**5. Concluding remarks**

260 Studies on Environmental and Applied Geomorphology

sustainable development discourse, popularised in 1980 by the World Conservation Strategy (IUCN et al., 1980), and firmly established in 1992 by the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. By the close of the twentieth century, all areas of nature and landscape policy are being expected to demonstrate their contribution to more

The re-emergence of landscapes as cultural action arenas for sustainable development is inseparable linked to the dual process of globalisation and regionalisation. In the final quarter of the twentieth century the solidification of the concept of the nation-state and its unwieldy structure has been weakened, and with it the (homogenizing) notions of modernity and universality (Harvey, 1989). Local and regional specificities of space, form and place (territorial distinctiveness) are put forward to counteract the dislocation and lack of meaning in modern society. Contextual forces are to give a sense of place and meaning in a globalizing world. Increasingly cultural landscapes are seen as such a contextual force. After a period of nationalism we observe a renewed interest in the region all over Europe: regional differences and traditions are cherished, the issue of regional identity is widely debated, and new regional movements are emerging (Keating, 1998). Some even speak about the 'rise of regional Europe' (Harvie, 1994). The spatial and material dimension of this 'regional Europe' is symbolised by the manifold European cultural landscapes. The outstanding richness, regional diversity and uniqueness of landscapes form collectively a common European natural and cultural heritage (Pedroli et al., 2007). The existence of specific regional identities, each with its typical landscape heritage, is actively promoted, defended and helped by EU policy, programmes and funds, like the LEADER Rural Development programmes, INTERREG, and networks like the European Geoparks

As a result of the emerging sustainability agenda a commitment to maintain and enhance the landscape quality of rural and urban areas is a central theme of several state and European visions of a sustainable countryside. Against this background protected landscapes throughout Europe more and more function as flagships for a new and integrated public policy for rural areas. Since landscape conservation and countryside development are aspects of a single whole, conservation increasingly is seen as an integral part of sustainable management. This is highlighted by the above-mentioned British, French and German protected landscapes (be it National Parks, Nature Reserves, protected landscapes or Geoparks), which, since the 1990s, strive towards a regional integration of agriculture, nature and landscape, thereby overcoming the often-strong

Already in the 1980s IUCN recognized protected landscapes as "living models of sustainable use" (Lucas, 1992). Recent political commitment to sustainable development on a European level further strengthens the idea of an inclusive approach for protected landscapes (Council for the EU, 2006). The concept of sustainable development encourages policy officials to address the environmental and social as well as economic dimensions of rural areas. Because of the particular origin and nature of protected landscapes, principally the close relationship between landscape and the people connected with it category V protected areas […] could very well "become pioneers in society's search for more sustainable futures" (Phillips, 2002). Several public policies in Europe have recently

Network, built up with the support of European Union initiatives.

sectoral division of countryside, regional and landscape policy.

sustainable living.

This chapter has highlighted that cultural landscapes are increasingly understood as something not merely to be protected and preserved. The World Heritage Convention and the European Landscape Convention (Council of Europe, 2000, 2006) as well as the new concepts and strategies for nature parks in Britain, France and Germany propose considering cultural landscapes in general, and protected landscapes in particular, also as a force to promote sustainable (regional) development. The notion of development and change is a key component of the concept of sustainable development itself. Indeed, sustainable development not only involves sustaining what has been realised as Brundtland defines, but also sustaining future development (Brundtland, 1987). It means the preservation of opportunities, but also the creation of new resources and opportunities for future generations.

From Landscape Preservation to Landscape Governance:

**6. References** 

European Experiences with Sustainable Development of Protected Landscapes 263

protected landscapes are recognised as keystones for sustainable development initiatives. National parks, Geoparks, eco-museums and landscape parks are unique constellations of 'nature', people, heritage, tourism and culture. These resources are managed with under appreciated pools of drive and expertise. Such areas demonstrate the real meaning of sustainable development, whilst conserving the exceptional natural and cultural heritage. We have attempted to contribute to the emerging (albeit under-theorised) area of protected landscapes within academic discourse by comparing British, French, and German landscape conservation approaches. However, given the large number of protected landscapes in Western Europe, and their increasing responsibilities in wider city and countryside development programmes, we think there is scope for more large-scale and in-depth (comparative) studies. Fortunately, a diverse range of initiatives is currently developed, focusing on a European-wide landscape research and action programme, substantially funded with a strongly integrative perspective. For instance, under the umbrella of UNISCAPE (European Network of Universities for the Implementation of the European Landscape Convention) professional networks are created to exchange information and expertise on landscape conservation and development (see: http://www.uniscape.eu/). These networks are essential to encourage and establish new and widely-shared approaches (including theories, concepts and methods) that will support more integrated, sustainable

and socially-relevant landscape research as well as landscape management practices.

*Urban Planning* Vol. 75, 3-4, pp. 187-197

of California Press.

324 – 326

from:

Heritage Centre, 60–68.

Borrini\_Feyerabend.pdf)

Allard, D. & Frilieux, P.N. (1992). Designation of and institutional arrangements for

Applegate, C. (1990). *A Nation of Provincials: The German Idea of Heimat*. Berkeley: University

Besio M., editor (2003). Conservation planning: the European case of rural landscapes. In:

Beunen, R.; Opdam, P.F.M. (2011). When landscape planning becomes landscape

Bloemers, T.; Kars, H.; Van der Valk, A. (2010). *The Cultural Landscape & Heritage Paradox.* 

Borrini-Feyerabend G. (2004). *Governance of Protected Areas – Innovation in the Air*. (Retrieved

Brundtland G. (1987). *Our Common Future, Report of the World Commission on Environment and* 

Bergmann, K. (1970). *Agrarromantik und Grosstadtfeindschaft*. Köln: A. Hein.

*European Dimension*. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

[Published as Annex to General Assembly document A/42/427].

protected landscapes in France (a review and case study in Normandy). Council of Europe Conf. Protected Landscapes: A comparative European Perspective. UK. Antrop, M. (2006). Sustainable landscapes: contradiction, fiction or utopia? *Landscape and* 

*Cultural landscapes: the challenges of conservation*. Paris (France): UNESCO World

governance, what happens to the science? *Landscape and Urban Planning* 100 (4). – p.

*Protection and Development of the Dutch Archaeological-historical Landscape and its* 

http://www.earthlore.ca/clients/WPC/English/grfx/sessions/PDFs/session\_1/

*Development*. Rome: World Commission on Environment and Development

In order to realize sustainable territorial development, the emphasis in protected landscapes is shifting from maintenance to development. As a result, landscape conservation strategies not only protect cultural and natural heritage of cultural landscapes, but also enhance territorial dynamics that strengthen and requalify the (weakened) territorial assets, such as (regional) identity and nature. Sustainability – and thus the challenge for protected landscapes - is increasingly positioned in the character of change itself and not in terms of any optimal state, pattern or blueprint. Common historical roots, special landscape features, typical products, cultural traditions, as well as innovative projects are possible initial points for identity-based processes. In connection with governance arrangements cultural landscapes can be constituted as action arenas for sustainable development. As a result, cultural landscapes are not only public interest goods and services that directly affect the social well-being of individuals but also represent important urban and rural development assets. Cultural landscapes are part of a region's capital stock and base for the development of countryside communities.

Given the limitations of our current institutions to respond to landscape-scale change, landscape governane will require a high degree of collaboration to bridge disparate sectors, to integrate complex institutional layers, and to engage a wide array of actors in the sustainable development of cultural landscapes (Görg, 2007). Since multi-sectoral and multilevel partnerships are essential to an inclusive and participatory approach to landscape conservation, the intention is to stimulate and integrate mutual gains between sectoral interests by a 'conservation through development' approach. By working cooperatively with local and regional stakeholders, local, regional and national governments try to increase regional wealth creation, giving greater importance to rural areas, and creating more acceptance for landscape conservation among the local population and increasing awareness of nature and the environment among visitors.

Building multi-sector and multi-level partnerships for sustainable development of protected landscapes, however, is not an easy task for protected landscape authorities and institutions. Considerable conflict and opposition can easily arise. Most often causes of resistance have less to do with possible economic losses to local livelihoods arising from designation, but rather lie in the manner of consulting and involving local interests. Participation processes are often too late, too formal, and too narrow in compass. In addition, there can also be much miscommunication and misunderstanding between landowners, farmers, businesses and residents on the one hand, and the landscape conservation officials and experts on the other. Governance experiences with protected landscapes in Western Europe, therefore, emphasize the importance of communication skills, and capacity to create consensus among those who live and work in protected landscapes, to reduce scepticism and suspicion regarding the purpose of landscape conservation (Thompson, 2003, 2006; Janssen et al., 2007). It is only via the process of collaboratively acting together that full understanding and co-operation is achieved (Healey, 2007). Involvement and building capacity is key to securing sustainable stewardship of cultural landscapes (Selman, 2001).

We assume that governance for sustainable development of protected landscapes remains a challenging task in the 21st century. In that regard it is gratifying to note that there is an emerging (academic) debate on the influence of protected landscapes on local and regional development (Mose, 2007). Both in the academic debate and in conservation practice protected landscapes are recognised as keystones for sustainable development initiatives. National parks, Geoparks, eco-museums and landscape parks are unique constellations of 'nature', people, heritage, tourism and culture. These resources are managed with under appreciated pools of drive and expertise. Such areas demonstrate the real meaning of sustainable development, whilst conserving the exceptional natural and cultural heritage. We have attempted to contribute to the emerging (albeit under-theorised) area of protected landscapes within academic discourse by comparing British, French, and German landscape conservation approaches. However, given the large number of protected landscapes in Western Europe, and their increasing responsibilities in wider city and countryside development programmes, we think there is scope for more large-scale and in-depth (comparative) studies. Fortunately, a diverse range of initiatives is currently developed, focusing on a European-wide landscape research and action programme, substantially funded with a strongly integrative perspective. For instance, under the umbrella of UNISCAPE (European Network of Universities for the Implementation of the European Landscape Convention) professional networks are created to exchange information and expertise on landscape conservation and development (see: http://www.uniscape.eu/). These networks are essential to encourage and establish new and widely-shared approaches (including theories, concepts and methods) that will support more integrated, sustainable and socially-relevant landscape research as well as landscape management practices.
