Search for: All records

This perspective emerged from ongoing dialogue among ecologists initiated by a virtual workshop in 2021. A transdisciplinary group of researchers and practitioners conclude that urban ecology as a science can better contribute to positive futures by focusing on relationships, rather than prioritizing urban structures. Insights from other relational disciplines, such as political ecology, governance, urban design, and conservation also contribute. Relationality is especially powerful given the need to rapidly adapt to the changing social and biophysical drivers of global urban systems. These unprecedented dynamics are better understood through a relational lens than traditional structural questions. We use three kinds of coproduction—of the social-ecological world, of science, and of actionable knowledge—to identify key processes of coproduction within urban places. Connectivity is crucial to relational urban ecology. Eight themes emerge from the joint explorations of the paper and point toward social action for improving life and environment in urban futures.

 

Abstract Australia is experiencing mounting pressures related to processes of urbanisation, biodiversity loss and climate change felt at large in cities. At the same time, it is cities that can take the leading role in pioneering approaches and solutions to respond to those coupling emergencies. In this perspective piece we respond to the following question: What are the required transformations for prioritising, valuing, maintaining and embracing nature in cities in Australia? We adopt the mission framework as an organising framework to present proposed pathways to transform Australian cities as nature-positive places of the future. We propose three interconnected pathways as starting actions to steer urban planning, policy and governance in Australian cities: First, cities need to establish evidence-based planning for nature in cities and mainstream new planning tools that safeguard and foreground urban nature. Second, collaborative planning needs to become a standard practice in cities and inclusive governance for nature in cities needs to prioritise Aboriginal knowledge systems and practices as well as look beyond what local governments can do. Third, for progressing to nature-positive cities, it is paramount to empower communities to innovate with nature across Australian cities. Whilst we focus on Australian cities, the lessons and pathways are broadly applicably globally and can inspire science-policy debates for the post COP15 biodiversity and COP26 climate change implementation processes. 

This paper presents a typology of ecological injustice hotspots for targeted design of nature-based solutions to guide planning and designing of just cities. The typology demonstrates how the needs and capabilities of nonhuman nature can be embedded within transitions to multi- and interspecies relational futures that regenerate and protect urban social-ecological systems. We synthesise the findings of previous quantitative and qualitative analyses to develop the Ecologically Just Cities Framework that (1) works as a diagnostic tool to characterise four types of urban ecological injustices and (2) identifies nature-based planning actions that can best respond to different types of place-based ecological injustices. 摘要 本文提出了一个生态不公正热点的类型学，用于有针对性地设计基于自然的解决方案，以指导公正城市的规划和设计。该类型学展示了非人类自然的需求和能力如何能够被嵌入到向多物种和跨物种关系的未来过渡中，从而再生和保护城市社会生态系统。我们综合了之前的定量和定性分析结果，制定了生态公正的城市框架，(1) 作为诊断工具来描述四种类型的城市生态不公正；(2) 确定了基于自然的规划行动，可以最好地应对不同类型的地方生态不公正问题。 

Urban social–ecological–technological systems (SETS) are dynamic and respond to climate pressures. Change involves alterations to land and resource management, social organization, infrastructure, and design. Research often focuses on how climate change impacts urban SETS or on the characteristics of urban SETS that promote climate resilience. Yet passive approaches to urban climate change adaptation may disregard active SETS change by urban residents, planners, and policymakers that could be opportunities for adaptation. Here, we use evidence of urban social, ecological, and technological change to address how SETS change opens windows of opportunity to improve climate change adaptation.