14
1 Green and Ecological Infrastructures and Water Security …
green infrastructure policies the realm of public participation and grey infrastructure strategies the domain of technocratic expertise. Because of this strain, municipal officials and other champions could take green infrastructures ‘at face value
as inherently sustainable’, which Wachsmuth and Angelo (2018: 1052) called ‘the
realistic illusion’, while grey infrastructure implementation suffers from ‘the illusion
of transparency’ that is characterised by considering a problem to be technological
optimisation.
In this respect, Finewood et al. (2019: 910) expressed a further argument by stating
that, ‘The impacts of hidden or obscured values and normative biases embedded in
[green] infrastructure suggest that it is important to be attentive to who designs them
and for what purpose’. In this book, I intend to uncover how green and ecological
infrastructure policies and initiatives are designed, and by whom? Finewood et al.
(2019: 910) went on to say that their research has discovered that a green infrastructure is the ‘purview of engineers’. These professionals design and implement such
systems by utilising technocratic decision-making processes for the protection of
urban properties and for investment opportunities, by complying with regulations, as
well as by stimulating and promoting urban development. Even so, it would appear
that engineers are not the only ones that ‘dominate’ in the equation and that the wider
epistemic community are also involved.
In a study on the role of the epistemic community in shaping the local government policy in Fukuoka City, Japan, Mabon et al. (2019), observed that ‘Locallysituated scholars … have, for several decades, sought to shape local responses to
environmental change by influencing the policy for the built environment and the
green space.’ In this sense, Mabon et al. (2019) argued that the role of the epistemic
community in Fukuoka tends to lean towards ‘technocratic’ governance and that
scholars could act ‘as a higher authority for setting an appropriate environmental
policy’. Furthermore, Boelens and Vos (2012) argued that municipal officials internalise the expression of the concepts and processes that are expressed by ‘experts’.
When considering the conclusion of Mabon et al. (2019), as well as the assertion of
Boelens and Vos (2012), Reus-Smit and Snidal (2008) expressed the view that these
interpretations by city planners entail the empirical side (p. 28) of the theoretical coin
of green and ecological infrastructures. What about the normative side? In this book,
I will explore the theoretical tension between the empirical and normative stances in
eThekwini’s green and ecological policy landscape, and I will indicate how the wider
epistemic community has contributed to the thinking of eThekwini city planners in
conceptualising and implementing green and ecological infrastructure enterprises.
All in all, this brief literature review indicates that not all local government officials
understand a green infrastructure in the same way; they have divergent considerations of the concept, of the operating environment of the infrastructure, and of the
ways and means of its implementation. What the examination also tells us is that a
one-size-fits-all approach to green and ecological infrastructure policy development
and implementation would most probably not work, because unique socio-economic
and ecological circumstances influence the green and ecological infrastructure policy
environment of local governments. Furthermore, the examination of literature indicates that green and ecological infrastructure approaches are not merely technocratic
1 Green and Ecological Infrastructures and Water Security …
green infrastructure policies the realm of public participation and grey infrastructure strategies the domain of technocratic expertise. Because of this strain, municipal officials and other champions could take green infrastructures ‘at face value
as inherently sustainable’, which Wachsmuth and Angelo (2018: 1052) called ‘the
realistic illusion’, while grey infrastructure implementation suffers from ‘the illusion
of transparency’ that is characterised by considering a problem to be technological
optimisation.
In this respect, Finewood et al. (2019: 910) expressed a further argument by stating
that, ‘The impacts of hidden or obscured values and normative biases embedded in
[green] infrastructure suggest that it is important to be attentive to who designs them
and for what purpose’. In this book, I intend to uncover how green and ecological
infrastructure policies and initiatives are designed, and by whom? Finewood et al.
(2019: 910) went on to say that their research has discovered that a green infrastructure is the ‘purview of engineers’. These professionals design and implement such
systems by utilising technocratic decision-making processes for the protection of
urban properties and for investment opportunities, by complying with regulations, as
well as by stimulating and promoting urban development. Even so, it would appear
that engineers are not the only ones that ‘dominate’ in the equation and that the wider
epistemic community are also involved.
In a study on the role of the epistemic community in shaping the local government policy in Fukuoka City, Japan, Mabon et al. (2019), observed that ‘Locallysituated scholars … have, for several decades, sought to shape local responses to
environmental change by influencing the policy for the built environment and the
green space.’ In this sense, Mabon et al. (2019) argued that the role of the epistemic
community in Fukuoka tends to lean towards ‘technocratic’ governance and that
scholars could act ‘as a higher authority for setting an appropriate environmental
policy’. Furthermore, Boelens and Vos (2012) argued that municipal officials internalise the expression of the concepts and processes that are expressed by ‘experts’.
When considering the conclusion of Mabon et al. (2019), as well as the assertion of
Boelens and Vos (2012), Reus-Smit and Snidal (2008) expressed the view that these
interpretations by city planners entail the empirical side (p. 28) of the theoretical coin
of green and ecological infrastructures. What about the normative side? In this book,
I will explore the theoretical tension between the empirical and normative stances in
eThekwini’s green and ecological policy landscape, and I will indicate how the wider
epistemic community has contributed to the thinking of eThekwini city planners in
conceptualising and implementing green and ecological infrastructure enterprises.
All in all, this brief literature review indicates that not all local government officials
understand a green infrastructure in the same way; they have divergent considerations of the concept, of the operating environment of the infrastructure, and of the
ways and means of its implementation. What the examination also tells us is that a
one-size-fits-all approach to green and ecological infrastructure policy development
and implementation would most probably not work, because unique socio-economic
and ecological circumstances influence the green and ecological infrastructure policy
environment of local governments. Furthermore, the examination of literature indicates that green and ecological infrastructure approaches are not merely technocratic