10
Table 2.2 presents the scoring protocol used for the vision and objectives component. A plan is awarded the highest score when it defines locally specific principles and quantitative targets for the enhancement of ES provision. A high-quality
vision and objectives component is expected to coordinate public and private landuse decisions to achieve the defined goals (Berke and Godschalk 2009), and, more
specifically, to guide the choice of the best planning alternatives in terms of both
“what” and “where” (Kremer and Hamstead 2016). For the actions component, we
assigned a binary score to record the presence, for each urban ES, of at least one
action (as in Wilkinson et al. (2013)). We then defined the overall quality of the
component as the share of ES addressed by at least one action in the plan. To measure the overall quality of inclusion in the sample, we adopted the depth indicator
proposed by Tang et al. (2010), which calculates the average score considering
only the plans with a non-zero score in the component. We calculated the indicator
for each urban ES for the information base and for the vision and objectives
components.
Table 2.2 Scoring protocol for the vision and objectives component. The examples are taken from
the analysed plans (own translation). Plan ID codes are reported in Annex 1
Score Description
Example
0
The plan contains no evidence of
objectives related to the ES.
–
1
The plan defines objectives of
ecosystem conservation/
enhancement, which are expected to
affect positively ES provision, but
does not directly refer to ES.
“Allow the restoration of river sides, particularly
of potential flooding risk areas and retention
areas that control overflows”. (Source: P11)
2
The plan defines objectives directly
related to ES provision. However,
they are entirely descriptive, and lack
local application and analysis.
“Tree planting, enlargement of existing green
areas, and hedge planting must be encouraged to
enhance the local micro-climate (including air
purification, noise abatement, and mitigation of
the heat island caused by impermeable
surfaces)”. (Source: P07)
3
The plan defines qualitative
objectives directly related to ES
provision through a locally specific
analysis and application of the ES
concept.
[In the peri-urban areas] “the municipal
administration envisions the drafting of a
specific plan […] for the safeguard and
enhancement of green recreational areas and
green belts, aimed at increasing the absorption
of particulate matter and the reduction of the
urban heat island effect.” (Source: P10)
4
The plan defines objectives and
quantitative targets related to ES
provision through a locally specific
analysis and application of the ES
concept.
“The objective of increasing the amount of
public green areas up to three times the existing
can also be reached by making the 22% of the
actual inaccessible green areas accessible and
usable. This way, the green area per inhabitant
doubles and exceeds the 30 Km
2
/inhabit..”.
(Source: P09)
2 Reviewing Ecosystem Services in Urban Plans
Table 2.2 presents the scoring protocol used for the vision and objectives component. A plan is awarded the highest score when it defines locally specific principles and quantitative targets for the enhancement of ES provision. A high-quality
vision and objectives component is expected to coordinate public and private landuse decisions to achieve the defined goals (Berke and Godschalk 2009), and, more
specifically, to guide the choice of the best planning alternatives in terms of both
“what” and “where” (Kremer and Hamstead 2016). For the actions component, we
assigned a binary score to record the presence, for each urban ES, of at least one
action (as in Wilkinson et al. (2013)). We then defined the overall quality of the
component as the share of ES addressed by at least one action in the plan. To measure the overall quality of inclusion in the sample, we adopted the depth indicator
proposed by Tang et al. (2010), which calculates the average score considering
only the plans with a non-zero score in the component. We calculated the indicator
for each urban ES for the information base and for the vision and objectives
components.
Table 2.2 Scoring protocol for the vision and objectives component. The examples are taken from
the analysed plans (own translation). Plan ID codes are reported in Annex 1
Score Description
Example
0
The plan contains no evidence of
objectives related to the ES.
–
1
The plan defines objectives of
ecosystem conservation/
enhancement, which are expected to
affect positively ES provision, but
does not directly refer to ES.
“Allow the restoration of river sides, particularly
of potential flooding risk areas and retention
areas that control overflows”. (Source: P11)
2
The plan defines objectives directly
related to ES provision. However,
they are entirely descriptive, and lack
local application and analysis.
“Tree planting, enlargement of existing green
areas, and hedge planting must be encouraged to
enhance the local micro-climate (including air
purification, noise abatement, and mitigation of
the heat island caused by impermeable
surfaces)”. (Source: P07)
3
The plan defines qualitative
objectives directly related to ES
provision through a locally specific
analysis and application of the ES
concept.
[In the peri-urban areas] “the municipal
administration envisions the drafting of a
specific plan […] for the safeguard and
enhancement of green recreational areas and
green belts, aimed at increasing the absorption
of particulate matter and the reduction of the
urban heat island effect.” (Source: P10)
4
The plan defines objectives and
quantitative targets related to ES
provision through a locally specific
analysis and application of the ES
concept.
“The objective of increasing the amount of
public green areas up to three times the existing
can also be reached by making the 22% of the
actual inaccessible green areas accessible and
usable. This way, the green area per inhabitant
doubles and exceeds the 30 Km
2
/inhabit..”.
(Source: P09)
2 Reviewing Ecosystem Services in Urban Plans