1.3 Misinterpreted Multi-functionality
11
environments, but also peri-urban and rural areas around large cities (Madureira and
Andresen 2014); this is the discursive drive behind the promotion of these infrastructure types. In this vein, the infrastructure is geared towards encompassing socioeconomic development. However, what is not considered by observers is the normativity around the promotion and functionality of both infrastructures, coupled with the
wider publicly-informed and encompassing stakeholder perceptions of their performance. By this, I mean that, since both infrastructure types have a specific ecosystem
functionality, it is possible that green and ecological infrastructure proponents could
focus exclusively on the empiricism that is coupled with both infrastructure types,
while ignoring the interpretive and normative sides of the practicality coin (more on
this later).
In this book, I will report on an investigation that not only studied the multifunctionality of green and ecological infrastructure projects, but also their interpretive
and normative sides and, more specifically, to what extent paradigms and theories
influence the development and application of green and ecological infrastructures.
It is important to not only understand the green and ecological initiatives from an
instrumental-policy perspective, but also from a worldview and theoretical angle.
This is to gain a deeper understanding of the motives behind the promotion of such
infrastructures by local governments and the hidden implications for the environment
and the broader public. To do this, I need to briefly review the policy outlook of both
infrastructure types.
1.4 Green and Ecological Infrastructures as Instrumental
Policies
Following on from the misinterpreted multi-functionality argument above, Dunn
(2010) argues that local authorities usually do not implement green infrastructures
in the poorer neighbourhoods of urban environments. However, applying such an
infrastructure can also benefit the more needy communities in terms of ecosystem
services; by improving the quality of urban water, reducing urban air pollution,
improving public health, enhancing urban aesthetics and safety, as well as generating
green collar jobs and urban food security. Even so, according to Dunn (2010), the
fact that green infrastructures assist the urban poor, is not always the issue. The
concern is that both legal and instrumental policy barriers to green infrastructure
implementation are inhibiting its benefits for the poor. Dunn (2010) advocates the
removal of legal and policy obstacles, an increase in public financing and the raising
of awareness of the benefits of green infrastructures among policy-makers and the
wider public, which will facilitate an awareness of the their benefits among those
that are deprived.
Schäffler and Swilling (2013) investigated the importance of robust planning
for green infrastructure implementation in Johannesburg. For them, the important
considerations are the public value of a green infrastructure and the opportunity cost
11
environments, but also peri-urban and rural areas around large cities (Madureira and
Andresen 2014); this is the discursive drive behind the promotion of these infrastructure types. In this vein, the infrastructure is geared towards encompassing socioeconomic development. However, what is not considered by observers is the normativity around the promotion and functionality of both infrastructures, coupled with the
wider publicly-informed and encompassing stakeholder perceptions of their performance. By this, I mean that, since both infrastructure types have a specific ecosystem
functionality, it is possible that green and ecological infrastructure proponents could
focus exclusively on the empiricism that is coupled with both infrastructure types,
while ignoring the interpretive and normative sides of the practicality coin (more on
this later).
In this book, I will report on an investigation that not only studied the multifunctionality of green and ecological infrastructure projects, but also their interpretive
and normative sides and, more specifically, to what extent paradigms and theories
influence the development and application of green and ecological infrastructures.
It is important to not only understand the green and ecological initiatives from an
instrumental-policy perspective, but also from a worldview and theoretical angle.
This is to gain a deeper understanding of the motives behind the promotion of such
infrastructures by local governments and the hidden implications for the environment
and the broader public. To do this, I need to briefly review the policy outlook of both
infrastructure types.
1.4 Green and Ecological Infrastructures as Instrumental
Policies
Following on from the misinterpreted multi-functionality argument above, Dunn
(2010) argues that local authorities usually do not implement green infrastructures
in the poorer neighbourhoods of urban environments. However, applying such an
infrastructure can also benefit the more needy communities in terms of ecosystem
services; by improving the quality of urban water, reducing urban air pollution,
improving public health, enhancing urban aesthetics and safety, as well as generating
green collar jobs and urban food security. Even so, according to Dunn (2010), the
fact that green infrastructures assist the urban poor, is not always the issue. The
concern is that both legal and instrumental policy barriers to green infrastructure
implementation are inhibiting its benefits for the poor. Dunn (2010) advocates the
removal of legal and policy obstacles, an increase in public financing and the raising
of awareness of the benefits of green infrastructures among policy-makers and the
wider public, which will facilitate an awareness of the their benefits among those
that are deprived.
Schäffler and Swilling (2013) investigated the importance of robust planning
for green infrastructure implementation in Johannesburg. For them, the important
considerations are the public value of a green infrastructure and the opportunity cost