B 5.1 Landscape policies from below

[TERCUD]

"The shaping of humanized landscapes results first from the many local decisions of land owners and land users concerning agriculture, housing, circulation, social relations. Local authorities are in a good position to influence them. They are responsible for the creation, maintenance and control of public spaces, roads, squares; they are in charge of garbage collection and waste water treatment – or control them; they monitor the quality of air and decide traffic restrictions when the ozone rate is too high; they are responsible for regulations concerning the nuisances that some land-use is generating both in rural areas (wandering cattle destroying cultures, for instance), and in urban ones (forbidding dangerous or unhealthy activities; preventing the erection of too high buildings).
The success of these landscapes policies does not derive only from the local authorities’action: it relies on the attitudes of their electors. Concerning the many actions which spoil landscapes and destroy their balance, everyone has a responsibility. Coercive measures have to be complemented by pedagogic ones: it is important to explain the reasons why people have to care for litter, refrain from cutting wild flowers and avoid noisy activities for the sake of their neighbours or wild animals.

Landscape policies from above
The smooth functioning of the activities in a place, the improvement and preservation of its natural and humanized landscapes do not depend only on local initiatives. The persons or enterprises taking decisions at the local level have to respect national laws and regulations; they often depend on headquarters located in a big city in the country or abroad; they have to take in consideration the evolution of market prices. Since a good part of what concerns local landscapes results from factors or decisions operating at a larger scale, local authorities usually have no jurisdiction, or only limited jurisdiction, in those fields.
Policies from above are rooted in the scale of many of the forces present in any place, in the role of persons, enterprises or associations developing actions in different locations, and in the existence of externalities, the effects of which can only be measured for a whole river basin, region or nation. By now, with the emergence of global effects, some form of international agreement – and power – has to be achieved in order to avoid spirals of global environmental degradation.
Laws and regulations are the main tools that central or regional governments mobilize in order to control the evolution of landscapes, preserve their ecosystems, facilitate their productive uses, maintain their visual quality and save the memory incapsulated in them. People are required to conform to laws and regulations; local governments have to accept the limitations and orientations which are imposed on their activities.
Just as for the policies from below, it appears that coercive measures are not enough – and that they are not always very efficient."

(This is an excerpt from the text by Professor Paul Claval “THE IDEA OF LANDSCAPE”)

[Justin Carter]

written by Justin Carter
I found the two articles submitted very informative and stimulating.
I was particularly interested in the subject of 'Landscape policies from below' - in particular, the idea of policies - even those generated at a local authority level - needing to be influenced by the electorate. One obstacle to this in the UK is that local government is often a subject of ridicule and mistrust. Whether this mistrust is justified or not is debatable.
My academic interest is in how trust and participation can be encouraged and won back. Coercive measures certainly have their limitations and I think that too much moral baggage can damage progress towards more sustainable attitudes (eg. in regards renewables). I certainly favor the pedagogical approach and would like to ask who the 'teachers' should be in this developing curriculum?
In my own paper 'Pedal Power for Bybrua' I will be putting forward the notion of the artist as socially engaged facilitator - developed from Suzanne Lacys notion of 'New Genre Public Art' from the 1980's. I certainly don't think that it should always be the artists responsibility to fulfill such a role, but artists do have the visual literacy fundamental to landscape interpretation and composition. In terms of method, I am interested in Lefebvres text Rhythmanalysis where the practitioner has the potential to intervene within the everyday 'between a place, a time and an expenditure of energy' (Lefebvre, 2004) and in so doing, make the invisible visible.