TY - JOUR

T1 - Disentangling the practice of landscape approaches

T2 - a Q-method analysis on experiences in socio-ecological production landscapes and seascapes

AU - Torralba, Mario

AU - Nishi, Maiko

AU - Cebrián-Piqueras, Miguel A.

AU - Quintas-Soriano, Cristina

AU - García-Martín, María

AU - Plieninger, Tobias

N1 - Funding Information: This research has been funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) project number 426675955, Landscape Chains. CQS acknowledges EU funding through the Marie Sklodowska–Curie grant number 101031168. MACP was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Grant Number: 01LC18064. We are grateful to the IPSI secretariat for their support and share of resources and to the 45 case studies that participated in this research. Publisher Copyright: © 2023, The Author(s).

PY - 2023/7/1

Y1 - 2023/7/1

N2 - Landscape approaches are gaining momentum in both scientific and policy agendas. However, landscape approaches comprise a multitude of concepts, approaches and principles, which are in part similar, in some parts different or even contradictory. In this paper, we used a Q-method questionnaire to explore how landscape approaches are understood and employed in 45 case studies of socio-ecological production landscapes and seascapes derived from the International Partnership for the Satoyama Initiative (IPSI), as well as the motivations for employing them. Our analysis revealed that all landscape approaches pursued very similar goals, namely to ensure that local communities as landscape stewards have the capacity to preserve context-specific values in the face of socio-economic and environmental changes. The tools for reaching such goals are built upon people and nature feedback dynamics that crystalize in rich biodiversity and local ecological knowledge. However, our analysis also showed that the means to reach those goals differed depending on many contextual factors, such as the dominant ecosystems and socio-economic activities in the landscape, the constellation of actors or the most relevant drivers of change affecting the social–ecological system. In particular, we identified four distinct lenses in which landscapes approaches are applied in practice to landscape sustainability: (1) for the preservation of natural values, (2) for the preservation of socio-cultural values, (3) for the promotion of social justice and participatory governance, and (4) for securing food security and local livelihoods. Our results showed an association between the choice of a lens and the value types motivating the use of a landscape approach. Relational values were associated with a focus on landscape conservation and safeguard of social–ecological values. Our study highlights the relevant and beneficial role of landscape approaches as a boundary concept and emphasizes the need for transdisciplinary and participatory methods within landscape research and practice to navigate the context-specific options for implementation of landscape approaches.

AB - Landscape approaches are gaining momentum in both scientific and policy agendas. However, landscape approaches comprise a multitude of concepts, approaches and principles, which are in part similar, in some parts different or even contradictory. In this paper, we used a Q-method questionnaire to explore how landscape approaches are understood and employed in 45 case studies of socio-ecological production landscapes and seascapes derived from the International Partnership for the Satoyama Initiative (IPSI), as well as the motivations for employing them. Our analysis revealed that all landscape approaches pursued very similar goals, namely to ensure that local communities as landscape stewards have the capacity to preserve context-specific values in the face of socio-economic and environmental changes. The tools for reaching such goals are built upon people and nature feedback dynamics that crystalize in rich biodiversity and local ecological knowledge. However, our analysis also showed that the means to reach those goals differed depending on many contextual factors, such as the dominant ecosystems and socio-economic activities in the landscape, the constellation of actors or the most relevant drivers of change affecting the social–ecological system. In particular, we identified four distinct lenses in which landscapes approaches are applied in practice to landscape sustainability: (1) for the preservation of natural values, (2) for the preservation of socio-cultural values, (3) for the promotion of social justice and participatory governance, and (4) for securing food security and local livelihoods. Our results showed an association between the choice of a lens and the value types motivating the use of a landscape approach. Relational values were associated with a focus on landscape conservation and safeguard of social–ecological values. Our study highlights the relevant and beneficial role of landscape approaches as a boundary concept and emphasizes the need for transdisciplinary and participatory methods within landscape research and practice to navigate the context-specific options for implementation of landscape approaches.

KW - Biology

KW - Environmental planning

KW - Landscape sustainability

KW - SEPLS

KW - Q-sorts

KW - Environmental Governance

KW - Integrated landscape management

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85150618313&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/a00c1885-9523-3d9c-8d1d-0b56d6344624/

U2 - 10.1007/s11625-023-01307-2

DO - 10.1007/s11625-023-01307-2

M3 - Journal articles

VL - 18

SP - 1893

EP - 1906

JO - Sustainability Science

JF - Sustainability Science

SN - 1862-4065

IS - 4

ER -