In 2006 Davies et al. (2006: 5) suggested that green infrastructure might be simply old wine in a new bottle. The suggestion that green infrastructure is nothing new has never really prompted much of a response from its advocates. They simply highlight that it re-interprets the most appropriate elements of different green space planning techniques, reframing them as the integrated approach known as green infrastructure. Green infrastructure is therefore not revolutionary and it has not developed out of the blue. What it is, though, is a more nuanced form of understanding between people, place and the environment, which helps its advocates to view development (and management) through a more holistic perspective (Benedict & McMahon, 2006). Duly, green infrastructure could be seen as a chameleon within planning, which enables its user to diversify its emphasis to suit the context of a specific development. Should this be considered a problem? At its very essence, planning – and within the context of green infrastructure, landscape planning – is a process of evolution, not stagnation (Isserman, 2014). Any debate of green infrastructure thus reflects, at least in part, the antecedents that have supported its development.