Decalogue: Strategic elements for the planning and management of Barcelona’s metropolitan Green Infrastructure

Metropolitan areas are introducing a new paradigm in their planning, adopted by the European Union in relatively recent times (European Commission, 2010): whose open spaces constitute, in addition to a set of habitats of high natural value, a Green Infrastructure that provides a series of ecosystem services on which both the quality of life of the citizens who inhabit the built space depends, as well as the possibility of developing a more circular and sustainable economy than the current one. This paradigm shift is considered essential so that the metropolises can play the role that corresponds to them in the Sustainable Development Goals proposed in the United Nations 2030 Agenda and assumed by the Spanish and Catalan governments.

However, the debate that has been carried out to specify this new approach to the interdependence between built space and open space has also highlighted the need to know and evaluate the interactions that occur, or could occur, between these spaces. Taking on this challenge requires another look at metropolitan socio-environmental systems, which identifies their role in the functioning of the territory and allows quantifying the flows of matter and energy that move in both directions. This will allow us to understand how this barter configures a certain biodiversity and certain structures of land use that are expressed in landscapes that must provide vital ecosystem services through the network of cities and adaptation to global change.

The Green Infrastructure has a regulatory framework specified in article 15 of Law 42/2007 and the different strategic frameworks that contemplate it, such as the Green Infrastructure Program of Catalonia 2017-21, at the Catalan level; the National Strategy for Green Infrastructure and Ecological Connectivity and Restoration, at the Spanish level; and Communication COM (2013) 249 final of the European Commission. According to the definition introduced by this Communication, Green Infrastructure is understood as the ecologically coherent and strategically planned network of natural, semi-natural areas and other environmental elements, designed and managed for the conservation of ecosystems and the maintenance of the services that provide. Thus, it is necessary to understand the Green Infrastructure far beyond its ecological value linked to biodiversity or environmental quality, and consider it as a key element within the infrastructure network of the whole territory, and specifically of urban settlements.

55.3% of the world population (4,220 million people) lived in urban areas at the end of the first decade of the 21st century, and it is estimated that 60.4% of the world population (5,167 million people) will live in a city of at least 500,000 inhabitants by 2030 (United Nations, 2019). This urban growth will mean a significant increase in the demand for energy, food and materials, and an expansion of the built space of approximately 1.2 million km2 throughout the world (Seto et al., 2012). It will also entail a very considerable degradation and fragmentation of the territory, leading to a serious loss of habitats and species, compromising the functionality of ecosystems and their ability to provide ecosystem services to society (Liu et al., 2016; McDonald et al., 2013).

This scenario of urban growth poses great challenges for the sustainability of metropolises, especially in relation to mitigation and adaptation to climate change (Demuzere et al., 2014), the availability and quality of water, the provision of food and other natural resources. , or waste management (Chen, 2007; Satterthwaite et al., 2010). These challenges transcend urban limits and involve peri-urban and rural environments. For this reason, one of the questions that must be asked is how to plan the development of these highly anthropized territories, combining population growth with its metabolic demands, the conservation of ecosystems and the protection of biodiversity, focusing on well-being human. It is evident that a socio-ecological perspective is fundamental to planning metropolises (Pickett et al., 2001, 2011) and a treatment of the territory as a system (Marull et al., 2008; Padrón et al., 2020).

This implies consideration of a myriad of interactions between ecological, economic, social, cultural and technological perspectives, including key elements along the urban-rural gradient. One approach to address this challenge are nature-based solutions (Cohen-Shacham et al., 2016; Maes & Jacobs, 2017), particularly those related to the implementation of a metropolitan Green Infrastructure. Although this is a fairly broad concept in its definition and application (for example, we can talk

ar of Green Infrastructure as a structural tool of landscapes, but also as a strategic framework for territorial planning), is relatively consolidated and is currently the focus of important debates on the sustainability of metropolises (Chatzimentor et al., 2020) . We understand by Green Infrastructure the network of natural and semi-natural areas, which has been strategically planned and managed with the aim of supporting native species, maintaining natural ecological processes, sustaining air and water resources, and contributing to health. and the quality of life of communities and individuals (Benedict & Mcmahon, 2002). This network can be made up of very diverse open spaces, in rural and urban areas, both terrestrial and freshwater, coastal and marine. They include everything from parks and nature reserves, to greenways and conservation easements, agricultural land and other man-made elements, such as ecoducts or bike paths (Naumann et al., 2011). In this sense, the concept of multifunctionality of Green Infrastructure is fundamental, since it is directly associated with the capacity of this network and its components to provide society with important ecosystem services that often lack substitutes (Hansen & Pauleit, 2014; Tzoulas et al., 2007), promoting social cohesion and the functioning of ecosystems (Salomaa et al., 2017). Although the concept of Green Infrastructure is being applied more and more internationally, its main advances in terms of implementation in different areas and metropolitan regions have been mainly in the Global North, and especially in Europe, where it has managed to consolidate itself as an essential element of the main strategies to face climate change (EU Adaptation strategy) and the loss of biodiversity (EU Biodiversity strategy 2030). For example, this last strategy seeks the consolidation of a trans-European network of open spaces, based on the strengthening of the current Natura 2000 Network, restoring and better connecting the functional ecosystems of the different territories, improving ecological connectivity and the provision of ecosystem services (European Commission, 2021). From the Habitats Directive (article 10) the Member States of the European Union are urged to improve the ecological coherence of the Natura 2000 network. In particular, for Spain, article 46 of Law 42/2007 on Natural Heritage and Biodiversity calls on the autonomous communities to promote, within the framework of their environmental and territorial planning policies, the conservation of ecological corridors and the management of those elements of the landscape and territorial areas that are essential or have primary importance for migration, geographical distribution and genetic exchange between populations of wild fauna and flora species. In the case of the Barcelona metropolitan area, the high fragmentation of open spaces, the homogenization of the landscape and the effects on climate change, among other impacts derived from urban and industrial activities, are the main threats to sustainability. of this territory and the main challenge for a functional Green Infrastructure. For this reason, territorial planning (such as the Metropolitan Urban Master Plan, currently being prepared), is working to develop tools that will guide the necessary regulations, at supra-municipal and local scales, to achieve the objectives of improving ecological connectivity, naturalizing the territory, enhance the values ​​of the biophysical matrix, and improve the efficiency of the urban metabolism, minimizing environmental impacts by enhancing the values, functions and services of the Green Infrastructure (AMB, 2020). However, despite this strategic framework and its political-legislative support, there are still important challenges for the effective territorial implementation of Green Infrastructure in the Barcelona metropolitan area. Without going any further, the expansion of El Prat airport is currently under debate, which could cause irreversible impacts on the few wetlands that still remain in the metropolis, essential for the regulation of the delta water system and the biodiversity it hosts. And not so long ago (2012), leisure and gaming macro-projects were even considered, such as Eurovegas, which would have seriously affected the Baix Llobregat Agrarian Park (about 800 hectares), essential for the provision of food and the functioning of the economy. -landscape of a territory with as many urban and infrastructural pressures as the Barcelona metropolitan area.

These two examples serve to verify the fragility of the metropolitan Green Infrastructure in the face of economic investments with great transforming capacity of the land.

and, therefore, the need to consolidate, as soon as possible, a Green Infrastructure that allows facing the important current and future socio-ecological challenges. Some of the questions to ask refer precisely to how this territorial implementation of the metropolitan Green Infrastructure should be done, at a local but also supra-municipal scale, and how to evaluate its functionality from a systemic point of view, as well as its capacity to provide ecosystem services to society (Chatzimentor et al., 2020; Slätmo et al., 2019). The still wide, and sometimes diffuse, definition of Green Infrastructure, in practice has not allowed the convergence of the visions of the various territorial actors, to reach consensus between the economic model, social welfare, biodiversity conservation and urban planning, we put case.

To meet this challenge, in 2018 the Metropolitan Laboratory of Ecology and Territory of Barcelona (LET) was launched. The LET is established through an agreement between the Metropolitan Area of ​​Barcelona (AMB), the Institute of Regional and Metropolitan Studies of Barcelona (IERMB) and the Center for Ecological Research and Forestry Applications (CREAF), and is part of the UAB Open network Labs. The LET has three fundamental objectives: to complete and update the databases on the most significant biophysical variables in the Barcelona metropolis, in accordance with the administrations involved, so that they can be used in the sustainable planning of the territory; monitor the key dimensions (metabolic efficiency, biodiversity conservation, landscape functioning, ecosystem services, climate change and social cohesion) and planning tools (green infrastructure, peri-urban agriculture, etc.) of the metropolitan territory; and promote applied research to generate knowledge about the metropolitan socio-ecological system, identifying the critical/strategic elements for planning and managing the territory.

The objective of the monograph recently published in Papers 64 Challenges and opportunities of the metropolitan green infrastructure, coordinated by the LET, has been to evaluate the potential application of the concept of metropolitan Green Infrastructure, from two perspectives: first, experience and advances observed in the Barcelona metropolitan area, and second, from a set of international experiences regarding the conceptualization, application, development and challenges of green infrastructure in various global regions, such as South America, Asia, North America and North Europe. . The conceptual and methodological advances gathered in the 18 Papers articles are relevant for the understanding and application of the concept of metropolitan Green Infrastructure, but there is still a long way to go from the academic, political and technical fields.

In summary, it is necessary to introduce in urban and territorial planning the new paradigm mentioned at the beginning of this article: the need for a multifunctional Green Infrastructure that allows the provision of a series of essential ecosystem services on which their quality of life depends so much on the citizens, such as the possibility of developing a more circular and sustainable economy, mitigating and adapting to global change. This paradigm shift is essential for cities to implement the Sustainable Development Goals, but it requires new criteria and innovative methods for planning cities in relation to their metropolises, as well as political will.

At the presentation of the Papers monograph on April 28 at the Palau Macaya in Barcelona, ​​a decalogue on “Strategic elements for the planning and management of the Metropolitan Green Infrastructure of Barcelona” was agreed upon by all the authors, with the objective that is useful for a socio-ecological transition of the metropolitan territory. It is presented below:

Decalogue on

Strategic elements for the planning and management of Barcelona’s metropolitan green infrastructure

 

Main goal:

Promote the Barcelona Metropolitan Green Infrastructure as a provider system of multiple ecosystem services, in order to stop the loss of biodiversity, adapt cities to climate change and turn them into more sustainable, resilient and healthy spaces for people.

Specific objectives:

1. Plan Green Infrastructure as a conditioning factor for sustainable urban and territorial progress from a systemic approach.

Strategic elements:

1.1 Characterize the key elements and functions of the Green Infrastructure from a systemic approach, as a basis for its planning and implementation in various urban typologies.

1.2 Establishing guidelines and regulations binds

recommendations, as well as recommendations, that guarantee the planning of the Green Infrastructure, adapting it to the specific needs of each territorial scale (urban, municipal, metropolitan, regional).

 

2. Establish mechanisms and instruments for governance, planning, management and financing of Green Infrastructure from a transversal perspective.

Strategic elements:

2.1 Develop a Green Infrastructure governance model that reinforces public leadership and favors interinstitutional and intersectoral coordination and synergies with private agents and the community fabric.

2.2 Articulate instruments and mechanisms that facilitate financing for the establishment and management of Green Infrastructure, solutions based on nature and ecosystem services.

2.3 Establish agreements between populations and public administrations from various territorial areas to intertwine to advance towards an integration between the countryside, cities and the metropolis that allows closing the cycles of water, nutrients, food and energy in a way that guarantees mitigation and adaptation to climate change; and the supply of ecosystem services.

2.4 Create coordination mechanisms at different administrative scales, from regional to municipal and neighborhood, including the potential of citizen participation in the management of Green Infrastructure.

 

3. Regenerate urban fabrics and new urban developments in relation to Green Infrastructure following the principles of ecosystemic urbanism.

Strategic elements:

3.1 Establish the reconnection of the city with nature with the implementation of a network of green areas and urban parks on a metropolitan scale.

3.2 Implement the concept of superblocks to build a green fabric in height and on the surface in urban systems.

3.3 Plan the green infrastructure taking into account the characteristics of the vegetation and the variables of the visual, sound and social landscape.

3.4 Stop the creation of new suburbs and new transport infrastructures in the Barcelona metropolitan region.

 

4. Connect the metabolic flows that move the metropolitan system with its Green Infrastructure following the principles of the circular economy.

Strategic elements:

4.1 Urban planning must have a systemic evaluation framework, understanding the water-energy-materials-territory relationship, to design efficient strategies in the use of resources and mitigation/adaptation to climate change.

4.2 Use organic urban waste to supply fertilizers to metropolitan agriculture, without large new infrastructures, but taking advantage of existing ones.

4.3 Consider the relationship between metabolic efficiency, economic activity and land use in urban and territorial planning.

 

5. Strengthen the functional structure of the Green Infrastructure by expanding and diversifying its elements, favoring its naturalization.

Strategic elements:

5.1 Promote mosaic landscapes, avoiding the fragmentation of habitats and the barrier effect of infrastructures.

5.2 Project and generate new Green Infrastructure through the implementation of solutions based on nature, with a systemic vision and adapted to the priorities of each territorial scale.

5.3 Deconstruct, restore and regenerate degraded spaces and soils both in the urban area and in open spaces.

 

6. Improve the biodiversity associated with Green Infrastructure, taking into account the functions and services it provides to society.

Strategic elements:

6.1 Preserve and improve the existing natural heritage in urban and peri-urban habitats, their biodiversity and associated ecosystem services.

6.2 Comprehensive treatment of the green and agroforestry spaces of the metropolitan territory, from the private garden to the best preserved forest spaces.

6.3 Manage increasing biological invasions that can negatively affect the overall functioning of biodiversity.

 

7. Value the functionalities of the Green Infrastructure contemplating ecosystem and nature-based solutions.

Strategic elements:

7.1 Improve the ecological and social connectivity of the urban Green Infrastructure and its continuity with the peri-urban and regional Green Infrastructure.

7.2 Preserve the spaces of the natural water cycle to guarantee ecological connectivity and the hydric and thermal regulation of the territory

7.3 Take advantage of the mosaic landscape in the peri-urban environment to favor the closing of the metabolic cycles (water, energy, nutrients, food), increasing their efficiency and reducing the negative externalities of the city.

7.4 Guarantee the coherence and integration of the different scales of the Green Infrastructure (urban, municipal, metropolitan and regional) to

maximize ecological functions and ecosystem services.

 

8. Diversify the ecosystem services of the Green Infrastructure such as agroecological production, climate regulation and cultural and leisure spaces.

Strategic elements:

8.1 Promote the Green Infrastructure as a space where citizens can develop socio-cultural and leisure activities, improving their well-being and health.

8.2 Increase food supply services through the recovery and reconversion of agricultural land towards agroecological production

8.3 Optimize the capacity of the Green Infrastructure as a provider of climate regulation services and reduction of natural risks and minimization of the impacts of extreme weather events.

8.4 Advance in the multi-scale integration of the various Green Infrastructure spaces that must constitute an agroecological territory where bioeconomic circularity between the countryside, cities and the metropolis becomes a reality.

 

9. Develop methodologies that allow a comprehensive evaluation of Green Infrastructure as essential tools for urban sustainability.

Strategic elements:

9.1 Improve knowledge of the Green Infrastructure and develop indicators to characterize its elements, functions and services in the different types of urban, agricultural and protected natural areas.

9.2 Develop multi-criteria tools that allow systemic modeling of the multifunctionality of Green Infrastructure and facilitate the calculation of planning scenarios (land use, ecological transition, climate change).

9.3 Establish procedures for periodic evaluation of the state of the Green Infrastructure, of the achievement of planning objectives, and accountability of the initiatives carried out.

9.4 Promote citizen science projects as a new method of obtaining data on biodiversity and promote socio-environmental values.

 

10. Create social awareness and involve citizens in the development of Green Infrastructure to support people’s health and well-being.

Strategic elements:

10.1 Develop citizen communication initiatives for the enhancement of Green Infrastructure, and specifically of solutions based on nature, and the ecosystem services they provide.

10.2 Promote the active involvement of diverse people and groups in the promotion and development of actions that favor Green Infrastructure, including the recovery and strengthening of new agricultural, livestock and forestry activities aimed at the agroecological transition.

10.3 Design the Green Infrastructure to promote the health and well-being of citizens, in relation to the urban and social context.

 

References

Àrea Metropolitana de Barcelona (AMB). (2020). Avanç del Pla Director Urbanístic Metropolità. In Quaderns PDU metropolità. Barcelona.

Benedict, M. A., & Mcmahon, E. T. (2002). Green Infrastructure: Smart Conservation for the 21 Century. Renewable Resources Journal, 20.

Chatzimentor, A., Apostolopoulou, E., & Mazaris, A. D. (2020). A review of green infrastructure research in Europe: Challenges and opportunities. Landscape and Urban Planning, 198.

Chen, J. (2007). Rapid urbanization in China: A real challenge to soil protection and food security. CATENA, 69.

Cohen-Shacham, E., Walters, G., Janzen, C., & Maginnis, S. (2016). Nature-based solutions to address global societal challenges. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. xiii + 97pp. In Nature-based solutions to address global societal challenges.

Demuzere, M., Orru, K., Heidrich, O., Olazabal, E., Geneletti, D., Orru, H., Bhave, A. G., Mittal, N., Feliú, E., & Faehnle, M. (2014). Mitigating and adapting to climate change: Multi-functional and multi-scale assessment of green urban infrastructure. Journal of Environmental Management, 146.

European Commission (2010). Green Infrastructure. Summary report, nature and environment. Leaflet no. KH-32-10-314-EN-C.

European Commission. (2021). EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030. European Union.

Hansen, R., & Pauleit, S. (2014). From multifunctionality to multiple ecosystem services? A conceptual framework for multifunctionality in green infrastructure planning for Urban Areas. Ambio, 43.

Liu, Z., He, C., & Wu, J. (2016). The relationship between habitat loss and fragmentation during urbanization: an empirical evaluation from 16 world cities. PLoS One, 11.

Maes, J., & Jacobs, S. (2017). Nature-Based Solutions for Europe’s Sustainable Development. Conservation Letters, 10.

Marull, J., Pino, J., Tello, E., & Mallarach, J. M. (2008). El tratamiento del territorio como sistema: criterios ecológicos y metodologías paramétricas de análisis. Ministerio de Vivienda. Ciudad y Territorio. Estudios Territoriales, 157.

McDonald, R. I., Marcotullio, P. J., & Güneralp, B. (2013). Urbanization and Global Trends in Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.

Naumann, S., Rayment, M., Nolan, P., Forest, T. M., Gill, S., Infrastructure, G., & Forest, M. (2011). Design, implementation and cost elements of Green Infrastructure projects. Final Report. 070307.

Padró, R., La Rota-Aguilera, M. J., Giocoli, A., Cirera, J., Coll, F., Pons, M., Pino, J., Pili, S., Serrano, T., Villalba, G., Marull, J. (2020). Assessing the sustainability of contrasting land use scenarios through the Socioecological Integrated Analysis (SIA) of the metropolitan green infrastructure in Barcelona. Landscape and Urban Planning, 203.

Pickett, S. T. A., Cadenasso, M. L., Grove, J. M., Boone, C. G., Groffman, P. M., Irwin, E., Kaushal, S. S., Marshall, V., McGrath, B. P., Nilon, C. H., Pouyat, R. v., Szlavecz, K., Troy, A., & Warren, P. (2011). Urban ecological systems: Scientific foundations and a decade of progress. Journal of Environmental Management, 92.

Pickett, S. T. A., Cadenasso, M. L., Grove, J. M., Nilon, C. H., Pouyat, R. v, Zipperer, W. C., & Costanza, R. (2001). Urban Ecological Systems: Linking Terrestrial Ecological, Physical, and Socioeconomic Components of Metropolitan Areas. Annual Review of Ecology and Systmatics.

Salomaa, A., Paloniemi, R., Kotiaho, J. S., Kettunen, M., Apostolopoulou, E., & Cent, J. (2017). Can green infrastructure help to conserve biodiversity? Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 35.

Satterthwaite, D., Mcgranahan, G., & Tacoli, C. (2010). Urbanization and its implications for food and farming. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 365.

Seto, K. C., Güneralp, B., & Hutyra, L. R. (2012). Global forecasts of urban expansion to 2030 and direct impacts on biodiversity and carbon pools. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109.

Slätmo, E., Nilsson, K., & Turunen, E. (2019). Implementing green infrastructure in spatial planning in Europe. Land, 8.

Tzoulas, K., Korpela, K., Venn, S., Yli-Pelkonen, V., Kaźmierczak, A., Niemela, J., & James, P. (2007). Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using Green Infrastructure: A literature review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 8.

United Nations. (2019). World population prospects 2019. In Department of Economic and Social Affairs. World Population Prospects 2019. Issue 141.

van Vliet, J. (2019). Direct and indirect loss of natural area from urban expansion. Nature Sustainability, 2.