Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Preface
- PART I Introductory perspectives
- PART II Theory, experiments, and models in landscape ecology
- PART III Landscape patterns
- PART IV Landscape dynamics on multiple scales
- PART V Applications of landscape ecology
- PART VI Cultural perspectives and landscape planning
- 26 The nature of lowland rivers: a search for river identity
- 27 Using cultural knowledge to make new landscape patterns
- 28 The critical divide: landscape policy and its implementation
- 29 Landscape ecology: principles of cognition and the political–economic dimension
- 30 Integration of landscape ecology and landscape architecture: an evolutionary and reciprocal process
- 31 Landscape ecology in land-use planning
- PART VII Retrospect and prospect
- Index
- Plate section
- References
28 - The critical divide: landscape policy and its implementation
from PART VI - Cultural perspectives and landscape planning
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 November 2009
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Preface
- PART I Introductory perspectives
- PART II Theory, experiments, and models in landscape ecology
- PART III Landscape patterns
- PART IV Landscape dynamics on multiple scales
- PART V Applications of landscape ecology
- PART VI Cultural perspectives and landscape planning
- 26 The nature of lowland rivers: a search for river identity
- 27 Using cultural knowledge to make new landscape patterns
- 28 The critical divide: landscape policy and its implementation
- 29 Landscape ecology: principles of cognition and the political–economic dimension
- 30 Integration of landscape ecology and landscape architecture: an evolutionary and reciprocal process
- 31 Landscape ecology in land-use planning
- PART VII Retrospect and prospect
- Index
- Plate section
- References
Summary
Forecasts made in planning policy are rarely achieved in the practicalities of local application, and the case for landscape conservation is no exception. The critical divide between landscape policy developed by upper-tier government agencies and the implementation of those conservation measures at a local level is a phenomenon common to many locations. A specific case of this divide was studied in Ontario, Canada over a span of time between the passing and defeat of one planning act and the introduction of another. Through a series of interviews conducted with both the creators and the future implementers of the landscape policy in those acts, central issues that contribute to conservation resistance were examined. This qualitative study compares the responses, identifies the differences, and in the end suggests strategies that may be useful to other jurisdictions to help foster a better land-use planning environment for landscape interpretation, use, and protection in the development process.
The concept of landscape: theory and application
“Landscape” is an idea that has a long tradition in academic literature (Sauer, 1925; Hartshorne, 1939; Hoskins, 1969; Meinig, 1979; Cosgrove, 1984; Schama, 1995). Interest in the concept's utility for planning has grown in the last decade (Mitchell et al., 1993; Maines and Bridger, 1992; Watson and Labelle, 1997; Cardinall and Day, 1998; Rydin, 1998; McGinnis et al., 1999). It has been acknowledged that it can serve as a basis from which planners can integrate natural and cultural elements and issues – historically, two realms polarized from each other (Olwig, 1996).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Issues and Perspectives in Landscape Ecology , pp. 281 - 295Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2005
References
(1969). A ladder of citizen participation. American Institute of Planners Journal, 35, 216–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1972). The Idea of Landscape and the Sense of Place. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1992). “Place prosperity vs people prosperity” revisited: an old issue with a new angle. Urban Studies, 29, 185–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bookchin, M. (1992). The meaning of confederalism. In Putting Power in its Place: Creating Community Control, ed. and . Gabriole Island, BC: New Society Publishers, pp. 59–66.Google Scholar
(1998). On the unrecognized significance of the ephemeral landscape. Landscape Research, 23, 119–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1998). Embracing value and uncertainty in environmental management and planning: a heuristic model. Environments, 25, 110–125.Google Scholar
(1993). The Subject Finds a Voice: Foucault's Turn Toward Subjectivity. New York, NY: Peter Land.Google Scholar
(1993). Nature Pictorialized: “The View” in Landscape History. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
(1990). Culture in the experience of landscape. Landscape Research, 15, 11–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1984). Continuity with Change: Planning for the Conservation of Man-Made Heritage. Toronto: Dundurn Press.Google Scholar
(1987). Planning in the Public Domain: from Knowledge to Action. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hunt, J. (1991). The garden as cultural object. In Denatured Visions: Landscape and Culture in the Twentieth Century, ed. and . New York, NY: The Museum of Modern Art, pp. 19–32.Google Scholar
and (1999). Consensus building and complex adaptive systems: a framework for evaluating collaborative planning. APA Journal, 65, 412–423.Google Scholar
(1987). Aesthetics, affect and cognition: environmental preference from an evolutionary perspective. Environment and Behaviour, 19, 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1994). How to Evaluate and Nominate Designed Historic Landscapes. Bulletin 18. Washington, DC: US Department of the Interior, NPS.Google Scholar
Laurie, I. C. (1975). Aesthetic factors in visual evaluation. In Landscape Assessment: Values, Perceptions, and Resources, ed. , , and . New York, NY: Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, pp. 102–118.Google Scholar
(1992). Protected Landscapes: a Guide for Policy-Makers and Planners. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
and (1992). Narratives, community and land use decisions. Social Science Journal, 29, 363–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (1999). Bioregional conflict resolution: rebuilding community in watershed planning and organizing. Environmental Management, 24, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meinig, D. W. (1979). The beholding eye: ten versions of the same scene. In Interpretations of the Ordinary Landscapes: Geographical Essays, ed. . New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 33–48.Google Scholar
, , and (1993). Forest places of the heart: incorporating special spaces into public management. Journal of Forestry, 91, 32–37.Google Scholar
(1994). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, 2nd edn. Toronto: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
(1996). Recovering the substantive nature of landscape. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 86, 630–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ontario Legislative Digest Service (1996). 1st Session, 36th Legislature, Bill Number 20 (G), Release 20, April 26.
and (1992). Putting Power in its Place: Create Community Control!Gabriola Island, BC: New Society.Google Scholar
(1981). Humanistic Geography and Literature: Essays on the Experience of Place. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Pollock-Ellwand, N. (1997). Planning for the landscape idea. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Waterloo, Canada.
(1990). Landscapes of the Mind: a World of Sense and Metaphor. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
(1990). Reading Landscape: Country–City–Capital. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
(1982). The Meaning of the Built Environment: a Non-Verbal Communication Approach. London: Sage.Google Scholar
and (1980). Symbolism and the cultural landscape. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 70, 459–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1995). Qualitative Interviewing: the Art of Hearing Data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
(1998). Land use planning and environment capacity: reassessing the use of regulatory policy tools to achieve sustainable development. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 41, 749–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sales, K. (1992). “Free and equal intercourse:” the decentralist design. In Putting Power in its Place: Create Community Control! ed. and . Gabriola Island, BC: New Society, pp. 20–27.Google Scholar
(1925). The Morphology of Landscape. University of California Publications in Geography 2. Berkeley, CA: University of California PressGoogle Scholar
(1988). Scenic value of countryside landscapes to local residents: a Whatcom County, Washington case study. Landscape Journal, 7, 40–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1997). The place of landscape: a conceptual framework for interpreting an American scene. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 87, 660–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seamon, D. (1981). Newcomers, existential outsiders and insiders: their portrayal in two books by Doris Lessing. In Humanistic Geography and Literature, ed. . London: Croom Helm, pp. 85–100.Google Scholar
(1988). The Great Divide: a historical perspective. Landscape Research, 13, 2–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1993). Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analyzing Talk, Text and Interaction. London: Sage.Google Scholar
(1982). Common Landscapes of America, 1580 to 1845. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
(1987). Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Tuan, Y. (1979). Thought and landscape: the eye and the mind's eye. In The Interpretation of Ordinary Landscapes: Geographical Essays, ed. . New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 89–102.Google Scholar
and (1997). An introduction to planning and land use management in the United States, with comparisons to Canada and England. Environments, 24, 66–83.Google Scholar
, , , and (1990). Dealing with Change in the Connecticut River Valley: a Design Manual for Conservation and Development. Amherst, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.Google Scholar
(1990). Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar