Briefing: Rethinking urban infrastructure from an ecological perspective in a post-Covid-19 world

Urban areas continue to change in response to climatic, engineering and socio-economic changes. Covid-19 exacerbated this by forcing many people to reflect on the composition of their local environment and evaluate the quality, quantity and provision of nature within urban areas. As a consequence of Covid-19 built infrastructure specialists have been further challenged to consider more ecologically focussed approaches to development that work within existing development frameworks. To achieve this, engineers, planners, architects and the environment sector should work more effectively to exchange knowledge, share best practice and create new practices that align engineered solutions with environmentally focussed design and management. It also requires a more nuanced appreciation of the elemental and thematic understandings of urban nature, which are often absent from development plans. If cities are to become more sustainable, a more holistic approach to development that integrates ecologically sensitive design with engineering innovation is needed. As a consequence, there is the potential to future-proof urban areas against the problems associated with health, climatic and economic change. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Engineering Sustainability is the property of Thomas Telford Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Parks, COVID-19 and the impact of austerity funding on public-service provision in a time of crisis

Since 2010 funding for local government in the UK has been drastically cut, first under the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition and subsequently by successive Conservative governments. The impact of this has been a drastic downscaling of funding of local health, education and environmental services. The limitations placed upon local planning authorities (LPA) by fiscal cuts has been brought to the fore in the UK (and internationally), by the novel coronavirus--COVID-19--and the subsequent 'stay-at-home' orders issues by the UK government. With restrictions of movement in place, although these are beginning to be relaxed in May 2020, among the few resources available to people are public parks and green spaces. As a result of COVID-19, parks have become both sanctuaries and contentious spaces, physically and conceptually, as the public, LPAs and central government have fought over perceived 'rights' to the landscape, and what practices should be allowed in them. All of which has been framed within an ongoing debate of austerity government and the management in a time of public-sector contraction. Here, Mell reflects on a series of factors that have influenced the funding and management of parks in the UK, the political decision making that has shifted funding away from the welfare state, and the reactions of individuals and communities to the restrictions placed upon them by the COVID-19 lockdown.

Access to Nature in a Post Covid-19 World: Opportunities for Green Infrastructure Financing, Distribution and Equitability in Urban Planning.

Covid-19 changed the way many people viewed and interacted with the natural environment. In the UK, a series of national lockdowns limited the number of places that individuals could use to support their mental and physical health. Parks, gardens, canals and other "green infrastructure" (GI) resources remained open and were repositioned as "essential infrastructure" supporting well-being. However, the quality, functionality and location of GI in urban areas illustrated a disparity in distribution that meant that in many cases communities with higher ethnic diversity, lower income and greater health inequality suffered from insufficient access. This paper provides commentary on these issues, reflecting on how planners, urban designers and environmental organizations are positioning GI in decision-making to address inequality. Through a discussion of access and quality in an era of austerity funding, this paper proposes potential pathways to equitable environmental planning that address historical and contemporary disenfranchisement with the natural environment in urban areas.