84
J. A. R. Plata et al.
The physical settings have been traditionally considered key aspects for the quality
of life and social welfare. For instance, Gelh (2013) holds that social benefits of open
spaces rely on aspects related to proximity and connectivity. However, proximity does
not ensure itself equitable access or translate into positive effects if people cannot
freely experience the place due to social factors in the environment such as crime or
heavy vehicular traffic (Jennings et al. 2016). The sociodemographic characteristics
of the population, as well as their needs, merits and choices, can aslo determine
the opportunities for enjoying benefits from green infrastructure components (Hay
1995).
In consequence, ongoing projects and plans must contribute to tackle with the
problems that trigger negative perception of green infrastructure. Open spaces with
green elements and activities met positive rates. In contrast, people evaluated negatively rivers. Connectivity is key to stablish a green infrastructure network; therefore, a negative perception of people about rivers may be an obstacle to integrate
efficiently a green infrastructure network that provide benefits for all inhabitants.
People reported that rivers were abandoned and without activities. Local authorities
have fostered some initiatives and projects to create linear parks along rivers, however it has not succeeded. Gelh (2013) mentioned that uncomprehensive design and
planning approaches trigger social conflicts on the use and attractiveness of places.
A land planning based on a green infrastructure approach can be a way to guarantee
the transfer and acquisition in optimal conditions, under minimum standards, of the
services and benefits for the whole population. In this sense, some sectors may have
their own means of achieving a pleasant, dignified and valuable life, but others may
not, unless the public administration guarantees it (Svara and Brunet 2005).
Van Assche and Verschraegen define planning as “the coordination of policy and
practice affecting spatial organizations” (2008, p. 263). From these authors perspective, planning enables envisioning and working on several problems at the same time
and creating new qualities and assets. The creation of new assets is the provision of
public goods and their benefits. In this sense, green infrastructure planning can result
in a sustainable Metropolitan Area of Leon with economic growth, environmental
assets, abundance of public goods (e.g. infrastructure, physical assets and amenities
and other “commons”), social services and low poverty and inequalities (UN-Habitat
(United Nations Human Settlements Programme) 2013).
In order to achieve this objective, local Authorities and local Council have the
opportunity of articulating different open natural spaces with the aim to create an efficient network, where all components have ecological and social functions at different
scales of the Metropolitan Zone. A key starting point is to emphasize the need of
disseminating the green infrastructure approach among authorities. A lack of understanding of green infrastructure concept has translated into a fragmented vision of
urban planning, where natural spaces are not strategic for quality of life and for the
sustainability of the Metropolitan Zone. A paradigm shift towards comprehensive
schemes may help authorities to efficiently integrate economic, social and environmental dimensions in the design and planning of a sustainable green infrastructure
network.
J. A. R. Plata et al.
The physical settings have been traditionally considered key aspects for the quality
of life and social welfare. For instance, Gelh (2013) holds that social benefits of open
spaces rely on aspects related to proximity and connectivity. However, proximity does
not ensure itself equitable access or translate into positive effects if people cannot
freely experience the place due to social factors in the environment such as crime or
heavy vehicular traffic (Jennings et al. 2016). The sociodemographic characteristics
of the population, as well as their needs, merits and choices, can aslo determine
the opportunities for enjoying benefits from green infrastructure components (Hay
1995).
In consequence, ongoing projects and plans must contribute to tackle with the
problems that trigger negative perception of green infrastructure. Open spaces with
green elements and activities met positive rates. In contrast, people evaluated negatively rivers. Connectivity is key to stablish a green infrastructure network; therefore, a negative perception of people about rivers may be an obstacle to integrate
efficiently a green infrastructure network that provide benefits for all inhabitants.
People reported that rivers were abandoned and without activities. Local authorities
have fostered some initiatives and projects to create linear parks along rivers, however it has not succeeded. Gelh (2013) mentioned that uncomprehensive design and
planning approaches trigger social conflicts on the use and attractiveness of places.
A land planning based on a green infrastructure approach can be a way to guarantee
the transfer and acquisition in optimal conditions, under minimum standards, of the
services and benefits for the whole population. In this sense, some sectors may have
their own means of achieving a pleasant, dignified and valuable life, but others may
not, unless the public administration guarantees it (Svara and Brunet 2005).
Van Assche and Verschraegen define planning as “the coordination of policy and
practice affecting spatial organizations” (2008, p. 263). From these authors perspective, planning enables envisioning and working on several problems at the same time
and creating new qualities and assets. The creation of new assets is the provision of
public goods and their benefits. In this sense, green infrastructure planning can result
in a sustainable Metropolitan Area of Leon with economic growth, environmental
assets, abundance of public goods (e.g. infrastructure, physical assets and amenities
and other “commons”), social services and low poverty and inequalities (UN-Habitat
(United Nations Human Settlements Programme) 2013).
In order to achieve this objective, local Authorities and local Council have the
opportunity of articulating different open natural spaces with the aim to create an efficient network, where all components have ecological and social functions at different
scales of the Metropolitan Zone. A key starting point is to emphasize the need of
disseminating the green infrastructure approach among authorities. A lack of understanding of green infrastructure concept has translated into a fragmented vision of
urban planning, where natural spaces are not strategic for quality of life and for the
sustainability of the Metropolitan Zone. A paradigm shift towards comprehensive
schemes may help authorities to efficiently integrate economic, social and environmental dimensions in the design and planning of a sustainable green infrastructure
network.