Landscape planning for biodiversity

Abstract For much of recorded history, we have viewed the natural environment as a resource to be exploited. However, our attitude to nature has begun to shift profoundly as the negative effects of our industrial economy have become clearer and more catastrophic. The growing credence given in recent years to conservation of the world's biodiversity is a good example of this shift in cultural values. Landscape planning is a process through which to pursue biodiversity conservation. Well informed scientific analysis, linked with pragmatic politics in an effective planning process, may be used to guide plans which: (1) are proactive instead of reactive; (2) are visionary as well as pragmatic; (3) are well founded in terms of research and understanding; (4) are prescriptive, not just informative; (5) are spatial, identifying and prioritizing specific areas and locations for protection and enhancement; (6) are implementable, in terms of political support and available resources; (7) use regulations and impact procedures as implementing tools; (8) are comprehensive but not too detailed; (9) are mid- to long-term in time-scale; (10) overcome the inherent tendency of project-level regulation and assessment to fragment habitat; (11) focus on planning for habitats and systems; (12) provide a rational basis for coordinating project-specific mitigation requirements; (13) provide effective financial mechanisms to compensate for significant losses of economic opportunity; (14) build political consensus and public support through an open and accountable process; (15) are cyclical, through monitoring and review; (16) are binding, rather than simply advisory. This paper discusses key issues involved in planning for biodiversity in urbanizing regions, drawing in particular on case studies in southern California. It stresses the need for a greater interaction and exchange of information between the research and modeling of science and the practice of planning.