Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Concept of Landscape in Russian Legislation

  • Published:
Geography and Natural Resources Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

It has been revealed that, despite the absence of a government landscape policy in Russia, the regulation of several spheres of economic activity includes requirements for the sustainable use of landscapes. The landscape concept is applied to manage resource-oriented types of activity in Russia. Environmental protection, as well as preserving Russian natural and cultural heritage, are the key activities. It is found that the use of approximately 40 types of landscapes classified under different criteria are regulated by Russian legislation. Only three of them are legally approved: landscape, natural landscape, and anthropogenic landscape. Federal legislation governs landscape management for almost all types of economic activities listed in this work. At the interregional and regional level, the focus is on the use of geosystems in tourism, agriculture, and natural and cultural heritage conservation, as well as environmental protection. At the local (municipal) level, the landscape concept is used to manage urban planning, zone settlements, classify lands, and assess their cadastral value. Integral geosystems (rather than individual natural and cultural-historical resources) are objects for management within the framework of the functioning and development of specially protected natural areas, as well as the protection of cultural heritage. The objectives of their use are mainly mentioned in strategic documents. It is pointed out that the number of features in the governmental regulation of geosystem use in Russia is related with several principles of landscape planning: a hierarchical nature (management of the geosystems at all levels, from federal to municipal), commitment to the ecological aspects of regional policy (landscape management is basically used for environmental protection), and reliance on the ecological framework of the territory (the establishment and management of specially protected natural areas for the conservation of unique and typical natural complexes which form a part of the ecological framework).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Fry, G.L.A., Multifunctional landscapes – towards transdisciplinary research, Landscape Urban Plan., 2001, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 159 –168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Sayer, J., Sunderland, T., Ghazoul, J., Pfund, J.L., Sheil, D., Meijaard, E., Venter, M., Boedhihartono, A.K., Day, M., Garcia, C., Oosten, C., and Buck, L.E., Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses, Proc. Nation. Acad. Sci. USA, 2013, vol. 110, no. 21, pp. 8349–8356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Simensen, T., Halvorsena, R., and Erikstad, L., Methods for landscape characterisation and mapping: A systematic review, Land Use Pol., 2018, vol. 75, pp. 557–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bastian, O., Landscape classification in Saxony (Germany) – a tool for holistic regional planning, Landscape Urban Plan., 2000, vol. 50, pp. 145–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. European Landscape Convention. Council of Europe Publishing Division, Strasbourg, 2000. https://www. coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/rms/ 0900001680080621. Cited July 20, 2020.

  6. Antipov, A.N. and Semenov, Yu.M., Yu.M. Landscape planning in the Baikal region, Geogr. Prir. Resur., 2006, no. 1, pp. 11–18.

  7. Klimina, E.M., Landshaftno-kartograficheskoe obespechenie territorial’nogo planirovaniya (na primere Khabarovskogo kraya) (Landscape and Cartographic Support of Territorial Planning (On the Example of the Khabarovsk Krai)), Vladivostok: Dal’nauka, 2007.

  8. Semenov, Yu.M., Landscape-geographical support of the ecological policy of nature management in regions of Siberia, Geogr. Nat. Resour., 2014, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 208–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Mirzekhanova, Z.G. and Klimina, E.M., Assessment of landscape diversity for the development of programs for sustainable development of the Khabarovsk Krai, Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk. Ser. Geogr., 2017, no. 4, pp. 88–96.

  10. Fry, G., Tveit, M.S., Ode, A., and Velarde, M.D., The ecology of visual landscapes: exploring the conceptual common ground of visual and ecological landscape indicators, Ecol. Indicators, 2009, vol. 9, pp. 933–947.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chuman, T. and Romportl, D., Multivariate classification analysis of cultural landscapes: an example from the Czech Republic, Landscape Urban Plan., 2010, vol. 98, pp. 200–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kolbovskii, E.Yu., Unresolved issues of landscape science and landscape planning, Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk. Ser. Geogr., 2013, no. 5, pp. 19–29.

  13. Butler, A. and Berglund, U., Landscape character assessment as an approach to understanding public interests within the European Landscape Convention, Landscape Res., 2014, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 219–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Olwig, K.R., Mainstreaming landscape through the European Landscape Convention, Landscape Res., 2016, vol. 41, no. 8, pp. 981–982.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Boesch, M., Renner, E., and Siegrist, D., “Brandscaping”: from traditional cultural landscapes to “Label Regions”, Mountain Res. Dev., 2008, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 100–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. De Montis, A., Impacts of the European Landscape Convention on national planning systems: a comparative investigation of six case studies, Landscape Urban Plan., 2014, vol. 124, pp. 53–65.

  17. Nitavska, N. and Zigmunde, D., Legislative framework for landscape planning in Latvia. doi. Cited June 20, 2020.https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/245/6/062033

  18. European Landscape Character Areas: Typologies, Cartography and Indicators for the Assessment of Sustainable Landscapes, Wascher, D.M., Ed., 2005. https://edepot. wur.nl/1778. Cited July 20, 2020.

  19. Boesch, M., Is “culture” still relevant to regional policy?, Mountain Res. Dev., 2007, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 4–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gerber, J.D. and Knoepfel, P., Towards integrated governance of landscape development, Mountain Res. Dev., 2008, vol. 28, no. 2, p. 110–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Landshaftnoe planirovanie: printsipy, metody, evropeiskii i rossiiskii opyt (Landscape Planning: Principles, Methods, European and Russian Experience), Antipov, A.N., and Drozdov, A.V., Eds., Irkutsk: Inst. Geogr. Sib. Otdel. Ross. Akad. Nauk, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Semenov, Yu.M., Landscape planning: The applied branch in complex physical geography, Geogr. Nat. Resour., 2017, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 319–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Gafina, L.M., Legal protection of landscape diversity in the Russian Federation, Biznes v Zakone, 2007, no. 4, pp. 279–282.

  24. Vedenin, Yu.A. and Kuleshova, M.E., Kul’turnyi landshaft kak ob’’ekt kul’turnogo i prirodnogo naslediya, Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk. Ser. Geogr., 2011, no. 1, pp. 7–17.

  25. Mulyarova, E.V., Cultural landscape as an object of cultural and natural heritage, Zh. Inst. Naslediya, 2016, no. 4 (7), pp. 12–17.

  26. Kuleshova, M.E., Normative-legal aspects of the preservation of cultural landscapes in Russia, Chel.: Obraz I Sushchnost’. Guman. Aspekty, 2019, no. 1 (36), pp. 133–153.

  27. Kul’turnyi landshaft kak ob”ekt naslediya (Cultural Landscape as an Object of Heritage), Vedenin, Yu.A. and Kuleshova, M.E., Eds., St. Petersburg, Inst. Naslediya, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Zharikov, Yu.G., Urban planning: Ecology, aesthetics, law, Agrar. Zemel. Pravo, 2013, no. 10 (106), pp. 11–18.

  29. Antrop, M., The concept of traditional landscapes as a base for landscape evaluation and planning. The example of Flanders Region, Landscape Urban Plan., 1997, vol. 38, pp. 105–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Antrop, M., Geography and landscape science, Belgeo, 2000, vol. 1, pp. 9–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Ot’aheľ, J., Landscape and landscape research in Slovakia, Belgeo, 2004, vols. 2–3, pp. 337–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Messerli, P., Research on Alpine landscape development: from research to policy, Mountain Res. Dev., 2008, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 128–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kozová, M., Oťaheľ, J., and Hrnčiarová, T., Landscape classification – methodological approaches and proposal of the Slovakia project, Geoscape, 2009, vol. 2, no. 4, pp.

  34. Mucher, C.A., Klijn, J.A., Wascher, D.M., and Schamine’e, J.H.J., A new European Landscape Classification (LANMAP): A transparent, flexible and user-oriented methodology to distinguish landscapes, Ecol. Indicators, 2010, vol. 10, pp. 87–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Tsilimigkas, G. and Kizos, T., Space, pressures and the management of the Greek landscape, Geografska Annaler: Ser. B, Human Geogr., 2014, vol. 96, no. 2, pp. 159–175.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Dokuchaev V.V. Russkii chernozem, M.; L.: Sel’khozgiz, 1936, 552 s.

  37. Shaw, D.J.B. and Oldfield, J., Landscape science: A Russian geographical tradition, Ann. Amer. Assoc. Geographers, 2007, vol. 97, no. 1, pp. 111 –126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Isachenko, A.G., Landshaftovedenie i fiziko-geograficheskoe raionirovanie (Landscape Science and Physical-Geographical Zoning), Moscow: Vyssh. Shk., 1991.

  39. Oldfield, J. and Shaw, D.J.B., A Russian geographical tradition? The contested canon of Russian and soviet geography, 1884–1953, J. Histor. Geogr., 2015, vol. 49, pp. 75–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. GOST 17.8.1.01-86. Protection of Nature. Landscapes. Terms and definitions. https://base.garant.ru/5369966/. Cited October 21, 2020.

  41. Federal Law No. 7-FZ of January 10, 2002 “On Environmental Protection. ” https://base.garant.ru/12125350/. Cited October 21, 2020.

  42. Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. https://base.garant.ru/2133078/. Cited June 13, 2019.

  43. Guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention. https://whc.unesco.org/document/ 178311 Cited July 20, 2021.

  44. Kolbovskii, E.Yu., Landshaftnoe planirovanie (Landscape Planning), Moscow: Akademiya, 2008.

  45. Federal Law No. 82-FZ of April 30, 1999 “On Guarantees of the Rights of Indigenous Minorities of the Russian Federation.” http://www.consultant.ru/document/ cons_doc_LAW_22928/. Cited July 20, 2021.

  46. Federal Law No. 73-FZ of June 25, 2002 “On Objects of Cultural Heritage (Monuments of History and Culture) of the Peoples of the Russian Federation.” http:// www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_37318/. Cited July 20, 2021.

  47. Federal Law No. 33-FZ of March 14, 1995 “On Specially Protected Natural Territories.” http://www. c-onsultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_6072/. Cited July 20, 2021.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Complex Analysis of Regional Problems, Far East Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, 679016, Birobidzhan, Russia

    D. M. Fetisov & S. A. Solovchenkov

Authors
  1. D. M. Fetisov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. A. Solovchenkov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to D. M. Fetisov or S. A. Solovchenkov.

Additional information

Translated by L. Mukhortova

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fetisov, D.M., Solovchenkov, S.A. The Concept of Landscape in Russian Legislation. Geogr. Nat. Resour. 43, 101–107 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1875372822020020

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S1875372822020020

Keywords:

Search

Navigation