Advertisement

The Material Base of Sustainable Development—The Landscape

  • László Miklós
  • Erika Kočická
  • Zita Izakovičová
  • Dušan Kočický
  • Anna Špinerová
  • Andrea Diviaková
  • Viktória Miklósová
Chapter

Abstract

The concept of the sustainable development requires an exact formulation of the main object of our interest—the landscape—in the sphere of science, politics, decision-making, planning and projecting. The different approaches to the landscape offer different possibilities for their implementation in legislation and real planning processes. The decisive step is the functional integration of landscape-ecological knowledge into existing management and planning processes. With simplification we can state that we need to integrate two groups of knowledge: the first and initial is the definition what actually is to be planned and managed. This is the “demand” from humans. The second one is the knowledge of the landscape, the landscape “offer, supply”. The confrontation of these two groups should lead to a process referred to as the ecologization of the landscape management. The landscape is a comprehensive integrated spatial-material entity—the environment for the life of people and other organisms rather than just its separate components. At the same time it is the only space which we must all fit into. So, the landscape resources are used for different purposes for different activities that compete with each other and they cause mutual conflicts. Relevant environmental-political documents starting with Agenda 21 issued on Rio Summit 92, namely the Chapter 10 entitled “Integrated approach to the management of land resources” justified the need for the integrated landscape management as a major instrument of sustainable development. All above-mentioned principles can be realized if the landscape is understood systematically, as a geosystem. This understanding has become the base for the legally defined and nowadays routine planning tools—the landscape-ecological planning LANDEP and projecting the territorial system of ecological stability TSES—as transmitters of the landscape-ecological knowledge into the spatial planning processes.

Keywords

Landscape Ecologisation Integrated management Plannings 

References

  1. AGENDA 21 (1992) United Nations conference on environment and development. Rio de Janeiro (United Nations), A/Conf. l5l/4Google Scholar
  2. Antrop M (2013) A brief history of landscape research. In: Howard P, Ian Thompson I, Waterton E (eds) The Routledge companion to landscape studies. Routledge, Oxon, New York, pp 12–22Google Scholar
  3. Barsch H, Sauppe G et al (1993) Zur Integration landschaftsoekologischer und sociooekologischer Daten in gebietliche Planungen. Potsdamer Geographische Forschungen, Band 4. Universität Potsdam, p 226Google Scholar
  4. Belaňová E (2014) Krajinno-ekologické aspekty integrovaného manažmentu krajiny v územnom pláne a v projekte pozemkových úprav. Dizertačná práca. Technická univerzita Zvolen, p 190Google Scholar
  5. Belaňová E, Kanianska R, Kizeková M, Makovníková J, Jaďuďová J, Zelený J, Kočická E, Vaľková V, Wagner J, Mitterpach J, Samešová D (2014) Quo Vadis - čo a ako možno integrovať? In: Stav a trendy integrovaného manažmentu životného prostredia: vedecká monografia. In: Diviaková A (ed) et al. 2014, p 220Google Scholar
  6. Bezák P (2006) Integrovaný prístup hodnotenia krajiny na príklade výskumu v NP Poloniny. In: Izakovičová Z (ed.) Smolenická výzva III. Integrovaný manažment krajiny - základný nástroj implementácie trvalo udržateľného rozvoja: zborník príspevkov z konferencie. Ústav krajinnej ekológie SAV Bratislava, pp 125–130Google Scholar
  7. Brandt J, Vejre H (eds) (2004) Multifunctional landscapes: theory, values and history, vol I. WIT Press, SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
  8. Caims J, Crawford TV, Salwasser H (eds) (1994) Implementing integrated environmental management. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, p 137Google Scholar
  9. Cash DW et al (2003) Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proc Nat Acad Sci 100(14):8086–8091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chorley RJ, Kennedy BA (1971) Physical geography—a system approach. Prentice—Hall Interantional Inc, London, p 370Google Scholar
  11. Drdoš J (ed) (1983) Landscape synthesis: geoecological foundations of the complex landscape management. VEDA, BratislavaGoogle Scholar
  12. Haber W (1990) Using landscape ecology in planning and management. In: Zonneveld S., Forman RTT (eds) Changing landscapes on ecological perspective. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp 217–232Google Scholar
  13. Haber W (2002) Kulturlandschaft zwischen Bild und Wirklichkeit. In: Schweizerisches Akademie der Geistes und Sozialwissenschaften. Bern, Akadenmievorträge, Heft IX, p 19Google Scholar
  14. Haber W (2005) Pflege des Landes – Verantwortung für Landschaft und Heimat. In: Deutscher Rat für Landespflege (ed): Landschaft und Heimat. Schriftenreihe des Deutschen Rates für Landespflege, vol 77. Meckenheim, pp 100–107Google Scholar
  15. Hreško J, Pucherová Z, Baláž I, Ambros M, Bezák P, Bírová L, Boltižiar M, Bridišová Z, Bugár G, Ceľuch M, David S, Gerhátová K, Jančová A, Kaločaiová M, Košťál J, Mederly P, Mišovičová R, Petluš P, Petrovič F, Rezník S, Rózová Z, Ružička M, Rybaničová J, Ševčík M, Trungelová D, Tuhárska K, Vanková V, Vereš J (2006) Krajina Nitry a jej okolia. Úvodná etapa výskumu. UKF Nitra, Fakulta prírodných vied, Nitra, p 182Google Scholar
  16. Huba M, Ira V (2006) Integrované prístupy ku kraji ne a koncepcia trvalo udržateľného rozvoja. In: Izakovičová Z (ed.) Smolenická výzva III – Integrovaný manažment krajiny – základný nástroj implementácie trvalo udržateľného rozvoja. Zborník príspevkov z konferencie, Ústav krajinnej ekológie SAV, Bratislava, pp 89–93Google Scholar
  17. Izakovičová Z (2006) Integrovaný prístup k hodnoteniu poľnohospodárskej krajiny. In Geografická revue: Geografické a geoekologické štúdie, 2006, roč. 2, č. 2, pp 333–339, ISSN 1336-7072Google Scholar
  18. Izakovičová Z, Kozová M (2008) Integrovaný manažment krajiny - nástroj podporujúci udržateľný rozvoj územia. In Enviromagazín časopis o tvorbe a ochrane životného prostredia, roč. 13, mimoriadne číslo, pp 8–11, ISSN 1335-1877Google Scholar
  19. Izakovičová Z, Hrnčiarová T, Králik J, Liška M, Miklós L, Moyzeová M, Pauditšová E, Ružičková H, Šíbl J, Tremboš P (2000) Metodické pokyny na vypracovanie projektov regionálnych územných systémov ekologickej stability a miestnych územných systémov ekologickej stability. MŽP SR, Združenie KRAJINA 21, Bratislava, p 155Google Scholar
  20. Kerényi A (2007) Tájvédelem. – Pedellus Tankönyvkiadó, Debrecen, p 184Google Scholar
  21. Kertész Á (2010) Tájökológiai kutatások 2010. IV. Magyar Tájökológiai Konferencia, MTA FKI, Budapest, p 294Google Scholar
  22. Kienast F, Wildi O, Ghosh S (eds) (2007) A changing world. Challenges for landscape research, vol 8, Landscape Series, Springer, Dordrecht, pp 753–754Google Scholar
  23. Kozová M (2006) Strategické environmentálne hodnotenie ako nástroj udržateľného rozvoja regiónov. In: Acta Geographica Universitatis Comenianae, vol 47. pp 99–108Google Scholar
  24. Krcho J (1968) Prírodná časť geosféry ako kybernetický systém a jeho vyjadrenia v mape. Bratislava, Geografický časopis, 20(2):115–130Google Scholar
  25. Krcho J (1978) The spatial organisation of the physical-geographical sphere as a cybernetic system expressed by means of measure as entropy. In: Acta Facultatis Rerum Naturalium Universitas Comenianae, vol 16. Geographica, pp 57–147Google Scholar
  26. Mander Ü, Müller F, Wrbka T (2005) Functional and structural landscape indicators: upscaling and downscaling problems. Ecol Ind 5(4):267–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Miklós L (1991) Morphometric indices of the relief in the LANDEP methods and their interpretation. Ecology (ČSFR) 10:159–186Google Scholar
  28. Miklós L, Izakovičová Z (1997) Krajina ako geosystém. VEDA, SAV, Bratislava, p 152Google Scholar
  29. Miklós L, Špinerová A (2011) Krajinno-ekologické plánovanie LANDEP. VKÚ, Harmanec, p 159Google Scholar
  30. Miklós L, Diviaková A, Izakovičová Z (2011a) Ekologické siete a územný systém ekologickej stability. Vydavateľstvo TU vo Zvolene, p 141Google Scholar
  31. Miklós L, Ivanič B, Kočický D (2011b) Krajinnoekologická základňa integrovaného manažmentu povodia Ipľa. Digitálna databáza a tematické mapové vrstvy. Projekt HUSK 0801/2.1.2/0162 Vytvorenie jednotného monitoringu na báze priestorového informačného systému v povodí Ipľa. Banská Štiavnica, Esprit, spol. s r. o. (elektronický zdroj)Google Scholar
  32. Miklós L, Izakovičová Z, Kanka R, Ivanič B, Kočický D, Špinerová A, David S, Piscová V, Štefunková D, Oszlányi J, Ábrahámová A (2011c) Geografický informačný systém povodia Ipľa: Katalóg GIS a výber máp. Bratislava: Ústav krajinnej ekológie SAV: Katedra UNESCO, Fakulta ekológie a environmentalistiky, Technická univerzita Zvolen, Esprit Banská Štiavnica, p 143Google Scholar
  33. Miklós L, Kočická E, Kočický D, Diviaková A, (2015) Geosystémy ako krajinnoekologická základňa pre integrovaný manažment krajiny. (Geosystems as a landscape-ecological basis for integrated landscape management – in Slovak). Technická univerzita Zvolen. p 101 + AnnexesGoogle Scholar
  34. Mizgajski A, Markuszewska I (eds) (2010) Implementation of landscape ecological knowledge in practice. The Problems of Landscape Ecology. Volume XXVIII. Polish Association for Landscape Ecology, Wydawnictvo Naukowe Adam Miczkiewicz University, PoznańGoogle Scholar
  35. MoE SR (1993) Metodické pokyny na vypracova nie dokumentov územného systému ekologickej stability. Bratislava. č. 101/93 – IIGoogle Scholar
  36. Nassauer JI (2012) Landscape as medium and method for synthesis in urban ecological design. Landscape Urban Plann 106:221–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nassauer JI, Opdam P (2008) Design in science: extending the landscape ecology paradigm. Landscape Ecol 23:633–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nassauer J, Santelmann MV, Scavia D (eds.)(2007) From the Corn Belt to the Gulf. Societal and environmental implications of alternative agricultural futures. Resources for the Future, Routledge, Washington p 272Google Scholar
  39. Neef E (1967) Die theoretischen Grundlagen der Landschaftslehre. H. Haack, Gotha, LeipzigGoogle Scholar
  40. Neef E, Richter H, Barsch H, Haase G (1973) Beitrage zur Klarung der Terminologie in der Landschaftsforschung Geographisches Institut der Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR, Leipzig, p 28Google Scholar
  41. Preobrazhensky V S, Minc A A (1973) Sootnoshenye ponyaty geosystema a ekosystema. In: Práce a materiály z biológie krajiny 20. Proceedings of 3rd International Symposium on the Landscape Ecological Research. ÚBK SAV, BratislavaGoogle Scholar
  42. Preobrazhensky VS, Kupriyanova TP, Alexandrova TD (1980) Issledovanie landšaftnych sistem dľa celej ochrany prirody. In: Struktura, dinamika i rozvitije landšaftov, AN SSSR, Institut geografii, Moskva, pp 11–25Google Scholar
  43. Richling A, Malinowska E, Lechnio J (eds) (1994) Landscape Research and its Applications in Environmental Management. IALE Polisch Assoc, Warsaw, p 289Google Scholar
  44. Ružička M, Miklós L (1982) Landscape ecological planning (LANDEP) in the process of territorial planning. Ekologia (CSSR) 1(3):297–312Google Scholar
  45. Ružička M, Miklós L (1990) Basic premises and methods in landscape ecological planning and optimization. In: Zonneveld IS, Forman RTT (eds) Changing landscapes: an ecological perspective. Springer—Verlag, New York, pp 233–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Siebert SF (2004) Traditional agriculture and the conservation of biological diversity in Crete, Greece. Int J Agric Sustain 2:109–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. SkEA (2009) Metodické pokyny na vypracovanie aktualizovaných dokumentov R-ÚSES, CMŽP – OMK Bratislava, p 133Google Scholar
  48. Slocombe DS (1998) Lessons from experience with ecosystem management. Landscape Urban Plann 40(1–3):31–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sochava V B (1977) Landscapes of Southeastern Siberia (1:1 500000 map). MoscowGoogle Scholar
  50. Szaro CR, Sexton WT, Malone ChR (1998) The emergence of ecosystem management as a tool for meeting people ́s needs and sustaining ecosystems. Landscape und Urban Plann 40:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. von Bertalanffy L (1968) General system theory. Foundations, development and applications. George Brazileer, Penguin Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  52. Wu J (2013) Key concepts and research topics in landscape ecology revisited: 30 years after the Allerton Park workshop. Landscape Ecol 28:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wu J, Hobbs R (2002) Key issues and research priorities in landscape ecology: an idiosyncratic synthesis. Landscape Ecol 17:355–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zonneveld IS (1995) Land ecology: an introduction to landscape ecology as a base for land evaluation. Land management and conservation. SPB Academic Publishing, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • László Miklós
    • 1
  • Erika Kočická
    • 1
  • Zita Izakovičová
    • 2
  • Dušan Kočický
    • 3
  • Anna Špinerová
    • 1
  • Andrea Diviaková
    • 1
  • Viktória Miklósová
    • 2
  1. 1.UNESCO-Chair for Sustainable DevelopmentTechnical University in ZvolenZvolenSlovakia
  2. 2.Institute of Landscape Ecology SASBratislavaSlovakia
  3. 3.ESPRIT Ltd.Banská ŠtiavnicaSlovakia

Personalised recommendations