Application of Systems Engineering to Improve Ecological Knowledge Uptake in Spatial Planning Processes

Résumé fourni par la source

ABSTRACT The Global Biodiversity Framework calls for participatory, biodiversity‐inclusive spatial planning to address accelerating losses of biodiversity and ecosystem services driven by land‐use change. Yet spatial planning systems continue to enable nature degradation despite the increasing availability of ecological data. Ecological data is produced under a knowledge‐deficit model—assuming that more data leads to better decisions. However, in spatial planning practice, data must be activated through participation: the less the participation, the less ecological knowledge enters decision‐making. Participation is shaped by three dimensions: demos (who participates), chronos (when participation occurs), and kairos (the knowledge environment that enables effective participation). To examine how ecological data becomes integrated into planning decisions, we apply the Stakeholders, Problem, Alternatives, Decision, and Evaluation (SPADE) systems engineering framework. Using triangulation of interviews and gray literature, analyzed through thematic analysis, we interpret findings through a complexity lens, focusing on multi‐stakeholder interactions, path dependency, and unpredictable behaviors. We find multiple orientations for activating ecological data, but the regulated pathway addresses the most system requirements. We identify the need for an interpretation function within planning system architectures to create the appropriate kairos in which planners accept ecological data as decision‐relevant knowledge. We identified a number of examples of positive feedback which are limiting the ability to integrate ecological data in planning decisions. Finally, we argue that aligning future ecological data production with stakeholder objectives may enhance its uptake. This study offers a qualitative systems approach to better understand why biodiversity continues to decline despite enhanced data availability and regulated planning processes.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.