Advertisement

Landscape as a “Common”: Collective Protection and Management

  • Paola PittalugaEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Urban and Landscape Perspectives book series (URBANLAND, volume 14)

Abstract

Design approaches to the landscape and to the enhancement of cultural heritage based on the thematisation and spectacularisation of landscapes and architectures or the propensity for constructing simulacra no longer constitute an exception but if anything, the rule. This is favoured by processes of privatisation of space to the detriment of public space with the commercial standardisation of places for selling and consuming. In fact, if the landscape is private, no longer freely available or available on payment and organised according to private models, we risk globalising the landscape, too, turning it into a consumer good and relegating it to the sphere of appearances: a landscape to sell, but not to inhabit. But there is also the opposite problem: where the landscape is public and freely accessible, there is a tendency to exploit it and to manage and protect it by authoritarian and sanction-based methods that make both landscape and environmental and cultural heritage even more remote and forgotten by people. Is it then possible to consider the landscape as a common good and safeguard it locally without hetero-directed interventions by means of forms of collective management? This chapter explores these issues through some examples of protection and management of landscape and public goods. These forms operate in an intermediate dimension and transform landscape and environmental resources into something that is neither public nor private, but shared and collective.

Keywords

Landscape Common good Collective protection and management 

References

  1. Agrain P (2005) Cause commune, l’information entre bien commun et propriété. Fayard, ParisGoogle Scholar
  2. Arena G (2006) Cittadini attivi. Laterza, BariGoogle Scholar
  3. Bender B, Winer M (2001) Contested landscapes. Movement, exile and place. Berg, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Bennett G (1991) EECONET: towards a European ecological network. Institute for European Environmental Policy, ArnhemGoogle Scholar
  5. Bennett G (ed) (1998) Linkages in landscape. IUCN, GlandGoogle Scholar
  6. Berdoulay V, Entrikin JN (1998) Lieu et sujet. Perspectives théoriques. L’Espace Géographique 2:111–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Besio M (1995) Riqualificazione ambientale e protagonismo delle comunità locali. Due casi di progettazione urbanistica partecipata. Parametro 211:18–57Google Scholar
  8. Blakely E, Snyder M (1999) Fortress America. Gated communities in the United States. Brookings Institution, HarrisonbourgGoogle Scholar
  9. Bravo G (2005a) Istituzioni e partecipazione nella gestione di risorse comuni. In: Pellizzoni L (ed) La deliberazione pubblica. Meltemi, Rome, pp 265–280Google Scholar
  10. Bravo G (2005b) Verso un futuro comune. Rivista Eco 120:8–11Google Scholar
  11. Breuste J, Feldmann H, Uhlmann O (eds) (1998) Urban ecology. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  12. Brunetta G, Moroni S (2011) La città intraprendente. Carocci Editore, RomeGoogle Scholar
  13. Cacciari P (ed) (2010) La società dei beni comuni. Ediesse, RomeGoogle Scholar
  14. Daniels S, Cosgrove D (1988) Introduction: iconography and landscape. In: Daniels S, Cosgrove D (eds) The iconography of landscape: essays on the symbolic representation, design and use of past environments. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  15. Davis M (1999) Città di quarzo. Indagando sul futuro a Los Angeles. Manifestolibri, RomeGoogle Scholar
  16. Donadieu P, Périgord M (2005) Clés pour le paysage. Ophrys, ParisGoogle Scholar
  17. Donolo C (1997) L’intelligenza delle istituzioni. Feltrinelli, MilanGoogle Scholar
  18. Foldvary F (1994) Public goods and private communities: the market provision of social services. Edward Elgar, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. Foreman D (2004) Rewilding North America: a vision for conservation in the 21st century. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  20. Gambino R (1997) Conservare innovare: paesaggio, ambiente, territorio. Utet, TurinGoogle Scholar
  21. Gambino R (2000) Reti ecologiche e governo del territorio. Parchi 29:81–87Google Scholar
  22. Gil F (2002) La exclusión social. Ariel, BarcelonaGoogle Scholar
  23. Grazzini E (2011) Il bene di tutti. L’economia della condivisione per uscire dalla crisi. Editori riuniti, RomeGoogle Scholar
  24. Hardin G (1968) The tragedy of the commons. Science 162:1243–1248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hess C (2009) La conoscenza come bene comune. Bruno Mondadori, MilanoGoogle Scholar
  26. Hess C, Ostrom E (eds) (2007) Understanding knowledge as a commons, from theory to practice. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  27. Hill MO, Carey PD, Eversham BC, Arnold HR, Preston CD, Telfer MG, Brown NJ, Beitch N, Welch RC, Elmes GW, Buse H (1994) The role of corridors, stepping-stones, and islands for species conservation in a changing climate. English Nature Research Report, 75Google Scholar
  28. Hobbs RJ, Wilson AM (1998) Corridors: theory, practice and achievement of conservation objectives. In: Dover JW, Bunce R (eds) Key concepts in landscape ecology. IALE, Preston, pp 265–279Google Scholar
  29. Jongman RHG (1995) Nature conservation planning in Europe: developing ecological networks. Landsc Urban Plan 32:169–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Low S (2003) Behind the gates. Routledge, London/New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Luigi N (2007) Un exemple de gestion collective en région Ombrie: le bois de la Marzolana. Forêt Méditerr XXIX(1):47–52Google Scholar
  32. MacArthur RH, Wilson ED (1967) The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  33. Massa R (1999) Le reti ecologiche: un nuovo paradigma della conservazione. Oikos 8Google Scholar
  34. Mattei U (2011) Beni comuni, Un manifesto. Laterza, BariGoogle Scholar
  35. Mininni M (2002) Può l’ecologia aiutare a costruire il paesaggio. Urbanistica 118Google Scholar
  36. Negri A, Hardt M (2010) Comune. Oltre il privato e il pubblico. Rizzoli, MilanGoogle Scholar
  37. Noss RF, Cooperrider AY (1994) Saving nature’s legacy: protecting and restoring biodiversity. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  38. Nott MP, Pimm SL (1997) The evaluation of biodiversity as a target for conservation. In: Pickett STA, Ostfeld RS, Shachack M, Likens GE (eds) The ecological basis of conservation. Heterogeneity, ecosystems, and biodiversity. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp 125–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Olwig K (2007) The practice of landscape conventions and the just landscape: the case of the European landscape convention. Landsc Res 32(5):579–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ostrom E, Gardner R, Walker JM (1994) Rules, games, and common-pool resources. The University of Michigan Press, Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
  42. Palermo PC (2008) Thinking over urban landscapes. In: Maciocco G (ed) Urban landscape perspectives. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York, pp 27–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pittaluga P (2001) Progettare con il territorio. Immagini spaziali delle società e pianificazione comunicativa. FrancoAngeli, MilanGoogle Scholar
  44. Pittaluga P (2008) Images of local societies and projects for space. In: Maciocco G (ed) Territorial future of the city. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York, pp 87–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ricoveri G (2005) Beni comuni fra tradizione e futuro. Emi Editore, BolognaGoogle Scholar
  46. Ricoveri G (2010) Beni comuni vs merci. Jaca Book, MilanGoogle Scholar
  47. Riesco J (2004) Urban expansion landscapes and objects. ViA Arquit 1:14–21Google Scholar
  48. Rios Osorio LA, Ortiz Lobato M, Álvarez Del Castillo X (2005) Debates on sustainable development: towards a holistic view of reality. Environ Dev Sustain 7(4):501–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Riva M (2010) Gestione partecipata dell’acqua e risposte adattive del settore irriguo a seguito di eventi di crisi idrica. PhD thesis. http://air.unimi.it/handle/2434/150088
  50. Rizzi P (2005) Imparare ed agire partendo dalla comunità. Sutrio: un’esperienza di community visioning. In: Maciocco G, Pittaluga P (eds) Immagini spaziali e progetto della città. FrancoAngeli, Milan, pp 57–83Google Scholar
  51. Rodotà S (2010) Se il mondo perde il senso del bene comune. La Repubblica, 10 AugGoogle Scholar
  52. Sabatini F, Cáceres G (eds) (2004) Barrios cerrados e integración residencial en Santiago de Chile. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and Institute of Geography, SantiagoGoogle Scholar
  53. Salwasser H (1990) Conserving biological diversity: a perspective on scope and approaches. A review. Forest Ecol Manage 35(1–2):79–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Savard JPL, Clergeau P, Mennechez G (2000) Biodiversity concepts and urban ecosystems. Landsc Urban Plan 48:131–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Soulé ME, Terborgh J (1999) Continental conservation. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  56. Svampa M (2001) Los que ganaron. La vida en los countries y barrios privados. Biblos, Buenos AiresGoogle Scholar
  57. Unwin T (2001) Landscapes and ethics – introduction. Ethics Place Environ 4(3):219–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Varady DP (2005) Desegregating the city: ghettos, enclaves, and inequality. Hardcover, AlbanyGoogle Scholar
  59. Venturi Ferriolo M (2002) Etiche del paesaggio. Il progetto del mondo umano. Editori riuniti, RomeGoogle Scholar
  60. Venturi Ferriolo M (2004) Etiche del paesaggio. Ri-vista, 1Google Scholar
  61. Vitali T (2010) Società locali e governo dei beni comuni. Il Nobel per l’economia a Elinor Ostrom. Aggiorn Soc 2:91–100Google Scholar
  62. Webster C (2001) Gated cities of tomorrow. Town Plan Rev 72(2):149–170Google Scholar
  63. Wildavsky A (1971) Does planning work? Public Interest 24:95–104Google Scholar
  64. Wildavsky A (1973) If planning is everything, maybe it’s nothing. Policy Sci 4(2):127–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Architecture, Design and PlanningUniversity of SassariAlgheroItaly

Personalised recommendations