Interview with Urban Planner Amy Longva from Niche Planning Studio

This content was authorised by SGS Economics and Planning, a former partner of LGIU.

Amy Longva is an Urban Planner at Niche Planning Studio. She is currently collaborating with local governments across regional Victoria and Tasmania to develop robust strategic plans for sustainable development.

Can you tell us a little bit about how you came to work in planning and your current role at Niche?

I began my career as a botanist in Western Australia and transitioned into the clinical genetics space when I moved to Melbourne. Science requires many of the same things planners need – a willingness to problem-solve and adapt to new challenges, the ability to apply innovative solutions, and curiosity about systems thinking. For me, a desire to influence the bigger picture and strategic thinking led me away from the lab bench and into a different part of the system. At Niche, I’ve been supported in exploring every facet of planning, from assisting local government with overflow statutory applications to collaborating on urban greening strategies and developing Structure Plans for regional towns. Underlying all of that is my passion for biodiversity and its link to public health – something scientists are beginning to explore at the lab bench.

Can you describe the importance of integrating biodiversity into planning strategies at the local government level?

The UN predicts that more than five billion people will live in cities by 2030, experiencing large increases in non-contagious diseases such as allergies, cancer and mental health illnesses. Globally, cities have the same bacterial signatures and are more similar to one another than to a local rural area. Science has demonstrated that urbanisation and resulting biodiversity loss have contributed to the rise in these non-contagious diseases. I was interested in exploring how urbanisation negatively impacts soil and microbial biodiversity. This leads to a lack of exposure within the population to beneficial microbes and therefore increases in non-contagious diseases.

Are there ways councils can improve biodiversity outcomes through everyday infrastructure projects like roads, drainage, and parks?

Biodiversity tends to be regarded solely as a reflection of the number of plant and animal species, with strategies and actions targeted to increase numbers, rather than to appreciate ecosystems as a whole. We know that rewilding strategies targeted to enhance biodiversity in green spaces have shown potential to improve the health of urban residents by increasing microbial diversity and reducing pathogenic microbiota. Constraints such as maintenance budgets or knowledge gaps can hinder the implementation of some of these solutions. It’s hard for Council to agree or implement some of these solutions if they don’t fit with existing models of greenspace maintenance, for example.

What policy changes or legislative support would help local governments do more in this space?

Planners and policy-makers first need to be aware that soil and microbial biodiversity are issues of relevance to population health, and that they should be considered when planning and designing urban spaces. Planners should not need to be scientists to plan and manage urban spaces, but they should have access to scientific information in an understandable, accessible and relevant format to inform their work. There are alternative approaches to managing biodiversity, including consideration of a caring for Country approach; better communication between siloed professions of planning and science; and improved spatial data analysis and access. Three simple actions are:

1. Design green spaces that support and promote diversity in healthy vegetation communities – diverse and healthy vegetation leads to diverse and healthy soils in a positive feedback loop.
2. Address soil constraints; healthy soils give healthy microbiomes. Note that this may involve soil remediation or regeneration, and consultation with soil scientists.
3. Design urban areas for inclusive opportunities for the community to have ‘hands-on’ interaction with natural space – offering opportunity for enhancement and replenishment of human microbiota from environmental microbiota.

Can you share an example of a local government that is leading in biodiversity sensitive planning?

The City of Melbourne are leading the way in Victoria with their approach to biodiversity. Their Nature In The City strategy, published in 2017 was ground-breaking in it’s acknowledgment of all components of the ecosystem, “from the soil with its underground fungi to the plants and animal, including insects, birds, mammals and frogs”, and considers the entire city, including exotic species, as an eco-system. They have partnered with universities to develop methods of improving streetscape biodiversity, have trialled planting native wildflower meadows instead of grass as understoreys in open space and have an active citizen science and education program.

However, the challenges surrounding biodiversity for each municipality are different, as the urban fabric shifts from peri-urban to urban across the city, and rural municipalities have different considerations altogether.