Advertisement

Multifunctional land use: meeting future demands for landscape goods and services

  • Ülo Mander
  • Katharina Helming
  • Hubert Wiggering
Chapter

Abstract

Cultural landscapes are multifunctional through their simultaneous support of habitat, productivity, regulatory, social, and economic functions (de Groot 1987; Bastian and Schreiber 1999). Heterogeneity is a basic characteristic of landscape, and this heterogeneity implies the capacity of landscape to support various, sometimes contradictory functions simultaneously. Many elements in cultural landscapes have a multifunctional character, and this has been thoroughly studied. For instance, hedgerows (Burel 1996), forests (Pandey 2002), wetlands and their ecotones (Kruk 2003), riparian buffer zones (Mander et al. 2005) and various grassland ecosystems (Gibon 2005), which control various energy and material fluxes in the landscape, protect biodiversity and provide recreational opportunities for people, are classical examples of multifunctional landscape elements. Land use is the key activity which determines the performance of landscapes with respect to socio-economic functions such as land based production, infrastructure and housing. The degree of integration between these socio-economic functions and environmental functions including natural resources protection depends on the patterns and intensities of land use (Wiggering et al. 2003).

Keywords

Agricultural Landscape Landscape Change Cultural Landscape Future Demand Ecological Network 
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. Altieri MA (2000) Multifunctional dimensions of ecologically-based agriculture in Latin America. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 7: 62–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Antrop M (2004) Landscape change and the urbanization process in Europe. Landscape and Urban Planning 67: 9–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aznar O, Marsat JB, Rambonilaza T (2006) Tourism and landscapes within multifunctional rural areas: the French case. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  4. Barkmann J, Helming K, Müller K, Wiggering H (2004) Multifunctional landscapes: towards an analytical framework for sustainability assessment of agriculture and forestry in Europe. Final Scientific Report. EU FP5 Project EVK-CT-2002-80023.Google Scholar
  5. Bastian O, Schreiber KF (1994) Analyse und ökologische Bewertung der Landschaft. Jena, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  6. Bezák P, Halada L’, Petrovič F, Boltižiar M, Oszlányi J (2006) Bukovské vrchy in the Slovak Carpathian Mts. — landscape changes and trends. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  7. Bills N, Gross D (2005) Sustaining multifunctional agricultural landscapes: comparing stakeholder perspectives in New York (US) and England (UK). Land Use Policy 22: 313–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brandt J (2003) Multifunctional landscapes — perspectives for the future. Journal of Environmental Sciences-China 15: 187–192.Google Scholar
  9. Brunstad RJ, Gaasland I, Vardal E (2005) Multifunctionality of agriculture: an inquiry into the complementarity between landscape preservation and food security. European Review of Agricultural Economics 32: 469–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Burel F (1996) Hedgerows and their role in agricultural landscapes. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 15: 169–190.Google Scholar
  11. Costanza R, d’Arge, R, de Groot RS, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naeem S, O’Neill RV, Paruelo J, Raskin RG, Sutton P, & van denBelt M (1997) The total value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 253–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dalgaard T, Kjeldsen C, Hutchings N, Happe K, Osuch A, Damgaard M, Zander P, Piorr A (2006) Multifunctional farming, multifunctional landscapes and rural development. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  13. De Groot RS (1987) Environmental functions as a unifying concept for ecology and economics. The Environmentalist 7: 105–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Groot R, Hein L (2006) The concept and valuation of landscape goods and services. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  15. Deybe D (2006) Policies, research perspective and challenges on multifunctional land use. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  16. Fry G (2001) Multifunctional landscapes — towards transdisciplinary research. Landscape and Urban Planning 57: 159–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gibon A (2005) Managing grassland for production, the environment and the landscape. Challenges at the farm and the landscape level. Livestock Production Science 96: 11–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Groenfeldt D (2006) Multifunctionality of agricultural water: Looking beyond food production and ecosystem services. Irrigation and Drainage 55: 73–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hagedorn K (2006) Towards an institutional theory of multifunctionality. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  20. Haines-Young R, Watkins C, Wale C, Murdock A (2006) Modelling natural capital: The case of landscape restoration on the South Downs, England. Landscape and Urban Planning 75: 244–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hasenauer H, Putzhuber F, Mirtl M, Wenzel W (2006) Multifunctional land use: The Eisenwurzen region of the Austrian Alps. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  22. Helming K (2003) Landscape Tomorrow: a research network for sustainable development of multifunctional landscapes. In: Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Sustainable Development of Multifunctional Landscapes. Springer Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp. 269–277.Google Scholar
  23. Jørgensen SE (2006) Application of ecological engineering principles in landscape management. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  24. Klug H (2006) Participative landscape planning using a GIS approach for facilitation. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  25. Kristensen LS, Thenail C, Kristensen SP (2004) Landscape changes in agrarian landscapes in the 1990s: the interaction between farmers and the farmed landscape. A case study from Jutland, Denmark. Journal of Environmental Management 71: 231–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kruk M (2003) Biogeochemical multifunctionality of wetland ecotones in lakeland agricultural landscape. Polish Journal of Ecology 51: 247–254.Google Scholar
  27. Kull A, Idavain J, Kull A, Oja T, Mander Ü (2006) Changing landscapes of transitional economies: Estonian coastal zone. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  28. Landscape Tomorrow (2006) http://www.landscape-tomorrow.netGoogle Scholar
  29. Lange E (2006) Introduction: Our landscape a shared and limited resource. Gaia-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society 15: 193–194.Google Scholar
  30. Lankoski J, Ollikainen M (2003) Agri-environmental externalities: a framework for designing targeted policies. European Review of Agricultural Economics 30: 51–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lõhmus K, Kull A, Truu M, Truu J, Kaar E, Ostonen I, Meel S, Rosenvald K, Kuznetsova T, Uri V, Kurvits V, Mander Ü (2006) The reclamation of North-Estonian oil shale mining area. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  32. Mander Ü, Hayakawa Y, Kuusemets V (2005) Purification processes, ecological functions, planning and design of riparian zones in agricultural watersheds. Ecological Engineering 24: 421–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mander Ü, Külvik M, Jongman RHG (2003) Scaling in territorial ecological networks. Landschap 20:113–127.Google Scholar
  34. Matthews R, Selman P (2006) Landscape as a focus for integrating human and environmental processes. Journal of Agricultural Economics 57: 199–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Meyer B, Degorski M (2006) Integration of multifunctional goals into land use — the planning perspective. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  36. Milne RJ, Bennett LP, Harpley PJ (2006) Contributions of landscape ecology, multifunctionality and wildlife research toward sustainable forest management in the Greater Toronto Area. Forestry Chronicle 82: 403–411.Google Scholar
  37. Möller D, Fohrer N, Steiner N (2002) Quantification of landscape multifunctionality in agriculture and forestry. Berichte über Landwirtschaft 80:393–418.Google Scholar
  38. Müller F, Burkhard B (2006) An ecosystem based framework to link landscape structures, functions and services. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  39. Nassauer JI (1995) Culture and changing landscape structure. Landscape Ecology 10: 229–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Opdam P, Steingrover E, van Rooij S (2006) Ecological networks: A spatial concept for multi-actor planning of sustainable landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 75: 322–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Osterburg B, Nitsch H, Gay SH (2006) Landscape issues of the EU Common Agricultural Policy reform: implications for modelling Slee, B. Landscape goods and services related to forestry land use. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  42. Pahl-Wostl C (2006) The importance of social learning in restoring the multifunctionality of rivers and floodplains. Ecology and Society 11: 1–10.Google Scholar
  43. Pandey DN (2002) Global climate change and carbon management in multifunctional forests. Current Science 83: 593–602.Google Scholar
  44. Pedroli B, Pinto-Correia T, Cornish P (2006) Landscape — what’s in it? Trends in European landscape science and priority themes for concerted research. Landscape Ecology 21: 421–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Piorr A, Müller K, Happe K, Uthes S, Sattler C (2006) Agricultural management issues of implementing multifunctionality: commodity and non-commodity production in the approach of the MEA-Scope project. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  46. Plieninger T, Bens O, Hüttl RF (2006) Innovations in land-use as response to rural change — a case report from Brandenburg, Germany. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  47. Podmaniczky L, Vogt J, Schneller K, Angyan J (2006) Land suitability assessment methods for developing a European Land Information System for Agriculture and Environment (ELISA). In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  48. Potter C, Burney J (2002) Agricultural multifunctionality in the WTO — legitimate non-trade concern or disguised protectionism? Journal of Rural Studies 18:35–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ryszkowski L, Karg J (2006) The influence of agricultural landscape diversity on biological diversity. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  50. Skärbäck E (2006) Planning for healthful landscape values. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  51. Tress G, Tress B, Fry g (2005) Clarifying integrative research concepts in landscape ecology. Landscape Ecology 20: 479–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Van der Heide CM, Overmars KP, Jongeneel RA (2006) Land use modelling for sustaining multiple functions in the rural countryside with an application in the Achterhoek Region, the Netherlands. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering U (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  53. Vanslembrouk I, Van Huylenbroeck G, Van Meensel J (2005) Impact of agriculture on rural tourism: A hedonic pricing approach. Journal of Agricultural Economics 56: 17–30.Google Scholar
  54. Vejre H, Abildtrup J, Andersen E, Andersen PS, Brandt J, Busck A, Dalgaard T, Hasler B, Huusom H, Kristensen LS, Kristensen S., Præstholm S (2006) Multifunctional agriculture and multifunctional landscapes — land use as interface. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  55. Von Haaren C, Reich M (2006) The German way to greenways and habitat networks. Landscape and Urban Planning 76: 7–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Vos W, Meekes H (1999) Trends in European cultural landscape development: perspectives for a sustainable future. Landscape and Urban Planning 46: 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Waarts Y (2006) Indicators for agricultural policy impact assessment the case of multifunctional beef production. In: Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin. This book.Google Scholar
  58. Wiersum KF (2004) Forest gardens as an ‘intermediate’ land-use system in the nature-culture continuum: Characteristics and future potential. Agroforestry Systems 61: 123–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wiggering H, Dalchow C, Glemnitz M, Helming K, Muller K, Schultz A, Stachow U, Zander P (2006) Indicators for multifunctional land use — Linking socio-economic requirements with landscape potentials. Ecological Indicators 6: 238–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wolf SA, Primmer E (2006) Between incentives and action: A pilot study of biodiversity conservation competencies for multifunctional forest management in Finland. Socity & Natural Resources 19: 845–861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ülo Mander
    • 1
  • Katharina Helming
    • 2
  • Hubert Wiggering
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of GeographyUniversity of TartuTartuEstonia
  2. 2.Leibniz-Centre of Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF)MünchebergGermany

Personalised recommendations