainability and Resilience .............. 19 2.1.2.1.1 Health and Wellness ...................................................... 19 2.1.2.1.2 Community Sustainability Considerations ..................... 22 2.1.2.1.3 Community Resiliency Considerations .......................... 25 2.1.3 The Rural Land Use Planner ......................................................................... 26 2.1.4 The Use of GI in Planning Efforts Around the World ................................... 28 2.1.4.1 Introduction .................................................................................. 28 2.1.4.2 GI Planning in the European Union (EU) ....................................... 29 2.1.4.3 United Kingdom (UK) Land Use Planning Using GI ....................... 33 2.1.4.4 Using GI for Municipal Planning in Sweden .................................. 37 2.1.4.5 GI Planning in Australia ................................................................. 38 2.1.4.6 The Use of GI in Africa .................................................................. 39 2.1.4.7 GI Planning in the United States (U.S.A.) ...................................... 40 2.1.4.8 GI Use in Canada ........................................................................... 46 2.1.4.8.1 Canadian National Level Consideration of GI ................ 46 2.1.4.8.2 Provincial Level Consideration of GI .............................. 48 2.1.5 An Evolutionary History of GI Thinking for Land Use Planning .................... 49 2.1.5.1 Landscape Architectural Expressions of Open Space Provision from the United States ............................................................................. 50 v 2.1.5.2 Early Efforts of Planning with Nature/Environmental Protection in Canada and the U.S.A. .............................................................................. 51 2.1.5.3 Early Regional Resource Management and Conservation Planning in Ontario .................................................................................................. 52 2.1.5.4 Late 20th Century Expressions of Nature/Natural Systems Design ................................................................................................................... 52 2.1.5.5 Planning with GI - Some Concluding Observations from the Literature .................................................................................................. 53 2.1.6 A Conceptualization of GI Planning ............................................................. 54 2.1.6.1 Introduction .................................................................................