4.7 Article

Collaborative Geodesign to advance multifunctional landscapes

Journal

LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING
Volume 156, Issue -, Pages 71-80

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.05.011

Keywords

Geodesign; Landscape planning; GIS; Ecosystem services; Collaboration; Multifunctional landscapes

Funding

  1. US Department of Agriculture's Natural Resource Conservation Service Conservation Innovation Grant Program
  2. University of Minnesota's Office of the Vice President for Research
  3. Initiative for Renewable Energy and Environment
  4. Institute on the Environment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper illustrates the application of Geodesign in the context of multifunctional landscape scale planning and design to optimize production of food and biofuel commodities with enhanced water quality and habitat performance. It draws on multiple disciplinary perspectives, highlighting the contributions of Geodesign in advancing stakeholder consensus in balancing natural resource protection and agricultural production priorities. The paper uses the Seven Mile Creek Fuelshed Project as a research context for examining the ways that Geodesign can enhance collaborative planning processes, build knowledge of natural and production systems at the landscape scale, and integrate consideration of feedback from multiple performance criteria into an adaptive and iterative process of landscape planning and design. The paper describes the development and application of the Geodesign system used in the landscape planning process and offers important insights into how the system contributed to the collaborative stakeholder engagement, informed stakeholder decision making, and enhanced the landscape planning outcomes. A mixed-method analytical approach is used to assess stakeholder perceptions and the outcomes of the collaborative Geodesign process. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available