Environmental Management

, Volume 15, Issue 2, pp 205–214 | Cite as

A method of approach to landscape stability. Part 1: Fundamentals and methodology

  • Vaclav Skopek
  • Jan Vachal
  • Zdenek Sterbacek


A four-stage method of providing conditions for improving the stability of a landscape sector is presented. In the first stage, structure and function of the landscape system is examined, predominantly based on the results of monitoring. In the second stage, a method is suggested for applying monitoring data to a dynamic structure with complex functions of the territory under examination. In the third stage, the territory is optimized as to the function of particular components within it. The optimization consists in controlling the dynamics of the flows of material, energy, and population within the sector. In the fourth stage, the holistic function of the landscape strip should be monitored with respect to representative key factors. The entire concept is based on assuming the existence of destabilizing processes leading to ecocritical situations and determining mitigating factors using heuristic methods of optimization.

Key words

Landscape stability prognosis holistics Typology Heuristics Optimization Model 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Armand, D. L. 1975. Landscape Science (in Russian). Nauka, Moscow.Google Scholar
  2. Beek, K. J. 1978. Land evaluation for agricultural development. Dissertation Wageningen. ILRI pub. 3. 333 pp.Google Scholar
  3. Beek, K. J. and J. Bennema. 1972. Land evaluation for agricultural land use planning: An ecological methodology. Afd. Bodemkunde en Geologie, Wageningen.Google Scholar
  4. Egler, F. E. 1970. The way of science: A philosophy of ecology for the layman. Hafner, New York.Google Scholar
  5. Forman, R. T. T., and M. Godron. 1986. Landscape ecology. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  6. Godron, M., and R. T. T. Forman. 1983. Landscape modification and changing ecological characteristics. Pages 12–28in H. A. Mooney and M. Godron (eds.) Disturbance and ecosystems. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  7. Hadac, E. 1976. Complex interdisciplinary investigation of landscape.Landscape Planning 4:333–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Haigh, J. J. 1987. The holon: Hierarchy theory and landscape research.Geomorphological Models, Catena Suppl 10:181–192.Google Scholar
  9. Hall, C. S. 1988. An assessment of several of the historically most influential theoretical models used in ecology and of the data provided in their support.Ecological Modeling 43:5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Huddleston, J. H. 1987. Use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Linn County, Oregon, USA.Environmental Management 11(3):389–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hushon, J. M. 1987. Expert systems for environmental problems.Environmental Science and Technology 21(9):838–841.Google Scholar
  12. Krummel, J. R., R. H. Gardner, G. Sugihara, R. V. O'Neil, and P. R. Coleman. 1987. Landscape patterns in a disturbed environment.Oikos 48:321–324.Google Scholar
  13. Naveh, Z. 1985. Landscape ecology—a bridge between bioecology and human ecology.Human Ecology Bulletin 3:7–9.Google Scholar
  14. Naveh, Z., and A. S. Liebermann. 1984. Landscape ecology. Theory and applications. Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  15. Risser, P. G., J. R. Karr, R. T. T. Forman. 1984. Landscape ecology. Directions and approaches. Illinois Natural History Survey, Special Publication 2. 16 pp.Google Scholar
  16. Schreiber, K. F. 1977. Landscape planning and protection of the environment. Applied sciences and development. Institute for Science Cooperation. Tubingen, Germany. pp. 128–139.Google Scholar
  17. Skopek, V. 1984. Aims of regional ecological research in the Bohemian forest (Sumava).Ecologia (CSSR) 3(1):99–108.Google Scholar
  18. Skopek, V. 1986. Geoecological evaluation the structure and processes in agroecosystems. IVth International Congress of Ecology, Syracuse, p. 315.Google Scholar
  19. Skopek, V., J. Pomije, M. Bartos, and D. Lhotkova. 1987. Anthropoecological evaluation of landscape system.Ecologia (CSSR) 6(3):179–186.Google Scholar
  20. Stamm, T. 1987. Agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in Latah County, Idaho, USA.Environmental Management 11(3):379–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Steiner, R., R. Dunford, and N. Dosdall. 1987. The use of agricultural land evaluation and site assessment in the United States.Landscape and Urban Planning 14(3):183–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sterbacek, Z., and J. Pospisil. 1989. Why and what kind of an expert system for prognoses in environmental sciences.Ecology (CSSR) 8(2):131–142.Google Scholar
  23. Sterbacek, Z., and V. Zavazal. 1989. Development of a fuzzy oriented shell of an expert system and its application or prognoses in landscape ecology.Knowledge based systems (submitted).Google Scholar
  24. Sterbacek, Z., V. Skopek, and V. Zavazal. 1990. A composite landscape ecology prognostic expert system—COLEPES. Part I, System philosophy and design.Ecological Modelling 50:145–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Turner, M. G. (ed.). 1987. Landscape heterogeneity and disturbance. Ecological studies 64: Springer-Verlag, New York. 239 pp.Google Scholar
  26. Urban, D. L., R. V. O'Neill, and H. H. Shugart, Jr. 1987. Landscape ecology.BioScience 37(2):119–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Vernadskij, V. J. 1945. The biosphere and the noosphere.American Scientist 33:1–12.Google Scholar
  28. Zonneveld, I. S. 1977. Stability and dynamics of ecosystems. Med. W.L.O., 4(1):16–28.Google Scholar
  29. Zonneveld, I. S. 1979. Land evaluation and land(scape) science. ITC Textbook, Chapter VII. Enschede, Netherlands.Google Scholar
  30. Zonneveld, I. S. 1986. Scope and concepts of landscape ecology as an emerging science. IV. International Congress of Ecology, Syracuse, New York.In Trends in Landscape Ecology. Springer-Verlag, New York. (in press).Google Scholar
  31. Zube, E. H. 1987. Perceived land use patterns and landscape values.Landscape Ecology 1(1):37–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zube, E. H., and J. L. Sell. 1986. Human dimensions of environmental change.Journal of Planning Literature 1(2):162–176.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vaclav Skopek
    • 1
  • Jan Vachal
    • 1
  • Zdenek Sterbacek
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Landscape EcologyCzechoslovak Academy of SciencesCeske BudejoviceCzechoslovakia

Personalised recommendations