Klijn, J.

Pedroli, B.

Veeneklaas, F.R.

English

NARCIS 

Anticipating landscape policy - Driving forces

Name not available

Wageningen Yield 

39
Workshop 1 / Atelier 1
Anticipating landscape policy – Driving forces
Bas PEDROLI [Jan KLIJN and Frank VEENEKLAAS)]
Alterra Wageningen, The Netherlands
Landscape as a product
The European landscape is the product of centuries-long interaction between the 
physical world and human intervention. Climate change is one of the drivers in this 
interaction. We see that landscape has almost always been on the receiving end of 
physical processes and human intervention. In other words, landscape evolution is 
dependent on, and the expression of, a series of autonomous forces (physical and 
society-induced) and on policy-driven developments in other policy sectors. This can 
be illustrated by the fact that almost all the landscape values we now cherish so much, 
came about as unintended side effects. 
Chance, short-sightedness, ignorance, political opportunism and other similar factors 
which are diffi cult to predict or control, have often ultimately had a decisive infl uence 
on the end product. 
One positive example of this process is the Oostvaardersplassen, a forgotten corner 
in one of the newest polders in the Netherlands, which was occupied immediately by 
numerous wetland birds, and which now is one of the most precious Dutch nature 
reserves (Kampf, 2002). But we have also seen well-intentioned environmental policy 
producing negative landscape results, just to mention the numerous noise buffers and 
screens along our motorways.
Landscape policy in a narrow sense
Governments do not take a neutral stance and formulate policy targets for landscape, in 
the Netherlands e.g. laid down in the targets for conservation and development of core 
qualities in the National Landscapes and basic qualities for all landscape. Government 
interventions aimed at conservation and restoration of landscape qualities are, however, 
given their ambitions, generally limited in size and effectiveness (Klijn, 2004). 
Cause and effect
Because landscape is dependent on other developments, whether autonomous or 
as part of a wider policy, landscape policy would be better served by gaining more 
insight into the driving forces themselves, their consequences for spatial planning, and 
fi nally, their impact on the landscape. Such insight could enable unused opportunities 
to be exploited and change or mitigate negative consequences at an early stage. 
Landscape and driving forces / Paysage et forces déterminantes
40
In considering the driving forces behind landscape development work, it is important 
for us to realise that:
a)  these forces infl uence the landscape through a series of cause and effect chains; 
climate change e.g. works through a multitude of effects on landscape; 
b)  the real world is always subject to several driving forces at the same time, that 
may work together to have a cumulative effect, or conversely, slow each other 
down; 
c)  there is not only one-way traffi c from independent/dominant to dependent/
subordinate; but the reverse can also be the case, i.e. determined by the landscape, 
for instance because of lack of space; and fi nally;
d)  the way these forces operate on the landscape has its own dynamics. They can 
have the effect of spreading slowly but surely, or work as a magnet. This is one of 
the aspects that determine the extent to which they can or cannot be reversed.
Climate as a driving force has impact on landscape in mainly three different ways:
–  the direct effects of climate change on landscape, as a transformation of natural 
vegetation or the emergence of new agricultural crops;
–  adaptation: measures that are being implemented to adapt to changing conditions, 
like fl ood protection measures, increasing water retention capacity, etc.
–  mitigation: the landscape effects of policy measures to reduce emission of 
greenhouse gasses. Examples of the latter are the raising of the water table in 
wetland areas, the use of agricultural land for production of biofuels, and the 
adoption of alternative means of energy production (e.g. wind parks).
National policies on landscape
Landscape is a public commodity. This implies that public appreciation for this 
commodity cannot properly be expressed through the markets (Buijs et al., 2006). 
This justifi es government involvement. But it is important what role government 
adopts in the landscape dossier and what role it actually plays. After all, because 
of various initiatives, and because of its role as supervisor of new land use, the 
government itself is one of the most important driving forces when it comes to 
landscapes, and this amounts to more than specifi c landscape policy and the 
associated instruments. 
The position of national governments is infl uenced in two directions; some people 
would say weakened. The fi rst is the increasing infl uence of EU policy and European 
regulation. In addition to formal rules, the member states are requested to take more 
and more responsibility in the international context, for instance in the conservation of 
special landscapes of international signifi cance. At the same time much of landscape 
policy and its implementation is being delegated to lower government authorities. 
41
Workshop 1 / Atelier 1
The government is then required to identify national criteria for supra-local and 
supra-regional interests and responsibilities and indicate what is the responsibility of 
national government and what is not. 
At the same time, in many countries regulations are being substituted by stimulation 
measures. For example in the Netherlands, the government, and specifi cally the 
Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality, has not made it easier for itself 
by changing its management model, under the motto: ‘from direct intervention to 
indirect incentives’. Various interest groups are being encouraged to participate more 
and more in the development of ideas and in local solutions, and co-fi nancing for 
implementation is actively sought from third parties. The Ministry is increasingly 
taking the position of facilitator, in contrast to its classical managerial, or at the least, 
directive role. Government institutions, not only the Ministry of Agriculture, often 
have diffi culty in adapting to their changing role and this is sometimes noticeable in 
their reticence, even in areas that typically come under the government’s remit.
The shifting of tasks, authorisation and responsibilities certainly hold the promise 
of solutions better suited to the case in hand and greater involvement of the people 
concerned. But it also carries the risk of not always getting the priorities right and 
of lacking supra-local or supra-regional coherence. It must be recognised too that 
the absence of professionalism, and short-term thinking, coupled with a lack of 
knowledge, will ultimately take its toll. Because the emphasis of responsibility has 
shifted to lower government authorities and third parties, it has become vital to 
transfer knowledge and know-how. This is the responsibility of central government. 
But as in a relay race, where it happens that the baton is not successfully passed on, 
so it occurs in administrative reforms as well. The consequences of a lost race are, 
however, considerably less serious than the irreversible loss of landscape values. 
Which conclusions can then be drawn from the administrative developments sketched 
above in the light of the peculiarity of landscape policy, that will allow is to better deal 
with landscape development in practice?
Towards a more pro-active role and long-term view
Governing means looking ahead. To make any meaningful contribution to conservation, 
restoration and the positive development of landscape values, it is essential to 
timely identify what should be done and recognise potential consequences, exploit 
opportunities and avert threats. A tour d’horizon along the possible developments 
that may impact on the landscape has been given by Klijn & Veeneklaas (2007). They 
conclude that these developments are partly autonomous in character, and thus cannot 
be infl uenced at all, or at the most, only to a small degree. But in many other cases 
they can be infl uenced. However, this almost always concerns issues where others than 
landscape policy – other policy sectors, other levels of administration, other players 
– have a dominant say. Recognising the role that others play in decision-making at an 
Landscape and driving forces / Paysage et forces déterminantes
42
early stage can help in establishing your own agenda and determining a strategy for 
consultation and collaboration, as well as in presenting your own view in the right way 
at the right time.
The language of others
Social change is an ongoing process, everywhere, driven by economic, demographic, 
socio-cultural, technological and other factors. The line of reasoning is also grounded in 
that vocabulary, value assessments rest on matters other than landscape quality, on, for 
instance, safety or economic benefi t. It is always desirable to understand the interests 
and motives of other parties and to make the role and signifi cance of landscape clear 
against this background and even in those terms. Economic arguments in particular 
can be useful in expressing the desirability or suitability of landscape objectives. In 
short, try to understand the language of others and make it your own. The reverse 
strategy can also be applied more often. Other parties in society, other ministries can be 
‘instructed’ in the nature and meaning of landscape values and their role in conserving 
them. In the same way that thinking about and acting on sustainability seems to have 
become formally and informally internalised in all government departments, levels of 
government and the private sector, this is also conceivable when it comes to landscape 
quality.
And although the Dutch tax authority has to admit in its publicity that “we can’t make 
it any more pleasant”, landscape policy still holds the trump card, that actually, it can 
make it more pleasant.
Utilising knowledge and design
Klijn & Veeneklaas (2007) discuss a number of themes that are likely to impact on 
landscape in the coming decades. Knowledge development is already underway, as 
are various research programmes. It is therefore vital to obtain a better picture of the 
landscape aspects and most of all, to communicate them to those involved (Pedroli et 
al., 2007). Making people more aware of opportunities and threats by means of early 
warning and early alert systems is basic.
Design can play an important supporting role here. It can serve as a verbal and visual 
discussion medium. To discover what it is exactly that we are talking about and what 
alternatives there may be. Designs are eminently suitable for a fi rst test to see what 
impact interventions or developments would have on the landscape. By employing 
new technology, in the design and by spatial classifi cation, designs can usefully be 
employed in the orientation phase. They can generate alternatives and inspire those 
involved to develop the project further along promising paths. Alternative designs can 
be assessed against various criteria and weighed against each other. In the assessment 
phase the various alternatives do not need to include all the effects in statistics and 
be given a fi nal score. One thing, however, is certain: the perception and weight of 
43
Workshop 1 / Atelier 1
landscape values are so layered, so complex and so subjective that quantifying all 
those values objectively in assessments and decision-making is neither feasible nor 
sensible. Raising awareness, demonstrating consequences and offering alternatives in 
land use, development and management will contribute much more realistically to a 
discussion in which politics holds sway. 
References
Buijs, A.E., B. Pedroli & Y. Luginbühl (2006). From hiking through farmland to 
farming in a leisure landscape. Changing social perceptions of the European 
landscape. Landscape Ecology 21 (3): 375–389.
Kampf, H. (2002). Nature conservation in pastoral landscapes: challenges, chances 
and constraints. In Pasture Landscapes and Nature Conservation. B. Redecker,
P. Finck, W. Hardtle, U. Riecken & E. Schroder (Eds). Springer, Berlin, pp. 15–30.
Klijn, J.A. (2004). Driving forces behind landscape transformation in Europe, from 
a conceptual approach to policy options. In: R.H.G. Jongman (Ed.): The new 
dimensions of the European Landscape. Springer, Berlin. pp. 201-218.
Klijn, J.A. & F.R. Veeneklaas (2007). Anticiperend landschapsbeleid. Deel 1, Drijvende 
krachten. Alterra Report nr. 1557, Wageningen. 87 p.
Pedroli, B., A. Van Doorn, G. De Blust, M.L. Paracchini, D. Wascher & F. Bunce 
(Eds., 2007): Europe’s living landscapes. Essays exploring our identity in the 
countryside. LANDSCAPE EUROPE, Wageningen / KNNV Publishing, Zeist. 432 p.


Driving forces behind landscape transformation in Europe, from a conceptual approach to policy options. In: R.H.G. Jongman (Ed.): The new dimensions of the European Landscape.

Europe’s living landscapes. Essays exploring our identity in the countryside.

From hiking through farmland to farming in a leisure landscape. Changing social perceptions of the European landscape.

Nature conservation in pastoral landscapes: challenges, chances and constraints.

Anticipating landscape policy - Driving forces

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NARCIS

Name not available

Wageningen Yield