IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v8y2019i6p98-d240924.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Future of Traditional Landscapes: Discussions and Visions

Author

Listed:
  • Hans Renes

    (Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, 3584 CB Utrecht, The Netherlands
    Faculty of Humanities, Vrije Universiteit, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Csaba Centeri

    (Institute of Nature Conservation and Landscape Ecology, Faculty of Environmental and Agricultural Sciences, Szent István University, 2100-Gödöllő, Páter K. u 1., Hungary)

  • Alexandra Kruse

    (Institute for Research on European Agricultural Landscapes e. V. (EUCALAND), 51491 Overath, Germany)

  • Zdeněk Kučera

    (Department of Social Geography and Regional Development, Faculty of Science, Charles University, 2 128 43 Prague, Czechia)

Abstract

At the 2018 meeting of the Permanent European Conference for the Study of the Rural Landscape (PECSRL), that took place in Clermont-Ferrand and Mende in France, the Institute for Research on European Agricultural Landscapes e.V. (EUCALAND) Network organized a session on traditional landscapes. Presentations included in the session discussed the concept of traditional, mostly agricultural, landscapes, their ambiguous nature and connections to contemporary landscape research and practice. Particular attention was given to the connection between traditional landscapes and regional identity, landscape transformation, landscape management, and heritage. A prominent position in the discussions was occupied by the question about the future of traditional or historical landscapes and their potential to trigger regional development. Traditional landscapes are often believed to be rather stable and slowly developing, of premodern origin, and showing unique examples of historical continuity of local landscape forms as well as practices. Although every country has its own traditional landscapes, globally seen, they are considered as being rare; at least in Europe, also as a consequence of uniforming CAP (Common Agricultural Policy) policies over the last five decades. Although such a notion of traditional landscapes may be criticized from different perspectives, the growing number of bottom-up led awareness-raising campaigns and the renaissance of traditional festivities and activities underline that the idea of traditional landscapes still contributes to the formation of present identities. The strongest argument of the growing sector of self-marketing and the increasing demand for high value, regional food is the connection to the land itself: while particular regions and communities are promoting their products and heritages. In this sense, traditional landscapes may be viewed as constructed or invented, their present recognition being a result of particular perceptions and interpretations of local environments and their pasts. Nevertheless, traditional landscapes thus also serve as a facilitator of particular social, cultural, economic, and political intentions and debates. Reflecting on the session content, four aspects should be emphasized. The need for: dynamic landscape histories; participatory approach to landscape management; socioeconomically and ecologically self-sustaining landscapes; planners as intermediaries between development and preservation.

Suggested Citation

  • Hans Renes & Csaba Centeri & Alexandra Kruse & Zdeněk Kučera, 2019. "The Future of Traditional Landscapes: Discussions and Visions," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-12, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:8:y:2019:i:6:p:98-:d:240924
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/8/6/98/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/8/6/98/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carsten Mann & Tobias Plieninger, 2017. "The potential of landscape labelling approaches for integrated landscape management in Europe," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(8), pages 904-920, November.
    2. Nadja Penko Seidl & Mojca Golobič, 2018. "The effects of EU policies on preserving cultural landscape in the Alps," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(8), pages 1085-1096, November.
    3. repec:ipt:wpaper:jrc73276 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Martinát, Stanislav & Navrátil, Josef & Dvořák, Petr & Van der Horst, Dan & Klusáček, Petr & Kunc, Josef & Frantál, Bohumil, 2016. "Where AD plants wildly grow: The spatio-temporal diffusion of agricultural biogas production in the Czech Republic," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 85-97.
    5. Marianne Lefebvre & Maria Espinosa & Sergio Gomez-y-Paloma, 2012. "The influence of the Common Agricultural Policy on agricultural landscapes," JRC Research Reports JRC73276, Joint Research Centre.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vladan Djokić & Aleksandra Milovanović & Jelena Ristić Trajković, 2020. "The Textuality of the Modernist Rural Landscape: Belgrade Agricultural Combine (PKB) as a Driver of the Urban Development of Third Belgrade," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-24, November.
    2. Martina Venturi & Francesco Piras & Federica Corrieri & Beatrice Fiore & Antonio Santoro & Mauro Agnoletti, 2021. "Assessment of Tuscany Landscape Structure According to the Regional Landscape Plan Partition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-20, May.
    3. Lingyu Kong & Xiaodong Xu & Wei Wang & Jinxiu Wu & Meiying Zhang, 2021. "Comprehensive Evaluation and Quantitative Research on the Living Protection of Traditional Villages from the Perspective of “Production–Living–Ecology”," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-25, May.
    4. Jiang, Qianzi & Wang, Zhifang & Yu, Kongjian & Dou, Yuehan & Fu, Hongpeng & Liang, Xueyuan, 2023. "The influence of urbanization on local perception of the effect of traditional landscapes on human wellbeing: A case study of a pondscape in Chongqing, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    5. Sandra Fatorić & Robbert Biesbroek, 2020. "Adapting cultural heritage to climate change impacts in the Netherlands: barriers, interdependencies, and strategies for overcoming them," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(2), pages 301-320, September.
    6. Viviana Ferrario, 2021. "Learning from Agricultural Heritage? Lessons of Sustainability from Italian “Coltura Promiscua”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-13, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jan Gregar & Jan Petrů & Jana Kalibová & Věra Ürge & David Kincl & Jan Vopravil, 2024. "Impact of intercrops on soil loss and surface runoff from sloping maize fields," Soil and Water Research, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 19(3), pages 168-175.
    2. Mirosław Biczkowski & Aleksandra Jezierska-Thöle & Roman Rudnicki, 2021. "The Impact of RDP Measures on the Diversification of Agriculture and Rural Development—Seeking Additional Livelihoods: The Case of Poland," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-26, March.
    3. Hristov, Jordan & Clough, Yann & Sahlin, Ullrika & Smith, Henrik G. & Stjernman, Martin & Olsson, Ola & Sahrbacher, Amanda & Brady, Mark V., 2020. "Impacts of the EU's Common Agricultural Policy “Greening” reform on agricultural development, biodiversity, and ecosystem services," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 42(4), pages 716-738.
    4. Matthews, Alan & Salvatici, Luca & Scoppola, Margherita, 2017. "Trade Impacts of Agricultural Support in the EU," Commissioned Papers 252767, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    5. van Zanten, Boris T. & Zasada, Ingo & Koetse, Mark J. & Ungaro, Fabrizio & Häfner, Kati & Verburg, Peter H., 2016. "A comparative approach to assess the contribution of landscape features to aesthetic and recreational values in agricultural landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 87-98.
    6. Paola Gullino & Maria Gabriella Mellano & Gabriele Loris Beccaro & Marco Devecchi & Federica Larcher, 2020. "Strategies for the Management of Traditional Chestnut Landscapes in Pesio Valley, Italy: A Participatory Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-13, December.
    7. Paola Gullino & Luca Battisti & Federica Larcher, 2018. "Linking Multifunctionality and Sustainability for Valuing Peri-Urban Farming: A Case Study in the Turin Metropolitan Area (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-18, May.
    8. Fabio Recanatesi & Matteo Clemente & Efstathios Grigoriadis & Flavia Ranalli & Marco Zitti & Luca Salvati, 2015. "A Fifty-Year Sustainability Assessment of Italian Agro-Forest Districts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-13, December.
    9. Josef Navrátil & Stanislav Martinát & Tomáš Krejčí & Petr Klusáček & Richard J. Hewitt, 2021. "Conversion of Post-Socialist Agricultural Premises as a Chance for Renewable Energy Production. Photovoltaics or Biogas Plants?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-21, November.
    10. Solfanelli, Francesco & Ozturk, Emel & Pugliese, Patrizia & Zanoli, Raffaele, 2021. "Potential outcomes and impacts of organic group certification in Italy: An evaluative case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    11. Guzmán, G. & Boumahdi, A. & Gómez, J.A., 2022. "Expansion of olive orchards and their impact on the cultivation and landscape through a case study in the countryside of Cordoba (Spain)," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    12. Tomáš Krejčí & Josef Navrátil & Stanislav Martinát & Ryan J. Frazier & Petr Klusáček & Kamil Pícha & Jaroslav Škrabal & Robert Osman, 2021. "Spatial Unevenness of Formation, Remediation and Persistence of Post-Agricultural Brownfields," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-18, March.
    13. Agnieszka Urbanowska & Małgorzata Kabsch-Korbutowicz, 2021. "The Use of Flat Ceramic Membranes for Purification of the Liquid Fraction of the Digestate from Municipal Waste Biogas Plants," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-12, July.
    14. Pablo Acebes & Zuriñe Iglesias-González & Francisco J. Muñoz-Galvez, 2021. "Do Traditional Livestock Systems Fit into Contemporary Landscapes? Integrating Social Perceptions and Values on Landscape Change," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-19, November.
    15. Galluzzo, Nicola, 2015. "Role And Effect Of Agroforesty Subsides Allocated By The Common Agricultural Policy In Italian Farms," International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Department of Economics and Finance, vol. 3(1), pages 1-13, January.
    16. Laurence Delattre & Marta Debolini & Jean Christophe Paoli & Claude Napoleone & Michel Moulery & Lara Leonelli & Pierre Santucci, 2020. "Understanding the Relationships between Extensive Livestock Systems, Land-Cover Changes, and CAP Support in Less-Favored Mediterranean Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-20, December.
    17. Stanislav Martinát & Justyna Chodkowska-Miszczuk & Marián Kulla & Josef Navrátil & Petr Klusáček & Petr Dvořák & Ladislav Novotný & Tomáš Krejčí & Loránt Pregi & Jakub Trojan & Bohumil Frantál, 2022. "Best Practice Forever? Dynamics behind the Perception of Farm-Fed Anaerobic Digestion Plants in Rural Peripheries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-17, March.
    18. repec:caa:jnlswr:v:preprint:id:43-2024-swr is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Chodkowska-Miszczuk Justyna & Kulla Marián & Novotný Ladislav, 2017. "The role of energy policy in agricultural biogas energy production in Visegrad countries," Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series, Sciendo, vol. 35(35), pages 19-34, March.
    20. Josef Navrátil & Tomáš Krejčí & Stanislav Martinát & Kamil Pícha & Petr Klusáček & Jaroslav Škrabal & Robert Osman, 2020. "Abandonment or Regeneration and Re-Use? Factors Affecting the Usage of Farm Premises in Different Social Spaces of the Rural," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-17, November.
    21. Navratil, J. & Picha, K. & Buchecker, M. & Martinat, S. & Svec, R. & Brezinova, M. & Knotek, J., 2019. "Visitors’ preferences of renewable energy options in “green” hotels," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 1065-1077.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:8:y:2019:i:6:p:98-:d:240924. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.