Landscape and Urban Planning 159 (2017) 62–75 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Landscape and Urban Planning journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/landurbplan Research Paper Spatial planning for multifunctional green infrastructure: Growing resilience in Detroit Sara Meerow ∗ , Joshua P. Newell School of Natural Resources and Environment, University of Michigan, USA h i g h l i g h t s • Green infrastructure in Detroit is not being sited to maximize ecosystem services. • A Green Infrastructure Spatial Planning (GISP) model is developed and applied to Detroit. • The GISP model provides an integrated, stakeholder-driven approach to maximize ecosystem services. • The model reveals tradeoffs, synergies and hotspots for future green infrastructure. • The model and planning approach can be readily deployed for other cities. a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 25 July 2016 Received in revised form 12 October 2016 Accepted 16 October 2016 Keywords: Green infrastructure Ecosystem services Resilience Detroit Spatial planning Urban greening a b s t r a c t Cities are expanding green infrastructure to enhance resilience and ecosystem services. Although green infrastructure is promoted for its multifunctionality, projects are typically sited based on a particular benefit, such as stormwater abatement, rather than a suite of socio-economic and environmental ben- efits. This stems in part from the lack of stakeholder-informed, city-scale approaches to systematically identify ecosystem service tradeoffs, synergies, and ‘hotspots’ associated with green infrastructure and its siting. To address this gap, we introduce the Green Infrastructure Spatial Planning (GISP) model, a GIS-based multi-criteria approach that integrates six benefits: 1) stormwater management; 2) social vulnerability; 3) green space; 4) air quality; 5) urban heat island amelioration; and 6) landscape connec- tivity. Stakeholders then weight priorities to identify hotspots where green infrastructure benefits are needed most. Applying the GISP model to Detroit, we compared the results with the locations of current green infrastructure projects. The analysis provides initial evidence that green infrastructure is not being sited in high priority areas for stormwater abatement, let alone for ameliorating urban heat island effects, improving air quality, or increasing habitat connectivity. However, as the Detroit GISP model reveals, it could be developed in locations that simultaneously abate stormwater, urban heat island, and air pollu- tion. Tradeoffs exist between siting to maximize stormwater management versus landscape connectivity. The GISP model provides an inclusive, replicable approach for planning future green infrastructure so that it maximizes social and ecological resilience. More broadly, it represents a spatial planning approach for evaluating competing and complementary ecosystem service priorities for a particular landscape. © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction For decades cities and communities have grappled with how to strategically balance often competing economic, environmental, and social justice goals (Campbell, 1996). Now there is increasing pressure to plan not just for sustainability but also for ‘resilience’, ∗ Corresponding author at: 440 Church Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA. E-mail addresses: sameerow@umich.edu (S. Meerow), jpnewell@umich.edu (J.P. Newell). or the ability to cope with disturbances or changes (Ahern, 2011; Davoudi et al. 2012). As with sustainability, planning for resilience is contested and political (Chelleri, Waters, Olazabal, & Minucci, 2015). A major strategy for enhancing the sustainability and resilience of cities and communities is the expansion of green infrastructure (Lennon & Scott, 2014). Green infrastructure refers to the devel- opment of urban green spaces, such as parks, rain gardens, and greenways, that provide a variety of social and ecological benefits, from improved public health to stormwater abatement (Jim, Yo, & Byrne, 2015; Young, 2011). These benefits are often classified using http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.10.005 0169-2046/© 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.