In recent decades, many cities, acknowledging the fact that nature is a vital part of cities, have adopted
sustainable development policies into their urban plans. Appendix 4 provides a brief summary of best practice sustainability models in cities, at a range of spatial scales. However, it is worthy to note that most of these best practice examples are on a city or global scale, with little consideration for the local scale, where urban
For a sustainable built environment, it is necessary to regulate the processes of nature and control the scale of human activities through integration of environmental processes in strategic spatial planning. According to Yigitcanlar and Dizdaroglu (2015), this integration bring a holistic understanding of the physical characteristics or urban development as being part of a system with the natural environment and its potential, risks, and limitations in the planning process. “In this respect, ecological
planning is a fundamental approach to the sparing and efficient use of natural resources while adopting human activities in a less harmful way to the environment” (Clini et
al., 2008, as cited in Yigitcanlar and Dizdaroglu, 2015: 164).
2.8.1 Sustainability and Poverty
Adams, Aveling, Brockington, Dickson, Elliott, Hutton, Roe, Vira, and Wolmer (2004) argue that threats to biodiversity and natural resources are often combatted by the
creation of protected areas which foreclose future land uses and have negative effects on poverty and the poor, through evictions, who may benefit from living on this land. They therefore suggest that the needs of local people need to be considered with great regard for human rights in order to align national poverty alleviation objectives and conservation and sustainability objectives. In order to
ensure a sustainable future, poverty and nature cannot be separated as a better understanding of nature and
sustainability objectives offers important opportunities for the betterment of poor livelihoods and the eradication of poverty through sustainable and renewable energy and development initiatives (Adams et al., 2004).
2.8.2 Rights of Nature
Acosta (2010) argues that nature should be a subject of rights, with the right to be restored when destroyed. This will ensure plural citizenship in a symbiotic relationship between humans and nature and will free nature from its status as an object to be owned through political encouraging and enabling of ecological and environmental justice. In the international Climate Talks in Paris (2015), the International Rights of Nature Tribunal was established to defend the rights of nature and ensure planetary justice in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Rights of Mother Earth (successful in the Ecuadorial Constitution). This landmark in human history, according to Acosta (2010), enables decision making around issues which negatively impact the environment and gives moral weight to civil movements which demand climate justice for sustainable futures. In order for an approach, such as this, to be successful or even viable in post-colonial countries, planning must find innovative ways to integrate the rights of nature with the rights of humans, which are often still not fully realized and respected.
2.8.3 Earth Jurisprudence
Despite the contestation of the promotion of environmental rights over what could be considered to be more pressing social issues, the move towards a comprehensive set of rights for the environment is in many ways a clear sign that nature plays a vital role in the survival of humans and the earth itself. Current government systems facilitate the perpetuation of human domination over nature, allowing for continued degradation of nature’s finite systems (Cullinan, 2010). Similarly to how colonial powers rejected the rights of indigenous people and allowing for their
oppression, so do current laws reject the rights of other non- human inhabitants (Cullinan, 2010). The idea of Earth
Jurisprudence as discussed by Cullinan (2010), establishes the earth as a whole community which allows for the creation of ecocentric or earth-centric systems of
governance. However, the word ecocentric, in this context, is slightly problematic. This is due to the fact that this
dissertation argues for a sustaincentric approach to
development which is not polarized and which integrates ecocentric and anthropocentric paradigms. As such, it means that earth jurisprudence allows space for
sustaincentric systems of governance which are people and environment centered.
2.8.4 Technology and Innovation
UNEP (2011) offers a positive prospect in the realm of technology and innovation. They suggest that
technological processes have the potential to deliver better and increased services which use less energy, minerals and water in order to reconcile the relationships between human society and nature. They favor policies and market signals which allow the transition to green low- resource-use economic models which they argue are financially viable and offer innovative solutions for an increased future potential for human survival and poverty alleviation. Additionally, a lecture given by Sue Parnell (2016) highlighted the fact that in order to achieve a more sustainable future for cities around the globe, innovation is the key in reexamining the interplay between the different facets of urban life. Innovation, in her view, is the solution to discovering new ways of living and interacting with
economic, social, and environmental processes. The old and unsustainable models of development are known to be insufficient to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and as such, new modes of development, enabled through spatial planning and design, are essential to the innovative realisation of a brighter future.
2.8.5 Indigenous Knowledge and Spirituality
Anderson (2005) suggests the legitimization of indigenous and local knowledge of people who live closely on and with the land and the importance of their conservation
efforts. Understanding this knowledge, he argues, can help in the creation of national policies as it is far more
sophisticated than originally thought to be in the past and offers opportunities for job creation and the establishment of new institutions around capturing this knowledge for inclusion in resource managament plans. Furthermore, Anhorn (2006) argues for the inclusion of religious and spiritual knowledge of land and its natural processes and resources in planing.
2.9 Planning Approach Recommendations for the