The Evolution of Landscape Ecology

  • Zev Naveh
  • Arthur S. Lieberman
Part of the Springer Series on Environmental Management book series (SSEM)

Abstract

Landscape ecology is a young branch of modern ecology that deals with the interrelationship between man and his open and built-up landscapes. As will be shown in this chapter, landscape ecology evolved in central Europe as a result of the holistic approach adopted by geographers, ecologists, landscape planners, designers, and managers in their attempt to bridge the gap between natural, agricultural, human, and urban systems.

Keywords

Landscape Ecology Physical Planning Open Landscape Landscape Planning Potential Natural Vegetation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arthur, L. M., T. C. Daniel, and R. C. Boster. 1977. Scenic assessment—an overview. Landscape Planning 4: 109–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bakker, P. A. 1979. Vegetaton science and nature conservation. In: M. J. A. Werger (Ed.), The Study of Vegetation. Dr. W. Junk, The Hague, pp. 249288.Google Scholar
  3. Bornkamm, R., and W. Grün. 1973. Eine Versuchsanlage zur Frage der Flachdach Begrünung. Landschaft + Stadt 3: 141–143.Google Scholar
  4. Buchwald, K. 1963. Die Industriegesellschaft und die Landschaft. Beitr. z. Landespflege 1: 23–41.Google Scholar
  5. Buchwald, K., and Engelhart, W. (Eds.). 1968. Handbuch für Landschaftpflege und Naturschutz. Bd. 1. Grundlagen. BLV Verlagsgesellschaft, Munich, Bern, Wien.Google Scholar
  6. Chorley, R. J., and B. A. Kennedy. 1971. Physical Geography, A Systems Approach. Prentice-Hall Intern., Inc., London.Google Scholar
  7. Christian, C. S. 1958. The concept of land units and land systems. In: Proceedings of Ninth Pacific Science Congress 20: 74–81.Google Scholar
  8. Christian, C. S., and G. A. Stewart. 1968. Methodology of integrated surveys. In: Aerial Surveys and Integrated Studies. Proc. Toulouse Conf., UNESCO, Paris, pp. 233–280.Google Scholar
  9. Dansereau, P. 1957. Biogeography: An Ecological Perspective. Ronald Press, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Dansereau, P. 1966. Ecological impact and human ecology. In: F. Fraser Darling and J. P. Milton (Eds.), Future Environments of North America. Natural History Press, Garden City, New York, pp. 425–464.Google Scholar
  11. Dansereau, P. 1975. Inscape and Landscape. The Human Perception of Environment. Columbia University Press, New York and London.Google Scholar
  12. Dansereau, P. 1977. Ecological Grading and Classification of Land-Occupation and Land-Use Mosaics. Geographical Paper No. 58. Lands Directorate Fisheries and Environment, Ottawa, Canada.Google Scholar
  13. Dansereau, P. 1980. The Template and the Impact. INTECOL Bull. 7 /8: 70–109.Google Scholar
  14. Duffey, E., and A. S. Watt (Eds.). 1971. The Scientific Management of Animal and Plant Communities for Conservation (11th Symposium, Brit. Ecol. Soc., 1970 ). Blackwell Sci. Publ., Oxford, London, and Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  15. Egler, F. E. 1942. Vegetation as an object of study. Philos. Sci. 9: 245–260.Google Scholar
  16. Egler, F. E. 1964. Pesticides in our ecosystem. Am. Sci. 52: 110–136.Google Scholar
  17. Ellenberg, H. 1950. Unkrautsgemeinschaften als Zeiger für Klima und Boden. Landwirtschaftliche Pflanzensoziologie 1. Ulmer, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  18. Ellenberg, H. 1956. Aufgaben und Methoden der Vegetationskunde. Ulmer, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  19. Ellenberg, H. (Ed.). 1971. Integrated Experimental Ecology. Methods and Results of Ecosystem Research in the German Soiling Project. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York.Google Scholar
  20. Ellenberg, H. 1974. Zeigerwerte der Gefässpflanzen Mitteleuropas. Scripta Geobot., Göttingen.Google Scholar
  21. Ellenberg, H. 1978. Vegetation Mitteleuropas mit den Alpen, 2nd edition. Ulmer, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  22. Haber, W. 1979. Theoretische Anmerkungen zur Ökologischen Planung. Verhandl. Ges. für Okologie 7, Weihenstephan.Google Scholar
  23. Haber, W. 1980. Raumordungskonzepte aus der Sicht der Ökosystemforschung. Forschungs.-und Sitzungberichte der Akad. für Raumforschung und Landesplanung, Hanover.Google Scholar
  24. Kiemstedt, H. 1967. Zur Bewertung der Landschaft für die Erhohlung. 1. Sonderheft d. Beiträge zur Landespflege, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  25. Kiemstedt, H. (Ed.). 1975. Landschaftsbewertung für die Erhohlung im Sauerland. Institut für Landes-und Stadtentwicklungs Forschung des Landes Nordhein-Westfalen. Band 1.008/1. Dortmund.Google Scholar
  26. Kuchler, A. W. 1967. Vegetation Mapping. Ronald Press, New York.Google Scholar
  27. Kuchler, A. W. 1975. Map of Potential Natural Vegetation of the Conterminous United States. 1:3,168,000. Special Publication No. 36, American Geographical Society, New York.Google Scholar
  28. Langer, H. 1970. Die Ökologische Gliederung der Landschaft und ihre Bedeutung für die Fragestellung der Landschaftpflege. Landschaft + Stadt 3: 2–29.Google Scholar
  29. Langer, H. 1973. Ökologie der geosozialen Umwelt. Landschaft + Stadt 5: 133140.Google Scholar
  30. Leser, H. 1976. Landschaftsökologie. Ulmer (UTV Nr. 521), Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  31. Mueller-Dombois, D., and H. Ellenberg. 1974. Aims and Methods of Vegetation Ecology. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  32. Odum, E. O. 1969. The strategy of ecosystem development. Science 164: 26 2270.Google Scholar
  33. Odum, E. O. 1971. Fundamentals of Ecology, 3rd edition. Saunders, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  34. Olshowy, G. 1973. Landscape planning in the Rhineland Brown Coal Area. In: D. Lovejoy (Ed.), Land Use and Landscape Planning. Aylesbury, England, pp. 249–251.Google Scholar
  35. Olshowy, G. 1975. Ecological Landscape Inventories and Evaluation. Landscape Planning 2: 37–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pflug, W. 1973. Umweltschutz in Lehre und Forschung in der Technischen Hochschule Aachen. Landschaft + Stadt 5: 98–115.Google Scholar
  37. Schmithiisen, J. 1963. Der wissenschaftliche Landschaftsbegriff. Mitt. flor.soziol. Arbeitgemeinschaft 10: 9–19.Google Scholar
  38. Schreiber, K.-F. 1976. Zur Sukession und Flächenfreihaltung auf Brachland in Baden-Würtenberg. Verhandl. Ges. für Ökologie 1976. Dr. W. Junk, The Hague, pp. 251–303.Google Scholar
  39. Schreiber, K.-F. 1977a. Landscape planning and protection of the environment. The contribution of landscape ecology. Appl. Sciences and Development 9: 128–139.Google Scholar
  40. Schreiber, K.-F. 1977b. Naturschutz und Flurbereinigung-einige Bemerkungen zu einem viel diskutierten Problem. Natursch. Landschaftpfl. 27: 48–51.Google Scholar
  41. Stumpel, A. H. P., and J. T. R. Kalkhoven. 1978. A vegetation map of TheGoogle Scholar
  42. Netherlands based on the relationship between ecotopes and types of potential natural vegetation. Vegetatio 37:163–173.Google Scholar
  43. Sukopp, H. 1970. Charakteristik und Bewertung der Naturschutzgebiete in Berlin ( West ). Natur und Landschaft 45: 133–139.Google Scholar
  44. Sukopp, H. 1971. Bewertung und Auswahl von Naturschutzgebieten. Schr. Reihe für Landschaftpflege und Naturschutz 6: 183–194.Google Scholar
  45. Sukopp, H. 1972. Wandel von Flora und Vegetation in Mitteleuropa unter dem Einfluss des Menschen. Ber. Landwirtschaft 50: 112–139.Google Scholar
  46. Teilhard de Chardin, P. 1966. Man’s Place in Nature. Collins, London.Google Scholar
  47. Trautmann, W. 1973. Vegetationskarte der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 1: 200,000 Potentielle natürliche Vegetation Blatt CC 5502 Köln. Schrift. Für Vegetationskunde 6.Google Scholar
  48. Trent Forschunggruppe. 1973. Typologische Untersuchungen zur rationellenGoogle Scholar
  49. Vorbereitung umfassender Landschaftsplanungen. Dortmund/Saarbruecken.Google Scholar
  50. Troll, G. 1971. Landscape ecology (geo-ecology) and bio-ceonology-a termi-nology study. Geoforum 8: 43–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tüxen, R. 1956. Die heutige potentielle natürliche Vegetation als Gegenstand der Vegetationskartierung. Angew. Pflanzensoziologie, Stolzenau/Weser 13: 5–42.Google Scholar
  52. Tüxen, R. (Ed.). 1968. Pflanzensoziologie und Landschaftsökologie. Intern. Symp. Intern. Ver. für Vegetationskunde Stolzenau und Rinteln.Google Scholar
  53. Tüxen, R., and H. Diemont. 1937. Klimaxgruppe und Klimaxschwarm. Jber. Naturhist. Ges. Hannover 88 /89: 73–87.Google Scholar
  54. van Leeuwen, C. G. 1966. A relation theoretical approach to pattern and process in vegetation. Wentia 15: 25–46.Google Scholar
  55. van Leeuwen, C. G. 1973. Oecologie en natuurtechniek. Natur en Landchap 27: 57–67.Google Scholar
  56. van der Maarel, E. 1971. Plant species diversity in relation to management. In: E. Duffey and A. S. Watt (Eds.), The Scientific Management of Animal and Plant Communities for Conservation. Blackwell Sci. Publ., Oxford, London, Edinburgh, pp. 45–63.Google Scholar
  57. van der Maarel, E. 1975. Man-made natural ecosystems in environmental management and planning. In: W. H. van Dobbin and R. H. Lowe-McConnel (Eds.), Unifying Concepts in Ecology. Dr. W. Junk, The Hague, pp. 263–274.Google Scholar
  58. van der Maarel, E. 1977. Naar een globaal ecologisch model voor de ruimte ontwikkeling van Neerderland [Toward a global ecological model for physical planning in the Netherlands]. Ministry of Housing and Physical Planning, The Hague, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  59. van der Maarel, E. 1978. Ecological principles for physical planning. In: M. W, Holgate and M. J. Woodman (Eds.), The Breakdown and Restoration of Ecosystems, NATO Conf. Ser. 1 (Ecology), Vol. 3. Plenum Press, New York and London, pp. 413–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. van der Maarel, E., and A. H. P. Stumpel. 1975. Landschaftsökologische Kartierung und Bewertung in den Niederlanden. Verhandl. Ges. für Ökologie 1974. Dr. W. Junk, The Hague, pp. 231–240.Google Scholar
  61. Vernadsky, W. I. 1945. The biosphere and the noosphere. Am. Sci. 33:1–12. Vink, A. P. A. 1975. Land Use in Advancing Agriculture. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York.Google Scholar
  62. Walter, H. 1960. Standortlehre (Analytische-ökologische Geobotanik). (Einführung in die Phytologie; Grundlagen der Pflanzenverbreitung.) Ulmer, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  63. Walter, H. 1964. Die Vegetation der Erde in öko-physiologischer Bertrachtung, Band 1: Die tropischen und subtropischer Zonen. E. B. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena.Google Scholar
  64. Walter, H. 1968. Die Vegetation der Erde in öko-physiologischer Bertrachtung, Band 2: Die gemässigten und arktischen Zonen. Ulmer, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  65. Walter, H. 1973. Vegetation of the Earth in Relation to Climate and the Eco-Physiological Conditions. Springer-Verlag, New York, Heidelberg, Berlin.Google Scholar
  66. Westhoff, V. 1971. The dynamic structure of plant communities in relation to the objectives of conservation. In: E. Duffey and A. S. Watt (Eds.), The Scientific Management of Animal and Plant Communities for Conservation. Blackwell Sci. Publ., Oxford, London, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  67. Westhoff, V., and E. van der Maarel. 1978. The Braun-Blanquet Approach, 2nd edition. In: R. H. Whittaker (Ed.), Classification of Plant Communities. Dr. W. Junk, The Hague, pp. 287–399.Google Scholar
  68. Whyte, R. O. 1976. Land and Land Appraisal. Dr. W. Junk, The Hague.Google Scholar
  69. Woebse, H. H. 1975. Landschaftsökologie und Landschaftsplanung. R. B. Verlag, Graz.Google Scholar
  70. Young, G. L. 1974. Human ecology as an interdisciplinary concept: A critical inquiry. In: A. MacFayden (Ed.), Advances in Ecological Research. Academic Press, New York, pp. 1–105.Google Scholar
  71. Zonneveld, I. S. 1972. Textbook of Photo-Interpretation, Vol. 7. (Chapter 7: Use of aerial photo interpretation in geography and geomorphology). ITC, Enschede.Google Scholar
  72. Zube, E. H., R. O. Brush, and J. G. Fabos (Eds.). 1975. Landscape Assessment: Values, Perception and Resources. Dowden, Hutchinson, and Ross, Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zev Naveh
    • 1
  • Arthur S. Lieberman
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of Agricultural EngineeringTechnion—Israel Institute of TechnologyHaifaIsrael
  2. 2.Landscape Architecture Program, New York State College of Agriculture and Life SciencesCornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations