Priority questions for the science, policy and practice of cultural landscapes in Europe

Authors and Affiliations: 

M. Hernández-Morcillo
Biogeography Department, Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Rudower Chaussee 16, 12489
Berlin, Germany.

C.Bieling
Chair of Societal Transition and Agriculture, University of Hohenheim, Schloss
Museumsflügel Ost, 70593 Stuttgart, Germany

M.Bürgi, J. Lieskovský
Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL, Zürcherstrasse 111, 8903 Birmensdorf, Switzerland

H. Palang, A. Printsmann
Tallinn University, Uus-Sadama 5, 10120 Tallinn, Estonia

N. Schulp, P.Verburg
Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), VU University Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1087,
1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands

T.Plieninger
Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhagen,
Rolighedsvej 23, 1958 Frederiksberg C, Denmark

Corresponding author: 
Monica Hernandez Morcillo
Abstract: 

The design of effective responses to safeguard cultural landscape values in Europe needs collaborative action among the stakeholders involved. Despite considerable progress triggered by the European Landscape Convention (ELC) and other initiatives to link landscape science, policy and practice, a joint research–action agenda is still lacking. We respond to this challenge by identifying common priority questions for the sustainable management of cultural landscapes in Europe. To this end, we gathered, in a first phase, the most relevant research questions through a Delphi like process with the research community in this field. In a second phase, the questions were prioritized by three stakeholder groups: scientists (Ss), policymakers (PMs) and practitioners (Ps). The importance ranks and the similarity between groups’ priorities were calculated and analyzed. We found that the research question that addressed the issue of how to secure sustainable cultural landscapes where they are not economically profitable was the most important, with high level of agreement among all stakeholders. Alignment among the three groups was generally high; being higher between Ps–Ss and Ps–PMs than between Ss and PMs. Two questions related directly to the empowerment of public and private actors to protect and sustainably manage cultural landscapes ranking among the total top 20. Firstly the topic of what motivates people to become active stewards of the landscape, received high attention from Ss and not much from Ps. Secondly, how can public participation in cultural landscape assessments be fostered, was a question that received a high level of agreement among the three groups. Our exercise can assist the implementation of the ELC by outlining the potential direction of future applied research and by strengthening the ties between the multiple stakeholders involved in the stewardship of European cultural landscapes.

References: 

Bieling C, Plieninger T, Pirker H, Vogl CR (2014) Linkages between landscapes and human well-being: An empirical exploration with short interviews. Ecol Econ 105:19–30. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.05.013

Borrini-Feyerabend G, Pimbert M, Farvar MT, et al (2007) Sharing power: A global guide to collaborative management of natural resources. Routledge, London ; Sterling, VA

Braunisch V, Home R, Pellet J, Arlettaz R (2012) Conservation science relevant to action: A research agenda identified and prioritized by practitioners. Biol Conserv 153:201–210. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2012.05.007

Bürgi M, Hersperger AM, Schneeberger N (2004) Driving forces of landscape change —current and new directions. Landsc Ecol 19:857–868. doi: 10.1007/s10980-004-0245-8

García-Martín M, Bieling C, Hart A, Plieninger T (2016) Integrated landscape initiatives in Europe: Multi-sector collaboration in multi-functional landscapes. Land Use Policy 58:43–53. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.07.001

Goldsmith S, Eggers WD (2004) Governing by network: The new shape of the public sector. Brookings institution press

Penker M, Enengel B, Mann C, Aznar O (2013) Understanding landscape stewardship –lessons to be learned from public service economics. J Agric Econ 64:54–72. doi:10.1111/j.1477-9552.2012.00363.x

Plieninger T, Kizos T, Bieling C, et al (2015) Exploring ecosystem-change and society through a landscape lens: recent progress in European landscape research. Ecol Soc 20 (2). doi: 10.5751/ES-07443-200205

Sutherland WJ, Adams WM, Aronson RB, et al (2009) One hundred questions of importance to the conservation of global biological diversity. Conserv Biol 23:557–567. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01212.x

Swaffield S (2012) Empowering landscape ecology-connecting science to governance through design values. Landsc Ecol 28:1193–1201. doi: 10.1007/s10980-012-9765-9

Vos W, Meekes H (1999) Trends in European cultural landscape development: perspectives for a sustainable future. Landsc Urban Plan 46:3–14. doi: 10.1016/S0169- 2046(99)00043-2

Wu J, Hobbs R (2002) Key issues and research priorities in landscape ecology: An idiosyncratic synthesis. Landsc Ecol 17:355–365. doi: 10.1023/A:1020561630963   

Oral or poster: 
Oral presentation
Abstract order: 
1