INTEGRATING LANDSCAPE IN SPATIAL DESIGN: A QUALITATIVE STUDY AMONGST EXPERTS IN FLANDERS VAN DAMME Sylvie Belgium University College Ghent, Faculty of Biosciences and Landscape Architecture, Brusselsesteenweg 161, B9090 Melle, Belgium Ghent University, Department of Geography, Krijgslaan 281, S8, B9000 Gent, Belgium +32 9 210 45 00; fax: +32 9 210 45 09 e-mail: sylvie.vandamme@hogent.be ANTROP Marc Belgium Ghent University, Department of Geography, Krijgslaan 281, S8, B9000 Gent, Belgium +32 9 264 46 95; fax: +32 9 264 49 85 e-mail: marc.antrop@ugent.be Landscape design Landscape architecture European landscape convention Content analysis Qualitative Methods Interviews Landscape concept Flanders The European Landscape Convention states that attention for the landscape should be in any kind of policy related to planning space. Hence, all planning and design professions should integrate landscape in their plans. To identify how this is done, we conducted an explorative study to find out what Flemish experts understand by the integration of landscape in design. This was done by a content analysis of publications and interviews, using methods of qualitative research. The results show that the experts consider the landscape concept useful to grasp the complexity of modern society, regardless the size and the place of the designing area. In particular, the attention for historical, ecological and scenic qualities were considered being important to integrate landscape into planning and design. The interpretation of the landscape concept by the experts can be retrieved in the European Landscape Convention. However, the study s findings highlight some specific interpretations of the landscape concept by the experts, which seem to add an important surplus value to design, and helps to explain why design disciplines are especially interested in landscape. Taking into account the interpretation of the landscape concept by different design disciplines will be vital when pursuing more integration of landscape into other areas of policy. INTRODUCTION Landscape has always been the core business in landscape architecture. According to Hackett, landscape is the medium in which landscape architects work and which makes the essential difference between landscape architecture and other design professions. Landscape architecture as such is a profession which reconciles a thorough understanding of the present landscape and its composing parts with strong forward-looking visions of the future landscape (1968 in Laurie, 1975). Landscape architecture activities range in scale from the planning of national parks through to the detailed design of small outdoor spaces (ECLAS, 2005). However, landscape architecture is not the only profession to integrate landscape in design. First, there is an increase in integrative (i.e. interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary) landscape projects, where the cooperation of disciplines across their disciplinary borders and the involvement of stakeholders and end-
users of research results were involved. (Tress et al., 2005) In practice, building architects, landscape architects, ecologists, spatial planners and urban designers join forces to cope with integrated and often large scale projects. Secondly, the cross-fertilization between landscape architecture, urban planning, site planning and design and other spatial planning disciplines seems to be extremely intense in most European countries. Bhalotra (in Van Der Bijl and Luten, 1993) describes it as a kind of mutual penetration of urban planning, architecture and landscape architecture. He pretends nowadays we have the strange situation that everybody does a little bit of everything. Landscape nowadays is a focal point of a range of disciplines and a field of interest for many. The formerly fragmentary and often compulsory attention for landscape seems to have evolved into a more sincere interest in landscape by planners and designers. This study focuses primarily on the designdisciplines. By design, we mean the search for forms that satisfy a program, involving the arrangement of a physical environment in complete detail by defining the precise location of structures, circulation routes, and activities in the landscape (Lynch, 1985). The European Landscape Convention (Council of Europe, 2000) offers some interesting guidelines regarding the relationship between landscape and design. The general measures (article 5) mention the necessity to integrate landscape into regional and town planning policies as well as in any other policies with possible direct or indirect impact on landscape. The convention demands a forward-looking attitude on the part of all those whose decisions affect the protection, management or planning of landscapes. It is emphasized that in seeking the right balance between protection, management and planning of a landscape, the convention does not aim to preserve or freeze the landscape at a particular point in its lengthy evolution. (Council of Europe, 2006) These statements address in particular spatial designers. Important is also the scope of the ELC, as it covers natural, rural, urban and peri-urban areas. It includes land, inland water and marine areas. It concerns landscapes that might be considered outstanding as well as everyday or degraded landscapes. (article 2). The Council of Europe emphasizes: The landscape is now recognised irrespective of its exceptional value, since all kinds of landscapes influence people s surroundings and deserve to be taken into account in landscape policies (Council of Europe, 2006). The approach is important as it makes landscape an integrative concept for divergent sectoral policies. It implies that landscape should be always and everywhere a concern in spatial design. These guidelines highlight landscape as a powerful concept for design disciplines. According to Sarlöv-Herlin (2004), many landscape architects and landscape planners worked in the spirit of the ELC for decades. It is not clear, however, if the effects of the ELC are tangible in design disciplines and if the landscape concept is implemented in design practice. The word landscape has complex and multiple meanings that shift in response to the context in which they are used and by the background of the users (Antrop, 2005). Spirn (1998) states that each discipline and each interest group reads and tells landscape through its own tunnel vision of perception, value, tool and action. According to her, professionals who specialize, read certain parts of landscape more deeply than other parts and shape them more powerfully. As a consequence, they often fail to understand landscape as a continuous whole. Working in a specific context and with a particular background, their narrowness of knowledge, experience, values, and concerns leads them to read and tell only fragments of the landscape concept. Thus, specific disciplines use their own concepts of landscape, suggesting the application of different approaches (Tress, 2001 and Muir, 1999). So, if design disciplines use the landscape concept, the question rises which fragments of the landscape concept they use. This paper studies whether and how Flemish spatial design experts interpret the integration of the landscape concept into design. Three approaches of the landscape concept were selected by means of a literature study: landscape as heritage, landscape as ecosystem and landscape as scenery. These approaches were presented as themes of discussion to Flemish experts on landscape and design. The experts (Baarda et al, 1996) are policy-makers, academics and people well-known for their pronounced opinion on landscape and design. They are noted for their knowledge and experience at the intersection of landscape and design. They are experienced persons, who are particularly capable of identifying different kinds of qualities and shortcomings in a certain part of the working field. The experts are familiar with a certain area of spatial design. METHODS AND MATERIALS
To assess the different approaches of landscape, interviews were taken from Flemish experts. By means of content analysis, the interpretation of the three approaches was detected. This section describes (1) the selection of the respondents, (2) design of the in depth interviews and (3) coding and interpretation of the interviews. Selection of the respondents The respondents were selected by means of conceptually-driven sequential sampling (Miles and Huberman, 1994). 15 experts were purposively selected by means of literature review on the subject and a profound exploration of the working field (Table 1). One expert refused participation. The experts represent the opinion of the field of architecture, garden architecture, landscape architecture, planning, ecology, urban planning or design. At the end of each interview, the expert was asked for other experts that might be useful to interview regarding to the subject. Their proposals were ranked, and evaluated. Interviewing one expert lead us to comparison with another; and understanding one key relationship in the setting revealed facets to be studied in others. The experts were reached by phone or by e-mail and invited to participate. An interview guide of open-ended questions was sent previously to give the responden the opportunity to prepare the interview. In depth interviews Interviews were conducted at locations convenient to the experts, often their home or their office. We used semi-structured face-to-face interviews with open-ended questions. This choice was made because more unstructured interviews give respondents more possibility to emphasize what is really important to them. An interview guide of open-ended questions on the three landscape approaches was used to direct the conversation. The semi-structured interview opened with questions to situate the expertise of each respondent. The interview focused on what they understand by integrating landscape into planning or design, and how Flemish designers do this. This was followed by questions regarding possible surplus values of the integration of landscape into design, and the context in which this occurs. They were asked broad questions related to the theme and then follow-up (probing) questions to encourage further detail. Interviewees were constantly urged to be as practical as possible, by means of crystallizing their ideas and illustrating their sayings with tangible examples of projects. The interview guide enabled the interviewer to frame the topics and keep participants on track, while allowing participants to express their own observations, perceptions and attitudes. Each interview was tape-recorded and transcribed verbatim. This transcription was corrected by the respondent. Data analysis To organize the data, the individual interviews were coded as described by Neuman (2007). From the interviews, we extracted predominant phrases and concepts and derived information regarding to the three landscape approaches. The three landscape approaches have been retained as main categories. Specific topics embedded in the interviews were given a representative name and then grouped into subcategories (figure 1). These subcategories that make clear the interpretation of the approaches by the experts. Words, categories, and themes were not counted or quantified as the purpose of the qualitative analysis was to gain depth and breadth of meaning. Coding the interviews was done using QSR International s NVIVO 8-software. The in-depth interviews were combined with literature review on the same subjects. RESULTS All of the interviewed experts state that landscape should be integrated in every project: rural or urban, small or big, public or private. They agree that landscape offers a surplus value to traditional design. The three approaches were all said to be valuable, though interpretation of the approach differed slightly depending on the expert. In this section we describe the experts approaches of the landscape concept, as identified in the interviews. The results are illustrated by means of excerpts from the interviews. Landscape as heritage
All of the experts see history as an important frame of reference, that should be taken into account, and therefore thoroughly should be researched. Experts explicitly see landscape as a dynamic concept. Integrating landscape in design therefore by no means is limited to the conservation of the historic landscape. Expert 14 comments: Memory but in another sense than monuments. I have the impression that, with monuments, things are frozen like a status quo. Whereas the world, and landscape in any case has to do with constant change these are living things, they go on. For all experts, judging the qualities of the heritage is of vital importance for a good design. On the basis of this judgment, the designer can write a sequel to the landscape palimpsest. We use those historic maps to know what we remove. We don t specifically want to conserve everything, but we just want to know what has been there. The fact that something has been there is no guarantee for quality. But then we know that it has been there, and why we take it away. In this sense, it is a kind of justification of what we do. (Expert 1) According to the experts, the heritage approach also serves as an important source of inspiration for designers. The historical background of a place is used by designers for the guidance of the conservation or the restoration of landscape features, but can, according to them, also be very inspiring when creating new landscape structures. Landscape as ecosystem The experts associated landscape as ecosystem mainly with three subcategories. First, experts stress the importance to know specific plants and their relationship to each other and their environment when designing. Apparently, it is not that simple to acquire this specific knowledge. Table 2 represents some excerpts from selected interviews on this subcategory. In this sense, plants seem to be a substantial part of the design for all of the experts, and not only decoration to be added when the rest has been built or realised. According to them, working with living materials reflects on the way designers have to handle the aspect of time. The fact that things that are designed with plants or trees for instance need time to become what they are designed for; and constantly change over time needs specific attention and particular expertise, as does the aspect of management. Secondly, the approach pays attention to each of these places in relation to another, and in relation to the role of man. Most of the experts refer to landscape ecology as an important foundation for designing. They agree that a deeper understanding of the landscape as an ecosystem more and more is of vital importance for a design. It is stressed that designing green places often is trickery. The ecological functioning of a system as a biotope for plants or animals is essential, and takes priority over the impression of ecology that is often suggested. One expert describes how a design proposes a soft spine, with willows and shrubs in the middle of a city centre, that can by no means function as an ecological corridor. Finally, landscape as ecosystem approaches landscape as a place to live in a larger context, with emphasis on sustainability, health, etc. Landscape architecture, urban planning, architecture is a surplus value, is creating a pleasant evironment, that may have a kind of aesthetics. (Expert 10) Landscape as scenery For the experts, landscape as scenery refers to the way landscape brings in the role of the observer in design. It refers to specific aspects as the creation of views, land marks, vista s, perspectives, etc. and to the importance of scale, volume, colour, the place of a building. Expert 4 states: When I approach landscape in a rather visually, this is because I find that this aspect is to a large extent lacking in planning. And because landscape for the rest gets a chance in natural, cultural-historical aspects and the spatial structure, one tries to introduce in an area. But visual aspects completely are lacking. Interesting here is the fact that the experts mainly see landscape as a specifically three dimensional concept, contrarily to space. Secondly, experts stress the importance of landscape as surroundings that influence people. Things people see, are also assessed, make them happy or not. Expert 1 refers to it
The idea is to move people. For example to conserve everyday things as a special quality, although this was initially not meant to be something with specific proportions that s what is charming. DISCUSSION Generally, the interpretations of the landscape concept by the experts can be retrieved in the European Landscape Convention. Landscapes as heritage parallels the idea of the European Landscape Convention (Council of Europe, 2000) that landscapes evolve through time, as a result of being acted upon by natural forces and human beings. Landscape as ecosystem corresponds to landscape as a the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors. Landscape as scenery finally refers to the landscape as a zone or area as perceived by local people or visitors, whose visual features and character are the result of the action of natural and/or cultural (that is, human) factors. Here, perception may refer both to the perceptive qualities of the landscape and to the landscape preferences. However, the study s findings highlight some specific interpretations of the landscape concept by the experts. For example, it is remarkable how the experts emphasise the importance of botanical knowledge as an important aspect of landscape integration. For certain experts interpreting the landscape concept this way, it adds an important surplus value to traditional design. Possibly, this specific interpretation explains partly why some specific design disciplines are especially interested in integrating landscape in their design. Tress and Tress (2001) wonder: How can we research landscapes if we do not define our study object, the landscape?. They urge for a theoretical debate so the term landscape reflects current usage. The findings of this study suggest that some design disciplines have specific interpretations of the landscape concept. Therefore, a redefinition of the landscape concept should take into account the interpretations by various design disciplines. In this scope, we have to recognize the expertise of other professions and accept confrontation and divergent opinions (Déscamps, 2000). Seemingly, scientists still ``retreat to the `safety' and familiarity of their own disciplines when faced with problems of extreme complexity'' (Groffman and Likens, 1994 in Déscamps, 2000). Though, when pursuing more integration of landscape into other areas of policy -as the ELC declares- more cross-disciplinary discussion regarding to landscape integration will be necessary (Jones, 1991 in Arler, 2000; Tress, 2001). CONCLUSION A research was done by means of qualitative analysis of interviews with experts representing various design disciplines and literature review. All of the experts agree that landscape offers an important surplus value to traditional design, and thought the three proposed approaches, landscape as heritage, landscape as ecosystem and landscape as scenery to be useful. The interpretation of each approach by the expert revealed certain new emphases of the interpretation of the landscape concept. The input from different areas of spatial design gave important insights in how professional designers may take into account landscape in their specific design. References Antrop, M., 2005, From holistic landscape synthesis to transdisciplinary landscape management in Tress, B. et al. Tress, B., Tress, G., Fry, G., Opdam, P., From landscape research to landscape planning: aspects of integration, education and application, pp. 27-50 Arler, F., 2000, Aspects of landscape or nature quality, Landscape Ecology, 15, p. 291-302 Baarda, D.B. et al, 1996, Basisboek open interviewen, Groningen, Wolters-Noordhoff, 165 p. Council of Europe, 2000, European Landscape Convention Council of Europe, 2000b, European Landscape Convention Explanatory Report Council of Europe, Presentation, accessed 2006-14-06, http://www.coe.int/t/e/cultural_cooperation/environment/landscape/presentation/ Déscamps, H., 2000, Demanding more of landscape research (and researchers), Landscape and Urban Planning, 47, 3-4, p. 105-109 ECLAS, 2005, Landscape architecture, internet, accessed 2005-03-25, http://www.eclas.org/content/landscape-architecture/landscape-architecture_main.php Laurie, M., 1975. An introduction to landscape architecture. Elsevier North Holland. 213 p. Lynch, K., Hack, G., 1984. Site planning. M I T Press, Cambridge.
Miles M. and Huberman M., 1994, Qualitative Data Analysis, Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications, 337 p. Muir, R., 1999, Approaches to landscape, Macmillan Press, Houdmills, 310 pp. Neuman W.I., Social Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches, Boston, Pearson Education, 403 p. Sarlöv Herlin, I., 2004. New Challenges in the Field of Spatial Planning: Landscapes. Landscape Research. 4, 399-411. Spirn, A. W., 1998, The language of landscape, New Haven, Yale University Press, 326 p. Tress, B. and Tress, G., 2001, Capitalizing on multiplicity: a transdisciplinary systems approach to landscape research, Landscape and Urban Planning, 57, p. 143-157 Tress G., Tress, B., Fry, G., Antrop, M., 2005. Trends in landscape research and landscape planning: implications for PhD students, in: Tress, B., Tress, G., Fry, G., Opdam, P., From landscape research to landscape planning: aspects of integration, education and application. pp. 1-10. van der Bijl, R., Luten, E., 1993. "We bouwen geen steden maar verzamelingen van woningen" - profiel Ashok Bhalotra. Blauwe Kamer. 1, 19-23. List of attachments Table 1: Experts selected by means of conceptually driven sequential sampling Table 2: Landscape as ecosystem as expressed in selected interviews Figure 1: Diagram of the process of coding. Literature research on pre-existing documents lead to the selection of three approaches of the landscape concept. These approaches were used as main categories to extract predominant phrases, concepts and derived information from the verbatim transcription of the interviews. Specific topics embedded in the interviews were given a representative name and then grouped into subcategories.