Introduction To The Theoretical Foundations of Multifunctional Landscapes and Their Application in Transdisciplinary Landscape Ecology

Jesper Brandt, Brbel Tress, Gunther Tress [eds.
Multifunctional Landscapes:
Interdisciplinary Approaches to Landscape Research and Management.
Conference material for the international conference on Multifunctional Landscapes: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Landscape Research and Management, Centre for Landscape Research, University of Roskilde, Denmark October 18-21, 2000.
Published by the Centre for Landscape Research Roskilde, September 2000
J. BRANDT, B. TRESS, G. TRESS . [eds.] (2000): Multifunctional Landscapes: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Landscape Research and Management.
Brandt, J., B. Tress, and G. Tress: Multifunctional Landscapes: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Landscape Research and Management. Conference material for the conference on multifunctional landscapes, Centre for Landscape Research, Roskilde, October 18-21, 2000. Published in September 2000. If you quote from this book, please use the above mentioned reference and refer to the paper title and the author.
Centre for Landscape Research, Roskilde, Denmark, 2000
Contents
I.
Introduction/Conference theme
13
II.
Plenary lectures
Antrop, Marc: Multifunctionality and urbanisation. Parris, Kevin: Agri-environmental indicators for multifunctionality in the countryside: Measuring changes in agricultural landscapes as a tool for policy makers. Eaton, Marcia M.: Aesthetic evaluation of multifunctional landscapes. Brandt, Jesper: Interdisciplinary landscape research and the management of multifunctional landscapes. Tress, Brbel and Gunther Tress: Scenarios for the management of multifunctional landscapes. Naveh, Zev: Multifunctional biosphere landscapes and the future of our Total Human Ecosystem. Mansvelt, Jan Diek van: Criteria and parameters for sustainable landuse. Brandt, Jesper: Demands for future landscape research.
17
19 20
20 21 21 21 22 23
III.
Lectures in the six workshops

1. Workshop no. 1: The landscape from vision to definition
Naveh, Zev: Introduction to the theoretical foundations of multifunctional landscapes and their application in transdisciplinary landscape ecology. Dcamps, Henri: How a landscape finds form and comes alive. Kostinskiy, Grigoriy: Landscape and place: the distinction between two notions (experiences of their usage in geography). Bastian, Olaf: Landscape ecology towards a unified discipline?
25
27
27 44 50 50
2.
Workshop no. 2: Monitoring multifunctional terrestrial landscapes

Howard, David C., Sandrine Petit, and Robert G. H. Bunce: Monitoring multi-functional landscapes at a national scale guidelines drawn up from the Countryside Survey of Great Britain. De Blust, Geert and Mira Van Olmen: Monitoring multifunctional terrestrial landscapes: some comments.
51
51
63
Sepp, Kalev et al.: The methodology and applications of agricultural landscape monitoring in Estonia. Pistrich, Karl Heinz and Hans Karl Wytrzens: The multifunctionality of the Alpine grassland in Austria.
71 71
3.
Workshop no. 3: Biodiversity versus landscape diversity in multifunctional landscapes

Jongman, Rob: The difficult relationship between biodiversity and landscape diversity. Emanuelsson, Urban: TBD Jeanneret, Philippe: Relationship between biodiversity and landscape diversity: examples in Swiss cultivated landscapes. Solon, Jerzy: Troubles with the evaluation of landscape diversity.
72
72 84 84 84
4.
Workshop no. 4: Complexity of landscape management

Romstad, Eirik: Public landscape goods an economic framework. Luz, Frieder: Participatory approaches in landscape ecology a basis for acceptance and implementation of concepts for managing multifunctional landscapes. Penker, Marianne: Determinants for successful policy-making in the field of landscape management. Lenz, Roman: Can we plan landscapes? Aspects of an applicationoriented landscape ecology.
86
86 98 109 109
5.
Workshop no. 5: Values and assessment of multifunctional landscapes

Haines-Young, Roy H. and Marion B. Potschin: Multifunctionality and value. Tybirk, Knud: Nature values in agricultural landscapes: different possibilities in organic and conventional farming systems. Palang, Hannes et al.: Defining valuable landscapes for planning purposes. Axelsson Lindgren, Christina: Multifunctional landscape planning within forestry and organic production. A comparative analysis from the visual quality perspective.
111
111 119 121 121
6.
Workshop no. 6: Ecological aspects of multifunctional landscapes in historical perspective.

Russell, Emily W. B.: Historical aspects of multifunctionality in landscapes. Olwig, Kenneth: Historical aspects of multifunctionality in landscapes opposing views of landscape. Dirkx, Joep: Historical ecology of Dutch cultural landscapes.
122
122 133 147
Spears, Ian: Integrated evaluation of historic landscapes in England, Wales and Germany.
147
IV.
Draft on Recommendations on Interdisciplinary Landscape Research

Tress, Brbel and Gunther Tress: Draft version for workshop no. 1 Brandt, Jesper: Draft version for workshop no. 2. Adsersen, Henning, Hans Henrik Bruun and Line Magnussen: Draft version for workshop no. 3 Hasler, Berit and Ulf Kjellerup: Draft version for workshop no. 4 Arler, Finn and Jesper Fredshavn: Draft version for workshop no. 5 Aaby, Bent and Per Ole Rindel: Draft version for workshop no. 6
149
151 157 162 166 170 173
V.
Papers presented in parallel sessions

1. Session A: Landscapes in theory
Frederiksen, Peter: Landscape theory a way out of the conceptual mess. Fry, Gary: Multifunctional landscape assessment a step nearer transdisciplinarity. Ingegnoli, Vittorio and Elena Giglio Ingegnoli: Main disciplinary models in landscape ecology: Limits and advantages. Khoroshev, Alexandre and Yury G. Puzachenko: Approaches to landscape research in Russia. Lang, Stefan Christian: WYGIWYS - What you get is what you see: The understanding of "landscape" between traditional epistemology and constructivism. Nguyen, The Thon: Fundamental problems of ecolandscape theory and their application for environmental planning and management. Pinto-Correia, Teresa and Alexandre Cancela dAbreu: The project of landscape identification and characterisation for Portugal. Presentation of a methodology for defining and characterising landscape units as basis for land use planning. Qvistrm, Mattias: On landscape boundaries and how to bound contemporary landscapes. Richling, Andrzej: Landscape as an object of investigation of various disciplines. Terkenli, Theano S.: Towards a Theory of the Landscape: The Aegean Landscape" as a Cultural Image.
175
177
177 177 178 178 179 179 180
180 181 181
2.
Session B: Functions of agricultural/rural landscapes

Berggren-Brring, Ann-Magreth: Function and pattern in relation to agricultural land use. Busck, Anne Gravsholt, Lone Sderkvist Kristensen and Jrgen Primdahl: Farmers' decision making concerning hedgerows. Dalgaard, Tommy and Hild Rygnestad: A bottom up method to map the farming structure and agricultural intensity at the landscape scale. Dennis, Peter et al.: Impacts on farmland biodiversity of large-scale changes in arable and pastoral landcovers. Geertsema, Willemien: Plant diversity and habitat networks in agricultural landscapes. Kalkhoven, Jan T. R.: Planning biodiversity in agricultural landscapes: development of a decision support system. Meyer, Burghard Christian, Heidrun Muehle, and Ralf Grabaum: Sustainable Planning in Agricultural landscapes. Olesen, Carsten Riis and Jrgen Primdahl: The hunted landscape. Roepers, Reinetta and C. R. Baltjes: Changes in landscape structure: a vector based analysis of three NW European agricultural areas.
183
183 183 184 184 185 185 186 186 187
3.
Session C: Functions of urban and recreational landscapes

Abdal, Mahdi and Majda Sulieman: Improvement of Agricultural Research Components in Urban Landscape and Greenery of Kuwait. Breuste, Jrgen: Recreation and nature conservation - two conflicting functions in multifunctional Central European urban landscapes. d'Hauteserre, Anne-Marie : Visionary entrepreneurism forges Monaco's multifunctional landscape. Gyllin, Mats: Defining urban biodiversity - a matter of scale, function and values. Jaarsma, Catharinus Freerk and Ir. G. Willems: Rural road networks in multifunctional landscapes. Karjalainen, Eeva: Ways of perceiving a recreation forest. Shuang, Chen and C. Y. Jim: Variations of Treescape in A Chinese City: The Case of Nanjing. Weiland, Ulrike: Which kind of planning is needed for an ecologically sustainable development of urban landscapes? Xu, JingHuai: The evolution of old Su Zhou city's environment ecology. Young, Christopher and P. J. Jarvis: A multicriteria approach to evaluating habitat change in urban areas: an example from the Black Country (UK).
188
188 189 189 190 190 191 191 192 192 193
4.
Session D: Landscapes as places for experience, perception and identification

Behm, Holger: Quo vadis savannah - hypothesis? - How a change in paradigm of anthropology would effect modern landscape aesthetics. Haines-Young, Roy and Jorge Rubiano: Visions of Sherwood. Handley, John and Robert Wood: Creative conservation or faking nature: a critical review of the ethics of landscape restoration. Kristiansen, Ib: Wired nature. Macfarlane, Robert: Outsiders in the British landscape? An analysis of ethnic minority landscape genesis projects in North-east England. Mouritsen, Ole: Cultural heritage and the new estate identity in the agrarian landscape. Sandall, Jean and Geoff Kaine: How do people evaluate native vegetation in agricultural landscapes? An application of Inglehart's Materialist-postmaterialist social values theory. Scott, Alister: Assessing public perception of landscape: The Welsh experience. Soini, Katriina: Cognitive mapping: a method for assessing biodiversity perceptions? Wojciechowski, Krzysztof H.: Various aspects of the landscape values considered as national heritage.
194
194 194 195 195 196 196 197 197 198 198
5.
Session E: Landscapes between continuity and change

Barczi, Attila and Katalin Jo: Kurgans: Historical and ecological heritage of the Hungarian plane. Caspersen, Ole and Bo Fritzbger: Long term retrospective landscape ecology - some methodological reflections. Deil, Ulrich: Characters of traditional and modern vegetation landscapes. Eigaard, Peter Ritzau and Bernd Mnier: Comparing long term landscape-development around three Danish lakes. Gilliron, Corinne: Agricultural landscape dynamics in Switzerland: a model using the brown hare as an indicator of the evolution of ecological qualities. Girel, Jacky: Land use history and changes in biodiversity of riparian landscapes (illustrated by the examples of the Rhone and Isre rivers valleys). Mander, lo and Marika Murka: Coherence of Cultural Landscapes: A New Criterion for Evaluating the Impacts of Landscape Changes. Mller, Per Grau: Cultural Environments - changing in the past and continuing in the future. Nsser, Marcus: Cultural landscape dynamics in the NW-Himalayas and Hindukush: A human-ecological monitoring approach using repeat photography. Roldn, Mara Jos, P. Martn de Agar, and C. L. de Pablo : Landscape mosaics: recognition and changes over time.
199
199 200 200 201 201 202 202 203 203 204
Zerbe, Stefan: The role of land use in the differentiation of natural units - a historical perspective.
204
6.
Session F: Observing landscapes

Annoni, A., Susan B. Christensen, and Steve Peedell: GIS for Natura 2000 - Monitoring of Europe's nature conservation sites. De Blust, Gert, Marc Antrop, V. Van Eetvelde, and Mira van Olmen: Integrated monitoring for the countryside: the Flemish experience. Fridman, Jonas and Gran Sthl: Developing a landscape monitoring program for Sweden. Haase, Dagmar: Towards an interdisciplinary monitoring of European floodplain landscapes: Geoecological approaches of terrestrial monitoring in floodplain forests within an urban landscape. Jentsch, Anke and Peter S. White: Impact of disturbance on landscape diversity. Netzband, Maik: Monitoring and Evaluating the Nature Space Potential in Suburban Spaces Using Remote Sensing Data and GIS. Ott, Jrgen: Monitoring "Kolbental" - a concept for the protection of a wetland area and its sustainable use for drinking water supply. Prez Gutierrez, P., C. T. Lpez de Pablo, P. Martin De Agar Valverde, and F. Daz Pineda: Analysis of landscape changes with integrated criteria: application to sustainable management of natural resources. Quinn, Elaine: Mitigation and Monitoring of Ecological and Visual Impacts of Projects Subject to EIA in the UK. Stdemann, Otto, Sabine Eckert, Sandra Odya, and Drte Krger: A methodical approach of an ecological process classification in the landscape research shown with Rostock Hierarchical ozonemonitoring (RHOM). Vejre, Henrik and Casper Szilas: Convergence of land attributes (soil, geology, geomorphology and soil water) with site productivity in plantations of Norway spruce in western Denmark. Vuorela, Niina: Detecting and classifying change transitions in the landscape using combined spatial data sets.
206
206 207 207 208
208 209 209 210
210 211
212 212
7.
Session G: Diversity and heterogeneity of landscapes

Beierkuhnlein, Carl: Comparing biodiversity and landscape heterogeneity at different scale. Blaschke, Thomas: Multifunctional connectivity analysis of landscape elements. Corbacho, P.P., A. Zrate, J. C. Rebollo, and C. L. De Pablo: Landscape homogenisation and fragmentation: Changes in the spatial organisation of the Madrid landscape (Spain).
214
214 214 215
Degrski, Marek: Is a geodiversity a part of landscape diversity. Fjellstad, Wendy, Wenche Dramstad, Gary Fry, and H. F. Mathiesen: Theoretical landscape indices meeting data from the real world. Hietala-Koivu, Reija : Connections between landscape diversity and modernizing agriculture in rural landscape. Ling, Christopher, John Handley, John Rodwell, and Julian Dring: Rebuilding the post-industrial landscape: interaction between landscape diversity and biodiversity on derelict land. Nagendra, Harini: Assessing the influence of patch type in determining patch structure: Studies in the Western Ghats, India. Porter, Jonathan, Geoffrey Griffiths, Steven Warnock, and Eunice Simmons : The Living Landscapes Project: Exploring the link between landscape character and biodiversity. Puzachenko, Yury and Gleb M. Aleshchenko: Assessment of Landscape Diversity using Aerial and Space Images.
215 216 216 217 217 218
218
8.
Session H: Evaluating landscapes

Atauri, J. A., Jos V. de Lucio: Landscape evaluation of natural protected areas. Auclair, Daniel, Jean-Francois Berczil, Frdric Borne, and Michel tienne : Assessing the visual impact of agroforestry management with landscape design software. Baruth, Bettina and Erik Borg: Contribution of multiscale remote sensing data for landscape evaluation in the Dnister region (Ukraine). Francis, Charles: Multiple goals and outputs in an agricultural landscape. Frederiksen, Pia, Esbern Holmes, and Jesper Brandt: Agricultural functionality and landscape heterogeneity: Multifunctionality in Danish agricultural landscapes. Grodzinski, Michael: Landscapes stability and diversity as strategies for development. Katter, Roswitha : Interdisciplinary evaluation of land use. Kiss, Gbor : Nature conservation evaluation of the inanimate natural components of the landscape. Kistowski, Mariusz: Problem of landscape pattern indication for their protection: A case study from young and old glacial areas of north Poland. Lorz, Carsten: Water supplier and forestry service, competitors to be in the use of forested catchments? A case study from Western Ore Mountains, Saxony FRG. Sinha, Amarendra Kumar and Mahaveer Punia: Watershed erosion response model WERM) for prioritization and management of multifunctional watershed: Experience from Western India.
220
220 221 221 222 222 222 223 223 224 225 226
10
9.
Session I: Policy and planning of multifunctional landscapes

Bills, Nelson and David Gross: Impacts of changing agrienvironmental policy on countryside conservation: A preliminary report about a comparative study of selected designated areas in New York, US and England. Buttenschn, Rita Merete: Regional nature protection based on nature management and agri-environmental regulations. Dax, Thomas and Gerhard Hovorka: The contribution of mountain policy to maintain multifunctional landscapes and to support rural development in Austria. Hasler, Berit and Ole Hjort Caspersen: Multifunctional landscapes and agriculture in a Danish region and targeting of agrienvironmental policies. Hong, Sunkee and In-Ju Song: Traditional land use patterns in Korea: From a cultural corridor of the far-eastern landscape. Johansen, Steinar and Geir Inge Orderud: The agricultural multifunctionality and multifunctional landscapes - policy options under different trade regimes. Mart, Klvik, Kalev Sepp, Jri Jagomgi, and lo Mander: Green network as a integrative planning tool in ecological landscape management in Estonia. Primdahl, Jrgen and Teresa Pinto-Correia: Integrating agricultural policies with planning and environmental policies. Veihe, Anita: Integrated land use planning a case study from Ghana. Wascher, Dirk M.: Landscape indicators at the European level.
227
227
227 228 228 229 229 230 230 231 231
10.
Session J: Managing multifunctional landscapes

Broge, Niels Henrik et al.: The use of remote sensing and anthropologic tools to define multifunctional landscapes in Thailand. Brzska, Jolanta, Andrzej Kijowski and Stefan Zynda: The methodology of drawing maps of environmental complexity for the needs of environmental management. Denzer, Vera and Dagmar Haase: Forms of historical and current land-use of the Leipzig floodplains anthropogenic influences, aspects of actual land-use conflicts and conflict management. Griffiths, Emma, Chris Ling, and John Handley: Community participation in the land restoration process. Hels, Tove and Kjell Nilsson: Boundaries in the landscape - results and experiences from interdisciplinary landscape research. Kuzmin, Sergey B.: Ecological safety of landscape management as exemplified from South Siberia region. Larsen, Dorthe K. and Jesper Brandt: A Cartographic Tool to Support Public Access to the Countryside. Miller, Craig: Management of alluvial forest remnants in a New Zealand agricultural landscape. Schou, Jesper S. and Berit Hasler: Economic and voluntary instruments for agricultural landscape management.
233
233 233 234 235 235 236 236 237 238
11
VI.
Poster presentations
Annoni, A., S. Christensen, and S. Peedell: GIS for NATURA 2000 Monitoring Europe's Nature Conservation Sites. Balon, Jaroslaw and Wieslaw Ziaja: Regional differentiation of landscape modification in the Polish Carpathians. Baranek, Elke, Tina Boeckmann, Kirsten von der Heiden, Rosemarie Siebert: Does the involvement of stakeholders facilitate the implementation of research results? Centeri, Cs., Attila Barczi, and R. Pataki: Application of GIS in erosion mapping on the Tihanyi Peninsula. Cristea, V. et al.: Multidisciplinary studies a basis for the planning of the sustainable development of Cluj-Napoca city (Romania). Dalgaard, Tommy et al.: Regional GIS-scenarios for land use. Dalgaard, Tommy and Arne Kyllingsbk: Long-term changes in Danish Agriculture. Dankl, Claudia: Cultural landscape research in Austria. De Blust, Geert and Mira Van Olmen: An ecologically based decision process for land reorganisation. Donner, Ralph: Integration of qualitative properties into landscape research. Eigaard, Peter Ritzau and Berit Hasler: An analysis of farmers reservations towards participation in voluntary agroenvironmental agreements. Francis, Charles et al.: Action research and learning in agriculture and food systems: Moving activities into the rural landscape. Frandsen, Ege Lau: Soil changes in relation to landscape and changes in management regime. Gibelli, Maddalena Gioia and R. Santolini: Landscape changes due to a linear infrastructure in a sensitive land unit: a springs area in n agricultural landscape. Glemnitz, Michael: Differentiation between abandoned fields and grasslands from satellite images through the use of phenological and structural vegetation parameters. Guzel, N.: Agrolandscapes dynamic of North-Western European Russia. Hunter, Sue, Karen Henwood and Nick Pidgeon: The place of forestry in modern Welsh culture: How individuals and communities perceive and relate to their aspects of their landscape specially in relation to modern forestry practice. Ilys, Zoltn: Farm system and landscape pattern in a traditional rural region in the Eastern-Carpatheans. Katter, Roswitha: Interdisciplinary evaluation of land use. Kovr, Pavel: Aboandoned anthropogenic landscapes: Are they potentially multifunctional? Lang, Stefan: Evaluating species related patch connectedness for animal dispersal modelling in heterogeneous landscapes. Ling, Chris: Toolkits for community led registration of derelict land. Marta, C., H. Freitas, and R. de Groot: Functions and values of agricultural landscapes: the pseudosteppes of Castro Verde, a case study from Southern Portugal.
239
241 241 242 243 243 244 244 245 246 246 246 247 247 248 248 249 249
250 250 251 251 252 252
12
Nagengast, Barbara and Mariusz Pelechaty: Changes in water and rush vegetation of the Lake Skrzynka in the last 70 years. Nyizsalovszki, Rita: Land use change and its effects on a sample area in the Tokaj-Foothill region (Hungary). Ode, . and G. Fry: Urban pressure on woodlands. Odya, Sandra, Otto Stdemann, and Sabine Eckert: Evidence of spatial differentiated dynamic of ozone injuries at the southern Baltic coast. Odya, Sandra, Sabine Eckert, and Otto Stdemann: Derivation of plant physiological thresholds for ozone near the grounds by means of standardized ozone indicating plant Nicotiana tabacum L. Bel W3. Padoa-Schioppa, Emilio and Marco Baietto: Local parks as a network component in a multidimensional approach of conservation. Pelechaty, Mariusz: Habitat diversity of the lake ecosystem. Ping, Zhao and Peng Shao Lin: Edge effect of successional communities and restoration of forest fragmentation in low sub-tropics of South China. Pietrzak, Maciej: Changes in the forest boundaries within central Greater Poland over the last 200 years. Quinta-Nova, Luis: The use of vegetation structure and composition measures to improve habitat classification in rural landscapes. Rivis, R., U. Ratas, and E. Puurmann: Methods of studying biodiversity in relation to landscape pattern of Estonian coastal areas. Seng, Mirijam: Anthropogenic transformation of cork oak-dominated landscapes in Spain and Portugal. Song, I.-J., S.-K. Hong, and H.-O. Kim: Distribution Characteristics of naturalized plants influences by land use patterns in Seoul Metropolitan Area. Stdemann, Otto, Sabine Eckert, and Sandra Odya: Analysis of ozone episodes and their inherent structure in several landscapes at the Southern Baltic coast. Tveit, Mari Sundli: Landscape preferences who sees what in the agricultural landscape. Vervloet, J. and D. M. Wascher: Fundamentals of landscape typology. Watve, Aparna, Gandhe R. V., and Gandhe K. R.: Planning of locale specific conservation strategy for plant diversity a case study from Mulshi region in Western Ghats, India. Wurbs, A., Glemnitz, M., Jacobsen, M.: Assessment of restoration potential for semi-natural biotops in agrarian landscapes. Yatsukhno, Valentin: Relations between biodiversity and landscape diversity (a case study of Belovezhskaya Pushcha)
253 253 254 254 255
255 256 257 257 258 258 259 259 260 260 261 262 262 263
13
I. Introduction
14
15
Introduction to the conference theme

At present, the landscape is a popular topic, not only in an academic but also in a broader context. People have strong ties to landscapes and use them in various ways. From a human perspective, many of the earths landscapes are being used more intensely than ever before in the history of earth, and landscapes are increasingly being used simultaneously for several purposes. During the post-war period, intensified land use has been furthered primarily by spatial segregation of functions. Growing land pressure and environmental problems have made this strategy problematic and a paradigm of complete multifunctionality is emerging. Thus, there will be high demands on the landscapes of the future, which will have to serve simultaneously the following functions: ecological (as an area for living), economic (as an area for production), socio-cultural (as an area for recreation and identification), historical (as an area for settlement and identity), and aesthetic (as an area for experiences). Depending on peoples different ways of using the landscape, it has a different meaning for them. In this regard, landscape is a very complex phenomenon. Single disciplines can only discover and describe small parts of the landscape as a whole. To understand landscape fully and address its challenges, discrete disciplines have to work together. Accordingly, the conference will give participants an opportunity to explore various approaches. Members of such disciplines as the sciences, humanities, and social sciences as well as architecture and the arts will meet. The conference seeks to bridge the gap between different approaches and to create a common ground for future landscape research that can meet the challenge of a renewed emphasis om multifunctionality. It is the conferences aim to bring the difficulties and problems in present landscape research to the fore and to present strategies for coping with them. The lectures and workshops aim to formulate common recommendations for future landscape research in the next millennium. Ultimately, the results of the conference will be presented and published as the Recommendations on Interdisciplinary Research on Multifunctional Landscapes. With this proceeding, the conference will follow up the efforts made by the European congress Landscape Ecology: things to do proactive thoughts for the 21st century," which was organized by the Dutch Association for Landscape Ecology in 1997. As a result of this congress, a little booklet* with recommendations was published. We recommend this lecture to our participants as it will be a good preparation for the workshop discussions. By the initiative Multifunctional Landscapes, we broaden the perspective from landscape ecology to landscape research and management in general, however at the same time focussing on a critical analysis of the emerging concept around multifunctional landscapes.
Jesper Brandt, Brbel Tress and Gunther Tress Roskilde, September 2000
*A new identity for landscape ecology in Europe. A research strategy for the next decade: outlines formulated at the European congress Landscape ecology: things to do proactive thoughts for the 21st century. Published by the Dutch Association for Landscape Ecology (WLO) in spring 1998
16
17
II. Plenary lectures
18
19
In order of their appearance during the conference.
Multifunctionality and Urbanisation

Marc Antrop
Department of Geography, University Ghent, Belgium
Considering the landscape, urbanisation refers to a series of highly dynamic and complex processes that transform the existing landscape. This happens mainly in the urban fringe zones, but urbanisation can also induce important changes in the remote countryside. Urbanisation induces functional changes of the way the land is used, as well as morphological changes, introducing many new landscape elements that wipe away the existing ones and thus cause a disruption of the initial landscape structures by fragmenting them. Finally, it causes profound changes in the attitude towards the landscape of the newcomers and new users, as well as the way they value their environment. Unless the rural landscapes of the countryside, it is difficult to experience the urbanised landscapes as a common heritage that allows an almost free access for the passing traveller. Characteristic for urbanised landscapes is the high density of numerous actors, which all use in a rather non-concerted manner a small piece of land. The result is a highly fragmented space with a mosaic of very different land uses and a high density of transportation infrastructures. The general structure of the landscape and the relations between its components is not clear and space has a highly privatised character. Can such a pattern be called a multifunctional landscape? First, different types of use and functionality should be determined and grouped into categories. Can these be related to concepts such as carrying capacity and sustainable development? A classification is proposed. Next, multifunctionality should be considered at different scale levels. The concept is intimately related to land use and land cover. At the lowest level, each field or land parcel should be considered separately. Is the field used always for the same purposes or can different cycles of use alternate? Does it allow exceptional infrequent uses? At a higher scale level blocks of fields having a similar or related types of functionality should be considered. How do these interact internally? Finally, at the highest scale level, the landscape level, whole continuous mosaic should be considered. How are different functionalitys compatible or conflicting, possible, necessary, indicated? Is it possible to embed functionality from different scale levels? These questions will be discussed using case studies from Europe.
20
Agri-environmental Indicators for Multifunctionality in the Countryside: Measuring Changes in Agricultural Landscapes as a Tool for Policy Makers
Kevin Parris
Agriculture Directorate, OECD, 2 Rue Andre Pascal, 75016 Paris, France Email: Kevin.Parris@oecd.org
To facilitate policy monitoring and evaluation, it is useful to consider agricultural landscapes as composed of three key elements: landscape structures or appearance, including environmental features (e.g. habitats), land use types (e.g. crop types), and man-made objects (e.g. hedges); landscape functions, for example, as a place to live, work, visit, and provide various environmental functions; and landscape values, concerning both the value society places on agricultural landscape, such as recreational and cultural values, and also, the costs to farmers of maintaining landscapes. The paper describes, in Section 1 the environmental and policy context of agricultural landscapes in OECD countries. This is followed, in Section 2 by an examination of a range of indicators that are currently being developed in OECD countries to track the state and trends in agricultural landscapes, in particular, indicators covering landscape structure or appearance; management, including private/public schemes to maintain and enhance landscapes; and the costs of landscape provision by farmers and benefits or values society places on agricultural landscapes. Section 3 , identifies future research challenges in this area, and finally, Section 4 concludes with a discussion on the place of landscape in the context of the current debate on multifunctionality and sustainability in the context of the agricultural sector. Key Words: landscape; agri-environmental indicators; policy; multifunctionality; sustainability.
Aesthetic Evaluation of Multifunctional Landscapes

Marcia Muelder Eaton
University of Minnesota, USA
Designs for sustainable environments cannot be fully implemented unless ecological and aesthetic values are consistent with one another. Multifunctional landscapes present special challenges---not only must different biosystems be ecologically compatible---so must the different aesthetic values that attach to the individual systems that make up the whole be brought into harmony. The analog of multi-media arts might be helpful here: though due attention must be given to the contribution of each medium, a different entity emerging from the interaction of the parts requires its own kind of evaluation.
21
Interdisciplinary landscape research and the management of multifunctional landscapes

Jesper Brandt
Centre for Landscape Research, Roskilde University, P.O. Box 260, DK-4000 Roskilde E-mail: brandt@ruc.dk
Growing ecological, economic and social conflicts in former monofunctionally used landscapes and the necessity to develop sophisticated types of regulation meeting the challenge of a more multifunctional use of these landscapes has been one of the motive behind the development of many interdisciplinary landscape projects since the mid-80ties. The set-up of a Danish project 1996-2001 Value, Landscape and Biodiversity will be presented as an example. It has the explicit goal to establish an empirical and theoretical framework for a research that can deal with the relation between values, consequences and planning in regard to integrated management and use of the Danish countryside. A short status of the project as well as a critical discussion of the practical and organisational problems facing such an interdisciplinary landscape project will be given.
Scenarios for the management of multifunctional landscapes

Brbel Tress & Gunther Tress
Centre for Landscape Research, University of Roskilde, P.O. Box 260, DK-4000 Roskilde E-mail: baerbel@ruc.dk and gunther@ruc.dk, http://www.geo.ruc.dk/vlb/bgt
Rural areas are having more and more demands placed on them by local and urban populations. There are many perspectives on appropriate development of rural landscapes and their small communities over the next two decades. Even if there is a decrease in agricultural land use, many other functions will take its place. The lecture presents a new approach to development challenges in the countryside in Denmark, based on scenario technique and active participation of stakeholders. With these tools, the authors have played out different extreme scenarios for rural areas, including industrial agriculture, tourism, and recreation, nature conservation, and residential expansion. All of these developments, which will have profound effects on the rural landscapes of the future, have been discussed with local and regional stakeholders. The results of these discussions will be the basis for a second set of scenarios that integrate several interests.
Multifunctional biosphere landscapes and the future of our Total Human Ecosystem
Zev Naveh
Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
Landscape ecologists will be able to play a significant role in the sustainable future of our Total Human Ecosystem and its landscapes, if they will make a clear distinction in their work between the following major landscape ecotope classes:
22
A. Sustainable multifunctional and multidimensional biosphere landscapes and regenerative systems: 1. Natural and seminatural biosphere ecotopes, (or in short bio-ecotopes) driven entirely by solar energy though photosynthesis and containing self-organizing (autopoietic) and selfregulating spontaneously evolving and reproducing organisms on which the future biological evolution depends. 2. Multifunctional agro-silvo-pastoral, as well as traditional and organic farming bioecotopes, in which the biological production, derived solely from solar energy, is channeled into economic goods. B. Unsustainable throughput systems of the fossil energy based, industrial society: 1. High input agro-industrial ecotopes in which solar energy is subsidized by fossil energy and high inputs of chemicals, replacing most of the natural, biological control mechanisms with detrimental environmental effects. 2. Urban-industrial and rural echnosphere ecotopes (or in short techno-ecotopes) and their technological artifacts, which are human-made and maintained depending almost entirely on fossil and nuclear energy and are resulting in high outputs of entropy waste and pollution and environment. Their detrimental impacts could be minimized by a more wisely and efficient use of natural resources in a solar-powered, reuse and recycle, sustainable and more just global economy.
Criteria and Parameters for Sustainable Land-use

Jan Diek van Mansvelt
Wageningen University Researchcentre, Department of Plantscience, Pb 9101, 6700 HB Wageningen, Netherlands, E-mail: Jan.DiekvanMansvelt@users.eco.wau.nl
Over the past decades, interest in the effects of agricultural land-use on the environment, natural ecosystems and the overall rural landscape has increased. From a wide range of disciplines of social and natural sciences, unintended and unwanted effects of unlimited specialisation and up-scaling have been reported. With soil erosion, pollution of soil, water and air, energy wastes, losses of bio-diversity and degradation of the rural societies, a broad spectrum of problems have emerged into the perception of those responsible for the planning and evaluation of the use of the land. Representatives of a wide range of disciplines have addressed large numbers of symptoms in research and policy. Less has been done to analyse common grounds for the mentioned problems in an interdisciplinary context. This paper will report on an interdisciplinary study made with EU support, trying to find common denominators for the problems and a consistent system to find ways to solve them. It will focus on keys for interdisciplinary in land-use research and policy, starting from the notion that the land-use should provide for the human needs for survival: physical, social and cultural. Drawing on the work of Maslow for human motivation, targets for land-use are derived, and from them criteria for the land-use planning and evaluation by environmentalists, ecologists, economists, sociologists, landscape architects and cultural anthropologists. Notions on the quality of life, as an overall target for land-use management, will be included in the presentation. It will be shown that a synergy between the multiple targets is quite well possible, and seems to be reached rather consistently in the context of organic types of sustainable agriculture.
23
Demands for future landscape research

Jesper Brandt
Centre for Landscape Research, Roskilde University, P.O. Box 260, DK-4000 Roskilde E-mail: brandt@ruc.dk
The conference Multifunctional landscapes has been open to a variety of questions related to modern landscape research. But it does not aim to give recommendations for all questions connected to future landscape research. Six workshop themes, all of importance to the overall theme of Multifunctional landscape' has been selected for a closer examination. Based on the contributions to the 6 workshops, the preliminary recommendations from these workshops, and the discussions within and between the workshop groups up to and during the conference, the challenges for a future landscape research that can serve as a constructive and critical guide for solving the problems facing the complex management and use of our landscapes will be presented.
24
25
III. Lectures in the six workshops
26
27
1.
Workshop No. 1: The Landscape from Vision to Definition
Workshop guide and presentation of recommendations: Brbel Tress, Denmark Gunther Tress, Denmark Main speaker: Zev Naveh, Israel First opponent speaker: Henri Dcamps, France Second opponent speaker: Grigoriy Kostinskiy, Russia Third opponent speaker: Olaf Bastian, Germany
Introduction to the Theoretical Foundations of Multifunctional Landscapes and their Application in Transdisciplinary Landscape Ecology.
Z. Naveh
Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
Abstract. A holistic theory of landscapes should become an integral part of the conceptual foundation of goal-oriented and mission-driven landscape ecology. Based on a dynamic systems view, emerging from the recent paradigm shifts and insights gained from findings on complexity and wholeness multifunctional landscapes should be conceived as tangible, mixed natural and cultural interacting middle-number systems and as the concrete, self-organizing Gestalt systems of our Total Human Ecosystem. Ranging from the smallest mappable ecotope holon to the global ecosphere landscape, they should be studied, upgraded, managed and evaluated with a biperspectivable systems view, treating them simultaneously both as products of both material, natural biogeophysical systems and as mental, cognitive noospheric systems. This can be achieved with the help of innovative transdisciplinary approaches and research methods, in close cooperation between landscape ecologists and ecologically oriented scientists from relevant social sciences, the humanities and arts and the professionals involved in all phases of land use decisions. Acting both as specialists in their own field of land expertise and as integrators, landscape ecologists could play an important dual role in ensuring the future of healthy, attractive and stable multifunctional landscapes as part of the creation of post-industrial symbiotic relations between human society and nature.
28
Introduction. Our workshop is called The Landscape from Vision to Definition. The meaning of vision is either simply the faculty of seeing, or in much broader sense, farsightedness, seeing beyond the present into the future, and envisioning from a vantage point a common goal. Such a dual meaning is also true for definition. It can be interpreted either as a statement of the precise meaning of a term, or as an attempt for stating a degree of distinctiveness of the outline like the definition in a photographic lens. I suggest that we should use the broader interpretations and view multifunctional landscapes (MLs) from such a vantage point with a clear vision of our future goal. We should find out together from this vantage point what makes MLs distinct and unique from any other view. This should lead us to our final conclusion on the necessity for a transdisciplinary, goaloriented landscape research. We can accomplish this assignment only with the help of a fruitful dialogue. The eminent theoretical physician and science philosopher David Bohm (1996) has called dialogue a stream of meaning, flowing among through us and between us. He compared the regular fashion of scientific discussions to a ping-pong game, in which each person presents his fixed position and only argues, in favor of his view without listening to the other position, and where people are betting the ideas back and forth to win. However in dialogue nobody is trying to win. Everybody wins if anybody wins it is a-win-win and not a win-loose relationship. According to Decartes, the understanding of nature and realization of certainty are achieved first by separation from the natural world, then by its precise measurement. This has lead to a utilitarian criterion of truth, and a reduction of the object of knowledge to an instrumental relation or quantifiable value that has been further developed into a statistical technique. This has served classical physics, followed by other natural sciences, in the efforts for reaching true predictions of future natural phenomena. However, the systems paradigm implies that understanding the process of knowing the epistemology - has to be included in the description of the natural phenomena, of which the observer is an inseparable part. Thereby the systems view has been developed as a perceptional and scientific window through which we are able to look at complex ecological and societal phenomena in their realistic way within the observed context. This contextual window view is of greatest relevance for our transdisciplinary landscape research. It can serve as the cognitive basis for the dialogue, leading to mutual understanding of different perceptions and window views by the landscape ecologists and the other research team members. Contrary to those who still cling to this scientific prediction model, and claim that in order to become a nature science landscape ecology (LE) has to develop its own predictive theory, I suggest that instead of a predictive science, it is essential for landscape ecology to become a prescriptive science. This is, of course, also true for a landscape theory: When we deal with human-influenced and modified landscapes, we cannot predict landscape changes by extrapolating from the past and present in to the uncertain future. As Holling (1996) and Bright (2000) have pointed out, rightly, we have to anticipate environmental surprises and we have to learn to deal also with uncertainties and unpredictability. However, we can anticipate and prepare different scenarios based on the principles of if.. then, and on base of these we can prescribe what, in our opinion should be done to realize the most desirable one. In this respect, landscape ecology can be compared to medicine. We have to diagnose the health of whole landscapes, anticipating their fate and the risks involved in their further misuse and degradation and the prospects for their further sustainable development, and then our obligation is to try and prescribe the best remedies for their management, conservation, restoration. For this purpose also our landscape theory cannot be bound down by a rigid and mechanistic predictive theory, for which classical Newtonian
29
physics has served as a model. It must be guided by a much broader future-oriented and dynamic worldview. The vantage point for this worldview should be, in my opinion, the realization that at the present deep ecological crisis, humanity has reached a crucial turning point in its relations to nature. These relations will be determined by the fate of our biosphere landscapes whose future is endangered by increasing pressures of exponential population growth and consumption, coupled with uncontrolled agro- and urban-industrial expansion. As I will explain in more detail below, their fate is closely coupled with the biological and cultural evolutionary trends, during our present transition from the industrial to the postindustrial global information age. Erwin Laszlo (1994), the world-renown systems philosopher and expert on global trends, has shown in a very blunt and convincing way, that at this Grand Transition the only choice is between further sustainable evolution of life on earth, or its further exponential degradation until its final extinction. Landscape ecologists can play a meaningful role in the choice of further evolution, if they will focus their view on the vision of an overarching transdisciplinary goal, namely, the creation of new, mutually beneficial symbiotic relations between nature and human society, as realized in healthy, productive, attractive and livable multifunctional landscapes. Research and action towards this goal have to based on a sound holistic conception of landscapes and their role in this process. However, such a theory of landscapes cannot be considered in isolation. It has to be an integral part of a broader holistic conception of landscape ecology and its theoretical and practical implications. Attempts in this direction have been made by us (Naveh and Lieberman 1994; Naveh 1990; 1995; 1998a; 1998b). These have been recently summarized in a special issue of Landscape and Urban Planning in an IALE symposium on Holistic Landscape Ecology in Action (Naveh 2000). Their concepts were formalized in terms of a hierarchical systems approach, rooted in General Systems Theory (GST) and its recent holistic and transdisciplinary insights in organized complexity, self-organization and coevolution in nature and in human societies. Although these issues have much relevance for our landscape theory, I can present them only in a very condensed way, as part of 10 major premises which in my opinion, could serve as the core theory for such a holistic theory MLs. Ten major premises for a holistic conception of multifunctional landscapes. First Premise: A theory of MLs has to be conceived in the light of the recent holistic and transdisciplinary scientific revolution, its paradigm shifts and recent insights in synthetic evolution and in the selforganization of nonequilibrium dissipative structures. They are part of the cultural evolution of human society, driven by leaps through bifurcations into higher organization levels by positive feedback loops of autocatalytic and crosscatalytic hypercycles and networks. The true meaning of contemporary holistic landscape conception can be fully comprehended only in the broader context of the recent holistic and transdisciplinary scientific revolution. According to Kuhn (1996) such a revolution takes place when the existing theories no longer adequately explain reality and new paradigms of conceptional schemes have to replace gradually those conventional and well-established paradigms of so-called normal science. In our case, such a revolution was initiated by a major paradigm shift from parts to wholes, and from entirely reductionistic and mechanistic approaches to more holistic and organismic ones. It leads to the turning away from breaking down, analyzing and fragmenting wholes into smaller and smaller particles towards new trends for integration, synthesis, and complementary. It means the need to replace the reliance on exclusively linear and deterministic processes by non-linear, cybernetic and chaotic processes, based on systems
30
thinking of complexity, networks and hierarchic order. It leads from a belief in the objectivity and certainty of the scientific truth towards the recognition of the limits of human knowledge, the need for a contextual view of reality, and the need for dealing with uncertainties. Thereby it leads from mono-and multi-disciplinarity to inter-and transdisciplinarity. As presented recently by Holling et al. (1999), such a holistic paradigm shift is changing already the science and practice of adaptive resources management and recognizes human wisdom and traditional common-sense and its deep cultural values. It has to change also our view of landscapes from a multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary picture of physical, chemical, biological, and other landscape elements and processes into a transdisciplinary view of the landscape and its multifunctional natural and cultural dimensions. This implies an overarching scientific and practical approach, transcending and crossing disciplines and professions, aiming together towards a common systems goal. This can be achieved by closely interwoven cooperation between many fields of knowledge and expertise and their interactions. Holistic landscape research requires such a transdisciplinary goal across ecology, geography, and ecological-oriented sociology, economics, anthropology, history, philosophy, political science, planning, and any other relevant scientific and/or professional field involved in this endeavor. Probably the greatest achievement of the transdisciplinary scientific revolution has been inspired by a great number of new research findings and especially those by the Nobel Price laureate Prigogine and his collaborators (Prigogine and Sprengers 1984) on the self-organizing properties of nonequilibrium dissipative structures. These lead to a major paradigm shift from the neo-Darwinian conception of evolution to an all-embracing conception of synthetic cosmic, geological, biological and cultural co-evolution, emphasizing cooperation as the creative play of an entire evolving universe. This transdisciplinary paradigm of Grand Synthesis (Laszlo 1987) of a Self-organizing Universe(Jantsch 1980), is opposed to the Newtonian paradigm of an atomistic world, operating by mechanistic laws of the clockworklike universe and its more modern view as a bio-chemical and physical machine. This synthetic evolutionary process should be conceived, as a discontinuous development of sudden leaps by "bifurcations" (from the Greek furca =fork) to a higher organizational level. As described by Laszlo (1994), in the cultural evolution these were leaps from the primitive food gathering - hunting to the more and more advanced agricultural and industrial stages, culminating in societies globally integrated in the emerging information age. Each of these bifurcations is driven mainly by the widespread adoption of basic cultural and technological innovation, culminating now in societies globally integrated in the emerging information age. Each of these bifurcations is driven mainly by the widespread adoption of basic cultural and technological innovation, such as symbolized presently by the computer. Landscape evolution is an integral part of this cultural evolutionary process. Therefore, without its comprehension we will never be able to grasp the holistic nature of these dynamics landscape changes, with which I will deal in more detail below. Capra (1996) has presented a brilliant synthesis of these recent scientific breakthroughs. It opens the way for a new holistic understanding of the Web of Life, in which landscapes are imbedded.
Second Premise: Each landscape is a three-dimensional, concrete ecological system that is more than the sum of its parts, containing more information than the sum of its measurable components, because of its emergent organizational system properties This holistic General Systems paradigm should serve as the major theoretical foundation of a holistic ML theory: It requires that we regard each landscape on its own right as a whole, as a concrete, space/time defined ecological system that is more than the sum of its parts. As a
31
result, also the information about the whole landscape is larger than the arithmetic sum which can be derived from its parts. Therefore the state of the whole must be known to understand the collective of the parts (Weiss 1969). Thus for instance, not only the natural but also the cultural components of a regional landscape, its forests, grass- and shrublands, its wetlands and rivers, its agricultural fields, its residential and industrial areas, its roads, traffic- and power-lines and their history contribute to the integral and truly holistic character of the landscape. They comprise its various human-ecological, social, economic, psychological, spiritual, aesthetic and functional aspects of experiencing and using the landscapes. In these, their complex network interactions cannot be comprehended merely by analysis, but only by synthesis within the context of the organization of the whole and its implications for resolving the pressing problems of our present ecological and cultural crisis, in the sense of the abovedescribed goal. Weiss (1969) demonstrated these essential holistic features of a system, as expressed by the invariance of the system, in comparison with the more variant fluctuations of its constituents by a simple mathematical formula. This shows that in a system the sum of deviations in physical, chemical, biological and ecological (and in the case of our MLs also cultural) parameters, expressed as the variance V of its elements a,b,c,..n, are greater than the variance of the total complex S: Vs <<(Va+Vb+Vc+.+Vn) This is the result of systems behavior under the internal degrees of freedom of its components by coordination and control. It is realized by the capacity of cybernetic adaptive self-regulation through negative feedback loops. Thereby the system - and in our case the landscape- becomes more than its parts, not in a quantitative-summative way but in a qualitative-structural way.
Third Premise: In the universal macrohierarchical organization of natural, multileveled and stratified open systems, MLs are part of the global ecological microhierarchy. Serving as the tangible matrix for all organisms, they form their own Holon hierarchy, with ecotopes as the smallest structural and functional holons and the ecosphere as the largest, global Holon. Under the inspiration of General System Theory, hierarchy theory has become an important part of the systems approach, and a cornerstone for transdisciplinarity. Its basic paradigm is the view of a hierarchical organization of nature as ordered wholes of multileveled, stratified open natural systems These range from the lowest, physical levels of space-time fields and quarks up to the astronomic entities of planets, stars, galaxies and their clusters. In this macrohierarchy of the cosmos, the biological levels of organismic complexity and the ecological levels of above-organisms complexities, integrating living systems with their environment, constitute the microhierarchy of our planet earth (Laszlo 1972). In any natural systems hierarchical organization, each higher level acquires newly emerging qualities and is therefore more complex as its lower subsystems. It organizes the level below it and serves thereby also as the context of the lower level. At the same time, its lower subsystem gives the function of each system and the purpose is given by its supersystem. For the representation of a holistic and dynamic view of the real world, we have to take into consideration its hierarchical structure and to adapt our means of measurement and evaluation to each level. Each higher level contains the lower one and displays lower frequency behavior. Classical ecology and eco-physiology have dealt mainly with the fast response loops between the atmosphere and the surface vegetation. Until recently it has been assumed that at the landscape scale we have to deal chiefly with the slower and weaker loops of landscape modifications through anthropogenic activities and their effects on biogeochemical cycling
32
and climate change. But because of the exponential rates of these modifications, their time scales become faster and faster and their loops become stronger and stronger coupled. Therefore the prevention of their adverse effects has become also more and more urgent. This has far-reaching implications on the ways in which the pragmatic usable information of the results of our studies should be brought to the attention of the stakeholders and decisionmakers, to induce their immediate response. An important development for the recognition of the dichotomic Janus - faced nature of each hierarchy level being at the same time both whole and part, was introduction of the "holon" concept by Koestler (1969): Holon is a composition of two Greek terms: holos = whole + proton = part). On each intermediary hierarchic level such holons function as self-contained wholes toward their subordinated sub-systems, but at the same time they act also as dependent parts toward their super-systems. In other words, depending on our point of view each Holon in the systems hierarchy behaves either as a part or as a whole. By studying, managing, and restoring landscapes with all their unique natural, cultural and perceptional dimensions, as ordered holons of such a landscape hierarchy (or " holarchy" in Koestler's terms), we can conceive the complementary nature of landscape units, being both parts of a higher space-time and perceptional hierarchy, and wholes toward their lower hierarchical levels. Thereby we are overcoming the contradiction between entirely one-sided holistic or reductionistic perceptions of landscapes. However, we have to realize that their organizational complexity cannot be treated as a rigid one-dimensional spatially structured physical and biological hierarchy but only as dynamic, multidimensional space-time, conceptual and perceptual Holon holarchies, from the largest and most complex global ecosphere landscape to the smallest landscape cell or ecotope. This can be considered the smallest, more or less homogeneous and clearly discernible and mappable building block of nature, with all its subordinated landscape elements and fluxes. In contrast to functional ecosystems, which are diffuse in space and more or less intangible (Allen and Hoekstra 1992), and the vaguely defined and delineated landscape "patches", ecotopes are concrete systems, well-defined in space and time and mapped, in general on scales of 1:10 000 to 25 000 (Leser 1991; Zonneveld 1995). Their boundaries are determined in a pragmatic way, according to the object and the needs of the study. Fourth Premise: For their study and management landscapes have to be upscaled from the ecotope to the higher landscape Holon levels both along biogeophysical and ecological and along cultural and perceptional gradients. This requires new integrative, multidimensional and transdisciplinary approaches and methods, including ecodiversity parameters. Environmental interactions and impacts do not operate in landscapes in clear-cut hierarchical boxes, but in a gradual way along different scales of space, time and intensity. As explained by Bohm & Peat (1987), they are also perceived in different ways, according to the overall disposition of both mind and body by the observer and his psychological and cultural filters and conceptual windows. However, up-to-now, landscape patterns and processes have been viewed almost exclusively within a biophysical and bioecological context along spatial and temporal scales. For dealing with the organizational patterns and the functional processes shaping these landscapes holons and their geomorphological, biological and cultural heterogeneity, not only their space-time dimensions should be enlarged, but also their perceptional and cultural dimensions have to be upscaled from the ecotope into larger landscape holons, such as slopes and mini-catchments, regional landscapes and biomes, up to the global ecosphere landscape. For this purpose, as well as for their study, conservation, management and restoration, mechanistic species, population, community and ecosystem
33
parameters are not adequate. These have to be replaced by new, more inclusive parameters, measuring ecological, topological and cultural diversity and their total landscape diversity and heterogeneity as "ecodiversity " (Naveh 1988a,b).
Fifth Premise: MLs are the spatial matrix in which all organisms, including humans, function. As such they at are also the concrete systems of our Total Human Ecosystem, integrating humans and their total environment at the highest co-evolutionary level of the ecological hierarchy. From what has been said up to now, it is obvious that for a full comprehension of the holistic conception of MLs and the transdisciplinary challenges of their study and management, they have to be treated within the context of a larger global ecological hierarchy of the integrated human-nature systems complex in which we live. According to the conventional ecological conception, natural ecosystems are considered as the highest organization level of the ecological hierarchy, above organisms, populations and communities (ONeill et al., 1987). This is indicative for the still dominating perception of a hierarchical order of nature, viewing humans merely as external factors to natural ecosystems, and creating therefore their own social and economical hierarchies. A more realistic conceptualization of the presently prevailing global ecological hierarchy has to take into account that human modified and managed cultural semi-natural and agricultural landscapes are making out by far the greatest majority of the total open landscape area on global scales (Pimentel 1992). Even the few remaining natural and close to natural landscapes and their terrestrial and aquatic networks are affected directly and indirectly by human impacts and they are shrinking rapidly from year to year. Their fate - like that of all other land- and seascapes on earth - is depending for good or worse almost solely on the decisions and actions of human society (Vitousek et al. 1997). We have acquired such enormous control capacities for good and worse that we are able not only to manipulate genes, cells and organs but also the many ecological and social strands around us. If we disregard the close links between natural and social systems, stemming from the modern dualistic worldview, and if we insist on a radical discontinuity between humans and the rest of the natural world, then we will not be able to divert the global change trajectory from extinction into future sustainable biological and cultural evolution. Therein lies the importance of the Total Human Ecosystem (THE) concept and its practical value. It perceives humans and their ecological, cultural, social, political and economic dimensions as an integral part of this highest co-evolutionary geo-bio-anthropo level of the ecological hierarchy above the ecosystem level in which humans are integrated with their total environment. It should serve therefore also as the basic conceptual cornerstone of the very much-needed overarching unifying systems metatheory, for all those involved in landscape study and management in the broadest sense. In this context it is clear, that MLs cannot be defined merely as spatially heterogeneous areas with repeated patterns of ecosystems on km wide stretches (Forman and Godron 1986). They are the matrix and living habitat of all organisms, including humans, and their populations, communities and ecosystems, functioning within different scales of the above described landscape holarchy. As such they are also the concrete, space/time defined ordered wholes and unique Gestalt systems of our THE. In the following premises I will attempt to further develop these unique THE Gestalt features.
34
Sixth Premise: MLs are mixed natural-cultural interaction systems with intermediate numbers of diverse natural biogeospheric and cultural noospheric components with closely interwoven patterns and processes. For their study innovative approaches and methods are required. MLs are belonging to a special class of middle-number ecological interaction systems whose elements are coupled with each other by mutual, mostly non-linear cybernetic relations. They are characterized by intermediate numbers of diverse natural biotic and abiotic and (anthropogenic) cultural components with greatly varying dimensions and structural and functional relationships among these components. For the organized complexity of such middle-number systems neither mechanical nor statistical approaches are satisfactory and innovative approaches and methods are required (ONeill et al. 1987; Weinberg 1975). This is especially the case with highly fragmented and heterogeneous human modified, used and managed cultural landscapes, in which natural and cultural pattern and processes are closely interwoven. Whereas the natural elements have evolved and are operating as parts of the geosphere and biosphere, the cultural ones are the creations of the noosphere (from the Greek "noos = mind), namely the sphere of human mind and consciousness. As shown lucidly by Jantsch (1980), the noosphere should be regarded as an additional natural envelope of life in its totality that Homo sapiens had acquired throughout the evolution of the human cortex as the domains of our perceptions, knowledge, feeling, and consciousness. It enabled the development of additional noospheric realms of info-socio- and psycho-sphere that have emerged during our cultural evolution. Seventh Premise: New notions for the comprehension and study of the unique, holistic nature of THE landscapes can be gained with the help of the Hologram Paradigm. It recognizes much deeper, enfolding, generative orders in which human mind, consciousness and creativity play an important role, and which are hidden behind the regular orders, described in landscapes by formal geometric structures and coordination grids. As explained by Naveh and Lieberman (1994) in much more detail, David Bohm, whom Einstein recognized as his intellectual successor, has used the advances of the lensless holograph photography for the development of exciting new holistic ideas and theories. These are of also greatest relevance for an innovative theory of holistic MLs and deserve our fullest attention. In a holograph the light from each part of the object falls onto the entire photographic plate. Therefore, each part of the plate contains information about its interrelated patterns, relevant for the perception of the whole . It reflects the whole and in a sense becomes enfolded across the holograph. This Hologram Paradigm has served Bohm (1980) as a powerful analogy for a new metatheory of a dynamic holistic whole and undivided order of the universe. To describe the deeper reality, he proposed a "new notion of order" which he named "implicate order" or enfolded order. It lies beneath the regular explicate order in which the fundamental equations are written, using the coordinates of space and time, and it gives rise to it in a universal holomovement. For him, what happens on the plate is simply a momentary frozen version of what is occurring on infinitely vaster scales in each landscape on earth and in each space of the universe. In this "everything is enfolded into everything". Bohm & Peat (1987) have carried this holistic paradigm even further. They claimed that no one order will fully cover the human experience and as contexts change, orders must be constantly created and modified. This is true also for the Cartesian grid of coordinates, which has dominated the basic order of physical and geographical reality for the last three hundred
35
years. Bohm and Peat (1987) questioned its general appropriateness and arrive at notions of different degrees of order: The flowing river gives a good image of how a simple order of low degree can gradually change to chaotic order of high degree, and eventually to random order. But they show that between the two extremes of simple regular order and chaos there is a rich new field of creativity, as a state of high energy making possible a fresh perception, generally through the mind. Full creativity requires also free play in communication in science. They recognized implicate order as a special case of generative order . This order is fundamentally relevant in nature, as well as in consciousness and in the creative perception and understanding of nature - and therefore also for MLs. Thereby Bohm and Peat (1987) reached an entirely new view of consciousness as a generative and implicate order that throws light on nature, mind and society, and opens the door to the kind of dialogue stated above. If such an overall common generative order will bring together science, nature, society and consciousness, this can have also far-reaching implications for our transdisciplinary landscape paradigms. In a recent comprehensive biography of Bohm and his work, his close collaborator Peat (1997, page 263) stated that the implicate order is a door into new ways of thinking and the eventually discovery of new and more appropriate mathematical orders. It is both a philosophical attitude and a method of inquiry. For landscape ecology this means that further and deeper insights into the holistic nature of landscapes can be gained only if we are ready to free our minds of rigid commitments to familiar notions of order. Only then, we may be able to perceive new hidden orders behind the simple regularity and randomness. It is possible for categories to become so fixed a part of the intellect that the mind finally becomes engaged in playing false to support them. Clearly, as context changes so do categories (Bohm and Peat, 1987, p.115). Such a change in context occurs when landscapes will no longer be treated as nothing but formal, spatial geometric structures and mosaics, describable by Archimedian geometry, and by the Cartesian grid of coordinates. Instead they will be conceived as unique Gestalt systems, imbedded in a hierarchy of subtle, generative, implicate orders, in which human mind, consciousness and creativity play an important role. First, important steps in this direction beyond the regular Archimedian order are the fractal dimensions, which occupy already an important role in many landscape studies. However it should be realized that the order of fractals is related to a local order of space, but in the implicate and generative order, the process of enfoldment is related to the whole, to the THE. For landscape research it will become a major challenge to capture the implicate and generative orders of landscapes. This may be achieved by further development of the holistic Gestalt interpretation of aerial photography, and its combination with holograph photography. Further new orders will hopefully emerge through the collaboration of landscape ecologists with other relevant scientific and professional fields for the development of practical tools and methods to include the appreciation of aesthetic, ethical and intrinsic nature values in the decision making process.
Eighth Premise: To overcome the dualistic view of perceiving landscapes either as exclusively biophysical, natural events or as psychological mind events, MLs should be conceived with a biperspectivable systems view as interacting products of natural biogeospheric systems and cognitive noospheric systems , observable simultaneously from two points of view and contextual windows A major obstacle for accomplishing these transdisciplinary challenges is to overcome the great epistemological barriers erected between scientists from the natural and humanistic scientific cultures by their contrasting perceptions of landscapes as either entirely physical or entirely
36
mental phenomena. This dichotomy originated from the deeply ingrained Cartesian dualistic view of nature and mind. It has resulted in the positivistic and reductionistic dualistic interpretations, by which the latter are soft systems which cannot be measured and quantified by conventional mathematical and/or biophysical means. Therefore they do not count (This, in spite of the fact that many landscape elements that cannot be counted, count in reality, and on the other hand not all those which can be counted, really count). In his groundbreaking introduction to systems philosophy, Laszlo (1972) developed an alternative to this dualistic view with the help of a biperspectivable systems view of two major systems classes of natural systems and cognitive systems: He defined natural systems as a random accumulation of matter/energy, in a region of physical space-time, organized into coacting interrelated subsystems or components, and cognitive systems as, systems constituted by mind events, including perceptions, sensations, volitions, feelings, dispositions, thoughts, memories and imaginations i.e. anything present in the mind. Both systems are single, self-consistent mind-events of cognitive systems and natural, physical space-time events of concrete systems. But they are internally and externally observable simultaneously as integrated natural cognitive and psychophysical systems. The unique feature of human mind is its capacity for retrospection. Introspectively "lived" systems can be externally "observed" systems of physical events, and physical events can be internally viewed through retrospection. This leads to the assumption that systems of mind events (i.e. cognitive systems) can be externally viewed and systems of physical events (i.e. natural systems senso Laszlo) can be internally viewed. As explained in detail by Laszlo (1972) the theories applying to natural and to cognitive systems are isomorphic, this means (See Naveh & Lieberman 1994, page 36) the equivalence relations of the structural properties of both systems have analogical coupling properties, in both directions, irrespective of the different energetic and material realizations of these couplings . Thus, f.i. a map of a certain landscape is isomorphic to the actual spatial relations between the different elements of this landscape. Therefore when switching from the one to the other system we change the content or reference of the theory, but its form remains the same. This lead Laszlo to the fundamental concept of the nature-cognitive (i.e. psychophysical) system , which are not "dual" but "biperspectival", and the basic entities of systems philosophy are non-dualistic, psychophysical systems, termed biperspectival natural cognitive systems. As thinking human creatures we are living not only in the physical, and geographical space of these concrete natural systems of the geosphere and the biosphere, which we share with all other organisms. At the same time we live also in the conceptual space of the cognitive systems of the human mind of the noosphere. As the products of both these internally and externally viewable natural and cognitive systems and their interactions, our THE MLs can serve as the tangible bridge between nature and mind. As such they can be perceived, studied, managed and evaluated simultaneously with such a biperspectivable systems view. This complementary approach is essential for any meaningful transdisciplinary research and its practical implementation.
Ninth Premise: The multifunctionality of landscapes is driven both by natural biogeospheric and by cultural noospheric processes. They are therefore multidimensional with important reciprocal effects on human society. For the appraisal of their intrinsic and instrumental bio-ecological, socio-ecological and socio-economic values close cooperation between landscape ecologists and experts from all other relevant scientific and professional disciplines is required.
37
The multifunctionality of landscapes is the quintessence of holistic landscape theory, as presented above. It can be fully comprehended by revealing the basic differences between landscapes, in comparison to living systems and ecosystems. Living systems are driven by chemical, physical and biological physiological processes, maintaining the multifunctionality of life. In ecosystems, the relations between organisms and their biotic and abiotic environment have created additional ecological processes, leading to a great number of vital regulation, production and protection functions. However, their multifunctionality is monodimensional, because it is based only on natural, material processes of flow of energy/matter and biophysical information, to be investigated by basic and applied disciplines of the natural sciences. On the other hand, the multifunctionality of our natural and cultural THE biosphere landscapes is multidimensional. It is deeply imbedded in their holistic, biperspectivable nature as mixed natural and cultural systems. Their functions are driven not only by natural, material-ecological processes, stemming from their geospheric and biospheric origin, and transmitted by biophysical information, but also by cognitive mental processes of noospheric origin and transmitted by cultural information. Their multifunctionality includes, according to Naveh and Lieberman (1994), three major domains: 1) The bioecological domain, related to those physical, chemical, and biological processes that ensure highest attainable productivity, diversity, and stability, and integrity. 2) The socioeconomic domain related to the direct economic benefits to be derived from these landscapes and their hard, marketable products. 3) The socioecological and cultural domain related to life quality, and to its sociohygienic, psychological, cultural, scientific and spiritual requirements. Producing only soft, non marketable social and cultural values, these functions are mostly ignored or underrated in the decision making process and are not fully recognized as vital life support functions. Their perception creates the unique reciprocal relations between human society and landscapes in which humans are both effectors and affected. The latter can have far reaching impacts on our state of mind, consciousness, attitudes and values. To this affective bond, the American cultural geographer Tuan (1974) has given the name Topophilia . Their effect on our physical and mental wellbeing is now more and more recognized. The new science of ecopsychology presents this as a powerful dimension, by suggesting that by living in greater harmony with nature we shall not only improve our mental health, but make our life happier and more fulfilled with meaning (Roszak et al. 1995). This coupling of mental health with landscape quality should become therefore an integral part of our vision of healthy landscapes. In the evaluation of these functions we have to realize that in addition to the anthropocentric dimensions of their instrumental values, measured by their benefits for human society, there is also an ecocentric and ethical dimension of the intrinsic existence values of landscape, not depending on these utilitarian values. Therefore we have to study landscapes function not only as a mere commodity to be exploited as a resource on which we project our economic interest, but as being a source of value on their own right, even if we cannot put any monetary and social value on their services. The cultural information of these cultural, multidimensional landscape perceptions is transmitted by cultural templates from generation to generation as a cultural landscape heritage. However, the rapid processes of cultural and landscape homogenization and urbanization are endangering these cultural biosphere landscapes, and their heritage values. We will not be able to prevent their extinction by stressing only their socio-economic functions, and by reducing the human role to that of Homo economus(ONeill and Kahn 2000). Instead, as suggested rightly, in the statement by the organizers, we have to mount a common, transdisciplinary effort with scientists from other relevant natural, social and human
38
disciplines, with artists with planners, and architects and also with ecopsychologists to study, evaluate and promote their multifunctionality by a much broader holistic approach.
Tenth Premise: In the synthetic evolution of the selforganization of nonequilibrium dissipative structures, our THE landscapes, as part of the cultural evolution, are driven through leaps of bifurcations into higher organization levels by positive feedback loops of autocatalytic and crosscatalytic hypercycle networks. In this process unsustainable throughput agro-industrial and urban-industrial landscapes are endangering the autopoietic regenerative biosphere landscapes and destabilizing the geosphere. In this final premise the circle will be closed by returning to the first premise in which new insights in synthetic evolution and the selforganization of dissipative structures were discussed and the cultural evolution was presented as leaps by bifurcations to higher organization levels. These leaps have been made possible by mutually reinforcing cross-catalytic feedback loops of whole chains of catalytic Auto-and cross-catalytic cycles. They have been first described by Eigen and Schuster (1979) as hypercycles , in chemical and biological processes, which underlie the emergence of life and were further developed by Maturana and Varela (1980) into a more general theory on the autopoiesis (From the Greek autopoiesis =self-creation) of living systems. The integration of the structure-oriented model of self-organization of dissipative structures, rooted in nonlinear thermodynamics, and the organization-oriented model of catalytic networks of autopoiesis, has culminated in a coherent theory of living systems, ecosystems and social systems. It has also far-reaching implications for natural and seminatural biosphere landscapes (Naveh and Lieberman 1994; Naveh 1998 a b): Accordingly, such systems on a relatively high organization level that can renew, repair and replicate themselves in a process of self-organization as networks of interrelated component producing processes, by creating and recreating networks in a flow of matter and energy and information, are called autopoietic systems . Throughout human history the Total Human Ecosystem expanded according to the rate of growth of human populations, their consumption and technological power, resulting in a gradual process of modification and conversion of natural landscapes into cultural landscapes. However, during this evolutionary process, and since the industrial fossil fuel revolution with accelerating speed, a crucial bifurcation has divided these Total Human Ecosystem landscapes into biosphere and technosphere landscapes and their ecotopes (or in short bio-and technoecotopes ), and most recently also into intermediate agro-industrial ecotopes. Their distinctive features require a basic functional classification, presented as an ordination of increasing modification, conversion and replacement described elsewhere in more detail (Naveh 1988a,b): Natural bio-ecotopes, as well as seminatural bio-ecotopes , such as forests, woodlands, grasslands, wetlands, rivers and lakes, are driven entirely by solar energy and its biological and chemical conversion through photosynthesis and assimilation into chemical and kinetic energy. They contain spontaneously evolving and reproducing organisms on which the future biological evolution depends. As adaptive self-organizing systems they are internally regulated by natural - that means biological and physical -chemical information and have the capacity to organize themselves in a coherent way by maintaining their structural integrity in a process of continuous self-renewal of autopoiesis. All these biosphere landscapes can be considered also as dissipative structures that are far from equilibrium, maintained and stabilized only by permanently interchanging energy and entropy with their environment. Driven by positive feedback of environmental and internal fluctuations, they move to new regimes that generate conditions of renewal of higher entropy production, while undergoing short and long-term
39
cyclic fluctuations, far from a homeostatic equilibrium stage. By "pumping out" entropy as disorder in their autopoietic live-creating process these landscapes increase their internal negentropy, ensuring more effective information and energy efficiency within the system, and play thereby an active role in the evolutionary process. As multidimensional and multifunctional landscapes, they are important life supporting and improving systems by fulfilling not only vital food production, regulation, protection and carrier functions, but also all other above mentioned "soft" socio-ecological and intrinsic functions. Traditionally and organic agro-ecotopes are also solar-energy powered biosphere landscapes. Although regulated and controlled by human cultural information, they have still retained a great amount of their self-organizing capacities. Therefore, like biosphere landscapes they can be called Regenerative Systems (Lyle 1995). Urban-industrial techno-ecotopes are human-made and therefore artificial systems, driven by fossil and nuclear energy and their technological conversion into low-grade energy. They lack the above described multifunctionality and the selforganizing and regenerative capacities of biosphere landscapes and result in high outputs of entropy, waste and pollution with farreaching detrimental impacts on the remaining open landscapes and human health. High-input agro-industrial ecotopes have replaced recently almost all low-input cultivated agro-ecotopes in industrial countries and are spreading now also in many developing countries. Although their productivity is depending still on photosynthetic conversion of high grade solar energy, this energy is subsidized to a great extent by low grade fossil energy, and their natural control mechanisms have been replaced almost entirely by heavy chemical inputs and throughputs. In this respect, and in their detrimental environmental impacts on the open landscape, its wildlife and biodiversity, and the quality of its natural resources of soil and water, as well as on human health, they come very close to technosphere landscapes, and like these, can be called Throughput Systems (Lyle 1995). Without heavy financial subsidies, even the most successful agro-industrial systems, as measured by high yields and agrotechnological sophistication, like those in Israel, are undergoing deep economic crisis. Therefore these landscapes have lost not only their ecological but also their economic sustainability. All these bio-agro- and techno-ecotopes are spatially interlaced in the industrial Total Landscape forming a disordered mosaic whose increasing homogenizing aesthetic and ecological entropy development has been described in a profound way by the important landscape historian Rolf-Peter Sieferle (1997). As a result of the overwhelming adverse and destabilizing impacts of the techno-and agro-industrial landscapes on the biosphere landscapes and the geosphere, they cannot function together as a coherent, sustainable Total Human Ecosystem ecosphere. This is manifested by many syndromes of biological and cultural landscape impoverishment and degradation, such as accelerated desertification, erosion, catastrophic flooding, salination, and eutrophication, as well as in threatening global climate changes and in the disruption of the protecting ozone layer in the stratosphere (Fig.1.). This creeping process of extinction can be prevented only by ensuring the structural and functional integration of bio-and technosphere ecotopes into a coherent sustainable ecosphere.
40
Fig. 1: The destabilization of the Total Industrial Landscape by unrestrained outputs of the technosphere and agro-industrial landscapes on the biosphere landscapes and the geosphere
Conclusions With the help of a holistic landscape conception, well grounded in system theory and its recent insights, we will be able to better comprehend and deal with landscapes as an integral part of the physical, chemical, biological, ecological and socio-cultural processes determining the fate of our THE and therefore also global survival. The biperspactivable system view of landscapes, functioning simultaneously as natural and cognitive systems, and therefore as a tangible bridge between nature and mind, opens the way for close cooperation between landscape ecologists and scientists from all other relevant disciplines and professions, working together for the joint overarching transdisciplinary vision of a sustainable future of our THE and its landscapes. Equipped with these conceptions, landscape ecologists can fulfill an important role by serving in the dual position of experts in their own field and as integrators for innovative, future-oriented research and action. Such research must take into consideration that the recent adoption of new information and communication technologies has caused the rapid development of the infosphere, driving
41
human society through unstable and even chaotic transitional stages towards this global information rich age with all its positive and negative implications, dangers and opportunities. It will depend on the readiness and ability of human society to follow the road toward further evolution and sustainability of our global THE, by choosing the bifurcation, converging towards a higher level of complexity and organization and toward further evolution of life on a higher level of quality. For this purpose, there is urgent need for the creation of a postindustrial, symbiosis between nature and human society, turning the antagonistic relations between the biosphere and the technosphere into mutually beneficial ones, in sustainable, healthy and information rich biosphere and technosphere landscapes The scientific input of landscape ecologists in restoring, reclaiming, and rehabilitating damaged landscapes, revitalizing wetlands, rivers, lakes and their embankments, creating living corridors and viable urban biosphere islands, could fulfil an important role in this integration. It should be part of comprehensive landscape planning and environmental management for sustainable development towards the information society. However, in order to become also a driving force in this symbiotic process, landscape ecologists must take an active part in the creation of new cultural, information-rich, crosscatalytic and synergistic feedback loops, linking natural, ecological, socio-cultural and economic processes of our THE. Thanks to the above-described recent insights in selforganization of autopioetic systems and their crosscatalytic networks, we are now able to deal in holistic ways with complex natural and cultural patterns and to offer practical means to the decision makers and the public for ensuring lasting mutual synergistic benefits for the people and their physical, mental and economic welfare, together with the creation of healthy, productive and attractive landscapes for the emerging information society This has been achieved in a recently completed interdisciplinary EU research project for regional sustainable development, by synthesizing and quantifying in more robust ways the interaction of the dynamic natural and socio-cultural and economic landscape processes with the help of dynamic systems modeling, including crosscatalytic networks, and holistic future scenarios and other integrative methods. Our model revealed mutual supportive crosscatalytic network relations in the dynamics of the emerging information society, initiated by the development of younger companies, their innovators and key people, comparable to the autopioetic dynamics driving ecological systems and natural and semi-natural biosphere landscapes. With the help of this model we could further show that the contribution of nature to regional attractiveness is crucial for regional upswing. Thereby the citizens will gain from nature, namely the soft intangible and intrinsic values, and the hard and marketable values of the regional "green biosphere landscapes. A further symbiotic CNN link of give and gain relation between these landscapes and the new successful regional economy could be created by paying an adequate fixed share of the tax income for the sustainable management, design and development (Grossmann et al. 1997; Grossmann 2000): Grossmann and Naveh, in press). Such models can be realized in practice only as part of an all-embracing environmental sustainability revolution. It will be driven by the widespread adoption of technological innovations of regenerative and recycling methods and the efficient utilization of solar and other non-polluting and renewable sources of energy, coupled by less wasteful and more sustainable lifestyles and consumption patterns. That this is not a utopian dream can be learned from the encouraging examples provided in the recent 1999 State of the World report (Brown et al. 1999), in addition to many others, indicating that we are at the threshold of such a postindustrial environmental sustainability revolution.
42
References Allen, Timothy, F. Hoekstra, Thomas, W. (1992): Toward a Unified Ecology. New York: Columbia University Press. Bohm, David (1980): Wholeness and the Implicate Order. London: Routledge and Kegan. Bohm, David (1996): On Dialogue. London: Routledge. Bohm, David; Peat, David F. (1987): Science, Order, and Creativity. A Dramatic Look at the Roots of Science and Life. New York: Bantam Books, Bright, Chris (2000): Anticipating environmental surprises. In: Brown, Lester R.; Flavin, Christopher; French, Hilary [eds]: State of the World 2000. A Worldwatch Institute Report on Progress Toward a Sustainable Society. New York, London: Norton & Company, pp.22-38. Brown, Lester, R., Flavin, Christopher; and French, Hilary [eds.] (1999): State of the World 1999. A Worldwatch Institute Report on Progress Toward a Sustainable Society. New York., London: Norton& Company., Capra, Fritjof (1996): The Web of Life. A New Understanding for Living Systems. New York: Anchor Books Doubleday. Eigen, Manfred: Schuster, Peter (1979): The Hypercycle: A Principle of Natural Selforganization. New York: Springer Verlag. Forman, Robert .T.T; Godron, Michel (1986): Landscape Ecology. New York: Wiley. Grossmann, Wolf, D., Meiss, Karl M., Fraenzle, Stefan (1997): Art, design and theory of regional revitalization within the information society. Gaia, 6: 105-119. Grossmann, Wolf, D. (2000): Realizing sustainable development with the information society the holistic Double-Gain-Link approach. Landscape and Urban Planning. Special issue on Holistic Landscape Ecology in Action. (In press). Grossmann, Wolf, D.; Naveh Zev (2000): Transdisciplinary challenges for regional sustainable development toward the post-industrial information society. Third International Conference of the European Society for Ecological Economics May 3-6 Vienna (In press). Holling, John (1996): Surprise for science, resilience for ecosystems and incentives for people. Ecological Applications 6:733-735. Holling, C.S; Berkes, Firket; Folke, Carl (1999): Science, sustainability and resources management. In: Berkel, Firket; Folke, Carl; Colding, Johan [eds.]: Linking Social and Ecological Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jantsch, Erich (1980): The Self-Organizing Universe. Scientific and Human Implications of the Emerging Paradigm of Evolution. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Koestler, Arthur (1969): Beyond atomism and holism.- the concept of the holon. In: Koestler, Arthur; Smithies, John, R. [eds.] Beyond Reductionism: New Perspectives in the Life Sciences. London: Hutchinson of London, pp. 192-216. Kuhn, Tomas, S. (1996): The Structure of the Scientific Revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 3rd edition. Laszlo, Erwin (1972): Introduction to Systems Philosophy: Toward a New Paradigm of Contemporary Thought. New York: Harper Torchbooks. Laszlo, Erwin (1987): Evolution: The Grand Synthesis. Boston: Shambhala, New Science Library. Laszlo, Erwin (1994): The Choice: Evolution or Extinction. A Thinking Person's Guide to Global Issues. New York: C. P. Putnam & Sons. Lyle, John,T. (1994): Regenerative Design for Sustainable Development. New York: John Wiley. Maturana, Humberto; Varela Francisco (1980): Autpoiesis and Cognition. Dodrecht: D. Reidel.
43
Naveh, Zev. (1990): Landscape ecology as a transdisciplinary framework for environmental education. In: Keiny, Shoshana; Zoller, Uri [eds.]: Conceptual Issues in Environmental Education New York: Peter Lang, pp. 125-146. Naveh, Z. (1995b): Interactions of landscapes and cultures. Landscape and Urban Planning, 32: 43-54. Naveh, Zev (1998a): Culture and landscape conservation - a landscape ecological perspective. In: Gopal, Brij; Pathak, P.S; Saxena, K.G. [eds.]: Ecology Today: An Anthology of Contemporary Ecological Research. New Delhi: International Scientific Publications., pp.19-48. Naveh, Zev (1998b): Ecological and cultural landscape restoration and the cultural evolution towards a post-industrial symbiosis between human society and nature. Restoration Ecology 6:135-143. Naveh, Zev (2000): What is holistic landscape ecology? A conceptual introduction. In: Palang, Hannes; Mander, Ulo; Naveh, Zev. [eds.]: Holistic Landscape Ecology in Action. Landscape and Urban Planning. (In press). Naveh, Zev; Lieberman. Arthur, S. (1994): Landscape Ecology Theory and Applications. Second Edition. New York.: Springer. Peat, David, F. (1997): Infinite Potential. The Life and Times of David Bohm. Helix Books. Reading Massachusetts: Addison Wesley, Pimentel, David (1992) : Conserving biological diversity in agricultural systems. BioScience 42:354-362. Prigogine, Ilia ; Stengers, Ilse (1984): Order out of Chaos. Mans Dialogue with Nature. Boston & London :New Science Library Shamabala,. Roszak, Theodor; Gomes Mary, E.; Kanner, Allen D. (1997): Ecopsychology. Restoring the Earth Healing the Mind. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books. Sieferle, Rolf, P. (1997): Rueckblick in die Natur. Eine Geschichte des Menschen und seiner Umwelt. Muenchen: Luchterhand Literaturverlag. Tuan, Yi-Fu (1974): Topophilia. A Study of Environmental Perception, Attitudes, and Values. Englewood Cliffs, New Jewrsey: Prentice-Hall. Vitousek, P.M., Mooney,H.A., Lubchenco, Janes; Melillo John,M. (1997): Human domination of Earths systems. Science 277:494-499. Weinberg, Georg, M. (1975): Introduction to General Systems Thinking. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Weiss, Paul, A.(1969): The living system: Determinism stratified. In: Koestler, Arthur: Smithies, John, R. [eds.]: Beyond Reductionism: New Perspectives in the Life Sciences. London: Hutchinson of London, pp. 3-55. Zonneveld, Isaak (1995): Land Ecology. An Introduction to Landscape Ecology as a Base for Land Evaluation, Land management and Conservation. Amsterdam: SPB Academic Publishing.
44
How a landscape finds form and comes alive.

Henri Dcamps.
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 29 rue Jeanne Marvig, 31055, Toulouse cedex 4, France.
Out of a ruin a new symbol emerges, and a landscape finds form and comes alive. John B. Jackson, 1994.
A journey from landscape vision to definition leads nowhere if it is made by ecologists alone, particularly if it is made without human and social scientists. This statement points to the central hypothesis of my lecture : societies interpret their environment according to the way they manage it, and they manage their environment according to way they interpret it (Berque et al. 1994). Adopting such a central hypothesis implies acknowledging the importance of human perception. Berque and his colleagues emphasise that understanding a landscape is not only to know the morphology of the environment or the physiology of human perception, it is also to know the cultural, social and historical causes of that perception - in other words what constructs human subjectivity. From that perspective, bocages, paddy-fields, mountain-pastures appear as ecosymbols, that is ecological as well as symbolic entities. Landscapes find form and come alive when a set of representations give these symbolic entities an explicit aesthetic scheme, that can be valued and reproduced for example as paintings or as postal cards, and that characterise a certain society at a certain time. Thus, the concept of landscape appears as a particular relationship a society keeps up with its environment. We need to remember that this concept does not exist in all societies: it appeared in the IVth century in the Chinese civilisation, and only in the XVIth century, at the Renaissance, in our European civilisation. According to Berque (1995), four criteria distinguish these landscape civilisations from those who are not : they use words to express the idea of landscape, they develop a literature (oral or written) to describe landscapes or celebrate their beauty, they produce pictorial representations of landscapes, they practice pleasure gardening. On this basis, Id like to illustrate how a landscape finds form and comes alive, taking as an example riparian areas, the areas that constitute my own research topic. Riparian areas are landscapes. This is not a new idea. Malansons comprehensive book published in 1993 was entitled : Riparian Landscapes , and my 1995 S.I.L. Baldi Lecture was sub-titled : a Landscape Perspective . We know that riparian areas are landscapes. but are we aware of the consequences of such a statement ? Lets recall some early work : In the nineteen forties, the German geographer Carl Troll undertook spatial analyses using aerial photographs and coined the word Landschaftskologie , an ecology that addressed large heterogeneous areas.
45
In the nineteen eighties, a paper co-authored by two ecologists, Paul Risser and James Karr, and a geographer, Richard Forman, revived landscape ecology in North America. Since those early days landscape ecology has continually moved forward, particularly with the use of satellite imagery and computer modelling. However, since the early nineties, under the influence of papers such as those published by Zev Naveh (1982, 1991) and Joan Nassauer (1992, 1995), an increasing number of ecologists have realised that landscapes are much more than what they had originally thought, and not just patches and ecological processes. Landscapes depend on cultural preferences and desires ; they are relative entities, where natural environmental processes and culture interact. If we consider riparian areas as landscapes it means that we consider them as ecological as well as cultural entities and this leads to a dramatic change in the way, we, as ecologists can contribute to their management.
Survival of riparian landscapes depends on ecological and cultural sustainability. Everywhere in the world, river flood plains are increasingly dominated by humans, leaving only fragments of riparian forests along rivers. The survival (or persistence) of such fragments depends on their ability to maintain their structure and function over time in the face of external pressures, in other words, it depends on their ecological sustainability. However, particularly in human dominated flood plains, sustainability appears to be a relationship between dynamic ecological systems and dynamic human economic systems, a relationship in which the ecological health and integrity of riparian forest fragments are not destroyed by the effects of human activities. Therefore, ecological sustainability is not enough. It must be combined with a cultural sustainability, where the survival of riparian fragments depends on human attention. Riparian landscapes are more likely to be ecologically maintained in a world dominated by humans, if they evoke the sustained interest of people ,- if they provide aesthetic experiences. In fact, survival of riparian landscapes requires that people enjoy and take care of them. Thus, our task, as scientists, is twofold : First, we must determine what are the landscape properties which should be the focus of human attention ; and secondly, we must devise ways of directing human attention to these properties. This is where, as suggested by Joan Nassauer (1992), vividness comes in. Landscape properties, which invite the focus of human attention, must be not only relevant, but also be clear. The more clear these properties, the more likely people will care of them. Id like to demonstrate that diversity and connectivity may be examples of such properties of riparian landscapes, helping to provide ecological as well as cultural sustainability.
Ecological sustainability requires people to have knowledge of both diversity and connectivity. Only diverse and connected riparian landscapes can maintain their function overtime, at the site as well at the watershed level. At the site level, the filter function of riparian systems depends on their diversity and connectivity. For example, the best protection for watercourses against diffuse pollution is provided by multi species buffer strips , including three interconnected zones (Lowrance et al.1998) :
46
- a herbaceous zone next to arable land which spreads surface flow, thus facilitating the deposition of coarse sediment, - a zone of managed shrubs and trees which maximises infiltration and storage of pollutants in woody vegetation, - and a permanent forest zone influencing the environment of the watercourse. These interconnected zones must be characterised also by a high species diversity because they will not buffer all the pollutants in the same way, and with the same efficiency, for conservative pollutants such as sediment, phosphorus, heavy metals or for nonconservative pollutants such as nitrate. If these interconnected zones are characterised by high species diversity there are other benefits as well as filtering diffuse pollution such as in flow regulation, fish production, wildlife habitat, timber production and landscape amenity. At the catchment level, stream networks provide great diversity, with small streams in the headwater areas providing both conduits and barriers to hill slope runoff, and larger streams in middle and lower zones providing runoff and water storage. This diversity needs to be connected in riparian zones for them to deliver their benefits. Thus, a continuous stream corridor, without major gaps, is essential to maintain aquatic conditions such as cool water temperature and high oxygen content, the conditions which are needed to maintain viable fish populations. Public health may require an entire transformation of multi land use catchments. A striking example is provided by the reduction of diffuse pollution by nitrate in the Vittel area of France. In 1988, the Company producing Vittel mineral water concerned about the ongoing constant increase in nitrate content of the subsurface waters close to the springs it was using. Vittel Company therefore launched a program to determine what changes in agriculture practice would be necessary to stop this increase, and what would be the conditions for that change to be accepted by farmers. It was quickly evident that such a program would challenge the local agricultural model and would lead to major changes in farm practice and building patterns. Agreements between Vittel company and individual farmers which allowed the production of a high quality mineral water and also the continuation of agricultural practices in the area entailed long and difficult discussions, and the mutual understanding of the necessary ecological processes of the catchment. These agreements resulted in the creation of a new landscape as can be seen on a before and after diagram (Deffontaines and Brossier 1997). This new landscape illustrates the role of diversity and connectivity in the ecological health of a multi land use catchment and demonstrates such an ecological health depends on more people having more knowledge and understanding of riparian diversity and connectivity. Cultural sustainability demands peoples attention and care towards diversity and connectivity. Lets begin with a quotation from John B. Jackson (1994) : The value of trees is not only that they can be beautiful and that they give us shade and privacy and coolness in the summer ; they also demand our attention and care. We are constantly interacting with trees ; some of them give us fruit, other give us firewood and all have to be thought about and even worried about when we consider the future. In brief, trees give us a sense of responsibility and sometimes a kind of parental pride . I think that this quotation could be applied to riparian landscapes. And Id like to illustrate this with two case studies where diversity and connectivity of riparian landscapes
47
were central themes in urban design. Both examples are from the work of the French landscape architect Bernard Lassus (1998). The first is the restoration of the Corderie Royale built at Rochefort, a French arsenal city from the 17th century. This historic building was erected along the estuary of the River Charente, which runs into the Atlantic to the South. In it, rigging for the kings ships built in nearby docks was made. For more than two centuries, soldiers and scientists sailed from Rochefort to all parts of the Americas, Quebec and West Indies. In these countries empty hulls of ships were filled with unknown plants, including the begonia, the large flowered magnolia and many others for the return voyage to France. They were planted and acclimatised near the Corderie before being sent elsewhere in Europe. In 1926, the arsenal came to a standstill and work at the Corderie stopped. Screens of trees spread into the once industrial banks of the river, hiding the building which, invisible from the river as well as from the town, was more or less forgotten. In 1992, the Corderie was successfully restored in the context of its historical relationship with the town of Rochefort. The landscape restoration symbolises the relationship between a former port and the far distant corners of the world. From the side of the Charente, the faade of the building can be seen through a screen of shrubs and small trees, which allows the boat passengers and the riverside walkers to discover it intermittently, and from diverse angles. On the town side, the Corderie is seen from the ramparts that dominate the building along its faade which are lined by Chimaerops palm trees. A ramp planted with Virginian Liriodendron slopes toward the palm tree line and leads to an area of rigging evoking the past port activity. This new riparian urban landscape provides connections between different historical periods ; between todays leisure activities and the time when the arsenal was in full use, and plant collecting from exotic places was active, before its abandonment and period of neglect. Each of these periods occupies a different yet connected space, and together they provide an opportunity for a new future - a horticultural landscape where the past is symbolised by the begonia. The restoration has drawn on historical diversity as the basis for a new culturally sustainable riparian landscape. My second example is the Park at Duisburg-Nord, in the industrial valley of the Ruhr in Germany. In this project, the canalised and heavily polluted river Emscher is used as a symbol of revival. On the map of the project some areas represent day needs of residents close to the Park, other areas correspond to three different time periods in the history of the valley. An area corresponds to former times with the rectilinear canalised river near factories and blast furnaces ; another area is even before that time with the sinuous curves of the riverbed, represented as it was before the factories were built ; a last area corresponds to the future with a series of gardens illustrating the process of landscape metamorphosis. These different areas are distinguished and yet united by a temporal pen composed of alternating rows of deciduous and coniferous trees placed parallel and obliquely. This project suggests two interesting points when considering natural and cultural interactions : First, rather than hiding the pollution problem behind landscape screens, the project makes very clear and vivid the diversity of connected time periods, which will give rise to a new future landscape. Secondly, a preoccupation with natural processes is not forgotten, it is simply placed in the context of the larger cultural picture of which they are part.
48
From these examples, it is clear that diversity and connectivity may be clear characteristics which can attract peoples attention and care, thus creating cultural sustainability.
Interaction between ecological and cultural sustainability governs riparian management. The project in the park at Duisburg-Nord, around the polluted river Emscher, emphasises an ecological perspective. It distinguishes, yet unites, different areas representing successive periods of ecological health phases of the river. Such an ecological understanding may increase landscape aesthetic pleasure in anchoring diversity not in a particular area, but in a variety of connected areas. In contrast, the restoration of the Corderie Royale along the Charente, in Rochefort, emphasises a cultural point of view. It distinguishes different historical time periods which linked together give a new sense of place for this riparian area. This new landscape may increase ecological knowledge in anchoring diversity not in a particular period of time, but in a variety of connected time periods. This is not to confound health experiences and aesthetic experiences of riparian landscapes. We all know that healthy landscapes are not necessarily beautiful and that beautiful landscapes are not necessarily healthy. But we are taking advantage of interactions between natural successional processes and aesthetic experiences to provide future landscapes which are ecologically and culturally sustainable. We must recognise that riparian landscapes - as other landscapes - evolve from a series of events over time which are influenced by our feelings of responsibility to them and our interest in them. Writing about the Chesapeake Bay, Mark Sagoff, from the Institute of Philosophy and Public Policy in Maryland, recalls, that in 1991, the sate of Maryland offered anyone registering a car the option of paying $20 to receive a special license plate bearing the words Treasure the Chesapeake . A surprising number of registrants bought the plate. And Sagoff asks : how many of us would have given the $20 for a plate that read Use the Chesapeake effectively , or something like that ? People treasure the Chesapeake - and similarly other environments - because of the value they attach to the Chesapeake in their identity, to what they are, not just what they want. In our world which is so increasingly dominated by humans, sustainable landscapes will be those where ecological health interacts effectively with cultural preferences and desires. This is really the key to successful riparian management. But a major issue remains :
We still have to promote this interaction. The examples I gave in this lecture lead to the same conclusion : diversity and connectivity may be relevant characteristics which can help to sustain riparian landscapes ecologically and culturally,- which can help building resilience as suggested by Berkes and Folke (1998). Indeed, the ecological and cultural approaches both focus on these two properties. This makes diversity and connectivity ideal tools to reconcile nature and culture when designing future riparian landscapes. Ideal tools also to develop a two way interaction where ecological knowledge increases landscape aesthetic pleasure and where, landscape aesthetic pleasure increases ecological knowledge (Nassauer 1997). Promoting such a two way interaction may be a crucial task for the sustainability of landscapes in general.
49
But we still need, as ecologists, to account for cultural preferences in riparian management (Dcamps 2000). We need to re-insert our ecological knowledge in the context of landscape experiences, expectations and pleasure. We need to become aware of sensory approaches. A sensory approach that involves making visible both Nature and our own nature is an indispensable way of reconciling science and the sensory world (Lassus 1998). References. Berkes F. and Folke C. ( eds). 1998. Linking social and ecological systems : management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge University Press. Berque A. 1995. Les raisons du paysage de la Chine antique aux environnements de synthse. Hazan. Berque A., Conan M., Donadieu P., Lassus B. and Roger A. 1994. Cinq propositions pour une thorie du paysage. Champ Vallon, Paris. Dcamps H. 1996. The renewal of floodplain forests along rivers: a landscape perspective. Verh. Internat. Verein. Limnol. 26: 35-59. Dcamps H. 2000. Demanding more of landscape research (and researchers). Landscape and Urban Planning 47 : 105-109. Deffontaines J.P. and Brossier J. (dir.). 1997. Agriculture et qualit de leau : lexemple de Vittel. Dossier de lenvironnement de lINRA n 14, Paris. Jackson J.B. 1994. A sense of place, a sense of time . Yale University Press. Lassus B. 1998. The landscape approach. University of Pennsylvania Press. Lowrance R. et al. 1998. Riparian ecosystem management model (REMM). http ://sacs.cpes.peachnet.edu. Malanson G.P. 1993. Riparian Landscapes. Cambridge University Press. Nassauer J.I. 1992. The appearance of ecological systems as a matter of policy. Landscape Ecology 6 : 239-250. Nassauer J.I. 1995. Culture and changing landscape structure. Landscape Ecology 10 : 229237. Nassauer J.I. (ed). 1997. Placing nature. Culture and Landscape Ecology. Island Press. Naveh Z. 1982. Landscape ecology as an emerging branch of human ecosystem science. Advances in Ecological research 12 : 189-237. Naveh Z. 1991. Some remarks on recent developments in landscape ecology as a transdisciplinary ecological and geographical science. Landscape Ecology 5 : 65-74. Risser P.G., Karr J.R. and Forman R.T.T. 1984. Landscape ecology : directions and approaches. Illinois Natural History Survey, Special Publication 2, 1984. Sagoff M. 1992. Has nature a good of its own ? pp 57-71 in : Costanza R., Norton B.G. and Haskell B.D. (ed). Ecosystem health. New goals for environmental management. Island Press. Troll C. 1939. Luftbildplan und kologische Bodenforschung. Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft fr Erdkunde, Berlin : 241-298.
50
Landscape and place: the distinction between two notions (experience of their usage in geography)
Grigoriy Kostinskiy
Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Science, Moscow, Russia
The paper is aimed at the clarification (from the standpoint of geography) of two close notions landscape and place. The comparison of these notions demonstrates that they are not identical, though often (especially in the flow of speech) are used as synonyms. The idea of landscape as a strict term in geography emerged much earlier than that of place in the very beginning of the 20th century. This was connected with a new humanistic impetus and was based on the long-standing (since the Renaissance visual art) idea of image, which reflects reality. In contrast to place, which is an elementary notion, landscape is a synthetic one. I call place elementary not because it is simple, but since it is basic, primordial (as well as space). The paired categories of place and space serve as the prerequisites of our discourse on territories, regions, landscapes, etc. By means of places we mark our terrestrial space, by means of landscapes this terrestrial space takes the form of images. Unlike place, landscape is connected not with the intuition of marking, but with the intuition of seeing. The methodological basis of the concept of landscape was holism, a holistic image (Gestalt). Landscape presupposes the presence of man in a specific cultural-psychological role of an observer (a contemplator). Not surprisingly that a landscape is usually regarded as the product of contemplation, similar to an image, a picture, or a paysage.
Landscape Ecology - towards a unified discipline?

Olaf Bastian
Saxon Academy of Sciences, Neustdter Markt 19 (Blockhaus), D-01097 Dresden, Germany e-Mail: Olaf.Bastian@mailbox.tu-dresden.de
The appearance of contemporary landscape ecology is not unified at all. There are historical reasons (esp. geographical and biological roots) as well as differences between science and application. The search for a unified theory of landscape ecology should consider previous concepts such as landscape diagnosis and landscape functions which were essentially elaborated in Central Europe. Because of the various aspects in a landscape (components, processes, relations), landscape ecology should be regarded as a multidisciplinary, better a transdisciplinary science, where different views and approaches are involved in a holistic manner. The principle of complementarity is helpful to understand the character of landscape ecology. The holistic approach in the context of human-nature-relations is the real challenge of modern landscape ecology regarding the background of increasing environmental problems and the discussions about sustainability. On the example of a case study in a part of Saxony (Germany), an appropriate methodology with several steps is demonstrated: The use of complex reference units, the assessment of many and diverse landscape functions, the transformation of (natural) scientific facts to categories of human society (by the evaluation which is the crucial step of the whole procedure), and the elaboration of environmental goals (landscape visions) are essential characteristics of a real holistic approach in landscape ecology.
51
2.
Workshop No. 2: Monitoring multifunctional terrestrial landscapes
Workshop guide and presentation of recommendations: Jesper Brandt, Denmark Main speaker: David C. Howard, UK First opponent speaker: Geert de Blust, Belgium, Mira van Olmen, Belgium Second opponent speaker: Kalev Sepp, Estonia Third opponent speaker: Karl Heinz Pistrich, Austria
Monitoring multi-functional landscapes at a national scale guidelines drawn up from the Countryside Survey of Great Britain
David C. Howard, Sandrine Petit and Robert G. H. Bunce
Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Merlewood, Grange-over-Sands, Cumbria, UK, LA11 6JU, e-mail: dhoward@ceh.ac.uk
Abstract The Countryside Survey is an approach to monitoring landscape and ecological change that has been developed in Great Britain since the 1970s. Data are collected using field survey and remote sensing (satellite imagery and aerial photographs) and have been linked to other surveys including those involving interviews with land-owners. The field survey is structured using an environmental classification to draw stratified, random samples of 1km squares from a known population, within which standardised procedures for vegetation survey and mapping are used. The classification is also used to integrate the different datasets and is an integral part of the Countryside Information System, a computer package designed to convey information about changes in Britains landscape and ecology to policy advisors. The paper discusses the principles of monitoring and addresses key questions associated with planning a new campaign. The history and development of the Countryside Surveys in Britain are used to provide examples of the application of those principles. Guidelines for environmental monitoring drawn from the experience of the Countryside Survey approach are proposed.
Keywords: Countryside Survey of Great Britain, field survey, national monitoring, sampling, classification
52
Introduction Multi-functional landscapes It has long been recognised that man has shaped the environment he lives in and generated the landscapes we see across most of northern Europe. While the detailed use of the land varies from area to area, it can be generalised into three or four sectors that compete with each other for land (Figure 1). The sector in Britain covering the largest area is agriculture that ranges from intense arable cropping to extensive grazing of semi-natural vegetation. Production forestry can be considered as similar to agriculture in that it looks to crop vegetation, however, the processes involved work over a different timescale. Other major sectors do not rely on vegetative production and are dominated by urban development (for residential housing, industry and transport). Quarrying, mineral extraction and waste disposal form a significant proportion of the non-vegetation sector.
Figure 1:
A diagrammatic representation of the major land uses in Great Britain draped over a map showing the density of Countryside Survey sample sites.
53
A rapidly expanding sector has been recreation. This sector can co-exist with all the sectors described so far. Recreation usually relies on the landscape and although (with one or two notable exceptions) it has not usually shaped the landscape, its growing financial power is now leading to landscape management for recreation. The recreational value of a landscape may be the driving force for conservation of both natural, historical and cultural features. Studies of multifunctional landscapes need to recognise the different land uses and their characteristics. The interactions between the management processes and the natural environment are complex and not always well understood. Background knowledge of the systems involved can help select appropriate methods of recording. Surveillance and monitoring Monitor, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, has several meanings, mostly describing people, some of which are relevant to us, but none that captures the current scientific essence of the word. The scientific term still has overtones of warning and admonition, but it is usually regarded as the act of sequentially observing and recording objects and events in the real world in such a way that change can be identified. The sense of warning comes where monitoring uses environmental quality standards to identify damaging exceedances as with critical laods. The act of observation and recording is termed surveillance and is associated with the verb to survey. Making and reporting a single observation can be performed with a variety of levels of rigour. Repeating those observations so that a time series can be fully related to one another requires far more care and precision and is termed monitoring. Survey provides a measure of stock while monitoring describes both stock and change, Monitoring the terrestrial environment used to be considered as a weak area of science as it was not considered to test a central hypothesis. Now it is progressively recognised as a valid field of research that is essential to the efficient management of our environment and the development of sustainable landscape systems. The products of monitoring now feed in to a wide range of studies such as those into changes in bird populations in agricultural ecosystems. As part of the expansion of landscape ecological research, rigorous approaches of assessing landscape change have been developed (Antrop, 1998; Bastian & Roder, 1998; Cousins & Ishe, 1998). The need for a better understanding of the processes underlying the changes in land use that we observe has stimulated research into its cause and effects, not the least by the development of conceptual models of land use transformation (e.g. De Koning et al., 1999). If we are to be capable of describing any potential environmental change, it is essential to adopt a holistic view of the landscape when devising a monitoring system ( Antrop, 1998). However, in practice, our incomplete understanding of the processes responsible for change and their interaction with landscape elements may cause problems. Our preconceptions may limit the material that we consider dynamic enough to be worthy of recording or lead to wrong estimates of the expected rate of change, which could lead to an inadequate frequency of survey. The driving forces controlling and influencing change, whether anthropogenic or natural, can be difficult to identify and often operate at different spatial and temporal scales. These issues make it impossible to prescribe a perfect methodology for monitoring landscapes. The situation is further confused by the many different objectives for monitoring which may include elements of ecology, environment, socio-economics and psychology. Our preconceptions and lack of complete understanding make the use of indicators dangerous. Indicators are valuable in communicating a message, they may be only partial surrogates for
54
the true process and change can be mis-represented or overlooked if they are the only information collected. Planning a monitoring campaign Basic considerations before starting a monitoring exercise The first question to ask in a monitoring exercise is what is being monitored and why?. In general terms it may seem simple to describe the need to record changes in ecology and the environment. Increasing public awareness of the environment and our interaction with it and the desire to be environmentally friendly give monitored information an important role in assessing the effectiveness of government strategy and helps plan new policies. The what can be more difficult to answer, especially if the topic of the monitoring exercise is broad (e.g. ecology and environment) and the goal not well defined. Scope and accuracy must therefore be clear before starting a monitoring programme. Guideline 1 The extent and components of the landscape being monitored must be explicitly stated. The geographic boundary of the region of interest must be demarcated and the statistical confidence in any results or descriptions set. Once all these items have been taken into account, a campaign of data collection can be planned.
In the case of the Countryside Surveys, the geographic extent was clear - Great Britain. Being a group of islands made the boundaries crisp and the lack of adjoining land reduced the potential problems of habitats being readily supported by land outside the domain. Recent divisions of the land classifications into Scottish and English and Welsh sections has led to some questions about this problem being addressed (Howard et al., 1998). Terminology and communication Appropriate methods of observing and recording must be formulated and publicised. While the information to be collected and the funds available will determine the methods of collection, it is important to be aware of the views of different users of the information. Unnecessary and irrelevant criticism can be produced by poor communication with different sectors and research fields simply because of differences in procedures and terminology. A standard terminology with glossaries and dictionaries should be used from the monitoring design to the presentation of results. In the case of the Countryside Surveys, this is covered in several ways: Elements of general methodology were addressed in The Ecological Consequences of Land Use Change project (Bunce et al., 1993) , Practical aspects of field survey covered in successive field handbooks (e.g. Barr, 1998) The Comparison of Land Cover Definitions and LUCID computer programme (Wyatt et al., 1994)) define categories used in reporting.
Being aware of the problem of potential misunderstanding is only the start of the solution. Continuing close collaboration and discussion with different groups who have interest in the results reduces the reflex reaction of rejection to the production of contradictory independent results. Within the Countryside Surveys advisory groups composed of representatives of government departments and agencies contribute to the formulation of reports and closed seminars offer the chance to discuss the results before full publication.
55
Guideline 2 Ensure that terms are clearly defined and methods fully explained . Clear communication is essential at all times, between workers and users of information.
Sampling strategies One of the primary objectives in any survey should be the efficient acquisition of data. In the case of the Countryside Surveys, this is aided by the use of a stratification to distribute samples and integrate datasets. The ITE Land Classification was designed as a general purpose sampling stratification to help efficiently record ecological information in rural Britain and allow information to be aggregated as regional and national statistics. The classification was produced using multivariate analysis of cartographic information describing climate, geology, morphology and human geography. In the original classification, every 1 km square in GB has been assigned to one of thirty two strata, called Land Classes (Bunce et al., 1996a). More recently, following the devolution of Scotland, the classification was extended to forty strata, allowing Scotland to be handled in complete isolation from England and Wales. The Countryside Surveys draw squares at random from a 15 km grid placed over the stratification; the grid therefore produces a dispersed sample. Using the ITE Land Classification, regional and national estimates have been produced from a sample of squares; a mean for each Land Class was calculated and then multiplied by the number of squares in that Land Class. The estimates for each Land Class were then summed to produce the final regional or national estimate. The variances of each individual Land Class was also calculated and combined to produce error terms for the national statistics
Guideline 3
Take care in targeting samples to maximise returns on effort . An appropriate stratification increases efficiency, but must be statistically rigorous.
Methods of data collection When monitoring, data need to be consistent between surveys. There is a great temptation to improve techniques, alter methods and acquire different information in successive surveys. Methods can be easily altered, but unless changes are carefully planned and conservative, compatibility between different sessions will be lost. It is important that the results can be presented in different styles so that they remain relevant to contemporary issues. For the Countryside Survey field survey, this is achieved by recording information in detail for fixed sample sites. The mapping of land cover and habitats is done using a flexible code system, so that the codes can be recombined (Howard & Barr, 1991). Other elements such as vegetation, freshwater invertebrates and soils are sub-sampled within the mapped sample units. The initial survey of 1978 was predominantly targeted at vegetation and this shaped the sample units and data were collected mainly from vegetation plots ( Bunce & Shaw, 1973). A kilometre square was selected as the base survey unit and quadrats placed at random within it. This size is a compromise between the desire to record as large a unit as possible, minimise edge effects and the limitation of how much work can be practically achieved in a short time-period. The approach contrasts that of other workers (some landscape ecologists and phytosociologists) who attempt to map using irregular shapes defined by the extent of the natural elements (e.g.
56
Zonneveld, 1989). The imposition of a regular grid eases the task of recording change, but causes problems in quantifying some characteristics, such as pattern.
Guideline 4
Use a standard method of recording on each sampling occasion. Any modifications or additions must be conservative and not jeopardise comparison with data already collected.
Choice of sample unit Other sizes of sample unit have been considered and attempted. A second map classification of Britain was produced in the 1980s at a resolution of 10 km square, but this was impractical for field survey (Ball et al., 1983). In Northern Ireland a similar 1 km square classification was produced (Cooper, 1986), but the complexity of the landscapes led to a sampling of quarter km squares with associated weightings to produce estimates (Cooper et al., 1997). Within Britain mapping is predominantly carried out on a standard co-ordinate system, the Ordnance Survey National Grid. The co-ordinate system has been carefully selected with respect to the shape of the country to minimise distortion in area, direction and shape (Harley, 1975). However, the system does not extend far beyond the coastline (indeed it does not extend to Ireland who have a different version of the same system) so mapping projection may be important to consider in selecting base maps. Mapping systems and map availability differs from country to country, but it is important to question the suitability of the projection for estimation of areal features. Method of recording Once the sample unit has been determined, it is then necessary to consider the level of detail at which information will be recorded. It is more appropriate to record information at a greater level of detail by sub-sampling (e.g. using quadrats for vegetation, soil pits and cores, water and invertebrate samples). For mapping it is necessary to define the precision of data recording. For the Countryside Surveys, vegetation was mapped if it formed more than 25% of the canopy cover when viewed from above. Distinct areas of land cover are mapped when they extended beyond the minimum mappable unit (20 m2 ); areas smaller than this are recorded as mosaics. For natural features or areas of extensive semi-natural vegetation the use of contemporary aerial photographs helped provide demarcation of different cover types. A standard method of recording in the field aids consistency. The use of standard recording sheets and codes allows information to be quickly and clearly noted in a variety of conditions for the Countryside Surveys, the recording sheets are printed on waterproof paper. A standard list of codes, drawn from the experience of previous surveys, is used for both vegetation and cover. Vegetation plot sheets contain a list of the 100 most frequently recorded species with space to add any additional species. For mapping, a list of terms is provided which are combined to produce a complete description. Surveyors are provided with a handbook containing the definitions of the terms, and they are allowed to generate new terms if necessary. However, they are directed to avoid using vague or ill-defined terms as from experience these take a disproportionate length of time to interpret. Structured map code sheets are used to encourage all information to be recorded it is better to make decisions in the field as they are harder to make and justify during the analysis. A benefit of the detailed mapping codes is the potential to re-mould the information into a variety of summary categories. Following the Rio Convention, Biodiversity Action Plans have
57
been devised in GB for a number of broad habitats. The flexibility of mapping has allowed previous surveys to be used to estimate changes in those categories. However, a consequence of the complexity is the time taken processing and validating the data. Be prepared for a lot of manipulation and interpretation post survey to avoid presenting large numbers of complex categories.
Guideline 5
Avoid or minimise subjective decisions being taken . Decisions should be made in the field wherever possible. Training and clear definitions aid decision making.
Preparation for survey Surveys can be seen as snapshots of the environmental stock and comparison of repeated surveys will provide details of change. For a snapshot, the surveys need to be performed within a tight time frame. If a survey for any area covering hundreds of square kilometres is to be completed within a single season, then a number of survey teams must be employed. For the British surveys, forty teams of two surveyors are employed to cover the summer of the year of survey. Expertise is required to perform survey and as the surveys have been 6-8 years apart, the people involved are not full time surveyors. Half of the surveyors are employed just for the period of survey and they come with a variety of skills and experience. It is not possible start with a team of inexperienced surveyors and expect the same results as if you start with experienced ones. The start of a survey is training. In the fortnight before the start of the Countryside Survey, the methods are described, handbooks circulated and field exercises carried out. Once field sites are being visited, in order to avoid bias, the survey team are overseen and guided by quality control teams and monitored by quality assurance. No matter how rigorous the supervision, there will always be some noise in the results, however it is important to avoid directional bias or at least to recognise and quantify it.
Guideline 6
Have a standard level of expertise for surveyors/interpreters . Once the standard is set, an improvement in performance may lead to a bias in results. Start with experts in their own fields rather than just looking for generalists.
Capitalise on the strengths of different approaches Each method of data collection has its own strengths and weaknesses. Ideally, methods should be combined in such a way that the strengths complement one another and the weaknesses are minimised. The common approaches range from remote sensing (using both satellite imagery and aerial photographs), field survey to interviews and archive searches. Every piece of information has its value, but the key is to recognise and record that value so that it contributes to the full picture.
58
Guideline 7
Utilise different sources of information to maximise their strengths . Census techniques give excellent broad-brush descriptions and give good geographic distributions, field samples provide greater depth of environmental/ecological detail.
Interpretation dont expect it to be simple! Once the results have been processed, interpretation can begin. One aspect of multifunctional landscapes that is particularly relevant in interpretation is the different timescales that different sectors work on. Agriculture tends to have an annual turnover and may use rotational management that is likely to produce change in detailed land cover over three to five year periods. Commercial forestry has a longer span, in Britain usually 60 to 70 years, although broadleaves are managed over much longer periods. Urban development is often looked on as simple expansion, but dereliction and abandonment do occur, especially with industrial facilities and extractive industries. As well as the management processes proceeding through the year, natural processes also proceed with a seasonal rhythm. The time of year a site is visited is important and when a site is revisited it is essential to return at a similar time. Unfortunately, calendar dates are only approximate guides to season and there is no good time frame that can be used to determine when to re-survey. Even when the surveys occur at the same time of the season, temporary change may be recorded due to atypical years (e.g. droughts or exceptionally wet periods). The period between surveys and their frequency is of crucial importance in terms of the questions the results can be used to address. Once the monitoring routine is established the separation period can become self justifying. The Countryside Surveys started in 1978 and were repeated in 1984, 1990 and 1998; a gap of six to eight years. Previous national estimates of stock of the British countryside arguably started in 1067 with the Domesday Book (although there are arguments that it built on Saxon census statistics). In the last century three other projects looked at land cover at a national scale. In the 1930s, Dudley Stamp led the First Land Utilisation Survey which was repeated in the 1960s with Alice Colemans Second Land Utilisation Survey. Unfortunately the latter was never fully published so stock and change figures are not available.
Guideline 8
The time between surveys should be long enough to allow change . This is a compromise as processes operate on different time-scales, so seasonal fluctuations and dynamic processes may be confounding.
The third project, Monitoring Landscape Change, used aerial photographs from the 1940s, 1960s and 1980s to report change. A classification was used to scale results up to national figures. The project had the benefit of using photographs of the same sites, making recorded changes real. However, the photographs were not from single unified campaigns and were not collected with the intention of making comparisons making the interpretation subjective in places.
59
Consistency is the key The benefits and drawbacks of using repeat sites as opposed to independent samples are complicated by the magnitude of change recorded. In general, for a large change statistical estimates are stronger when derived from independent samples, but small changes better using repeat samples. The latter approach also allows flows between land cover categories to be identified. The Countryside Survey revisits sites wherever possible, although additional sites have been added into each survey.
Guideline 9
Revisit the same sample locations so that real change can be recorded. Additional sample sites may be added, and rolling programmes can be adopted. Beware of bias from sites where information could not be collected.
Communicating the results It is important to consider the target audience of any results. In multi-functional landscapes, interest is likely to come from different groups with potentially opposing standings. Descriptions of stock can often be read in a variety of ways, but changes in stock are far more exacting and controversial. Unfortunately, this is the opposite way round to the statistical interpretation where change estimates are more difficult to produce and usually have less confidence than stock. The audience may not be scientific or well versed in reading academic literature and the standard reports produced for contracts may prove indigestible. Different formats need to be used to convey the results, glossy, summary reports (e.g. Parr et al., 1993), Web pages (e.g. http://www.cs2000.org.uk/) and computer packages manipulating and presenting results (e.g. Countryside Information System (Howard et al., 1994) are all valuable. Although the production of error terms or confidence intervals may give an air of validity, more needs to be done. The statistics may not cover all aspects of noise in the results and exercises quantifying the repeatability should be carried out. A quality assurance programme was undertaken for the 1990 and 1998 Countryside Surveys, but still needs some careful interpretation. Differences in species recorded for the same site may arise from a number of causes; mis-identification, mis-recording and mis-location are three that immediately spring to mind, but seasonal variation and management changes between teams surveying in the same year can produce striking results. Guideline 10 Test the accuracy of results through quality assurance exercises. Information should be presented in a variety ways but always qualified by descriptions of confidence.
Other national monitoring schemes Surveys have been carried out in many European states (see Table 1 for examples) but only now are they being repeated. We must not feel complacent that the spatial extent of survey and monitoring will allow definitive statements to be made about changes in multi-functional landscapes at a European scale. Just as the differences between surveys in one area using different techniques can masque change, so too can different techniques applied in in different areas.
60
Table 1 Example surveys in European states Country Austria Belgium Germany Netherlands Northern Ireland Norway Spain Reference Wrbka et al., (1999) Dufrne & Legendre, (1991) Haase, (1989) Jongman, (1990) Cooper et al., (1997) Sb, (1983) Elena Rossello, (1989)
The ideal solution is a unified repeated survey at a European scale, tying in both temporal and spatial scales. If this is not achievable, we should recognise the principles of monitoring and ensure interpretation and presentation is only made using compatible datasets. Discussion The benefits of hindsight After quarter of a century of monitoring, it is possible to ask What could Countryside Survey have done better? and there are a few topics that we would have addressed differently. The first is the definition of the domain for the survey; the surveys are targeted at rural Britain and so squares that were more than 75% built up were rejected. Subsequently we have produced classifications of urban land and performed survey, but it would have been better to include all squares originally. The second point relates to the development of the technique. The first survey (1978) was stronger on recording vegetation in plots than mapping, an issue that was addressed in the second survey (1984). Unfortunately, the second survey did not repeat the vegetation plots recorded in 1978. They have been repeated in 1990 and 1998, but the analysis would be more illuminating if the 1984 vegetation data were present. In 1978, the locations of the vegetation plots and soil samples were marked on 1:10,000 scale maps. The sites need to be relocated as accurately as possible to reduce one source of noise and so in 1990 they were marked with buried metal plates (identifiable subsequently using a metal detector) and photographed. The relocation in 1998 was easier and surveyors could record their opinion as to the accuracy of the relocation. The vegetation plots were photographed a second time in 1998 and some of the changes are startling. So far, this is one of the aspects we have not capitalised on all. There are other elements that we are also keen to develop or analyse such as the information recorded following discussions with land owners. This should be combined with the socio-economic survey carried out with our survey squares following the 1990 survey (Potter et al., 1996). Other links that will benefit from further development include the collaboration with the satellite derived Land Cover Map (Howard et al., 1996). Another aspect in which we were slow to start with was animal ecology. The 1990 survey included sampling freshwater invertebrates from standing and running water and the classification has been used to devise sampling schemes for badgers, foxes and bats (see Harris et al., 1995). Countryside Survey 2000 is being co-ordinated with a bird survey of the survey squares carried out by the British Trust for Ornithology.
61
None of the omissions detract from the major strengths of dataset that has been accrued from the monitoring. The surveys have been repeated four times and there is a commitment to continue collecting data. The results produced so far generally conform sufficiently to expert opinion, but do pose interesting questions. They are being increasingly used to help formulate government policy and question the management of our landscapes. The key characteristic that makes the information usable is that it is an objective sample of the British rural landscape. Acknowledgements The UK Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions (formerly the Department of the Environment) funded the extension of the ITE Land Classification and co-funded of the CS1990 and CS2000 with the Natural Environment Research Council. English Nature and the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food also funded sections of those surveys. References Antrop, M. (1998) Landscape change: plan or chaos Landscape and urban planning 41, 155161. Ball, D.F., Radford, G.L. & Williams, W.M. (1983) A land characteristic data bank for Great Britain ITE Bangor occasional papers Barr, C.J. (1998) Countryside Survey 2000 Field Handbook. In Internal report, Institute of Terrestrial Ecology. Bastian, O. & Roder, M. (1998) Assessment of landscape change by land evaluation of past and present situations Landscape and Urban Planning 41, 171-182. Bunce, R.G.H., Barr, C.J., Clarke, R.T., Howard, D.C. & Lane, A.M.J. (1996) The ITE Merlewood Land Classification of Great Britain Journal of Biogeography 23, 625-634. Bunce, R.G.H., Howard, D.C., Hallam, C.J., Barr, C.J. & Benefield, C.B. (1993) Ecological consequences of land use change Department of the Environment, London. Bunce, R.G.H. & Shaw, M.W. (1973) A standardised procedure for ecological survey Journal of Environmental Management 1, 239-258. Cooper, A. (1986) The Northern Ireland Land Classification University of Ulster Cooper, A., Murray, R. & McCann, T. (1997) The Northern Ireland Countryside Survey Environment and Heritage Service Cousins, S.A.O. & Ishe, M. (1998) A methodological study for biotope and landscape mapping based on CIR aerial photographs Landscape and Urban Planning 41, 183-192. De Koning, G.H.J., Verburg, P.H., Veldkamp, A. & Fresco, L.O. (1999) Multi-scale modelling of land use change dynamics in Ecuador Agricultural Systems 61, 77-93. Dufrne, M. & Legendre, P. (1991) Geographic structure and potential ecological factors in Belgium Journal of Biogeography 18, 257-266. Elena Rossello, R. (1989) Biogeoclimatic land classification and mapping in Spain. In GIS in ecology Merlewood research and development paper, vol. 114 (ed. R.G.H. Bunce and D.C. Howard) Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Grange-over-Sands. Haase, G. (1989) Medium scale landscape classification in the German Democratic Republic Landscape Ecology 3, 29-41.
62
Harley, J.B. (1975) Ordnance Survey Maps a descriptive manual Ordnance Survey, Southampton. Harris, S., Morris, P., Wray, S. & Yalden, D. (1995) A review of British mammals: population estimates and conservation status of British mammals other than cetaceans Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. Howard, D.C. & Barr, C.J. (1991) Sampling the countryside of Great Britain: GIS for the detection and prediction of rural change. In GIS '91 Applications in a changing world , vol. FRDA report 153 (ed. H. Schreier, S. Brown, P. O'Reilly and P.J. Meehan), pp. 171-176 Reid Collins, Vancouver, Canada. Howard, D.C., Barr, C.J. & Fuller, R.M. (1996) Linking ecological information recorded from ground, air and space: examples from the Countryside 1990 project Global Ecology and Biogeography Letters 5, 227-234. Howard, D.C., Barr, C.J. & Scott, W.A. (1998) The validity of using Countryside Survey sample data from Great Britain to estimate land cover in Scotland Journal of Environmental Management 52 . Howard, D.C., Bunce, R.G.H., Jones, M. & Haines Young, R. (1994) The development of the Countryside Information System Institute of Terrestrial Ecology Countryside 1990 series 1994 Jongman, R.G.H. (1990) Ecological classification of the climate of the Rhine catchment International Journal of Biometeorology 34, 194-203. Parr, T.W., Barr, C.J., Bunce, R.G.H., Fuller, R.M. & Furse, M. (1993) Countryside Survey 1990 Summary Report Department of the Environment Potter, C., Barr, C. & Lobley, M. (1996) Environmental change in Britain's countryside: An analysis of recent patterns and socio-economic processes based on the countryside survey 1990 Journal of Environmental Management 48, 169-186. Sb, H.V. (1983) Land use and environmental statistics obtained by point sampling Bull. Int. Statist. Inst. 50, 1317-1341. Wrbka, T., Szerencsits, E., Moser, D. & Reiter, K. (1999) Biodiversity patterns in cultivated landscapes: experiences and first results from a nationwide Austrian survey. In Heterogeneity in landscape ecology (ed. M.J. Maudsley and E.J.P. Marshall) IALE(UK), Long Ashton, Bristol. Wyatt, B.K., Greatorex Davies, N., Bunce, R.G.H., Fuller, R.M. & Hill, M.O. (1994) Comparison of land cover definitions Department of the Environment, UK, London. Zonneveld, I.S. (1989) The land unit - A fundamental concept in landscape ecology, and its applications. Landscape Ecology 3, 67-86.
63
Monitoring multifunctional terrestrial landscapes: some comments

Geert De Blust and Mira Van Olmen
Institute for Nature Conservation, Kliniekstraat 25, 1070 Brussels, Belgium e-mail: geert.de.blust@instnat.be; mira.van.olmen@instnat.be
Abstract Landscape monitoring gains credibility and utility the more it coincides with the different phases of the process of environmental and nature policy. The pursuit of sustainable development is a general accepted objective in this process. In this respect monitoring of multifunctional landscapes can gain a lot when adapting criteria for sustainable development. An integrated monitoring, addressing all possible phases of the cause-effect chains that are relevant to the studied landscape, makes this realizable. In the paper we focus on some critical aspects of the monitoring of multifunctional landscapes. After exploring the meaning of 'multifunctional landscapes', we give some remarks according integrated monitoring of them. Striving for policy relevance has consequences for the monitoring of multifunctional landscapes, especially when results are thought to be useful to elucidate causes of observed changes and must help to define proper policy measures. Keywords : spatial and integrated multifunctionality, sustainable landscapes, monitoring goals, the DPSIR-model, integrated
The nature of multifunctional landscapes and multifunctional land use The subject multifunctional landscape refers to the plural and simultaneous use of an area for several purposes; an area thus that serves different functions and combines a variety of qualities. Traditionally, those different functions tend to develop within separate zones, leading towards a segregation of functions. Apart from the problem of mutual impacts that hinders optimal development, part of the functions (of the countryside) cannot be confined to well defined areas only. To reach the nature conservation goals or to ensure the production of high quality drinking water e.g., more than a series of strict nature reserves or of sufficient water extraction and water protection zones are needed. Besides occupying mono-functional areas, these functions penetrate within other land use types as well. And finally, some of the uses and qualities of the countryside cannot be allocated unequivocally at all, as is the case with e.g. landscape-based recreation or the aesthetic values. All this poses not only problems to land use planning that is known to work with a mixture of mono-functional zones, multifunctional zones and loosely delimited zones, but has also consequences for the monitoring of multifunctional landscapes. It seems that multifunctional land use can be achieved in three ways: By pursuing different goals in a corresponding mixture of separate land use types. By pursuing the different goals on the same parcel of land but successively in time. By integrating from the beginning and constantly the different goals in order to accomplish them simultaneously.
64
Multifunctionality is therefore not only a matter of scale, although it is for the first case. Here one can distinguish the different land use types, each with an unequivocal goal and a dedicated manager: one piece of land with one function and one manager. Such a situation can be defined as 'spatial multifunctionality'. And indeed, when zoomed in or out, an area appears to be less or more multifunctional. In the second and third case however, different goals are attained within the same spatial management unit, either successively or simultaneously. Managers may succeed each other or remain the same and the original goals gradually merge until they cannot be distinguished any more. These types of multifunctional land use can be defined as 'integrated multifunctionality'. A landscape with a fine grained mixture of fields, ley or temporary grassland, Christmas-tree plantations, small nature sites, road verges managed for flowers and butterflies, a camping ground and a football-field, is an example of a spatially multifunctional area. In a designated area with modern agriculture and operative management agreements meant to conserve nature and landscape values or in a region with organic or biodynamic agriculture, types of integrated multifunctional land use can be recognised. When monitoring multifunctional landscapes, one must be aware to be able to cover both types of multifunctionality. This makes demands upon the methodology of monitoring, the resolution obtained by the spatial scale and the legend applied. For a landscape with spatial multifunctional land use, mapping resolutions used so far will mostly satisfy. But for the types of integrated multifunctional land use, this is more dubious. Indeed, the legend must be suitable to describe the variety of management measures that can be practised on what is considered a parcel with one type of land use. Not spraying pesticides, retarding the mowing date, banning hunting during the migration season, etc., make all the difference when it comes to combine agriculture and nature conservation and hence the sustainability of multifunctional landscapes. So ideally, the data recorded during monitoring should allow detecting these fundamental differences in management. Other types of integrated multifunctional land use are hard to record because some of the current legend units are too broad. Using a category such as 'urbanised area' in the monitoring of multifunctional landscapes may exclude a diversity of practises taking place in that urbanised area of the countryside, e.g. on the level of the farmsteads, that are an essential part of the multifunctional land use of the whole area (think of farm-tourism e.g.). All this makes it not unlikely that monitoring multifunctional landscapes is biased towards detecting especially spatial multifunctionality. Conclusion 1: The data to be recorded and the methods used for monitoring multifunctional landscapes should allow describing the different types of multifunctional land use. When a multifunctional landscape appears to be a mixture of mono-functional parcels, the question remains however if what was then called and seen as a multifunctional landscape, succeeds to be sustainable on the long run, sustainability that has to be assessed by successive monitoring rounds. The sustainability of multifunctional landscapes has to do with interrelations and mutual impacts between different land uses and once again with management. But it also depends on the spatial configuration of the different land use types composing the landscape. So monitoring the functionality of multiple land use requires that the particular spatial arrangement of individual land use types and their management can be described to. A higher zone with a nature area, surrounded by a sufficient broad buffer zone in combination with a footpath and adjacent to low lying intensive agricultural fields, can yield a sustainable multifunctional landscape, while the same land use types but arranged in a different spatial pattern, may not be sustainable at all. In large parts of Europe the topography and the hydrological landscape structure thus create relationships in landscapes that condition to a high degree the potentials for sustainable multifunctional land use. Therefore monitoring
65
should be able to describe these patterns and detect their changes over time. A heterogeneous landscape is not synonymous to a sustainable multifunctional landscape. The last means that chorological classifications and analyses should be considered in order to do justice to fundamental landscape patterns. Today however, typifications or topological classifications are used widely to construct the keys and legends for the monitoring of multifunctional landscapes. Conclusion 2: The legend used for the mapping and for the data collection and certainly the analysis of the cartographic results should allow to assess the sustainability of multifunctional landscapes.
Definition and aim of monitoring A rather strict but common used definition of monitoring is given by Hellawell (1991): Intermittent (regular or irregular) surveillance carried out in order to ascertain the extent of compliance with a predetermined standard or the degree of deviation from an expected norm. Since one is concerned with setting limits and deciding what to do when the results of the monitoring reveal that the goal is not reached, monitoring is intrinsically purposeful. According to this definition, monitoring is related to objectives and standards and is therefore goal oriented, as is landscape ecology. Monitoring is not open-ended. It is this goal orientation that marks out monitoring from related activities such as inventories, surveys and surveillance (Hellawell, 1991). Nevertheless, in practise these terms often got mixed up. We recommend however to stick to the original definition of monitoring. There can be three main reasons to set up a monitoring programme: - Assessment of the effectiveness of policy; - Audit function; - Early warning; In any of these cases, standards or norms have to be defined. The task of the monitoring is then to assess whether the current conditions lie within certain defined limits of these standards. Although crucial in the definition of monitoring and being the reason for existence of the instrument, a clear reference to the limits, standards, norms or goals is often absent in monitoring programmes. A probable reason for that and as such also a problem that is often encountered by researchers involved in the development of monitoring schemes is the lack of clearly defined policy goals. And in cases where there is a definition of norms or standards that give concrete form to those policy goals, it is often not measurable. An example of such a policy objective is the standstill principle, a central phrase in the new Decree on Nature Conservation in Flanders (21.10.1997). According this principle, new development projects should avoid the reduction of the current quantity and quality of nature. Today's situation should be regarded as the standard. Nevertheless, it is not the target to freeze that situation. Societal and economic development must go on. And hence the debate remains what is understood by 'quality' and 'quantity' of nature. It is clear that, although the policymakers have set a goal for the future, that goal is very difficult, if not impossible, to measure. Not an easy task to develop a monitoring programme that can reveal whether or not the standstill principle is observed regarding the natural values of the countryside.
66
However rather rare, there are some examples of incentives to give concrete form to abstract ecological targets. In 1989 the Third Memorandum on Water Management in the Netherlands introduced the AMOEBE method to set target images for ecological restoration of the sea and the rivers (Tjallingii, 1996). AMOEBE is an acronym for the Dutch title, which translates as General Method for Ecological Description. This approach is a good example of a methodology by which one tries to visualise the distance between the current ecological situation of an ecosystem and the ecological aims for that same system, set for the future (Ten Brink & Hosper, 1989). As a result, one gets a measurable distance to target. The method was later used to indicate target types for nature conservation policy in general (Tjallingii, 1996). In case of absence of measurable objectives, the scientists have to deduce them themselves. Doing so, the project will gain societal relevance. Without denying the importance of the public debate, one can say that the pursuit of sustainable development, also of multifunctional landscapes, is a general accepted objective. Forman (1995) defines a sustainable environment as an area in which ecological integrity and basic human needs are concurrently maintained over generations. Monitoring of multifunctional landscapes aims to describe changes in the landscape that eventually influence the potentials for a multifunctional land use. In the development and management of sustainable multifunctional landscapes and land use, the quality of the biotic and a-biotic components as well as that of their interrelations are essential. Therefore, these aspects should in any case be part of the criteria selected to assess the sustainability of multifunctional landscapes. That means that the preconditions for a multifunctional land use need to be detected. We mentioned already the importance of the management and the pattern of individual land use types or management regimes in this respect. Besides, the natural conditions that lead to and allow for multifunctionality should be surveyed too. Indeed, the conformity of land use and management with the natural conditions can be equally important to assess the sustainability of multifunctional landscapes and land use. In this respect, monitoring of multifunctional landscapes can gain a lot when adapting criteria for sustainable landscape management as they are developed in former work (e.g. Van Mansvelt et al., 1999). Van Mansvelt (1997) gives such criteria for a sustainable landscape, including those for the quality of the a-biotic and biotic environment (survival of the biosphere and food sufficiency), for the social environment (sharing and participation) as well as criteria for the cultural environment (human development and ethical survival). These criteria are made more concrete by translating them to parameters that can be chosen to assess the degree in which a certain criterion is met. A successful monitoring of multifunctional landscapes should be able to represent the data, needed to construct the criteria for sustainable multifunctional land use, in order to measure the changes in sustainability and the distance to target. In that sense, monitoring, or the development of a monitoring programme, can and should help to elucidate the current policy targets or at least to make them more clear and assessable. Nevertheless, one should always be careful not to link the aim of the monitoring strictly or exclusively to the aim of the current policy. Although monitoring seems to gain its relevance from the results that refer directly towards policy goals and quality standards, that dependence or coupling can be its weakness too. This because of the common phenomenon of short-term policy goals. In case the policy goals would change and there is a strong association with the monitoring programme, also the programme would have to change or might be skipped. Such
67
an evolution should be avoided at any price; since the value of a monitoring programme increases the longer it is maintained. Therefore the choice of criteria, indicators and variables, used in a monitoring programme is fundamental for the success of the whole and need to be well considered and consistent in a way that they can outlive any short-term policy and serve for different directions in policy goals that can be expected in the near future. Not yet mentioned, but essential for the success of every assessment, is a well know baseline that prevails when monitoring begins and to which all changes will be equated. The results of a first, intensive and complete executed campaign of the monitoring programme will serve perfect as a baseline. The baseline, together with the aims, in some way determines the ambition of the policy-intentions. It is obvious that goals have to be set in the beginning of the development of the programme. In fact it should be the first step in the process, since both sampling strategy and choice of parameters are depended on what one would like to know. Not to be forgotten is that monitoring and especially the subsequent results are not only useful to the policymakers, but also to the public. Where policymakers formulate objectives and develop corresponding instruments to reach those goals, monitoring programmes are there to proof the effectiveness of the instruments and to identify any possible undesirable processes that are not controlled at all by those measures. Thus monitoring can play a crucial role in putting a certain issue (once more) on the political agenda. If the standards or norms, defined by the policymakers, are not reached, monitoring might help to reveal the distance to target. Thats where research has an important task. We should be able to prove in a scientific way whether or not and to what degree a certain policy is effective. This warning function of the monitoring does not mean that the instrument is of minor scientific importance, as is suggested in the paper of Howard et al (2000): The scientific term still has overtones of warning and admonition,. Where the field recording can be regarded as a pure technical action, the development of the monitoring programme itself, including sampling strategy, analyses, and reporting, demands sufficient scientific skills (Usher (1991; Spellerberg, 1992). If the applied methods are not based on scientific principles, the results of the monitoring will be worthless. Conclusion 3: The first guideline for any monitoring campaign should be that the goals of the monitoring have to be clear to both contractor and employee. Therefore following actions should be undertaken: - Make concrete and visualise the baseline, the targets and the distance between the two. - Appeal to criteria and parameters for sustainable landscape management when deciding on what to monitor. - Make sure that the end users and stakeholders are involved in the development of the monitoring programme. Monitoring and the DPSIR-conceptual model Monitoring, and that counts also for monitoring of multifunctional landscapes, gains credibility and utility the more it coincides with the different phases of the process of environmental and nature policy. Depending the phase, environmental policy measures focus on the social activities, on the environmental pressure, on the quality and the structure of the
68
environment or on the consequences of environmental change for humans, nature and economy (Verbruggen, 1997). Also the policies for the countryside and the management of multifunctional landscapes are organised in this way. It is clear that this structure corresponds with the general concept of the environmental disturbance chains. In environmental management, it is a common rationale in this respect to work with a framework or conceptual model that links the different elements in cause - effect chains. The Pressure - State Response (PSR) Model of the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development) and the Driving forces - Pressures - State - Impact - Responses (DPSIR) Model used by the EEA (European Environment Agency) are examples. It is recommendable for monitoring to clarify its position in this framework, especially to define the proper phases the results of the monitoring are addressed to. A monitoring programme can be set up and a corresponding set of indicators can be developed to report on the state and the changes of only one of the phases of the management framework. Monitoring biodiversity or land use in a complex landscape then can yield very detailed and relevant results, but for policy it often remains unclear what measures could be taken to stop the observed evolution if this was assessed as negative. This type of monitoring doesn't learn a lot about causing factors. To be able to address to the different sectors of environmental policy and management, a monitoring programme should include a set of variables and indicators that relate to the different phases. The elaboration of a project therefore starts with an analysis of the occurring environmental disturbance chains. This must yield variables that are important to assess: the pressures (pressure indicators) that measure e.g. levels of activities, land use, emissions, the state (state indicators) as expressed by the quality (concentrations, structure, etc.) of the compartments of the environment, e.g. groundwater levels, nitrate concentration, the effect (effect indicators) in terms of consequences to biodiversity, public health etc. This whole exercise can also be done when a precise policy goal is lacking. The scientific challenge is then to deduce the comprehensive statement "maintenance of multifunctionality of the rural area" to its essential parts. In this respect, the preconditions for multifunctionality in an area and the relevant current or potential environmental disturbances that may threaten them must be analysed. Conclusion 4: Monitoring multifunctional landscapes should focus on pressures, states and effects in order to obtain as much information as possible that is suitable for the integrated management of these multifunctional landscapes.
Integrated monitoring. When attention is paid to monitor the causes and the effects of disturbance chains at the same time, and hence the variables are selected according their role in the DPSIR-conceptual model, we end up with an integrated monitoring. Besides the functional interrelations between the variables, the spatially nested surveillance of those variables is another fundamental character of such an integrated monitoring. Crucial in this process is the scale dependency of the variables. Where 1 km as a unit can be sufficient and even the best choice for the measurement of most aspects, it might be far too small for identifying the driving forces. Therefore we suggest that surrounding each monitoring plot a multi-vector space', the landscape ecological setting of the plot, is described. That means that the interrelations acting on the scale of the landscape are identified and hence potential sources or pathways of impact are located. These exercises will reveal e.g. whether or not there are groundwater pumping
69
stations or surface water discharge canals nearby; will yield information about well known pollution sources, or will help the analysis by showing that the monitoring site is situated in the vicinity of a large nature area or a big wood that has only a minor part of its area in the monitoring site itself. Doing justice to all the considerations so far, taking into account vertical and horizontal interrelations acting on different spatial scales and ensuring that the results are useful for a variety of policy goals, leads us to a more than ambitious research and monitoring programme. The foregoing was indeed a depiction of a rather ideal situation. Due to financial and practical restrictions, it will often be impossible to establish such a monitoring programme. Another reason why it is unlikely to be developed in its full extend, is the aim to produce statistically rigid results. Indeed, every component shows a characteristic spatial variation and hence demands an own spatial sampling strategy in order to obtain statistically sound results. The total number of monitoring sites that is required to meet the needs of statistical validity will then easily exceed any project facilities. Therefore, to obtain an integrated monitoring, collaboration with other thematic monitoring programmes e.g. air quality or water quality monitoring schemes might be the solution. In this respect integrated monitoring also means the tuning of different monitoring programmes and the clear and well defined interdisciplinary analysis of data collected in these different programmes. When integration is obtained by connecting different monitoring programmes, one needs to consider the sampling units and the related co-ordinate systems of the other mapping or monitoring schemes too. It is well known that historically, these mapping and monitoring schemes, often rely on the grid systems and sampling strategies of former or current inventories and surveys. The ideal co-ordinate system of a multifunctional landscape monitoring programme is then not any longer the only base. On the other hand, a well considered selection of sites for landscape and land use related monitoring, can be a robust spatial framework for other initiatives to emerge and for existing monitoring programmes to link on. As such the selected sites can act as anchors for new monitoring programmes and as field stations where we can study and learn interactions on a andscape scale in detail. Conclusion 5: The monitoring of multifunctional landscapes is best performed in an integrated way or the strategy is set up in such a way that the link with other thematic monitoring programmes is easily established in order to allow the integrated management of these landscapes.
References
Forman, Richard, T. T. (1995): Land Mosaics. The ecology of landscapes and regions. Cambridge: University Press. Hellawell, J. M. (1991): Development of a rationale for monitoring. - In: Goldsmith, Barrie F. [ed.]: Monitoring for Nature Conservation. - London, New York, Tokyo, Melbourne, Madras: Chapman and Hall, pp.1-14. Howard, David C., Petit, Sandrine and Bunce, Robert G. H. (2000): Monitoring multifunctional landscapes at a national scale: guidelines drawn up from the Countryside Survey of Great Britain. International Conference on Multifunctional Landscapes: workshop 2,
70
Monitoring multifunctional terrestrial landscapes. University of Roskilde, Centre for Landscape research. Spellerberg, Ian F. (1992): Monitoring ecological change. Cambridge: University Press. Ten Brink, Ben J. E. and Hosper, S. H. (1989): Naar toetsbare ecologische doelstellingen voor het waterbeheer: de AMOEBE-benadering. H2 O, Vol.20, pp. 612-617. Tjallingii, Sybrand P. (1996): Ecological Conditions: strategies and structures in environmental planning. Wageningen: DLO Institute for Forestry and Nature Research (IBN-DLO). Usher, Michael B. (1991): Scientific requirements of a monitoring programmeme. - In: Goldsmith, Barrie F. [ed.]: Monitoring for Nature Conservation. - London, New York, Tokyo, Melbourne, Madras: Chapman and Hall, pp.15-32. Van Mansvelt, Diek J. and Znaor, D. (1999): Criteria for the a-biotic and biotic realm: Environment and Ecology. In: Van Mansvelt, Diek J. and van der Lubbe, M. J. Checklist for Sustainable Landscape Management. Final report of the EU concerted action AIR3-CT931210: The Landscape and Nature Production Capacity of Organic / Sustainable Types of Agriculture. Amsterdam, Lausanne, New York, Oxford, Shannon, Signapore, Tokyo: Elsevier Science B. V. Verbruggen, A. (ed.) (1997): Report on the environment and nature in Flanders 1996. Learning to change. Erembodegem: Flemish Environment Agency.
71
The Methodology and Applications of Agricultural Landscape Monitoring in Estonia

Kalev Sepp1 , Mari Ivask1 , lo Mander2 , Maarika Mnd3 , Jaak Truu1 and Maarika Truu1
1
Environmental Protection Institute, Estonian Agricultural University, Institute of Geography, University of Tartu 2 Institute of Plant Protection, Estonian Agricultural University
Landscape monitoring was started as a sub-programme of biological object monitoring in 1996. The main objectives of the agricultural landscape monitoring programme are: a) To define changes in land use structure in different types of agricultural landscapes (intensive and extensive land use); b) To explain the connection between landscape structure indicators and the characteristics of ecological status of agricultural landscapes (soil microorganisms, number of earthworms, pollinators). Altogether nineteen study areas were strategically selected. Bioindicator-based monitoring method were applied for evaluating the human pressure to agricultural landscapes. Following parameters have been chosen: (1) at field level individuals and species of earthworms (Lumbricidae) per 1 m2 , diversity of soil microbial and earthworm communities, total hydrolytical activity of soil microorganisms, the number of colony forming microorganisms per 1 g of dry soil, and (2) at regional level the numerical composition of bumblebee species. Land use changes on the pilot areas over the last 50 years are analysed on the base of blackand-white interpreted aerial photos in the scale of 1:10,000. Time sections for analysing the changes were classified into three periods. The Principal Component Analysis (PCA) of the landscape elements and indicator species was carried out.
The multifunctionality of alpine grassland in Austria

H.K. Wytrzens and K.H. Pistrich
Institute of Agricultural Economics, University of Agricultural Sciences, Vienna Tel. +43/1/47654-3572 Fax +43/47654-3592 e-mail: wytrzens@edv1.boku.ac.at, pistrich@edv1.boku.ac.at, http://www.boku.ac.at/iao
Society increasingly expects the pastures and meadows of the Austrian Alps to fulfill a range of non-agricultural demands in addition to their traditional production function. This paper looks at how these demands differ both in character and geographical relevance, attempts to quantify them in full, and investigates how they are perceived by farmers. The analyses cover over 600 study plots in 44 Austrian mountain communities. A record of the demands placed on the land is drawn from a systematic analysis of activities and policies undertaken by public administration in the context of rural planning, water management and environmental protection. It also draws on a survey of some 190 farm managers in the regions studied (Styria, Tyrol and Lower Austria). The multifunctionality is then evaluated both quantitatively and qualitatively. The paper also develops a basic concept for measuring multifunctionality (the so-called "multidimensional intensity of use") and tests this approach using a parcel-based survey of around 50 different types of land use, including water protection, environmental protection, landscape protection, skiing (alpine and crosscountry), mountain biking, military use, transport (road, rail and air), hunting, waste disposal and many more. The results of the study should provide a basis for an integrated evaluation of the performance of mountain grassland in Austria.
72
3.
Workshop No. 3: Biodiversity versus landscape diversity in multifunctional landscapes
Workshop guide and presentation of recommendations: Bente Jessen Graae, Denmark, Line Magnussen, Denmark, Hans Henrik Bruun, Denmark, Henning Adsersen, Denmark Main speaker: Rob Jongman, The Netherlands First opponent speaker: Urban Emanuelsson, Sweden Second opponent speaker: Philippe Jeanneret, Switzerland Third opponent speaker: Jerzy Solon, Poland
The difficult relationship between Biodiversity and Landscape diversity

R.H.G. Jongman
Wageningen University and Research Centre, Environmental Sciences Expertise Group, PO box 47 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands, E-mail: r.h.g.jongman@alterra.wag-ur.nl
Abstract The relationship between biodiversity and landscape diversity, especially in the cultural landscapes in Europe is not straightforward. On different scale levels determinant factors change from climate for the environmental diversity for species diversity at the highest level to land cover and structure diversity with small-scale community variations and species diversity at the lowest level. At the ecosystem level biodiversity and landscape diversity are linked with diversity in regional land use systems and with land use changes and management as driving forces. The rural landscapes of Europe are in both a homogenisation and a fragmentation process. The regional differences are disappearing due to the dominating world economy. If regional differences are not kept then the cultural landscapes of Europe does that mean that their biological diversity will decline and only remnants will remain? Models on agricultural management and data on landscape change throughout Europe confirm this. Landscape change through technological changes, but at present mainly through policy decisions and the mental urbanisation of the rural land. If regional differences are important, then they have to be maintained through conscious environmental and ecological planning. The question is how. Should we maintain cultural landscapes or develop alternatives, new nature? Keywords: biodiversity, landscapes, landscape changes, Europe, scales, management.
73
1 Introduction European landscapes are viewed differently from north to south and east to west, but they are all related more to human impact than to the natural features. Although the concept of nature and landscape differs among people depending on their cultural and educational background, everyone knows that Mediterranean, Oceanic/Atlantic, Continental/Alpine, Boreal and Arctic landscapes show fundamental differences. Heathlands and bogs are known to be part of north and west Europe, stonewalls are found in Ireland and England, olive groves are Mediterranean. Land use has always been related to other changes in society and responds to political, economic and social changes through mans activities. Defining the relationship between landscape and biodiversity in Europe is therefore not simply a matter of counting species and landscape elements but involves also the inclusion of the diversity in environments on the various scales of the landscapes in Europe and the impact of mankind through management and policy making. In this contribution I want to present the problems that have to be faced when discussing the relationship between biodiversity and landscape diversity and the understanding of the importance of cultural landscapes. If one wants to understand biodiversity in Europe, it is necessary to analyse the diversity in patterns and processes that cause actual and potential biodiversity. Biodiversity is dependent on the natural richness of different parts of the continent. However, it is also dependent on the impact of man and the way he changed nature into cultural landscapes. In a hierarchical approach towards classification of landscapes the highest level is made up by the most stable component of landscapes, the climate, including more less stable components when downscaling. At the lowest level it is land use and its history which plays the key role in biodiversity and cultural diversity (Jongman and Bunce 2000). In Europe the regional differences in markets are disappearing. This means that agriculture and forestry are international activities and practices are becoming exchangeable through Europe. Land is used more intensively and accessibility has been improved by drainage and road building. Land that is too expensive to be used or that has physical handicaps becomes marginal and goes out of production. Units of land use systems are getting bigger: farm size is growing and natural areas grow towards bigger units, especially in land that is marginalising. In the past, land use was dictated by the structure of the land, its geomorphology, soil conditions and water availability. Interactions between nature and agriculture were expressed in the various cultural landscapes of Europe. Landscape structures had a function in providing wood, being a fence, purifying water, storage and so on. Nowadays animal and plant breeding technology, agricultural trade policy, logistics and environmental restrictions are the most important determinants for agricultural development and they strongly influence the changing landscape diversity, although the spatial structure of the land is still mainly traditional. This structure also still determines the biological diversity of Europe because a large part of Europe is dominated by human land use and characterised by man-made structures.
2 Biogeography and biodiversity In every continent an understanding of biogeography is important in the appreciation of differences in species composition and biodiversity. Climate variability is widely recognised as the main discriminant for the definition of biogeographical zones and species richness at the continental level. The main climate zones of Europe and their characteristics are given in Table 1. Species development and composition at the continental scale have been influenced mainly by
74
climatic differences. The species are the basic elements of the biodiversity. Comparison within genera such as the oak shows differences in species richness and most diversity seems to occur in the Mediterranean (Jongman & Bunce 2000). The total number of plant species in Spain is between 5000 and 6000, and in the Balkan Peninsula the number of plant species is over 8000. In Great Britain it is only 2000. Biodiversity differs through Europe; in the Mediterranean are in average more species than in the boreal or Atlantic zone, due to present climate and climate history. Within each biogeographical zone many types of biotopes (Moss et al, 1991) are present of which some are specific for a biogeographical zone or even endemic in a smaller region. Other biotopes are found everywhere in Europe; they might show gradients from south to north, from west to east and from lowland to upland. For example, bogs are typical western and northern vegetation types, heathlands are predominantly Atlantic and grasslands can be found throughout the continent. Biotopes are physical representations of groups of ecosystems that have common characteristics. They are not classified on species but on physiognomic and environmental characteristics such as climate, salinity and Ca-availability. Only on a more detailed level species play role in their characterisation. Pattern diversity is a major cause for species diversity within European regions. Natural pattern differences characterise the basic diversity of landscapes. The distribution of biotopes shows that species diversity is not the only descriptor of biodiversity. Ecosystem diversity is as is also recognised in the Convention on Biological diversity an extra dimension to species diversity representing the complexity of natural systems. Table 1: Climate characteristics in Europe (based on Walter and Lieth, 1964, Polunin and Walters, 1973 and Roisin, 1969).
Climate zone Arctic Boreal Atlantic Central-European Pontic/Pannonian Mediterranean Mean winter temp (C) < -10 < -7 1-7 -2- -5 -4 6-13 Mean summer temp (C) < 10 15 15-18 18-26 23 21-30 Precipitation (mm/year) 250 500 500-2000 (3000) 380-635 (1400) <450 400-1000 (4000) Precipitation period all year Aug-Sept all year all year May-June Winter Frost-snow Permafrost 4-6 months Short periods 1-3 months 1-3 months No
75
Table 2: Oak forests in Atlantic Europe of Pedunculate oak (Quercus robur), Sessile oak (Quercus petraea ) and Pyrenean oak (Quercus pyrenaica). Main distribution and characteristic species are given based on Polunin and Smythies1973, Polunin and Walters 1985; Noirfalise1987, Rivas Martnez 1974, Braun-Blanquet et al 1956, Aedo et al.1990).
Vegetation type Boreal Atlantic oak-pine forests Subcontinental oak-pine forests Atlantic oak forests Oak forest of pleistocene sands Oak-beech forests of tertiary soils Northern xerothermic oak forests Ligerian thermophilic oak forests Southern Atlantic forest, oligotrophic soil Oak forests of the low Pyrenees Atlantic-Cantabrian oak forests
Characteristic species/ combination Empetrum nigrum, Calluna vulgaris Pyrola spp Ilex aquifolium, Blechnum spicant Calluna vulgaris, Erica tetralix, Molinia caerulea Athyrium filix-femina, Luzula sylvatica Carpinus betulus, Corylus avellana, Luzula luzoides, Genista germanica Mespilus germanica, Ruscus aculeatus, Pulmonaria angustifolia Ulex europaeus, U. nanus, Erica scoparia, Erica cinerea Quercus pyrenaica, Ruscus aculeatus, Hypericum androsaemum Quercus pyrenaica, Ruscus aculeatus, Polistichum setiferum, Daboecia cantabrica Anemone trifoliata, Narcissus triandrus, Prunus lusitanicus Quercus pyrenaica, Q. suber, Ruscus aculeatus, Daphne gnidium Quercus pyrenaica, Draba muralis, Ficaria verna, Cytisus multiflorus Quercus pyrenaica, Picris longifolia, Galium rotundifolium
Country/region Norway, Scotland Eastern Germany England, Ireland Jutland, Lower Saxonia, The Netherlands, Flanders The Netherlands, Belgium, Western Germany Germany (Rhine valley and Eiffel) France, (Normandy, Brittany, Loire valley) France (Les Landes) France (low Pyrenees) Spain (Basque country)
Western Iberian oak forests Oak forests of lower hills in southern Europe South Atlantic mountain forest South Atlantic wet mountain forest
Spain (Asturias, Galicia) Spain (Galicia), Portugal (Minho) Spain (Galicia), Portugal (Minho, Beira) Portugal (Minho)
The interaction between climate, bedrock and relief causes differences in soil development. In the Atlantic climate in Europe podsols can develop whereas young alluvial clay soils are formed in deltas. In mountains bare rocks give rise to thin, easily eroding soils and snow cover is characteristic. Climate, relief, aspect, soils and water availability together determine the natural basis of landscapes and also their diversity. Although there are only three oak species in Atlantic Europe, a wide range of forest ecosystems exist defined by gradually changing environmental conditions and different regional conditions in soil and relief and characterised by a gradually changing species composition (Table 2). One can conclude that under natural conditions biodiversity is determined by the factors that constitute the natural landscapes.
76
Natural landscapes appear to be determined or characterised by different natural processes. The most general division is made up of climate followed by geomorphology and aspect. Although species distribution is strongly related to climate, it is a confusing element in understanding landscapes, because it only indicates part of landscape characteristics. Potential natural vegetation as an expression of species combinations appears to be useful to summarise larger units in Europe that often diverge significantly from real patterns of vegetation. At the regional level soil can be a useful attribute as well as land cover, although the latter is not stable. It is an attribute that already has strong links with land use dynamics and landscape structure. Differences can occur in regions where natural or man-made processes take place such as bog-formation, wind exposition and land use development (e.g. afforestation, urbanisation or land abandonment). Large parts of the Chinese, Japanese and European landscapes have been in traditional agricultural use for centuries. The history of these landscapes is different from natural landscapes (Meeus et al, 1990). In agricultural landscapes the decisions made by man are the main influence on land use patterns. Rural landscapes are, in major part, constituted by farms territories, which combine each other, and are more or less scattered and dispersed. Each farm acts upon landscape and Deffontaines et al (1995) state that the "collective" result at the landscape level is not predictable unless we know about farm technical and social functioning. The common result can be a characteristic traditional landscape, wild species and special breed of domestic species.
3 Land use change: homogenisation

Under the influence of changes in food demand, caused by demographic trends, the cultivated area of Northern America and in Europe has shown considerable fluctuations. A gricultural areas moving from one region to another, forests are removed in one part of the world and forests of exotic species are planted elsewhere. In this period the agricultural productivity in Canada, USA and EU measured in kg dry matter per unit of acreage continues to rise thanks to ongoing advancements in agronomic knowledge. Through changes in agriculture and forestry practices, landscapes have suffered rapid and often irreversible changes. These changes can be classified into two groups (Fry and Gustavsson, 1996): Those resulting from the marginalisation of farmland and forests and consequent abandonment of earlier practices; and Those arising from the more intensive use of highly productive land. Such processes have resulted in less land being farmed, but farming and forestry is done more intensively, more specialised, and at larger scales. Intensifying agriculture makes land monofunctional and takes away both cultural and natural diversity. Intensification by one farmer - reducing production costs - will improve his position on the market. Also, here we have to realise that the farming market is an international as well as within the European Union as elsewhere. The farmers in the Paramo of the Andes have to compete with the large-scale potato farmers in Canada and the Greek farmers have to compete with the Dutch and the Danish farmers on the cheese market. If the market is not regulated the farmers in the less favoured regions will marginalise. Both intensive and extensive land use are expressed in the landscape: the structure of the land, the size of the parcels and the area of natural and semi-natural vegetation that is present. Farms constitute complex filters for external driving factors of change (Common Agricultural Policies, socio-economic changes, etc). Apart from farmers many administrations and
77
organisations directly influence agricultural landscapes, but many do so through agricultural policies implemented by farmers. Nature conservation policies cannot be designed or implemented in the wider landscape without a proper conceptual framework to link ecological and agronomic approaches of biodiversity dynamics at the landscape level. The pressure of economic competition makes the land partly homogenising by disappearance of (semi-)natural features. This is not a new process but its features become more and more recognisable. We develop into a homogenised world. De Wit (1992) has carried out an analysis of resource use efficiency in agriculture. Basic in his theory is a sigmoid curve representing the relationship between costs of production and yield (Figure 1). Two points are of interest in an economic sense: The first is the intersection between the minimum cost-curve and the so-called gross return line. It represents the point of marginalisation. Below this point, no profitable production systems exist at the availa ble level of knowledge and prices. The second is the point of the economic optimum that has a tangent of 45 degrees. The point, where the line through P0 touches the minimal cost curve, is the point of minimum external costs per unit product. For a realistic representation the costs of internal resources (costs of machinery, buildings, interest, local and national values and constraints) have to be added. The higher these costs are, the more the point of marginalisation shifts to the right. This is the environmental optimum. If there are no regional differences in costs and values then all systems tend into the same direction: towards homogenisation.
Figure 1. De Wit's curve on the relation of productivity and costs (De Wit 1992). According to research of Van Rabenswaaij et al (1991) the optimum path for the presence of critical meadow birds turned out to be the zone between 50 - 150 kg N/ha. If these figures are combined with De Wit's curve then it appears that this zone is situated at the left side of the point of marginalisation. That means that economically sustainable agriculture is either being driven towards an environmental optimum or an economic optimum and it only can have a meaning for the lower valued vegetation types and non-critical meadow birds. This means, that flag-species for biodiversity are not supported by modern farming trends.
78
This conclusion is based on research of the type of grassland and farming for fodder production It can be considered as a "crop". Rough grazing with cattle and for meat production is possible at grassland that is in crop terms relatively poor, but in terms of labour productivity high. The scale and structure of farms using these technologies is however very different from pure forage producers such as the common dairy farms in The Netherlands (Rabbinge et al, 1996). It is clear however, that much of the farming in Europe is moving into the direction of intensive crop-like production. The results can already be seen for decades in the European landscapes. We see the decline in diversity in structure in the landscape. Coherency is disappearing. Examples can be found everywhere. In the Netherlands forests in the floodplains decreased from 1900-1980 with 90% and hedgerows with 80% (Jongman and Leemans, 1982). In the period 1950-1990 all the open side channels along the major branch of the Rhine have disappeared (Jongman, 1992). In the period 1976-1986 the treelines in the agricultural landscape of St Oedenrode decreased with 35%, if taken without the roadside plantings it was even 45%. But it does not only happen in the Netherlands. Also in the Czech Republic the natural plantings in the cultural landscapes disappeared nearly completely during the collectivisation process (Lipsky, 1992). Analysis of changes in the Picos de Europa (Spain) in the period from 1957 until 1990 showed that many small fields disappeared. In the valley and around villages they became larger agricultural fields or on the hillside fields and terraces natural areas enlarged due to abandonment (Ligtenberg & Van Rijswijk 1995). In the UK hedgerows decreased significantly in quantity and quality in the period 1976-1990. At the local level this means disappearance of speciesrich grasslands, hedgerow species, and birds of small-scale landscapes. On the other hand abandonment of agricultural land might increase the living space for large mammals and forest species. The question is now: "does this trend mean disappearance of species and of biodiversity or is it the opposite?"
4 New functions in the landscape: fragmentation In western Europe in the urban fringe intensive agriculture used to be an important land use. Now her role is strongly diminishing, other functions take over, such as horse keeping, garden centres and recreation facilities (Lucas & Van Oort, 1993). In the Netherlands the claim for urbanisation until 2020 has been estimated to be 500 to 900 km2 , 2-3% of the total area of the country. The influenced area will be much larger because of all the other related functions. It will be comparable elsewhere in Europe. In the competition with urban functions rural function mostly cannot survive. The increasing road density, building of new railroads and the intensity of its use lead to an increase of barriers in the landscape. The landscape develops into a new diversity of elements causing fragmentation for natural features: it can be considered as a negative landscape diversity. Many animal species are sensitive for fragmentation. The area that they need for living is depending on the body size, the home range and the maximum dispersal area. For small species roads are often inaccessible barriers and that means that they should find living space within the areas. Some animals like amphibians in spring take the risk of crossing roads towards breeding ponds. Larger animals will be hampered in their movements by urban areas, roads and unattractive land. Fragmentation of the landscape has many causes. Increasing traffic and intensifying agriculture caused many barriers in the European cultural landscape (Jongman, 1999). Transport infrastructure in Europe (roads, waterways and railways) intersects habitats of species and thereby decreases the possibilities of species to disperse between different habitats
79
that are divided by traffic lines. Urbanisation, agriculture and i n dustry have put increasing pressure on the total area of landscape and nature. The remaining natural area is fragmented due to a dense network of motorways, railways and waterways that covers the land especially in northwestern Europe. This process of fragmentation has resulted in loss of habitats, fauna casualties, barrier effect, disturbance (noise and light) and local pollution (IENE, 1997). Fragmentation of natural areas is a spatial problem that can be defined as the dissection of the habitat of a species in a series of spatially separated fragments (Figure 2) Fragmentation leads to diminishing habitat area and an increase in barriers or an increase in spatial discontinuity. Fragmentation is caused by barriers such as roads, urban areas inaccessible agricultural land or by a decrease of landscape elements (small forests, hedgerows riparian zones). A consequence can be that the effect of external negative impacts on habitats increases and the number of suitable and reachable habitat sites decreases.
Figure 2, Fragmentation of the landscape seen by an imaginary species (Opdam, 1991) Effects are species-specific and depend on the needed functional area, species mobility and isolating effects of the landscape (roads, urban areas, canals). Both decrease of functional area of a habitat site and isolation increases the chance of local extinction of populations and diminishes the chance of spontaneous return of species. The spatial effects are (Mabelis, 1990): Decrease in suitable area of the original ecotope; Increase in landscape heterogeneity and land use; Landscape fragments with subpopulations; Source-sink-relationships in natural populations (larger natural areas become increasingly important). We can be sure, that this process is surely influencing landscapes negatively. Biodiversity is declining due to fragmentation. 5 The consequences Intensive land use also means that there is an impact on nature and the environment. Sustainable land use and care for the products of a region - or in industrial terminology: quality control - means that an analysis of the impacts is important. A diverse picture can be given of the impact of man on the landscapes of Europe, but agriculture, urbanisation and
80
tourism have a major impact on the quality of the land, on its products and the ecology of the land. It is important to have an overview of the human impact on the larger landscape zones as well. That can provide a basis for international programmes for land management and quality control. Of course the processes of changes in a region are interrelated. If abandonment of agricultural lands takes place then afforestation or urbanisation might be a related process in that region. Pollution of water, soil and air are related to each other. However, not all aspects have necessarily the same impact in all landscapes. We are now becoming more and more aware of these changes that we consider good or bad depending on social and cultural context in space and time. In the Middle Ages the removal of forests was at a certain point considered negative and forest protection was developed. Castles, mills and old farms have been destroyed, later protected and later even restored. Under pressure of industrial development and expanding agriculture in the 19th century, nature became an object of conservation. It started with protection of buildings in the countryside, of sites of special interest and also of elements that were of special traditional value as remarkable or historical trees. Natural land cover in Mediterranean countries such as Spain have been highly altered by man (Pons, 1981; Naveh, 1987; Quezel et al. 1987). Agriculture, grazing, mining and forestry activities have disturbed natural Mediterranean landscapes. After more than two millennia of human presence in the 1940s Spanish landscapes were in steady state, as result of a balance of natural factors and human activities. Since the 1950s modern pressures have led to abandonment (Fernandez-Guilln & Jongman, 1994). However, we do not know if this has led to a decline of biodiversity. No doubt, that grassland species will disappear if farming ceases. However, does that also mean that species get extinct or will there be alternative places where species can survive or will grazing been replaced by "natural" grazers as in the Parque Nacional de Peneda-Grez in Portugal where herds of former mining horses (19th century) graze the heathland and grassland. Changes in land use in the last decades are not fundamentally different from what has happened historically, but the scale in time and space and the impact is much greater than before. That poses the question as to whether the natural system and the cultural landscape can adapt. It appears that landscape structures and species have difficulties in coping with the consequences of the Common Agricultural Policy to the open market policy and to privatisation in central and eastern Europe. That means that a strategy should be developed to maintain a multifunctional landscape that serves agriculture, forestry, transport and urbanisation needs, but also the functioning of nature. The survival of species, the maintenance of biological diversity and its use or consumption by man in all forms of well being, art and outdoor recreation, has become an element in life that must gain increasing political importance. If biodiversity is to be maintained in Europe it be clear to all of us, in Brussels, in the national capitals, in the regions and in the villages what we mean with it: flagspecies, red-list species, common species or even varieties of domestic species. We might be surprised on the outcome. There is a relationship between driving factors and the tendencies that are ongoing in land use change in Europe in both intensification and extensification. The consequences and reactions of society are complex and they depend on the perception of landscape and nature of man in its own social context. Landscape and nature conservation policies cannot be designed or implemented in the wider landscape without a proper conceptual framework to link ecological and agronomic approaches of biodiversity dynamics at the landscape level. Different actors
81
take the decisions are on different hierarchical levels from European to local. In land use the actors are: Authorities (European, national, regional, local) Enterprises Interest groups and NGOs The general public Nature conservation and biodiversity actions are taken on the European, national and often at the regional level. Grass-root organisations, local interest groups and sometimes communities drive the landscape concerns. Only a few scientists take part at this level and nearly no national politicians are interested. The general public is the consumer who uses the landscape for different functions (housing, recreation travelling, farming, art) and who takes its structure for granted. These four actor groups interact with different interest. Authorities have to make the policy rules, organise planning and the other three act within or around these rules. The more local the decisions are the more they are influenced by all the rules and decisions from above. However, it is often local decision-making that provides the final action in the landscape. 6 Conclusions Land use change has a great impact on biological diversity at all levels through the mechanisms mentioned above. There is no doubt that by changing the character of the landscape that has been built up over centuries, species number and ecosystem composition and structure will change markedly. It is therefore necessary to understand these changes if we want to maintain the landscapes and the biodiversity in Europe. Biodiversity and landscape diversity do not cover the same issues. Biodiversity is a political issue on the world level, on the level of the European Union, national level and regional level. There is a relationship with landscape diversity, especially in cultural landscapes, but it is not a straightforward relationship. Changes in land use influence landscapes and in this way biodiversity. Before stating that change is negative or positive we must analyse the impact in relation to our objective and the scale at which we think. We might have to think about European impacts, national impacts and local impacts. We also must take into consideration the biogeographic position of an area under change as well as its land use history. Only if we do so and consider the landscape in a holistic way - that means including ecological, economic, social and cultural aspects - we might come to understanding the consequences of change and make plans for adaptation, mitigation or enforcement. We might then be able to design new landscapes that support the biodiversity we want in a new framework. References Aedo, C., Diego, C., Garcia, J. Codron, J. & Moreno, G. (1990): El bosque en Cantabria. Universidad de Cantabria y la Asamblea regional de Cantabria .. Braun-Blanquet, J. Pinto da Silva, A.R. & Rozeira, A. (1956): Resultats de deux excursions geobotaniques travers le Portugal septentrional et moyen, II. Agronomia lusitana XVIII (III). Deffontaines, J.P., Thenail, C., Baudry, J (1995): Agricultural systems and land use patterns: how can we build a realtionship? Landscape and urban planning 31(3) pp. 3-10.
82
De Wit, C. T. (1992): Resource use efficiency in agriculture. Agricultural Systems 40, pp.125151 IENE, (1997): Website IENE. http://iene.vvv.se Fernndez-Guillen, M.D. & Jongman, R.H.G. (1994): Diversidad y Agricultura, El Campo, 131, pp. 65-79. Fry G. & Gustavson R. (1996) Testing landscape design principles: the Landscape Laboratory. In R.H.G. Jongman [Ed]: Ecological and Landscape Consequences of Land Use change, pp.143-154. ECNC-publication series on man and nature Volume 2. Jongman R.H.G. & J.A.A.M. Leemans (1982): Vegetatieonderzoek Gelderse uiterwaarden. Provincie Gelderland, 99pp + kaartbijlage. Jongman, R.H.G. (1992): Vegetation, river management and land use in the Dutch Rhine floodplains. Regulated Rivers 7, pp. 279-289 Jongman, R.H.G. (1999): Landscape ecology and land use planning. In: Issues in Landscape Ecology. P.112-119. International Association for Landscape Ecology, Colorado, USA. Jongman, R.H.G. & Bunce, R.G.H. (2000): Landscape classification, scales and (bio)diversity in Europe. In R.H.G. Jongman and Mander [Eds]. Consequences of Land Use Changes. Advances in Ecological Sciences 5. Computational Mechanics Publications, Southampton, Boston, pp 11-38 http://www.agralin.nl/cgi-bin/WebQuery/clcwww?AU=Ligtenberg,+A.+Ligtenberg, A. & Van Rijswijk, J. (1995) : Effects of marginalisation in European highlands: analysis of changing land use in Picos de Europea using GIS. MSc thesis Wageningen University Lipsky, Z. (1992): Use of historic documents about territory for study of landscape development. In: Proceedings of the field workshop Ecological Stability of Landscape Ecological Infrastructure Ecological Management, pp.80-87. Federal Committee for the Environment, Institute of Applied Ecology Kostelec n.C.l. Lucas P., G. van Oort, (1993): Dynamiek in een stadsrandzone-Werken en wonen in de stadsrandzone van de agglomeratie Utrecht. Utrecht, Faculteit Ruimtelijke Wetenschappen, Rijksuniversiteit Utrecht. 387 pp. Mabelis, A. (1990): Natuurwaarden in cultuurlandschappen. Landschap 7, pp. 253-267 Meeus, J.H.A., M.P. Wijermans & M.J. Vroom. (1990): Agricultural lndscapes in Erope and their transformation. Landscape and Urban Planning 18, pp. 289-352 Moss, D, Wyatt, B., Cornaert, M .-H. & Roekaerts, M. (1991): CORINE biotopes The dsesign, compilation and use of an inventory of sites of major importance for nature conservation in the European Community. Luxembourg, Official Publications of the European Communities. Naveh Z., (1987): Landscape ecology, management and conservation of European and levant Mediterranean uplands, In K. Tenhunen et al. [eds], Land Response to Stress, SpringerVerlag, New York. Opdam, P. (1991). Metapopulation theory and habitat fragmentation: a review of holarctic breeding bird studies. Landscape Ecology, 5, pp. 93-106. Polunin, O. & Walters, (1985): M. A guide to the vegetation of Britain and Europe. London, Oxford University Press. Polunin, O. & Smythies B.E. (1973): Flowers of south-west Europe, a field guide. Oxford University Press London. Pons, A., 1981. The history of the Mediterranean shrublands, In F. Di Castri, D.W. Goodall, R.L Specht, Editors, Mediterranean-type Shrublands. Ecosystems of the World, vol. 11, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 131-138. Quezel, P, Tomaselli, R. and Morandini, R., (1987): Bosque y maquia mediterranea. Edit. Serbal-Unesco, Barcelona. Rabbinge R., Van Latesteijn, H.C. & Smeets, P.J.A.M. (1996): Planning consequences of long term land use scenarios in the European Union. Ecological and landscape consequences
83
of land use change in Europe, ed. R.H.G. Jongman. Proceedings of the first ECNC seminar on land use change and its ecological consequences. ECNC series on Man and Nature 2, pp. 36-51. Rivas-Martnez, S. (1974): Observaciones sobre la sintaxonomia de las bosques acidofilos Europeos, datos sobre la Quercetalia robori petraeae en la peninsula iberica. Colloques Phytosociologiques, III, pp. 225-260, Lille. Roisin, P. (1969): Le Domaine phytogeographique Atlantique dEurope. Gembloux. Van Rabenswaaij, C.W., L.A.F. Reyrink, P.J.A.M. Smeets & J.T.C.M. Sprangers (1991): Ecologische effecten van aangepaste landbouw. Rapport Centrum voor Agrobiologisch Onderzoek, Wageningen Walter, H. & H. Lieth, Klimadiagramm (1964): Weltatlas. VEB Gustaf Fischer Verlag, Jena.
84
TBD
Urban Emanuelsson
Sweden
Relationship between biodiversity and landscape diversity: examples in Swiss cultivated landscapes
Jeanneret, Ph., Schpbach, B. In the context of an evaluation of the effect on biodiversity of a national extensification programme in agriculture, field data of 3 regions (7km2 each) following a stratified sampling method were collected. A distribution model of 5 indicator (plants, butterflies, spiders, carabid beetles and birds) species is related to influencing factors by means of multivariate statistics (CCA, partial CCA). Hypothetical influencing factors are categorised: (1) habitat factors (management techniques, habitat type) and (2) landscape factors (habitat heterogeneity, variability, diversity, proportion of natural and semi-natural areas). The causal model developed for the spider assemblages revealed that local habitat factors, directly influenced by management practices are the most important ones. Landscape variability, heterogeneity and diversity in the surroundings are not significant factors. These results show that spiders move easily among habitats by ballooning can reach any habitat and are afterwards influenced by local habitat conditions. The model developed for butterflies shows that species assemblages are sensitive to landscape features. Particularly, surrounding habitat type has a major influence. Most of butterfly species fly over the landscape, visiting small or large areas but need structure to move and often several habitats to complete their life-cycles.
Troubles with the evaluation of the landscape diversity

Jerzy Solon
Institute of Geography and Spatial Organisation, Polish Academy of Sciences 00-818 Warsaw, Twarda 51/55, E-mail: j.solon@twarda.lan.pl
Analogously to the classic definition of species Alfa diversity, the measure of the landscape diversity takes into account the number of types of spatial basic units (e.g. ecosystems, habitats, geocomplexes, biotopes, sites, etc.) and their spatial share. The evaluation of the landscape diversity depends on: (a) the kind of a feature analysed (vegetation, land cover, habitats for chosen animals, etc); (b) the kind of basic unit st (e.g. narrowly understood vegetation association versus vegetation formation, or Corine 1 rd order unit versus Corine 3 order unit, etc.); and (c) the spatial dimension of analyses (the landscape as a whole versus smaller landscape units distinguished according to different criteria). Results obtained for different features, basic units and spatial dimensions are to some extent independent and clearly show different levels of landscape diversity. There is a common agreement that in fact landscape diversity means something more than only types of units and their spatial shares. In the more complex sense diversity of
85
the landscape also embrace: neighbourhood structure, border contrast, patch sizes and shapes, another characteristics, for which the term heterogeneity is often applied. In opposition to the classic index of diversity which value may be determined on the basis of statistical data, determinations of those features require detailed analysis of the spatial relations between all the units within a landscape. They may therefore be referred to as a group of analytical components of the overall diversity of the landscape.
86
4.
Workshop No. 4: Complexity of landscape management
Workshop guide and presentation of recommendations: Berit Hasler, Denmark Ulf Kjellerup, Denmark Main speaker: Eirik Romstad, Norway First opponent speaker: Frieder Luz, Germany Second opponent speaker: Marianne Penker, Austria Third opponent speaker: Roman Lenz, Germany
Public landscape goods - an economic framework

Eirik Romstad
Department of Economics & Social Sciences, Agricultural University of Norway e-mail: eirik.romstad@ios.nlh.no, http://www.nlh.no/ios/
Abstract The coming negotiations of the World Trade Organization (WTO) on agriculture has triggered an increased interest in the linkages between commodity production and public goods in agriculture. This paper takes a closer look at this issue. Particular emphasis is placed on production economics and policy design issues. Special attention is given to questions related to incentive compatibility, informational aspects and the participation constraint of policies to promote public goods production in agriculture. Key words: multifunctional agriculture, production economics, public goods and resource allocation mechanisms.
1. Introduction It is quite obvious that agriculture has a multifunctional role as agriculture provides several public goods as byproducts to its market commodities. Examples of such positive public goods include biodiversity, maintenance of traditional landscapes, wildlife habitats and agriculture's contribution to sustaining rural communities and cultures (Marsh, 1992). Agriculture, however, also creates some negative byproducts, including pollution of water courses, ground water and the air from the use of fertilizers and pesticides, soil erosion resulting from unsustainable farming methods, and the loss of biodiversity caused by extensive monocultures, fertilization or pesticide use. While it is generally accepted that agriculture produces positive and negative public goods,
87
there is controversy related to the importance of these public goods and bads,1 and what are good policies for providing the desired public goods. Major food exporters like Australia, New Zealand and the United States emphasize that good policies have minor or preferably no distorting effects on food production. High cost agricultural producers with a strong agricultural lobby like Austria, Japan, Switzerland and Norway tend to emphasize that market distortions are of minor importance compared to securing current provision levels of the public goods.
Both these positions are extremes as they do not entail a comparison of the marginal costs of the market distortions in relation to the marginal value of the public goods provided. 2 A constructive discussion of these issues demands that one has a clear understanding of what characterize public goods (and other goods classifications), and a concise and systematic approach to analyze multi-good production. To avoid having too many objectives for the agri-environmental policies, I suggest a distinction between the public goods that are site specific and where agriculture may have a unique role compared to public policy goals like the creation of jobs, where other sectors may provide these jobs at lower social costs than agriculture. In addition, I also recommend that agri-environmental policy concentrate on the "everyday landscape" and that special landscapes or management objectives are the responsibilities of separate policies for nature conservancies, national parks etc. This distinction reduces some of the adverse selection and moral hazard aspects that always should be considered in designing policies. In the next section I present an overview of the theoretical sides of public goods before I discuss some of the theoretical implications of this for policy design. The following section deals with production economics before I proceed to discuss policies for promoting the production of public goods from agriculture. The wide extent of price supports in European agriculture makes it particularly interesting to investigate the effects of price supports as one mean to promote the production of public goods from agriculture. 2. Theoretical background 2.1 Public and private goods There is much confusion regarding public goods. More specifically there is confusion regarding what classes of goods that are unlikely to be efficiently allocated in markets and those that are not. Randall (1983) is one of the few analytically tractable and systematic approaches to this question. Figure 1 is a slight modification of Randall (1983). The major difference between Randall's classification and mine is that he has discrete demarcations along the two dimensions rivalry and excludability, while I prefer to use continuous scales on excludability and rivalness.
For the reminder of this paper the term public goods relates to both positive and negative public goods. Whenever a distinction is needed, this is done explicitly .
2
The issue of valuation of non-market goods is not addressed in this paper. A good summary of the discussion of the valuation of public goods in particular related to contingent valuation can be found in the Journal of Economic Perspectives (1994) in articles by Diamond and Hausman (1994) and Portney (1994). A more institutional oriented critique of contingent valuation can be found in Vatn and Bromley (1994).
88
Figure 1: Excludable and rival goods (modified after Randall, 1983). Dividing goods by excludability and rivalness helps resolve the issue of market allocation and efficiency. Figure 1 shows that the crucial dimension for efficient allocation by the market is the degree of rivalness as indicated by the jagged line. The more rival a good is, the more likely it becomes that the market provides efficient allocations 3 as this reduces the likelihood for free riding behavior. This implies that market intervention may be warranted for more types of goods than pure public goods, i.e. for other goods than those that have low degrees of both rivalness and excludability. In such a perspective the term public goods is not very precise when it comes to providing a demarcation between situations when policy intervention may be warranted and where the market should be "left to itself". 4 There is no easy way out of this terminology caveat. This is particularly the case when it comes to agriculture, where its multifunctional character further complicates matters. A way out of this problem is to ask if any of the goods provided display public good attributes, i.e. attributes that clearly cannot be efficiently allocated by the market. One implication of such an approach is that it has clear linkages to the concept of externalities. Such a linkage has two major advantages: (1) It directly points to the incentive dimension of policy some factors are outside the objective sphere of agents, thereby facilitating a risk that these factors may not be accounted for unless appropriate policies (incentives) are put in place. (2) In a cost-benefit perspective on policy, it implies that even if we observe some externality, it may not be worth while to correct for the externality. More specifically, the externality may be Pareto-irrelevant (see Dahlman (1979) for further discussions).
Other factors that are important for efficient allocation by the market relate to the market power of the various market participants. More specifically, are the market participants likely to display price-taking behavior (see any good book on industrial organization, for example Tirole, 1988).
4
A market cannot be perceived as an institution that just emerges from itself. For any market to function, there needs to be certain rules on regulations in place, defining the rights of participants and the sanctions facing those not in compliance with the implicit contract market participation is. In such a perspective, the rights and obligations of market participants emerge over time. This implies a that a historical and contextual perspective is needed when analyzing markets and thereby market allocations.
89
In terms of multifunctional agriculture, the latter point is of particular relevance. Agriculture produces both positive and negative externalities. Due to the information problems associated with agriculture (for example nonpoint source pollution and its public good attributes like biodiversity), many externalities from agriculture are likely to be Pareto irrelevant. 2.2 Some mechanism design theory5 Any economic system or mechanism is a communication process, where messages are exchanged between agents. Each agent transmits messages to which other agents respond according to their self-interest. A successful resource allocation mechanism (RAM) utilizes this, so that each agent without necessarily understanding the complete process, is induced to cooperate in the determination of a satisfactory bundle of goods and services (Campbell, 1987). As such RAMs are extensions of the principal-agent model. The major implications of the resource allocation mechanism perspective on agri-environmental are that policies need to: (a) Meet the participation constraint. If this condition is not met, the regulator (the principal) is not guaranteed that providers (agents) of the public goods will operate. (b) Be informationally feasible and informationally efficient. A breach of the informational feasibility condition implies that the policy requires more information than what is available. Consequently, the regulator is unable to verify if agents are compliant or not with the policy objectives. The use of informationally inefficient policies means that there exists some other policy that produces the same allocation at lower costs. Hence, by definition informationally inefficient policies cannot result in welfare maximizing outcomes. (c) Be incentive compatible. If agents are not faced with appropriate incentives, the regulator is not guaranteed that the desired allocation will emerge. Setting verifiable policy targets is one of the major challenges for agri-environmental policies. It is also quite obvious designing transparent, targeted and tractable agri-environmental polices is difficult. From a legitimacy perspective it may therefore be the case that policy objectives need to be relaxed in order not to become informationally infeasible or informationally inefficient. 2.3 Precision vs. costs Besides setting verifiable (informationally feasible) policy targets, the benefits and costs associated with relaxing or tightening policy targets should be investigated. A tighter (more precise) target may "look good", but could come at additional costs that exceed the marginal benefits. Consider a situation where there is a reduction in the biodiversity of an area. First, assume that there exist multiple other areas in the same region with a similar composition of species and that none of these species are threatened by extinction. In that case, decision makers may have indifference curves similar to 1 and 2 in Figure 2, implying that a less precise and less expensive policy is preferred (A) over the more precise and more expensive policy (B). Next, assume the converse situation, where the area is quite unique in terms of its biodiversity. Then decision makers could be willing to spend more money on preserving this area. This
5
This section builds on Romstad, 1998.
90
corresponds to indifference curves similar to 1 and 2 , implying that policy B is preferred over policy A. Such state contingent differences in policy preferences are quite common. For example, areas that are important habitats for (threatened) species often undergo far stricter management practices than areas with few special characteristics. National parks, nature reserves and landscape management areas are (and should be) managed differently from everyday forest or agricultural landscapes. This does not imply that it is not worth while to try to maintain or enhance the qualities of ordinary landscapes, but that the expenditures for management per hectare of the common landscapes normally would be far below the justifiable expenditures on areas with more special public attributes.
Figure 2: Tradeoff between costs and precision (after Romstad, 1999a)
3. Some production theory Multifunctionality implies that several objectives are achieved at once. For now, assume that this is the situation. To facilitate a graphical analysis, assume two products, y and z, that are produced simultaneously. In the conventional definition of production possibility sets, physical input use is assumed constant at the production possibility frontier (Debertin, 1986). 'This also implies that production costs are kept constant for any allocation of y and z on frontier. In the case of multiproduct - multi-input production, assuming that input use is kept constant is a restrictive assumption. Letting the production possibility frontier be defined by any combination of y and z that does not exceed a given cost is a more flexible approach (Chambers, 1988). With standard assumptions on the second order conditions this gives the familiar expression for the (marginal) rate of product transformation between y and z:
[1] The optimal allocation of y and z is therefore partly determined by their relative prices, p y and p z . This is illustrated in Figure 3. Note that all joint pairs (y, z) on the production possibility
91
frontier (the product transformation curve) can be achieved with the same costs, C. The thin upward sloping sections of the RPTyz indicate a positive relationship between y and z, while the thick (downward sloping) segment indicates that it is not possible to get more of one of the goods without getting less or the other. For positive prices on y and z the profit maximizing allocations must then be located on the thick portion of the production possibility frontier.
C .
Figure 3: The production possibility frontier and the optimal allocation.
Figure 4: Substitution and income effects when costs are allowed to vary.
Naive understandings of equation [1] may lead to serious misinterpretations of price changes. Suppose that the price on y, p y, is dramatically reduced. This is often interpreted as a movement along the production possibility frontier. From the first order conditions it follows that the price drop changes the optimal use of y, and thereby also the optimal resource use (costs). Figure 4 illustrates these effects. In A assume that the scalar a is less than one (like one half). This changes the slope of the price line, which using a strict cost constraint yields a shift in the optimal allocation from A to B. However, when costs are not constrained, the production possibility set may shrink. This yields two effects: (i) the substitution effect from A to B, and (ii) the income effect from B to D. In consumer economics one distinguishes between the substitution and the income effect from price changes when doing demand analysis (Varian, 1984). Generally, the substitution effect is greater than the income effect, but this is not always the case. This generally also holds on the production side. Two products are technical complements in some region when the marginal cost of producing one product declines when more is produced of the other commodity. For technical complements one cannot analytically sign the total impact of these effects. Wrt. policy implications this stresses the need to take care when signing the effects of price changes.
92
4. Policy implications This section deals with policy instruments for the "every day agricultural landscape". There is no principal difference in producing public good attributes and private goods. Assume that the joint cost function Ch (y, z) exhibit the standard properties. In the dual formulation, the agent's profit function per hectare may exhibit the following elements:
Equation [2] illustrates that policy makers have a wide array of potential instruments at hand when designing an agri-environmental policy. In the ensuing sub-sections I will discuss the principal advantages and disadvantages of these instruments. 4.1 Price supports Price supports, > 0, imply that the farmers receive more for their agricultural commodities than the market price. Generally, price supports have two undesirable properties: (i) They lead to increased intensity (fertilizer, pesticide and labor use) than the market by itself would indicate. Consequently, there will be a net social loss as the marginal costs of production will exceed the social value of the marginal product. (ii) Increased fertilizer and pesticide use may increase overall pollution from agriculture. Despite these undesirable properties, such price supports could be part of an efficient agrienvironmental policy. Suppose that the relationship between a private commodity, y, and some public good attribute, z1 , is of the form depicted in panel A of Figure 5. Provided that there are large transaction costs associated with observing the public good attribute and that the standard deviation of the probability distribution is small and the probability distribution is skewed towards the frontier, a correctly set price support could increase the provision level of z1 . In that case it would meet the necessary RAM criteria (participation, informational viability and efficiency and incentive compatibility). There are, however, three general potential caveats from such a policy. (1) It may not lead to any significant increase in the level of the public good attribute as: The price support on the private commodity provides no incentives for increasing the production of the public good attribute. Any increase in the provision levels of the public good attribute would be by-product of the increase of the private
93
commodity, and it would depend on how the distribution of the public good attribute changes with increased levels of the private good. Even though a price support has an "income effect" (an outward shift in the production possibility set), the risk is large that the substitution effect from the price support may reduce the provision levels of the public good attribute.
(2) It could increase the quantity of y beyond the social optimum. This problem may be reduced if the price to consumers is set in the market, as the supply increase will lead to a drop in the market price until equilibrium in the commodity market is restored. (3) Suppose that there is some other public good, z2 , that also is closely linked to the production level of y, but that this relationship is inverse. This could imply that less of the second public good attribute would be provided (see Figure 5). The overall welfare implication of these changes (a possible increase in the first public good attribute and a possible decrease of the second public good attribute) depends on the relative values and magnitudes of the change in the provision levels for the two public goods in hand. Figure 5 depicts a situation where a price support, D, is given. The interaction between panel Y and panel A in the figure illustrates what goes on. The increase in the product price from p to (1+ D)p leads to an increase in the production of y from y* to yD , thereby indirectly increasing the production of z1 from z1l to z1 h . An unintended sideeffect of the price increase on the private commodity, y, is an indirect decline in the production of z2 from z2h to z2l . Figure 5 illustrates one reason why great care should be taken when using commodity price supports to influence the provision levels of public good attributes. Generally, such effects will be present. A primary example of this is how increased production per hectare often leads to more use of fertilizers and pesticides, thereby increasing the risk of pollution from agricultural commodity production. The problem illustrated in Figure 5 primarily stems from applying a functional relationship between the production of the market commodity, y, and the public good attributes, z1 and z2 , i.e., wrongfully assuming a one-to-one relationship between private and public goods production. Moreover, illustrates of Tinbergen's (1950) famous result that in general one needs one instrument per objective to be achieved.
Figure 5: Intended and unintended effects on the provision of public goods from a commodity price increase.
94
4.2 Direct payments for production of public good attributes One of the nice features of payments on the public goods provided is that they provide direct incentives for the production of the public good. This is particularly important if the relationship between goods and attributes is better described by a production possibility area, rather than through a functional ("dose-response") relationship, or if production possibility sets can be perceived as achievable with additional investments (i.e. the "putty-clay" framework of Johansen, 1972). To see these effects consider Figure 6, where a grand production possibility frontier with a rather large segment where an increase in y yields an increase in z. Now, assume three different initial allocations (marked by a dark point, l, and the initial relative price line marked by a thin dotted line) for two goods, y and z. The placement of the dot indicates the production possibility set with the least associated costs. Also assume that at the initial allocation there is too little provided of z.
Figure 6: Initial allocations and the effects of direct payments for z. In panel A the initial location is such that a change in the relative price alone in the favor of z (no income increase) is likely to induce the desired changes and increase the provision level of z at a minor expense of y. As the initial allocation and allocation A are on the same production possibility frontier, such a move is also welfare enhancing under the assumption that there is too little provided of z. In panel B a slight increase in the relative price on z and a reduction in the price of y to offset the income effect leaves the producer within the same production possibility set, and only leads to a minor increase in the production of the public good. Here, an increase in the budget coupled with the right incentives could lead to an allocation close to B, which would mean a clear increase in the public good provided. A side effect of this is also an increase in the amount of the private good provided. The main point in panel B is that the potential gains from a change in the relative price in favor of z and with an offsetting price decrease on y is likely to be minor as the initial allocation is close to the GPF in an area on the GPF where y and z are likely to be complements in some other production possibility set. Panel C depicts a situation that in principle resembles that of panel B. The principal difference is that while in panel B the distance from the initial allocation to an apparent complementary region of the GPF is small measured in terms of z, the converse is the case in panel C, i.e. the distance in z is relatively large, and the slope of the GPF suggests a competing region. Thus, in panel C one gets a reasonably large change from a relative price change in favor of z, but the potential gains from facilitating a shift to another production possibility set are promising. To induce such a shift income also needs to be increased.
95
The feasibility of direct payments depends crucially on the observability of the public good. Using the RAM terminology, this corresponds to informational feasibility. However, for the allocation resulting from a direct payment to be a candidate for welfare maximization, the same allocation cannot be achieved at lower informational costs. If this is not the case, direct payments constitute an informationally inefficient policy. Suppose that no other policy achieves the same allocation or an allocation with more of the public good attribute. In a strict sense, direct payments then become informationally efficient. This does, however, not imply that the policy per se meets the welfare criteria. Utilizing the reasoning on costs and precision in Section 2.3, one also needs to compare the marginal benefits and costs of various policies. Provided that precision is not overwhelmingly important and the informational costs are high, it is likely that indicator payments or production factor supports that are closely linked to the provision level of the public good will be more consistent with the objective of maximizing social welfare. 4.3 Other policy options Alternate policy instruments for promoting public goods include input regulations, lump sum transfers and cross compliance payments. The difficulty with these and many other policy instruments are that they do not provide direct incentives for producing public goods. Hence, unless care is taken in the design of such policies, undesirable allocations may result. Still, from a theoretical perspective cross compliance has some interesting properties. Those who voluntarily subject themselves to a cross compliance scheme do so because their expected profits from participating exceeds the expected profits from not doing so. Conversely, if the expected profits from non-participation exceed the profits from participation, the farmer chooses not to participate. This implies that the farmers with the least costs of complying with the regulations are more likely to sign up. Such systems could yield separating equilibria. Under certain conditions separating equilibria are welfare enhancing (see Rotchild and Stiglitz (1976) for an overview). Note the condition that for separating equilibria to exist, there can only be one principal. Consequently, cross compliance may be a cost reducing strategy to meet certain policy targets. As cross compliance programs can be easily tailored to specific regional needs, or made to induce that a minimum level of some public good attributes is provided, they are flexible and targeted. In a way specifically tailored cross compliance programs fall on the borderline between policies for the everyday landscapes and landscape preserves, utilizing contracts. This opens up for a wide array of policy options, including auctions to make farmers provide the desired public goods at the least costs. One potential disadvantage with such schemes is that the transaction costs may exceed the gains from having the least cost providers sign up. 7. Concluding remarks The primary result of this paper is that policies for promoting the production of public goods should be directly linked to the public goods in question. This result hinges on the assumption that the information costs of such direct payments are not too large. If that is the case, payments through some easily observable indicator is the second best alternative. Rarely, optimal policies contain the use of commodity price subsidies. The primary reason for this is that price supports lead to substitution effects in favor of the private good and away from the public good. Only in special cases will the income effect more than offset this substitution effect. Even in these (rare) cases paying directly for the public goods would entail less costly
96
solutions as the income and substitution effect then work in the same direction. The World Trade Organization negotiations on agriculture may pose particular challenges for the production of public goods from agriculture as commodity prices may become so low that the short term participation criterion (prices exceed marginal production costs) for farming is not met. This is of special concern if the existence of agriculture is crucial for the production of these public goods. In these cases differentiated price supports may be justifiable. One of the major concerns related to the use of price supports is their distortive effects in secondary markets. By making these payments pure, i.e. by having different product prices to farmers and the food processing industry, the majority of these distortions can be eliminated. The argument against commodity price subsidies to meet the short term participation constraint is that they increase public expenses. As the marginal costs of public funds exceed one, there exists a potential tradeoff between the distortions in the secondary markets and the tax distortions. In marginal farming areas at least parts of these price subsidies may therefore come in the form of import tariffs. This has important implications for the overall design of policy instruments to ensure the production of public goods from agriculture. Any public payment for public goods will lead to tax distortions. By equivalence to the above tax wedge argument for some tariffs in marginal farming areas, a second best optimal policy may seek to cover some of these public expenses through import tariffs on agricultural commodities. In principle, these import tariffs should be set so that the marginal benefits from reduced public expenditures equal the their marginal costs. These costs include changes in allocations between public and private goods, increased pollution caused by higher product prices, and the distortions in the secondary markets. Finally, this paper illustrates the importance of having a good understanding of the production processes, including using the appropriate modeling framework for multi-product production, when designing policy instruments for providing public goods from agriculture. An important feature of the multi-product production framework used in this paper is that production possibility sets are defined in economic terms, i.e. dependent upon relative price and costs. This has profound implications for policy analysis. References Campbell, D.E. (1987): Resource Allocation Mechanisms , Cambridge University Press, New York, NY. Chambers, R.G. (1988): Applied Production Analysis: A Dual Approach , Cambridge University Press, New York, NY. Dahlman, C.J. (1979): "The Problems of Externality", Journal of Law and Economics, 22 :141-162. Debertin, D.L. (1986): Agricultural Production Economics , Macmillan Publ. Company, New York, NY. Diamond, P.A. & J.A. Hausmann (1994): "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number", Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(4):45-64. Johansen, L. (1972): Production Functions, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Marsh, J. (1992): Agricultural Policy Reform and Public Goods, OECD Report 92-56, Paris, France. Portney, P.R: (1994): "The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economists Should Care",
97
Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(4):3-17. Randall, A. (1983): "The Problems of Market Failure", Natural Resources Journal, 23 (1):131148. Romstad, E. (1998): Game Theory and Resource Allocation Mechanisms , Lecture note in R301 Environmental Economics, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Agricultural University of Norway (http://kurs.nlh.no/ro301/notes/ram.html ). Romstad, E. (1999): "Theoretical Considerations Regarding Environmental Indicators", pp. 13-23 in Brouwer, F.M. & B. Crabtree (eds.), Environmental Indicators and Agricultural Policy , CAB International, Oxon, UK. Romstad, E., A. Vatn, P.K. Rrstad & V. Syland (2000): Multifunctional Agriculture Implications for Policy Design, Report no. 21, Dept. of Economics & Social Sciences, Agricultural University of Norway, s, Norway (WEB: http://www.nlh.no/ios/publikasjoner/melding/m-21.html ). Russell, N.P. (1993): "Efficiency of rural conservation and supply control policies", European Review of Agricultural Economics, 20 :315-326. Tinbergen, J. (1950): On the Theory of Economic Policy, Elsevier, North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Tirole, J. (1988): The Theory of Industrial Organization, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Varian, H.R. (1984): Microeconomic Analysis, Norton, New York, NY. Vatn, A. & D.W. Bromley (1994): "Choices Without Prices Without Apologies", Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 26 (2):129-148.
98
Participatory Approaches in Landscape Ecology A Basis for Acceptance and Implementation of Concepts for Managing Multifuncional Landscapes
Frieder Luz
University of Applied Sciences FH-Weihenstephan, Freising, Germany, Institute for Landscape Development, Technical University of Berlin
Introduction In reacting to Eirik Romstads paper I first want to state that I am a landscape planner and -ecologist with a strong social and behavioral interest I am not an economist. Therefore I am unable to comment in detail on Eiriks many charts and figures and on his precise evaluations of policy implications. However Eirik as an economist and myself as an (applied) ecologist interested in people in the landscape have several themes of concern in common and of course we differ in several points. We both look at the same multifuncional (cultural) landscapes from two different points of view and draw our conclusions. We represent two (or more) different approaches and sets of instruments trying to manage multifunctional landscapes in a complexity of ways, which are the theme of our workshop. In a way we represent a complete set of experts dealing with sustainable development of landcapes as we focus on economic, ecological and social aspects of landscapes. I want to point out some common problems we both may encounter when it comes to implementing or enforcing policies or concepts for managing landscapes. I hope we can agree that those problems of acceptance and implementation which are often criticized are shared by both sides but in offering solutions to improve implementation and acceptance I will focus on tools for managing landscapes applied in landscape planning and -ecology, the area I feel saver in than in economics. In Germany we have a number of tools for environmental planning which should guarantee a sustainable and multifunctional development of urban and rural landscapes. Landscape plans include local requirements and measures to implement the aims of nature conservation plans, requirements for urban development, recreation and the management of open space in the form of written texts, maps and additional measures. The Lnder may decide whether the content of a landscape plan will be incorporated into urban land use or zoning plans (Umweltbundesamt 1995). The implementation of landscape plans in the open landscape has to adress farmers and relies on the application of agri-environmental policies and programs. To use Eirik Romstads terms in short: From an ecological point of view a landscape plan tells us on a local scale where which positive public goods should be produced, and why (or vice versa where negative by-products of agriculture should be avoided or reduced). In order to implement these concepts the money provided by european, federal and state policies (for both everyday-landscapes and special-landscapes, a segregation used by Romstad which would need to be discussed) has to be channelled to local farmers. As landscape planners we mostly prefer the kind of policies which dont provide a general price subsidy but which pay for particular contribution to conservation measures, yield reduction or habitat measures to list a few.
99
Commom problems From my experience of studying the implementation of landscape plans with farmers since 10 years I see several similar if not same general problems of implementation faced by economic and ecological experts: Classical top-down approaches neglect attitudes and needs of regional and local actors and stakeholders. Policies and concepts for landscape management are often cooked by experts far away from those who are affected. Experts often have difficulties in making themselves understood by those who have to carry out their policies or plans. Each expert uses his or her own language. Subjective and emotional factors often play equal or even more important roles for accepting or rejecting plans or policies than objective and economic criteria.
From the position of socially responsible landscape ecology and -planning I want to go into more details about problems of implementation and present ways how top-down approaches can be turned into bottom-up ways of jointly developing perspectives for a sustainable management of multifunctional landscapes. Landscape ecological planning schemes in Germany are becoming more open toward new approaches which involve social and communicative aspects and instruments instead of focusing mainly on methods derived from natural sciences. Several research projects contributed to installing participatory measures in practice and resulted in guidelines of federal and state agencies dealing with nature conservation and landscape planning.
Restoring Cultural Landscapes without people in mind the neglect of social aspects in landscape planning and -ecology in the past Landscape planning and landscape ecological planning projects claim to have their roots in holistic approaches to deal with landscapes, however, the analysis of cultivated landscapes is still mainly restricted to bases of planning derived from natural sciences. While data on soil, climate, water, species, and biotopes are collected with great diligence, nothing even remotely as differentiated an analysis of the population and its relationship to the landscape is made. Human beings are seldom to be discerned in accounts of planning methodology or in photos from the areas being dealt with. At the same time, landscape planning activities should have every reason to not only take the physical facts of an area to be dealt with as their starting point, but also the social and economic situation of local people on whose backs the planning is to be implemented. Finally, statements on landscape planning targets can, as a rule, only be realised in collaboration with the local actors and stakeholders, namely with farmers. But the simple fact that the implementation of ecological concepts in ecological activity starts out from social systems and not from ecological systems (Hirsch 1992) has not yet found expression either in the performance guidelines nor in the regulations on fees for landscape planning, even though the democratic strength of user-oriented planning is frequently underlined. To be clear: as long as socioeconomic and personal factors do not become a integral part of concepts in landscape ecology, nature conservation and landscape planning we only do half the job (Nohl 1997) and therefore need not be surprised about the rejection of our schemes when they reach the local level. Even if knowledge of the scientific factors in landscape planning must be even more comprehensive in future, it is even more important to break new ground in the field of social and behavioral-related bases (fig. 1), as well as to touch on questions of acceptance in a purposeful manner, and to point out practicable solutions.
100
Fig. 1: Landscape analysis with people in mind With the introduction of a socioeconomic layer in the superposition of thematic maps the interests and needs of different landscape users would be taken into account as professionally as the mapping of vegetation, soils, species or land-use.
101
Methodology: Behavioral studies as a practical field of research In the early to mid nineties a number of research projects in Germany dealt with social, economic and behavioural issues concerning landscape ecology and landscape planning aiming at improvement of acceptance and implementation (Luz 1993, Kaule et al. 1994, Oppermann & Luz 1996,). Recently political sciences discovered nature conservation and landscape ecological projects as a field of research looking for political dimensions leading to sucess in implementing sustainable development (Brendle 1999). One of the first projects was carried our within the framework of a so called project for testing and development spread over six years funded by the German Federal Ministery of the Environment. Approx. 70 actual planning procedures were examined from landscapeecological, social-scientific and business-management aspects over a period of six years including an evaluation during a follow-up study (Kaule et al. 1994, Oppermann & Luz 1996). Four communities in the federal states of Bavaria and Baden-Wuerttemberg representing completely different structural conditions were selected to act as models and to undergo intensive investigation in a case study and action research approach. Among other things, the obstacles to implementation were analysed and innovative measures tried out which were intended to help the planning on to further-reaching implementation. Here the rare opportunity of observing the social processes set off in the communities concerned through the implementation of various landscape-planning instruments (local authority landscape plan, landscape panning in the course of schemes for land consolidation and for habitat network schemes) allowed to apply methods of qualitative social research over several years. The empirical basis for this acceptance- and implementaion research was formed by about 200 intensive interviews with the local authority decision-makers, representative bodies and the farmers affected, as well as the evaluation of the observations made at numerous local council sessions and public meetings. A large number of conclusions were drawn from this to be passed on to parliament for adding to the instruments of landscape planning, only a few of which can be described here from the point of view of acceptance research. Results From top-down to bottom-up: communication and cooperation as the basis for acceptance and implementation Already in the course of the preliminay study of the project, it turned out during the survey of experts in 18 local authorities that acceptance problems frequently resulted from difficulties in communication between the different groups involved in planning. Scientists, planners, administratives and local stakeholders are often communicating in a typical top-down direction which is best illustrated in the cartoon of figure 2. which also illustrates that gaps blocking the flow of informations should be widened and means of communication should be offered.
102
Fig. 2: From Top-down to bottom-up The typical top-down flow of information in landscape ecological planning projects between scientists, planners, bureaucrats and local people is responsible for a lack of communication (left). Widening gaps and offering communicative instruments allows for a bottom-up process (right). Graphs: G. Rollett
Three main reasons can be listed briefly for communication problems impeding acceptance: 1. Weaknesses in communication and the holding back of environmental knowledge The environmental knowledge collected with great scientific and financial effort is rarely passed on to the decision-makers, or even the affected farmers and landowners, prepared in a readily comprehensible and simplified form. This ability would seem to be completely.underestimated in the training of would-be landscape planners. As a result, the people affected do not only come to feel the arrogance of the powerful, but often also the arrogance of those who know who decide on the future of the cultivated countryside in a small and elitist-like group. However, any lasting and therefore sustainable acceptance is not based solely on the acceptance of an innovation, but also presupposes a comprehension of the planned project objectives from which the changed action is intended to result (Latin acceptare = understand!). It was possible to demonstrate in several cases that the planners with their view of things and language were simply not understood, but were themselves completely unaware of this. 2. Differences in perception and evaluation Landscape ecologists and planners are seldom aware that they as experts see the landscape with eyes completely different from those of the local residents and farmers. Thus, for example, in none of the places studied did the people interviewed perceive landscape changes affecting the same declining animal species as those the planners dealt with. Amongst locals there was always talk of the large species which dissapeared, such as the partridge or the common hare, whereas in the expert reports small species, such as beetles and grasshoppers were emphasised as indicators. Neverthelss, in one community directions for action for the realisation of a habitat network scheme were imparted in a simplified manner and on the basis
103
of the large and more perceivable species and thus successfully comprehended. Public awareness for landscape ecological questions also rose significantly within the case study communities, when scientists as part of a communicative measure were asked to give informal talks about their investigations in local meeting places such as community centres or even pubs. Having to explain their scientific observations in a language free of jargon and making themselves understood by locals was an unusual and difficult task for highliy qualified scientific experts. However, this effort lead to a new quality of common views and language which made discussions about management guidelines a lot more relaxed and reduced conflicting views. 3. The prehistory of a project The majority of planners behave as though they were acting on virgin soil in every place. The fact that many other experts before them may have played a role in achieving a negative or positive basic attitude among the decision-makers and people affected is seldom discussed. Yet emotional bias resulting from previous negative key-experiences often represents an important reason for allegedly irrational reasons for rejection. Who thinks of mapping the emotional toxic waste left by preceding generations of planners, even if this type of waste or leftover can cause the failure of even highly qualified specialist planning? In the case of one project which had been written off as a dead plan or a planning corpse, it proved possible by specifically tackling these points to revive communication between the parties involved and to work out strategies for implementation. After that it suddenly proved possible to take numerous steps to provide biotopes on the private land of farmers, something which had previously been regarded as impossible. These findings especially underline the call for taking subjective and emotional criteria into serious consideration when analysing landscapes which are inhabited and managed by people. Conclusions: lnvestigate more and communicate better the basis for communication and cooperation Quite independently of the rapidly changing framework and political conditions of landscape planning, a series ofcriteria from the social environment of a planning scheme can be mentioned as determinants for local acceptance and realisability (Luz 1993, cf. fig, 3). Taking these criteria into account in the phase of determining basic information help in recognising obstacles to implementation at an early stage and in removing them in the resultant planning and communication process. The Mapping in human brains necessary for this should be instrumentalised in the form of a pre-study about acceptance which should be conducted parallel to or even in advance of the determination of the planning bases in natural areas (Luz 1996). Some detailled expert discussions with representatives of the most important local actors with as contrary interests in the landscape as possible would already suffice for this. Such pre-studies on acceptance have been applied in a number of projects and wait for more intensive recognition. They always uncovered numerous facts about subjective data which helped to derive strategies for communication and implementation and served as eye-openers for scientists and planners involved in the communites under investigation.
104
Additional investigation: - differences in perception and evaluation - relationship between farmers and non-farmers - personal appreciation of landscape and environment - emotional prehistory - agricultural structure and conditions, perspectives for the future of farming - marketing prospects for products from sustainable agriculture - environmental qualifications within local administration
Additional communication: Passing on the environmental knowledge which was gathered and creation of environmental competence and awareness through: - simplified processing and presentation of expert knowledge - caring for working groups dealing with the development of models - lectures and walking tours with local residents, farmers, schools - advice on translating the project objectives into the situation for individual farms, clarification of the possibilities of obtaining grants - development ot professional marketing strategies to create regional identity with regional products from sustainable agriculture. Conclusion: more investigation better communication
Fig. 3: Completion of landscape planning instruments Supplementing landscape analysis with data collected from local actors and by adding communication tools as additional steps in the planning process.
In the communication phase, the most important point is to translate the planning objectives from the language of the experts into the language of the decision-makers and farmers. As part of the study of Kaule et al (1994) in several Bavarian communities, it proved possible to implement the landscape plan extremely successfully with local farmers because the effects of the planning objectives on the everyday life of a farm were communicated by means of a patient farm-by-farm advisory process. The ecological agrarian consultant here appeared, so to speak, as the landscape planners building supervisor. This translation from experts to farmers language is illustrated in the cartoons of figures. 4 and 5. Since this model-project a real network of self-employed ecological agricultural consultants developed who serve as mediators between planners and local farmers. Meanwhile in many communities they contribute to remarkable improvements of project implementation and also of farmers income from state, federal and European conservation programs which the farmers often are not aware of.
105
Fig. 4 and 5: Bridging ecological and socioeconomic aspects in landscape ecology Fig. 4: Birds and insects as indicators for ecological sensibility: One important component of scientific landscape analysis is information on fauna. Many statements on objectives for selected habitats can be substantiated by data on rare and endangered indicator species. Fig. 5: Cattle and tractors as indicators for economic feasability: Planning goals and measures derived from scientific data can only be implemented with local stakeholders, mainly with farmers. Information about their socioeconomic situation needs to be gathered with the same professional quality as data form birds and beetles in order to communicate the effects of the measures.
Round Tables and other means of communication Communicative planning techniques for the involvement and bundling together of the interests of all the local actors at the round table (Oppermann & Luz 1997) have for the most part up to now been left to chance or the personal commitment of individual planners or especially motivated members of the administration. They should become a firm integral part of a landscape planning oriented towards implementation. Figure 6 shows the instrumentalisation of the model more investigation better communication as a round table. Communication and cooperation of all local interest
106
groups leads to a gradual and steady implementation of landscape planning schemes and to an integration of local farmers, inhabitants, visitors and the local government. This model has been developed and tested in several model communities during research projects and lead to remarkable success. The translation of such models from research and model projects into everyday practice of landscape ecologists and planners is the most critical point to develop a more holistic approach in landscape ecology in which participation of people plays an equal role.
Fig. 6: Round Tables The instrumeantalisation of the model additional investigation and communication (see fig. 3) by establishing instruments for mediation of conflicting interests and coordination of steps towards implementation.
Participatory landscape ecology and -planning in practice applied examples Since the work of Kaule et al.(1994), Oppermann and Luz (1996), Luz (1996) and others exploring ways of opening nature conservation, landscape ecology and -planning for local and regional actors have become more popular in other research projects. Most important: this work and the awareness of a lack of participation lead to several guidelines and more model projects in several federal states of Germany. The Bavarian Ministery of environment issued a guideline for Landscape Planning at the Round Table which was one result of the described research project. Not only rural communities but also cities of significant size tend to invest more time into participation and look for ways of direct implementation already during the planning process instead of long procedures without visible action. One of the better known examples from Southern Bavaria is the Region of the Auerberg where 12 rural communities developed an intercommunal landscape concept employing over 60 working groups with about 300 local citizens involved in the planning and implementation process (Auweck & Jahnke 1994). Participation and communication also played a major role in the project for testing and development Revitalising the Lowlands of the River Ise in Northern Germany (Borggraefe et al. 1999). The efficiency of communication measures such as round tables, press
107
campaigns, discussions and CD-ROMs on the improvement of implementation of measures resulting from interaction between managers, planners and local population was studied in detail. Once more, the results confirm the longterm positive effects of intensified communication efforts in landscape ecology and nature conservation. Recent conclusions from an intensive study about the improvement of the efficiency of the implementation of landscape planning in Bavaria also call for further consideration of communication measures. Improving communication skills of all participants in landscape ecological planning will become the core of a multimedial set of guidelines for the implemantation of landscape plans to be published in spring 2001 (Luz et al. 2000).
Outlook The examples about participatory approaches in landscape ecology and -planning are encouraging and innovative and they show a new tendency in contemporary management of multifunctional landscapes in Germany. However, they are far from being common practice and widespread agreement amongst experts. Many natural scientists in planning teams remain very reluctant to taking ordinary people into the boat. To them it remains much saver to focus on so called objective planning criteria instead of opening the discussion for subjective or even emotional issues related to landscapes. As long as we cannot accept that the human dimension needs to play an equal role in landscape analysis and planning we continue to do half the job. If we want to take the claim serious that landscape ecology is a holistic discipline, we still have a lot to learn from the positive experiences in participatory landscape ecology.
References Auweck, F. & Jahnke, P. (1994): Experten- und Dialogplanung. Garten und Landschaft 8, p. 28-32. Borggrfe, K., Klsch, O., Lucker, T. (1999): Kommunikationsarbeit im Naturschutz. Beispiele aus dem E + E Vorhaben Revitalisierung der Ise Niederung. Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung 32 (4), p. 122-125. Brendle, U. (1999): Musterlsungen im Naturschutz Politische Bausteine fr erfolgreiches Handeln. Bundesamt fr Naturschutz, Bonn. Hirsch, G. (1992): Wieso ist kologisches Handeln mehr als eine Anwendung kologischen Wissens? berlegungen zur Umsetzung kologischen Wissens in kologisches Handeln. GAIA 2, p.141-151. Kaule, G., Endruweit, G., Luz, F., Oppermann, B., Weinschenck, G. (1994): Landschaftsplanung umsetzungsorientiert - Schlubericht zum Erprobungs- und Entwicklungsvorhaben "Ausrichtung von Extensivierungs-, Flchenstillegungs- und sonstigen agrarischen Manahmen auf Ziele des Natur- und Umweltschutzes mittels der Landschaftsplanung." Landwirtschaftsverlag, Mnster-Hiltrup. Luz, F. (1993): Zur Akzeptanz landschaftsplanerischer Projekte. Determinanten lokaler Akzeptanz und Umsetzbarkeit landschaftsplanerischer Projekte zur Extensivierung, Biotopvernetzung und anderer Manahmen des Natur- und Umweltschutzes. Dissertation am
108
Institut fr Landschaftsplanung und kologie der Universitt Stuttgart, Verlag Peter Lang, Frankfurt. Luz, F. (1993): Social Aspects in Landscape Planning. Anthos 4/93. Luz, F. & Oppermann, B. (1993): Landschaftsplanung umsetzungsorientiert. Garten und Landschaft 11/93. Luz,. F. (1996): Von der Arroganz der Wissenden zur Mitwirkung der Betroffenen - Kriterien fr Akzeptanz und Umsetzbarkeit in der Landschaftsplanung. In Selle (Hrsg.): Planung und Kommunikation p. 79 - 89 . Bauverlag, Wiesbaden. Luz, F. & Oppermann, B. (1996): Planung hrt nicht mit dem Planen auf - Kommunikation und Kooperation sind fr die Umsetzung unerllich. In: Konold, W. (Hrsg.) Naturlandschaft - Kulturlandschaft. Die Vernderung der Landschaften nach der Nutzbarmachung durch den Menschen p. 273-287. Ecomed, Landsberg. Luz, F., Luz, R., Schreiner, M. (2000): Landschaftsplanung effektiver in die Tat umsetzen. Entwicklung eines Leitfadens fr bayerische Gemeinden. Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung 32(6) p. 176-181. Oppermann, B., Luz, F., Kaule, G. (1997): Landschaftsplanung am Runden Tisch. Schlubericht zur Erfolgskontrolle zum Erprobungs- und Entwicklungsvorhaben "Ausrichtung von Extensivierungs-, Flchenstillegungs- und sonstigen agrarischen Manahmen auf Ziele des Natur- und Umweltschutzes mittels der Landschaftsplanung." Landwirtschaftsverlag, Mnster-Hiltrup. Umweltbundesamt (1995): Glossary of Environmental Terms for Urban and Regional Planners. Perthel, Berlin.
109
Determinants for Successful Policy-Making in the Field of Landscape Management

Marianne Penker When it comes to the issue of multifunctional landscapes the pivotal question is how to organise state-managed interventions in search of a balance of productive and recreational functions to guaranty a high societal wellbeing. The proposed paper presents theoretical and empirical findings of an only recently finished research project on policy-making in the field of sustainable landscape management. An interdisciplinary approach - combining theories of environmental economy, implementation research, new public management, landscape planing, and legal-sociology led to a framework of factors determining the effectiveness and cost-efficiency of political instruments. The paper focuses on determinants for a successful state-managed allocation of different ecological, economic, socio-cultural and aesthetic functions in the landscape. The theoretically deduced determinants and additional empirical studies form the basis of practical recommendations for a more effective and cost-efficient landscape management by state. The practicability of these partly unconventional proposals has been discussed with Austrian officials in the field of nature conservation and landscape management. Basically the paper argues that state-managed interventions in the development of landscape must follow three principles: that of cost-effectiveness, that of maximum societal wellbeing, and particularly the principle of avoiding irreversible losses of ecological and socio-economic development options.
Can we plan landscapes? Aspects of an application-oriented landscape ecology

Roman Lenz
University of Applied Sciences, Schelmenwasen 4-8, D-72622 Nrtingen, Germany lenzr@fh-nuertingen.de
To plan landscapes is problematic because of several reasons, especially: - (Data and) predictions are uncertain - Different goals and visions are thinkable - Informatory planning is increasing and may lead to new visions - Successful planning is as the problem itself complex and needs acceptance. Hence, it is necessary to accompany and guide planning from analysis to realisation, at least in the fields of: - Structure and function (system analysis) - Dynamics and evaluation (scenarios) - Options and decisions (acceptance) and this in fact on the integration level of environment-society-systems. On the basis of various own examples from different projects and landscapes, the abovementioned topics will be elucidated. Out of that, the following conceptional tools to cope with the problems are delineated: - Strategic cyclic scaling (multi-level-systems approach, meta-planning) - Inter- and transdisciplinarity - Problem-solving and planning has to be taken seriously (sustainability).
110
To conceptually overcome these problems, we have worked out an Environmental Impact Assessment Multi-level Approach ("EIAMA, or good planning practise approach; Lenz et al. 1996, 2000). In conclusion, we need a combination of manifold, problem-oriented methods and tools in order to come to a successful planning from analysis to realisation although we cannot predict and somehow really plan landscapes.
111
5.
Workshop No. 5: Values and assessment of multifunctional landscapes
Workshop guide and presentation of recommendations: Jesper Fredshavn, Denmark Finn Arler, Denmark Main speaker: Roy H. Haines-Young, UK, Marion B. Potschin, Switzerland First opponent speaker: Knud Tybirk, Denmark Second opponent speaker: Hannes Palang, Estonia Third opponent speaker: Christina Axelsson Lindgren, Sweden
Multifunctionality and Value

R.H. Haines-Young1 & M.B. Potschin 2
1
Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Environmental Science and Policy Research Group, Monks Wood, Abbots Ripton, Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire PE17 2LS, UK & School of Geography, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD E-mail: Roy.Haines-Young@Nottingham.ac.uk Department of Geography, Institute for Landscape Ecology, University of Basel Spalenring 145, CH4055 Basel, Switzerland E-mail: Marion.Potschin@unibas.ch
Abstract If we are to understand and plan for multifunctional landscapes, then we must also examine the multiple and often conflicting values that people assign to the resources that are associated with them. The problem of assigning value to environmental resources is complex, but some progress can be made using the concept of natural capital and the idea that ecosystem functionality can deliver a range of goods and services to society. It will be argued that we have to first understand value frameworks of the interest groups living in an area before we can plan in a multifunctional landscape. These value frameworks define the range of goods and services people expect or need from the landscapes and the spatial and temporal scales at which they consider them to be critical. Questions of sustainability can only be resolved by looking at these value frameworks in relation to the biophysical properties of the mosaic of ecosystems that constitute a landscape. When planning for sustainability we need to understand the limiting factors that control ecological processes within a multifunctional landscape, and how, within these constraints, conflicts between different value systems can be resolved. Keywords: Multifunctionality, landscape, indicators, value, sustainability
112
Introduction Discussion of multifunctionality by landscape ecologists is both important and timely. It is important because it poses difficult questions for our science. Ecology, or at least environmental quality, is just one of the many things people demand from landscapes. Confronted with the concept of multifunctionality, landscape ecologists have to consider just what kinds of insight their science can give in debates about the way people plan, manage or exploit landscape resources. The discussion is also timely, because with the human population set to peak at around 8 900 million in 2050 (United Nations Population Division 1998), the conflicting demands that people will put upon landscapes will increase relentlessly. In this paper we consider ideas of multifunctionality in the context of value. We will argue that the two are inexorably linked. Indeed we will argue that multifunctional landscapes cannot be understood without reference to some value system . Multifunctionality is not a property of ecological systems per se but a result of the interaction and linkage between society and environment. We will show that acceptance of this proposition has fundamental implications for the way in which landscape ecologists approach the practise of their discipline and the education of the next generation of scientists. In presenting these ideas we will react to the position taken by some recent commentators, such as Kerr (in press a, b and c ), who have sought to describe ways in which ecology can better serve the needs of society. Kerr has argued, for example, for a more seamless integration of basic and applied ecology. He also asserts the need for ecologists to be educated to work in more interdisciplinary ways so that issues spanning esthetics (sic), economics and ecology can be addressed. The development and application of concepts such as ecosystem health and ecological integrity are proposed as some of the ways in which scientist can better engage in public debates about our environmental futures.
Understanding multifunctionality Multifunctional landscapes have been represented in various ways at this meeting and in the associated papers. Common to most definitions is the idea that within a given area, different material processes in nature and society can take place simultaneously . Multifunctionality in landscapes is thus taken to mean the co-existence of different spheres such as ecology, economics, culture, history and aesthetics. The concept is more, however, than the recognition of the association or layering of biophysical and human systems. Using the concept it is further asserted that understanding the interactions between these systems is fundamental and that conflicts between biophysical and human systems can, in some sense, be better managed by promoting integrated planning and landscape heterogeneity. This picture of multiple linkages between human and environmental systems is, however, a simplistic one. To build theories about multifunctionality on such shallow conceptualisations would be unfortunate, because the coexistence model tells us very little about how integration might be achieved and how conflicts might be overcome. In order to see where the key issues lie, let us contrast this representation of multifunctionality with one built on what we will call the recursive model. According to the recursive model, multifunctionality is not simply the coexistence of material processes in nature and human societies. Rather, it is the proposition that multifunctionality is essentially a human centred concept that we need to understand how human value systems successively [or recursively] re-define what is important in terms of ecological function. In other words, in multifunctional landscapes we are not simply observing the coexistence of different, independent systems, but rather the reciprocal relationship between systems. Neither can exist in isolation. Multifunctionality is an emergent property arising out of the interaction of ecological and human value systems.
113
Ecosystem health and ecological integrity The problem with the coexistence model of multifunctionality is that it suggests that conflicts between natural and human systems can somehow be resolved by scientists finding ways to communicate their measures of ecological condition to the rest of society. Various tools and techniques are proposed. Environmental indicators are one such approach (HainesYoung 1999). Similar strategies are tried though concepts such as that of ecosystem health and ecological integrity. Kerr (in press a) has argued strongly that if we are to find better ways on managing human impact on the environment then measures of societal well-being should include measures of ecological health. For Kerr, measures of ecological heath are based on assessments of the integrity of ecological systems. For him, integrity means their capacity to support a biota that is the product of evolutionary and biogeographic processes with little or no influence from industrial society (Kerr in press, a, and see Figure 1). The scale of human impact is assessed, according to how far society pushes the ecological system away from what is essentially a natural condition. Once human actions alter a place so that it no longer possesses ecological integrity questions of value then arise. At what point Kerr asks, do we make a judgement that some critical threshold has been crossed and that the situation shifts from healthy to unhealthy, from sustainable to unsustainable (Kerr, in press, a, page 7). Figure 1: Biological condition in relation to human disturbance, from J. Kerr (in press b) Biological condition declines away from biological integrity as human disturbance increases. Biological integrity is the condition of a place that has its evolutionary legacyparts (e.g., species) and processes (e.g., nutrient cycles)intact. On the basis of contemporary societal
Pristine T
Biological integrity
Biological condition
Healthy = sustainable
Nothing alive
Unhealthy = unsustainable None Severe
Human disturbance
values, a site or region may still be considered healthy despite some decline below integrity. Biological condition can, however, degrade beyond a threshold (in the vicinity of T) where the situation becomes unhealthy because it is unsustainable. T is not necessarily an easily measured threshold, especially over short time scales. Rather it is a biological tipping point beyond which neither significant components of the natural biota nor human activity can be sustained in that place.
114
To operationalise the approach suggested in Figure 1, all we need is to find ways of measuring how far the system has been shifted from ecological integrity. Kerr, like others, have suggested biological assessments, based on multi-dimensional indices, as one way forward. Although we have focused here on the work of Kerr, it is important to note that these ideas are part of a larger body of work. The essential proposition is that ecological condition can be assessed in an objective sense and that indicators can be used to describe the state of ecological systems and the way they change over time and space. Elsewhere, for example, we can find this approach played out in the development and formulation of sustainability indicators at international, national and local levels. It is an attractive and beguiling approach, for it defines very clearly both a scientific agenda and a role for the scientists in public debates about the environment. The task for the scientist is to open the channel of communication between those who understand the properties of natural systems and the rest of society. Despite its attractions the coexistence model has a number of difficulties, particularly when we consider it in relation to ideas about multifunctionality. Three issues are apparent: 1. The model is one-dimensional: It assumes that the state of ecological integrity can be recognised and that we can agree on how that state can be measured and how departures from that state can be assessed. Clearly this might be possible if we have access to wilderness, where we can study natural systems, that is systems unaffected by human activities, but this is not always the case. How could the concept be applied in the case of the highly modified but ecologically rich cultural landscape so prised by landscape ecologists, and more typical of the European situation? 2. The model is static: It assumes that natural systems are in some kind of optimum, balanced or equilibrium state. But how can this be so? Natural systems both evolve and respond to changing environmental conditions. The natural state is never fixed. 3. The model reduces questions of value merely to discussions of when critical thresholds are crossed. While it is acknowledged that different groups might have different views about when the important boundaries are crossed, it does not consider the possibility that different groups may also define and characterise the structure of ecosystems in different ways. Consider how a farmer in Australia might define the ecological integrity of a landscape compared to, say, the aboriginal peoples who once had access to the same land. Most importantly, in the context of the present workshop, the coexistence model does not easily accommodate the multifunctional concept except to say that ecological integrity is one of the things we need or landscape planners to deliver, along with a range of other outputs that people require. Multifunctionality is, in other words, characterised merely as the coexistence of biophysical and human systems.
Natural Capital, Ecosystem Services and Multifunctionality We will suggest an alternative view of multifunctionality based on the proposition human value systems successively [or recursively] re-define what is important in terms of ecological function. We will argue that ecological function cannot be explored without reference to a value system, and that questions of value cannot be resolved unless their connection with ecological function is understood. The recursive model of multifunctionality is most easily explained in terms of what some call the concept of natural capital (Daily, 1998, Turner et al., 2000). Ecological systems
115
can be thought of as elements of natural capital because they can deliver a range of goods and services to people, in just the same way as human made capital can. Consider, for example, the landscapes of the South Downs of England. This is a rich cultural landscape, created by the activities of many generations. In ecological terms they are important for the biodiversity they support. However, biodiversity is just one of the outputs people derive from the ecosystems in these areas. These ecosystems have, in the past, benefited people though the farming and sylvicultural activities that they supported. Today they are important as the backdrop for a range of recreation and tourist activities. In biophysical terms, The Downs are an important aquifer, and in a social context represent a rich historical and cultural resource. Although as ecologists we map and present ecosystems as objects or habitat patches, in terms of defining their relationship with society, though the services and benefits they provide that they are much better represented. The challenge for the landscape ecologist is to understand how the structural and functional properties of those ecosystems support the range of outputs, goods and services that people value. These ideas about natural capital and ecosystem goods and services have been most widely discussed in the literature of environmental economics (Christensen and Franklin, 1996; Freeman, 1996), and it is in the context of wetlands that they have been most actively applied (e.g. Turner et al., 2000). The relevance of the paradigm to questions about sustainable landscapes has recently been discussed by Haines-Young (2000). It is particularly valuable in the context of the present workshop, because it provides a framework in which ideas about multifunctionality can be explored and applied. According to the natural capital paradigm, landscape multifunctionality arises according to the way in which different people, or groups in society, value the different outputs from an area. Conflicts arise not only because they may value these outputs differently (e.g. some might rank biodiversity more highly than others), but also because even within a single interest group there may be incompatible goals. For example, it may be impossible to maximise both the conservation of biodiversity and recreational opportunity in the same area. We may simply not understand what ecological trade-offs need to be made. What is important to note in the context of the present workshop is that multifunctionality is not a property of ecological systems per se, but only emerges though the interaction of human value systems and the capabilities of nature. Real ecological functions give rise to, or support, the goods and services that may desired by society, but the particular aspects of ecological systems that are important are defined recursively through the different value system. Functions that were considered important in the past may, no longer be so. Alternatively, as human values or needs change, functions that in the past were unrecognised or disregarded may become significant. The recursive character of the model of multifunctionality that we describe here can be illustrated by reference to a particular landscape issue that is emerging on the South Downs of England. This area has long been recognised as one of high landscape and scenic value. However, where as it was once rejected as a National Park, when the first tranche of designations were made, today legislation is now being drawn up to accord it National Park status. The reasons for the change in view are many, but key considerations include the way in which the context of these landscapes has changed given the surrounding development pressure in SE England, and the growing importance of these areas for recreation. For the future, development of the recreational opportunities within the new National Park will be an important issue, and it may well involve restoration of many of the chalk grassland areas that have been lost though agricultural improvement. However, while the landscape ecologist can provide a biophysical model that describes where habitat restoration is most easily achieved, this scientific understanding is not sufficient for the planner interested in biodiversity and recreation.
116
In designing these new cultural landscapes we have to take account of the biophysical limitations and capabilities associated with these landscapes and their potential use by people. When targeting restoration schemes planners will need to select land parcels that both have the capability of being restored and which also offer the greatest recreational benefits. Thus proximity of parcels to the footpath network would be a factor, as would associations with other historical or landscape features (see Figure 2). Figure 2: Using a GIS to determine multifunctional properties of land parcels on the South Downs, England.
Value of parcels (shown by different tones) defined by ecological function and proximity to footpath network
The land parcels and habitat patches that make up the landscape mosaic we recognise as the South Downs have different ecological properties and functional characteristics. However, which properties or functions we select depends on our value system. As the case of the South Downs shows, new ecological properties emerge, almost recursively as we apply our human value systems. The targeting of habitat restoration measures to promote biodiversity and recreation would be very different from any scheme that pursued either one of these goals in isolation.
117
Implications of and for Multifunctionality Natural systems cannot stand as a benchmark against which the scale and nature of human impact can be judged because people are just as much part of ecological systems as other organisms. Indeed, we have to find new ecological configurations within which human needs can be accommodated, rather than judge all actions in terms of how far the system is shifted from some idealised natural state. In seeking these novel ecological configurations or new cultural landscapes as we might call them, the concept of multifunctionality is particularly valuable. Two key issues are apparent. First, if we adopt the recursive model of multifunctionality, it allow us to understand how human value systems define our vision of what is significant in ecological terms, and how conflicts about the importance of those functions arise. The concept of multifunctionality when viewed from the recursive perspective, also helps us identify some of the key scientific issues that need to be addressed if landscape ecologists are to help society plan and build our landscapes of the future. Questions of landscape sustainability, for example, involve understand how the outputs goods and services people derive from an area can be maintained, and how they are supported by underlying ecological functionality. Moreover, in resolving such questions it is apparent that in order to derive these multiple outputs, trade-offs between the needs and aspirations of the different groups may be necessary. The goal of multifunctionality does not involve the identification of a single, optimal, landscape structure, but rather the set of landscape configurations that would sustain the outputs that society values (see Figure 3). The development of tools that help us define the set of ecologically viable futures represents one of the major challenges confronting landscape ecology today (Haines-Young, 2000; Potschin and Haines-Young, 2000). Figure 3: Defining multifunctional space
State (Multidimensional) Set of ecologically sustainable futures in terms of those which are capable of sustaining ecosystem outputs required by stakeholders
Future trajectories implied by stakeholder
Boundary of multifunctional space defined by ecosystem capabilities & stakeholder value Time
118
Second, it helps us define a future educational agenda. When confronted with the concept of multifunctionality, a typical response is to call for an inter-disciplinary approach. To foster such developments it is often proposed that we have to find better ways of communicating between disciplines. In contradistinction, the recursive model of multifunctionality implies more of a transdisciplinary vision. The next generation must not merely be trained to communicate with other experts, but to have specific competence in other discipline areas. Scientists must be capable of communicating across the boundaries of their discipline and of working across them. By stressing the need to combine insights about ecological function and human value, the recursive model of multifunctionality provides a new focus for those interested in the education of the next generation of landscape ecologists.
References Christensen, N.L. and Franklin, J.F. (1996): Ecosystem function and ecosystem management. In, Simpson, R.D. and Christensen, N.L. ( eds.) Ecosystem Function and Human Activity. Chapman and Hall, New York, p. 1-24. Daily, G.C. (1997): Introduction: What are ecosystem services? In: Daily, G.C. [Ed] Natures Services. Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Island Press, New York, p.1-10. Freeman III, A.M. (1996): On valuing the service functions of ecosystems. In: Simpson, R.D. and Christensen, N.L. [ eds.] Ecosystem Function and Human Activity. Chapman and Hall, New York, p. 241-254. Haines-Young, R.H. (1999) Environmental accounts for land cover: Their contribution to state of the environment reporting. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 24, 441456. Haines-Young, R. (2000): Sustainable Development and Sustainable Landscapes: Defining a New Paradigm for Landscape Ecology. Fennia 178 (1). Kerr, J. (in press a): What from ecology is relevant to design and planning? In: Johnson, B. and Hill K. [eds.] Ecological Thinking for Design and Planning. Island Press, Washington DC. Kerr, J. (in press b): Health, Integrity, and Biological Assessment: The Importance of Measuring Whole Things. In: Pimentel, D., L. Westra and R. F. Noss (eds.): Ecological Integrity: Integrating Environment, Conservation, and Health . Island Press, Washington, DC. Kerr, J. (in press c): Ecological Health and Societal Well-Being. Washington Public Health.. Potschin, M. and R. Haines-Young (2000): Landscape ecology, EIA and sustainable landscapes. In: Claire, T. (Ed.): Quantitative Approaches to Landscape Ecology. Proceedings of the 2000 Annual IALE (UK) Conference. Bangor, Wales. 6-10.09.2000 (Forthcoming, September 2000) Turner, R.K.; Bateman, I.J. and W.N. Adger (eds.) (2000): Economics of Coastal and Water Resources: Valuing Environmental Functions. Dorndecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers (forthcoming). United Nations Population Division (1998): World Population Projections to 2150. United Nations, New York, United States.
119
Nature values in agricultural landscapes: different possibilities in organic and conventional farming systems
Knud Tybirk
National Environmental Research Institute, Dept. of Landscape Ecology
Most natural ecosystems are by origin rather poor in nutrients. Through geological eras nutrients have been washed to the seas and most living organisms have evolved in ecosystems scarce in nutrients. Only few lowland areas have had nutrient levels comparable to present day agricultural ecosystems. Farming systems have during centuries formed the landscape in Northwestern lowland Europe from mainly forested ecosystems through various phases of opening up the forest by slash and burn and later settled agriculture. Humans have concentrated nutrients for their benefit around settlements by exploring nutrients in the outskirts of the villages. Such semi-natural and yet agricultural ecosystems often with heavy grazing was in favour of a large number of species associated with open animal grazed ecosystems and scattered trees. The processes of nutrient concentration in terrestrial ecosystems by humans was indeed speeded up during the 19th century when nitrogen fixing species were cultivated deliberately and other sources of nutrients, such as guano and marl, were used to improve croplands. In Denmark, the changes from stock-holding on large marginal heathlands, grasslands, shrublands and forested areas between villages was changed into stable based animal production early 20th century when efficient fences became available. However, agricultural practices were still relatively extensive until the 1950ies, mainly based on the principles of circulating nutrients within the ecosystem and hardly any use of chemical substances. These principles are still today the basics or organic agriculture, but the cultivated landscape has changed dramatically since the 50ies. Large fields on fewer and larger farms has become the general picture. The conventional farming system evolved dramatically from 1960-90 with still higher external inputs of nutrients and pesticides and an extreme degree of homogenisation of the production systems with every inch of potentially arable fields being cultivated. Under these circumstances, the natural and semi-natural ecosystems with large numbers of species of conservation interests have indeed been diminished and deteriorated. Fragmentation, air-borne inputs of nitrogen, pesticide drift, lack of extensive grazing etc. have reduced the quality of most patches on left-over semi-natural and natural ecosystems in the agricultural landscape in Denmark. The development of organic farming in Denmark during the 1990ies is a reflection of what can be termed a phase of post-productivistic transformation where the key-words are extensivation of the agricultural production system(less input of nutrients and no pesticides) diversification (more crops in rotation and more marginal grasslands) de-concentration and co-operation between farmers (on-farm dairies, exchange of animal food for organic fertiliser between farms etc) Optimistic conservation ecologists see these trends as a new possibility to recover the rich natural and semi-natural ecosystems in a multifunctional landscape. And in principle it should be possible. However, a number of preconditions have to be changed before this is the case. The paper presents work on how to introduce nature conservation and nature priorities into conventional and organic farmers agricultural practices in Denmark. A list of priorities of
120
nature values to be identified and focused on in the planning process are presented, and it is argued that there is a strong need to focus more on the unique values of nature. The values of nature for man are often neither exchangeable with other resources nor critical in a biological of physical sense for the survival of man, but represent what has been termed as unique values (Arler 2000). Such values can be esthetical, recreational or reflect what can be termed biological integrity. The paper will argue that it is essential to leave more room for biological integrity (e.g. spontaneous processes such as succession and the exclusion of excessive nutrient inputs) to improve the quality of nature in and thereby add more space to the unique values of nature in a multifunctional landscape.
121
Defining valuable landscapes for planning purposes

H. Palang1 , H. Alume1 , K. Hellstrm2 , K. Sepp2
1 2
Institute of Geography, University of Tartu Institute for Environmental Protection, Estonian Agricultural University
This paper presents the preliminary results of a project aiming at defining valuable landscapes for a county plan. It looks to answer three questions. First, which landscapes should be considered valuable in Estonian context. Second, how to find and delimit valuable landscapes. Third, how to assess the different values of these landscapes. Those valuable landscapes should then be taken into account while compiling county plans, which in turn should foresee options for preserving these valuable landscapes. The project focused on two main values of landscape, historical value and identity value. The first indicates the areas with traditional land use, where changes have been smooth rather than radical. Such traditional landscapes very often have also high esthetical and natural values. The second indicates the preferences of local people. It points out places that are of some importance for locals, including areas with recreational values. The defining process itself has to find a balance between the opinions of experts and locals, in order to solve the value conflict between everyday users of the landscape and "tourists" who come to see the landscape once in a while.
Multifunctional Landscape Planning within Forestry and Organic Production. A Comparative Analysis from the Visual Quality Perspective.
Christina Axelsson Lindgren
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Dept. of Landscape Planning, Alnarp P.O. Box 58, S-230 53 Alnarp, Sweden Phone: +46 40415413 Fax: +46 40465442 E-mail: Christina.Axelsson-Lindgren@lpal.slu.se
Forestry may visualise the good life in the landscape, and meet expectations and needs of people for recreation and inspiration. Forest landscapes may contain qualities of cultural heritage, health, personal development, aesthetical qualities and a manifold in natural and cultural experiences. With a Semantic Model for Forest Experience, one may compare and combine forest environments with different visual characters. Experiental dimensions of forests environments are 'openness, variation, preference, gender, vulnerability and extraordinarity'. They may be compared with characteristics for description of the bouquet of a wine. The bouquet of the product is important, both in wine production and in agricultural and forestry production, where you simultanously produce landscape qualities. Experiences created by the composition of forests are of such importance, that people are willing to spend a lot on aesthetical and experiental forest values. In a comparative project, characteristics of agricultural landscape elements, which may be parts of organic farming in plains with clay dominated soils, are presented to subjects. Expectations and demands of urban populations and farmers on new landscape structures, as multifunctional between fields-areas, are analysed. Subjects describe verbally and on maps their conceptions and expectations of how organic farming may be developed in urban fringe agricultural areas.
122
6.
Workshop No. 6: Ecological aspects of multifunctional landscapes in historical perspective
Workshop guide and presentation of recommendations: Bent Aaby, Denmark Per Ole Rindel, Denmark Main speaker: Emily W. B. Russell, USA First opponent speaker: Kenneth Olwig, Norway Second opponent speaker: Joep Dirkx, The Netherlands Third opponent speaker: Ian Spears, UK
Historical Aspects Multifunctionality in Landscapes

Emily W. B. Russell
Department of Geological Sciences, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ 07102 USA
Abstract To study multifunctional landscapes, we must consider past as well as present factors. All landscapes undergo a series of complex, interrelated changes over time, driven both by internal forces and by those that originate in more distant culture and economics. I consider here the last few centuries of change on three landscapes of the northeastern United States the Pocono Plateau in Pennsylvania, and the Shawangunk Mountains and Saratoga Battlefield of New York. They exhibit a variety patterns of land uses over time, but all have changed from economies that depended on local resource extraction to those that rely more on recreation and tourism. The consequences of the earlier uses have constrained later uses. By adopting a landscape-centered approach, the interrelationships among the different players and activities can be explored in a way that integrates evidence and perspectives from many disciplines. Keywords: agriculture, conservation, forestry, Pocono Plateau, Saratoga National Historical Park, Shawangunks, tourism Introduction Landscapes are multifunctional over time as well as space. Using the landscape itself as the focus for studying change over time, we can integrate the approaches of different disciplines to arrive at a better understanding of the systems and their potentials (Moss 2000). A typical progression of landscape functions in eastern North America has been from predominantly resource extraction and biomass utilization to recreation and conservation. Causes of this
123
progression are complex, including resource depletion, changing economic demands and cultural values, and use of fossil fuels. I will illustrate these points with simplified discussions of three landscapes in the northeastern United States (Figure 1). 1. Pike County on the Pocono plateau of northeastern Pennsylvania, a landscape dominated by the lumber industry, followed by recreation. 2. The Shawangunk Mountains in southeastern New York State where very mixed extractive uses in the 18th and 19th centuries yielded gradually to recreation and preservation. 3. Saratoga National Historical Park, the location of a critical battle of the American Revolutionary War, where an agricultural landscape was transformed into a historical park in the early-20th century. For each landscape, I will consider 3 questions 1. What are the basic natural features: geology, topography, hydrology and vegetation? 2. How have these features affected how people have seen and used the landscapes at different times? How have economic forces and cultural values influenced the uses of the landscape? 3. How have the uses of one time constrained the potentials of a later time?
Pike County, Pennsylvania The setting Pike County presents a rugged, glaciated landscape, with poor, very rocky soils developed on shales and sandstones. Many small streams dissect the uplands, most part of the watershed of the Delaware River which forms the eastern boundary of the county. Based on witness trees mentioned in land surveys, it appears that a forest dominated by oak and pine trees blanketed the region in 1800 AD (M. Brgi pers. comm). Period of resource extraction White pine trees attracted the lumber industry in the beginning of the 19th century, so that by 1846 the county had been nearly stripped of its valuable timber (Burrowes 1846, p. 291). In the second half of the 19th century, the tanning industry, which used ground bark in processing imported hides, harvested much of the remaining timber, especially oak and hemlock. By 1880, the scarcity of these trees led to widespread abandonment of tanneries (Hough 1882, p. 122; PA Dept. For., 1910, p. 156). After the major lumber-producing wood had been cut and fires swept frequently through the cut-over forests, the generally less valuable pitch pine remained and even it found several uses. Long valued for producing pitch (Williams 1980), its greatest use here, lasting well into the 20th century, was for props for anthracite mines in neighboring counties (Bowen 1854, pp. 192-193; Illick and Aughanbaugh 1930, pp. 49-50; Powell and Considine 1982, p. 3). In most years of the first decade and a half of the 20th century, more timber was cut for mine props than for any other use. Railroad ties also became a major user of timber as the mileage of railroads increased (PA Dept. For., 1902-1915). Thus, changing demand as well as supply determined the major uses of the landscape from 1800 to the mid-20th century. By the end of the 19th century, logging had left greatly depleted forest resources. A state survey concluded that, unproductive areas are large and present a picture of desolation and depopulation which cannot well be recognized without awakening most serious thought as to their present and future bearing on the prosperity of the [State]. ...[The land] continues to this day a literal barren, over which fires have swept and continue to sweep almost every year, destroying the young forest growth and rendering the soil, after each succeeding conflagration, more and more barren (Rothrock and Shunk 1896, pp. 33-34).
124
Under these conditions, the private owners of much of this land found it more economically profitable to abandon their properties than to pay real estate taxes on them (Rothrock and Shunk 1896, pp. 36-37; Considine and Powell 1982, pp. 33-34). Even so, lumbering continued to be a major industry well into the 20th century. The amount of lumber sold in Pike County increased from an average of 400 thousand m3 per year from 1902-1905 to 1.3 million per year from 1912 to 1915. Embedded in this matrix of timber cutting were a large variety of other land uses, some profiting from changes wrought by logging. Time has obscured details of the extent and precise location of these activities, but tantalizing hints abound, often in descriptions of causes of wildfires. In 1900, a local inhabitant noted that, Now is the time to burn the woods, in the old of the moon, when the sap is down, then the pasture will start quickly (PA Dept. For. 1903-1904, p. 25). Numerous references to fires set to improve pasturage suggest that this was a common post-logging use of the landscape. Hunting was another widespread and little documented activity, also noted because hunters set fires in the hope of improving the habitat for game. Blueberry pickers also intentionally set fires to improve the harvest, while others set fires for more esoteric purposes, such as smoking squirrels or bees out of trees (PA Dept. For. 1903-1915). Transition period In the early 20th c., the State of Pennsylvania saw degraded forests and the low price of abandoned land as an opportunity to begin to convert some of the apparently worst land to productive timber use (PA Dept. For. 1907, p. 129; Rupp 1924). By 1902 the state had purchased over 17 x 103 ha for this purpose (Anonymous 1903). While much of this land was cutover and unproductive, a large variety of trees were regenerating where fires had been prevented. By planting trees and preventing fires, the State hoped to reinvigorate the production of timber (PA Dept. For. 1907, p. 188). The few locales with old forests, however, inspired a different response, revealing the beginning of a shift in perception of the value of the landscape. It is to be hoped that no pecuniary consideration will lead to the sacrifice of these primeval forests which the State now owns, and which soon will be about the only bodies of original timber within the Commonwealth. But why value these trees solely for their worth in dollars, or as lumber? Sentiment is not wholly despicable (PA Dept. For. 1907, p. 128). As old stands became scarce because most had been cut, they began to acquire value in situ rather than for their economic value as lumber. Period of conservation Easy access from the metropolitan areas of Philadelphia and New York had begun to spur the development of a flourishing recreation industry by the late 19th century, first dependent on the railroad for transportation and later the automobile. Luxurious hostelries and commodious dwellings were replacing the primeval forest. (Pleasants 1913, p. 67) Numerous hunting and fishing clubs offered excellent fishing for trout, pickerel, bass and perch in streams and ponds, hunting for the abundant game birds, squirrels and foxes and somewhat uncommon deer (PA Dept. For. 1908-1909, pp. 295-296). Waterfalls present[ed] scene[s] of singular wildness and beauty (Burrowes 1846, p. 291). In the late 20th century, even better road access from the east and inexpensive petrol led to a burgeoning second home industry in the Pocono region, and even to commuter housing, for people trying to escape the crowded suburbs of northern New Jersey. In addition, a National Recreation Area created in the second half of the century offered sightseeing, hunting, camping, boating and wildlife and bird watching (National Park Service 1975, 1992). Logging continued, but at a slower pace as recreational development grew. Even though the forests gained amenity value as lumber became easily available from more distant
125
sources, in the late 20th century 60 percent of the land was still commercial forest land, over 70% of which was privately owned. The USDA Forest Service noted in 1982 that esthetic enjoyment of land was the prime benefit derived from private land in the region, although they also noted that forest management for timber could be combined with this enjoyment (Powell and Considine 1982, p. 79). The kinds of trees growing in this forest that was now enjoyed for esthetic purposes as well as timber had changed in the last 200 years. Red maple, which was rare in the colonial forest surveys, had become the most important tree species (Considine and Powell 1980). The percentage of pines in the forest had fallen from 27% of the trees to only 7.5%, hemlock from 5% to 2% and chestnut from 8% to less than 1% (M. Brgi, pers. comm.). Selective logging of white pine and hemlock, the chestnut blight of the early 20th century that killed all the mature chestnut trees, frequent fires, and other alterations caused either intentionally or unintentionally had greatly changed the composition of the forests. However, they were still valued highly as forests. While the earlier interest in the forest had viewed it as a commodity to be cut and sold, and had led to depletion of the resource, the late 20th century valued its continued existence, though this was not the same forest that had covered the land before logging, in either extent or composition. Only a few small, isolated tracts of old growth forest remained (Rowland and Smith 1951) The success of the recreation industry and a burgeoning growth of second homes and commuter homes depended on a wooded and at least superficially more natural landscape than the congested suburbs farther south and east. Conclusion In summary, forests have predominated as the landscape matrix in this part of the Pocono plateau over the last 3 centuries. This has not been a static matrix, however, as the lumber industry successively exploited different species. The industry, which was generally not locally funded, took no consideration of the future supplies of timber, as they could move to other places (Williams 1989), so the composition of the forests changed. The still-forested landscape, however, appealed to vacationers from more congested regions to the east and south, who began their own form of exploitation, building houses, golf courses, ski areas and other structures on the landscape. The outcome of tensions between passive enjoyment of the landscape as opposed to more intensive or extractive uses such as golf courses and logging is yet to be determined, but will continue to reflect local, regional, and extraregional economics and values.
Shawangunks The setting The Shawangunks are a narrow range of mountains underlain by distinctive siliceous conglomerate rock. This bedrock is very resistant to weathering, producing sharp cliffs and shallow, low-nutrient soils. More fertile shale and limestone underlie valleys to the east and west of the ridges, and the Hudson River on the east has provided transportation to New York City from the earliest days of Euroamerican settlement. This region, too, was heavily forested when European settlers began arriving in the 17th century. Oaks were the most common trees mentioned in land surveys. However, on the top of the ridges, pines predominated, especially pitch pines, and most of the oaks mentioned there were chestnut oaks, characteristic of dry areas. Both pitch pine and chestnut oak are also very tolerant of fires.
126
Period of resource extraction By the early 19th c. farmers had cleared most of the valleys for agriculture, leaving only the more rugged and infertile uplands forested. Unlike the forests of the Pocono region, these forests never supported a thriving, large scale lumber industry. However, repeated selective and scattered logging for local industries decimated most of the forest in the region between 1800 and the mid-20th century. Major uses of wood were bark for tanneries, charcoal to fuel mills, fuel and building wood and barrel hoops. These industries flourished especially after 1828 when the Delaware and Hudson (D&H) Canal was completed to carry coal from northern Pennsylvania to New York City, via the Hudson River, passing along the western margin of the Shawangunk region (Booth 1965). Tanneries. As in the Poconos, large tanneries built near stands of hemlock trees were processing hides before the second half of the 19th c. These were complex industries, combining tanning with lumber sales and a variety of mills (Ellenville Journal (EJ), June 29, 1849, July 14, 1849; EJ, March 4, 1859; Sept. 9, 1859). Local lore indicates that the tanning industry had exhausted adequate the hemlock by the mid-1860s (Huth and Smiley 1985). Charcoal and fuelwood. Some woodlots for sale in 1855 along the D&H Canal were advertised as having 4000 cords (14 x 103 m3 ) of wood, mostly oak with some pitch pine and chestnut, that would be good for coal (EJ, August 10, 1855). Much of the charcoal was used locally for furnaces and heating, but much was shipped via the canal to New York City (Poughkeepsie Sunday New Yorker, October 10, 1943). About 50 hearths where wood was burned to make charcoal have been found in the forests of the central Shawangunks (P. Huth, Pers. comm.). Most of the wood used for charcoal, such as oak, red maple, and chestnut, are species that sprout from the stump after they are cut, so the procedure produces a forest of multiple stemmed trees of species that sprout readily. They are usually cut repeatedly. Fuelwood cutting took place wherever a farmer had a woodlot, both for local use and for sale. Almost any kind of wood would suffice: beech, birch, maple, oak, and softwoods (including hemlock and chestnut). Intensive cutting for fuelwood continued into the mid 20th century, intensifying in response to the Depression of the 1930s and shortages caused by the Second World War. Records for Mohonk Mountain House, in the middle of the Shawangunks, document cutting at least 60 x 103 m3 of fuelwood on about 2100 ha in the 1930s and 1940s to provide energy to this large resort hotel. This was only slightly less than the estimate of the growth rate of the local woodlands of about 2.5 m3 /ha, so constituted very heavy harvest of the forest resources (Brown 1979). Miscellaneous other products . By the late 19th century, the large trees of any value in areas that were accessible had all been cut; most of the remaining wood was small saplings regenerating after logging or field abandonment. These were ideal for making hoops, used to hold together baskets, buckets, barrels and other containers. In 1908 a local hoop manufacturing plant made over 75 x 106 hoops a year, the largest output of hoops in the country (Smiley 1986). Larger sprouts served as firewood. Thus most of the original large timber had been harvested in the 19th century, and the second growth itself was cut from the end of the century into the 20th century. This procedure favored vigorously sprouting trees such as oaks and chestnuts over the more slowly reproducing hemlocks. Even shrubs and herbaceous plants in the forests provided sources of income. The leaves of wintergreen, a small herbaceous plant, can be distilled to produce oil of wintergreen for flavoring and medicine. One wintergreen still in the region operated for 75 years (New Paltz Independent and Times 1940). Local pickers harvested the leaves in 45 kg bags, providing an extra source of revenue (Smiley 1986). None of these plants thrived on the high ridges of the Shawangunks. There, the trees were small, mostly pitch pine, and huckleberries flourished. These latter provided fruit for a flourishing economy, the sale of huckleberries to the nearby cities. The crop filled dozens of wagons, each carrying 40-50 20 l boxes in 1878; a factory in 1900 canned about 150,000 cans
127
in one season (New Paltz Independent 1947). In the first few decades of the industry, day pickers harvested the berries, but by the end of the century, pickers moved to the fields for the season, living in tent cities. A whole culture grew up around the huckleberry picking, with families coming back to the same spots year after year (Fried 1995). In addition to harvesting the huckleberries, the pickers took action to improve the yield. Huckleberry bushes produce more berries when they are occasionally burned, and the vegetation of the high ridges where they flourished was especially inflammable. Whenever statistics were collected on ignition sources for fires in the forests of the northeastern United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, berry pickers almost always were included, and the Shawangunks were no exception (EJ June 10, 1871). For example, one fire set by pickers in 1939 escaped from their control and burned thousands of ha (Fried 1995, p. 47). Period of Conservation and Recreation In the late 19th c., hotels or summer camps were built on all four of the large ridgetop lakes Mohonk, Minnewaska, Awosting, and Maratanza. An anonymous writer in 1876 captured the essence of the appeal to tourists as the most interesting locality within one hundred, perhaps several hundred, miles of New York. Many experienced travelers consider them perfectly unique, and one of the most remarkable bits of scenery in the world (Trent 1971, p. 126). Another visitor described a bleaker side of the landscape, after the lumberman had sacrificed the primeval forest the land was left to recover itself, but the beneficent processes of nature have been constantly interrupted by fires that have raged everywhere, often burning deep into the soil and destroying all hope for the future (Pike, 1892). Interest in the region for its natural beauty, mature forests and rare features led to the development of tourism, with especial efforts by the Smiley family who owned much of the northern ridgetop area and landscaped the extensive grounds of three large resort hotels to emphasize their natural beauty. They did this, however, while cutting large amounts of lumber and fuelwood, maintaining uncut stands and strips to preserve the natural appearance of the landscape. At one ridgetop site, a concessionaire capitalized on ice caves, providing not only access, but also lighting for special effects in the caves. Scientists had yet another view of the area. The ice caves were a very unusual geological feature of exposed faults which had created the caves that held ice year round. Some of the highest ridges supported globally rare and threatened dwarf pitch pine vegetation (Favour, 1977; Thompson, pers. comm.). In addition, the area had several stands of oldgrowth hemlock and pitch pine forests, with many trees 300 or more years old (Abrams and Orwig 1995, Cook 1999). In the 1990s, these features stimulated the formation of a consortium of groups interested in maintaining the scientific, scenic and natural values of the area. This group, Shawangunk Ridge Biodiversity Partnership, was dedicated to protect the cliffs, summits and plateaus of the Shawangunk Ridge [which] form a unique landscape of extraordinary ecological significance (Brochure, ca 1995). The Partnership, however, also acknowledged that a vibrant local economy was essential to carry out their conservationist goals. The main problems now were not resource extraction, but rather the role of fires, whether they were a positive or negative force in the globally rare communities, how to control and enhance tourism, and the maintenance of the open space. The scattered though intense extractive industries and the early growth of the tourist trade had left a landscape rich in rare species on a naturally appealing landscape of cliffs, waterfalls and ridges. Conclusion Over the last 3 centuries, the matrix of the Shawangunk landscape has shifted from all forest to a mix of forest and agriculture, with most agriculture located in lowlands east and west of the main ridge. The lumber industry has never driven resource extraction here; local
128
industries and economic interests have had more impact. In the 19th century this was a truly multifunctional landscape, with agriculture, various timber industries, manufacturing, and tourism all taking part. Conflicts seem to have been minimal, while integration was the rule. Glass manufacturing in Ellenville used charcoal produced in the forests of the ridges, while agriculture provided food and livestock. Hoop pole cutting provided barrels for shipping. Farms supplied food and forests fuel for the tourist hotels, and the forests were cut lightly enough to still provide attractive landscapes. Fires were a threat, but they mainly burned areas that were fire prone and not destroyed by them. By the 20th century, agriculture was no generally longer viable as an economic mainstay; many farms reverted to woodland, which supplied fuel wood and other small wood. Fires remained a force until the middle of the century, when effective fire-fighting and restricted them. Concern then began to be voiced that the fires had maintained some of the unique habitats and species, so their suppression was in conflict with conservation. The landscape served fewer diverse functions for people, and became more attractive to the rare species of plants and animals that may have frequented them before resource extraction. Saratoga Battlefield The setting Located along the Hudson River several hundred km north of the Shawangunks, this 1400 ha national park commemorating the battle of Saratoga presents a very different landscape history, with agriculture rather than forestry predominating. It is located on sedimentary clays and sands left by a large glacial lake. The Hudson River has cut a deep channel through these, and has a wide floodplain of rich alluvial soils. Streams flowing down to the river have cut deep ravines. Deposits of glacial drift cover much of the western third of the landscape. With the exception of the ravines and bluffs above the river floodplain, the topography is gently rolling, and the soils are tillable. Witness tree data are not available for this landscape. While it may be tempting to correlate the level of detail with the value of the timber resource, it is more likely that the different systems of land allocation are responsible for the different amount of detail. For this site, survey descriptions did not include trees, only piles of rocks or stakes to mark property boundaries. In the region at large, oaks, hickories and chestnut dominated the forest on the uplands, with more hemlock in steep ravines. Pitch pine may have been locally common on sand deposits and white pine where there had been forest disturbance. Period of biomass harvest and resource extraction We get our first glimpse of this landscape from military maps drawn at the time of the Battle of Saratoga in September and October of 1777 (Wilkinson 1777). The maps, drawn by the British surveyor, shows details of farm clearings and the military camp in the northern part of the battlefield, occupied by British troops. Large fields covered much of the floodplain soils along the Hudson River, while small farms were scattered in the forest of the uplands, mostly on deposits of till. The history of the region suggests that wealthy Dutch settlers had cleared the rich alluvial soils along the Hudson River first, then later colonists from New England had acquired rights to land in the uplands, in smaller parcels (Miscellaneous deeds). Fields here were probably at that time no more than 16 ha (Snell 1949; Russell 1994). Crops included wheat, maize and potatoes, as well as pasture. There were fences around cultivated fields to keep livestock, including sheep, hogs, cattle and horses, out of the fields, while they grazed in the forest. Wood cleared to make farm fields fed local mills which prepared it for building wood as well as selling it to distant markets, and undoubtedly the forest was exploited for fuelwood and other small wood and game (Federal Industrial Census 1820; Hedrick 1933).
129
By the late 19th century, farmers had cleared most of the forest in the region, leaving only scattered woodlots and some forested ravines (U. S. Agric. Census Data). This was a diverse agricultural landscape. Mixed farming prevailed, with wool forming the major cash crop. Local fulling and carding mills processed the wool (Spafford 1924). Field crops included oats, maize, rye, potatoes and wheat, while there was a variety of other produce such as honey, cordwood, hops, peas, beans and fruits (Agricultural Census data). The opening of a canal along the Hudson River provided a market for the wool and other produce. The canal itself served as a market, with a turning basin located at the foot of a major ravine, where mules were sheltered and fed for the night. Sawmills, gristmills and plaster mills operated on some of the streams, though most of the wood for sawing was imported from farther up the river (Russell 1994). The landscape consisted of farm fields separated by stone walls, fences, or banks and ditches. Crops were apparently rotated with pasture, as there was little permanent pasture. Orchards of an acre or so and woodlots of 4-5 ha dotted the landscape, especially in ravines and on other steep banks.. This was a multifunctional agricultural landscape of privately owned, fairly small farms, but one that depended on distant markets for its economic vitality. The amount of actively farmed land decreased slowly after about 1880. By 1927 the proportion of land in open, cleared fields had dropped from 90% to 80% of the land area (1927 Air Photo). Linear patches of forest were common along fence lines and small streams, with larger patches on the steep bluffs above the Hudson River and generally adjacent to older woodlots. While mixed farming continued, many farmers concentrated more on livestock, especially sheep and cows, and the principal field crops were hay and oats for local feed. A local cheese factory processed at least some of the local milk products although much milk was shipped to more distant markets (Bidwell and Falconer 1925). Contributing to landscape diversity was a local industry driven by distant markets: the mining of sand for making forms for casting metal, especially brass. Using less than 1% of the land, this mining left a distinct pattern of soil disturbance (Russell 1995). Period of historical conservation and recreation The late 19th and early 20th centuries saw a growth of interest in memorializing the battlefield, adding a layer of functions to the waning farmland economy. The Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR) inspired and spearheaded a project that erected 22 monuments on the battlefield at key locations, all on privately owned property, and published a guide to these (McGregor 1945). In 1923 a group of local citizens began acquiring the now not particularly desirable farmland for a battlefield park, and later in the decade the State of New York acquired this and additional land for a state park. For visitor use they built picnic areas, replicas of old buildings and other structures. Sheep farming continued, to keep the land open so that the course of the battle could be interpreted from various overlooks. In the 1930s this became the nucleus for the National Historical Park (Russell 1994). Thus as the value of the land for farming waned, interest in it as a memorial park grew. This was fueled in part by general sentiment in the nation at large, and in part by the increasing difficulty of making a living by farming here. Development of the National Park led to major changes in the landscape. Deciding to try to recreate the pattern of fields and forest that existed at the time of the second battle of Saratoga on October 7, 1777, the National Park Service began a program of field abandonment to allow forest to recolonize areas that had been forest in 1777 but were fields in 1940 (Snell 1949). This led to the current landscape, which serves one primary function: memorializing the battle. This involved not only abandoning fields, but also building a tour road and visitor center with parking areas, removing old fence rows and stone walls (which had marked the original land divisions of the early 18th century), razing buildings erected by the state and eradicating orchards.
130
Within the primary function of the park, several secondary functions are embedded. This park serves as public, open space in a region where suburbanization is spreading, so serves many visitors as nature preserve, bike and hiking trails, and other natural park uses. As old fields succeed to forest in the surrounding region, the fields kept open here provide habitat for open-field birds. Archeological excavations are also part of the function of the park. The long and extensive use of the land for agriculture left a legacy of limited seed sources for tree regeneration. In some areas tree regeneration is very slow, whether caused by the lack of seed sources, the changed hydrology due to ditching and plowing the heavy soils, or the high density of deer. White pines seeding from the older stands and American elms seeding from hedgerows are the major tree species, and both are affected by disease, so that they often do not form closed canopy forests. Aspens form large clones with slow replacement by hardwoods. The only old woodlot that is still extant was half logged in the 1960s, and the remaining part grows on part of the landscape that was probably cleared in 1777. Conclusion The fertile soils of this landscape led to its use as farmland, while its location on a bluff above the Hudson River led to its importance for the Revolutionary War. In the colonial period it was a typical multifunctional developing agricultural landscape, with farmers clearing fields for mixed farming, grazing livestock and hunting for game in the forests, cutting timber, and trading along the river. While it was actively farmed, uses were also complex, with mixed farming, woodlots used for a variety of wood products, mills on the streams. Produce was sold or processed locally or most probably traded via the river and later the canal. There was some mining, but it was of limited extent or impact. As agriculture became less profitable and interest in the battlefield grew, the use of the land changed dramatically, so that the value was in memorializing the battle, and funding came from tourists and the federal government. Most fields no longer served to produce salable products, but rather were an expense. Former uses limited the ability of the forests to regenerate where fields were abandoned, and this slow regeneration limits the faithfulness of how the landscape reflects that of 1777, when the forests were tall with a closed canopy. Now they are short and open. General conclusions All three landscapes were forested in 1700. In the Poconos and the ridge of the Shawangunks the forest itself was seen as a resource, which was exploited over the next three centuries. This exploitation never led to complete deforestation or replacement of the forest by open vegetation for more than short periods, but it led to changes in species composition as loggers removed those species that were most valuable at the time, and introduced diseases eliminated others. The forests at Saratoga were also a valuable resource, which was most probably cut for timber as well as fuel wood, but once removed it was not allowed to regenerate. The entire landscape shifted to one of agricultural fields interspersed with small woods, the inverse of the Pocono landscape that had forest interspersed with small fields. In both the Poconos and the Shawangunks farms dominated lowland landscapes. In the Poconos, the forest products served industries and activities generally removed from the local landscape, such as mining in adjacent counties, processing hides shipped in from abroad, and timber for shipment to a distance. This separation of resource use from production most likely led to the disregard for the condition of the forests and the abandonment of land for unpaid taxes. It also led to major changes in species composition of the forest and the impossibility of replacing the prior uses. They were not sustainable as practiced. In the Shawangunks, on the other hand, forest products served more local interests, and ownership of
131
the land was mainly more local. This led to more concern about the land, perhaps, and to repeat use, for example for charcoal, fuelwood, or blueberries. At Saratoga, the farm economy depended on markets far removed from the local landscape, so as these markets dwindled the value of the farmland also dwindled. In all of the landscapes, the value and productivity of the landscape decreased over time in terms of resource extraction, but its recreational value increased as lands nearby became more densely settled and transportation by car the norm. This has led to the current use of all three landscapes primarily for recreation, potentially a more sustainable use. The landscapes that exist today are quite different from those of 1700 because of intervening uses, use of fossil fuels, changing cultural values and economic conditions, which have conditioned the current value of the landscape. Immersing oneself in a landscape and attempting to see it from the viewpoints of many different actors at a time, and different actors over time, provides a basis for evaluating the potential for a complex of different functions to coexist and to build on each other over time (Brgi 1999). While historical sources constrain the level of detail that can be attained, integration of a variety of disciplines can provide templates to understand this shifting mosaic of multifunctional landscapes over time.
Acknowledgments I would like to thank the organizations which have supported this research, especially the U.S. National Park Service, The Nature Conservancy and The National Science Foundation. I would also like to thank Matthias Brgi for use of his data from the Poconos and very helpful comments on earlier version of this paper.
References cited Abrams, M. D. and D. A. Orwig. (1995): Structure, radial growth dynamics and recent climatic variations of a 320-yr old Pinus rigida rock outcrop community, - Oecologia 101:353-360 Anonymous. (1903): Pennsylvanias forest reserves, - Forest Leaves 9:23 Bidwell P. W. and J. I. Falconer. 1925. History of Agriculture in the Northern United States, 1620-1860. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, DC Booth, M. A. (1965): The Delaware and Hudson Canal, - M.A. Thesis, State University of New York College at Oneonta Bowen, E. (1854): Pictorial Sketch-Book of Pennsylvania, - Philadelphia, PA: W. White Smith Brochure, ca (1995): Shawangunk Ridge Biodiversity Partnership Brown, C. T. Jr. (1979): Progress Report on Forestry, - New Paltz, NY: Report to Mohonk Mountain House, 1942, repr., Research Report for the Mohonk Trust Brgi, M. (1999): A case study of forest change in the Swiss lowlands, - Landscape Ecology 14:567-575 Burrowes, TR. H. (1846): State-Book of Pennsylvania .- Philadelphia: Uriah Hunt & Son Considine, T. J. Jr. and D. S. Powell. (1980): Forest Statistics for Pennsylvania - 1978, - USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Resource Bulletin NE65 Cook, E. (1999): tree ring data at www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ftp-treering.html Favour, P. (1977): Boundary Study Report for Ellenville Fault - Ice Caves Registered Natural Landmark, - New Paltz, NY: Smiley Research Center, Mohonk Mountain House
132
Fried, M. (1995): The Huckleberry Pickers, - Hensonville, NY: Black Dome Hedrick, U. S. (1933) A History of Agriculture in the State of New York, - New York State Agricultural Society, Albany, NY Hough, B. F. (1882): Report on Forestry.- Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, USDA. Vol. 3 Huth, P. C. and D. Smiley. (1985): Forest vegetation changes: a plant community in transition - per stirpes, - New Paltz, NY: Research Report to Mohonk Preserve Illick, J. S. and J. E. Aughanbaugh. (1930): Pitch Pine in Pennsylvania - Research Bulletin 2, Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Dept. of Forests and Waters McGregor, J. (1945): DAR markers guide travelers to battlefield, - The Saratogian, Aug. 3. Moss, M. R. (2000): Interdisciplinary, landscape ecology and the Transformation of Agricultural Landscapes, - Landscape Ecology 15:303-311 National Park Service. (1975, 1992): Delaware Water Gap Pamphlet, -n.p. Pennsylvania Department of Forestry. (1902-1915): Reports, - Harrisburg, PA Pike, M. H. (1892): Shongum. -II, - Garden and Forest 241:472 Pleasants, H. (1913): A Historical Account of the Pocono Region of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia: John C. Winston Powell, D. S. and T. J. Considine, Jr. (1982): An Analysis of Pennsylvanias Forest Resources, - USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Resource Bulletin NE-69 Rothrock, J. T. and W. F. Shunk. (1896): Report for 1895, - Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Department of Forestry Rowland, H. B. and W. H. Smith. (1951): Reclaiming Pennsylvanias Desert, Pennsylvania Forests and Waters 3:4 Rupp, A. E. (1924): History of land purchase in Pennsylvania, - Journal of Forestry 22:490497 Russell, E. W. B. (1994): Cultural Landscape History, Saratoga National Historical Park, Boston, MA : Report submitted to the National Park Service, North Atlantic Regional Office Smiley, D. (1986): Resource Industries of the Shawangunks, - Mohonk Preserve Historical/Cultural Note #16 Snell, C. W. (1949): A Report on the Ground Cover at Saratoga National Historical Park, October 8, 1777, - Saratoga NHP, Administrative History Files Spafford, H. G. (1824) : Gazetteer of New York, - Albany, NY: B. D. Packard Thompson, J. (1996): Vegetation survey of the northern Shawangunk Mountains, Ulster County, New York, - Troy, NY: Report to the Nature Conservancy, Eastern New York Chapter Trent, G. D., ed. (1971): The Gentle Art of Walking. A Compilation from the New York Times, - New York: Arno Press Wilkinson, W. C. (1777): The Encampment & Position of the Army Under His Exc.y L. G. Burgoyne, at Swords and Freemans Farms on Hudsons River near Stillwater. Saratoga National Historical Park Williams, M. (1980): Products of the forest: mapping the census of 1840, - Journal of Forest History 24:4-23 Williams, M. (1989) : Americans and Their Forests: A Historical Geography, - Cambridge: Cambridge University
133
"Historical Aspects Multifunctionality in Landscapes" - Opposing Views of Landscape

Kenneth R. Olwig
Geography Department, NTNU, Trondheim's University, Norway
Abstract An explosion of interest in landscape in the humanities and social sciences has created the basis for a "reflexive" conceptualization of landscape. This reflexive approach is used here to generate various opposing views to the landscape scenarios presented in Emily W.B. Russell's paper. This "opposition" concludes with a proposal to rethink landscape in non-scenic terms as a means of facilitating the development of multifunctional landscapes within the context of a non-authoritarian and democratic society. Key Words: reflexive theory, scenery, political landscape, surveillance, cartography, planning
Introduction The role of the "opponent" is to problematize the thesis of the first speaker and to thereby help move the session and conference toward recommendations for continued multi-disciplinary research on the perception and/or measurement of multifunctionality in "landscape." This includes suggestions for the adoption/consideration of multifunctionality in planning and management. The opponent, in this case, is supposed to do this through a response to Emily W. B. Russell's paper with the above title.6 This response will first seek to illustrate the uses of multi-disciplinary approaches in relation to the examples given in Russell's paper. It will then conclude with a discussion of the implications of this approach for planning and management. We have seen an explosion of interest in landscape within the humanities and social sciences (e.g. Barrell 1972; Williams 1973; Barrell 1980; Cosgrove 1984; Olwig 1984; Bermingham 1987; Cosgrove and Daniels 1988; Jones 1991; Bender 1993; Ingold 1993; Mitchell 1994; Schama 1995; Cronon 1995; Spirn 1998). This interest is related to a parallel awareness of the reflexivity of disciplinary knowledge. This means that disciplines do not simply study some external objective phenomenon that is "naively given." Disciplines are rather created during particular historical junctures in which the disciplines themselves are actively involved in shaping their object of study. Michel Foucault helped inspire much of this interest with his brilliant studies of how our notions of such key subjects as language, economy and nature (ecology means the economy of nature) were developed at particular junctures in history and subsequently influenced the course of that history (Foucault 1973). This inward reflexive turn toward disciplinary epistemology and ontology is by no means limited to Foucault's followers. It is now characteristic of just about every serious discipline within the social sciences and humanities including contemporary archaeology and history. This interest also extends to the construction of the natural sciences as disciplines, as seen from the perspective of the social sciences and the humanities. In-so-far-as as the natural
Notes 6 I apologize for the incompleteness of my references. I received the paper a month after the deadline, which meant that I wound up writing this while vacationing in a remote corner of cyber space.
134
sciences tend to define themselves as arising purely through the objective empirical study of objective material phenomena, disciplinary reflexivity is in fundamental conflict with both their ontology and epistemology, and hence difficult for them to broach. 7 The illusion of "natural" science objectivity is much more difficult to sustain in the social sciences and the humanities, where the scholar, as a human being, clearly is implicated as a subjective component of the object of study. Landscape provides an ideal focus for the interest in disciplinary reflexivity because it becomes clear, upon reflection, that landscape is not simply a natural phenomenon that we can perceive and measure from different angles, like a bug under a microscope. The predominant modern meaning of landscape, studies show, was literally constructed at a particular juncture in history within particular social and political contexts. The "object" perceived is thus itself the creation of a particular mode of perception and measurement. In this sense, the landscape is a little like the eye we see in the mirror of the microscope. Landscape, to begin with, is not a word, like quark , or chloroplast, that springs from the natural sciences and is defined by them. Landscape is the common property of the living Germanic languages of Europe, and no individual authority has the power to make the definitive definition. We must live with a word that history has given us, and the populace feels the right to use, because the concept's power in planning and management lies in its mediating position between the realm of technocracy and that of the polity. Philology, however, can make the concept's complexity clearer so that we, as scholars, can develop a more precise conception of this mediating role. Taking this point of departure, it can be helpful to start with the definition from a scholarly English etymological dictionary, that gives the evolution of a word's meaning in the order of its development (Merriam-Webster 1995: landscape ): landscape Etymology: Dutch landschap, from land + -schap ship, Date: 1598. 1 a : a picture representing a view of natural inland scenery b : the art of depicting such scenery 2 a : the landforms of a region in the aggregate b : a portion of territory that can be viewed at one time from one place c : a particular area of activity : SCENE [political landscape] 3 obsolete : VISTA, PROSPECT Emily W.B. Russell's case study of Saratoga National Historical Park provides an excellent point of departure by which to illustrate the implications of the contemporary "reflexive" approach to landscape in relation to the evolution of the word's English meaning as sketched in the above definition. Russell's text also provides a useful basis for exemplifying the implications of this reflexive approach for the subject matter of this conference session. Landscape as Scene of Power The first English meaning of landscape listed above is: "1 a : a picture representing a view of natural inland scenery." Battlefield sites, like Saratoga, inevitably have interpretation centers
7
An example of the lack of reflexivity in the natural sciences is their wariness of footnotes. Footnotes allow for a two tiered text in which complex arguments can be given an extra dimension (for those interested), that does not interfere with the flow of the text. Footnotes also draw attention to the fact that they are part of a text that is largely about other texts, not a naively given segment of "reality." An apparent natural science bias in this conference is suggested by the instructions to authors that they "avoid footnotes" not a good way to attract writers from the humanities!
135
that include interpretative maps, landscape scenes and dioramas illustrating the array (or disarray) of the troops. A later development of landscape's meaning is: " 2 b : a portion of territory that can be viewed at one time from one place." It is typical of such scenic battlefield interpretations that they are viewed from a position far above the action. From a vantage point the "theater of war" is spread out before the spectator in such a way that the chaotic violence of battle, as experienced by the soliders, is reduced to something approaching the logical movements of chessmen across the squares of a map-like and panoramic chessboard. Dioramas are often constructed so that the visitor shares the same commanding panoramic perspective upon the scene as that surveyed by the generals depicted in the painting or diorama. Perhaps the generals, like the viewer, have a map or plan of the battlefield site in hand, and perhaps they are using it to plan their next strategic move through the landscape below. The battlefield scene, I have described above, of a modern visitor sharing the view point of an historic wartime general, illustrates a "reflexive" approach to landscape. This is because the modern viewer is not just sharing the surveillant gaze from a particular concrete elevated ridge or bluff, in a particular place. The viewer is also sharing a particular way of conceptualizing landscape. This conceptualization of landscape was, I would argue, partly constituted through the practice of planning battles in this particular way, according to particular stated and unstated rules. The modern viewer, at an interpretive center, is thus not only looking at an objective representation of a particular event, the viewer is also experiencing a particular interpretation of a particular event that is built into the very concept of landscape represented at the interpretation center. This concept, itself, has its origins in an authoritarian approach to human organization which, among other things, organized the rituals of war in such a way that battles were played out by soldiers who, from on high, were manipulated by generals as if they were so many chess pieces. This mode of conceptualizing landscape is so pervasive that it is easily taken for granted today. It now pervades our very language, where it is common to speak of "commanding" "surveying" landscape views from "vantage" (advantage) points, without giving a thought to the military surveillance origins of these expressions (on surveillance more generally, see: Foucault 1979). The vantage point gives us a visual perspective on the scene of battle, but this perspective also is an expression of a particular point of view that is simultaneously constituted by the mode of perception. Thus, when we conceptualize the battle as represented by the painted landscape prospect or diorama, we are placed within a framework that is bipolar in structure. This approach divides the world into centrally placed individual outsider, whose distanced and elevated gaze controls the scene of action, and hence the mass of insiders . In this case the insiders are the regular soldiers who bodily act out their roles on the field of battle as if in a play hence the expression "theater of war." By accepting this representation, however, we are led to forget that wars, for example, need not be fought that way. Guerrilla warfare is thus "irregular" and against the rules of war, but it can be highly effective, even if it does not lend itself to representation in landscape panoramas. In guerrilla warfare it is difficult to tell the insiders from the outsiders, the generals (if there are generals) and spectators from the fighters and the people. The battlefield site at Saratoga, with its elevated vantage points, is suited to a particular form of war (and social organization), and (not coincidentally) to a particular form of landscape representation and understanding. State Regimentation and the Origins of the Landscape Scene Military interests arguably played a central role in the development of the modern concept of landscape as a portion of territory that can be viewed, as a scene, at one time from one place. The development of the state as a powerful centralized body in the Renaissance was linked, in
136
great measure, to the exigencies of the increasing social presence of a professionalized, state controlled military. The court surveyor, or architect, played an important role in these developments as the designer of evermore sophisticated fortifications and their environs. This required the development of scientific surveying and cartographic techniques that were also applied, as at Saratoga, to the mapping of the fields of battle. It was discovered that by using cartographic methods it became possible, for the first time in modern history, to create pictorial central point perspective "landscape" scenes of places. The court surveyor's talents were not used only for "practical" military ends, but also for ideological purposes, as when they were employed to create the first modern theaters staged with a perspective scenic illusion. The theater became the vehicle by which the court could envision, and promote, the perspectives offered by a centralized state organized according to rational, strategic, plans (a plan being a synonym for map), like those of the military. The stage was structured with a floor plan upon which the scenery was constructed and this provided the setting upon which the drama was played. The head of state was given a commanding perspective on the scene from a throne placed at the point where the lines of perspective converged on the audience. From here the head of state could, in certain forms of court theater known as a "masque," oversee each progressive change in scenery as a vision of the progress made by the material body of the state under central rule (on the above, see: Olwig forthcoming a.). As Rgis Debray reportedly put it: "Because nobody has ever either seen or heard a state, a state must, at any price, make itself visible and let itself be heard : It is the theater of the state which creates the state, just as the monument creates memory."8 In England, the court used the theater to support the absolutist ambitions of James I of England, and his desire to unite the geographical body of Britain as one state under his natural law. One of James' enthusiastic supporters in this endeavor was his chancellor and legal advisor, Sir Francis Bacon. Bacon did everything he could to thwart the power of Parliament and supplant the particular bodies of customary/common law (that divided England and Scotland) with rational and universal statutory law based on "natural" principles. Bacon's ideal state was an autocracy advised by a college of scientists. The power of this "sciental" state to transform the environment, and hence society, was envisioned by the court through the use of landscape scenery in the court theater. According to Stephen Orgel, a leading authority on the Renaissance masque , this form of theater sought to envision "among the promised benefits of the new learning the most fabulous wonders . . . : dominion over the seasons, the raising of storms at will, the acceleration of germination and harvest." The masque was thus "a celebration of this concept of science, a ritual in which the society affirms its wisdom and asserts its control over its world and its destiny" (Orgel 1975: 55). In the masque the spectators, particularly the monarch on his throne of state, overtakes the role of the general in a battle, commanding a scene, orchestrated by his lieutenants (the court architects and planners). Contemporary cartographers called their atlases "theaters" and a playhouse could be called "the Globe." "All the world" came to be seen as a vast "stage," to paraphrase Shakespeare, upon which the historical drama of the nation state was to be played. This conceptualization of landscape embodied a temporal scene by scene, stage by stage, progressive narrative development that eventually stimulated the modernist idea that science and the state would be able to pave the way for the progress of society through the manipulation of the landscape scene (Olwig forthcoming b.). What is interesting to us, is that landscape scenery, from the very beginning, was connected to a project involving a strategic alliance between Baconian scientist/technocrats and the state to command the landscape (and with it the people). It is disquieting, in this light, to consider that it was also part of a project to install absolutism and the expense of parliamentary democracy and common law.
8
Unfortunately, I do not have access to the reference for this quote.
137
Landscape as the Theater of War The landscape at Saratoga National Historical Park is almost literally that of a theater of war. Its stage has been set and managed by the (armed) rangers of the United States National Park Service, dressed in uniforms resembling the garb of Teddy Roosevelt's elite "Rough Riders" in the imperialist Spanish American war. Such battlefield sites also provide the stagelike setting for costume drama reenactments, as well as the model for dioramas and other theatrical interpretive devices. Saratoga memorializes a new American Nation's critical battle against their external British overlords, thereby underlining the role of regular military organization in the birth of the nation. The Saratoga landscape provides the stage upon which this new nation was supposedly baptized in fire and became one with the soil upon which its blood had fallen in battle. Once baptized, according to the familiar national narrative, "manifest destiny" would then lead the American nation west, bringing civilization to landscapes hitherto populated by wild and nomadic savages (Boime 1991). This imperial destiny, ordained by God and Nature (capitalized, like God) was to be memorialized in the world's first National Nature parks, and it was here the earliest rangers needed to use their guns to defend American nature lovers from the "Indians" a native people that was relegated, in name, to a foreign continent (Olwig 1995b). By using a reflexive, interdisciplinary approach, drawing, among other things, on art history, literary history, legal history and geographical history, I have sought to provide, above, some background for understanding the social importance of the Saratoga "landscape." This approach is "reflexive" in that it shows that the way landscape is defined, as scenery, is part and parcel of the way a nation state defined itself, in terms of a natural geographical body, as "American." The American continent was thus defined as the landscape scene upon which a national identity was to be built and the national drama to be played out. In this building process the conquest of the geographical body of the American continent, and with it the "uncivilized" Indians , not to mention the Spanish Mexicans, was central to the formation of national identity. This, of course, was a further development of a theme already staged by the court of King James I when England subordinated Scotland and conquered Ireland. America was at one and the same time a territory, defined literally by the map's lines of longitude and latitude, and a landscape scene beckoning its population toward the infinite spaces and possibilities of its western horizon (Boime 1991; Cronon 1992). Much as the "British" nation derived its identity from the landmass of the British Isles, the Americans derived theirs from the landmass of America and to this day, if you are born on American soil you are automatically an American citizen. Once one begins to grasp the role of landscape scenery in the formation of American national identity, it becomes easier to understand the significance of the Saratoga landscape described by Russell. It becomes clearer why fortunes have been spent, and the local citizenry's lands appropriated, and the memory of their cultural landscape erased, in order to re-create the landscape stage upon which the battle at Saratoga was fought. This landscape, as known from military maps, has been staged by the National Park Service, to set the scene for a particular, privileged, story of national development. From various "overlooks" the visitor attains a top down commanding view of the scene of battle from above, as if he or she were a sentry or general. This is a story which was initially enshrined and monumentalized (22 monuments were built) by a notoriously chauvinistic, elitist, quintessentially WASP White Anglo-Saxon Protestant organization known as the Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR), before the battlefield became the property of the National Park Service. The landscape, of course, could also be used to tell other stories. The Revolutionary War may be over-rated. Today, for example, the political rights of U.S. citizens and Canadians are comparable, yet the Canadians never fought a revolutionary war. One also has to wonder whether a Mexican wetback, living as a second class citizen in the
138
American State of New Mexico, feels that it was God's and Nature's "manifest destiny" that the American Southwest was taken from the Mexicans? There are different ways to "Remember the Alamo." Perhaps America is, more importantly, the story of differing peoples learning to live peacefully together, than it is a story of battles and conquest fought to secure the landscape scene? Russell's presentation suggests that such a story might also be told about the Saratoga landscape, with its long heritage of multi-ethnic settlement. As a landscape, Saratoga is generic for countless similar sites in the world, such as Denmark's National Dybbl Battlefield Site near the contemporary border between Denmark and Germany. This carefully landscaped battlefield monumentalizes the struggle to define the border between Denmark and Germany. It was the site of a Danish victory over German troops in 1848, and a Danish defeat in 1864. This struggle was not just waged militarily, but also by scholars, who battled to show that it was their nation state that had grown, stage by stage, out of the natural landscape and soil of the land dividing Denmark and Germany, thereby legitimizing the hegemony of their particular nation state. Germany, at this time, was much in the position of 17th century Britain and 18th-19th century America, as a state consolidating its territorial identity as a nation. The Germans, like the Americans, used natural boundaries to define their territorial prerogatives, and this is one reason why they saw peninsular Jutland as naturally belonging to Germany. The Danes, on the other hand, used the dividing line of the Eider River as their natural demarcation. Blood and soil nationalism, in which the nation, following the tenets of environmental determinism, was seen to grow and expand, stage by stage, out of the landscape, was not peculiar to Germany, but the Nazi excesses of W.W.II gave Germany, and landscape with it, a particularly bad name. This approach to landscape, unfortunately, is undergoing a revival due to the nationalistic reaction against globalism, internationalism, and population mobility, that has led to a revival of blood and soil nationalism in ecological guise. This is illustrated by the arguments of Professor Bent Muus, a prominent member of a number of major Danish and world nature organizations. He has termed the "adulteration" of the Danish "fauna, flora and landscape" by non-native species an "abomination." Muus' call for floral and faunal authenticity recalls the racism and nationalism identified with eugenics at a time when Danish racism and xenophobia, often linked to "landscape values," is becoming increasingly manifest on the national political scene a phenomenon that is by no means limited to Denmark (Lowenthal 1994; Lowenthal 1996). Muus argues, however, that: "The suppressed aversion of many Danes to the immigration of greater numbers of Asians and Africans is due, in reality, to the intellectually analogue situation that immigrants, in their appearance and culture, are not authentic North Europeans." "But this is not," Muus claims, "racism in the negative sense, it shows, on the contrary, respect for cultures" (Muus 1996). It helps, when evaluating the claims of biologists like Muss, to have a reflexive understanding of the landscape concept's history and its links to suspect theories of racial hygiene and eugenics (Grning and Wolschke 1985; Grning and Wolschke-Bullmahn 1987; Tokar 1988; Groening and Wolschke-Bulmahn 1989; Groening and Wolschke-Bulmahn 1992). The concept of landscape, in my opinion, can provide wonderful insights into society/nature relations, if used critically, but it is important that it not be discredited, as happened after W.W.II through misuse in projects of questionable scientific validity and dubious social merit (Framke 1979; Olwig 1996a). Landscape as Narrative One problem with the conceptualization of landscape as a series of layered scenes is that the very structure of this conceptualization implies and structures a narrative, whether or not one is conscious of this. In some cases, the fact that one emphasizes the stage by stage
139
development, upon a given natural foundation, tends to imply a form of evolutionary soil to blood environmental determinism. This approach makes the spatially inscribed vertical process of development seem "natural," whereas "horizontal" processes of change, coming from outside the parameter of a supposedly "naturally" bounded territory, are seen to be unnatural. This approach underplays the enormous social and environmental importance of spatial interaction, while playing up the "authentically" native (and inbred). Insight into the sometimes hidden workings of such structures is provided by the development of discourse and narrative theory in the humanities and social sciences (Mitchell 1981; Bruner 1986). This theory can thus help explain how the changing landscape scene can provide the framework for a story that will tend to be interpreted, consciously or unconsciously, in relation to a number of familiar structural patterns such as that of comedy or tragedy. Such insight, in turn, provides a means of guarding against the inadvertent ideological misuse of landscape research. Part of the problem with such narratives is that they can easily provide a subconscious pre-structure for the way landscape change is represented and interpreted. It might thus be argued that Garrett Hardin, in his influential environmentalist tracts, tells the story of the commons as a "tragedy" because this is compatible with a larger conception of the stages of human development held by Hardin (and conservative Americans more generally) (Hardin and Baden 1977). For this reason, he interprets the landscape of the commons in a way that fits the structure of a tragedy. There are those, however, who cogently argue that Hardin's interpretation is a distortion of history (McCay and Acheson 1987).
Multifunctional Landscapes and Multidisciplinary Insights In Emily W.B. Russell's study of multifunctional landscapes, Saratoga National Historical Park provides a particularly apt example of the use of landscape, conceived as scenery, as the stage setting for a national historical narrative. Russell's example from the Pocono plateau of northeastern Pennsylvania, on the other hand, tells a somewhat different sort of narrative of the "interrelationships among the different players" (Russell 2000: 1). Here the baseline is not landscape of Revolutionary America, but the distant era when the plateau's "basic natural" geological features were formed. These natural features, in turn, are of interest because of the way they are seen to have affected the use and perception of landscape, thereby determining the constraints for subsequent landscape layers. Russell presents the Pocono plateau as an area where external economic forces have been allowed to exploit indigenous resources. This has apparently resulted in the creation of a relatively monotonous landscape that resists multifunctional usage. The Pocono plateau provides the negative background against which the more positive multifunctional situation of the Shawangunks is measured. In the Shawangunks, we are told, the control over the environment has been much more locally based and small scale, while benefiting, at the same time, from the interest of a large estate owner, the Smiley family, in landscape gardening. In this way a "truly multifunctional" landscape developed that in the 1990's has aroused the interest of a consortium of environmentalists, called the Biodiversity Partnership, dedicated to the protection of the "'unique landscape'" with its "'extraordinary ecological significance'" (Russell 2000: 4-6). Russell does not discuss, in this paper, what she means by landscape in relation to the differing meanings of landscape, thus leaving it to the reader to reflect on her use of the concept. The reflexive approach to landscape, outlined above, can be of help in this situation, precisely because of its reflection upon the historically situated meaning of landscape as a concept (rather than a naturally pre-given object). It can be useful here to discuss Russell's use of the word landscape in the light of the dictionary, as quoted above. A philologist or historian of ideas, using the techniques of discourse and narrative analysis, might note that
140
Russell describes the landscape as something that is "seen" from differing "viewpoints" by "different actors" or "players" (Russell 2000: 9, 1). Her language thus suggests that she has adopted the scenic notion of landscape (definitions 1a,b, 2b, 3) upon whose stage we are all players. This fits with her presentation of the landscape in terms of a geological stage floor, with varying layers of vegetation and culture developing, in stages, upon this surface. Each stage is seen to be interesting because of the way it effects "how people have seen and used the landscapes at different times" (Russell 2000: 1). Russell's landscape is not just a scene, it is also a bounded unit (definition 2a) , although the principles and criteria used to define the landscape's boundaries are unclear. Are they political, as in the case of Pike County, Pennsylvania, or are they geological, as in the case of the Shawangunk Mountains? This confusing of the physical and political character of landscape is not new, as has been seen. There seems to be a hidden natural moral imperative in Russell's landscape structure. The landscapes that are seen to reflect positive qualities of multifunctionality and biodiversity are those that have developed endogenously, primarily on the basis of local interests and values. Negative qualities, be they human or natural (e.g. diseases), are almost always identified with exogenous factors, such as the growth of cities, transport, trade, "luxury" tourism and capitalism.
Landscape Narratives The landscape scenes described by Russell might be interpreted as the setting for differing narratives with characteristic structures, such as that of comedy or tragedy in theater. The story of Pike County might thus be viewed, using modern narrative theory, as a story of environmental declension, in which an environment tragically loses diversity through the workings of alien forces (Merchant 1995). The literary theorist might call it a "negative pastoral," in which an initially virginal and Edenic landscape is transformed into a negative image of itself (Olwig 1981). In this story, the pre-settlement landscape, though rugged and poor, was authentic and diverse, like the mythic hills of ancient Arcadia in Greece, the home of pastoral poetry. Rapacious timber barons, however, rapidly destroy this landscape, leaving it to urban tourists for whom it is "at least superficially more natural landscape than the congested suburbs farther south and east" (Russell 2000: 3). Studies of declensionist forms of environmental narrative have remarked upon the way such narratives tend to structure the treatment of some "facts" while causing others to be overlooked. These studies have recently had considerable impact showing that such narratives, be they from the "Dust Bowl" of North America, the forests of Eastern Africa or the eroding slopes of the Himalayas, have had a tendency to exaggerate the positive qualities of the past, while overplaying the negative qualities of the present (Worster 1979; Leach and Mearns 1996; Slater 1995). This sort of narrative structure seems to be at work in the telling of the story of a Pike County that was "nearly stripped of its valuable timber" by 1846, then cut over and burnt to the degree that vast areas are described as being "a picture of desolation and depopulation." The unspoiled nature of Pike County manages, however, to be stripped, and denuded of its virgin landscape several times, and this weakens the narrative's credibility. Thus, we are told that, at the beginning of the 20th century, the county, despite its environmental rape , still somehow managed to retain "the only bodies of original timber within the Commonwealth [of Pennsylvania]." This virginal "primeval forest" is then replaced by Babylonian "luxurious hostelries and commodious dwellings" and the depredation of record lumber production (where does all this wood come from?) (Russell 2000: 1-4). Personally, when I compare the dreary climes described by Russell, with the beloved Pike County of my youth, I begin to wonder about what has been left out of her narrative, such as the Native Americans, liminality, rites of passage and, oh yes, sex!
141
Native Americans, Liminality, Rites of Passage and Sex! It is curious to note that none of the examples given by Russell mention the Native Americans, though their former presence is suggested by names like Shawangunk , Pocono and Saratoga. Adding the Native Americans, perhaps, would have muddied the neat narrative from nature to culture presented in Russell's scenarios. For the Native Americans, of course, these landscapes would not be authentic pristine nature, but a culturally shaped environment (Cronon 1983). This was as true prior to white settlement, as it is now. Human beings (including both Native Americans and modern geo scientists), as creatures of culture, can only know nature through culture (even natural science is a form of culture). Students of the concept of nature know that one of the classic ways in which humans define the natural is through rites of passage. For the Native Americans this might have been an initiation rite, by which the youths were brought out into the margins of their territory, where they crossed not only a physical boundary (limen), but also a social boundary between childhood and adulthood (and hence also into sexual maturity). It is here, on the margins of society, that the initiates explore their inner nature, as well as the nature of their attachment to their collectivity and its environment (Turner 1974; Olwig 1995a). We still engage in rites of passage, of course. For some of us, as Boy and Girl Scouts from East Coast urban working class districts, the vicinity of the Poconos along the Delaware, was the location of the camps where we were initiated into nature (and the lore of the Native Americans) (Olwig 1985). For us, this was, and is, nature , even if Russell finds it lacking in "old growth forest" (a notoriously slippery concept) and deems the area only "superficially" more natural than the "congested suburbs" we ourselves called home (Russell 2000: 3). The Poconos, however, are primarily famous for another rite of passage involving nature, the honeymoon. This is the place where ordinary people from New York and Philadelphia have gone to spend their honeymoons in designated resorts that specialize entirely in providing just the right natural setting for post-nuptial sex (on landscape and sex see: Olwig 1993). If the Poconos attracted urban scouts and ordinary honeymooners, the rich and educated had classier "natural" places to go to, following the upper class trail of Teddy Roosevelt. These were more exclusive and tasteful natural sites, but never too far from a comfortable, well-landscaped lodge in which to bed down. The most notable East Coast example of this is the Shenandoah National Park. This area was a cause clbre for the elites of Washington DC, much as Yosemite was for the elites of San Francisco, with George Freeman Pollock, and the Potomac Appalachian Trail Club, playing an analogous role to that of the Sierra Club. Much as the emparkment of Yosemite meant the eradication of its Native American population and the loss of their cultural landscape, the "restoration" of the Shenandoahs' nature involved the uprooting and removal of several thousand mountaineers (450 families) who had dwelled in the area since the Eighteenth Century (Pollock 1960; Reeder and Reeder 1978: 69-87; Heatwole 1992: 27-44). Winding through the new nature of the park, the 470-mile long mountaintop Skyline Drive, stretching from the Great Smokies to the Shenandoahs, provides a modern American equivalent of the scenic paths that wind through the landscape parks of British landed estates. As with their British forebears the road links a progression of scenic spots from where the motorist can stop and survey a countryside framed by nature (Pollock 1960: 211-233; Heatwole 1992: 27-43 Wilson, 1992 #746: 33-37). There is even a countryseat of sorts in the park. This is Pollock's resort called Skyland, where those who can afford it can still recreate in genteel surroundings. The role of Pollock and Skyland in the Shenandoahs' appears to be analogous to that of Smiley and his three resorts, including(?) the Mohonk Mountain House, in the Shawangunks. The emparkment of the Shenandoahs has been so successful that the area is now seen to be a wilderness and moves are being taken to severely restrict the recreative use by ordinary campers. We all have our ideas of what is authentic nature, and they usually say more about our social background, than
142
about the innate qualities of the areas we designate to be nature. Nature, after all, is probably the most value-laden word in our language.
Paradise Regained? The Poconos case study provides the negative narrative foil against which the reader is led to measure the Shawangunks in Russell's paper. The story of the Shawangunks is not that of paradise lost, but paradise regained through the wonders of science (Merchant 1995). This is a narrative with roots in ancient myth, but its most famous incarnation is no doubt that of Bacon's Atlantis. In this modern version, due to the locally oriented small scale economy of this area, and the presence of a wise estate owner (a classic figure in 18th Century British Whig ideology) with a taste for landscape aesthetics, this area was spared the depredations visited upon the Poconos. It became instead "a truly multifunctional landscape, with agriculture, various timber industries, manufacturing, and tourism all taking part. Conflicts seem to have been minimal, while integration was the rule" (Russell 2000). Times have changed, however, and agricultural land has been abandoned and paradise is threatened. Fortunately, a consortium of environmentalists, the Shawangunk Ridge Biodiversity Partnership , is poised to attack the problem from its ridge top vantage point. The noticeable attraction, evinced by this paper, of scenic elevations to environmentalists is curious, given the fact that when it comes to biodiversity (a notoriously nebulous concept) stinky, fetid, buggy, flat, non-scenic, counter-functional environments like swamps are probably the more important. One problem with the paradise regained through science narrative is that there is a lot of evidence to the effect that scientific management, be it of sea or of land, rarely works as well as it is supposed to, and is often quite disastrous. The world is littered with examples of failed scientific management schemes ranging from those of the former "Eastern" Europe to the forests of Germany to the game reserves of Africa (Scott 1998). Part of the problem is that the complexity of historically generated human environment relations, that create valued environments, is often well beyond the comprehension of scientists and managers who seek to preserve or develop these environments. In this case, the Shawangunk Ridge environmentalists recognize the need for a "vibrant local economy" (Russell 2000: 6), but one wonders how well they are equipped to help generate such an economy? I would suggest that rethinking the concept of landscape might facilitate insight into how societies sometimes succeed in generating multifunctional and diverse environments.
Rethinking Landscape The example of the Saratoga Battlefield provides an interesting counterpoint to the example of the Shawangunks. Here, a multifunctional and diverse, biologically and culturally rich environment developed that was not planned by wise estate owners, or batteries of ecologists. It developed, instead, through a long period of agrarian settlement going back to the Dutch farmers, and, no doubt, to the Native Americans before them. I would suggest that environmental historians could learn a great deal about past human/environment relations by explicating the past not just in terms of what we mean by such terms as landscape and nature , but also in terms of what the people of the past meant by these terms. The case of the Dutch is particularly interesting here because the dictionary tells us that the word landscape entered the modern English language from the Dutch, who spelled it landschap . If we could have asked the Dutch settlers what they meant by landschap they probably would not have described it as a layered scene built upon a geological foundation.
143
To the Dutch, as to other speakers of Germanic languages, the primary meaning of landscape was something approaching what the Merriam-Webster dictionary defines as: "c : a particular area of activity : SCENE (political landscape)" in which "scene" means "the place of an occurrence or action" (Merriam-Webster 1995: landscape, scene). Landscapes, put simply, were generally historically generated quasi-independent countries or polities that were usually organized on the basis of customary law, rooted in social practice, as formalized by representative legal bodies (Olwig 1996b). In such institutions active agents represented the land or country through discourse (hence the word parliament) with other representatives.9 The notion of landscape as historical polity, rooted in customary law, provides a poor framework, unlike the scenic concept of landscape, for a unilinear, stage by stage, narrative story. The law of custom is based on the constant conscious interpretation and reinterpretation of multiple narratives rooted in precedent and concrete practice, in which humans, not the landscape scene, is the active agent. The Netherlands were thus essentially a union of lands or landscapes organized according to principles in which power devolved to those local bodies best able to plan and manage in a given situation. It could be argued that it was the ability of these lands to manage complex systems of dikes and drainage that not only created the dry land upon which the Netherlands were largely built, but which also strengthened their position against the encroachment of jealous authoritarian inland centralized states. The Netherlanders, of course, were not inbred homebodies, confining themselves to a "natural territory." They were inveterate traders and travelers, and that is why we find them as the earliest white settlers of Saratoga. If we come down from the commanding viewpoint afforded by scenic mountain ridges (balloons, spy-planes and satellites), and if we begin to root our arguments in human law and history, rather than natural law and bedrock, then we may be able to develop an approach to landscape that can help us to understand the significance of, for example, Pike County, Shawangunk or Saratoga, as landscapes defined by people, rather than by God, Nature or National destiny. Thus, if we want to understand how pre-park Saratoga developed into a multifunctional and environmentally diverse place, it would be useful to understand how the Dutch, and later settlers from the British Isles, developed customs and common laws for the organization and management of this complex environment. This approach to landscape has, of course, much wider applicability today, when, especially since the formulation of Agenda 21 at the Rio conference, the emphasis in environmental policy and planning has been placed upon local initiative.
The Planning and Management Imperative As I have suggested above, differing conceptions of landscape are historically related to differing ideals of government and polity. Landscape is not an objective, God given entity, or a Ding an sich , but a way of conceptualizing the world that has developed through human history. Conceived as scenery, landscape was well suited to the Renaissance state's desire to plan and manage an ideal realm in accordance with what it defined as nature. Landscape scenery provided a visual means of comprehending a hierarchically and rationally planned and managed state. This planning ideal was propounded to counter to the "unnatural" rule of
Many of the quasi independent polities within Schleswig were such "landscape" countries (spelled Landschaft in German). The largely Frisian landscape territories along the coast of the Wadden sea survived through centuries through their ability, as political communities, to manage a complex wetland environment that environmentalists now see to be of enormous biological, as well as cultural, importance (Olwig 1996).
144
custom, as embodied in Parliament. The historical origins of these differing ways of thinking about the organization and management of landscape are still pertinent. The reflexive approach to landscape that has developed recently can be interpreted as a response to the failures of modernism's centralized, technocratic state planning and its grand narratives of unilinear progress through stages of development (Olwig 1999; Olwig in press). The critique of landscape as the expression an authoritarian outsider's, topdown, perspective is similarly linked to the search for alternative ways of thinking about landscape. These critical reflections are highly pertinent to the issue of how we think about environmental management and planning. Agenda 21 and various related "alternative development" strategies are providing an alternative to the top-down approach, but neither modernistic planning, nor the centralized nation state that fostered it, are dead. In many places today state bureaucracies are tightening their grip on academic research, and erasing former distinctions between applied governmental and basic academic research institutions. State agencies generally expect researchers to provide unambiguous "scientific" data suitable for central state planning and management, and this conflicts with the scholarly imperative to think critically and reflexively. A rising European tide of national xenophobia has simultaneously given new impetus to national romantic conceptions of landscape as scenery. It is imperative that researchers reflect on the planning and management implications built into the very concept of landscape, and use this reflection to foster multifunctionality within a diverse, and democratic, political landscape.
References Barrell, John (1972): The Idea of Landscape and the Sense of Place. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Barrell, John (1980): The Dark Side of The Landscape: The Rural Poor in English Painting 1730-1840. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bender, Barbara [ed.] (1993): Landscape: Politics and Perspectives. Oxford: Berg. Bermingham, Ann (1987): Landscape and Ideology: The English Rustic Tradition. London: Thames and Hudson. Boime, Albert (1991): The Magisterial Gaze. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press. Bruner, Edward M. (1986): Ethnography as Narrative. In: Turner, Victor; Bruner, Edward [eds]. The Anthropology of Experience. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, pp. 13955. Cosgrove, Denis (1984): Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape. London: Croom Helm. Cosgrove, Denis; Daniels, Stephen [eds.] (1988): The Iconography of Landscape. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cronon, William (1983): Changes in the Land: Indians, Colonists, and the Ecology of New England. New York: Hill and Wang. Cronon, William (1992): Telling Tales on Canvas: Landscapes of Frontier Change. In: Prown, Jules David, [ed.]: Discovered Lands, Invented Pasts. New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 37-87. Cronon, William, [ed.] (1995): Uncommon Ground: Towards Reinventing Nature. New York: Norton. Foucault, Michel (1973): The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. New York: Vintage. Foucault, Michel (1979 (orig. 1975)): Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (orig. title Surveiller et punir). Harmondsworth: Penguin. Framke, W. (1979): Rager den tyske geografis udvikling den faglige diskussion i Danmark?: Et debatoplg. Aarhus: Geografisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet.
145
Groening, Gert; Wolschke-Bulmahn, Joachim (1989): Changes in the philosophy of garden architecture in the 20th century and their impact upon the social and spatial environment. Journal of Garden History, Vol. 9 no. 2, pp. 53-70. Groening, Gert; Wolschke-Bulmahn, Joachim (1992): Some Notes on the Mania for Native Plants in Germany. Landscape Journal, Vol. 11 no. 25, pp. 116-126. Groening, Gert; Wolschke-Bulmahn, Joachim (1985): Die Landespflege als Instrument National-sozialistischer Eroberungs-politik. Arch +, no. 81, pp. 46-59. Grning, Gert; Wolschke-Bulmahn, Joachim (1987): Politics, planning and the protection of nature: political abuse of early ecological ideas in Germany, 1933-45. Planning Perspectives, Vol. 2, pp. 127-148. Hardin, Garrett; Baden, John (1977): Managing the Commons. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman. Heatwole, Henry (1992): Guide to Shenandoah National Park. Luray, Virginia: Shenandoah Natural History Association. Ingold, Tim (1993): The Temporality of Landscape. World Archaeology, Vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 152-172. Jones, Michael (1991): The elusive reality of landscape. Concepts and approaches in landscape research. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift; Vol. 45, pp. 229-244. Leach, Melissa; Mearns, Robin [eds.] (1996): The Lie of the Land: Challenging Recieved Wisdom on the African Environment. London: International African Institute in ass. with James Currey. Lowenthal, David (1994): European and English Landscapes as National Symbols. In Hooson, David [ed.]: Geography and National Identity. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 15-38. Lowenthal, David (1996): Possessed by the Past. The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History. New York: The Free Press. McCay, Bonnie J.; Acheson, James M. [eds.] (1987): The Question of the Commons: Culture and Ecology of Communal Resources. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press. Merchant, Carolyn (1995): Reinventing Eden: Western Culture as a Recovery Narrative. In: Cronon, William [ed.]: Uncommon Ground: Towards Reinventing Nature. New York: W.W. Norton: 132-159. Merriam-Webster (1995): Collegiate Dictionary. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster. Mitchell, W.J.T., [ed.] (1981): On Narrative. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Mitchell, W.J.T. [ed.] (1994): Landscape and Power. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Muus, Bent (1996): Eftermiddagens indlg, Professor Bent Muus, Zoologisk Museum. In: Vibeke Andersen [ed.]: Natursyn: Milj- og Energiministerens konference med organisationerne om natursyn, KolleKolle, Copenhagen: Milj- og Energiministeriet, Skov- og Naturstyrelsen, pp. 40-41. Olwig, Kenneth R. (1981): Literature and 'Reality': The Transformation of the Jutland Heath. In: Pocock, Douglas C.D. [ed.]: Humanistic Geography and Literature. London: Croom Helm, pp. 47-65. Olwig, Kenneth Robert (1984): Nature's Ideological Landscape: A Literary and Geographic Perspective on its Development and Preservation on Denmark's Jutland Heath. London: George Allen & Unwin. Olwig, Kenneth (1985): At vandre ud i naturen og ind i sig selv: Friluftsliv og identitet i Aquehonga. Jordens Folk: Etnografisk Revy, Vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 183-190. Olwig, Kenneth Robert (1993): Sexual Cosmology: Nation and Landscape at the Conceptual Interstices of Nature and Culture, or: What does Landscape Really Mean? In: Bender, Barbara [ed.]: Landscape: Politics and Perspectives. Oxford: Berg, pp. 307-343.
146
Olwig, Kenneth Robert (1995a): Landscape, landskap , and the body. In: Nilsson, Jan Olof; Linde-Laursen, Anders [eds.]: Nordic Landscopes: Cultural Studies of Place. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers, pp. 154-169. Olwig, Kenneth Robert (1995b): Reinventing Common Nature: Yosemite and Mt. Rushmore-A Meandering Tale of a Double Nature. In: Cronon, William [ed.]: Uncommon Ground: Towards Reinventing Nature. New York: W.W. Norton, pp 379-408. Olwig, Kenneth R. (1996a): Nature Mapping the 'Ghostly' Traces of a Concept. In: Earl, Carvill: Mathewson, Kent; Kenzer, Martin S. [eds.]: Concepts in Human Geography. Savage, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 63-96. Olwig, Kenneth Robert (1996b): Recovering the Substantive Nature of Landscape. Annals of the Association of American Geographers Vol. 86, no. 4, pp. 630-653. Olwig, Kenneth R. (1999): The Destruction and Construction of Place: Landscape, Utopian Displacement and Topian Identity. In: Slettan, Dagfinn; Maehlum, Brit; Stugu, Ola Svein [eds.]: Stedet som Kulturell Konstruksjon. Trondheim: The University in Trondheim. 27: 53-74. Olwig, Kenneth R. (forthcoming a.): Landscape, Nature and the Body Politic: From Britain's Renaissance to America's New World (working title). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Olwig, Kenneth R. (forthcoming b.): Landscape, Place and the State of Progress. In: Sack, Robert David [ed.]: Progress (working title). Baltimore: John's Hopkins University Press. Olwig, Kenneth R. (in press): Landscape as a Contested Topos of Place, Community and Self. In: Hoelscher, Steven; Adams, Paul; Till, Karen [eds.]: Textures of Place. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press. Orgel, Stephen (1975): The Illusion of Power: Political Theater in the English Renaissance. Berkeley: University of California Press. Pollock, George Freeman (1960): Skyland: The Heart of the Shenandoah Nation Park. n.p.: Chesapeake Book Co. Reeder, Carolyn; Reeder, Jack (1978): Shenandoah Heritage: The Story of the People Before the Park. Washington, D.C.: The Potomac Appalachian Trail Club. Russell, Emily W.B. (2000): Historical Aspects Multifunctionlity in Landscapes. Multifunctional Landscapes: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Landscape Research and Management, Centre for Landscape Research, University of Roskilde, Denmark. Schama, Simon (1995): Landscape and Memory. London: Harper Collins. Scott, James C. (1998): Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. New Haven: Yale University Press. Slater, Candace (1995): Amazonia as Edenic Narrative. In: Cronon, William [ed.]: Uncommon Ground: Towards Reinventing Nature. New York: W.W. Norton, pp. 114-131. Spirn, Anne Whiston (1998): The Language of Landscape. New Haven: Yale University Press. Tokar, Brian (1988): Social Ecology, Deep Ecology and the Future of Green Political Thought. The Ecologist, Vol. 18, no. 4/5, pp. 132-141. Turner, Victor (1974): Dramas, Fields and Metaphors: Symbolic Action in Human Society. Ithica: Cornell University Press. Williams, Raymond (1973): The Country and the City. New York: Oxford University Press. Worster, Donald (1979): Dust Bowl: The Southern Plains in the 1930s. New York: Oxford University Press.
147
Historical ecology of Dutch cultural landscapes

Joep Dirkx
Wageningen University and Research Centre, Alterra, The Netherlands. e-mail: g.h.p.dirkx@alterra.wag-ur.nl
The historical grown variety in Dutch cultural landscapes is disappearing rapidly, causing a great loss of regional identity. Landscape planning has not been able to stop this. The great efforts the Dutch government is making to develop an National Ecological Framework, in order to stop the loss of natural values, also does not stop the decrease of landscape quality. The fact is that the main target of the framework is to restore nature, not to increase the identity of cultural landscapes. In some cases nature restoration even caused loss of landscape identity. At this moment the sense is growing that it might be more effective to associate nature conservation targets with a reinforcement of landscape identity. A helpful source of information to realise this, turns out to be historical ecological research. It provides knowledge of the relation between the great variety in historical cultural landscapes and the natural values that used to be associated with them. The results help to decide about the relevance of landscape patterns and elements and their potential for nature conservation targets. In the paper this will be illustrated with the results of one or two casestudies.
Integrated Assessment of Historic Landscapes in England, Wales and Germany

Ian Spears Landscape planners at the University of Rostock have developed a methodology for the evaluation of historic landscape components, including their ecological distinctiveness and contribution to landscape quality. Through appraisal of the archaeological and ecological dimensions of sites in Germany and England, the value of an integrated approach to the assessment of historic landscapes has been examined. To further develop the German methodology the project explores the interaction between ecology and archaeology and assesses the human impact on the landscape by identifying the processes of change. These have been conducted by undertaking a number of different levels of study. At the widest level, broad correlations between archaeology and ecology have been examined using county databases. At the site level plant distributions have been recorded and archaeological assessment undertaken to evaluate the intricate associations between plant species and archaeological features. The surrounding landscape of some of these sites has also been considered so that they can be set in a broader historic landscape context. The results of the project show the value of an integrated approach to the study of historic landscapes by demonstration the association between archaeological features and plant species.
148
149
IV. Draft on Recommendations on Interdisciplinary Landscape Research
150
151
Second draft of Recommendations for Interdisciplinary Landscape Research Workshop No. 1: The landscape from vision to definition
Proposed by Brbel & Gunther Tress
Centre for Landscape Research, University of Roskilde, P.O. Box 260, DK-4000 Roskilde, E-mail: baerbel@ruc.dk and gunther@ruc.dk, http://www.geo.ruc.dk/vlb/bgt
In collaboration with Zev Naveh, Grigoriy Kostinskiy, and Olaf Bastian.
Problems in current landscape research
(1) Landscape is a subject of research in many disciplines: architecture, arts, biology, economics, geography, geology, history, law, philology, philosophy, physics, planning, psychology, sociology, and others. Each discipline has its own interests and preferences in investigating landscape issues. In some disciplines, landscape is a more central issue than in others. However, landscape research is seldom seen as an opportunity for collaboration among disciplines. On the contrary, a given academic discipline frequently looks for its own piece of landscape. This is a valid approach, resulting from different academic traditions. But academia cannot shut out the outside world. Landscape research faces demands and challenges from society, government, and the economy, which seek answers to their questions and problems. The complexity of the real world and its environmental problems cannot be solved by any single discipline. Until now, the answers to these questions largely came from single disciplines or at best from two or more closely related disciplines. At present, the complexities involved in understanding, planning, and managing landscapes prevent single disciplines from solving past problems and facing future challenges. Communities, legislators, industry, business, local stakeholders, and the public at large demand much of landscapes, based on differing concepts of landscape and its processes. Landscape research can help solve these conflicting demands. In order for future landscape research to meet the challenges with which it is faced, it must be approached as a common effort by all disciplines.
II
General recommendation: The need for a transdisciplinary approach in future landscape research
(2) If scientists intend to make a significant contribution to the solution of the abovementioned problems and conflicts, they have to break down the tacit infrastructure and rigid boundaries of scientific thought and specialisation in the academic and professional disciplines in which they have been educated. Future landscape research should be holistic, oriented toward problem-solving, and rooted in systems theory with its integrative and complementary approach to thought and action. (3) Future landscape research demands a transdisciplinary approach that goes beyond the efforts of interdisciplinary research. In interdisciplinarity, attempts are made to hybridise two or more disciplines, but the goals remain mostly within the framework of disciplinary research. It operates on a single level despite the multiple goals of these. Classical landscape
152
ecology has depended on interdisciplinary work, which has resulted in many cases in the transfer of methods from one discipline to another. In transdisciplinarity, by contrast, we cross different disciplines, as the prefix trans indicates, and go beyond them, to reach a higher level of integration. Driven by the imperative of unity of knowledge, transdisciplinarity aims to study unified global reality. Although it is organised according to the multiple goals of different disciplines, it works toward a common, overarching purpose on a higher system level. Transdisciplinarity has its theoretical foundation in the systems view. To reach consensus on the overarching supergoal is imperative and it can be achieved only if all members of a research team share a similar holistic worldview with a broad conceptual foundation and meta-theory on the multifunctional and mutually reciprocal roles of landscapes in nature and human society. (4) The realisation of transdisciplinary landscape research demands reflection and revision of all disciplines approaches and methods. All disciplines have to re-orient themselves to develop common research strategies. The ability to re-orient and to reach the abovementioned consensus, and to collaborate in the framework of a well-coordinated team is one of the greatest difficulties and obstacles for transdisciplinary research. (5) All disciplines can contribute to such a strategy and all disciplines are needed. No one discipline predominates over the others or possesses the right definition and interpretation of landscape. The sciences, social sciences, humanities, arts, as well as physical planning, should not be seen as competitors. On the contrary, they should all contribute to problemsolving associated with the understanding, planning, and managing of landscapes. Landscape ecologists in multidisciplinary research team have dual roles: they serve as specialists in their own fields and, more importantly, as integrators of other team members. (6) Transdisciplinary landscape research should not only consider academic traditions, but also local and ethnic/cultural traditions, the interests of stakeholders, and those of the public at large. (7) Landscape research should be considered a service to society . To maximise the benefits resulting from landscape research findings and to ensure their widespread application, such research must stress practice, not academic theory. The results must be relevant to planning and management, and must be promoted by different media. Researchers must ensure that the results of their efforts are available to the public and decision-makers. (8) Everybody involved should be aware of the fact that transdisciplinary research is more difficult and therefore demands more time and money than any other type of research. As such, special efforts must be made to bring its importance and necessity to the attention of local, regional, and international institutions and persons with the resources to sponsor research.
153
III
Specific recommendations regarding landscape theory and its application
For workshop no. 1 The landscape from vision to definition, a common effort rests on the answers to the following questions: a) How can we define landscape for future landscape research? b) How can we include/consider the multifunctionality of landscapes in a transdisciplinary approach to landscape and landscape research? c) How can we arrive at a transdisciplinary approach to future landscape research? a) Towards a definition of landscape for future landscape research (9) The term landscape has various meanings depending on the context in which it is used. In a biological context it has a different meaning than in the context of sociological research. Geology uses landscape in a different manner than cultural studies. Use of the landscape in the arts may vary from its usage in politics, law, or planning. Numerous visions and definitions of landscape exist. Progress in landscape research will depend on the development of a definition of landscape that is not just borrowed from any one discipline, but rather represents several visions. (10) Several variants on such a definition should be discussed; one working variant is proposed here. Landscape represents conjoined natural and cultural components articulated on the earths surface, which possess corporeal integrity and semantic unity. By corporeal integrity we mean an intelligible construction that functions seamlessly in our consciousness as an external to human beings continual environment. (11) The Total Human Ecosystem is suggested as a guiding conceptual principle for the holistic meaning of landscape. It is the overall entity, the sum of all global landscapes, in which the human is integrated into his/her entire environment including all living organisms and their total environment. (12) Landscapes should be regarded as holistic systems, which consist of the physical geosphere and biosphere and the mental noosphere. These three fields are closely related and influence one another. (13) Therefore, landscapes are multi-dimensional. The mental dimension of landscape is as important as its physical (spatial) dimension. Neither physical processes nor human actions nor human perceptions alone shape the landscape. Physical processes and human activities, taken together with human attitudes toward them, shape and create the landscape at several levels from the smallest landscape unit (the ecotope) to the largest global landscape of the ecosphere, the Total Human Ecosystem. (14) Landscapes and humans developed together in a co-evolutionary process. Landscapes would not exist in their present shape without human influence. Therefore, humans should not be considered merely as external disturbances, but as creative individuals.
154
(15) A mutual relationship exists between people and the landscape. Not only do people influence the landscape, but landscape also influences people. This co-dependency is the most important linking factor between natural- and human-oriented sciences in landscape research. (16) Landscapes are not static; they change constantly. Contrary to the homeostatic climax idea, landscapes are dynamic and are changing constantly and slowly through time together with the biological evolution of their natural elements. Landscape evolution occurs much faster insofar as it intersects with the cultural evolution of human society and the dynamic interactions between humans and landscapes, especially since the Industrial Revolution. The rate of change is becoming more and more rapid due to growing human influences. These dynamic changes in landscape pattern and processes are important characteristics of landscapes.
b) Towards a consideration of multifunctionality in a transdisciplinary approach (17) The expression multifunctional landscapes refers to the different material, mental, and social processes in nature and society that take place simultaneously in the landscape and interact accordingly. Multifunctionality in landscapes means the co-existence of ecological, economic, cultural, historical, and aesthetic functions. Although there are different ways to classify landscape functions, all lead to the same conclusion that landscapes are multifunctional. (18) In general, landscape research must recognise that all landscapes have the potential to be multifunctional, but to different extents. But often multifunctionality is overlooked in the interests of promoting one function and subordinating all others. Such landscapes may be called monofunctional, even if they have the potential to be multifunctional. (19) Landscape multifunctionality is not synonymous with multiple land uses. Different land uses can be a criterion for multifunctionality in landscapes, but a single land use can involve numerous functions. Different land uses can result in different functions, but not all functions can be expressed as land uses. Agricultural used land has, for example, economic, aesthetic, and recreational functions, but only one land use, namely, agriculture. (20) Depending on the individuals perspective, different functions can come to the fore in the same landscape. A farmer looks at an agrarian landscape in a different way than a tourist or a painter. A young person may not have the same perception of a landscape as an old person. A person with certain knowledge about this landscape may see different functions than a person without that knowledge. The position and perspective of individuals play an important role in the perception of multiple functions. From a contextual systems point of view, all these different perceptions should be recognised. One of the important tasks of landscape research is, insofar as possible, to provide tools for optimising these functions to yield maximum benefit for nature and human society. (21) When applying a transdisciplinary approach to future landscape research, methods and tools must be appropriate to the characteristics of landscape multifunctionality. Research methods should not only consider land use, land cover, distribution of landscape elements, and functional demands on a given landscape, but also the individuals perspective on it and the plurality of its functions. Landscape multifunctionality cannot only be surveyed with quantitative measurements, but must also be evaluated using qualitative assessment tools.
155
(22) Multifunctionality is not only really a question of scale. It may seem easier to identify multifunctionality on a larger scale, but it is possible to discern multifunctionality even on smaller scales. One must ask whether it is advisable to focus only on land use when looking at landscape functions. While the recreational or aesthetic functions of a large agricultural or urban area can hardly be identified on a large scale, a smaller scale can reveal these distinctions. (23) Landscape multifunctionality supports the principle of sustainability, which aims at integrating ecological, economic, and social functions. Multifunctionality can further sustainable development. (24) Finally, we have to conclude from all the different points mentioned above that study and evaluation of landscape multifunctionality depends on a complementary transdisciplinary approach. c) Towards a transdisciplinary approach to future landscape research (25) There is general consensus that a landscape consists of both a natural and a cultural dimension, often regarded as diametrically opposed to one another. The perceived division between nature and culture has divided the academic world into a group of researchers in the sciences, which concerns itself with landscapes natural dimension, and a group of researchers from the humanities, arts, and related disciplines that deals with cultural phenomena. In the case of landscapes, this divide is counter-productive and must be rejected. A first step towards transdisciplinarity is mutual acceptance of attitudes and views as a precondition for collaboration. The systems view has been developed as a perceptive and scientific window through which we are able to look at complex ecological and societal phenomena within the observed context. This contextual window view is highly relevant to transdisciplinary landscape research. (26) To develop transdisciplinary research strategies, each discipline must critically discuss theories and methods they have applied recently. Only a critical review of past research can open new perspectives for future research. Transdisciplinary landscape research demands teams of researchers made up of people representing different interests in society. (27) Considering the distinct positions and perspectives of individuals toward landscape and its functions, it is impossible for a single researcher to thoroughly investigate landscape multifunctionality. Therefore, groups of researchers should work together. Each of them should seriously consider this limitation when starting new projects. (28) Experiences in transdisciplinary research projects have to be collected and must be available for all partiesnot just scientists, but also politicians, planners, and other decision makersinterested or involved in future landscape research. To improve the interchangeability of research efforts, we suggest the foundation of an international discussion and information group on transdisciplinarity that could assist in future landscape research. A network must be built in which common problems of transdisciplinary research can be discussed and experiences exchanged. (29) Results from future landscape research must be published and promoted in a way that makes them available and useful for academics outside specific disciplines, decision-makers, and the general public. The communication process among scientists and others has to be
156
given much higher priority. Discussants must give up fixed positions and embrace open dialogue. (30) If we wish to promote our holistic, future-oriented transdisciplinary approach in landscape ecology, we must expend much more effort on education, not just research, toward this goal.
157
First draft of "Recommendations on Interdisciplinary Landscape Research" Workshop No. 2: Monitoring multifunctional terrestrial landscapes
Prepared by Jesper Brandt
Centre for Landscape Research, University of Roskilde, Bldg. 19.1, P.O. Box 260, DK-4000 Roskilde, e-mail: brandt@ruc.dk
1. Integrating trends in the growing need for terrestrial landscape monitoring Terrestrial landscape monitoring is still at the foundation stage, mostly seen in a goal-oriented context of a biologically oriented terrestrial monitoring for nature-policy purposes. It should however widen to a broader perspective, since there are many important development trends these years that merges together in an interest for monitoring at the landscape level. One should be aware of these other aspects that might support the monitoring, which is often an expensive, time-consuming and organisationally complicated activity. Among these trends the following should be mentioned: 1. A growing understanding of the connection between a variety of environmental problems and land use processes has been recognised at the political level resulting in different types of direct or indirect regulations of land use and its intensity. Since this connection however obviously differs between different types of landscapes at different geographical levels, a linkage of environmental monitoring to a landscape-oriented land use and landcover monitoring is more and more recognised. 2. Landscape-related regional and local differences in population density, in intensity of economic activities as well as in traditions concerning the management of the culturally transformed landscape, offers different opportunities and obstacles in solving environmental problems. The resulting differentiation in economic activities and environmental problems will give rise to economic, social and political tensions that has to be studied also in a context of on-going changes in landscape structure and function. 3. Recent changes in agricultural policy seems to give rise to a general shift in land use strategy in many types of agricultural landscapes, often described as the post-productivist transition. Within this frame, a productivist phase of intensivation, concentration and specialisation resulting in growing contradictions between the natural structure and dynamics of the landscape and a monofunctional and homogeneous type of land use seems to be gradually replaced by a trend towards extensivation, diversification and dispersion of land use activities, that furthers a more multifunctional land use, where each function is less intensive and thus more landscape-adapted than hitherto. It is however probable that the productivist and post-productivist strategy will develop parallel and mutually, which only deepens the need for systematic studies of the trends that in any of the two cases will influence and be influenced by the different conditions given in different types of landscapes. 4. The technological changes of the productivist phase of modern agriculture were often characterised by labour-saving investments, not sensitive to a differentiation in environmental and landscape conditions. So, in general this type of 'non-spatial' technology has often focused on the shaping of common environmental conditions, not only furthering the segregation in land use and monotonisation of agrarian landscapes, but also ignoring the landscape dimension within planning and management in general.
158
Especially the development within information technology has recently changed this situation, so that todays land use technology is much more oriented towards the economical as well as ecological advantages of adapting the land use processes to the landscape conditions. This development will indeed also influence the trend of the postproductivist transition. 5. Regional planning in the productivist phase was often supporting the 'non-spatial' technology by economic support for homogenisation of environmental conditions in form of melioration, farm amalgamations etc. as well as zonal legislation, giving regional or local priorities to intensive monofunctional types of land use. Along with the postproductivist transition and the changing technological possibilities, growing endeavour for more sophisticated types of direct or indirect land use regulations develop, gradually replacing the former tradition of planning for a segregated land use. This is however only possible if a better understanding of the linkage to differences in landscape conditions are known and recognised, and the conflicts related to these matters are better regulated. 6. Finally trends in urbanisation processes towards much a more dispersed pattern of settlement and economic activities can be observed. This is primarily linked to the development in transport technology and networks, but also trends in information technology, growing amount of leisure time and dissatisfaction with the environmental and social conditions in the existing urban areas (e.g. many cottage settlements) is given rise to urban sprawl that in different ways calls for a more multifunctional use of our landscapes. All these trends are giving rise to considerable changes in land use and land cover as well as in the natural and social functions of our landscapes. Whether these changes are developing in a direction towards a more sustainable use and management of our landscapes is an open question. It should however be suspected that both positive and negative trends can be found and that trends related to both changes and landscape functional consequences can be related to natural, socio-economic and cultural characteristics of landscapes nested together at different levels. An overall goal for terrestrial landscape monitoring should be to detect such trends in a systematic and reliable way. A monitoring of multifunctional terrestrial landscapes include additionally the thesis that the systematic monitoring of different aspects of landscape functionality might add to the understanding of ongoing landscape changes and widen the possibilities for the formulation of policies for a more sustainable use of our landscapes. Based on the experiences developed mainly through landscape-ecology-oriented research on landscape surveillance gradually developing towards a '1. generation terrestrial landscape monitoring', a variety of preliminary guidelines for the further development of monitoring of multifunctional terrestrial landscapes can be stated. Three different main areas for recommendations for future research can be derived: a. The need for strategic conceptualisations for the monitoring system, making it possible to integrate variables and indicators in a way that can support policy- or managementgoals. b. The need for the development of a dedicated landscape model, related to basic categories on landscape (multi)functionality, including a classification of functions that can take into account both more or less well-formulated policygoals and more long-sighted perspectives. c. The need for organisational models ('handbooks') for multifunctional landscape monitoring systems that can catch the variety of detailed, but important experiences on the development and maintenance of such monitoring systems.
159
2. The need for strategic conceptualisations for the monitoring system To support policy- and management goals, a landscape monitoring system should go beyond the detection of changes in the state of the landscape and reflect information on landscape processes, including its socio-economic aspects. Although landscapes and also historically developed cultural landscapes - functions as integrated systems, where all parts can be mutually dependent on each other, problems of landscape management can often be conceptually linked to an environmental disturbance chain. Such chains should be reflected in the monitoring system. Models like the Pressure State Response (PSR) Model of the OECD or the Driving forces Pressures State Impact Responses (DPSIR) Models used by the European Environmental Agency (EEA), are examples to be transformed into a landscape context. Although short-termed specific policy goals might dominate the immediate demands on a landscape monitoring system, these should be subordinated more broader goals linked to a long-sighted maintenance of the landscape monitoring system that will increase its value considerably. 3. The need for the development of a dedicated landscape model If emphasis shall be given to the opportunities to include functionality-shifts and other functionality-considerations in the monitoring system, these aspects have to be integrated at all levels. Basically it will be necessary to develop a. a hierarchically structured classification of landscape functions with a basic division into ecological functions for the maintenance of the integrity of the landscape system and related ecosystems, and socio-economic and cultural functions related to different types of land-use more or less adapted to the landscape. b. A functionality-relevant landscape classification system of natural land units, land cover and land use, supporting a time-dimension in the allocation of spatial functionality. c. A system for analysis and description of functional potentials of natural land units that allow for a systematic analysis of the spatial conformity of land use and management with the natural conditions. Integrating the functionality-classification in a time-sensitive landscape model will allow for a spatial distinction between three main different types of multifunctionality: a. Multifunctionality as a spatial combination of different functions related to separate land units. b. Multifunctionality as different functions devoted to the same land unit, but separated in time, typically in a certain cycles. c. Multifunctionality as integration of different functions at the same or overlapping land units, at the same or overlapping time. Since a land use segregation strategy is based on a systematic implementation of type a eventually related to a zoning that furthers a simplification of the spatial land use pattern even this strategy will express a certain multifunctionality, that increases with the spatial level of registration. A land use integration strategy should however rather follow the technical and social possibilities for spatial integration of functions based on flexible, 'soft' or extensive ways of land use, thus of type c, where the degree of multifunctionality is less related to the spatial level of registration.
160
Due to chorological connections between most functions in landscapes, integration of or conflicts between different functions will however exist in all three types of multifunctionality, with the degree of multifunctionality much related to the chorological structure of the functional land units, and a clear distinction between the three types will probably be difficult. A supplementary analysis of landscape multifunctionality should be related to a spatial analysis of boundaries between different functions in the landscape ('functional ecotones'). 4. The need for organisational models ('handbooks') for multifunctional landscape monitoring systems A system for monitoring of multifunctional terrestrial landscapes has to be based on extremely strict scientific principles. Due to the complex scientific character, and to the complicated organisational way of data collection and storage there will be a strong need for systematic collection of experience from scientific practise devoted to the development of landscape monitoring systems. Among guidelines already collected the following should be mentioned: a) Remotely sensed earth observation data is an indispensable source for landscape monitoring. Either air photos or recent developed satellite data with high geometrical resolution are indispensable tools by the detailed preparation of the survey, by the survey of many types of land cover, by the detection of many different types of structure and changes and for the extrapolation of results derived from a landscape monitoring system. Due to the detailed character of much ecological oriented landscape information and due to the need of integrating functional information related to land use, a landscape monitoring system has however basically to be performed through detailed field surveys. b) The extent and components of the total landscape being monitored must be explicitly stated as a baseline for the monitoring, to sharpen scope, accuracy and statistical confidence in any results or descriptions. c) For economic, time-, and organisational reasons landscape monitoring has mostly to be based on a very limited sample of the total area surveyed. The targeting of samples is crucial to maximise returns on effort, and should in general be related to an appropriate and statistically rigorous stratification. d) All land units, land covers and land uses within each sample area should be surveyed in a mutually exclusive way to allow for comparable time-series analysis. No types of units should be omitted. e) The same sample locations should be revisited, so that real change can be recorded, and the time between surveys should be long enough to allow change. f) Since surveys has to be based on interdisciplinary teams with different experiences and altering from survey to survey all terms and methods should be fully explained in a field handbook, and a clear communication between all involved should be established and controlled, e.g. through field training courses that can ensure a standard level of expertise for surveyors/interpreters. g) Standard methods of recording that minimise modifications, additions and subjective decisions and judgements among the field workers should be established for all types of
161
information collection. Decisions and judgements should be made in the field, not by the data storage. h) The very different approaches for the monitoring, ranging from remote sensing to detailed ground photos, and from field surveys and to interviews and archive searches can be difficult to standardise and integrate. It is however important to combine different sources of information to maximise their strengths. By reclassifications, and by data-correction related to later observed data-errors different information sources (e.g. air and ground photos) can be a necessary support. i) Data-control should be an inherent part of the monitoring system. This should not only be related to field survey checks, but also by systematic control in connection with the data storage. Integrated GIS-layer model that can support detailed time-series analysis of the monitored data, can be an important tool for the successive control and improvement of data quality among different stages of the monitoring process. By result communication, accuracy should be tested through quality assurance exercises and results guided by descriptions of confidence where possible. Due to the complex character of landscape dynamics, result should preferably be presented in a variety ways.
j)
162
First draft of "Recommendations on Interdisciplinary Landscape Research" Workshop No. 3: Biodiversity versus landscape diversity in multifunctional landscapes.
Proposed by Line Magnussen1 , Hans Henrik Bruun2 , Henning Adsersen3
Botanical Institute, Univ. of Copenhagen, ster Farimagsgade 2D, DK-1353 Kbenhavn K E-mail: 1 linem@bot.ku.dk, 2 hanshb@bot.ku.dk, 3 adser@bot.ku.dk
Biodiversity has become an issue of concern for all parts of landscape studies. The formulation of the concept landscape diversity is an expression of this interest. In the context of multifunctional landscapes landscape diversity may be one of the key stone concepts. One reason for the focusing on biodiversity - understood as biological diversity is that diversity measures are holistic attributes of complex systems. Within biology, systems that may be studied are hierarchically organised, and holistic diversity measures may be attributes to any of the hierarchical levels: genetic diversity is an attribute of a population, species diversity is an attribute of an ecosystem, and ecosystem diversity is an attribute of a landscape. All the three mentioned biodiversity measures are specifically highlighted in the Rio convention. Biodiversity as a formulated concept appeared in the eighties, but nevertheless, biodiversity was a focus of ecological studies during the last half part of the 20th century, especially on the genetic diversity and species diversity level. Paradigms have arisen, methodologies have been developed and the principles have been applied in practice. Biodiversity has therefore the status of a well-defined concept with a certain background of scientific thinking and research. Biodiversity as a concept encompasses the multitude of biological expressions within a certain level of the biological hierarchy. It can be expressed in terms of diversity indices that are analogous or comparable to condition descriptors as entropy from thermodynamics or information from cybernetics. Biodiversity is often considered a multistructural concept but as the elements considered (genes, species, and ecosystems) are functional biological units there is a strong multifunctional bearing in the use of the word. The title of this workshop, by the use of the conjunction versus, seems to allege differences between biodiversity and landscape diversity. One obvious difference is that landscape diversity has no such basis with a tradition and a generally known conceptual frame as biodiversity. This difference is an appetising challenge to this workshop: we may tread new trails and influence future understanding of landscape diversity. It is important that the workshop addresses other, more substantial questions: 1.Can we construct a landscape diversity concept that is a holistic measure of an attribute of a landscape or a region that has any relation to other holistic measures (e.g. biodiversity) that can be assessed reasonably precisely that can be used in comparative procedures (monitoring (time-time) or inventorying (space-space)
163
2. How much of the theories and experiences about biodiversity can be applied on landscape diversity the biogeographical approach: gene flows, migration of species, ecosystem succession the resource-dimension diversity approach: population size versus genetic diversity, area or energy availability versus species diversity, age versus diversity the diversity - stability approach: are diverse systems more stable or are stable systems more diverse? the intermediate disturbance and intermediate fertility hypothesis: diversity has a bellshaped relation to disturbance and to fertility. 3. In the context of the multifunctional landscape approach, what is the value (or virtue) of biodiversity and of landscape diversity? 4. How can we in practice influence biodiversity and landscape diversity of a region? 5. The organisms constituting biodiversity are under the constraints of genetic laws, life cycle traits, and ecologically caused evolution, migration and extinction self-replicating biologically without interference of man. Due to this, biodiversity possesses natural sustainability. Human impact may impede this process severely. How do we ensure that some landscapes or landscape elements remain undisturbed, so that regional sustainability can be achieved also in terms of biodiversity?
Preliminary recommendations After a thorough consideration of these questions, and discussions with colleagues at home institutions and at the conference, we hope that the participants in workshop 3 will agree on explicit recommendations to a research strategy on the topic of the workshop. The organising committee of the conference has asked the workshop guides to propose a series of preliminary recommendations. It should be stressed that this procedure is meant as an aid to prepare and structure the discussion, not as an attempt to present a pre-approved manifest. During the whole period till the conference our Emails will be open to responses from you. We have chosen to group the recommendations according to the questions above: Ad 1. In the search for a meaningful concept and measure of landscape diversity, the following issues should be scrutinised: multistructurality versus multifuntionality diversity versus heterogeneity versus complexity should landscape diversity include biodiversity, geodiversity and perhaps diversity of interactions with culture? should landscape diversity be a within landscape or a between landscapes measure?
Ad 2. A landscape diversity concept should be evaluated in relation to other holistic measures of complex systems, and analogies and differences should be critically examined. Theories of
164
disciplines treating complex systems could be of strong interest for multifunctional landscapes. Among such theories could be mentioned: Ecology (biodiversity) Cybernetics (information) Thermodynamics (entropy) Linguistics? (semiotic measures?) Economics? (???)
Ad 3. Objective 1 of the Rio convention is to conserve the maximum possible biological diversity for the benefit of the present and future generations and for its intrinsic value. In a multifunctional approach it becomes a challenge to assess the mentioned benefit and intrinsic value of biodiversity. As far as landscape diversity encompasses ecosystem diversity, the Rio convention will oblige landscape management as well as wildlife management. As a consequence: Multifunctional landscape research should comprise studies and assessments of benefit to man of biodiversity and landscape diversity Multifunctional landscape research should comprise studies and assessments of intrinsic values of biodiversity and landscape diversity
In biodiversity conservation, the concepts of authenticity and rarity or uniqueness play a large role. These concepts fall partly under the intrinsic values. There are many examples where these concepts are related to low rather than high biodiversity Multifunctional landscape research should set up criteria for assessment of landscape authenticity and rarity/uniqueness Multifunctional landscape research should examine the relationships between these concepts and landscape diversity. Ad 4. Technology offers almost unlimited possibilities to manipulate with biodiversity and landscapes. Somebody may interpret multifunctional landscape management as landscapes manipulated in multiple ways. Irresponsible or careless use of technology may disturb or destroy landscapes and their biodiversity, but on the other hand well-planned and careful technology use may help to limit adverse effects on undisturbed landscapes and help restoration of damaged landscapes. Multifunctional landscape research should contribute to assess good technological practice and good management practice whenever technological (incl. biotechnological) enterprises have effect on the landscape scale Multifunctional landscape research should participate in identifying technologies applicable to landscape restoration or reclamation.
Ad 5. There are many organisms and ecosystems that are extremely vulnerable to disturbance. A multifunctional approach to management of the landscapes they inhabit may be deleterious. In fact many severe conservation problems are due to over-exploitation or to management that try to exert too many functions in the same landscape. Some conservation problem may only be solved by exclusion of human entrance and impact.
165
It should be acknowledged within multifunctional landscape research that a high degree of multifunctionality may have adverse or deleterious effects on biodiversity and landscape diversity. It should be acknowledged within multifunctional landscape research that in order to preserve the biodiversity of some landscapes they need to be without human interference. It should be acknowledged within multifunctional landscape research that biodiversity and landscape diversity exist, sustain and evolve also where there is no multifunctional management.
166
Second draft of "Recommendations on Interdisciplinary Landscape Research" Workshop No. 4: Complexity of Landscape Management
Berit Hasler and Ulf Kjellerup Commented and supplemented by Eirik Romstad, Marianne Penker and Roman Lenz. These preliminary recommendations embrace statements and discussion points regarding some of the problems and disciplines associated with the complexity of landscape management and regulation. Regulation and management of landscapes are complex, both because of the multifunctional character and definition of landscapes, and because of the manifold disciplines involved in both practical management and landscape management research; e.g.. landscape planning, geography, economics, law and sociology. A basic problem regards how multifunctionality in the open countryside can be, and are viewed, from the different social and/or crossdisciplinary sciences, because these different disciplines and approaches results in different recommendations regarding management and regulation as well as further research. Focus on the workshop is on the use of regulatory and non-regulatory instruments - efficiency - participation and compliance from the view of these different social sciences. Because agriculture is a major land use factor in many countries, focus is concentrated on the multifunctionality of agricultural landscapes. The basic understanding of the statements and discussion points in a regulatory- and informalperspective and framework is intrinsically linked to a simple functional model consisting of four basic elements:
Goals/objectives Regulatory and non-regulatory Instruments Output Outcome Goals or objectives can be interpreted as targeted values in landscape and nature policies. Regulatory and non-regulatory instruments consist of e.g. permissions, prohibition , preservation, planning/ zoning, economic incentives, information and voluntary agreements, and the term "output" consist of behavioural changes induced by the regulatory and non regulatory instruments, as well as public services of landscape management. The term outcome consists of intended and unintended changes in landscape and nature quality from the agents behaviour and from public services, as well as the consequences for the economy and institutions. This term is important because the incentives in the policy can be efficient with respect to behavioural changes, but the effectiveness regarding the nature and environmental objectives can be low, because of a lack of knowledge in our understanding of the relationship between intervention and management, and landscape quality.
167
If it is difficult to find verifiable environmental goals (i.e., it is costly or technically difficult to measure these goals), changes in agent behaviour can be used as a proxy. This is a "secondbest" setting, and one must take care not to mix-up changes in agent behaviour with achievement of the ultimate environmental goals. 1. Taking different disciplinary approaches into account, but also different management practices, multifunctionality can be regarded: (a) A specific goal or objective for the policy and instruments implemented, or (b) A consequence of the implementation and integration of different policies, e.g. agricultural, recreational, landscape, nature and resource protective policies. In other words multifunctionality can be regarded an integrated outcome of these policies. One example of (a) is the suggestions of cross compliance policies for both production and environment within the agricultural policy in EU. An example of (b) is that the agricultural price policy influences the attributes of landscapes as both selection of crops, husbandry production etc. are affected i.e. permanent and extensive grasslands are a by product of a certain husbandry production, extensive cattle production. The two approaches (a) and (b) will apparently influence the efficiency of the policies in different directions. From an economic point of view (a) will not lead to an efficient regulation and management, but as some policies result in multifunctional attributes coming across, multifunctionality has to be discussed and analysed from the (b) perspective. In other words, multifunctionality can be regarded a feature of the production of multiple products (the multi-production function). From the perspective of management and regulation (policy) the major problem is that only some of the attributes are currently paid for, mainly the private good components like yields. The presence of unexpected or adverse effects from one policy (e.g. the price policy) on other policies (e.g. environment and landscape policy) is inherent in many policy contexts and production systems to varying degrees. From this point of view the efficiency of all the policies involved depends on how well one is able to utilize the inherent linkages. One other aspect is that it is imperative for policies that incentives to reach these goals are clear. More specifically discussion points are: 2. Different perspectives and disciplines points at various regulatory and non-regulatory instruments as efficient to attain goals of landscape management and/or goals of multifunctionality. As efficiency can be defined from many perspectives, this discussion includes discussions of efficiency from the scope of the different sciences (social sciences) involved in the workshop. From an economic perspective parts of this regard how to pay producers for the production of multiple products, including the efficiency problem of paying for nature production/nature and landscape amenities. If transaction costs, i.e. administrative and information costs, are not too high, direct "performance" payments, i.e., paying directly for producing the public goods in question is preferred. The parallel is easily seen in nonpoint source pollution, where the firstbest solution is penalizing decreases in ambient quality, the "second-best" is penalizing
168
emissions, and the "third best" is regulation agricultural practices (like fertilizer taxes, catch crop requirements, etc.) Another part regards if nature/landscape amenities should be produced publicly or privately, and if it is possible to create efficient markets for all products. Most of the landscape amenities display public good characteristics that make it difficult to have an efficient private demand side, and most of these amenities must be paid for via public budgets. 3. If multifunctionality is a goal or a product itself, or should be interpreted as a mix of products created in the same area/landscape, as a result or "by-product" of integrated or separate policies, it can be discussed and analysed from theoretical, disciplinary perspectives. But it can also be discussed within more empirical settings and frameworks, e.g. involving examples from national policies to illustrate consequences of these two approaches and or/ international analyses involving WTO, the CAP. When multifunctionality happens as a by-product, it is certainly a good idea to focus on certain landscape qualities, and leave other, more site specific, for nature protection and explicit nature policy. If one goes through existing public policies in many countries one sees that this kind of separation exists, as rare landscapes of high value are protected as national parks, nature preserves, etc. In other countries the production of nature goods are more reliant on the agricultural policy, as important nature and landscape values are tied to development of the agricultural production. This happens in countries where agriculture are area consuming compared to other types of land use. 4. With respect to the recommendations for further landscape research from the perspective of management and regulation, the need for conceptual and empirical models can be stressed. These can be top-down or bottom-up approaches, disciplinary or integrated social and environmental/landscape ecological analysis. Within landscape and integrated environmental/social science research there are several examples pointing out that it is a possible, but a difficult and time consuming task, to establish credible interdisciplinary/transdisciplinary models as tools in the analysis of landscapes and environment as such. Furthermore these models are used in analyses of multifunctionality in/of landscapes. The modelling efforts can serve as an analytical tool as well as a tool providing information for the administrative- and political level. 5. Both for modelling studies and more conceptual approaches the definition of landscapes are difficult to handle as it is problematic to view landscapes as a distinct category in regulation and research into Regulation. Often landscapes are interpreted as land-use or land-cover, reducing the inherent qualities as well as the multifunctional dimensions. A question is whether we need an explicit definition of Landscapes (from the point of social sciences) as a distinct category in order to cope with Multifunctionality, and if such a defintion can identify important characteristics of landscapes from the points of social sciences. From an economic perspective this can be reduced to an identification of the externality problem. 6. The right and access to landscapes will influence the choice of regulatory and nonregulatory instruments, and the efficiency of the mentioned approaches regarding multifunctionality as a by-product or a goal in it self. From an economic point of view, rightto-access implies that it becomes even more difficult than under closed access to charge the
169
public, and thereby finance policy by such means. This implies that the only way to pay for public goods is through public budgets, one way or another. 7. Creation of valuable landscapes in a multifunctional policy context can be desirable with respect to control, information and enforcement when it comes to the management of widespread everyday landscapes without unique characteristics, but that the preservation of rare and high-value, unique landscapes has to be protected by more costly policies directed towards the high values. 8. Efficient methods and instruments to improve awareness and education for multifunctional issues in the specific landscapes are important, both towards farmers and other users of the landscapes. As a growing share of the population is getting a more remote relationship to landscapes (think about the game boy generation), this poses a severe challenge to policy makers. Without awareness, the public support for policies to enhance or preserve landscape qualities is likely to decline. Primary school is probably an important institution in terms of "educating" the public about landscape values. Demonstration areas (with nature paths etc.) is another important educational tool. A point of concern: public preferences have changed, and will continue to change over time. At the same time we know that "preferences are created" one example is marketing for commercial goods.
170
First draft of "Recommendations on Interdisciplinary Landscape Research" Workshop No. 5: Values and assessment of multifunctional landscapes
Proposed by Finn Arler and Jesper Fredshavn2 During the latest decades we have witnessed a growing awareness of the kinds of landscape values or nature qualities sometimes referred to as post-productive values, i.e., values which are not related directly to traditional production activities like farming, forestry, mining or industry. It is not always easy to distinguish between productive values and post-productive values, of course. Farming, for instance, is not just a way of extracting foodstuff from an ecosystem, it is also a cultural activity with a variety of attached values. Or take the various new landscape elements like amusement parks and holiday camps, many of which are quite difficult to put on either side exclusively. Still, in most cases it is fairly obvious what is meant, when we say that the gains we get from the productive activities should balanced with other kinds of values. The main subjects of Workshop 5 are these post-productive landscape or nature values and qualities, understood as values and qualities which are (or are considered to be) important to few or many people, who are living in, related to, temporarily placed in, or otherwise engaged in a certain landscape. These values and qualities can be different from each other in many ways. Some of them are obvious for all to see, others are only recognized by few (biologists, historians, gardeners, painters, etc.). Some may be easy to measure, others may not. Some values and qualities are fairly permanent features, whereas others only exist temporarily. Etc. etc. Because of these and various other dissimilarities it can be quite difficult to pay due respect to all of them in a landscape assessment. On this background, the workshop 5 shall focus especially on the following questions: 1. Which kinds of values are relevant, and which of these should be considered main values? 2. To whom are the values relevant? Are they all relevant for everybody (actually or potentially), or are some of them never going to appeal to more than a few experts and connoiseurs? 3. How and by whom should the relative importance of these often apparently incommensurable values be estimated? Are there some relevant objective or generally acceptable measures, indicators or methods available? 4. How and by whome should they be balanced against values related to productive activities? Is it possible to imagine a multicriteria optimization method, which could help us solve the problem, or should one simply forget about general methods, and rely on political decision procedures? The following recommendations for landscape research in general, and workshop 5 in particular, are related to these four question.
171
Recommendations: ad 1. It is an important part of landscape research to identify and, as far as possible, rationally evaluate landscape values and nature qualities, both in order to describe the present state of the landscapes and their qualitiess, and to set goals for future landscapes. At least three main sets of values and qualities are likely to be of fundamental importance: aesthetic and pictorial qualities, historical and narrative qualities, as well as biological (together with geological) diversity and uniqueness. These sets of values can then be subdivided into more specific categories. The first task of workshop five will be to try to make a general and ordered checklist of relevant values, and try to qualify the reasons for their relevance. ad 2. It is important to identify the values and qualities of a landscape, and not just identify the present stakeholders and interest groups and the values they may simply happen to have for the time being. Values and qualities are features which can be rationally discussed and evaluated. It is therefore not particularly objective or democratic simply to refer what people for the time being happen to consider to be valuable, compared with substantial discusions of relevance and relative value. However, it is also a highly relevant question to ask what status experts (e.g., of ecosystems) or connoissurs (e.g., of pictorial qualities) should be given, and whether the values and qualities they identify should be given particular consideration. This will be the second subject for discussion in workshop 5, and quite important for landscape research in general, of course. ad 3. Some kinds of values and qualities are measurable to some extend, or there may at least be some good indicators on whether they are present or not. Species diversity can be measured directly, for instance, and water quality can be evaluated in various direct and indirect ways (chemistry, visibility, indicator species, etc.). Good indicators are usually extremely helpful when one tries to assess the qualities of the landscape, to identify the possible threats to these qualities, and to describe the impact the presence and considerations of these qualities have on other qualities and the future landscape development. Other kinds of values are far more difficult to evaluate. This is the case with the atmosphere of a landscape, for instance, or the historical importance of some of its elements. Therefore, the question arises whether or how it is possible to deal with such unmeasuable values and qualities, and whether there are any methods available which makes it easier to deal with apparently incommensurable values. If there are such assessment methods available, how we can we make sure that unmeasurable qualities are being systematically underestimated. ad 4. The balancing of post-productive qualities against each other is only one part of the general balancing or landscape assessment process. The post-productive qualities need be balanced against values related to productive activities, too. In principle, one can imagine four different ways to carry out this assessment. The first one is to rely on economics, i.e., to put an economic value on each and every kind of value and quality, put them all into an econometrical computer programme, and see which combination comes out on top. As an alternative to economic valuation, one could use a kind of multicriteria assessment scheme, process the data and other kinds of inputs and see which combination scores highest on most indicators. A third alternative is to sit down and watch the fight between interest groups, accepting that the strongest group with most members or persuasion skills shall win the battle. The fourth and last alternative is the perhaps fairly idealistic proposal to see the political process as primarily a rational deliberation process, which cannot be reduced to an arational battle, and which often ends up with results which are at least as good as those made by economical or multicriteria assessment methods. A process, i.e., in which landscape researchers have a chance of being heard whenever their arguments are sensitive and reasoned
172
out carefully enough. The way landscape research is carried out is quite dependent on which of these procedures to rely on, and the question of procedures will therefore be the last question taken up in workshop 5.
173
First draft of "Recommendations on Interdisciplinary Landscape Research" Workshop No. 6: Ecological aspects of multifunctional landscapes in historical perspective
Proposed by Bent Aaby
Problems in present landscape research
(1) The landscape acts as a frame for many activities such as cultivation, transport, recreation and so on and each research discipline has priorities and makes demands in relation to landscape use. How can these legal expectations be fulfilled at the same time and in the same area without creating social conflicts? Interdisciplinary approaches to landscape research and management play a key role in answering this question. Each research discipline often focuses on features in the landscape from its own interesting point of view depending on academic traditions. But the academic society is not a world apart. Society, politicians and other landscape consumers make many demands, but their concept of landscape and the way they understand the processes within it differs from that of individual research disciplines. This is one of the challenges faced us in present investigations of cultural landscapes; another challenge is the historical aspect. The present landscape is the result of a long term evolutionary process which sometimes has resulted in rapid and dramatic changes as well as more gradual variations and phases of stability. Cultural landscapes retain features hidden or visual from the different phases in the development of those landscapes.. How can we benefit from this cultural heritage in our present use of the landscape without destroying the historical identity of an area? A change to a more holistic research strategy based on multifunctional landscapes may be one of the solutions to the above mentioned questions. II General recommendations on future landscape research from workshop group 6. (2) Future landscape research should be multidisciplinary and focus more on time-related processes. Information of this kind is often difficult to perceive by modern observations but can be detected and quantified by palaeoecological methods. (3) Present day biodiversity is determined by a number of factors including the historical dimension. Palaeoecological, historical and archaeological knowledge is an important issue in landscape research and contributes to a holistic perception of the modern landscape. (4) Historical ecological research provides knowledge of vegetation types, their use in past societies and the natural values that were associated with them. This information is obtained on various areal scales depending on the source material. The scale of area is an essential issue when evaluating scientific results and only information related to the same scale of area should be used in comparisons.
174
III
Recommendations from workshop no. 6: Ecological aspects of multifunctional landscapes in historical perspective
(5) The pre-industrial landscape was based on multifunctional use. Forest ecosystems, for example, served as a source for wood and hay production, grazing and hunting. During the 19th and 20th century land use became intensive and mainly uni-functional. Today there is a common demand for co-existence of different functions including ecology, economy, culture, aesthetics and recreation. (6) Integrated use of land and resources in pre-industrial Europe enhanced the adoption of local ecological and environmental conditions to different needs. (7) The multifunctional use of the historical landscape facilitated the formation of different habitats, supported biodiversity and met the goal of sustainability. (8) Multi- and unifunctional use may both lead to overexploitation and landscape degradation. History has taught us that disturbance should be regulated to avoid ecological landscape degradation. (9) Disturbance influences biodiversity and a moderate level of disturbance often supports species richness. (10) Pre-historical and historical landscape components contribute to landscape quality and improve the ecological dimension of the area. (11) The ecological functionality and the diversity of forests, river systems, and signs of historical land-use should be taken into account in regional planning of multifunctional land use.
175
V. Papers presented in parallel sessions
176
177
1.
Session A: Landscapes in theory
In alphabetical order of the names of the authors.
Landscape theory - a way out of the conceptual mess

Peter Frederiksen
RUC-19.2, P.O. Box 260, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark, e-mail: pfred@ruc.dk
The article suggests a definition of landscape and a way to build a theory of landscape through a number of statements: (1) landscape is just one among many objects of study in the universe, (2) a transdisciplinary theory of landscape is a contradiction in terms, (3) a theory requires a common, scientific language for all of landscape, (4) this language may be developed in (a) an empirical-inductive manner from the existing, conceptual chaos to new theories, or (b) by using mathematical principles and theories as the theoretical foundation of landscape, mathematical models to describe landscape, and mathematics to guide the formulation of non-mathematical models, (5) complex adaptive systems (biosystems) and other dynamical systems (geosystems), which is emerging as a common denominator for a wide variety of natural, social and cultural phenomena, is a good candidate as a language, (6) complex adaptive landscape systems are symbol systems (language, knowledge, ethical, aesthetical), arenas (political, economic and social systems) and ecosystems a multitude of terrestrial and aquatic subsystems; landscape geosystems are the lowermost atmosphere, landforms, drainage basins and their interaction produce landscape - i.e. systems at the land surface and its immediate surroundings, (7) the real issue for the human complex adaptive system is how to interact with the rest of landscape, and (8) a landscape theory must therefore also be able to describe the problems and solutions of this interaction. A series of arguments in favour and against the statements are presented.
Multifunctional landscape assessment a step nearer transdisciplinarity

Gary Fry
Norwegian Institute for Nature and Cultural Research, PO Box 736 Sentrum N-0105 Oslo, Norway
One of the problems facing landscape professionals is the task of assessment across sectoral boundaries. This paper examines the barriers to such work and the results of two projects in Norway that specifically set out to explore ways around the problems. The first project set out to incorporate landscape ecological concepts into archaeological prediction models to identify Viking grave mounds, and the second project investigated the role of landscape structure for biodiversity, cultural heritage and human experience of landscape. In both studies we found the following differences between academic disciplines of particular importance; language
178
and concepts, differences in approaches to qualitative and quantitative data, the role of scientific literature and academic traditions, and spatial scale. Results found that for many landscapes management choices would have to be made, as what was found positive for one subject interest was not necessarily good for others. Landscape grain size was found an important factor for most interests with fine grained landscapes reflecting historical continuity, abundance of wildlife habitats and positive landscape experience.
Main disciplinary models in landscape ecology: limits and advantages

Vittorio Ingegnoli * and Elena Giglio Ingegnoli **
* University of Milan, Faculty of Natural Sciences ** University of Milan
During the Fifth World Congress of IALE (1999) the President noted that the variety of topics and approaches represented in the literature testifies to the diversity of landscape ecology as a discipline. This diversity is at once its great strength and its potential weakness. If we compare the main topics of landscape ecology, we arrive to recognise four principal disciplinary models. The first (geographical) is associated with the interrelation between natural and human components, from the point of view of geomorphology, botany, architecture, etc., led by geography toward an interdisciplinary science. The second (chorological) is rooted in population ecology and zoology, driven by the need to develop spatial characters and scale processes in general ecology. The third (matrix-configured) is related with the attempt to study the ecology of land ecosystems. The fourth (holistic ) derives from an holistic view, dealing with landscapes as open, adaptive, self-transcendent systems of natural and human elements. Each point of view defines the landscape in different manners. In our opinion it is necessary to arrive to a new disciplinary model capable to utilise and to integrate the best of all the others. We could call it holistic unifying, because the holistic model has the best epistemological basis to do this, but needs some integration.
Approaches to landscape research in Russia

Alexandre.V.Khoroshev, Yury.G.Puzachenko Landscape science in Russia has developed on the basis of Hettner and Humboldt concepts within geography. Landscape was defined as relatively homogeneous in space natural system with similar type of relations between components. Notion of hierarchical organization of landscape was formulated as important empirical generalization. Landscape is treated as main unit of physical geography - territorial system occupying first hundreds of square kilometres formed on the section of the Earth`s crust with unified geological composition, history of development, morphological structure, defined by regular combination of relief, soils, vegetation, animals, hydrological and geochemical regimes. Such system determines forms of human activity. Landscape is divided into morphological units of different scales forming
179
hierarchy - up to 5-6 levels. Repeated in space types of combination of units can be structural elements of landscapes. Landscapes are individual phenomena and serve as elements of physical-geographical regionalization. Within this concept research of landscape structure was carried out aiming at investigation of mechanisms of hierarchical organization, borders between landscape units. Methods of landscape mapping are worked out. Present-day methods of quantitative analysis of landscape structure afford to form basis for modelling dynamics of complex natural and anthropogenic systems in different spatio-temporal scales.
WYGIWYS - What you get is what you see: The understanding of 'landscape' between traditional epistemology and constructivism
Stefan Lang Virtually every practical application and most of the methodical issues in landscape ecology deal with 'landscape' as an entity, thus as a concrete object of investigation. Reflections and more extensive considerations are rare, standard definitions are unhesitatingly adopted. By that we have to admit that our discipline is built upon a slightly shaky fundament and is composed by somewhat blurred imaginations. Hot discussions took place in the 1970ies driven by epistemological disagreements among the then leading German speaking geographers and a young critical fellow named G. HARD. Starting there the paper is supposed to give a comparing overview over the further development within the understanding of 'landscape'. Several approaches will be discussed all of them aiming at finding scientific foundations for the realm of landscape ecology. These ones point to three directions: the classical view of the German geography and its critic, the system theoretical approach particularly pushed by Z. NAVEH and the pragmatic view of an organism-centered perception of 'individual' landscapes formed by a specific mosaic of 'patches'. Although the paper will indicate shortcomings in every approach, 'landscape' is not supposed to keep indefinable. For that finally the author pleads for a intentional and flexible synthesis of some core ideas distilled from the different attitudes. Being conceptualized to cause ongoing discussions the paper was mainly driven by some general considerations concerning questions like these: - are 'landscapes' existing independent from our thinking or are they merely a product of perception and only explicable by an epistemological constructivism; (how) can we deal with a 'blurred' imagination of what 'landscapes' could be; can a 'patch' or a 'landscape-unit' be considered as the realization of emergent properties above the organism; - is then a landscape consisting of patches a further level in this hierarchy?
Fundamental problems of ecolandscape theory and their application in environmental planning and management.
The Thon Nguyen Ecolandscape is a present territorial complex, which has the geographical landscape structure and the ecological function of ecosystems which exist and develop on that territory. Ecolandscapes are distinguished by landscape structures and different ecological functions in different territories. The paper presents a geosystem model of geographical landscape, an ecosystem model and their integration in an ecogeosystem model of ecolandscape. The
180
structure and multifunction of ecolandscape include: 1) geographical landscape structure with ecosystem structure, 2) natural multifunction of geographical landscape with ecological multifunction of ecosystems. Ecolandscapes are classified according to the use of their socioeconomic functions. Ecological territorial systems in ascending scale of territory consist of: ecolandface, ecolandshape, ecolandscape, ecoregion, ecoprovince, ecocountry, ecostate. The paper emphasizes that ecolandscape and ecological territories are biotope or habitat of a humane ecosystem. Environmental science is the science of humane ecology therefore ecolandscape is the object of environmental science studying the habitat territory of human being and other creatures. The theory of ecolandscapes is applied to study of environment. Environmental planning and management is carried out territorially, hence ecolandscapes play an important role in environmental planning and management.
The project of landscape identification and characterisation for Portugal. Presentation of a methodology for defining and characterising landscape units as basis for land use planning
Teresa Pinto-Correia and Alexandre Cancela d'Abreu
University of vora, Colgio Luis Verney, 7000 vora, Portugal tel.351.266 745334, fax.351.266 744968/971, E-mail: mtpc@uevora.pt
The project of landscape identification and characterisation in Portugal is being undertaken by a interdisciplinary team at the University of Evora, as a command by the Environment and Planning Ministry, to be finished in summer 2001. The aim is to identify lansdcape units for the whole country, and to characterise these units, leading to the undertsanding of the main processes and trends going on, and giving orientations for future management. This paper relates to the methodology defined for identifying these landscape units, which combines objective data as lithology, land forms, land use, farm structure, settlement pattern, etc, with more subjective information and sensitive judgement as the local and regional culture, identity and the character of the landscape. The characterisation of the units combines all this information with the temporal dimension: the past influences, the most relevant historical features and, for the future, the factors and perspectives of change. The paper focus mainly on the problems, on one side, and potentialities, on the other, of such a work and specially of the methodology defined, and on the questions arising from the combination of an objective and a subjective - based on expert judgement - approach.
On landscape boundaries and how to bound contemporary landscapes

Mattias Qvistrm
Department of Landscape Planning/Alnarp, Box 58, 230 53 Alnarp, Sweden
Boundaries are a central feature in all landscape studies, even though the character of the boundaries studied varies a lot. However, contemporary landscapes and its boundaries seem to be hard to understand using conventional modes of landscape analysis, based primarily on the study of maps and the information given by visual analysis. New modes of transport and communication in the 19th and 20th century, have offered new ways of establishing boundaries
181
in time and space, boundaries invisible for many landscape researchers. These boundaries have a great impact on the landscape of today. In this paper I will argue for the need of a timespatial analysis where speed and boundaries are understood as closely related phenomena, to facilitate an understanding of contemporary landscapes. As a point of departure, the importance of boundaries in landscape research will be analysed. Thereafter the timespatiality of the 20th century boundaries will be discussed. The discussion will be focused on the boundaries caused by the late 20th century roads, and is based on studies in semi-urbanised areas in southern Sweden.
Landscape as an object of investigation of various disciplines

Andrzej Richling
Faculty of Geography and Regional Studies, Warsaw University, Poland
The term landscape is used in various disciplines of science. In physical geography this term is most frequently used as a synonym of geocomplex (geosystem) and is hierarchically classified. The concept of geochemical landscapes stresses the role of the mutual subordination of units bordering each other. Landscape phytocomplexes are distinguished and characterised on the basis of type and areal distribution of the types of physiocenosis. In architecture landscape is understood as the shape of terrain (visible landscape). At the same time in common speech, the word landscape is used to denote the natural scenery (rural and industrial landscape, winter and summer landscape, ugly and nice one, etc.). Landscape definitions rarely determine its taxonomic rank, although it is widely accepted that landscape is a large spatial unit sometimes identified with a region. In the taxonomy of physico-geographical units landscape is divided into smaller units, called morphological parts of landscape. In the systems of vegetation classification the aspect of superiority of landscape is also emphasised. In landscapes delimiting two basic approaches can be used; the morphological and the functional. The morphological approach defines the areal extent of the unit, whereas the functional outlines the change of states and of processes within the units limits. The more complete definitions of landscape are formulated by the representatives of landscape ecology. Discussed notion is used here to denote a "complete", though heterogeneous whole functioning in accordance with the laws of nature, capable of selfregulating and marked with a certain individuality. Each landscape should be characterised by spatial dimension and the structural, functional and visual features.
Towards a theory of the landscape: The Aegean Landscape as a cultural image

Theano S. Terkenli
Department of Geography, University of the Aegean, Karantoni 17, Mitiline 81100, Lesvos, Greece, Tel: 3-0251-36414, Fax: 3-0251-36099, E-mail: t.terkenli@aegean.gr
For landscapes to fulfill their multifunctional roles as sustainable milieux of human livelihood, the question of scale, and thus the criteria by which objectives are negotiated and outcomes measured, is vitally important. The plethora of processes of action and interaction
182
among the various components of a landscape dictate that there are almost no methodological frameworks and tools that would have no application in landscape study, planning, use or policy implementation. If emphasis is retained on characteristics distinctive to the landscape context, however, such as the visual--cognitive--experiential interface and bio-physical-human interaction in the landscape, the beginnings of a theory of landscape as a stage set for human life may thus be established. Towards this goal, this paper represents an attempt to apply concerns about scale and appropriate methodology on landscape form, function and meaning in delineating a framework of analysis for the Aegean landscape of Greece. Such a challenging goal may best be approached through critical geographical perspectives. In terms of theory, Aegeanity is negotiated on the basis of geographical scale and cultural meaning, encompassing distinctive landscape characteristics as presented above. In terms of Aegean landscape analysis, goals and criteria of assessment are interwoven into appropriate methodological schemata.
183
2.
Session B: Functions of agricultural/rural landscapes
Spatial structure and multifunctional use of agricultural landscapes

Ann-Margreth Berggren Brring
Department of Landscape Planning, Alnarp, Sweden
Three agricultural areas in Scania (southern part of Sweden) exemplifies change of landscape pattern from 1947 and onwards. The study attempts to quantify spatial changes relevant to ecological function and visual qualities. The use and reliability of this kind of planning information is also discussed. Aerial photos (1:30 000) are used as primary source of information. Agricultural development has steered the change of landscape. Other forms of use are regarded as being of secondary importance. Economical benefit of agricultural production, and physical and other conditions within a specific area influence the development, leading to different levels of change among areas. Change of spatial structure size or shape - influence the conditions for abundant species and simultaneously affects the visual qualities of the landscape. Interest in products from alternative farming increases. Agricultural ideals as giant fields are fading. Politicians stress the importance of regional identity. There are good opportunities for the creation of a landscape more suited for multifunctional use. Descriptions of landscape spatial structures and their history are valuable planning information when coming changes of land use are discussed.
Developments of hedgerows and wood lots: farmers decision making

Anne Gravsholt Busck, Lone Sderkvist Kristensen and Jrgen Primdahl
The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Department of Economics and Natural Resources
Farmers are the primary landscape managers in Danish agricultural landscapes. Understanding landscape changes and the role of public policies, in that process, require an understanding of farmers' motives to carry out landscape changes. However there is little knowledge about farmers' decision making concerning the landscape. With hedgerows and woodlots as the point of departure the paper will explore farmers' decision making process concerning landscape changes. Development of hedgerows and woodlots are used as indicators of structural landscape changes, because they represent widespread and long term decisions and because we expect farmers to have different attitudes toward the two types of elements. Farmers motives to plant, remove and renew hedgerows and wood lots are analysed utilising data from recent studies of landscape changes in different agricultural landscapes. Also the farmers use of personal network, when deciding on landscape changes and how this influences the farmers decisions, is explored. The results are discussed and related to how the
184
knowledge can be used within physical planning and advisory services to improve locations and compositions of plantings.
A bottom up method to map the farming structure and agricultural intensity at the landscape scale
Tommy Dalgaard and Hild Rygnestad
Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Dept. of Agricultural Systems Danish Institute of Agricultural and Fisheries Economics, Dept. of Agricultural Policy
The EU agricultural policy, Agenda 2000, aims at a multifunctional use of the agricultural landscape, where productivity is only one amongst many aims, including environmental protection, better use of resources, preservation of the cultural landscape and rural development. To change the development of the intensive agricultural landscape of Western Europe towards more multifunctionality, geographical related knowledge about farming structure and agricultural intensity is needed. However, existing statistical (top down) data from EUROSTAT are based on statistical samples that are too small to be used for analysis at the landscape scale. In this paper, a new method to map the farming structure and agricultural intensity at the landscape scale is presented and then applied to a 31 km2 agricultural area of Denmark. Denmark has been a pioneer collector of digital farm information so it is possible to use a bottom-up approach, where the EUROSTAT farm typology is applied to all farms and mapped at the landscape scale. The spatial distribution of farm types and the agricultural intensity is analysed and then compared to maps of other landscape functions. For example, the results show that areas with drinking water magazines or designated for afforestation contain a disproportionately large number of part time farmers. Key-words: Farm typologies, bottom up, structure, region, scale
Impacts on farmland biodiversity of large-scale changes in arable and pastoral landcovers

Dennis, P.1 , Cole, L.J.2 , Milligan, A.L.3 , Furness, R.W.3 , McCracken, D.I.2 , Murphy, K.J.3 and Waterhouse, A.2
1
Integrated Land Use Systems, Macaulay Land Use Research Institute, Craigiebuckler, Aberdeen, AB15 8QH, UK (e-mail: p.dennis@mluri.sari.ac.uk). 2 Scottish Agricultural College, Auchincruive, Ayr, KA6 5HW, UK, (e-mail: l.cole@au.sac.ac.uk).
3
Environmental and Evolutionary Biology, Institute of Biomedical and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, University Avenue, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK, (e-mail: a.milligan@bio.gla.ac.uk).
A study was undertaken of the plant and animal diversity in a Scottish river catchment classified as predominantly under agricultural land use. Sampling of a range of biological taxa was carried out on representative agricultural landcovers, replicated across the river catchment to allow the analysis of the relative influence of landform and land use. Standard field methods were used to survey vascular plants, bryophytes, birds, beetles and spiders. Data on land form and land cover were extracted from National landcover, soils and digital elevation
185
databases, along with finer resolution data collected by field survey on arable and pastoral landcovers, field boundaries and remnant biotopes. Management data were collected from landowners and farmers for each of 61 fields where the biota were sampled. This work contributes to the development of a model to express biodiversity at the river catchment scale, based on the context of agricultural land covers with alternative land covers and landform. The model will be used to estimate the effect on farmland biodiversity of different scenarios of change in agriculture. The compatibility of changes in agricultural landcovers, necessary to maintain a viable agricultural sector, with the sustainability of the natural heritage function of agricultural landscapes, will be discussed.
Plant diversity and habitat networks in agricultural landscapes

Willemien Geertsema The network of semi-natural landscape elements is crucial for the survival of many plant species in agricultural landscapes. We studied the effect of habitat quality, age and the spatial arrangement of habitat on the survival and diversity of wild plant species in a network of ditches in an agricultural landscape in the Netherlands. The habitat quality within the network was very heterogeneous in space as well as time. In such a system the species might function as a metapopulation. Plant species with contrasting dispersal and seed bank characteristics were studied. The influence of agricultural activities on the adjacent fields appeared to be very important for some plant species, for others the vicinity of seed sources was more important. The results of observational and experimental work were used for the development of a spatially explicit simulation model. Using this model, the effect of spatial arrangement, the quality and the dynamics of habitat on the population dynamics and the survival of plant species with contrasting dispersal and seed bank characteristics can be studied. The results of the empirical and modelling work will be presented and discussed.
Planning biodiversity in agricultural landscapes: development of a decision support system

Jan T.R. Kalkhoven
Alterra, Green World Research, Wageningen, NL
In the highly cultivated landscapes of Western Europe the green and blue veins, that is the small landscape elements like hedgerows, road verges, ditches and ponds, are the places where nature quality is still retained. These green veins have there own nature quality and are connecting elements in the networks of large nature areas. In the same time they have a function for recreation and water retention. In the urgent planning of sustainable agricultural in a sustainable landscape a tool is desirable, to ensure a certain nature quality in the agricultural landscape. Such a tool will be developed as a decision support system: regional landscapes are described with physical and ecological parameters and possibilities; these parameters form the first axis of a matrix. The second axis consists of parameters for several functions of the landscape: nature quality, recreational activities and retention of water. For each function the essential landscape parameters are indicated. The matrices of different landscapes will be linked with GIS-maps
186
and can be used for designing scenario s of the agricultural landscapes or comparison of the scenarios.
Sustainable Planning in Agricultural Landscapes

Burghard C. Meyer (*), Heidrun Muehle, Ralf Grabaum
Centre for Environmental Research Leipzig-Halle, Germany (*) corresponding author. Fax: +49 341 235 2219. E-mail address: meyer@alok.ufz.de
At past and at present, man have intervened in terrestrial ecosystems, often ignoring any principle of sustainability. In Central Germany, based on very fertile black soils, agriculture has predominated for hundreds of years. It is characterised by short crop rotations, large fields and only few hedges, fruit trees, rows or copses in the landscape. In many cases the intensive agricultural management is the cause of the threats to soil, water, atmosphere and biosphere. The project presented focuses a method on the development of scenarios under different land use options as a tool for farmers, landscape planners, environmental and agricultural authorities to assess the results of land use changes. These scenarios are based on methods assessing the landscape functions in relationship to the protection of other functions like soil erosion, water discharge regulation and agricultural production capability in a multifunctional view. The method uses a database which is integrated into a geographic information system, and a method of multicriteria optimisation. The method of optimisation achieves results which can be considered as compromises between different landscape functions. Beside landscape assessment and optimisation a quantification of changes of the landscape balance, based on scenarios under different land uses is necessary.
The hunted landscape

Carsten Riis Olesen* & Jrgen Primdahl**
* National Environmental Research Institute, Dep. of Landscape Ecology, Kal. ** Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Dep. of Economics and Natural Resources, Copenhagen.
Hunting for recreative purposes is a popular activity in Denmark. Approx. 250.000 people are national game licence holders, 170.000 hunters pay the early fee, although only 120.000 file a resulting annual bag report other than zero. The living conditions of wildlife are to a large extent defined by the landscape structure, but the local hunting management does also affect the game species. Substantial proportions of farmers landscape decisions are associated with interests in hunting. Detailed analyses of the importance of hunting in a landscape perspective are presented. An extensive survey of land use and landscape changes on more than 700 farms and private forest properties, including personal interviews of all the owners serve as the primary data material. Of the total area studied (app. 14.000 adjoining ha) 16% are not subject to hunting. These areas are primarily intensively cultivated open farmland. However, some aggregation appears, forming larger areas of non-hunted pockets in the landscape. Spatial descriptions of the farms on which the owner does not want hunting and the ecological importance of these non-hunting areas are evaluated. Reviews of the local game bag records indicate distinct differences in wildlife densities in different types of landscape. Implications for the future landscape- and wildlife management are discussed.
187
Changes in landscape structure: a vector based analysis of three NW European agricultural areas
R.G. Roepers * & C.R. Baltjes
Wageningen University. Department of Environmental Sciences, Land Use Planning Group, Gen. Foulkesweg 13, NL-6703 Wageningen, The Netherlands. * Author for correspondence: Fax: + 31 317 482166; e-mail: Reinetta.Roepers@users.rpv.wau.nl
Agricultural areas in Europe are under going complex changes that involve socio-economic, biotic and abiotic factors. Landscapes change constantly, especially under human influence. It is well known that there is a close correlation between land cover, landscape structure and the intensity of land use. Understanding land use changes and the consequences for landscape structure is important to support planning, policy making and management related to land use as well as the landscape. Within three case study areas, sample areas of one square kilometre are selected according to certain criteria. A three step historical analysis is based on 1:25.000 topographical maps. Land cover classes are defined so that classes are comparable through the years. Analysis are carried out with ARC-VIEW in vector based shape-files related to different themes. A description is made of the land cover change. The spatial structure of the landscape is analysed and described by indices like number, size, perimeter, fractal dimension, diversity and nearest neighbour. The followed approach gives a good indication of changes in land cover and landscape structure. Farm characteristics and policy explain to a certain extent the observed changes. Main points of the used method are (1) the level of detail possible, (2) interpretation of information and (3) invested time for analyses. If only broad classes are used analyses based on topographical maps are use full and, especially in the future with the availability of digital maps, can be very efficient. Keywords: landscape structure, land use, methodology, GIS
188
3.
Session C: Functions of urban and recreational landscapes
Improvement of Agricultural Research Components in Urban Landscape and Greenery of Kuwait

Mahdi Abdal and Majda Sulieman
Aridland Agricultural Department, Kuwait institute for Scientific Research
Agricultural development in Kuwait faces many problems and obstacles such as limitation of water resources for irrigation, soils conditions, climatic extreme particularly during the summer periods, and train manpower. With all these extreme conditions for agricultural development in Kuwait, there is strong demand from both the public and the government for agricultural activities. Urban landscape and greenery is one of the agricultural activities that have extreme demand from both the public and the government. Travelling around the world enhanced the public for the important of urban landscape and the beautification of the urban areas. Planning urban landscape and greenery for Kuwait need various variables and efficient management of all the limited resources. Irrigation water is very limited in Kuwait and the quality is deteriorating from over pumping the underground water and increased soil salinity by over irrigation and lack of drainage. Efficient irrigation water management can be improved with the enhancement of irrigation research activities in Kuwait and implementation of the outputs. Research can be concentrated also on water evaporation, which is very high, and the introduction of mulching materials to improve water irrigation efficiency. Most of the soils in Kuwait are sandy with limited organic materials and plant nutrients. Research in soil fertility and plant uptake of nutrients is very essential for any agricultural activities. Introduction of ornamental plants with tolerant to drought, salinity and heat is continuous research component of urban landscape and greenery in Kuwait. Training local staff in basic agricultural activities and research development will improve resources management and enhanced greenery of Kuwait. Key Words: agriculture, irrigation, salinity, fertility, ornamental, drought, heat, drainage, evaporation, and greenery.
189
Recreation and Nature Conservation two conflicting functions in multifunctional Central European Urban Landscapes
Jrgen Breuste Cities in Central Europe are still growing. They especially enlarge their area, not growing by their number of inhabitants. The agglomerations are allready much bigger than the so called core cities of agglomerations. In many parts of Central Europe incuding Germany - exist allready enlarged urban landscapes. The sources of urban growth are individual livestyles, the cheep mobility and the nearly zero-costs of nature in economic process. When we accept that city dwellers still need contact and recreation in an natural environment, that cities also in the near fututre will further on grow and that nature must be secured also in urban landscapes, than the conflict between nature conservation and recreation in urban landscapes is clear visible. The starting question is: How to qualify and possible quantify the demands of urban dwellers for recreation in natural environment and how to compare these demands with the reality of nature conservation strategies in urban landscapes? The investigations on borth fields were made in empirical studies in the urban agglomeration of Halle-Leipzig (Germany). It could be showed that the trends for natur-near recreation goes outside the cores of urban landscapes and that the accaptance for new urban nature ist still low. The existing nature potentials are not recognized and used for recreation. On the other hand natur conservation strategies dont really include the utilization of natur by recreation. Mostly it fights against more intensivly use by people. The strategies of urban natur conservation in Halle and Leipzig had been evaluated for this task. The results showed the contradicting demands for nature, the existing potentials of nature and the conservative protection strategies of institutional nature conservation. These are the reasons of the conflicts. The study shows some possible ways how to come out of the conflict. One is the acceptance of multifunctional utilization of urban natur especially by the nature conservation, the other is the strength of accaptance of all kinds of urban nature potentials and the nessesary incease of knowledge and experience with different forms of urban nature for different groups of urban dwellers. This shows a perspective for further mulitfunctional development of urban landscapes as living space for people and natural environment.
Visionary entrepreneurism forges Monacos multifunctional landscape

Anne-Marie dHauteserre
Department of Geography, The University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton, New Zealand. Email: adhautes@waikato.ac.nz:
When Monaco in 1999 celebrated the fiftieth year of the reign of Rainier III it justly celebrated his entrepreneurism which guided a 3000% economic growth over the same period while total population increased by only 67%. This economic and demographic development required structures to be fitted in a restricted geographic space. This paper will show that the princes vision has been to accommodate this growth in a multifunctional landscape that has maintained the fragile balance between humane development and neo-liberal market forces. It has encouraged meaningfulness to structure social relationships rather than erect a superstructure hiding the ever more rapacious mechanisms of capital. Monacos socially constructed multifunctional landscape is dynamic, in a constant process of construction and
190
reconstruction of both its physical elements (buildings and natural features) as well as of its conceptualization. It is a worked upon lived in place while it is also a fantasized landscape by both promoters and potential visitors. This paper will also demonstrate that Monacos multifunctionality has many dimensions: temporal, physical (both vertical and horizontal), economic, conceptual and that the dynamism of the principality is the result of tensions between those dimensions. Keywords: visionary entrepreneurism, social construction, multifunctional landscape, geographic space.
Defining urban biodiversity a matter of scale, function and values

Mats Gyllin
Department of landscape planning Alnarp, Swedish university of agricultural sciences PO Box 58, S230 53 Alnarp, Sweden, phone: int+46 40 15410, email: mats.gyllin@lpal.slu.se
To many biologists urban biodiversity is less valuable than rural biodiversity, which m i plies that human influence is thought of as a negative, or even disqualifying, factor, even though the number of spontaneous species in many cases is much higher within the u rban areas than in surrounding agricultural areas. However, some of the most highly regarded rural environments are very much dependent on man for their existence, e.g. hay meadows, so there have to be other, less clear reasons than simply the presence of man. On the other hand, there is a tendency for non-biologists to regard urban biodiversity as a simple visual impression, thus disregarding the underlying ecological processes and reducing it to "green with more or less structural variation". It is the objective of this paper to discuss the values attached to urban biodiversity from different views and in different spatial and temporal scales. Since biodiversity is highly scale dependent, it is very probable that communication failure between different interest groups is due to lack of precision regarding scales. It is concluded that urban biodiversity should include all organisms, spontaneous or not, to be a useful concept.
Rural road networks in multifunctional landscapes

Ir. C.F. Jaarsma and Ir. G. Willems
Land Use Planning Group, Wageningen University, Gen. Foulkesweg 13, 6703 BJ Wageningen, The Netherlands, Telephone +31 317 482050, Telefax +31 317 482166, E-mail: Rinus.Jaarsma@users.rpv.wau.nl
Nowadays landscapes have to serve different functions simultaneously, such as recreation, nature and agriculture. For optimal functioning all these functions require full accessibility by a well-equipped road network. However, this seems to be a contradictio in terminis, because such a network also has harmful effects on several functions. One would like to see a road network, which could serve interests of both accessibility and a sustainable environment. Many roads, especially the Minor Rural Roads (MRRs) are not equipped for the desired traffic volumes and mix of modes. The traffic-concept Traffic Calmed Rural Area is developed to regulate traffic flows better over the whole road-network. With this concept one can take area-specific measures on the scale of a road section by down- or upgrading of roads.
191
Before applying this concept one wants to know the implications for the landscape, in order to preserve and/or strengthen the valuable landscape. Therefore Hauptmeyer (1998) has developed a method, determining the landscape value of MRRs. The method gives a ranking of characteristic landscape features, like: scale, historicity, naturalness and functionality. This method will be demonstrated in a case-study, where agriculture, nature, recreation and the landscape are integrated in a sustainable mosaic.
Ways of perceiving a recreation forest - a case study in southern Finland

Eeva Karjalainen
Finnish Forest Research Institute, Unioninkatu 40 A, 00170 Helsinki, Finland Tel. + 358 9 85705766, fax + 358 9 85705717, eeva.karjalainen@metla.fi, http://www.metla.fi/pp/Ekar/ek-ep.htm
This paper presents a case study on visitors perceptions of a recreation forest in southern Finland. During the summer of 1998, a total of 22 visitors of the area were interviewed. The researcher walked together with each visitor along a one-kilometer long path, and each visitor was allowed to comment freely about the environment. Interviews were audio-recorded and tapes were transcribed. Transcripts were analyzed using a qualitative content analysis. Following ways of perceiving and evaluating the recreation forest were identified; social environment, biological environment, setting for activities, economical environment, place for experiences and exploring, environment for others, and educational environment. One person could experience the environment in several differing ways. Visitors compared the forest to other places; to urban environment, to other natural areas and to their childhood environment. Some visitors indicated that their perceptions of the forest depend on their state of mind, current situation and the purpose of their visit.
Variations of the Treescape in a Chinese City: The Case of Nanjing

Chen Shuang and C.Y. Jim
Department of Geography & Geology, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Urban trees, as prominent landscape elements of cities, have received much attention from both practitioners and academics. Trees in Chinese cities hitherto have received little detailed analysis from the viewpoint of urban forestry or landscape analysis. This study attempts a comprehensive evaluation of the tree population in Nanjing, which has the best green cover amongst Chinese cities, and to illustrate the intimate association between urban development and the companion trees in China. Based on a survey of 6527 trees, the results show that trees in institution grounds have higher species diversity, bigger size and better performance than the other habitat types. The condition of trees in residential neighbourhood is rather poor. Along roadside, over 40% of trees are large with DBH > 25 cm. Factory is a potential urban tree repository with abundant small trees. The variations are largely related to tree site condition, which is largely determined by land use and development intensity. The tree management systems varying with habitat types also augment the treescape differences. The
192
relationship between treescape and habitat type could furnish hints for urban forest management and planning in conjunction with urban planning.
Which kind of planning is needed for an ecologically sustainable development of urban landscapes?
Ulrike Weiland
Technical University Berlin, Institute for Management in Environmental Planning, FR 2-7, Franklinstrasse 28/29, D-10587 Berlin, Tel: +49 30 314 27692, Fax: + 49 30 314 73517, email: weiland@imup.tu-berlin.de
Spatial and environmental planning shall implement the spatial and the environmental aspects of the sustainable development conception. This requires modifications of spatial and environmental planning and implies for new contents, methods and instruments in both planning forms, especially in planning for urban landscapes resp. urban areas. Spatial planning shall implement all spatial aspects of the sustainable development conception, while environmental planning shall implement only a part of them, i.e. the environmental aspects. This agrees in general with the usual relations between spatial and environmental planning, but has to be modified in order to fulfill additional conditions due to the implementation of the sustainable development conception. Prerequisition of a clear definition and assignment of sustainable development and its environmental aspects is a model, which describes the relations between the environmental, social and economic aspects of spatial development for urban landscapes taking into consideration the long-term perspective and the people involved. In order to implement the conception of an ecologically sustainable development of urban landscapes spatial and environmental planning have to cooperate closely, and they have to become "fivedimensional". Planning has to consider the five "dimensions" area, volume, time, and actors involved and to scope with the following planning tasks: 1. + 2. dimension: space management, 3. dimension: resource management, 4. dimension: consideration of long-term perspectives, 5. "dimension": information, participation and cooperation with all concerned resp. interested societal groups. The report will be based on my postdoctoral thesis and explain the model of how spatial and environmental planning can cooperate in order to implement an ecologically sustainable development of urban landscapes, and it will elaborate on the "five dimensions" of planning.
The evolution of old Su Zhou citys environment ecology

Jing Huai Xu
E-mail: zrmo@sune250.szrtc.edu.cn
Suzhou is world-famous for its more than 2500 years long history and its city's location which has never been changed. This article will discuss the following content: Lanes of rivers and lakes,local-style dwelling houses and classic gardens ,reflecting the advanced oriental dewelling civilization which was "the people in harmony with the place", still have significant meanings to the evolution of old Suzhou city's environment ecology and the future
193
construction about human settlement environment, especially today when there have great contradicitions between economic development and the old city's protection.
A multicriteria approach to evaluating habitat change in urban areas: an example from the Black Country (UK).
C.H.Young* and P.J.Jarvis (*Author presenting the paper)
School of Applied Sciences, University of Wolverhampton, Wulfruna Street, Wolverhampton, United Kingdom WV1 1SB, Tel: (00 44 1902) 322170, Fax: (00 44 1902) 322680, e-mail: in5398@wlv.ac.uk
Using a combination of weighted criteria a habitat value index (HV1) was derived from all habitats patches (a total of 877) within four 1km grid squares in Wolverhampton. Two years after the initial survey a follow-up evaluation was carried out to identify areas of substantial change and the new data used to amend the baseline value map. Where there is no change in patch boundary just a change in internal characteristics this is reflected in a change in the HVI, however where there is a change in patch configuration the effect of this on the patch HVI and its contextual relationship with the wider urban landscape can be seen. The HVI method is quick, simple and consistent and allows direct spatial and temporal comparisons to be made. This consideration in vital in monitoring landscape change and in providing quantitative information for decision-makers in a constantly changing environment.
194
4.
Session D: Landscapes as places for experience, perception and identification
Quo vadis savannah hypothesis ? How a change in paradigm of anthropology would effect modern landscape aesthetics
Holger Behm
Universitt Rostock, Institut fr Landschaftsplanung und Landschaftskologie J. v. Liebig Weg 6, D 18051 Rostock
The savannah hypothesis (BROOM 1933) states that the Australopithecines and Homo habilis, our phylogenetic ancestors, developed bipedalism and other human features as savannah hunters. These is the background for explanations in modern landscape aesthetics on human habitat preference, e.g. for savannah like park landscapes Since 1995 new discussions in palaeoanthropology (TOBIAS 1995 and other) have lead to a very critical view of some scientists on the savannah hypothesis. The background therefore are new fossil findings in South Africa. These scientists around the eminent South African palaeontologist Prof. Phillip Tobias believe that water has played a much bigger part in hominisation and that hominids where upright before the forest shrunk. If that is right, many aspects of asthetic values of landscapes will arise in another light. The paper would like to show, based on a critical view on the discussions in palaeontology and anthropology and their aplication in landscape evaluation and design , if or how a change in paradigm would effect modern landscape aesthetics. These includes design principles, landscape evaluation and recreational values of landscapes.
Visions of Sherwood
Roy Haines-Young & Jorge Rubiano
School of Geography, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD
This paper describes the issues surrounding the recreation of the landscapes associated with Sherwood Forest. Not only is the landscape itself multi-functional, in the sense that it delivers to the local communities a range of goods and services, but also the people who live and work their have multiple visions for the future of this area. The paper describes the development of a set of GIS tools that allows the different groups that have a stake in the landscapes of Sherwood Forest to storyboard their ideas about the development of the area. These tools have been created in the context of the natural capital paradigm. The paper will show how these tools and concepts can be used to identify both the conflicts that exist between the different visions and their sustainability.
195
Creative conservation or faking nature: a critical review of the ethics of landscape restoration
John Handley & Robert Wood
Centre for Urban and Regional Ecology, School of Planning & Landscape, University of Manchester
During the past three decades ecological science has made an increasingly significant contribution to the restoration of damaged landscapes and the mitigation of the impacts of development. Attempts at landscape restoration have become increasingly ambitious involving, for example, restoration blasting to create simulated daleside landscapes in limestone quarries and large-scale translocation of primary habitats such as woodland, heathland and grassland in the face of urban development. The paper would review the current state of the art in creative conservation and would then reflect on the implications for environmental ethics. Are we creatively channelling the development process towards rebuilding environmental capital or undermining ecological integrity by faking nature?
Wired Nature? Cultural aspects of Defining One European Landscape

Ib Kristiansen The notion of ecological networks has within the last decades developed fast on a regional and national level in Europe as a new approach in nature conservation. On a European supranational level, a network of Natura 2000' sites of European importance, has been adopted as well, and promoted as a European flagship concerning nature conservation. The article reviews this development in the light of the multitude of changes and increasing interconnectedness the European societies are exposed to by the new information technologies. As a consequence of the increasing speed in the flow of environmentalised information there is a development towards a culture of ecological modernisation, and a development of our culture/nature relationship towards the perception of, what might be called, a science fictious third nature. The cultural transformation of the European continent has several dimensions. One crucial dimension is centralised European governance through environmental standardisation and a widespread tendency of centralisation of the institutional power. The supranational environmental policy is constructing a new European order and coherence, widely relying on science, construction of objective factors, distribution of reliable and harmonised environmental information, and implementation of environmental standardised legislation. However, this causes alienation towards national, regional and local situated cultures. Thus, in spite of the good intentions, there is the risk that the ecological networks and the protection of nature become enclosed information of environmental data among politicians connected to closed networks of nature conservation bureaucracies and semi-political expert-groups. Contrary to the ideals of a centralised European governance, a future potential of the new information technologies could be to create bottom- up webs of networks and make possible a more interactive performance between the top-down and bottom-up approaches. Accordingly limits should be set towards technical standardisation of nature and its protection - to protect natural as well as cultural diversity.
196
Outsiders in the British landscape? An analysis of ethnic minority landscape genesis projects in North-east England
Macfarlane, Robert
University of Northumbria, Division of Geography and Environmental Management, Centre of Environmental and Spatial Analysis, UK, robert.macfarlane@unn.ac.uk
The rational for landscape projects often comes directly from social and cultural forces; in common with the conservation effort at large, these forces may be mediated by scientific judgements about typicality, rarity, history and appropriateness, but personal environmental values are often constructed with reference to the everyday and the familiar. Just as historical antecedents are often analysed at length in determining appropriate management strategies for designated and protected conservation sites, such histories may all-important at a personal and community level in determining the level of interest and involvement with conservation projects. Ethnic minority groups are often highly marginalised in the environmental and conservation movements and there is an extensive literature on the "cultural Exclusiveness" of many of the pillars of UK conservation, perhaps most notably the English countryside, and external efforts to involve ethnic minority groups with urban conservation projects have only met with very limited success. Environmental initiatives by ethnic minority groups in the UK, which have embraces community gardens, sacred lands and food gardens, are fundamentally about the creation of meaningful areas of "nature" and cultural landscapes. These often communicate ideas about ecology, landscape and nature that need to be accommodated in the wider thinking about landscape management, ecological restoration and urban conservation initiatives. The research is analysing a number of landscape genesis projects in Tyneside, from highly personal spaces through to wider public areas. The implications of the meanings and motivation, which are driving such projects, for present local authority activities are evaluated and a more widely references approach to landscape and ecological restoration project is developed.
Cultural heritage and the new estate identity in the agrarian landscape
Ole Mouritsen
Ariktektskolen i Aarhus
The rural landscape visualises an ambiguous scenery of the cultural heritage of the agrarian production still physically present, but containing new urbanised functions and of the big scale farming almost hidden but being a possible new manor house landscape in embryo. The agrarian landscape does not represent a true telling. The splendour of the manor houses is a part of the romantic view of the landscape aesthetics with their readable narratives. Contrary to that, the big scale farming is in general opposed to or even in conflict with the rest of the society. The development is forced by economic demands but culturally and aesthetically there is a void still to be fulfilled by the big scale farming as being a desirable addition to the cultural environment of the agrarian landscape. A new concern of the estate identity (unity) as well as the buildings and the farmland could pay and important role of giving a positive contribution to the image of the farming and its landscaping by representing a true narrative of what goes on out there.
197
How do people evaluate native vegetation in agriculural landscapes? An application of Ingleharts Materialist-Postmaterialist Social Values Theory
Jean Sandall, Geoff Kaine
School of Marketing and Management, University of New England, Australia
Ingleharts Materialist-Postmaterialist Social Values theory would suggest that the characteristics that appeal to people in agricultural landscapes and the positions they take on environmental issues will reflect the social values they hold. In this study, we conducted 200 interviews with people from various groups with a stake in conserving remnant native vegetation in agricultural landscapes to investigate: 1) whether there were systematic relationships between the characteristics that people find appealing in agricultural landscapes and the social values they hold; and 2) whether there were systematic relationships among peoples social values, the characteristics that people find appealing in agricultural landscapes, and the stakeholder group they were drawn from. Analysis of the interview data revealed that there were systematic relationships among peoples social values, the characteristics that appealed to them in agricultural landscapes, and the stakeholder group they were drawn from. The findings indicate that the conflict over conserving remnant native vegetation in agricultural landscapes is rooted in fundamental differences in the social values held by different stakeholders.
Assessing public perception of landscape: The Welsh experience

Alister Scott Assessing public perception of landscape continues to be both an academic and policy challenge. Landscapes can mean different things to different people and invoke different psychological responses. The involvement of the public in landscape matters has been and continues to be controversial. Constraints of time and resources, together with a reluctance to delegate responsibility to the public have generally limited the scope and influence of much participation to conventional reactive strategies. This paper assesses the potential of a new methodology to identify public perception of landscape in Denbighshire. Forming part of a wider initiative known as LANDMAP, a technique adopted by the Countryside Council for Wales for identifying distinctive landscape areas, household questionnaires and focus groups have been used to evaluate public perception in response to carefully selected photographic media. The results afford important insights into public perception and allow particular landscape types to be evaluated in both quantative and qualitative terms. For the first time it is possible to evaluate public perception results in conjunction with other factors within GIS applications for landscape management decision making. Analysis of the results for two selected areas shows that the public has strong attachments to managed rural landscapes in general and wish to see more integrative and participative strategies for landscape protection and management. Such attitudes challenge planners and policy makers to rethink their approaches towards conventional landscape management strategies and planning.
Key Words: LANDMAP, public perception, citizen participation, focus groups, methodology, and re-appraisal of planning policy
198
Cognitive mappig: a method for assessing biodiversity perceptions ?

Katriina Soini
Agricultural Research Centre of Finland, Resource Management Research. FIN 31600 Jokioinen. Tel +358 3 4188 3191. email. katriina.soini@mtt.fi
In the recent agri-environmental and rural policy the role of local natural and cultural heritage has been highlighted as a mean for sustainable spatial development. The emphasis has been placed on the multifunctional rural space: on conservation and creative management of landscapes. However, this kind of development cannot be reached only by implementing topdown policy measures. The focus should also be on landscape perceptions and experiences of local people. In this research the landscape perceptions of four rural communities are examined with a special focus on biodiversity. The perceptions will be studied by cognitive mapping and the results will further be compared with scientific biodiversity measured in the same areas. In this study, cognitive maps are understood as a continuum of several types of mapping (traditional cognitive mapping, concept mapping and symbol mapping). The ultimate aim of the research is to find out relationships between the perceived and scientific values of biodiversity and actions of rural communities. The paper illustrates the way cognitive mapping might be used in landscape perception research. Keywords: multifunctional landscape, environmental perceptions, landscape assessment, spatial development, cognitive mapping.
Various aspects of the landscape values considered as national heritage

Krzysztof H. Wojciechowski
Environmental Protection Dept., Earth Sciences Institute, Maria Curie Sklodowska University Lublin, POLAND
National heritage can be defined as a set of objects (material and immaterial) which are preserved , popularised and put to represent to others in order to symbolise and sustain some particular combination of values , myths and outlooks actually common to the group of individuals recognising themselves as a nation . In particular landscape (or their aspects) can be valued as : - specific or representative fragments of unchanged nature , - conserved elements of nature , examples of human care for nature , - scenery of past events worth to be remembered , - testimony of skills or artistic tastes of past generations , - living and material legacy of ways of lifeof the past generations, - objects of art. and/or achievements of engineering , - sceneries inspiring aesthetic experience , Contemporary societies tend to treat as its heritage both (defined by J.B.Jackson) types of landscapes deserving protection : most renowned ones , belonging to the class of the former political landscapes (also called emblematic landscapes) and landscapes presently recognised as cultural monuments , belonging in the past to the class of vernacular landscapes
199
5.
Session E: Landscapes between continuity and change
Kurgans: Historical and ecological heritage of the Hungarian Plane

Barczi, Attila & Jo, Katalin
Szent Istvn University, Dept. of Landscape Ecology
Basically the Great Hungarian Plain which is part of the Carpathian basin has a mosaic-like structure, and rich in living areas because of its hydrographical conditions. The isolated hillocks which called kunhalom (it means: Cumanian hillock, kurgan) by Hungarian people belongs to the landscape of the Great Hungarian Plain. Sizes show big variety: between 20-90 metres in diameter, 0.5 - 12 (possibly 20 metres) in heightand so-called shield-size is between 50 to 160 metres. Their sketch generally a round-like oval. They are hemisphere- or cone-shaped structures. Some of the Cumanian hillocks were settlements at the ancient time, so they lived through from the levels of damaged and reconstructed houses from time to time in several thousand years. This structure of settlements existed at two periods of the prehistoric age: late new Stone Age (4000-3500 B.C), and early and middle Bronze Age (2600-1500 BC). These structures were connected with the special agricultural system of SouthEastern Europe and Asia Minor. Another big part of the Cumanian hillocks served as burial ground for the settlers of the Carpathian basin. These hillocks were erected in a short time period, from the surrounding ground to comply with the requirements of prehistoric funerals. The Cumanian hillocks could fulfil another functions beyond that. Small hillocks, wich were to serve safety with making signs and news passing easier and faster were frequently situated mainly on the Great Hungarian Plain and the East-Transdanubian region. The forming of border hillocks was connected with signing the countrys or settlements border. Cumanian hillocks are inestimable treasures of our country. They have significant value in archeology, landscape, botany and soil science. Archeologists suspect that the dreaded Hunan leader Attila was buried in one of these hillocks. Most of our relic from the 10-15th century comes from these Cumanian hillocks or their surroundings. Their landscape value makes the monotonous flat horizon a bit various. The Hungarian heath-plant vegetation of loess is the most western appearance of the continental grass vegetation. In undisturbed state its extremely rich in living areas, and a suitable place to get food, for reproduction and rest for the living organisms, and it can be a reservoir area for them at the winter time. On the hillocks, which are in the best condition, we find a relatively weedless loessgrass, but it often has a limited species number. These living areas should play a great part in the biological green passage system or the restoring of the original vegetation to the area. The values of Cumanian hillocks in soil science can be understood when you think about the task of the soil. The soil is the most important factor among of the conditionally renewable natural resources. It is the integrator, reactor and transformator of some other natural resources; scene of the biomass production; a natural reservoir of the heat, the nutrition elements and the water; a
200
natural filter; a big capacity of buffered area; an important gene-reservoir; raw material of the possible technical utilization; a place to build, and the archives of the Geo- and Cultural history. These functions are well-reconcilable with the possible Cumanian hillocks researches so we can get useful information for the soil-formation, and the properties of the buried soil layers with the investigation of Cumanian hillocks in soil science.
Long term retrospective landscape ecology some Methodological reflections

Ole Hjorth Caspersen and Bo Fritzbger The aspect of retrospective landscape ecology is central for the landscape ecological discipline in order to gain adequate understanding of the composition and functioning of the present and future landscapes. Nevertheless an acknowledgement of the importance of this perspective is often committed in landscape ecological research. The implementation of older maps are time-consuming, changing classifications and new methods for map-production, etc. makes the interpretation difficult. These problems increase when maps and data from 19th century or beyond are employed. Typically, these maps are hand-drawn and have local projections. However information regarding former land use considered in a system context, is often important to the understanding of the present use and are valuable when assessing the possibilities for future land use in the form of scenario studies. This paper discusses the expediency of applying a retrospective methodology that combines landscape ecology with the traditional historical approach. This method is applied to an investigation area for the period 1680-2000. By use of agricultural census combined with older maps within a GIS, a 125 km2 area in Jutland is analyses with respect to land use and landscape dynamics within a landscape ecological perspective.
Characters of traditional and modern vegetation landscapes

Ulrich Deil
Department of Geobotany, Institute of Biology II, Schnzlestr. 1, D-79104 Freiburg, Germany
To study the effects of the cultural transition from a selfsustaining society via an preindustrial to an agroindustrial system for the plant cover, three Mediterranean mountains are compared at the plant community and at the landscape level. They are located in the mountainous arc from southern Portugal via southwestern Andalusia to northwestern Morocco. The methodology is on the one hand location-for-timesubstitution, on the other hand a retrospective approach by comparing the actual (90ies) and the former (60ies) landuse pattern. Qualitative (species composition, vegetation types) and quantitative (alpha-diversity, cover degree of landuse-types) parameters are used. In Spain, where agroindustrial management is prevailing, multifunctional landunits and shifting cultivation are disappearing. Big landownership creates scoarse grained landscapes there. In Portugal, medium-size farming is dominating. The transformation to a market oriented production depends from the accesibility and productivity of the sites. In Morocco, selfsustaining agriculture and shifting cultivation give origin to weed communities with high alpha-diversity and to a
201
small scale pattern in land use types. Every technological level produces specific plant associations. Common elements are roadside verges and other ruderal communities. Modernisation of vegetation landscapes ends up with a more trivial and scoarser plant canopy.
Comparing long term landscape-development around Three Danish lakes

Peter Eigaard & Bernd Mnier The overall aim of our work within the research project 'AGRAR 2000' is to trace landscape development around three Danish lakes during the past 200 years. These areas have developed differently, determined by varying geo-physical settings and cultural heritage. Nowadays, intensively utilised areas tend to develop towards increasingly uniform landscapes, but they still maintain different landscape functions and ecological importance, reflecting their regional historic development. To trace landscape dynamics, we have set up a spatio-temporal mapdatabase using a Desktop GIS linked to agricultural census data stored in a Relational Database Management System. Main data sources are sets of scanned topographic maps and census data from the middle of the 19th century onwards. Digital maps on soil properties and morphological features supplement the main data set. Integrating spatial and temporal dimensions in analysing landscape-development enhances understanding the dynamic of landscape processes. The key landscape elements dealt with are forest types, wet meadows, dry grasslands and heathlands. Analysing long-term landscape-development can be used for identifying landscapes of potentially high nature quality and/or cultural heritage. These aspects are important when discussing potentials and plans for managing future landscapedevelopment and protection.
Agricultural landscape dynamics in Switzerland: a model using the brown hare as an indicator of the evolution of ecological qualities.
Corinne Gilliron Changes in the Swiss agricultural landscape have been observed through five periods from 1950 to 1990; data were obtained from historical statistics, aerial photographs and maps from 944 communes (out of a total of 2128 in the study area) for which data were available. The data-set consists of 25 variables reflecting land-use, agricultural practices, sociology, meteorology and geomorphology. Seventeen of these are relevant for the brown hare (Lepus europaeus). The other eight are needed to explain land-use changes. A theoretical index of hare density can be calculated using three of our variables and the observations and counts of hares made by the Swiss Ornithological Institute of Sempach. This way of integrating the biologists' observations into our spatio-temporal model of the landscape's qualities is innovative and demonstrates the problem of linking different scales. The other twenty-two variables are used as input to our model, which is derived from a hierarchical multivariate divisive model called PEGASE* . This model is then used to explain hare density index evolution. The central point of our research is to integrate the temporal
202
aspect in our model by defining types of evolution curves, constructed on five observations in time.
* Partition d'un Ensemble Gographique pour l'Analyse Spatiale Ecologique, M. Phipps, Department of Geography, University of Ottawa, Canada
Land use history and changes in biodiversity of riparian landscapes (illustrated by the examples of the Rhne and Isre rivers valleys)
Jacky Girel
Universit Joseph Fourier, Centre de Biologie Alpine, U.M.R. Ecosystmes et Changements Environnementaux, B.P. 53, F 38041 GRENOBLE (Cedex 9), jacky.girel@ujf-grenoble.fr
Since the Neolithic period, riparian landscapes had been severely modified by the cumulative impacts induced by man. The anthropogenic disturbances have concerned the fluxes (in the case of engineering works such as diking, channelization, drainage, artificial silting, gravel mining and hydroelectric development) or directly the alluvial vegetation (in the case of land clearing, cultivation, tree plantation, establishment of alien invasive plants). Since the 19th century, technological advances have allowed the development of large scale engineering works which modified sometimes in an irreversible way the movements of the fluxes of water, sediments, organic matter and plant species. The biological systems respond to these perturbations in different ways: i) morphological changes and physiological adjustments of the plant to the new environmental conditions; ii) death of hygrophylic and mesohygrophylic communities and conversely demographic explosion of mesic plants and communities. Through the examples of alpine riparian landscapes (the Rhne river and tributaries) it has been shown how the modifications which have disturbed the floodplain dynamics and function patterns also have changed landscapes and plant biodiversity.
Coherence of Cultural Landscapes: A New Criterion for Evaluation the Impacts of Landscape Changes
lo Mander and Marika Murka
Institute of Geography, University of Tartu, 46 Vanemuise St, 51014 Tartu, Estonia Phone: +37 27375819, Fax: +37 27 375825, e-mail: mander@ut.ee
We propose a new method for calculating the coherence of cultural landscapes. It refers to accordance of potential (natural) and actual (cultural or man-made) landscape diversity. To measure the natural landscape diversity an index was worked out that considers the number of soil types, number of soil patches, contrast between two adjacent soil patches, and patch perimeters. Ecological diversity of cultivated landscape is estimated according to ecotones density defined as transition belts between agricultural lands and natural biocenoses. We assume that the changes in landscape structure, especially of ecologically compensation areas (e.g. woodlots, hedges, riparian zones, natural/seminatural grassland patches, ponds etc.), should be in certain accordance (coherence) with the local geomorphological and soil conditions. In 195 land reclamation areas from all landscape regions in Estonia we analyses the soil structure, diversity of landscape before and after land reclamation (i.e. in 1972-74 and 1975-76, respectively), and the current situation. During the repeated visits to study areas,
203
appearance of soil erosion, deflation, bank erosion, level of humus mineralisation and changes in scenic values was documented. We have found out that marine sandy plains and limestone plains, as the areas with the simplest geomorphology and soil cover structure, and, on the other hand, all hilly areas (except drumlin fields and till-covered kame fields) with the most complicated structure of abiotic factors, are the most vulnerable landscape types. It means that the simplification of landscape diversity, determined on the base of ecotones network density, could be least in landscapes with both very simple and very complicated potential diversity, determined by heterogeneity of abiotic factors. Currently, majority of these former agriculturally used areas is abandoned. This concept is useful in landscape planning evaluation the impacts of landscape changes causes by land reclamation or conversion to more intensive management.
Cultural Environments changing in the past and continuing in the future

Per Grau Mller
Centre leader of Changing Landscapes, Cartographical Documentationcentre, University of South Denmark, Campusvej 55, DK 5230 Odense M
This paper will deal with a Danish approach to the administration of the cultural landscape, called cultural environments (kulturmilj). With basis in the cultural historical projects of the ongoing strategical research project Changing Landscapes it will be stressed that to understand the landscape of the present it is necessary to impose a historical view of the landscape. The landscape turns out as multifunctional and diverse, but to understand the multifunctionality an explanation of its history will help to alter or continue the structure of the landscape. I will focus on four elements to understand the structure of the landscape: the settlement in the landscape, the land use, the borderlines and the infrastructure. My examples will derive from the agricultural landscape of historical times and of the present. Dealing with the very common and misused word sustainability it will be shown that a cultural, human dimension is lacking in its implementation. To make a development ecologically and economically sustainable it will be necessary to have a cultural, historical understanding of the landscape. It must be stressed that the intention is certainly not to make a museum landscape, but to make people continue their lives in the landscape conscious of the legacy of our forefathers. A point will be that we must learn to live with the history in the landscape. This still gives us lots of opportunities to act as man in the present.
Cultural Landscape Dynamics in the NW-Himalayas and Hindukush: A Human-Ecological Monitoring Approach Using Repeat Photography
Marcus Nsser
Department of Geography, University of Bonn, email: m.nuesser@uni-bonn.de
This paper presents contemporary land cover and land use changes in the high mountain regions of northern Pakistan. The regional land use system in these marginal belts of human habitat is based on irrigated crop cultivation in the valley bottoms, combined with mobile
204
livestock keeping, and forest utilisation in the upper ecological belts. The altitudinal zonation of environmental conditions stipulates a vertical and seasonal migration pattern as part of an adapted agro-pastoral economy. A human-ecological analysis of landscape transformation processes requires a research perspective which takes into account environmental resources as well as historical and socio-economic aspects of land use systems. Based on repeat photography, emphasis will be laid on contemporary vegetation changes and landscape dynamics. For the Nanga Parbat region (NW-Himalayas), a comprehensive collection of historical landscape photographs taken there by members of the German Himalaya expeditions of 1934 (by R. Finsterwalder) and 1937 (by C. Troll) forms a valuable data-base for comparative studies. The second study area in the eastern Hindukush was studied (and photographed) by a scientific expedition in 1966. Recent fieldwork (1992-1997) rendered it possible to repeat a great number of historical photographs from viewpoints identical to the earlier ones, which in turn serve to illustrate cultural landscape changes over the last decades.
Landscape mosaics: recognition and changes over time

Roldn, M.J.*; Martn de Agar, P & de Pablo, C.L.
Dpto. Interuniversitario de Ecologa. Facultad de Biolgicas. universidad Complutense. 28040 Madrid, Spain. *mjroldan@eucmos.sim.ucm.es
Studies of landscapes and their changes in time are based on the identification of the patches they are comprised of, their cartography and the analysis of their temporal changes. The landscape, however, is made up of groups of patches or mosaics, rather than isolated patches. This paper develops a methodology to identify and characterise the mosaics present in a territory and their changes in time. A mosaic is defined as a characteristic spatial set together of patches, including their relative spatial positions in a determined physical environment, at a determined scale of detail. Land use maps were obtained from aerial photography of the area from 1946 to 1999. The patches contacting with each other patch were registered. These contacts are the boundaries. We designed a patches x boundaries matrix and carried out a multivariate ordination, and with the ordination co-ordinates of the observations (patches) we did a cluster analysis. The spatial projection of the clusters provided a map of mosaics. We mapped the mosaics at different cut levels of the cluster hierarchy. We analysed the main temporal change tendencies of the mosaics with the use of this cartography.
The role of land use in the differentiation of natural units a historical perspective
Stefan Zerbe The differentiation of natural units on the basis of abiotic (climate, geology, hydrology, etc.) and biotic factors (flora, vegetations, etc.) has to be considered as an essential part of the geographical and landscape ecological analysis. Additionally, the anthropogenous influence on landscape development and especially the secular development of settlements and landuses can be derived from investigations of the cultural history of landscapes. With the SandstoneSpessart, a natural unit in SW Germany, as the example, the influence of man on the
205
differentiation of the natural landscape through different forms and intensities of land use is shown. It is obvious, that different abiotic and biotic site conditions within the natural unit have led to a spatial differentiation of the landscape. However, economic and political factors also play a major role in the historical development of relatively homogeneous natural units. Accordingly, on the basis of a cultural historical analysis in combination with an investigation of the actual vegetation, four natural sub-units can be differentiated in the Sandstone-Spessart. This combined approach of landscape ecological analysis and cultural historical investigations provides a useful basis for the regional differentiation of nature conservation and landscape planning objectives.
206
6.
Session F: Observing landscapes
GIS for NATURA 2000 - Monitoring Europe's Nature Conservation Sites

A. Annoni, S.Christensen, S. Peedell
European Commission - Joint Research Centre, Space Applications Institute, Agriculture and Regional Information Systems Unit, I-21020 Ispra (Va) Italy
Natura 2000 is a European network of Nature Conservation sites designated by Member States under the Birds Directive 10 and the Habitats Directive 11 , where human activity must be compatible with the conservation of sites of natural importance. The creation of the Natura 2000 network is the cornerstone of Community Nature Conservation policy and a major challenge for the European Commission and the Member States. Contrary to what is widely believed, the Natura 2000 network does not only comprise National Parks, but include large areas of productive land. Natura 2000 is strongly based on the concept of sustainable development, where productive activities must be integrated with the requirements of nature conservation. Environmental concern is increasingly being integrated into EU policy measures such as Agenda 2000. The Natura 2000 sites are numerous and cover a significant area of the EU territory by 2004 there are expected to be some 15000 sites, covering more than 10% of the EU territory. Enlargement of the EU will increase the number of sites significantly. Many Natura2000 sites can be considered as multifunctional and facing pressures such as urbanisation, agriculture and recreation, but there is currently no clear definition of how these sites should be assessed and monitored at European level. The lack of harmonised spatial data at European level presents a significant barrier to the development of monitoring systems. The diversity of the Natura2000 sites, combined with the heterogeneity of existing data held by different organisations throughout Europe, requires a concerted approach based on clear requirements of site management. Under an agreement between the Joint Research Centre and Directorate General Environment, the fundamental issues in creation of a harmonised spatial database for Natura2000 are being addressed. By establishing a Geographic Information System (GIS) for Natura2000, a standard set of applications will be available to allow the analysis and definition of standard measures to support site monitoring.
10 11
Council Directive79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds. Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora.
207
Integrated monitoring for the countryside; the Flemish experience.

De Blust, G. (1), M. Antrop (2), V. Van Eetvelde (2) and M. Van Olmen (1).
(1) Institute of Nature Conservation, Brussels, Belgium (2) Department of Geography, University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium.
For the rural areas of Flanders (Belgium) an integrated monitoring scheme is elaborated, intended to assess the state of terrestrial bio-diversity outside nature reserves. The purpose is to monitor changes in bio-diversity directly related to potential causing factors, e.g. land-use, environmental conditions, spatial characteristics of habitats. Integrated refers to two aspects: 1) selection of key indicators following as much as possible pressure-state-response models; 2) spatially combined monitoring of parameters within selected sites (1 x 1 km2). Both ensure that functional interrelations between indicators will contribute to understand observed changes in bio-diversity. In this paper we will focus on some critical problems to be solved in order to reach the final goal: the implementation of a methodology for the integrated monitoring of complex landscapes in relation to bio-diversity. Problems of concern are among other things: How to translate a broadly stated and open-ended policy theme into a precise and unequivocal scientifically sound monitoring scheme? How to attain a representative selection of monitoring sites? What variables for what purposes? How to achieve a maximal output from a minimal programme, a prerequisite for a successful adoption by environmental policy?
Developing a landscape monitoring program for Sweden

Jonas Fridman, Gran Sthl
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Forest Resource Management and Geomatics, SE-901 87 Ume, Sweden
In the new framework for national environmental monitoring in Sweden, adopted by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, a programme for monitoring of landscapes is included. The main focus of the programme is on biodiversity, although aspects on land cover, land use, and cultural heritage sites may also be incorporated. The programme is scheduled to start in 2003. Until then, development work will be carried out. As a basis for this work, the idea is that the monitoring programme should involve three levels: 1) Census information from satellite imagery 2) Air photo interpretation of sampled landscapes (typically 1x1 km in size) 3) Field inventory in the sampled landscapes Primarily, the programme is intended to provide results for strategic environmental decisions at regional and national levels. These results will be obtained mainly from the assessments in the last two levels. The census satellite information is planned to provide local level data as input for local level decisions. These data will, however, be quite coarse due to the mostly limited correlation between field conditions and satellite data. The work to develop the programme started in 1999. The aim of the presentation is to communicate the results from the initial studies, including work on what indicators to assess and what specific design to use. In addition, the results from a first pilot test will be presented.
208
Towards an interdisciplinary monitoring of European floodplain landscapes: Geo-ecological approaches of terrestrial monitoring in floodplain forest within an urban landscape
Dagmar Haase
Centre for Environmental Research Leipzig-Halle, P.O. Box 2, D-04301 Leipzig, e-mail: haase@alok .ufz.de
The region of the Leipzig floodplain wetlands with one of the most beautiful floodplain forest in Europe as well as strongly degradated areas contains. The rivers of Weisse Elster and Pleisse are examples of the strong human impact on wetland ecosystems. The open pit mining around Leipzig and the chemical industries, were the sources of millions of tons of toxic organic and inorganic contaminants of which some have been accumulated in the floodplains of the floodplain ecosystems. Moreover, the floodplains and their forest are important elements of the German wetlands and considerable retention areas for flora and fauna that are in danger of becoming extinct. Furthermore, intensive land use has a long history in the floodplain regions around Leipzig. Since centuries there has been functioning a certain interaction of ecological (e.g. changing of the atmospherically inputs) and socio-economic factors (e.g. migration processes, variation of the land-use structure, developing aesthetic understanding of nature) within the floodplain landscape which must be regarded as important for the further development of both, the floodplains and the city of Leipzig. But, which are the main factors of the development of the floodplain ecosystems and how the society needs to control it? Within the presented research paper different methods have been used to generate an interdisciplinary approach of terrestrial monitoring to find out the hot spots of the floodplain landscape development.
The impact of disturbance on landscape diversity

Anke Jentsch (& Peter S. White) Landscapes are dynamic, with natural or anthropogenic disturbances being among the most important sources for gradual or abrupt change. In this contribution we review essential findings from disturbance ecology on the impact of disturbance on landscape diversity and landscape equilibrium. The size of a landscape is considered relative to the scale of its disturbance dynamics. Focusing on the multiple patch scale we explore whether landscapes exhibit constant and predictable structures at large spatial scales, despite high variance in disturbance dynamics at smaller scales. The dominant scale issue here is the question of patch dynamic equilibrium. Disturbance regimes contribute significantly to biotic diversity and spatial heterogeneity of landscapes. They produce a continuum of conditions from primary to secondary succession and leave behind a wide range of legacies from the predisturbance ecosystem. These legacies often create further heterogeneity within landscapes, with different species favoured in different kinds of patches. In most landscapes disturbances also interact with human-imposed scales and boundaries, and in turn boundary conditions affect disturbance frequency and magnitude. On the search for generality in disturbance ecology we seek to understand the causal interaction of spatial and temporal patterns of disturbance with landscape configuration across diverse landscape and types of disturbance. It is important to study disturbance, because disturbance is present in all landscapes, it occurs across a wide range of scales, it creates patchiness and affects landscape composition and functioning.
209
Disturbance is essential to the maintenance of biodiversity, it plays a critical role in climate change and exotic species invasion. Humans alter disturbance regimes and need to understand subsequent landscape dynamics for developing models with predictive capabilities. We propose that the diversity of landscape pattern is among others the product of a few fundamental variables describing disturbance regimes. Nevertheless, we are challenged with spatial and temporal variation in disturbance events and ecosystem response, with variation of absolute values along gradients within and between landscapes, with variation in species adaptations among ecosystems, and with variation in sampling and analysis.
Monitoring and Evaluating the Nature Space Potential in Suburban Spaces Using Remote Sensing Data and GIS
Maik Netzband
University of Leipzig, Faculty of Physics and Earth Sciences, Institute for Geography
The redevelopment process in east German urban regions since the reunification is a process which brought forward structurally modified and often disperse settlement structures in an extraordinarily short period of time. This very dynamically running impact has led to a clear re-evaluation of the surrounding countryside and to an absolute deconcentration of population and of work-places. In this project an analysis and an evaluation of the nature space potential for the suburban space are to be made by means of remote sensing methods including geographical information systems (GIS). With the results derived a progress control of desired planning goals can be made. Within the last ten years landscape structure indices have been implemented on remote sensing image data for different mapping scales. As original input data topographic maps, aerial photographic data as well as satellite images have been used. Thus the analysis of historical samples represents the base for the comparison of current as well as of future landscape structures and enables predicates to evaluate the dynamics of the landscape. A methodological approach is presented, after which monitoring and evaluation of a landscape diversity in suburban landscapes are feasible on the basis of high resolution satellite data.
Monitoring "Kolbental" - a concept for the protection of a wetland area and its sustainable use for drinking water supply
Jrgen Ott In this paper the general concept of the monitoring project "Kolbental" near Kaiserslautern (Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany), which began in 1998, and some first results are presented. In this protected wetland area with lots of endangered species and biotopes an organisation for drinking water supply (Zweckverband Wasserversorgung Westpfalz) will start the extraction of groundwater - about one million cbm per annum - in 2001. The use of this area for drinking water supply was only allowed by the local governement, if the extraction will take place in accordance with the presented monitoring programme. During the first 3 years the basic investigations, and thereafter during a five year period the investigations to determine the possible impact are taking place. Beside abiotic factors like climate, soil moisture etc. and
210
intensive mapping of a broad spectrum of biotic factors takes place (biotopes, flora, carabid beetles, grasshoppers, butterflies and dragonflies). This long term programme should ensure, that the extraction will be in a sustainable way and will not harm significantly the biocoenosis of this wetland area.
Analysis of landscape changes with integrated criteria: application to sustainable management of natural resources
P. Prez Gutierrez, C. T. Lpez de Pablo, P. Martn de Agar, F. Daz Pineda
Departamento de Ecologa, Facultad de Biologa, Universidad Complutense de Madrid 28040 Madrid (Spain).
A methodological procedure for the integrated analysis of the landscape and its evolution, with sustainable management in mind, is shown. By mean of a cluster analysis over the matrix of data, obtained from the thematic maps of the territory, internally homogenous groups of observations can be recognized at different levels of similitude. Cartographic expression of these levels gives different ecological maps. Landscape analysis can be done considering the boundaries of patches, focusing both on the characteristics of each patch and the whole landscape. By comparing the values obtained in the different years, the changes in the landscape and in the interactions between patches can be characterized. This procedure has various advantages, in that: it is an objective and contrastable analysis of the relationships taking place in a territory. It detects the main elements of a territory and their interactions in the functioning of the landscape, as well as their temporal evolution, considering different levels of detail. In the other hand the relationship between changes in landscape characteristics and other ecological parameters that are harder to acquire can help to design policies for managing the characteristics of the landscape for different exploitation objectives.
Mitigation and Monitoring of Ecological and Visual Impacts of Projects Subject to EIA in the UK
Elaine Quinn A mandatory requirement of the environmental impact assessment regulations in the UK is a description of the measures to mitigate significant adverse environmental effects resulting from a proposed development. However, there are no mandatory requirements for monitoring the implementation and effectiveness of the proposed measures. The basis of this investigation is to explore the nature and extent of monitoring of the implementation and effectiveness of ecological and visual impact mitigation measures in the UK. Firstly, the quality of ecological and visual impact assessments in the UK is evaluated through the review of environmental statements. From this sample, 12 case studies have been selected. Site visits and interviews have been undertaken to ascertain if the mitigation measures proposed in the environmental statement have been implemented and are proving to be effective. For the monitored projects the data is evaluated to assess its reliability and adequacy for auditing impacts, evaluating the effectiveness of mitigation measures and testing the accuracy of predictive techniques. For
211
projects without monitoring, site visits and interviews have been undertaken to determine whether the absence of monitoring is permitting unnecessary environmental damage.
A methodological approach of an ecological process classification in the landscape research shown with the Rostock Hierarchical Ozone Monitoring (RHOM)
Stdemann, Otto; Sabine Eckert; Sandra Odya; Drte Krger
University of Rostock, Research Group Applied Meteorology and Ecosystem Analysis
Usually multifunctionality of a landscape refers to ecological, economical and production functions. Furthermore multifunctionality refers to the formation of hierarchical classified processes. These processes result in phenomena of landscapes by them showing the coupling of numerous functions. Aims of an ecological process classification will be derived. Process analysis with the example of the Rostock Hierarchical Ozone Monitoring: Episodes with high ozone concentrations near the ground are linked with a hierarchical system of processes of the dynamics in the atmosphere coupled with processes forcing the formation of anthropogenic abiotic and biogenic as well as naturally biogenic ozone precursors. Together with air- , airchemical and photochemical processes these processes result in landscape-dependent ozone concentrations. Based on the ozone deposition rate of the plant (and of man of course) and their controlling mechanisms we can define the local-specific ozone effect potential. The processes of damage genesis on plants can be showed as sequences for every organismic organization stage: cell stage, tissue stage, organ stage and the whole plant. By analizing the landscape related ozone formation, the local-specific as well as the plant-specific ozone effects the genesis of a geographic pattern of phytotoxic effects of near ground ozone can be described. According to the methodological rules of process research (Landscape ecological Axiom, Multiscale Analysis, element , partialcomplex- and landscaperelated process structure) the nature of processes can be described by the process categories process genesis, process dimension, process constellation, process function and process regulation. With a developed tool-box so for every causality problem a process classification can be derived. The tool-box contains the subject, the methodological approaches, criteria for the classification and examples for every process category. Strict working during process classification guarantees the validity limits of the correspondence of aim, content and method. So gaps of the process analysis are realized. The lecture is completed by posters.
212
Convergence of land attributes (soil, geology, geomorphology and soil water) with site productivity in plantations of Norway spruce in western Denmark.
Henrik Vejre* and Casper Szilas**
*Department of Economics and Natural Resources, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Rolighedsvej 23, 1958 Frederiksberg C **Chemistry Department, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Thorvaldsensvej 40 1871 Frederiksberg C * Corresponding Author
The convergence between soil type, soil nutrients, soil water, geomorphology, geology and site productivity (tree growth) was tested at 57 sites in western Denmark, all vegetated with even aged Norway spruce stands. Site productivity was lower on dune landscapes as compared to glaciofluvial plains and moraine landforms. Productivity was highest on glacial till, followed by glaciofluvial sand and eolian sand. Entisols and Inceptisols were common on sandy till sediments, while Spodosols and Entisols with spodic characters were commonly found on eolean sand. 60 % of the soils were podzolized, and they dominated the old moraines and glaciofluvial plains, whereas no specific soil type characterized young moraines. Glaciofluvial plains converged generally with glaciofluvial sand, but was often covered by eolean coversand. Eolean sand occured commonly on moraine land forms. The soil phosphorus status was highest on glacial till and glaciofluvial sand, as compared to eolean sand. Accordingly, young moraines were generally rich in phosphorus. It is concluded that geomorphology is a poor predictor for site productivity, whereas the sediment type is more reliable. The spatial variation in land attributes was strong, implying problems with extrapolation from single observations, and homogeniety in one attribute does not imply homogeniety in others. The assumption of convergence among land attributes in land evaluations should be tested before any major site classification system is employed. Key Words: Soil, geology, geomorphology, site productivity, Norway spruce, land attributes, soil nutrients, soil water.
Detecting and classifying change transitions in the landscape using combined spatial data sets.
Niina Vuorela
Department of Geography, University of Turku, 20014 Turku, Finland e-mail: niina.vuorela@utu.fi, tel. 358+2+3336287, Fax. 358+2+3335896
Key words: landscape change, environmental variables, spatial data, GIS Analysis of landscape changes requires information of different environmental variables contributing to the characteristics of the landscape. These variables are both natural and anthropogenic. Representative information can be obtained from several sources, such as remotely sensed images, landscape descriptions, maps, historical records and photographs, which represent the landscape at different times and from variable perspectives. This study aims to detect and classify change transitions in the landscape bases on combined use of spatial information about different environmental variables. The case study area, the island of
213
Ruissalo, represents a unique biodiversity site in SW Finland with largest oak populations in the country. The island is also an important recreation and conservation area. The research approach has three major phases. Firstly, current landscape patters are observed and classified. Secondly, change transitions in the landscape are detected. Thirdly, landscape is re-classified according to the nature of these change trajectories. The approach requires use of multitemporal data sets, which vary according to spatial, temporal and thematic contents. Digital management of the data sets based on Geographic Information was use in the detection of the change transitions. With the aid of data combination it is possible to characterise landscapes according to their spatio-temporal nature. This could be of use in future evaluations of biodiversity, where it is relevant to consider both the current biodiversity and landscape change dynamics.
214
7.
Session G: Diversity and heterogeneity of landscapes
Comparing Biodiversity and Landscape Heterogeneity at Different Scales

Carl Beierkuhnlein
Landscape Ecology, University of Rostock, Justus von Liebig Weg, D-18051 Rostock Germany
Biodiversity became an important issue since the UNCED-conference. Meanwhile most countries have signed the biodiversity convention and are obliged to contribute to the conservation of biodiversity. To reach this goal, the identification and monitoring of biodiversity is necessary. These data can also help to register vegetation response to climate or landuse change. Information about spatial aspects of biodiversity within an area can be gained by the analysis of similarity or dissimilarity between plots. The heterogeneity or homogeneity of vegetation and the occurence of ecotones are important aspects of biodiversity. Following a systematic distribution, the sampling of data was performed in two Central European landscapes on the basis of a grid size of 106 m2 for the total area. A grid with quadrats of 104 m2 was used for a selected subset of plots and of these records another subset was divided into fields of 102 m2 . Patterns emerged from these data and were related to site conditions and to landuse. A scale dependence can be found within the actual data. Based on these results it can be concluded that various qualities of global change might be effective at different scales.
Multifunctional connectivity analysis of landscape elements

Thomas Blaschke The developing field of landscape ecology has provided a strong conceptual and theoretical basis for understanding landscape structure, function, and change. Growing evidence that habitat fragmentation is detrimental to many species and may contribute substantially to the loss of regional and global biodiversity has provided empirical justification for the need to manage entire landscapes, not just the components. Developments of GIS technology have made a variety of analytical tools available for analysing and managing landscapes. Much emphasis has been placed on developing methods to quantify landscape structure and a great variety of landscape structural indices have been developed for this purpose. The study of landscape patterns, however, has to focus on interactions among patches within a landscape mosaic, and how these patterns and interactions change over time. These interactions are complex and their explanations depend heavily on the view of the observer (scale, resolution, thematic interest). A multifunctional approach is devoloped to allow for a multifunctional
215
modelling of connectivity between landscape elements considering the development and dynamics of spatial heterogeneity and its affects on ecological processes and the management of spatial heterogeneity. The approach aims for overcoming the binary view of a landscape (habitat non-habitat) which is underlying most statistics based on nearest neighbor distance at the patch, class, and landscape levels.
Landscape homogenisation and fragmentation: Changes in the spatial organisation of the Madrid landscape (Spain)
Corbacho, P.P ; Zrate, A.; Rebollo, J.C ; & De Pablo, C.L*.
Depto. Interuniversitario de Ecologa, Facultad de Biologa. Universidad Complutense, 28040 Madrid, Spain. *Tel: 34-91394.5083 Fax: 34-91394.50.81 e-mail: cldpablo@eucmax.sim.ucm.es
Landscape changes were studied from 1956 to 1972, 1980 and 1991. Four sets of 676 plots were located on aerial photographs in each year. The cover of 26 land-uses was noted. A hierarchical clustering of the plots according to the land-uses for each year was made. Maps were produced from the spatial projection of those clusters, then fragmentation can be measured. To choose the hierarchical level to be mapped, the hierarchies were analysed using niche width measures (A) of the land-uses in the clusters, based on entropy indices. The minimum overall A value permits to recognise the hierarchical level that best define the landscape structure in each year. The value of this minimum is a measure of the spatial heterogeneity of the map. The A value of each land-use permits to identify those ones that best segregate in the different clusters (map sectors). A considerable change in the structure took place since 1980. The sectors defined in the previous years lose definition and fragment. There is a more indiscriminate distribution of land-uses in the sectors. The landscape had become fragmented and homogenised, changing from a structure with clearly differentiated sectors in 1956 to one that was equally homogeneous at any scale of detail.
Is a geodiversity a part of landscape diversity

Marek Degrski
Institute of Geography and Spatial Organisation, Polish Academy of Sciences, 00-818 Warsaw, Twarda 51/55, E-mail: m.degor@twarda.pan.pl
According to the classic definition of landscape as a system of abiotic and biotic elements and to the assumption of biodiversity as a one of the outer expression of total system diversity, it is possible to say that biodiversity is determined by the interaction between all elements of the system. Irrespective of the nature level (e.g. species, biocenotic), biodiversity is conditioned by the quantity and quality of available resources, which are strong connected with abitotic conditions (geo-conditions). Study was carried on the different scale of landscape units, from the landscape units of the lower rank as habitats or ecosystems, to the regional scale. It was noticed different environmental components which were most important to spatial variability of geodiversity, from the geochemical level (content of nutrients, moisture, reaction) to the geomorphological one (land form). Geodiversity is also very important element for the anthropogenic activity in the environment, where one of the form of expression in the
216
landscape is land use and land cover. Presented study showed strong correlation between geodiversity and landscape diversity depends on the scale and level of spatial organisation.
Theoretical landscape indices meeting data from the real world

Fjellstad, W.J.1 , Dramstad, W.E.1 , Fry, G.L.A.2 & Mathiesen, H.F. 1
1
Norwegian Institute of Land Inventory; 2 Norwegian Institute for Nature Research
Recently, the use of mathematical indices as tools to quantify and communicate information on various aspects of landscape has become increasingly common. Among planners and policy-makers in particular, these simple numbers conveying objectivity and scientific rigor have gained considerable popularity. However, any attempt to describe something so complex as a landscape in very simple terms, should meet certain scepticism. This has been the case for landscape indices, and the debate regarding their use and potential misuse is ongoing. In the Norwegian monitoring programme for agricultural landscapes, several indices are used, including indices of landscape diversity and heterogeneity. To ascertain whether these index values contain landscape information of relevance to e.g. biodiversity has been an important issue in the development of the monitoring programme. Index values were therefore related to field data on birds, vegetation, bumblebees and butterflies. This paper presents results from the 1998 monitoring squares. The results show significant correlations between number of bird species and both landscape diversity and heterogeneity values. Number of plant species was significantly correlated with heterogeneity values, whilst number of recorded insect species showed no relationship to either diversity or heterogeneity. Both results and the influence of sampling methods are discussed.
Connections between landscape diversity and modernizing agriculture in rural landscape

Reija Hietala-Koivu Landscape diversity from the point of view landscape ecological theory and methods can be analysed by quite a many indices. For instance, Shannon's diversity (SHDI), Shannon's evenness (SHEI), patch density (PD), edge density (ED) and landscape percentages (%LAND) describe landscape structure and composition. Variables describing modernization are the numbers of farms and tractors, which are measured in relation to field area. Modern agriculture requires more and more field area and farming machinery for ones living. In a case study of three areas, landscape diversity and modernization of agriculture were studied in 1954-1998 in Finland. Changes in distribution among patches were indicated to be decreasing. Changes in patch densities and patch shapes imply noticeable effects in simplifications of the visual landscape. At the same time, two thirds of the farms gave up agriculture and field sizes per farm doubled. In addition, in all three areas field area per tractor decreased remarkably, because of agricultural mechanization. Furthermore, decreased landscape diversity along with modernized farming practices will be highlighted from the viewpoint of human diversity.
217
Rebuilding the post-industrial landscape: interaction between landscape, diversity and biodiversity on derelict land.
Chris Ling1 , John Handley1 , John Rodwell2 & Julian Dring2
1 2
Centre for Urban and Regional Ecology, School of Planning & Landscape, University of Manchester Unit of Vegetation Science, School of Planning & Landscape, University of Lancaster
In the older industrial regions of Europe the transition from a heavy industrial to a knowledgebased economy has left extensive tracts of derelict and damaged land in its wake. Where it is possible and appropriate this land is being treated and restored for hard end-use such as housing and commercial development. However in many cases this is neither cost-effective nore appropriate and alternative soft end uses provide the alternative. An approach to land restoration which works with the grain of natural recovery has been shown to produce attractive, biodiverse and cost-effective landscapes. Understanding the relationship between landscape diversity and biodiversity is central to this approach.
Asessing the influence of patch type in determining patch structure: Studies in the Western Ghats, India
Harini Nagendra
Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012, India Telephone/Fax: (91-80) 360 1453, Email: harini@ces.iisc.ernet.in
Current research suggests that metrics of landscape pattern can act as indicators of ecological processes and biodiversity maintenance. This paper assesses the influence of patch type in determining patch structure. Studies were carried out in 13 landscapes between 9-54 km2 in the Western Ghats of India, a highly heterogeneous hill chain considered one of the worlds biodiversity hot-spots. Landscapes were mapped into 5-9 patch types. Three metrics were identified as concerned with aspects of patch size and shape, and inter-patch distance. An analysis of variation revealed that the within-type component of variation in patch metrics was dominant, accounting for much as 85-99% of the total variation in landscape patch structure. Between-type differences in patch structure were correspondingly minor. No significant differences in patch size, shape or distance could be established for different patch types, using data pooled across landscapes. Further, dendrograms of patch type similarity relationships varied widely from landscape to landscape. This study establishes the dominance of context (landscape) over type (patch identity) in determining patterns of patch structure, for the tropical landscapes of the Western Ghats. A possible explanation is provided by the predominance of local-scale, historical and human-influenced drivers of landscape change.
218
The Living Landscapes Project: Exploring the link between landscape character and biodiversity
Jonathan Porter, Geoffrey Griffiths & Steven Warnock1 , Eunice Simmons 2
1
The Department of Geography, The University of Reading, Whiteknights, Reading,. Berks, UK RG6 6AB. e-mail: j.r.porter@reading.ac.uk 2 T.H. Huxley School, Imperial College at Wye, University of London, Ashford, Kent, TN25 5AH
The Living Landscapes Project is developing a system of landscape character mapping to provide a framework for ecological monitoring in the wider countryside. The project involves the University of Reading and Wye College, with funding from English Nature, the government agency with responsibility for nature conservation in England. With growing evidence that present day processes of change often degrade the character of the countryside and its wildlife, there is an urgent need to develop a robust and widely accepted character bases framework that takes proper account of the natural, cultural and visual dimensions of the landscape. The paper will report on the GIS-bases characterisation process and demonstrate how the base mapping of Land Description Units (LDUs) are classified into distinct ecological types that reflect differences in the distribution of species and the type and structure of habitats within the wider countryside. field survey, supported by species distribution data and existing information on habitat type and extent from air-photography and published sources, is being used to validate the ecological typology. A novel aspect of the validation process will be to compare the distribution of indicator species, selected from published sources and the Biotope Preference Database of the Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, against ecological landscape type. The paper will report on results from this process, to demonstrate the extent to which the ecological typology for seven counties in the English Midlands, reflects the differences in the ecological character of the landscape
Assessment of landscape diversity using arial and space images

Yury G.Puzachenko, Gleb M.Aleshchenko Image is treated as a method of measurement of physical properties of land surface in determined interval of waves length. General purpose is obtaining useful information about structure of the territory reflected by signal. In multichannel photo image is transformed by principal components method, and image in each component is treated separately. On the basis of two-dimensional spectrum fractal dimensionality is calculated, number of existing hierarchical levels and parameters of interrelation "number of level - linear sizes" are defined. For different hierarchical levels by slipping square of corresponding size parameters of image texture (diversity, richness, fragmentation index, fractal dimensionality) are assessed. Multidimensional analysis of image is realized by segments (squares) received as a result of shift of image relative to itself on the number of pixels corresponding to average linear size of selected level. Dimensionality of selected level and its reflection in corresponding factor space is defined by method of multidimensional scaling. Classification of image is realized using kmeans method with number of classes defined by dimensionality. At the next step for each class dimensionality is defined over again and classification is repeated for the second level. This procedure is repeated until difference of classes extracted becomes statistically insignificant from homogeneous ones. Classification of image is realized simultaneously in all channels. Image with extracted classes of texture for each hierarchical level is the basis for
219
assessment of landscape diversity. Classification can be realized simultaneously by space image and image of relief affording more complete representation of landscape structure.
220
8.
Session H: Evaluating landscapes
Landscape evaluation of natural protected areas

Atauri, J.A. & de Lucio, J.V.
Departamento de Ecologa. Facultad de Ciencias. Universidad de Alcal. Alcal de Henares. 28871 SPAIN.
Designation of natural protected areas has historically been the result of a mixture of criteria (politic, aesthetic and ecological) often not well defined. Currently there is a concern for the implementation of objective criteria for the designation of protected areas: the future network of protected areas for the UE (Nature 2000) is based upon the importance for certain species or habitats. Nevertheless there is a growing awareness of the need of conserving global processes acting at landscape scales. The development of a concise set of indicators of landscape quality is therefore a priority for landscape evaluation for conservation. In this work, a multicriteria evaluation is carried out in the Madrid region comparing two different sets of criteria: species richness and a set of indicators of landscape processes. Our concern is to asses the integration of two different systems of protected areas (natural parks and Natura 2000 network) and their contribution to the maintenance of environmental services provided by landscape. Results of landscape evaluation are compared with the existing system of natural protected areas to assess to what extent it account for the conservation of either species diversity or landscape processes, and also to assess to what extent these criteria have been implicitly considered for designation. Results show quite different outputs for each set of criteria. The existing set of natural protected areas does not fit with areas of highest total species richness, but fits quite well with those areas with highest scores for rare species of birds, revealing its importance in the designation process. Regarding landscape processes, the existing set of natural protected areas does not correspond with those areas with highest value for preservation of landscape processes, as many areas of high value for the selected indicators are not included in any protected area. This study highlights the need of consideration of global processes and the conservation not only of endangered species but also of the functions and services provided by natural areas in the design of networks of natural protected areas.
221
Assessing the visual impact of agroforestry management with landscape design software
Daniel Auclair 1 , Jean-Francois Barczi1 , Frdric Borne 1 , Michel tienne 2
1
CIRAD INRA ; UMR de Modlisation des Plantes (AMAP) ; TA40/E ; 34398 Montpellier cedex 5 ; France auclair@cirad.fr http://www.cirad.fr/presentation/programmes/amap.shtml 2 INRA domaine st. Paul ; Unit dEcodveloppement ; Site Agroparc ; 84914 Avignon cedex 9 ; France etienne@avignon.inra.fr
Trees are generally considered as important cultural features of the landscape. Forestry and agroforestry management can offer many opportunities for enhancing the aesthetic value of forest or woodlands, the resulting visual aspect is however not easy to convey to decision makers and to the general public. Landscape design and visualisation software can be of great help as a decision support system. In a case study of in the Cvennes (France), various agroforestry management options have been simulated with the AMAP Landmaker software. The terrain was described through a digital elevation model. Information concerning the farm structure (land tenure, land use units) was integrated in a geographic information system. The AMAP database provides accurate 3-dimensional plant architectural models, built according to the botanical concepts developed by the Montpellier school of botany. individual tree computer mock-ups were computed for each species present, at the desired ages, in order to simulated landscape evolution with time. Images of the scene were computed through IMAGIS and observed on the screen from several virtual viewpoints. Various management options have been tested and visualised, providing a basis for discussion between partners concerning spatial organisation, such as the layout of forest and agricultural plots.
Contribution of multiscale remote sensing data for landscape evaluation in the Dnister region (Ukraine)
Bettina Baruth, Erik Borg
German Remote Sensing Data Center, 17235 Neustrelitz, Germany
One of the central aims of the German - Ukrainian interdisciplinary research project Transformation processes in the Dnister region (west Ukraine) (http://www.dnister.de) is supplying the evidence that landscape structure can be described and quantified from remote sensing data for nature conservation concerns. Specific methods and image processing algorithms are necessary. Landscape structure is an important parameter, because landscape patterns, ecological and environmental processes can be linked quantitatively. In order to take full advantage of this information, methods of structural analysis have to be developed and applied. A multiscale remote sensing data set is used to analyse landscape structure (landscape composition, size and shape of objects, adjacent objects, spatial relationships among objects) and to bring these results in relation to endangered breeding bird habitats in central Europe. The selection of suitable ecological parameters will be discussed as well as the choice of qualified corresponding image processing methods. Furthermore, own developments for characterising the Ukrainian landscape will be presented.
222
Multiple Goals and Outputs in an Agricultural Landscape

Charles A. Francis
University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0949, USA
Understanding the complex structures and multiple functions and outputs from agroecosystems in agricultural landscapes is key to design of efficient integrated systems for the future. When people and groups with divergent goals and vested interests are studied as key determinants in management of the landscape, this human dimension introduces potentials for conflicts and competition for resources and space. Different opinions on land use must be resolved if people are to work in harmony and make best use of resources. Since it is essential to find support from society at large, to place an appropriate value on the ecosystem services and agricultural outputs from the landscape, it is important to prepare and present coherent plans and be able to articulate them well. Boundaries between different activities must be defined and appropriate. If coordination of people and co-location of activities can inform the design of efficient and sustainable landscapes, then the emergent properties can add value to the human efforts and biological processes in the landscape. Rational design of rural landscapes is essential to the sustainability of agriculture and society.
Agricultural functionality and landscape heterogeneity: Multifunctionality in Danish agricultural landscapes

Pia Frederiksen1 , Esbern Holmes2 , Jesper Brandt2
1 2
Dept. of system Analysis, National Environmental Research Institute, Denmark Dept. of Geography and International Development Studies, Roskilde University
A characterisation of the multifunctional use of a landscape might to a certain degree be derived from the structure of the land cover. To evaluate this possibility a detailed monitoring system for Danish agricultural landscapes has been used: Information on farm level of the degree of agricultural specialisation and other types of land use has been related to the degree of landscape monotonisation (measured by land use structure and the related biotope structure) within each holding. Differences in geo-ecological conditions are taken into account. The investigation show that the most heterogeneous landscapes are clearly related to intensive pig-production combined with intensive pig-game (in- and outside the farm) and golf. A national-wide implementation of this type of multifunctional land use in advocated.
Landscapes stability and diversity as strategies for development

Michael Grodzinski
University of Kiev, Ukraine, Sichneve Povstannia 3/97 Kiev-10, Ukraine 252010 michael_grodzinski@hotmail.com
Concepts of stability and diversity of landscapes are regarded by many landscape ecologists as tools for making their science to be more applicable for developmental decision-making process. For the decision-makers, however, the landscape ecological ideas on stability and diversity become much more attractive if they are formulated in a quantitative terms. The
223
decision-makers are interested in approaches and results of measuring how stable and divers the landscapes are. The concept of landscapes stability developed in Ukraine is based on the general principles of the reliability theory from the applied mathematics. The adaptation of this theory to landscapes allows measuring different forms of stability (inertness, recoverability, and plasticity) using a variety of indices. Most of them are of probabilistic terms and could be calculated by different techniques. According to a particular problem one could choose the most appropriate stability index, and according to data available the most appropriate technique for its estimation. The same approach is used for landscapes diversity estimation. We distinguish four types of landscape diversity (natural, anthropocentric, biocentric, and perceptual) and for each the special indices are developed. On the basis of these estimates a collection of maps of landscapes diversity are composed and then used for solving a variety of conservational issues.
Interdisciplinary evaluation of land use

Roswitha Katter New land use alternatives obtained must refer to specific regions and must be evaluated as to their expected future effects by means of a combined evaluation procedure. The Project Potential land use after mining" is funded by the Federal Ministry of Science and Transport and the Styrian Government. The aim is to at define measures for ensuring the sustainable development of abandoned mining areas as for example in the Eisenerz Region in Styria (Austria). The investigation process is supported by an interdisciplinary evaluation system developed by the project team taking into account natural sciences, sociological and humanities aspects. The analysis of the target situation from the point of view of the various disciplines as well as the evaluation criteria and indicators constitute an integral part of this interdisciplinary evaluation model. The criteria applied in the disciplines ecology, geosciences, archaology, history and socioeconomics are defined and set in relation, as part of the evaluation model, to represent the effects of land use. The interdisciplinary evaluation system is developed and applied primarily to assess different land use scenarios. In order to increase the chances of implementation, residents of the region are invited to participate in the project in a dialogue process right from the start.
Nature conservation evaluation of the inanimate natural components of the landscape

Gbor Kiss
University of Debrecen, Department of Applied Landscape Geography
The conservation of biological diversity, the protection of botanical and zoological values are the fundamental tasks of nature conservation. The basis of this consideration is due to the large-scale endangerment and deterioration of these values. We think that the living worldcentric concept is basically right since the impoverishment of the living world endangers even the human species in a long run. Nevertheless, we think it important that the values of
224
inanimate nature and the soils will get the right weighting as to their significance. These formations constitute equal parts of the natural systems and they may be taken individually also as values worth for conservation. The decision of which objects are worthy for conservation among the inanimate natural formations and soils needs scientific research. With regard to earth sciences, however, the number of those special studies whose objective is the determination of natural values is relatively small, and currently there is no elaborated method which would enable us to select the most valuable formations on an exact basis. From the aspect of nature conservation, the geomorphologic and especially the pedological values are the most neglected from among the value types belonging to the scope of earth sciences. We drafted the objectives of our research in the following points: Determination of the circle of geomorphologic and pedological values. Elaboration of methods for the determination of the nature conservation value of landforms and soils. Elaboration of an exact method for the selection of typical formations of natural value. This is the first step in the determination of nature conservation value. In our lecture, we illustrate the method for determining the value of typicalness through examples of periglacial landforms, as well as lessivated and podzolised brown forest soils. In the cases of these types of landforms and soils, our objectives are to determine the characteristics of the typical formations on an exact basis, to prepare evaluation tables enabling us to evaluate the value of typifiedness, and to select the values on the basis of the results.
Problem of landscape pattern indication for their protection: A case study from young and old glacial areas of North Poland
Mariusz Kistowski
University of Gdansk, Poland
Since 1991, Polish law concerning nature protection has made it possible to create protection landscape complexes, covering areas of especially valuable natural and cultural landscape in order to preserve their esthetical value. The basic problem in indicating the areas for protection is the assessment of the visual value of landscape. This value is a result of the layout of the landscape mosaic, changing in space and time (seasonally and in long-term). These layouts result mainly from the features of relief, hydrographic network and land cover. However, due to the differences in landscape structure of the young and old glacial areas, slightly different criteria and manner of assessment have been suggested for these two types. On the regional level, the assessment of landscape attractiveness is performed within basic square fields (1 or 4 km2 of size) by calculating the relative altitude, length of lake and sea shoreline or length of rivers and the number of vegetation patches. An additional criterion is the occurrence of historical and cultural objects, such as old villages, palaces, manors, wind or water mills, paved highways, etc. On the detailed (local) level, the visual attractiveness of the landscape is assessed on the basis of the information on its local diversity, harmoniousness of the natural and cultural relations in the landscape, the state of its quality, and the way in which anthropogenic objects are incorporated into the landscape. The suggested method has been tested on the area of Gdask Region in northern Poland and a part of Podlaskie District in eastern Poland. A comparison of these two areas is interesting due to their natural and
225
cultural differences resulting from different history of these areas. The results of this study were presented by means of GIS MapInfo and Vertical Mapper software.
Water supplier and forestry service, competitors to be in the use of forested catchments? A case stuy from the Western Ore Mountains, Saxony, FRG
C.Lorz
Institute of Geography, University of Leipzig, Johannisallee 19a, 04103 Leipzig, FRG, lorz@rz.uni-leipzig.de
The upper parts of the Western Ore Mountains, Saxony are almost completely covered with spruce stands (Picea abies ). These are differently used in historic times by man and recently by foresters and water suppliers. While naturally the production of timber is the main interest of the foresters, the water supplier are using these areas as catchments for the inflows for water reservoirs, which supply the drinking water for the bigger cities of southern Saxony. These systems show periods of instability, which leads to the phenomenons of forest decline and stream water acidification. Characteristics of forest decline as lost and browning of cones, higher sensitivity to insects, and windthrow are observed all over the area. Typical phenomenons of water acidification are low pH-values with very low periodic pH, and high amounts of Aluminum and Manganese. Reasons for these malfunctions (in an anthropocentric sense) are the preindustrial overuse and the input of acidifiying substances in the industrial period in combination with the natural properties of these areas. Direct remediation activities are restricted to liming, which is planed and carried out by the forestry service. Aim of these activities is the reactivation of the nutritient cycle and the mobilization of the nutrients fixed in the inactive organic layers. Aims of the water suppliers to interfere in these catchments do not exist till now. Moreover, the effects of liming on the quality of stream water are still hard to predict. In a micro-catchment, Groe Pyra, Western Ore Mountains no remarkable amounts of heavy metals were observed. But for the nitrate concentration higher amounts as in unlimed comparable areas nearby (Lysina-catchment, Western Czech republic) were found. This is consistent with data of the water quality control in the drinking water reservoirs and their inflows. How much of the nitrate origins from higher mineralisation rates in the organic layer through liming and how much from the increasing atmospheric N-input in the last 30 years is hard to judge. Finally, liming did not prevent the ecological important episodic drops of the pH during storm events and snowmelting. The colaboration of water suppliers and foresters is in the beginning. First projects to change the spruce stands into mixed beech-spruce stands are made, but the economic pressure on the forestry is to heavy to carry out this alone for the whole area. Therefore, it must be one of the most important aims of the development in this area to free the forestry sevice from their economic constraint and to involve the water suppliers financially and conceptionally in the managment of the forested catchments.
226
Watershed erosion response model (WERM) for prioritization and management of multifunctional watershed: Experience from Western India
A.K.Sinha* and Mahaveer Punia**
*Environmental Geology Lab,Department of Geology, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur-302004,India. Email:sinhaaa@jp1.dot.net.in and sinha_1415@hotmail.com **Birla Science and Technology Centre, Malviya Nagar Industrial Area, Jaipur-302017.
Watershed represents an ideal multifunctionl landscape which is arena of varied biophysical and cultural activities .Environmental degradation of a watershed is threat to a reliable and acceptable water supply which ultimately control the other ongoing functional processin the system . Due to various natural and anthropogenic factors watershed gets frequently degraded. Sedimentation and changing pattern of the stream , owing to erosion, which seriously reduces the water availability and quality for both domestic and productive purposes , are the major manifestations of such degradations. Need for increased water security and thereupon food security has led to the increasing realization that watershed approach and watershed management are the essential component of the sustainable development process. The main purpose of the watershed management is to ensure that hydrological , soil, and biotic regimes on the basis of which water development projects are planned and community base activities are envisaged are properly maintained or even enhanced. In order to have effective and targeted watershed management, prioritization of watershed is a highly viable proposition as the exercise considerably reduces the cost and time in the watershed management perspective. Prioritization of watershed means the location and determination of vulnerable watershed which is in state of environmental degradation. With the existing resources of manpower and financial needs particularly in developing countries , treatment of complete watershed area may not be possible and so there is a need for precise identification and selection of problematic micro-watershed for treatment on priority basis. Moreover, the entire watershed do not degrade uniformly and hence problematic area demands more attention than the rest. The present paper discusses the WERM and the prioritization process adopted for prioritizing the Watershed in Shahabad tehsil of western India which served as the basis for selection of relevant watershed management approaches for the remediation of the vulnerable watershed .
227
9.
Session I: Policy and planning of multifunctional landscapes
Impacts of changing agri-environmental policy on countryside conservation: A comparative study of selected designated areas in New York, US and England, UK
David Gross and Nelson Bills
Cornell University
This paper deals with contrasts between the American and British experience with management of rural landscape. In the US interventions on behalf of farming and the environment have focused on two distinct policy tracks: farmland protection and soil erosion/water quality. Each track has its own constituency and an exclusive list of policy remedies. Consequently, US agri-environmental programs operate in roughly parallel universes. Missing in this bifurcate policy environment is a broad view of agricultures position in the rural landscape. In this paper we discuss insight obtained by reviewing the British experience with countryside management. While patterns of land settlement, greenfields development issues, and the status of water quality are debated in the UK, policy dialogue and design often arcs over these matters with countryside management as the interlocking theme. This framework has provided the conceptual underpinnings for the series of British schemes designed to engage the agricultural community in environmental improvements. We want to investigate the possibility of enriching the American experience with this broader, landscape-based approach to agri-environmental programs.
Regional nature protection based on nature management and agroenvironmental subsidies.

Rita Merete Buttenschn Most protected nature in Denmark is management dependent. An evaluation of the effect of management through the nature management, respectively, agro-environmental funds of these types nature showed that whereas the agro-environmental subsidies in particular are important for the maintenance and re-establishment of extensifying agricultural practices on so called 3-habitats, the nature management funds were used mainly for management within the conservation order areas and for public access facilities. The studies and analysis behind this evaluation was made as case-studies in Nordjyllands and Ribe county based on information from the period 1989 to 1999. They clearly demonstrated that the agro-environmental subsidy-agreements made after the transfer of the administration resort to the counties: have encompassed more management extensifying agreements;
228
have reduced the use of fertilisers; have cover a larger proportion of 3-habitat. The evaluation concludes that there is a need for a better integration of the apparatus into the different levels of the physical planning process and hereby: securing continuity in the in the agreements content; securing a temporal and spatial continuity of the agreement areas; securing that the highest prioritised areas are given the subsidies.
The contribution of mountain policy to maintain multifunctional landscapes and to support rural development in Austria
Thomas Dax and Gerhard Hovorka,
Bundesanstalt fr Bergbauernfragen, Mllwaldplatz 5; A-1040 Wien; Austria e-mail: thomas.dax@babf.bmlf.gv.at, gerhard.hovorka@babf.bmlf.gv.at
The landscape in Austria is characterised by the high proportion (70%) of mountain areas. Although the Austrian mountain areas have long been more than just an agricultural region, mountain farming still bears the key role in safeguarding the sensitive eco-system and thereby the multifuncional landscape and the general living and working space. The Austrian economic and territorial policy started to put particular importance on regional development of mountain areas and the impact on landscape very early. Since the early 1970s a special Mountain Farmers Support Programme and specific regional policy measures has been established which were adopted several times to new challenges. The paper will analyse and evaluate the Austrian mountain area policy, in particular mountain farming policy and elaborate on the implications of recent evolutions of policy reform (Agenda 2000) for preservation and development of mountain areas, mountain farming and multifunctional landscapes. Conclusions for important generalisable criteria for a successful mountain area policy will be drawn. Also the particular relevance of rural amenities for the local/regional potential of regions like the mountain areas will be discussed.
Multifunctional landscapes and agriculture in a Danish region and targeting of agri-environmental policies
Berit Hasler (AKF)* and Ole Hjort Caspersen (FSL), DK
*Corresponding author: bh@akf.dk phone 45 33 114 59 49 40
The analysis incorporates a GIS analysis of the agricultural land use in the Danish region Bjerringbro-Hvorslev tied to an analysis of the possibilities and limitations of directing the support schemes to the most valuable landscape elements. Hereby it can be possible to obtain a higher participation rate among farmers who manage valuable nature elements. The valuable landscape elements are identified by a GIS analysis of the land use in a period of 200 years (1800-1995) in the region, which facilitate the pinpointing of continuously managed grasslands valuable from a nature and landscape point of view, but loosing economic value in agricultural production. This analysis shows large changes in the management of the grasslands in the period, and that the remaining valuable areas to a large extent are managed by part time farmers. In addition, interviews and GIS mapping of the regulatory zones shows
229
that only a small part of these fields are protected by nature conservation, and that they are not under environmental friendly management agreements either. The ability to target the agrienvironmental schemes to these valuable areas are analysed and discussed involving farm level economic analysis for different production lines, as well as sector economic analysis of the potential future economic development of agriculture in this region.
Traditional Land-Use Patterns in Korea: From a Cultural Corridor of the Far-Eastern Landscape Perspectives
Hong, S.-K. and I.-J. Song
Seoul National University, Seoul 151-742 and Seoul Development Institute, Seoul
Modernization is threatening the coexistence of the human being and ecosystem. Feng-shui theory is emerging as a new notion of land-use strategy for Asia those have the limited human settlement area and natural resource. This theory originated from China had been differentiated to several ways by distribution pattern and arrangement of the distinct land(scape) elements composed of Asian landscape. Korea which have an important role of cultural corridor connected among Asian countries has been used this theory for many empirical ways in populated area. Under the principle of Feng-shui, people determines the optimum location, which is consistent with ecological and cultural attributes as well as biogeoecology integrated. This paper is focusing on the changes of land-use and its pattern of Seoul Metropolitan area in Korea. Land cover maps showed that the area of vegetation altered by plantation and housing, and also stream and river corridor became straight. Landscape change of urban area was related to the cultural changes initiated by socioeconomic development. We explored the quantitative spatial structure and pattern of several human dominated landscapes as Feng-shui based prototypes identified in ancient literature. Finally, we propose guidelines based for the Feng-shui for urban landscape-ecological planning in Korea.
The agricultural multifunctionality and multifunctional landscapes policy options under different trade regimes
Steinar Johansen and Geir Inge Orderud
Norwegian Institute for Urban and Regional Research
Agnar Hegrenes
Norwegian Agricultural Economics Research Institute
The pressure for opening up the food sector for international trade has increased during the last decade. As a result, the focus on the multifunctional agriculture: i.e. indirect effects of farming and forestry, also has increased, including the agicultures production of cultural landscapes. The question posed is whether the different landscapes formed by agricultural activities defend a protectionist policy and subsidizing measures. Given a positive answer, the focus is on the links between different landscapes and different agricultural practices, and then ask whether a policy focusing more on the landscape effect also require the development of new policy measures and instruments. The paper will give an outline of the possible reasons for accepting agriculture as a multifunctional activity, and then concentrate the discussion on
230
policy issues related to the link between agricultural production and production of landscapes and settlement, based on a Norwegian setting.
Green network as an integrative planning tool in ecological landscape management in Estonia

Mart Klvik 1 , Kalev Sepp1 , Jri Jagomgi2 and lo Mander2
1 2
Environmental Protection Institute, Estonian Agricultural University Institute of Geography, University of Tartu
In the 1999 the Estonian Government issued the degree on Defining environmental conditions for the development of land-use and settlement structure for second phase of country planning. Planning of green network is oriented at achieving the following goals: to maintain the natural self-regulation of the environment at the level necessary for human existence to protect valuable associations to allow sustainable economic management, recreation as well as guarantee the availability of natural zones to the public; to maintain and promote historical, cultural and esthetical identity and awareness of the areas of natural and cultural inheritance. Generally, it is possible to divide the green network designing into three stages: to develop the methodology and basic criteria for designing green network planning; analysis of the green network with other infrastructures (defining barriers, conflict etc) and to work out recommendations for maintenance and designing of green network. The new methodology of defining green network in spatial planning was developed and applied. The designation of structural components (core area, corridors, nature development areas) of green networks is bases on: morphometrical parameters of the elements (core areas territorial extent, strip structures width) nature conservation and environmental protection values.
Integrating agricultural policies with planning and environmental policies

Jrgen Primdahl1 and Teresa Pinto-Correia 2
1 2
Agricultural University, Denmark, University of Evora, Portugal
New developments and old policy objectives are characterising rural areas and public policies throughout Europe. These contradictions between changing development patterns and outdated policies have challenged traditionel agricultural policies, planning, and nature conservation strategies. In the context of multifunctional landscapes, policy integration is a key word. The various reforms of the common agricultural policy within the EU which have been implemented the last ten years are analysed from a policy integration perspective focusing on the agricultural landscape. This is done first for EU member states as a whole with the emphasis on the coordination of agricultural, environmental and planning
231
objectives. Using Denmark and Portugal as case studies policy integration is described in more detail on the background of current changing patterns of Danish and Portuguese agricultural landscapes. It is shown that clear tendencies towards more multifunctional landscapes at the local landscape level occur but the way public policy is supporting this process is complex and policy integration is not working well in any of the two countries. Major obstacles to the integration of landscape concerns into agricultural and planning policies are discussed and proposal for improvements are presented.
Integrated land use planning: a case study from Ghana

Anita Veihe
Department of Geography and International Development Studies, Roskilde University, House 19.2, PO Box 260, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark
Land use planning activities are often characterised by different actors with their own specific goals. The aim of this study was to produce land use scenarios for the introduction of vetiver grass (Vetiveria zizanoides ) in order to minimise soil erosion. Three key actors had been identified (the farmers, the government and a soil conservationist) with different planning objectives. Based on a regional soil erosion risk map derived using the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE), GIS and linear programming techniques, different land use scenarios were identified reflecting the actors objectives and incorporating both bio-physical and socioeconomic parameters. A land use scenario taking into consideration the goals of all three actors simultaneously was also generated. Scenarios varied considerably and the study showed that when soil loss is minimised, input costs is the limiting factor whereas labour is the limiting factor when gross margin is maximised and that it would not be economically viable to introduce vetiver hedges if gross margin is to be maximised alone. If maximising yields, both labour and input costs are limiting factors. In the final scenario taking into account goals of all three actors, it was demonstrated that by relaxing the soil loss minimisation goal it was possible to achieve both high yields and a high gross margin. At the same time, soil loss could be minimised and with the help of GIS, areas for planting vetiver hedges could be identified.
Landscape Indicators at the European Level

Dirk M. Wascher
ECNC
The objective of this paper is to present landscape indicators as adequate tools for (1) measuring the impact of agriculture on the environment, (2) monitoring the effects of existing and future measures related to agricultural policies, and (3) using this knowledge to achieve a better integration of landscape concerns into agriculture. An analysis of the existing policy background demonstrates that there is a long history of landscape legislation, protection and planning at the national level. At the international level, landscapes are getting increasing policy attention as documented by a number of new environmental programmes and policies, among which a number of European initiatives but also amendments to the Convention on Biological Diversity. A review among European countries demonstrated that approaches towards landscape assessment are relatively similar in terms of scope, objectives and their focus on landscapes. While landscape character and functions related to perception, ecology
232
and sustainable use are forming main assessment targets, technical standardisation (e.g. by remote sensing, photo interpretation) as well as the identification of distinct landscape units as geographic references form the base for many methodological concepts. Following the Driving Force-State-Response framework, landscape descriptors have been differentiated according to driving force and state issues. Some of these issues can be considered to form a pool for the identification of landscape indicators. It is also illustrated that both state and driving force issues can vary from region to region, pointing at the need for region-specific approaches when developing an adequate indicators system. The selection of agrienvironmental indicators should be based on criteria such as efficiency, reliability and spatial validity. In terms of operational efficiency at the international level, the wide range of actual landscape descriptors and hence potential indicators points at the need to employ widely harmonised statistical and geo-referenced data. Constraints in terms of scale, aggregation, accessibility to and existence of harmonised digital data on the one hand, and the level of detail that is required to assess essential landscape functions on the other hand, pose major methodological challenges. The third important task to better understand the complex links that exists between agricultural practices and their effects on landscapes. At the international level, it must be considered as useful to identify key rural processes as horizontally operating driving forces. Attempts to analyse such driving forces are likely to generate a set of indicators in correspondence to indicators on landscape functions. The paper closes by presenting a list of candidate indicators for both driving force (rural processes) as well as state (landscape functions and character) issues.
233
10.
Session J: Managing multifunctional landscapes
The use of remote sensing and anthropological tools to define multifunctional landscapes in Thailand.
Niels Broge 1 , Lotte Isager2 , Ukrit Uparasit 3 , Somporn Sangawong4 , Harold Kirsch5
1 2
Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Denmark University of Copenhagen, Denmark 3 Thailand Development Research Institute, Thailand 4 University of Chiang Mai, Thailand 5 Geoscientific Research & Consulting, Thailand
In Thailand, decades of population increase combined with economic and infrastructure development has put forest areas under pressure. The urgent need to conserve remaining forests has been acknowledged by Thai political decision-makers as well as by the general public. But striking a sound - or sustainable - balance between forest conservation and economic development for the often poor forest-dwellers has proven a difficult task and, indeed, a highly politicised task at both local and national levels. In this paper, it is argued that satellite images combined with anthropological analysis of land-use change and management represents a useful tool for landscape management in Thailand. Satellite imagery from 1980 to 1999 is used to define land-use classes and classify the park and buffer-zone area using a standard classification key for Thailand. These classes are then reproduced as land-use maps from which regional changes in land-use over time are identified and analysed. This analysis is supplemented by an anthropological study of political and socio-cultural aspects of land-use transition in the area, including local people and other stakeholders perceptions of the changing environment. The complementarity of satellite image analysis and anthropological studies is discussed and is argued to strengthen the overall analysis of the complexity and multi-functionality of the landscape.
The methodology of drawing maps of environmental complexity for the needs of environmental management
Jolanta Brzska, Stefan Zynda, Andrzej Kijowski In 1994 a statutory obligation was imposed in Poland to the effect that complex studies of natural and socio-economic space should be conducted for the needs relating to the management of territorial self-government units (i.e. cities, towns, communes and provinces). The methodology of drawing maps of environmental complexity for the needs of environmental management is based on: using up-to-date cartographic materials and aerial photographs;
234
using GIS techniques in the process of preparing thematic layers of information on a particular city, town or commune; drawing a model map presenting the functional structure of local natural environment; preparing a sozological layer of information on existing threats, pollution and degradation of local natural environment; drawing a model map presenting the environmental evaluation as the basis for determining the directions of environmental management. The methodology of drawing complex thematic maps of natural environment involves the application of quantitative and qualitative techniques to compile thematic databases and collect information on the local area. When conducting inventory surveys the particular environmental media constitute distinct layers of information. Only when drawing a map presenting the functional structure of the local natural environment the media are treated comprehensively, which makes it possible to carry out an environmental evaluation of the local space. Finally, the environmental management strategy is devised for particular territorial self-government units (communes).
Forms of historical and current land-use of the Leipzig floodplainsanthropogenic influences, aspects of actual land-use conflicts and conflict management
Vera Denzer & Dagmar Haase
University of Frankfurt, Centre for Environmental Research Leipzig-Halle; V.Denzer@em.uni-frankfurt.de, haase@alok.ufz.de
This paper focuses on regional landscape planning in the region of the Weisse-Elster-Pleisse rivers (Germany) floodplains which have been influenced and transformed by man since centuries and today present a typical middle-European cultural landscape. Up to nowadays economic and recreational land-use demands, intensity and dynamics of anthropogenic influences on the floodplains have been intensified. After the political change in Eastern Germany 1990 there is forced the renaturation in form of artificial overflowing of floodplain forest stands which are positive for the equilibrium of the forest but a danger to the cultural landscape structures, buildings, sports grounds and other current land-uses. Moreover, the prognostic land-use conflicts initiated by flooding measures concern different land-users such as farmer, the forest department, private landowners and the city government of Leipzig and demand a form of conflict management as well as the development of a detailed planning conception of this cultural landscape as one of the most important recreation areas of the city of 500,000 inhabitants. Within such a conception of which parts will be presented within this paper there should be taken into account the ecological functionality, the diversity of forest and river systems and aspects of preservation of the cultural monuments and forms of historical lands-uses.
235
Community participation in the land restoration process

Emma Griffiths, Chris Ling & John Handley
Centre for Urban and Regional Ecology, School of Planning & Landscape, University of Manchester
The restoration of land which has been damaged by former industrial activity is usually considered to be a technical problem; the province of the civil engineer and the environmental scientist. The communities that helped to create these landscapes have a strong interest in reclamation outcomes but their sense of isolation and social exclusion is all too often reinforced by the technocentric land restoration process. This paper will report the results of a critical assessment of a major land restoration programme in England and Wales (Changing Places) which is led by Groundwork an environmental NGO. Groundwork is committed to an ecologically informed and participative approach to land restoration which makes full use of innovative community involvement techniques such as planning for real. The paper will explore the effectiveness of this approach, the barriers to effective participation and ways in which they can be overcome.
Boundaries in the landscape results and experiences from interdisciplinary landscape research
Tove Hels and Kjell Nilsson
Danish Centre for Forest, Landscape and Planning, Hrsholm Kongevej 11, DK-2970 Hrsholm. E.mail: the@fsl.dk
Boundaries in the landscape makes up a five year long concerted research effort, joining 13 scientists from disciplines as different as botany, jurisprudence, history, economy and filosophy. The subprojects focus on exploitation of natural resources, both by man (production and recreation) and other beings, how exploitation is interpreted, valued and ranked by humans, how this in turn leads to regulations and eventually, how regulations affect the use of natural resources. In our presentation we firstly review the recent political background for interdisciplinary landscape research in Denmark. Secondly, we review the interdisciplinary process within the project Boundaries in the landscape. Our study revealed three rather distinct phases towards the development of interdisciplinarity: the first and very time consuming phase focused on clarifying definitions of concepts and methods. The second phase focused on data collection and elaboration of a common data base in the 156 km2 study site, shared by all subprojects. The third phase was characterised by writing, commenting and collecting contributions to a joint output of the project: a collection of essays describing the results of the sub-projects. Through structured interviews with the participating researchers our study revealed that the main benefits of interdisciplinarity is clear albeit difficult to validate: development of an ability to relate more critically to current paradigms and methods within ones own research field. The cost of interdisciplinarity is primarily the increased amount of time spent compared to ordinary disciplinary research, plus the difficulty in getting interdisciplinary manuscripts published.
236
Ecological safety of landscape management as exemplified from South Siberia region

Sergey B. Kuzmin
Institute of Geography, Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences 1Ulanbatorskaya St., Irkutsk 664033, Russia, E-mail: kuzmin@irigs.irk.ru Fax: (3952) 467717
There are many ecological problems occur in South Siberia region due to landscape management. The main one is the protection of natural monuments. Lake Baikal is the most value natural monument where recreation and ecological tourism are the main types of economy. It requires certain landscape management as there are series of natural hazards on the Lake Baikal shore. Under study is Preolkhon region located in the central part of the Baikal Rift Zone. Main natural hazard occurs from recent tectonics and seismicity controlling the topography. Preolkhon landscapes are formed by the Primorsky Fault Zone. Three criterions are used for geomorphic hazard assessment: 1) gradient of heights, 2) density active faults, 3) activity of geomorphic processes. The maps of appropriate criterions are constructed. Three parameters has been used to risk assessment: 1) geomorphic hazard, 2) antropogeneous destruction of landscapes, 3) perfection of economy. Geomorphic hazard is background natural parameter inducing the initial factor of anxiety of managers concerning landscape disasters. Anxiety increases when antropogeneous destruction of landscapes, instability of landscape, unpredictability of disasters are rised. The third parameter shows as far as the man is capable to secure itself and enclosing landscape at realization of concrete sort of economy. The high ecological significance and low stability are typical of Preolkhon landscapes. Urgent improvement of recreation is necessary to lower risk and to reduce negative effect on landscapes. Landscape management should be implemented: 1) administrative control over the activities of travel companies and agencies; 2) adaptation of experiences of other countries with a high level of tourism; 3) lowering of unorganized tourism; 4) tourism instructing; 5) prohibitions of unauthorized dig operations; 6) recultivation of the broken grounds; 7) planning and regulation of motorways and foot tracks network; 8) definitions of an optimal amount of tourists, which are capable to sustain the natural systems at the expense of stability and self-cleaning ability; 9) attraction of the investments to ecological rehabilitation of lands; 10) attractions of public institutes and movements, initiative groups in promoting nature protection activities.
A Cartographic Tool to Support Public Access to the Countryside

Dorthe K. Larsen and Jesper Brandt During recent years there has been a growing interest in using the Danish countryside for nonagricultural purposes, including settlement and recreation. Despite a zoning legislation enforced in 1970 restricting land use and use of buildings in rural areas to agricultural purposes, a degree of 'hidden urbanisation' of the countryside is observed. A liberalisation of this regulation can be expected, resulting in a new wave of settlement, among other things based on the recreational potentials of the countryside. Alongside this development, the legal possibilities for open access to the countryside has been widened. The Nature Protection Act from 1992 specifies the rights of the public to access different types of public and private areas. In the planning of the countryside a growing number of paths and tracks are developed, partly in co-operation with the owners. Most Danish farmers by tradition accept that people
237
trespass their private property, provided they do it thoughtfully, and people will rarely experience problems if the farmer is contacted beforehand. To further the recreational use of the countryside there is, however, a strong need for better access to information on: 1. The landscape values; where do we find a certain type of landscape feature or what do we find of interest in a particular area ? 2. The rights of access; which type of access right applies to a certain area, or where are we allowed to go by bicycle? 3. The owners/tenants; who do we ask for permission to visit a particular location or route without access right ? This sort of information provides the means for handling possibilities as well as constraints of access to the countryside in a pro-active way that can serve to minimise conflicts between land owners and recreationists. This paper presents a computerised cartographic tool for providing such information for the Danish agricultural landscape. The tool utilises the flexibility of digital map data and simple GIS functions in different ways. Firstly, in terms of variable map scale and detail: Hikers need a large scale map with footpaths whereas access by motorised vehicles calls for a medium scale map showing primarily motorable tracks. Secondly, the tool supports variable map contents based on a range of different map layers. This gives the user the option to select the appropriate map contents for a particular purpose. Thirdly, information and search facilities are available for providing information on particular features; a description of a site, the name and telephone number of the land owner, etc. The cartographic tool is implemented for a typical Danish agricultural area based on a compilation of available existing digital information on topography, landscape values (e.g. areas under general protection and archaeological/historical sites) and a national cadastre.
Management of alluvial forest remnants in a New Zealand agricultural landscape

Craig Miller
Department of Conservation, Private Bag 701, Hokitika, New Zealand, Cmiller@doc.govt.nz
Pastoral agriculture is concentrated on recent alluvial soils of the west coast of the South Island, New Zealand. These soils account for 6% of the land area, and were once covered in tall podocarp (Podocarpaceae) forest. Now only 0.8% of the original forest cover remains as small scattered patches. This forest type is under-represented in the protected area network despite 76%, or 1.8 million ha, of the West Coast being protected for nature conservation purposes. Consequently the major land management issue is how to protect and maintain these remnants on private land and, if possible, increase their area without reducing the available area of prime agricultural land. Flood disturbance was the major physical process that resulted in regeneration of these alluvial forests prior to human clearance. Now flooding is contained by stop banking and where it does occur land management ensures that pasture rather than forest is reestablished. Stock grazing is now the main disturbance regime in many remnants. This is known to reduce the availability of palatable native species, and may also have an influence on the regeneration of podocarp seedlings. This paper examines the effects of decoupling alluvial forest remnants from flood disturbance and of stock grazing on remnant condition. The short to medium term future of these remnants is modelled, and scenarios for remnant management and enhancement are presented.
238
Economic and Voluntary Instruments for Agricultural Landscape Management

Jesper S. Schou*, Berit Hasler**
*National Environmental Research Institute, Frederiksborgvej 399, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark, JSS@DMU.DK **Institute of Local Government Studies, Nyropsgade 37, DK-1602 Copenhagen V, Denmark, BH@AKF.DK
Economic aspects are important for both the attainment of public goods form agriculture, as well as for the economic consequences of policy measures applied, necessary to achieve environmental objectives. In other words preservation and development of future landscapes is dependent of economic factors, which sets out the reference for the production activities as well as the funding for the public effort of landscape preservation. Economic instruments, e.g. farmers voluntary participation in financial support schemes, are used as incentives for farmers to improve multifunctional qualities of the landscape. Because of the voluntary nature of these approaches, they do not necessarily secure fulfilment of the environmental and landscape objectives. Consequently, unique and valuable nature qualities must be protected by conservation. On the other hand, the voluntary approach can be efficient for the provision of more widespread nature goods and landscape qualities from agriculture. In this paper the economic factors and the agronomic restraints that govern farmers choices of landscape use and landscape management is presented in conjunction with the potential for a more comprehensive use of voluntary and economic instruments in landscape management. Different types of nature goods connected with agricultural landscapes, are identified, and the potentials and limitations of voluntary approaches are discussed.
239
VI. Poster presentations
240
241
GIS for NATURA 2000 Monitoring Europe's Nature Conservation Sites

A. Annoni, S.Christensen, S. Peedell European Commission - Joint Research Centre, Space Applications Institute, Agriculture and Regional Information Systems Unit, I-21020 Ispra (Va) Italy
Natura 2000 is a European network of Nature Conservation sites designated by Member States under the Birds Directive 12 and the Habitats Directive 13 , where human activity must be compatible with the conservation of sites of natural importance. The creation of the Natura 2000 network is the cornerstone of Community Nature Conservation policy and a major challenge for the European Commission and the Member States. Contrary to what is widely believed, the Natura 2000 network does not only comprise National Parks, but include large areas of productive land. Natura 2000 is strongly based on the concept of sustainable development, where productive activities must be integrated with the requirements of nature conservation. Environmental concern is increasingly being integrated into EU policy measures such as Agenda 2000. The Natura 2000 sites are numerous and cover a significant area of the EU territory by 2004 there are expected to be some 15000 sites, covering more than 10% of the EU territory. Enlargement of the EU will increase the number of sites significantly. Many Natura2000 sites can be considered as multifunctional and facing pressures such as urbanisation, agriculture and recreation, but there is currently no clear definition of how these sites should be assessed and monitored at European level. The lack of harmonised spatial data at European level presents a significant barrier to the development of monitoring systems. The diversity of the Natura2000 sites, combined with the heterogeneity of existing data held by different organisations throughout Europe, requires a concerted approach based on clear requirements of site management. Under an agreement between the Joint Research Centre and Directorate General Environment, the fundamental issues in creation of a harmonised spatial database for Natura2000 are being addressed. By establishing a Geographic Information System (GIS) for Natura2000, a standard set of applications will be available to allow the analysis and definition of standard measures to support site monitoring.
Regional differentiation of landscape modification in the Polish Carpathians

Jaroslaw Balon, Wieslaw Ziaja
Jagiellonian University, Institute of Geography, Cracow, Poland
The Polish Carpathians are the northernmost part of all European montainous arcs of the Alpine orogeny, and the southernmost part of Poland. The Polish part of Carpathians contains 20000 km2 which is 6% of Poland. Their position and small altitude 97,5% of their area
12 13
Council Directive79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds. Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora.
242
below 1000 m a.s.l. determine a comparatively gentle climate. There is big population (2,4 milion) and dense settlement and transport network in the mountains, bordering on a coal basin (Upper Silesia) which is a big emitter of atmospheric pollution. The mountain landscape state and dynamics depend mainly on the interaction between men and environment in the past and today. The following results of that interaction are visible in the Carpathian landscape: - reduction of a forest cover to ca. 40% of the mountains area, for settlement and agriculture, - replacement natural mixed or deciduous forests with spruce monocultures in places, - degradation of forest biocenoses because of industrial and urban atmospheric pollution, - spread of ploughlands in the past, extension of grass-lands and afforestation of marginal grounds today, - diminution of wetlands and flooding some river valleys (dams). Spatial differentiation of the landscape modification is described in the regional scale, through dividing 25 mesoregions into types.
Does the involvement of stakeholders facilitate the implementation of research results? Experiences from a participatory-based project in Brandenburg (Germany)
Elke Baranek1 , Tina Boeckmann2 , Kirsten von der Heiden2 , Rosemarie Siebert2
1 2
Humboldt University Center for Agricultural Landscape and Land Use Research (ZALF e.V.) Institute for Socio-economics
Contents: The co-operative research project GRANO Approaches for Sustainable Agricultural Production in North-eastern Germany is sponsored in the context of the national research focus Ecological Concepts for Agricultural Landscapes. Six research initiatives from Berlin and Brandenburg (Germany), in co-operation with stakeholders from two model regions in Brandenburg, are developing concepts for sustainable land use on a regional level. GRANO is following a participatory approach: the project phases, from the problem definition to the results analysis, are designed in co-operation with decision-makers and public and private stakeholders. The action research approach is applied in this context. The project is in the third of the four-year time span. The poster provides a brief review of the participatory approaches and an insight into the initial findings and empirical results. Goal: Concepts for sustainable land use are being developed and tested with respect to their transferability. Concrete improvements which will extend past the time span of the project are also being initiated in the model regions. Hypothesis: The early participation of farmers, farmer associations, extension workers, politicians, government agencies as well as environmentalists ensures that during the project time span, concepts with a high acceptance are developed for a motivated and long-term implementation. Initial results: During the process of a participatory situation analysis and co-operative selection of work focuses, four project areas were created: Decentralisation and flexibility of agroenvironmental policies Agroenvironmental Extension and Knowledge System Regional Marketing: Agriculture and Tourism Regional Site Management Since then, numerous individual activities and projects have resulted from the project areas. The stakeholders participation will be analysed with our developed indicator system. In
243
addition, the development of a procedure called controlling by stakeholders allows for a continual feedback possibility for involved stakeholders. The description of the projects with respect to the indicators developed in the project for determing stakeholder participation as well as encouraging stakeholder feedback comprise a main part of the poster presentation. Evaluation: The new roles of all the participants in the research process (action research), initial feedback and the factors which support as well as hinder the implementation of results are shown.
Application of GIS in erosion mapping on the Tihanyi Peninsula

Centeri, Cs. Barczi, A. Pataki, R.
Saint Stephan University, Dept. of Soil Science and Agrochemistry, 2100-Gdll, Pter K. u. 1., Hungary. T: +36-28-420-200/1815, C: +36-30-202-7336, F: +36-28-410-804, E-mail: centeri@freemail.com.au
The area of Hungary is 9.3 million hectares, out of which 6.4 million hectares are covered by agricultural lands. We might declare that most of agricultural lands are effected by erosion that means half of the countrys area. General erosion maps have been made on the scale of 1:75 000 and 1:200 000 of the hilly and mountainous areas. The soil erosion map on the scale of 1:500 000 was ready for the whole country in the 1950s. The maps indicate three degrees of soil erosion plus sedimentation. Introduction of GIS made revolution in agricultral mapping and planning. The first, most commonly known erosion model was the Wischmeir-Smiths Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE). There are thousands of plot data for the USA that might be useful for estimating the certain factors for USLE under Hungarian circumstances until it is measured in situ. USLE is the official erosion mapping model of Hungary. We chose the Tihanyi Peninsula to evaluate an erosion prediction map at the scale of 1:10 000. We were curious how the USLE model works at this scale and what kind of modifications are needed to make the model more precise. We were also trying to find sediment area using GIS. As well known USLE is not capable for this.
Multidisciplinary studies - a basis for the planning of the sustainable development of Cluj-Napoca city (Romania)
V. Cristea, I. Goia, C. Baciu, D. Gafta, I. Coroiu The largest town of Transylvania (Romania) does not possess a General Urbanistic Plan yet. This is why a team of researchers has initiated a complex, multidisciplinary study as part of the grant 179, financed by a loan from the World Bank. The main partial results have shown the following aspects: a) the radon content of underground waters is strictly related to the nature of the rocks; b) there are three areas of geomorphological risk; c) a series of groups of organisms (diatoms, lichens, mosses, nematodes, Lepidoptera, birds and micromammals) can be used as bioindicators as well as a measure of the hygiene of the various districts; d) there is an increase in population, which does not occur by natural growth but by the immigration of people from the periurban villages;
244
e) the use of urban and suburban agricultural land has become intensive, being predominantly focused on plant growing and less on animal breeding and beekeeping; f) green spaces have diminished by 3.6% in the last ten years in favor of the various constructions; g) the architecture of the "intra-muros" space tends to "brusselize" through constructions that do not integrate with the traditional style; h) the touristic pressure in the forests increase the border effect. It is estimated that the General Urbanistic Plan should take into consideration the possibilities ofered by the corridor of the Somesul Mic river and the results of complex studies, as a scientific base for its achievement.
Regional GIS-scenarios for Land Use

Tommy Dalgaard1 , Hild Rygnestad2 , Andreas Hll3 , Erling Andersen3 , Jrgen Dejgaard Jensen2 , Poul E. Larsen1 , Troels Degn Johansson3
1 2
Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Dept. of Agricultural Systems Danish Institute of Agricultural and Fisheries Economics, Agricultural Policy Research Division 3 Danish Forest and Landscape Research Institute
How do policy measures affect the environmental and socio-economic impact of agriculture? To answer this question, a method to assess the policy impact of different policy measures on the rural landscape in Denmark has been developed14 . An economic agricultural sector model is linked to a Geographical Information System containing single farm data for land use and animal husbandry. Changes in land use, nitrogen use and gross margins due to policy initiatives are mapped as indicators of environmental and socio-economic impacts. This poster illustrates two measures for subsidised afforestation within a 43 km2 study area: 1) Open invitation to tender to all farms in the study area, 2) Standard flat rate payments restricted to designated afforestation areas. Results indicate that with a fixed total subsidy amount, measure 1 leads to a larger forest area. However, this area does not always coincide with the areas designated for afforestation. Thus, the environmental benefits of measure 1 may be inferior to those of measure 2. The poster discusses which of the two strategies is likely to give the best result for the total available budget. The analytical framework demonstrated can help such an evaluation, not only related to afforestation, but also a range of other policy measures.
Long-term Changes in Danish Agriculture

Tommy Dalgaard1 , Arne Kyllingsbk1
1
Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Dept. of Agricultural Systems
This poster presents some preliminary agroecological analyses of changes in Danish agriculture during the 20th century. The investigations were carried out as a part of the
14
The method is developed under the project Landscape Assessment Scenarios (Fremtidsscenarier for kulturlandskabets udvikling), funded by the Danish Environmental Research Programme 1997-2001 (see www.ou.dk/Hum/ForandLand/English/Index.htm)
245
research project AGRAR 200015 , which investigates changes in the Danish agrarian landscape on the time scale of centuries. The materials used are historical agricultural statistics, combined with existing digital agricultural data within a geographical information system. Most of the present agroecological methods available to investigate impacts of farming are made on a temporal scale of a few growth seasons and a spatial scale of a farm or a field. New methods are therefore needed to describe changes on spatio-temporal scales of regions and centuries. Preliminary maps of the spatial and temporal change in livestock production and land use reveals drastic changes. A more detailed investigation of the regional differences is to be carried out within five kilometers radiuses around nine selected lakes covering the regions of Denmark. Time series of three key indicators for the environmental and landscape impact of the changes in Danish Agriculture are illustrated: 1) the nitrogen balance, 2) the fossil energy use, 3) the land use distribution. The question is whether present agriculture is sustainable. A comparison with historical agrarian systems, which have stood the test of time might provide new information to answer this question.
Cultural Landscape Research in Austria

Claudia Dankl The Austrian research programme Sustainable Development of Landscapes and Regions Cultural Landscape Research for short addresses problems such as the unplanned settlement in the open country, soil sealing, exodus from peripheral regions, increasing traffic volume or the loss of species. From its very beginning, the research programme has been a research and socio-political experiment relying on interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity. The experience made with the programme shows that practical implementation of interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity is very difficult. The programme management therefore tries to create an adequate framework that supports interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary work: by interdisciplinary modules, financing of the project co-ordination expense, interdisciplinary expert valuation, accompanying research, PR and marketing, by cooperating with artists, pupils, youth groups, with planning offices and with farmers. Quality criteria, methods and operational procedures for interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary work are developed. The programme now comprises forty modules, in which approximately 350 researchers participate. The modules are assigned to the following research fields: indicators of sustainability, biodiversity and quality of life, genesis, transformation and perception of landscape, multi-functionality and conflicts of use, control and implementation, social infrastructure, sustainable use of water and wetlands, cities and their surroundings, sustainable rural development. About one third of projects performs tasks supporting the overall programme: science marketing, PR work, accompanying research, evaluation of the use of new media. Moreover, the Ministry of Science tries to make a contribution to other sociopolitical objectives by means of focused research programmes: For example, the programme Advancement of Women in Science increased the share of female researchers in project teams from an average of thirty to forty percent.
15
A research Project funded from 1999-2002 by four Danish Research Councils: Natural Science, Humanities, Agricultural Science and Social Science (see www.natmus.dk/agrar2000/) Interdisciplinarity describes a form of co-operation among several disciplines by which the borders among disciplines are crossed. "Transdisciplinary" projects are characterised by the border of the system in which the production of knowledge takes place: Knowledge is not only generated for but together with the practice and implementation is an integral part of the project.
246
An ecologically based decision process for land reorganisation

Geert De Blust and Mira Van Olmen
Institute for Nature Conservation, Kliniekstraat 25, 1070 Brussels, Belgium e-mail: geert.de.blust@instnat.be; mira.van.olmen@instnat.be
As a result of social pressure during the last decades, the instrument of land consolidation in Flanders had to evolve from a pure sectorial instrument in favour of agriculture to with broader societal aims. To optimise the ecological share in this evolution, a method for an ecologically bases decision and planning process for land consolidation was developed. In a first part it is explained how nature within the area of reorganisation should be described and analysed, how this all can be translated to reorganisation measures and management. A second part offers background information on techniques, theories, concepts and models that can be useful during the process. Through the systematic analyses of the ecology of the land consolidation area, of the possibilities for nature development, the societal value and the applied policy, one should come to fair handling of and planning for nature. Moreover, the developed method should make it possible to deliberate the final results upon the initial situation of nature in the area and the aims of land consolidation as regards that nature, whats essential for a proper evaluation in the end.
Integration of qualitative properties into landscape research

Ralph Donner If quality is considered to be the matching complement to quantity, then qualitative properties are the expressions of inter-relationships between individual geofactors which cannot be measured in any immediate form. The method of qualitative research discovered and described by the author closes the gap between the scientific quantitative approach on the one hand and qualitative-aesthetic phenomenology on the other. Science and art are thus brought together to create an understanding of the landscape. The integration of qualitative properties incorporates correlations, the relationships between the components and entirety of a hierarchically structured landscape model and aesthetic features. The poster presents selected aspects of this approach, partly in comparison with quantitative methods.
An analysis of farmers reservations towards participation in voluntary agro-environmental agreements

Peter Ritzau Eigaard1 and Berit Hasler2
1
National Environmental Research Institute, Department of Policy Analysis, Frederiksborgvej 399, P.O. Box 358, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark 2 Institute of locale Government Studies Denmark, Nyropsgade 37, DK-1602 Kbenhavn V Denmark
Within the subproject Economic Incentives and farmers production of Nature Quality under the research project Boundaries in the landscape a questionnaire examining farmers participating in support schemes for environmentally sensitive areas has been carried out. The
247
schemes, EU-2078, are offered by the EC. The questionnaire has been carried out within the project site in Bjerringbro/Hvorslev, in the designated areas for these schemes. Both part time and full time farmers participated in the questionnaire. The answers shows that the overall interest in the support schemes is not very high in the area. The part time farmers has not been aware of the possibility to participate, although having areas with potentials for scheme agreement. Full-time farmers are more aware of the possibilities in participating in the agreements, but their interest in examining the economic possibilities has been modest. Conclusions on the questionnaire is that part time farmers should be provided with more information, and comparison with other analyses indicates that the objectives of the schemes should be more clear and focussed towards nature preservation. By mixing environmental goals of nutrient reduction together with nature-preservation goals , the nature-preservation goals gets overseen.
Action Research and Learning in Agriculture and Food Systems: Moving Activities into the Rural Landscape
Charles Francis (University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE USA) Geir Lieblein (Agricultural University of Norway, Aas, Norway) Juha Helenius (University of Helsinki, Viiki-2, Helsinki, Finland) Lennart Salomonsson (Swedish Agricultural University, Uppsala, Sweden) John Porter, Hanne Olsen, N. Sriskandarajah (KVL, Taastrup, Denmark) A Nordic MSc degree program in Agroecology and Ecological Agriculture has recently been established through NOVA University and the member universities of the consortium in the region. In addition to focus on transdisciplinary research and education in ecological agriculture and food systems, this program is introducing innovative learning approaches into the courses and curriculum. Experiential learning and problem solving skills can be built on theory and lectures from the classroom and library research, but there is no substitute for hands-on experience working with real-world challenges in the field. The new program includes class projects that are assigned to student groups who interview residents in the agricultural landscape, determine their goals and assess their resources, and then work together with local people to envision a positive future wanted situation. With goals and visions well understood, it is possible to design a path to achieve those goals in their agroecosystems that are imbedded in multifunctional agricultural landscapes.
Soil changes in relation to landscape and changes in management regime

Ege Lau Frandsen Department of Geography and International Development Studies, Roskilde University, Denmark, elf@ruc.dk In Denmark, most of the original forests, grasslands and wetlands have been transformed into cultivated landscapes, which has resulted in an extensive loss of biodiversity. Today, approximately 65% of Denmarks total area (43,000 km) consist of arable farmland. Over the past decade there has been many calls for environmental protection and action plans have
248
emerged. Until now there has been a tendency to protect areas with little economic value for the farmer, and more detailed examination on both soil and semi natural vegetation in previously cultivated well-drained dry farmland with a high potential production capacity is missing. This part of the research project shows the results of the soil forming processes that have occurred on three landscape types (inland dunes, out wash plains, and hill island) in Denmark, in a period of 2-30 years fallow.
Landscape changes due to a linear infrastructure in a sensitive land unit: a springs area in an agricultural landscape
Gibelli M.G. 1 , Santolini R.2
1 2
School of Landscape Architecture, University of Genova, Genova, Italy University of Urbino, Urbino, Italy
The linear infrastructures are one of the major font of fragmentation in european landscapes. Otherwise the increasing of railways is an important way to decrease the traffic pressure over highways. So we need some methods to measure the impact over the landscape at the different scales in which it does occur. This problem is efforted in an area of the typical agricultural landscape of the Padana plan. In the last fifty years, the intensive agriculture has completed changed the original landscape, which once was characterized by crops and trees, wet meadows and a lot of channels due to the presence of spreading grounds. Up to now the more evident effects of this process are: the increasing of the landscape contrast due to the lost of the seminatural features and of many ecotones between urban and natural landscape, the decrease of interactions between complementary ecosystems, the banalization of ecosystems with the decreasing of biodiversity. The infrastructural network, has also increased the fragmentation of the landscape mosaic. All these processes involve a lost of the landscape selfregulation capacity so that the system has become more and more instable and sensitive. In this situation a new railway can produce an heavy impact, so we need an ecological approach to point out the metastability conditions of the landscape and the means to get a new suitable metastability. We must know the effects of impacts and measure them to look for actions which are able to mitigate, compensate and also improve the actual critical conditions. Landscape ecology approach gave a substantial contribute either in the analysis and in assessment phases, suggesting methods and indexes to study the landscape structure and functions, to measure impacts, to simulate the different alternatives of the study area recovery, and to chose the best solution
Differentiation between abandoned fields and grasslands from satellite images through the use of phenological and structural vegetation parameters
Michael Glemnitz The proportion and assemblage of semi-natural habitats are strongly correlated with the habitat function of landscapes. Reliable and accurate data on the biotic inventory of regions and the development of methods for their periodical update are required for monitoring and evaluation of the habitat function. In addition to meeting requirements for successful
249
differentiation of different kinds of biotopes, the data should also help support direct conclusions concerning ecological characteristics. Based on this background, investigations in an area of 2500 km2 east of Berlin (Germany) were used to identify important classes of seminatural grassland habitats and abandoned fields. These habitat groups are characterised by their species composition, structural and phenological parameters as well as by the seasonal changes of these parameters throughout the vegetation period. Results show main differences in ecological characteristics between several groups of habitats and suggest possibilities for the monitoring of these habitat groups through the use of satellite images. Satellite images were interpreted by combining spectral and multitemporal classifications. The interpretation procedures reflect differences in surface coverage, amount of litter, the dominance of several species groups, differences in vitality and the seasonal dynamics between the groups of investigated habitats.
Agrolandscapes dynamic of North-Western European Russia

N.Guzel The process of reduction of agrolandscapes has taken place some decades in the NorthWestern European Russia. Karelian Isthmus is heterogeneous territory. 11 types of landscape are presented here. Agricultural lands occupy landscapes such as kames, sandy, sandy-loam, clayey plains, sometimes with excess moistening, sandy fluvioglacial plains, loamy morainic plains, mesotrophic and evtrophic peat-bogs. During 100 last years the area of agricultural lands have reduced in 1,4 times on the Karelian Isthmus. The most part of it had been abandoned after change of State border after of the Second World War. Overgrowth processes on neglected agricultural lands are going on unequally in different types of landscapes. Four stages can be revealed of the processes of natural reestablishment of vegetation. I - (period to 20 years after termination of agricultural use) - grass-herb meadow with unclosed brush II - (20 - 40) - shrub layer with closed or low-closed canopy and unclosed or low closed small-leaved regrowth III - (40 - 80) - closed small-leaved forest, sometime including the coniferous trees IY - predomination of the coniferous on small-leaved trees Reestablish vegetation successions can be realised by different ways, with different rate, including various trees and ecological groups of species in different landscapes. Now most area occupy a former agricultural lands, inhering on III stage and presenting itself smallleaved forest.
The Place of Forestry in Modern Welsh Culture: How individuals and communities perceive and relate to aspects of their landscape specifically in relation to modern forestry practice.
Sue Hunter, Karen Henwood & Nick Pidgeon
University of Esat Anglia
Four areas of Wales, chosen for their contrasting socio-geographical status (Wrexham, ruralindustrial North Wales, Milford Haven, rural-industrial South Wales, Lampeter, rural mid-
250
Wales and Cardiff, and urban/industrial connurbation), were examined using a series of 19 focus groups and paper tasks, investigating a total of 105 participants drawn from a sample of the local communities. The questions asked concentrated on the importance of woods, forests and trees to the life and culture of people in Wales, how woods and trees were perceived at the level of public and personal understandings, and if different meanings and experiences tended to be associated with woods and forests depending on regional location. Here we focus on one interesting aspect of the findings, which was the sense of home or heritage associated with the natural landscape, and the fragmented nature of this concept depending on length of residence and association with the community of the area, which we hypothesise also corresponds in some measure to a sense of empowerment and control over issues pertaining to the environment as a whole and thus perceptions of it both personally and culturally.
Farm System and Landscape Pattern in a Traditional Rural Region in the Eastern-Carpatheans
Zoltn Ilys In the humanized landscape, it is often the traditional peasant farming forms that maintain landscape patterns (hedgerows, rows of trees as ecological corridors, relict spots, traditional medow farming on marshlands and mountain medows etc.) of significant ecological values. The selected sample area is Ghimes in the Eastern Carpathians (Romania), which has a traditional landscape, where due to isolation, relative autarky, the absence of collectivization, late development of bourgeois mentality, the forming factors of traditional historical landscape still have their effect and characteristics of landscape structure still can be seen. Cadastral maps from 1874 and 1909 have been evaluated from the point of view of landscape utilization. In a historical geographical fieldwork they have been compared to the recent landscape pattern. The social-economical circumstances of the transformation of hedgerows between farms of different utilization (mainly between hayfields and pastures) formed as a result of parcelling in traditional landscape are presented.
Interdisciplinary evaluation of land use

Roswitha Katter New land use alternatives obtained must refer to specific regions and must be evaluated as to their expected future effects by means of a combined evaluation procedure. The Project "Potential land use after mining" is funded by the Federal Ministry of Science and Transport and the Styrian Government. The aim is to at define measures for ensuring the sustainable development of abandoned mining areas as for example in the Eisenerz Region in Styria (Austria). The investigation process is supported by an interdisciplinary evaluation system developed by the project team taking into account natural sciences, sociological and humanities aspects. The analysis of the target situation from the point of view of the various disciplines as well as the evaluation criteria and indicators constitute an integral part of this interdisciplinary evaluation model. The criteria applied in the disciplines ecology, geosciences, archaology, history and socioeconomics are defined and set in relation, as part of
251
the evaluation model, to represent the effects of land use. The interdisciplinary evaluation system is developed and applied primarily to assess different land use scenarios. In order to increase the chances of implementation, residents of the region are invited to participate in the project in a dialogue process right from the start.
Abandoned anthropogenic landscapes: Are they potentially multifunctional?

Pavel Kovr
Department of Botany, Charles University, Bentsk 2, 128 01 Prague 2, Czech Republic
Abandoned landscape artefacts such as dumps or deposits of sedimentation basins give the possibility to monitor spontaneous environmental differentiation of semicultural or cultural areas. Stress and disturbance on one hand, and diversity features given by different rates of vegetation succession on the other, enable some general estimates of the potential habitat and landscape multifunctionality. Development of landscape ecology needs to be more experimental when we expect higher credibility within exact and theoretical disciplines, and simultaneously more friendly to nature if we may support the nature-like functioning landscape elements. In this respect, restoration ecology offers fruitful outputs for ecology of landscapes. Long-term study of different types of waste deposits has shown various trends of the ecosystem development according to the sediment properties. Substantial factors for decision making on landscape parts are the scale of functional heterogeneity and the regional context which could be demonstrated by the case studies.
Evaluating species related patch connectedness for animal dispersal modeling in heterogeneous landscapes
Stefan Lang Landscape ecology emphasizes the meaningful relationships between spatial configuration and ecological processes. These patterns can be characterized by countless quantitative measures, of which the Proximity Index is one of the most common metrics. Relating the patch size to the distance between patches it distinguishes sparse distributions of small habitat patches from clusters of large patches. However, inter-patch distances are not Euclidean, but are a complex function of relative patch frictions to moving organisms. In general movement patterns differ from Euclidean distance according to a respective organism specific spatial behavior. This is mainly influenced by a specific perception. The connectedness of patches is by that a function of the underlying landscape mosaic and the animal dispersal of a specific organism or species. Binary landscapes cannot properly model this complicated movement path through the 'matrix'. 'Proximity' is by that turning to a relative concept primarily depending on the movement possibilities and perceptions of organisms. In the presented study several simulation techniques were used to evaluate the ecological stability of altered configurations. Besides that a path modeling was performed in order to show the effects of a organisms centered view of patch connectivity within heterogeneous landscapes. A friction surface on a raster layer served to simulate the characteristic dispersal of several species.
252
Toolkits for Community Led Regeneration of Derelict Land

Chris Ling Industrial and urban restructuring has left significant areas of derelict and under-used land in urban and urban-fringe areas in many parts of the E.U. While many sites have been successfully reclaimed to conventional hard end uses, a significant number of sites cannot be regenerated in this way. Many in this category are situated in close proximity to residential areas, whose communities are often themselves socially and economically disadvantaged. Local communities have a strong interest in the sustainable regeneration of such sites as this can enhance local image and community confidence, create local amenities and can provide opportunities for local job creation and vocational skills training. These sites also offer the opportunity to adopt innovative, ecologically-informed approaches to regeneration which can contribute to significant enhancement of bio-diversity. The objective of this project is to develop comprehensive toolkits package to assist and promote community participation and ecologically-informed approaches to the process of regenerating derelict land. The aim is to significantly enhance the capacity of community groups and other actors to adopt such approaches.
Functions and values of agricultural landscapes: The pseudosteppes of Castro Verde, a case study from southern Portugal.
Marta, C1., Freitas, H1 & de Groot, R2 .
1 2
Departament of Botany. University of Coimbra. Portugal; cmarta@ci.uc.pt; hfreitas@ci.uc.pt Environmental System Analysis Group. Wageningen University. Neatherlands; Dolf.deGroot@Algemeen.CMKW.WAU.NL
Agricultural landscapes represent the end product of the transformation of natural areas by humans, for the purpose of agriculture. The complexity of the european agricultural landscape structure and function, as well as its evolution in the last thirty years, has been dominated by the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP). Actually, CAP has been reshaping the agricultural landscape of rural Europe, through intensification or land abandonment. The so-called agrienvironmental regulation (EEC 2078/92) represent an effort to integrate the overlapping agricultural and environmental traits with the maintenance of the countryside.In Portugal only one zonal programme was implemented under the scope of agri-environmental measures, in Castro Verde, Alentejo. This programme aims primary at the maintenance of traditional extensive farming systems on which various bird species with particular conservation status rely. The region of Castro Verde is dominated by pseudosteppes and it is marginal from an economic point of view, requiring concern on agroforesty land use due to its environmental characteristics. The soils of this region are characterized by scarcity in organic matter, thinness and low water capacity. The traditional agricultural land use, with crop rotation, represents a management practice that optimizes system productivity without disrupting its functioning and properties. In addition to its importance for certain bird species and overall biodiversity, this semi-natural landscape could also be highly valued for a wide range of ecological functions, scenic qualities, of cultural and socio-economic significance. We present a preliminar approach to develop a comprehensive famework in order to assess the functions of this landscape and its associated values.
253
Changes in water and rush vegetation of the Lake Skrzynka (the Wielkopolski National Park, Poland) in the last 70 years
Nagengast, Barbara & Pelechaty, Mariusz
Department of Hydrobiology, Adam Mickiewicz University, Marcelinska 4, 60-801 Poznan, Poland, email: marpelhydro@poczta.onet.pl
In the summer season of the year 1996 survey of the water and rush vegetation present in the Lake Skrzynka was carried out. As a result 10 associations were distinguished. Phytocoenoses of most of the associations found build peat-bog which is an important structural and functional element of the lake landscape and tell the Lake Skrzynka from the other ones located in the Wielkopolski National Park. The following associations were distinguished: Potamogetonetum natantis, Polygonetum natantis, Nupharo-Nymphaeetum albae, Phragmitetum communis, Scirpetum lacustris, Thelypteridi-Phragmitetum, Caricetum elatae, C. rostrate, C. diandre, C. lasiocarpe . Acquired results were compared to the previous literature data concerning the vegetation of the Lake Skrzynka in the years 1929, 1952, 1957, 1972, 1988, 1992 and 1993. According to this comparison, changes in the species composition, structure and area of the water and rush communities, which were followed by the landscape changes, were established. Especially, decay of submerged vegetation built by Utricularia vulgaris, U. minor and Myriophyllum verticillatum was observed. Generally, 6 percent of new species were found (mostly trees and bushes) and 12 percent of species decayed. Associations present in the Lake Skrzynka are typical for two different types of habitats: dystrophic and eutrophic. The lake investigated is subjected to low anthropopressure so the changes observed could be considered as a result of natural processes taking place in this lake.
Land Use Change and its Effects on a Sample Area in the TokajFoothill Region (Hungary)
Rita Nyizsalovszki The Tokaj-Hegyalja Region due to its advantageous features, it is the northernmost wine region of Hungary. The territorial changes of the vineyards supported with statistical data may be only traced from 1873. In the middle of the previous century, the area of the vineyards was not much different from the present. Nevertheless, the territorial situation of the plantations has undergone great changes.The second more significant reconstruction happened in the sixties. The vineyards moved down to the lower areas which could be easily mechanised. In my research area the change in landuse was the following between 1870 and 1990. The ratios of arable land (to 43%) and vineyards (to 45%) show decrease. However, the ratios of gardens and orchards (with 78%), lawn (with 180%) and areas withdrawn from cultivation (with 300%) have grown. The territory of forests did not change. At present, the area of fallow land is growing year by year. The oldest fallow lands occupy the highest areas which are difficult to approach and to cultivate. The ratio of vineyards planted on disadvantageous surfaces are gradually repressed from the 1990s, their place is taken by orchards and arable lands. Summing it up, it may be concluded that a significant part of the fallow lands are situated on areas with favourable endowments. Their re-cultivation would be favourable from the aspect of the quality of wine.
254
Urban pressure on woodlands

. Ode 1 , G. Fry2
1
Department of Landscape Planning Alnarp, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 58, S-230 35 Alnarp, Sweden, email: asa.ode@lpal.slu.se 2 Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Dept. of Landscape Ecology, Dronningensgade 13, 736 Sentrum, N-0105 Oslo, Norway , email: gary.fry@ninaosl.ninaniku.no
The concept of urban woodland can be defined by the influence of urban processes. The aim of this study was to analyze urban pressure on woodlands for major cities in Scania, Southern Sweden to identify which woodlands that could be characterized as urban. The approach used can function as a framework for discussing management strategies for woodlands. To determine urban pressure, three models were used for woodlands within a 10 km radius of urban areas. Model of settlement pressure. Woodlands were given values based on their distance to settlements weighted by population. Network model with analysis of accessibility and a time-cost analysis, where woodlands were given values according to their accessibility and travel costs A visual intrusion model in two steps. 1) Visibility of woodlands from urban areas. 2) Visual intrusion of settlement, roads and powerlines into the woodlands. Urban pressure on woodlands was assessed based on the visual influence of urban structures and visibility from the urban areas. The results of the analyses were used to classify woodlands by urban influence. The study further aims to provide an index of urban influence to apply to woodlands and assist in comparing results of research on urban woodlands.
Evidence of spatial differentiated dynamic of ozone injuries (Nicotiana tabacum L. Bel W3) at the southern Baltic coast
Odya, Sandra; Otto Stdemann; Sabine Eckert
Universitt Rostock, AG Angewandte Meteorologie und Umweltanalyse, D-18051 Rostock)
The process orientated Rostock Hierarchical Ozone Monitoring (RHOM) was used for proving geographical pattern of ozone effects in the range of a mesochoric climate sequenze along the southern Baltic coast. Location specific ozone effects are a function of ozone concentration, autecological impacts at the location of growth and plant specific ozone sensitivity. Results: 1. Evidence of location specific ozone effects in a mesochoric climate sequence for the ozone indicating plant Nicotiana tabacum L. Bel W3 by means of a developed evaluation scheme for macroscopic damages related with AOT401 concentrations for the plant specific growth period 2. Mathematical proofs of the significance of differences in location specific damage levels 3. Estimation of location specific deposition rate depending on ozone concentration and location specific autecological impacts for the ozone indicating plant Nicotiana tabacum L. Bel W3. Conclusions: The extent of the damage follows a geographic pattern. Preliminary fixing of plant physiologically relevant thresholds therefore should be plant specifically and depending
255
on landscape - corresponding to the ozone formation potential and ozone effect potential of the respective location. The presented results form the basis for the creation of such potential maps for Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.
1
) AOT40
accumuleted exposure over treshold concentration of 40 ppb
Derivation of plant physiological thresholds for ozone near the ground by means of standardized ozone indicating plant Nicotiana tabacum L. Bel W3
Odya, Sandra; Sabine Eckert; Otto Stdemann
Universitt Rostock, AG Angewandte Meteorologie und Umweltanalyse, D-18051 Rostock
Presently applied values of allowable ozone concentration like AOT40 (accumuleted exposure over treshold concentration of 40 ppb) only relate to ozone concentration of the air, but not to actual ozone deposition rate. Strict estimation of injurious ozone concentration has to be based on the evidence of irreversible plant changes. For derivation of location specific plant physiological thresholds outdoor plants of the accepted ozone monitor Nicotiana tabacum L. Bel W3 were analized concerning to ozone effects at different biological organisation levels. The evidence of primary damages and the documentation of typical process effects were of particular interest. The first discovered injury symptom referring to ozone were very small paracrystalline structures in cells of the green assimilation tissue. The identification as Ca(C2O4 ) . H2 O was achieved by means of transmission electron microscopy with analysis of elements ESI1 / EELS2 and microscopy by use of polarization. On the histological level the development of necrotic tissue is illustrated, beginning with the destruction of the cell membrane of sporadic palisade cells, leading to the dying of individual cells and finally the occurrence of well defined areas of necrotic tissue concerning the complete profile of leaf.
1 2
) ESI ) EELS
Elektron Spectroscopic Imaging Electron Energie Loss Spectroscopy
Local parks as a network component in a multidimensional approach of conservation

Emilio Padoa-Schioppa, Marco Baietto
University of Milano-Bicocca, p.za della Scienza 1 -20126 Milano ITALY, consbiol@disat.unimib.it
Continental and regional ecological networks are quite well investigated, while the local level begins now to be studied. It is necessary to integrate a local scale in a district scale, and then a district scale in a regional perspective. The local level is important in order to protect ecosystems that can support small networks. In the surroundings of Milan, the conservation for local scale may interact in an agricultural landscape, where man management changed completely the original land use, and where now it is necessary to protect ecosystems like fields with hedgerows, or residual wooded areas. The Agricultural Park Sud-Milano is a park (about 46.000 ha) that has been instituted in order to realise a green belt around the southern part of Milan, but the increment of urbanization is the main ecological problem. In
256
this work we show how a small reserve in the western part of Agricultural Park Sud-Milano can be considered as an important component of an ecological network. Analysis on the biodiversity (birds, mammals carnivores), on the remaining hedgerows network, on the land use and on the historical transformations underline the important role that this area can play in the future to construct a multidimensional network for the conservation.
Habitat diversity of the lake ecosystem

Pelechaty, Mariusz
Department of Hydrobiology, Adam Mickiewicz University, Marcelinska 4, 60-801 Poznan, Poland, e-mail: marpelhydro@poczta.onet.pl
In the summer season of the year 1998 habitat investigations of the water and rush vegetation along three transects in three lakes of the Wielkopolski National Park (Western Poland) were carried out. The physical and chemical properties of habitats studied (28 of water and 23 properties of substrate) were presented at the background of the water and sediment properties of the deepest part of the lake (mid-lake). As far as the intensity of anthropopressure, reflected by nutrients load from external sources, is considered, the lakes are considerably differentiated. Habitats of the following communities were examined along the transects: Lake Greckie (the lowest load of nutrients): Caricetum acutiformis - Phragmitetum communis mid-lake; Lake Jaroslawieckie (the highest load of nutrients): Phragmitetum communis community built by Fontinalis antipyretica and Nuphar luteum - Nupharo-Nymphaeetum albae (Nymphaea alba) mid-lake; Lake Budzynskie (mean load of nutrients): ThelypteridiPhragmitetum - Phragmitetum communis - Typhetum angustifoliae - Myriophylletum verticillati - Nupharo-Nymphaeetum albae (Nuphar luteum) mid-lake. As a result it was established that communities were differentiated due to the majority of properties of their habitats and the differences due to the substrate properties were more pronounced. In respect to some properties, the differences between values of the water and substrate properties of phytolittoral habitats and the water and sediment properties measured in the mid-lake were more expressed. The properties of mid-lake seemed to be depended on the width of the phytolittoral, which is to be observed in the Lake Budzynskie. Values of the water and sediment properties of mid-lakes of the other lakes under study reflected external influences on those ecosystems. It was especially remarkable when taking into account concentrations of nutrients. Based on this observation, it could be said that phytolittoral as a particular element of the landscape appearing between adjacent water and land ecosystems (transition zone) plays important role in the lake ecology.
257
Edge Effect of Successional Communities and Restoration of Forest Fragmentation in Low Sub-tropics of South China
Peng Shao Lin
Guangzhou Branch, Chinese Academy of Sciences,Guangzhou 510070, PR China, Phone: +86 20 87606709,Fax: +86 20 87775791, E-mail: slpeng@ms.gzb.ac.cn
Zhao Ping
South China Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou 510650, PR China, Phone: +86 20 87639381, Fax: +86 20 87701031, E-mail: heshanstation@scib.ac.cn
We studied the dynamics of an ecotonal forest community that was located in between a Pinus massoniana pine forest and a mixed forest community in the low sub-tropics of China based on field data collected over a16-year period. Several community attributes were examined, including species richness, diversity, leaf area index, biomass and productivity. Comparative ordination and cluster techniques were used to analyze the effects of adjacent forest stands on the structure and dynamics of the ecotonal community. The results showed that the ecotonal community, which was characterized as a pine forest 16 years ago, rapidly changed to a mixed forest while its adjacent communities (pine and mixed forests) remained unchanged. The boundary of the ecotonal community moved over 100 m into the pine forest. Duration of edge effect lasted about 20 years in this type. The consequence of edge effect was consistent with the direction of succession in this region, suggesting that the landscape context played an important role in determining local community structure and dynamics. Because the ecotonal community became increasingly similar to one of its neighboring forest communities (i.e., the mixed forest), the degree of landscape fragmentation was substantially reduced.
Changes in the forest boundaries within central Greater Poland over the last 200 years
Maciej Pietrzak Changes in the area and distribution of forest complexes as well as in the configuration of their boundaries are conceived of as a common and the most spectacular manifestation of man-induced landscape changes, at the same time testifying to the increasing deforestation. In view of this, changes in the location of forest boundaries occurring within central Greater Poland over the last 200 years were studied for a number of periods (Pietrzak, 1998) on the basis of surveys conducted within particular spans of time (i.e. 1793-1830, 1830-1933, 193387). The distribution of forest complexes within the studied periods is shown on the attached map, which illustrates the location of the forest complexes within particular time-intervals, and thus, in a sense, shows the dynamics of their changeability. Also evident are the stretches which, throughout the whole studied period, were invariably covered by forests, whose hypothetical area is 34.4 square km (8.6 percent of the total studied area). Obtained data on the area of the forest complexes and the length of their boundaries point to the non-rectilinear and non-regressive character of changes occurring over the studied span of time. The highest degree of afforestation (22.5 percent) and the highest density of forest boundaries (0.72 km/square km) were reported in 1830 as well as in the case of the most recent period (22.35 percent and 0.58 km/square km respectively). At present, however, the fragmentation of the forest areas is much limited in comparison with the past periods. The lowest degree of afforestation (13.4 percent) and low density of forest boundaries (0.43 km/square km),
258
accompanied by high fragmentation of forest complexes, are shown on the map drawn in the 1930s. Within the whole studied period (194 years) an increase in forest surface was reported (12.2 square km or 15.8 percent), and the length of the forest boundaries increased by 64.1 km (38.4 percent). Thus, the average rate of increase stood at 0.06 square km/year and 0.33 km/year respectively. A considerable increase was reported also in the years 1793-1830 (the first time-interval) and 1933-87 (the third time-interval) - 12.8 square km and 122.8 km, and 35.8 square km and 57.5 km respectively. A sharp decline was reported in the case of the second time-interval (1830-1933), when the forest surface was reduced by 36.4 square km and the length of the forest boundaries decreased by 116.2 km. At that particular time the degree of afforestation dropped to merely 13.4 percent, and the forest complexes were characterised by the highest degree of fragmentation.
The use of vegetation structure and composition measures to improve habitat classification in rural landscapes
Luis Quinta-Nova
Escola Superior Agrria de Castelo Branco, Quinta Sr. de Mrcules, 6000 Castelo Branco, Portugal, Email: lnova@esa.ipcb.pt
Keywords: Landscape Ecology, Wildlife-Habitat Relationships, Habitat Classification, Vegetation Structure The methods used to determine habitat classifications are important to planning and management. Therefore, the use of wildlife communities to improve habitat classification is crucial in Landscape Ecology. The importance of vegetation in the habitat use characteristics of breeding bird communities occurring in vora and Setbal (Portugal) was studied. Those areas have different land use gradients resulting from their management. Four transects were censured to provide distributional records of all species in order to investigate the relationship between vegetation structure and ornithological abundance. Multivariate ordination methods were used to classify the habitat on each transect as suitable or unsuitable for avian species, using foliage diversity measures and other structural measures. After calculating avian similarities among vegetation types, cluster analysis was used to group vegetation types into similar habitats based on wildlife species composition. This approach for classifying physiognomic types in rural landscapes allows consistent development of wildlife management strategies.
Methods of studying biodiversity in relation to landscape pattern of Estonian coastal areas

Rivis, R.,1 Ratas, U.,1 Puurmann, E.2
1 2
Institute of Ecology, Estonia 10137, Tallinn, Kevade St. 2.; Lnemaa Centre of the West Estonian Archipelago Biosphere Reserve, Estonia 91301, Lnemaa, Vormsi
The biological diversity connected with landscape diversity. Every landscape represents a system of closely interrelated components (abiotic and biotic), being a definite structural complex that is constantly enriched with new features in the course of its development. The
259
regularities of landscape diversity are expressed in its relations with the natural background and socio-economic conditions, as well as changes within the landscape type.Estonia is a small country at the Baltic Sea with long shoreline (3790 km) where coastal landscapes form a remarkable part. Being located on the boundaries of terrestrial and marine systems, coastal landscape represents a specific structure. The maps of nowadays coastal landscapes in the scale 1 : 10 000 served as a basis for our research. The landscape fragmentation on the map expressed by vegetation types. The method of landscape profile has been used for studying the landscape structure and mutual relationships between their components. The lists of vascular plants, bryophytes and lichens were compiled. Beside variability of nature, landscape pattern depends on the intensity and character of land use. Mainly human activities modify the vegetation. To compare the maps of different times a unified classification of the land cover types was used.
Anthropogenic transformation of cork oak-dominated landscapes in Spain and Portugal

Mirijam Seng
Dept. of Geobotany / Institute of Biology II, Albert-Ludwig University of Freiburg Schnzlestr. 1, D-79104 Freiburg / Germany, sengmiri@uni-freiburg.de
Cork oak forests have been influenced by man for at least several hundred years. In recent decades, rural exodus and the introduction of industrialized agricultural techniques have dramatically altered traditional land use in the mediterranean area. These factors and their effects on forest vegetation can be observed with different intensity and time lag in various regions of SW Iberia. We quantify landscape and vegetation pattern on two spatial levels for two mountainous areas with similar environmental conditions and potential vegetation, but different landuse history and divergent trends: the Serra de Monchique in the Algarve (Portugal) and the Sierra del Aljibe in Andalusia (Spain). For one typical valley in each area, vegetation maps were analysed as to landscape composition and configuration. Belt transects and relevs in square plots were used to provide information about about age structure of cork oak populations and stand homogeneity. Landuse patterns differ fundamentally between the two areas: The Portuguese study area is characterized by a mosaic of small patches, whereas in the Spanish Sierra del Aljibe landscape structure is dominated by large contiguous patches of cork oak forests. In both areas, the sparse regeneration success of cork oaks may cause future problems for forest conservation.
Distribution Characteristics of Naturalized Plants Influenced by Land Use Patterns in Seoul Metropolitan Area
Song, I.-J., S.-K. * Hong, H.-O. Kim
Seoul Development Institute, Seoul 100-250 and * Seoul National University, Seoul 151-742
During land transformation process in the human history, naturalized plants were introduced to several land use pattern by the different ways of plant itself. Including some naturalized plants that had been contribute to land restoration, many naturalized plants have been invaded to original habitat for native plants. Once the plants were colonized, they extend their area and
260
population size. Urban developed areas often give an important role of source habitat for extending naturalized plants. In recent, this situation is one of environmental problems about the urban landscape management controlling the naturalized plants that invaded in the developed area and conserving the native vegetation. This paper is focusing on the relationship between distribution characteristics of some naturalized plants and land-use pattern in developed area in Seoul. Gangdong-Gu, one of administrative area in Seoul was selected for this study. We examined the recent land use change using LANDSAT TM data and spreading of the representative naturalized plants (Robinia pseudoacacia and Eupatorium rugosum) by field survey. As a result, these two species were often occurred in the same habitat and distributed in forest edge disturbed by man. Their distribution patterns were related to landscape indices (patch size and shape) in the forest edge.
Analysis of ozone episodes and their inherent structure in several landscapes at the southern Baltic coast
Stdemann, Otto; Sabine Eckert; Sandra Odya
Universitt Rostock, AG Angewandte Meteorologie und Umweltanalyse, D-18051 Rostock
Supposition of a factual discussion about the definition of regional threshold values of the near ground ozone is the knowledge about: 1. the meso- and microscale spatio-temporal-variability of the ozone concentration 2. the site-specific plant-physiologically caused ozone-effect-potential. The functions of landscapes in forming ozone are determined by: 1. the spatial arrangement of human and natural of issuers ozone precursors and their fluxes 2. the spatio-temporal -variability of meteorological elements along a climatic sequence 3. the hierarchical staggered transport processes of the atmosphere. Definition: An ozone episode is represented by a period of 1 day, within witch the phytotoxic threshold values of 80 g ozone /m air are exceeded, realizing the site-specific plant-physiological caused ozone-effect-potential which is valid for Nicotiana tabacum L. Bel W3. The 100-km-catena of ozone measuring stations from NE to SW represents the Baltic coast and the Darss-Bodden-landscape with pine and beech forests (1), the suburban ground moraine between Rostock and a large pine/ oak-forest (2), a traffic centre in Rostock (3) and an agrarian region in the inner lowlands of Mecklenburg (4). The spatial-time-variability of the episodes and the probability distributions of ozone concentrations > 80 g/m along a climatic sequence are different. Atypical ozone weather conditions increasingly caused those ozone episodes defined above.
Landscape Preferences who sees what in the Agricultural Landscape

Mari Sundli Tveit This study examined student and public visual landscape preferences for agricultural scenes in Eastern Norway. The landscape preference study was conducted with randomly selected
261
public participants from 3 rural municipalities and students from the Agricultural University of Norway. Preferences were assessed through ranking photographs and analysis of free text. Study areas were 1km2 sample squares from the Norwegian monitoring programme for agricultural landscapes. Results from the preference study were compared with data on biodiversity and cultural heritage. Results suggest links between landscape preferences and the other landscape interests collected by the monitoring project. Significant differences were found between the student and the public groups even within a comparatively narrow visual range of arable farming landscapes. Differences were evident both in preference scores and in free text data. Student preferences were influenced largely by landscape structure, while the presence of buildings was most important in shaping public preferences. It is suggested that the revealed divergence in preferences between the two groups is a result of differences in familiarity and especially in formal knowledge and expertise. Openness (or grain size) was found important in shaping landscape preferences, as were complexity, topography and the presence of man-made structures. The results are discussed in relation to evolutionary and cultural theories of landscape aesthetics.
Fundamentals of Landscape Typology (Phase 1: Physical Geographical Map of Europe)

J. Vervloet, Alterra & D.M. Wascher, ECNC Despite a number of encouraging research activities in the field of landscape ecology and geography, there is still a lack of widely recognised landscape typology and mapping that will find applications in the policy field. While a number of useful landscape typologies and maps have been developed at a national level, European approaches towards landscape mapping have been facing severe problems in terms of scale, accuracy and policy relevance. Policy relevance is very much dependent on the level of detail as well as on harmonisation between regional concepts and priorities. In the late 1980s and 1990s several attempts have been made to produce a European landscape map. After a first draft that was made at a conference of landscape architects in 1988 (Meeus et al., 1988; Meeus, 1990) a more extensive map was made in 1995 as a part of the report Europes Environment The Dob Assessment ( Stanners & Bourdeau, 1995 ; Meeus 1995 ). This Pan-European landscape map distiguished thirty cultural landscapes, subdivided in eight main entities distinguished by aspects like geological sediments, climate, geomorphology, soils, landuse, hydrology, topography, settlement patterns and landscape image. As part of the implementation of the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy (PEBLDS), the European Centre for Nature Conservation is coordinating project under the Strategys Action Theme 4 on European Landscapes. One of these projects is the furtehr development of a Pan-European Landscape Map. The future map is supposed to depict the spatial dispersion and landuse aspects of the main European landscape types. The original objective of the project was to arrange landscapes in an hierarchical order, incorporating both natural and cultural aspects in a systematic fashion. The desired hierarchical system should start with natural characteristics at the first tier and break these down according to the degree of cultural transformation, for which a rational set of indicators should be developed. The poster depicts the first methodological step of this map making process, namely the identification of key geomorphological units as the basis for the future landscape typology.
262
Planning of locale specific conservation strategy for plant diversity A case study from Mulshi region in Western Ghats, India
Watve Aparna, Gandhe R.V. and Gandhe K.R.
Post-Graduate Research Centre, Department of Botany, Modern College, Pune 411005. India.
The distribution of plant diversity at species and community level in different landscape elements was studied in Mulshi region, Western Ghats, India. Qualitative and quantitative ecological data showed that out of 578 plant species 86 species(approx, 15%) are endemic to Western Ghats. Herbaceous communities were dominant in species (53% of total) and accounted for 57% of endemism. Scrub and degraded forest habitats were most rich in species and had a high percentage of endemism (80%). Rare and threatened species such as Ceropegia huberi and Cyathocline lutea were seen only in the scrub areas. Plant communities were unique in forest habitats, high altitude plateaus, slopes, screes and had a restricted distribution in the landscape. Species assemblages such as Peucedanum grande, Begonia concanensis, Ceropegia huberi and Pouzolzia indica were only on rocky outcrops at high altitudes and thus had a highly restricted distribution in the landscape. These findings indicated the inadequacy of the conservation strategy of the government which focused on conserving forest habitat and protection of tree species. Local conservation priority is the protection of the rich herbaceous communities and unique habitats. While planning future conservation strategy changes in land-use and lack of awareness about local preservation priorities need to be considered. Active involvement of local people, landscape planners and policy makers is also essential.
Assessment of restoration potential for semi-natural biotops in agrarian landscapes

Wurbs, A., Glemnitz, M., Jacobsen, M. The proportions and biotic quality of landscape elements play a key role in the diversity of species in agrarian landscapes and hence determine the habitat function of the landscape. With the aim to assess the potential for the restoration of semi-natural biotopes an, experimental programme was carried out in a study area of 2.500 km2 near Berlin. We analysed the occurrence of semi-natural biotopes characterised by different plant species inventories. Discriminant analysis based on these observed data and soil parameters obtained from soil maps helped to identify representative and main differences of soil characteristics of seminatural biotopes. The correlations between the site parameters and the biotope occurrence determine by the discriminant analysis were applied to assess the potential of arable land or grassland for the restoration of specific semi-natural biotopes. Based on the site characteristics, this method allows for a spatial explicit assessment of a landscape in terms of the types of semi-natural biotopes which can be established. This method may be used for further analyse and scenarios for effects of biotope restoration.
263
Relations between biodiversity and landscape diversity (a case study of Belovezhskaya Pushcha)
Valentin Yatsukhno
pr. Skoryna, 4 Belarusion State University, Department of Geography. 220050 Minsk, Belarus Phone/017/2265773, fax: /017/2066129, E-mail: landlab@geo.unibel.by
The national park Belovezhskaya Pushcha is one of the largest preserves in Europe distinguished for their natural diversity of forest ecosystems. Its size is greatly determined by spatial heterogeneity and genetic peculiarities of the landscapes. The following formula was used to estimate quantitatively the weighted average of land plant species (A) within a particular landscape:
A=ax + by + cz+ nm, 100
where a,b,c is species number for associations; x,y,z associations area within the landscape. Estimating the landscape diversity, one should take into consideration not only the areas occupied by various plat associations, but also the diversity level, number and forms of their areas. This enables one to estimate the land plant species number within the landscape and conditions for their occurrence and spatial spreading. The method proposed permits estimating of the ecosystem actual and potential biodiversity based on the correlation between plant associations and landscape. Besides, it enables one to perform a more substantiated study of the effect exerted by abiotic factors on the floristic wealth and phytochorogogical structure of plant communities.
264
The conference is sponsored by:

Introduction To The Theoretical Foundations of Multifunctional Landscapes and Their Application in Transdisciplinary Landscape Ecology

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction To The Theoretical Foundations of Multifunctional Landscapes and Their Application in Transdisciplinary Landscape Ecology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jesper Brandt, Brbel Tress, Gunther Tress [eds.

Published by the Centre for Landscape Research Roskilde, September 2000

Centre for Landscape Research, Roskilde, Denmark, 2000

Lectures in the six workshops

Workshop no. 2: Monitoring multifunctional terrestrial landscapes

Workshop no. 3: Biodiversity versus landscape diversity in multifunctional landscapes

Workshop no. 4: Complexity of landscape management

Workshop no. 5: Values and assessment of multifunctional landscapes

Workshop no. 6: Ecological aspects of multifunctional landscapes in historical perspective.

122 133 147

Draft on Recommendations on Interdisciplinary Landscape Research

Papers presented in parallel sessions

180 181 181

Session B: Functions of agricultural/rural landscapes

Session C: Functions of urban and recreational landscapes

Session D: Landscapes as places for experience, perception and identification

Session E: Landscapes between continuity and change

Session F: Observing landscapes

208 209 209 210

Session G: Diversity and heterogeneity of landscapes

215 216 216 217 217 218

Session H: Evaluating landscapes

Session I: Policy and planning of multifunctional landscapes

227 228 228 229 229 230 230 231 231

Session J: Managing multifunctional landscapes

250 250 251 251 252 252

253 253 254 254 255

Introduction to the conference theme

II. Plenary lectures

In order of their appearance during the conference.

Multifunctionality and Urbanisation

Aesthetic Evaluation of Multifunctional Landscapes

Interdisciplinary landscape research and the management of multifunctional landscapes

Scenarios for the management of multifunctional landscapes

Criteria and Parameters for Sustainable Land-use

Demands for future landscape research

III. Lectures in the six workshops

Workshop No. 1: The Landscape from Vision to Definition

How a landscape finds form and comes alive.

Landscape Ecology - towards a unified discipline?

Workshop No. 2: Monitoring multifunctional terrestrial landscapes

Monitoring multifunctional terrestrial landscapes: some comments

The Methodology and Applications of Agricultural Landscape Monitoring in Estonia

The multifunctionality of alpine grassland in Austria

Workshop No. 3: Biodiversity versus landscape diversity in multifunctional landscapes

The difficult relationship between Biodiversity and Landscape diversity

3 Land use change: homogenisation

Troubles with the evaluation of the landscape diversity

Workshop No. 4: Complexity of landscape management

Public landscape goods - an economic framework

This section builds on Romstad, 1998.

Figure 2: Tradeoff between costs and precision (after Romstad, 1999a)

Figure 3: The production possibility frontier and the optimal allocation.

Determinants for Successful Policy-Making in the Field of Landscape Management

Can we plan landscapes? Aspects of an application-oriented landscape ecology

Workshop No. 5: Values and assessment of multifunctional landscapes

Multifunctionality and Value

Unhealthy = unsustainable None Severe

Future trajectories implied by stakeholder

Defining valuable landscapes for planning purposes

Workshop No. 6: Ecological aspects of multifunctional landscapes in historical perspective

Historical Aspects Multifunctionality in Landscapes