Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Regional Planning for Linking Parks and Landscape: Innovative Issues

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Nature Policies and Landscape Policies

Part of the book series: Urban and Landscape Perspectives ((URBANLAND,volume 18))

  • 1226 Accesses

Abstract

Since 2000, the emerging international indications (new paradigms relating to the protected areas, the European Landscape Convention, the socio-ecological approach of resilience) have expanded the relationship between protected areas and landscape. The paper reflects on conceptual innovations with reference to the methodological approach of some countries: the assessment of the landscape in the United Kingdom as a tool for defining policies and plans capable of integrating and harmonizing the development of human societies with the conservation of ecological and landscape stability and the territorial enhancement policies in the Netherlands that promote territorial development starting from nature and the landscape.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    World Conservation Congress “People and Nature, Only One World”, Bangkok, 2004; World Conservation Congress “For a Diverse and Sustainable World”, Barcelona, 2008; World Conservation Congress “Nature +”, Jeju, 2012.

  2. 2.

    Landscape Sensitivity in the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA).

  3. 3.

    Landscape Guidelines, Landscape Convention – A Framework for Implementation, 2007, 2009.

  4. 4.

    Determination of the “general sensitivity of the landscape”, which depends on the characteristic sensitivity relating to the single landscape resources and to visual sensitivity, independent of the type of change envisaged. It is generally used in the preparation of vast regional or subregional strategies or for the LVIA.

  5. 5.

    Identification of sensitivity with respect to a specific type of change or development. It is achieved by studying the landscape, its characteristics and values and the way in which it is perceived by the population, as well as the nature of the change proposed.

  6. 6.

    Measuring the landscape capacity (LC), the capacity to respond to the different territorial governance processes. LC depends on the sensitivity to change, visual change and that of the general and specific value of the single landscape elements. LC is used to assess the effects of relevant policies. In general, the assessment categories used are qualitative (high, medium, low), while the quantitative approach finds reference in those assessments that use GIS to organize and integrate the different levels of information, allowing the construction of evaluative matrices and algorithms and the dissemination of information and elaborations among a nonexpert public (through the web, via the principle of transparency) as well as guaranteeing an effective and efficient use of information for the definition of alternative scenarios of action on the landscape (Landscape Guidelines).

  7. 7.

    ICCA Consortium website http://www.iccaforum.org/.

References

  • Berkes F, Folke C (eds) (1998) Linking social and ecological systems: management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrini-Feyerabend G, Farvar MT, Nguinguiri JC, Ndangang VA (2007) Co-management of natural resources: organising, negotiating and learning-by-doing. GTZ and IUCN/Kasparek Verlag, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R, d’Arge R, de Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naeem S, O’Neill RV, Paruelo J, Raskin RG, Sutton P, van den Belt M (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387:253–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council of Europe, Committee of Ministers (2008) Recommendation CM/Rec (2008)3 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the guidelines for the implementation of the European Landscape Convention. 6 Feb 2008 -17th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies

    Google Scholar 

  • Davoudi S (2012) Resilience: a bridging concept or a dead end? Plann Theory Pract 13(2):299–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egoh B, Reyers B, Rouget M, Richardson DM, Le Maitre DC, van Jaarsveld AS (2008) Mapping ecosystem services for planning and management. Agr Ecosyst Environ 127(1–2):135–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrlich PR, Kennedy D (2005) Millennium assessment of human behavior. Science 309(5734):562–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folke C, Colding J, Berkes F (2002) Building resilience for adaptive capacity in social-ecological systems. In: Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (eds) Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Folke C (2006) Resilience: the emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses. Glob Environ Change 16(3):253–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folke C, Carpenter SR, Walker B, Scheffer M, Chapin T, Rockström J (2010) Resilience thinking: integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability. Ecol Soc 15(4):20. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art20/

  • Gallopín GC, Gutman P, Maletta H (1989) Global impoverishment, sustainable development and the environment: a conceptual approach. Int Soc Sci J 121:375–397

    Google Scholar 

  • Granek EF, Polasky S, Kappel CV, Reed DJ, Stoms DM, Koch EW, Kennedy CJ, Cramer LA, Hacker SD, Barbier EB, Aswani S, Ruckelshaus M, Perillo GME, Silliman BR, Muthiga N, Bael D, And Wolanski E (2010) Ecosystem services as a common language for coastal ecosystem‐based management. Conserv Biol 24(1):207–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson LH, Allen GR, Holling CS (eds) (2010) Foundations of ecological resilience. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • IUCN (2003) Vth IUCN world parks congress. Durban

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson JX, Kasperson RE, Turner BL (1995) Regions at risk: comparisons of threatened environments. United Nations University Press, Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

  • Kates RW, Clark WC, Corell R, Hall JM, Jaeger CC, Lowe I, McCarthy JJ, Schellnhuber HJ, Bolin B, Dickson NM, Faucheux S, Gallopín GC, Grübler A, Huntley B, Jäger J, Jodha NS, Kasperson RE, Mabogunje A, Matson P, Mooney H, Moore B III, O’Riordan T, Svedin U (2001) Environmental and development: sustainability science. Science 292(5517):641–642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman S (1993) The origins of order. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Klausmeyer KR, Shaw MR, MacKenzie JB, Cameron DR (2011) Landscape-scale indicators of biodiversity’s vulnerability to climate change. Ecosphere 2(8)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozlowski J (1986) Threshold approach in urban regional and environmental planning: theory & practice. University of Queensland Press, St. Lucia

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyle JT (1985) Design for human ecosystems. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministries van VROM & LNV (2008) Agenda landschap. Landschappelijk verantwoord ondernemen voor iedereen. Ministrie LNV, Den Haag

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips A (2003) Turning ideas on their head. The new paradigm for protected areas. George Wright FORUM. 20(2):8–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruitenbeek J, Cartier C (2001) The invisible wand: adaptive co-management as an emergent strategy in complex bio-economic systems. Occasional paper number 34. Center for International Forestry Research, Jakarta

    Google Scholar 

  • Sijtsma FJ, Farjon H, van Tol S, van Hinsberg A, van Kampen P, Buijs A, van Hinsberg A (2013) Chapter 8: Evaluation of landscape changes – enriching the economist’s toolbox with the Hotspotindex. In: Heijman W, van der Heide CMJ (eds) The economic value of landscapes. Routledge, London, pp 136–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Steward J (1955) Theory of culture change. University of Illinois Press, Urbana

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanwick C (ed) (2002) Judging capacity and sensitivity, landscape character assessment guidance for England and Scotland. The Countryside Agency

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner BL II, Matson PA, McCarthy JJ, Corell RW, Christensen L, Eckley N, Hovelsrud-Broda GK, Kasperson JX, Kasperson RE, Luers A, Martello ML, Mathiesen S, Naylor R, Polsky C, Pulsipher A, Schiller A, Selin H, Tyler N (2003) Illustrating the coupled human–environment system for vulnerability analysis: three case studies. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100(14):8080–8085

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Eetvelde V, Antrop M (2004) Development of European landscapes. Analyzing structural and functional changes of traditional landscapes – two examples from Southern France. Landsc Urban Plann 67:79–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Voghera A (2011a) Land use indicators for landscape assessment. In: Cassatella C, Peano A (eds) Landscape indicators. Assessing and monitoring landscape quality. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 141–165. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0366-7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Voghera A (2011b) Dopo la Convenzione europea del paesaggio. Politiche, piani e valutazione/After the European landscape convention. Policies, plans and evaluation. Alinea Editrice, Florence

    Google Scholar 

  • White LA (1949) The science of culture: a study of man and civilization. Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Interuniversity Department of Regional and Urban Studies and Planning (DIST), Politecnico and Università di Torino, Viale Mattioli 39, 10125, Turin, Italy

    Angioletta Voghera

Authors
  1. Angioletta Voghera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Angioletta Voghera .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Interuniversity Department of Regional and Urban Studies and Planning (DIST), Politecnico and Università di Torino, Turin, Italy

    Roberto Gambino

  2. Interuniversity Department of Regional and Urban Studies and Planning (DIST), Politecnico and Università di Torino, Turin, Italy

    Attilia Peano

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Voghera, A. (2015). Regional Planning for Linking Parks and Landscape: Innovative Issues. In: Gambino, R., Peano, A. (eds) Nature Policies and Landscape Policies. Urban and Landscape Perspectives, vol 18. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05410-0_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation