A teleological vision of “landscape”: law, territory, medicine and human rights

This paper analyses how the current concept of landscape, which overcomes a scenery-based characterisation and a confinement to classical aesthetics and art, relates to the notions of the common good, commons and commons pool resources (CPRs). I consider landscape as a complex process in which human beings (with their history and culture) and their environment are mutually defined. On the basis of this approach to landscape studies, and by considering contemporary documents on landscape (i.e. the European Landscape Convention, the Latin American Initiative for Landscape and the Unesco Florence Declaration) I analyse the similarity between the notion of landscape and the concepts of common good, the management of commons and the commons pool resources institutions. Through theoretical research supported by practical examples (e.g. community gardens) I argue that landscape can be defined as a common good, can include the commons, and the collective management of lands and common pool resources institutions. The paper relies on an excursus through the theories and legal documents, with a specific regard to the theoretical foundations of these different notions. The analysis carried out in the paper leads, in the end, to the possibility of defining the ‘right to landscape’. Even if the concept is new in the literature, and a right to landscape is not recognized as a right per se, it is already implicated and studied in many international rights laws. Three approaches to landscape as a right have been distinguished: the right to landscape as a perceived landscape (a collective right), as a right to the environment, and a right for addressing human rights. I integrated these approaches by arguing that landscape is a domain in relation to which human rights can be claimed, and that landscape can be considered as a right to which human beings are entitled.

In this paper I will analyse and question the idea of “right to landscape” firstly by focusing on the concepts of common good/commons/common pool resources. Regarding the distinction among the previous three terms, I will take inspiration from the work by E. Ostrom (1990; 2009), by considering how she changed the idea of commons and the management of CPRs, after the great debate that the topic crated in the sixties (see Hardin 1968). The analysis of old and new commons shows that there is a specific idea of state, society, politics embedded in the different approaches in analysing and managing landscape. Furthermore, the management of landscape is related to a philosophical idea of state, values and democracy (Olwig, 2003; 2013). Nowadays the political implications of the concept of commons/common good are various. Through the concept of commons, several authors question the liberal theory of state in the management of land, and the fact that private property was often considered the only solution for both poverty’s problem and management of CPRs (see Caffentzis 2004; Hardt and Negri 2009; Harvey 2011; De Bollier 2012; Angelis 2013;). The literature on the concept of commons is currently thriving, and in this paper I focus on the specific relationship between landscape and commons (see also Menatti, 2013; 2014). In the contemporary era the main issues relative to commons are the exhaustion of natural resources and the safeguarding of cultural and natural heritage (both material and immaterial). I state that one of the ways to safeguard landscape is to consider it a common good and also a possible human right. The question is not trivial and it is open to debate. I will analyse in this respect the Unesco document called Florentine Declaration on Landscape (http://whc.unesco.org/en/news/943/). But it is important to remind that already in the European Landscape Convention landscape is characterised as common good (ELC: Preamble). The Unesco Convention clearly starts from these premises and tries to give a wider and more universal (but not homologated) definition of landscape. Relying upon a concept of landscape that is holistic, historical, dynamic, multicultural and adaptive, it encourages intergovernmental, transnational and public-private cooperation. And by stating that: “landscape is a common good, the right to landscape is a human necessity” it opens the debate for a new range of theoretical possibilities. The literature about this topic is scarce, although the book edited by the Cambridge Centre for Landscape can be considered an important precursor (see Egoz, Makhzoumi, Pungetti 2013). The crucial point analysed in the recent literature is the link between human rights and landscape. The right to landscape does not concern only conflict zones or native areas but, also and more comprehensively, everyday landscapes and environments that are threatened and damaged. In such a way thinking about landscape can be transformed into thinking about the ‘right to landscape’, for everyone and every society. On these bases I will argue how the idea of landscape as human right can implement and complete the debate about landscape and common good/commons.

Il Capitale Culturale: Studies on the Value of Cultural Heritage, 2018

This article aims at inquiring the beginnings of protection of landscape in historical and comparative perspective. The laws and the official acts, that have been approved by different countries, are intended as a reliable framework on the basis of which it would be possible to point out historical and geographic contexts for the development of landscape protection. The French, British and Italian contexts will be analyzed, in period between the year 1864, when the law for protection of the Yosemite Valley was approved in the USA, and year 1906, when the first law was approved in France, in order to specifically and exclusively protect the landscape. Questo contributo intende affrontare il tema della nascita della tutela del paesaggio in prospettiva storica e comparativa. Le leggi e gli atti ufficiali sono la fonte primaria di analisi, attraverso le quali si tenta di costruire una intelaiatura generale che consenta di inviduare epoche e situazioni storiche in cui il paesaggio ha com...

I Quaderni di Careggi issue n.6, 2014

Landscape as mediator. Landscape as commons. International perspectives on landscape research (Castiglioni, Parascandolo,Tanca eds.), 2015

This introduction addresses some of the topics currently debated in landscape affairs. In the fi rst chapter I opt for a terminological defi nition of “environment” as the processual / scientifi c aspects of an area whereas “landscape” may be used in post-processual / phenomenological approaches, which is in accordance with the use of many studies in recent years. The term “nature” on the other hand is an analytical category to signify an area without human impact and therefore only existent as an imagined reality. Moreover, this idea of nature fulfils social demands as it stabilizes society by providing the imagined possibility of a counter-life. Archaeology, however, is not the only discipline to deal with landscape affairs. The term “landscape” is used by many disciplines providing a chance and threat alike to interdisciplinary cooperation. In practice the use of landscapes has to be negotiated between many social groups from academia as well as from other fields of society. This may result in different approaches to and interpretations of archaeological landscapes. In heritage management, alliances with tourism and environmental protection for example are in danger to subordinate archaeological / historical aims to values of other actors. In this respect, the European Landscape Convention provides a useful basis for further action as it offers an integrative and multifocal approach.

2006

J-Reading - Journal of Research and Didactics in Geography, 2016

Landscape planning is the result of a complex and coordinated effort. The interpretation of the idea of Landscape by the Urban Planning discipline is clearly facing some hardship. In Italy, the tools of the Landscape planning currently in effect (Landscape and Cultural Heritage Code  L.D.42/2004 and subsequent revisions) include a not flexible and straightforward series of rules.At present the landscape planning discipline is facing a rethinking of its models due to the inadequacy of its founding standpoints and of some ideologically manufactured claims based in turn on a specious conception of identity. This is proven by the fact that several regional plans are having a very hard time to apply basic rules and regulations to the practicality of the planning at a local level.In order to better explain the above mentioned points, we are going to present the case of the Sardinian Regional Landscape Plan (SRLP) in which several critical issues reveal themselves and converge as they ste...

The AAG Review of Books, 2019

'Landscape' is a contemporary term in the field of urban and environmental studies. A concept which came from Europe to Iran and now is frequently used in various fields in the country. The concept of landscape, as a new kind of reality in the world, emerged in the Renaissance era in Europe, and according to the changes in the western worldviews in these centuries, has gained various aspects and meanings. The multifaceted concept of landscape which is even hard to describe in the philosophic view, had been coined in the field of art, passed through the world of philosophy, and affected by the recent achievements in the field of the relation between human and environment, is wildly considered in the planning and designing the human environs. Still, its multifaceted meaning frequently ignored by the specialist around the world as well as Iran. By considering the evolution of the concept of 'landscape' in Europe in a historic recall, this paper attempts to reveal the fundamental aspects of this concept, its current meaning, and anticipate its future shifts and its field of influence. By adopting a descriptive method and comparative analysis, the concept of landscape from the Renaissance until now is examining and classified through the historical and existing definitions. At the end, based on this historical review, with the futurological approach, the paper looks into the possible future for this ambiguous. The results of the classification of the definitions of 'landscape' from the Renaissance until now shows that although the emergence of 'landscape' coined based on the classic dualism between subject and object and the distinction between the world of physics and the world of phenomena as an individualistic regard to the nature, but with by the failure of this dualism and accepting the uncertainty in the world, it evaluated as a subjective-objective phenomenon. In the 21st century, this concept as a new field of science has gained the considerable attention and considered as a savior discipline for our crisis period of mono-dimensionality in the human and its environs relation.