Charles Darwin University

CDU eSpace
Institutional Repository

 
CDU Staff and Student only
 

Navigating trade-offs in land-use planning: integrating human well-being into objective setting

Adams, Vanessa M., Pressey, Robert L. and Stoeckl, Natalie (2014). Navigating trade-offs in land-use planning: integrating human well-being into objective setting. Ecology and Society,19(4 - Article No. 53).

Document type: Journal Article
Citation counts: Altmetric Score Altmetric Score is 1
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Attached Files (Some files may be inaccessible until you login with your CDU eSpace credentials)
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads
Download this reading Adams_49353.pdf Published version application/pdf 3.97MB 24
Reading the attached file works best in Firefox, Chrome and IE 9 or later.

IRMA ID 84376995xPUB161
Title Navigating trade-offs in land-use planning: integrating human well-being into objective setting
Author Adams, Vanessa M.
Pressey, Robert L.
Stoeckl, Natalie
Journal Name Ecology and Society
Publication Date 2014
Volume Number 19
Issue Number 4 - Article No. 53
ISSN 1708-3087   (check CDU catalogue open catalogue search in new window)
Total Pages 21
Place of Publication Canada
Publisher Resilience Alliance Publications
HERDC Category C1 - Journal Article (DIISR)
Abstract There is an increasing demand for development of natural resources, which can be accompanied by environmental degradation. Planning for multiple land uses requires navigating trade-offs between social, economic, and environmental outcomes arising from different possible futures. To explore these trade-offs, we use the Daly River catchment, in Australia’s Northern Territory, as a case study. The catchment contains areas of priority for both conservation and development. In response to the challenge of navigating the required trade-offs, the Daly River Management Advisory Committee (DRMAC) initiated a land-use plan for the region. Both development and conservation of natural resources in the catchment will affect human well-being and the long-term provisioning of ecosystem services in diverse ways. To understand some of these impacts, an innovative engagement process was designed to elicit the relative importance of key factors to residents’ well-being. The process identified 19 well-being factors grouped into four domains: biodiversity, socio-cultural, recreational, and commercial. Overall, the highest-ranked well-being factors were in the social-cultural and biodiversity domains while commercial values were ranked the least important. Respondents reported low satisfaction with commercial factors as well, noting concerns over environmental impacts from existing developments and sustainability of future developments. We identified differences in the reported importance values for several types of stakeholders, most notably between indigenous respondents and those employed in the agricultural sectors. Indigenous respondents placed greater importance on biodiversity and socio-cultural factors. Agricultural respondents placed greater importance on commercial factors. The outcomes of our engagement were integrated into DRMAC’s process of objective-setting to ensure that objectives for each domain were included in land-use planning. Our results can also anticipate potential conflicts between different stakeholders and changes in well-being associated with different land uses. We describe how our findings will inform the next stages of stakeholder engagement and comment on the utility of such an approach for integrating well-being into objective setting for land-use and scenario planning.
Keywords Development
Human well-being
Land-use planning
Objective setting
Stakeholder engagement
Systematic
Conservation planning
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-07168-190453   (check subscription with CDU E-Gateway service for CDU Staff and Students  check subscription with CDU E-Gateway in new window)


© copyright

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in CDU eSpace. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact digitisation@cdu.edu.au.

 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Access Statistics: 23 Abstract Views, 24 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Wed, 19 Aug 2015, 12:27:13 CST