Sustainable Built Environments

2013 Edition
| Editors: Vivian Loftness, Dagmar Haase

Sustainable Landscapes

Reference work entry

Definition of the Subject and Its Importance

The subject of sustainable landscapes is a complex one because landscape as a concept includes not only the physical structure of the environment but also human perception [1]. This latter, being subjective, means that values of landscape change from person to person, cultural to culture, and over time. Thus, compared with a simpler subject such as air quality where there are objective measures of levels of pollutants, for example, what may be a sustainable landscape in one circumstance may not be in another or at one time when compared to another time frame. This makes the future prediction or modeling of sustainable landscapes particularly challenging.

Landscapes should be of great concern to most people and they may have many diverse values. For example, using the common approach of sustainability with the three “pillars,” landscape may have an economic value as scenery for tourism; a social value as the place where people live; and an...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


Primary Literature

  1. 1.
    Council of Europe (2000) European landscape convention. Accessed 30 Mar 2010
  2. 2.
    Maslow A (1954) Motivation and need. Harper, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bell S (1999) Landscape: pattern, perception and process. E&FN Spon, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    European Environmental Agency (1995) European environment: the Dobriš assessment. European Environmental Agency, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bell S, Alves S, Silverinha de Oliveira E, Zuin A (2010) Migration and land use change in Europe: a review. Living Rev Landscape Res 4:2,
  6. 6.
    Zasada I, Alves S, Müller FC, Piorr A, Berges R, Bell S (2010) International retirement migration in the Alicante region, Spain: process, spatial pattern and environmental impacts. J Environ Plann Manage 53(1):125–141Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jongman RHG (1996) Ecological and landscape consequences of land use change in Europe. In: Proceedings of the first ECNC seminar on land use change and its ecological consequences, vol. 2, ECNC Publication Series on Man and Nature, TilburgGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    EU (2005) Overview of agri-environment principles, types, measures, and applications. Accessed 31 Mar 2010
  9. 9.
    Antrop M (2005) Why landscapes of the past are important for the future. Landscape Urban Plann 70:21–34Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hoskins A (1955) The making of the English landscape. Hodder and Stoughton, LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rackham O (2000) The history of the countryside. New edition. Phoenix, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cronon W (1983) Changes in the land. Hill and Wang, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bell S, Nikodemus O, Peneze Z, Kruze I (2009) Management of cultural landscapes: what does this mean in the Former Soviet Union: a case study from Latvia. Landscape Res 34(4):425–455Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Selman P (2008) What do we mean by sustainable landscape? Sustain Science Pract Policy 4(2):23–28Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Roe M (2007) Landscape and sustainability – an overview. In: Benson J, Roe M (eds) Landscape and sustainability, 2nd edn. Routledge, London, pp 1–15Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Haber W (2002) Kulturlandschaft zwischen Bild und Wirklichkeit. Sweizerische Akademie der Gescheites- undSozialwissenschaften, BerneGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Berleant A (1982) The aesthetics of environment. Temple University Press, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Forman RTT, Godron M (1986) Landscape ecology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cosgrove D (1984/1998) Social formation and symbolic landscape. The University of Wisconsin Press, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Crang M (1998) Cultural geography. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schama S (1995) Landscape and memory. Alfred A. Knopf, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Oppenheimer S (2003) Out of Eden. Constable and Robinson, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bell S (2004) Elements of visual design in the landscape. Spon, AbingdonGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tyrväinen L, Miettinen A (2000) Property prices and urban forest amenities. J Environ Econ Manage 39(2):205–223Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dziegielewska D (lead author), Tietenberg T, Niggol Seo S (topic editors) (2009) Total economic value. In: Cutler J (ed) Encyclopedia of earth. Environmental Information Coalition, National Council for Science and the Environment), Cleveland, Washington, DC. [First published in the Encyclopedia of Earth 22 Aug 2006; Last revised 28 Aug 2009]. <>. Accessed 31 March 2010
  26. 26.
    Daniel T (2001) Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landscape Urban Plann 54(1–4):267–281Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage (2002) Landscape character assessment – guidance for England and Wales. Countryside Agency, SNH, Battleby, ScotlandGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Countryside survey programme for the UK. Accessed 31 Mar 2010
  29. 29.
    Canter D (1977) The psychology of place. Architectural, LondonGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Barker RG (1968) Ecological psychology: concepts and methods for studying the environment of human behavior. Stanford University Press, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wicker AW (1979) An introduction to ecological psychology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ward TC, Myers MS (2003) Interviews and questionnaires. In: Bell S (ed) Crossplan: integrated, participatory planning as a tool for rural development. Forestry Commission, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ponzetti JJ (2003) Growing old in rural communities: a visual methodology for studying place attachment. J Rural Community Psychol E6(1):1–11Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Low SM, Altman I (1992) Place attachment: a conceptual inquiry. In: Altman I, Low SM (eds) Place attachment: human behavior and environment. Plenum, New York, pp 1–12Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Milligan MJ (1998) Interactional past and potential: the social construction of place attachment. Symbolic Interact 21(1):1–33Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rubinstein RL, Parmelee PA (1992) Attachment to place and the representation of the life course by the elderly. In: Altman I, Low SM (eds) Place attachment: human behavior and environment. Plenum, New York, pp 139–64Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Williams DR, Patterson ME, Roggenbuck JW, Watson AE (1992) Beyond the commodity metaphor: examining emotional and symbolic attachment to place. Leisure Sci 14:29–46Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Jorgensen B, Stedman R (2006) A comparative analysis of predictors of sense of place dimensions: attachment to, dependence on, and identification of lake shore properties. J Environ Manage 79:316–327Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Proshansky HM, Fabian AK, Kaminof R (1983) Place identity: physical world socialization of the self. J Environ Psychol 3:57–83Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Korpela K (1989) Place-identity as a product of environmental self-regulation. J Environ Psychol 9:241–256Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Relph E (1976) Place and placelessness. Pion, LondonGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Tuan YF (1980) Rootedness versus sense of place. Landscape 24(1):3–8Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kelly G (1955) Principles of personal construct psychology, vol I–II. Norton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Palimpsest (2010) In Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Accessed 13 Apr 2010
  45. 45.
    Birnbaum CA (1994) Protecting cultural landscapes planning, treatment and management of historic landscapes. US Department of Interior National Park Service, Technical Preservation Service, Washington, DC,
  46. 46.
    Farina A (2008) The landscape as a semiotic interface between organisms and resources. Biosemiotics 1:75–83Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Jones M, Howard P, Olwig KR, Primdahl J, Herlin IS (2007) Multiple interfaces of the European landscape convention. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift-Norwegian. J Geogr 61:207–215, ISSN 0029–1951Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Teutonico JM, Palumbo G (eds) (2002) Management planning for archaeological sites. The Getty Conservation Institute, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Palang H, Fry G (2003) Landscape interfaces. In: Palang H, Fry G (eds) Landscape interfaces. cultural heritage in changing landscapes. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp 1–14Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Macinnes L (2004) Historical landscape characterization. In: Bishop K, Philips A (eds) Countryside planning: new approaches to management and conservation. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Jellico G, Jellico S (1995) The landscape of man (revised edition). Thames and Hudson, LondonGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Berger RW (1985) In the gardens of the Sun King: studies on the Park of Versailles under Louis XIV. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Goulty SM (1993) Heritage gardens: care, conservation and management. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Our Common Future, Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Published as Annex to General Assembly document A/42/427, Development and International Co-operation: Environment 2 Aug 1987Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    European Environment Agency (1999) Environmental indicators: typology and overview. Technical Report No. 25. EEA, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Landscape Institute/Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (2002) Guidelines for landscape and visual impact assessment, 2nd edn. Spon, LondonGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Scottish Natural Heritage (2009) Siting and design of windfarms in the landscape version 1. Scottish Natural Heritage, InvernessGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Everhardt WC (1972) The national park service. Praeger, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Mair J, Delafons J (2001) The policy origins of Britain’s national parks: the Addison Committee 1929–1931. Plann Perspect 16(3):293–309Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Tapio H (2007) Visuaalinen maisemaseuranta: kulttuurimaiseman muutosten valokuvadokumentointi: kuvat. Taideteollisen korkeakoulun julkaisusarja. A 76. Taideteollinen korkeakoulu. Musta taide, HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Tveit M, Ode A, Fry G (2006) Key concepts in a framework for analysing visual landscape character. Landscape Res 31(3):229–255Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Macaulay Institute The virtual landscape theatre. Accessed 31 Mar 2010
  63. 63.
    Palmer JF (2004) Using spatial metrics to predict scenic perception in a changing landscape: Dennis, Massachusetts. Landscape Urban Plann 69:201–218Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Fairbrother N (1970) New lives, new landscapes. Architectural, LondonGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    European Environment Agency (2009) Ensuring quality of life in European towns and cities. Report No 5/2009. EEA, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Godin S (2008) Tribes: we need you to lead us. Portfolio, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Mc Harg IL (1967) Design with nature. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Bell S, Apostol D (2008) Designing sustainable forest landscapes. Taylor and Francis, AbingdonGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Pigram JJJ, Jenkins JM (1999) Outdoor recreation management. Routledge, AbingdonGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Stankey GH, Clark RN, Bormann BT (2005) Adaptive management of natural resources: theory, concepts, and management institutions. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-654. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, PortlandGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Thompson JW, Sorvig K (2008) Sustainable landscape construction. Island, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Bell S (2010) A summary of the challenges identified and thoughts on where do we go from here? In: Thompson CW, Aspinall P, Bell S (eds) Challenges for research in landscape and health Routledge, Abingdon, pp 259–278Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    European Environmental Agency (2006) Urban sprawl in Europe. The ignored challenge. Report No 10/2006. EEA, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar

Books and Reviews

  1. Apostol D, Sinclair M (eds) (2006) Restoring the Pacific Northwest: the art and science of ecological restoration in Cascadia Society for Ecological Restoration. Island, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell S, Simpson M, Tyrvainen L, Sievanen T, Proebstl U (eds) (2009) European forest recreation and tourism: a handbook. Taylor and Francis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Benson J, Roe M (2007) Landscape and sustainability, 2nd edn. Routledge, AbingdonGoogle Scholar
  4. Berger A (2007) Designing the reclaimed landscape. Routledge, AbingdonGoogle Scholar
  5. Bishop K, Philips A (2004) Countryside planning: new approaches to management and conservation. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Brady E (2003) Aesthetics of the natural environment. Edinburgh University Press, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  7. Greem B, Vos W (eds) (2001) Threatened landscapes. Taylor and Francis, AbingdonGoogle Scholar
  8. McHarg IL (1998) To heal the Earth. Island, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  9. Saar M, Palang H (2009) The dimension of place meanings. Living reviews in landscape research 3 downloaded from Accessed 31 Mar 2010
  10. Selman P (2006) Planning at the landscape scale. Routledge, AbingdonGoogle Scholar
  11. Sheppard SRJ, Harshaw WW (2001) Forests and landscapes: linking ecology, sustainability and aesthetics. IUFRO Research Series 6. CABI, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  12. Uuemaa E, Antrop M, Roosaare J, Riho M, Mander Ü (2008) Landscape metrics and indices: an overview of their use in landscape research. Downloaded from Accessed 31 March 2010

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.OPENspace Research CentreEdinburgh College of ArtEdinburghUK
  2. 2.Estonian University of Life SciencesTartuEstonia