Living in the Anthropocene epoch, as we are, our landscapes are very much the living representation of our civilization in various forms. The eminent landscape designer Geoffrey Jellicoe defined the “landscape of man” as an “environment that has been shaped and managed by human activity.” Given the extensive human footprint, there are very few landscapes globally that have not been influenced by our ourselves and our brethren. We are, in reality, living in the epoch of the “landscape of man,” and in many significant senses we can apply this terminology to anywhere, and any place, in the global milieu. Yet the suffix “-scape” means, in many languages, to “shape.” Thus the term “landscape,” in the etymological sense, suggests that environments are inherently influenced by man and our activities. The term “land”, with its root in the Germanic languages, indicates a sense of belonging (= I own). Indeed the etymology of the term itself is complex but indicates there is some commonality of understanding that could provide insights into reconciling our understanding of what the term “landscape” represents.
Landscapes clearly represent different entities to different people. The fields of history, art, philosophy, psychology, biology, anthropology, politics and environmental science have used the term, with little inter-changeability between disciplines. The very word “landscape” itself is evocative. It is more a case of muddling through and being flexible enough to adapt to change, and integrating multiple objectives for the best possible benefits. Yet the landscape approach is anything but orderly. the research environmental and development) community to categorize and compartmentalize the concept of landscapes for ease of understanding is arguably an extension of our need for order, systems and process. Responses ranged from, “what is a landscape?” to “where are these principles being practiced?” to “which landscapes are being sustainably managed?”Īs credible and valid as such questioning is, enquiries within our own (i.e. However, and somewhat surprisingly, popular reaction to the publication of this loose framework primarily focused on specificity rather than the broader framework itself. While recognizing that the landscape approach is no panacea, our article points out that there are few alternatives that are likely to address challenges at the landscape scale more effectively. These 10 principles emphasize adaptive management, stakeholder engagement and dialogue, and multiple objectives.
In an attempt to provide a guiding framework to the landscape approach, the Center for International Forestry Research and partner institutions described 10 principles that characterize such an approach.
0 kommentar(er)
