- •Series Editor’s Preface
- •Contents
- •Contributors
- •1 Introduction
- •References
- •2.1 Methodological Introduction
- •2.2 Geographical Background
- •2.3 The Compelling History of Viticulture Terracing
- •2.4 How Water Made Wine
- •2.5 An Apparent Exception: The Wines of the Alps
- •2.6 Convergent Legacies
- •2.7 Conclusions
- •References
- •3.1 The State of the Art: A Growing Interest in the Last 20 Years
- •3.2 An Initial Survey on Extent, Distribution, and Land Use: The MAPTER Project
- •3.3.2 Quality Turn: Local, Artisanal, Different
- •3.3.4 Sociability to Tame Verticality
- •3.3.5 Landscape as a Theater: Aesthetic and Educational Values
- •References
- •4 Slovenian Terraced Landscapes
- •4.1 Introduction
- •4.2 Terraced Landscape Research in Slovenia
- •4.3 State of Terraced Landscapes in Slovenia
- •4.4 Integration of Terraced Landscapes into Spatial Planning and Cultural Heritage
- •4.5 Conclusion
- •Bibliography
- •Sources
- •5.1 Introduction
- •5.3 The Model of the High Valleys of the Southern Massif Central, the Southern Alps, Castagniccia and the Pyrenees Orientals: Small Terraced Areas Associated with Immense Spaces of Extensive Agriculture
- •5.6 What is the Reality of Terraced Agriculture in France in 2017?
- •References
- •6.1 Introduction
- •6.2 Looking Back, Looking Forward
- •6.2.4 New Technologies
- •6.2.5 Policy Needs
- •6.3 Conclusions
- •References
- •7.1 Introduction
- •7.2 Study Area
- •7.3 Methods
- •7.4 Characterization of the Terraces of La Gomera
- •7.4.1 Environmental Factors (Altitude, Slope, Lithology and Landforms)
- •7.4.2 Human Factors (Land Occupation and Protected Nature Areas)
- •7.5 Conclusions
- •References
- •8.1 Geographical Survey About Terraced Landscapes in Peru
- •8.2 Methodology
- •8.3 Threats to Terraced Landscapes in Peru
- •8.4 The Terrace Landscape Debate
- •8.5 Conclusions
- •References
- •9.1 Introduction
- •9.2 Australia
- •9.3 Survival Creativity and Dry Stones
- •9.4 Early 1800s Settlement
- •9.4.2 Gold Mines Walhalla West Gippsland Victoria
- •9.4.3 Goonawarra Vineyard Terraces Sunbury Victoria
- •9.6 Garden Walls Contemporary Terraces
- •9.7 Preservation and Regulations
- •9.8 Art, Craft, Survival and Creativity
- •Appendix 9.1
- •References
- •10 Agricultural Terraces in Mexico
- •10.1 Introduction
- •10.2 Traditional Agricultural Systems
- •10.3 The Agricultural Terraces
- •10.4 Terrace Distribution
- •10.4.1 Terraces in Tlaxcala
- •10.5 Terraces in the Basin of Mexico
- •10.6 Terraces in the Toluca Valley
- •10.7 Terraces in Oaxaca
- •10.8 Terraces in the Mayan Area
- •10.9 Conclusions
- •References
- •11.1 Introduction
- •11.2 Materials and Methods
- •11.2.1 Traditional Cartographic and Photo Analysis
- •11.2.2 Orthophoto
- •11.2.3 WMS and Geobrowser
- •11.2.4 LiDAR Survey
- •11.2.5 UAV Survey
- •11.3 Result and Discussion
- •11.4 Conclusion
- •References
- •12.1 Introduction
- •12.2 Case Study
- •12.2.1 Liguria: A Natural Laboratory for the Analysis of a Terraced Landscape
- •12.2.2 Land Abandonment and Landslides Occurrences
- •12.3 Terraced Landscape Management
- •12.3.1 Monitoring
- •12.3.2 Landscape Agronomic Approach
- •12.3.3 Maintenance
- •12.4 Final Remarks
- •References
- •13 Health, Seeds, Diversity and Terraces
- •13.1 Nutrition and Diseases
- •13.2 Climate Change and Health
- •13.3 Can We Have Both Cheap and Healthy Food?
- •13.4 Where the Seed Comes from?
- •13.5 The Case of Yemen
- •13.7 Conclusions
- •References
- •14.1 Introduction
- •14.2 Components and Features of the Satoyama and the Hani Terrace Landscape
- •14.4 Ecosystem Services of the Satoyama and the Hani Terrace Landscape
- •14.5 Challenges in the Satoyama and the Hani Terrace Landscape
- •References
- •15 Terraced Lands: From Put in Place to Put in Memory
- •15.2 Terraces, Landscapes, Societies
- •15.3 Country Planning: Lifestyles
- •15.4 What Is Important? The System
- •References
- •16.1 Introduction
- •16.2 Case Study: The Traditional Cultural Landscape of Olive Groves in Trevi (Italy)
- •16.2.1 Historical Overview of the Study Area
- •16.2.3 Structural and Technical Data of Olive Groves in the Municipality of Trevi
- •16.3 Materials and Methods
- •16.3.2 Participatory Planning Process
- •16.4 Results and Discussion
- •16.5 Conclusions
- •References
- •17.1 Towards a Circular Paradigm for the Regeneration of Terraced Landscapes
- •17.1.1 Circular Economy and Circularization of Processes
- •17.1.2 The Landscape Systemic Approach
- •17.1.3 The Complex Social Value of Cultural Terraced Landscape as Common Good
- •17.2 Evaluation Tools
- •17.2.1 Multidimensional Impacts of Land Abandonment in Terraced Landscapes
- •17.2.3 Economic Valuation Methods of ES
- •17.3 Some Economic Instruments
- •17.3.1 Applicability and Impact of Subsidy Policies in Terraced Landscapes
- •17.3.3 Payments for Ecosystem Services Promoting Sustainable Farming Practices
- •17.3.4 Pay for Action and Pay for Result Mechanisms
- •17.4 Conclusions and Discussion
- •References
- •18.1 Introduction
- •18.2 Tourism and Landscape: A Brief Theoretical Staging
- •18.3 Tourism Development in Terraced Landscapes: Attractions and Expectations
- •18.3.1 General Trends and Main Issues
- •18.3.2 The Demand Side
- •18.3.3 The Supply Side
- •18.3.4 Our Approach
- •18.4 Tourism and Local Agricultural System
- •18.6 Concluding Remarks
- •References
- •19 Innovative Practices and Strategic Planning on Terraced Landscapes with a View to Building New Alpine Communities
- •19.1 Focusing on Practices
- •19.2 Terraces: A Resource for Building Community Awareness in the Alps
- •19.3 The Alto Canavese Case Study (Piedmont, Italy)
- •19.3.1 A Territory that Looks to a Future Based on Terraced Landscapes
- •19.3.2 The Community’s First Steps: The Practices that Enhance Terraces
- •19.3.3 The Role of Two Projects
- •19.3.3.1 The Strategic Plan
- •References
- •20 Planning, Policies and Governance for Terraced Landscape: A General View
- •20.1 Three Landscapes
- •20.2 Crisis and Opportunity
- •20.4 Planning, Policy and Governance Guidelines
- •Annex
- •Foreword
- •References
- •21.1 About Policies: Why Current Ones Do not Work?
- •21.2 What Landscape Observatories Are?
- •References
- •Index
20 Planning, Policies and Governance for Terraced … |
327 |
The presence of different operators therefore creates a TL polarization. The strength of its operators comes from the ways they manage their interpretation of the landscape. As landscape producers, they speak different languages and have diverse relationships with public institutions. If, on the one hand, central TLs impose a market rationale and seek public legitimacy, peripheral or marginal TLs often have difficulty in experimenting new forms of entrepreneurship and cooperation, based on practices of resistance. These, often bold, upstream and critical practices point, in the first place, to the need to define less generic rules that are more attentive to the context. Rules that regulate conservation while, at the same time, facilitating an adaptation of TL to contemporary life and to working conditions.
20.4Planning, Policy and Governance Guidelines
For each of the TL classes, specific planning, policy and governance guidelines are identifiable, as briefly indicated in the summary table. The guidelines focus on TL as physical infrastructure, set of functions (production, water and land management), source of ecological services, territorial framework and landscape figure.
Even in conditions of irreversibility or quasi-irreversibility, TL1 might be affected by eco-systemic practices of reacquisition based on specific plans and rules. This hypothesis could be coordinated with re-naturalization or recolonization policies (with wooded cultivation, in some cases) identifying the most appropriate governance in terms of gradients of naturalness. In many contexts, it may be useful to rehabilitate the “civic uses” and the “community lands” (see Community Land Advisory Service in UK), especially in mountain areas where they sometimes account for 30–40% of the municipal surface (Alves and Pedro 2009).
Reversibility of TL2 is a great opportunity, which is often overlooked, especially arranging eco-systemic services and the strengthening of spatial frames. In this perspective, planning can significantly contribute to defining the standards and the rules on land cover and land uses but, above all, in appreciating the local energy, food and climate balance sheets. These planning interventions can also affect TL3, whenever negative externalities need to be limited.
Perhaps more than any other class, TL2 requires special attention in terms of policies, since it involves contexts where experimental practices (of production and) are rather common with significant effects on employment and entrepreneurship.
In many cases, the practices, values and principles are incompatible with existing market rules. Indeed, these practices may implicate economic principles as those fostered by alternative processes: for example, forms of circular economy at the local level, forms of food self-sufficiency, barter trade, alternative complementary currency or quasi-money, land and time banking, and so on. Policies should interpret such innovations and support them through incentives, and tax reductions: especially to create jobs, to raise broader awareness of the state of eco-systems or to encourage and strengthen social interactions. Several opportunities have emerged
328 |
E. Fontanari and D. Patassini |
from the dialogue between formal and informal institutions, first, second and third sector, among contemporaries, modern and customary tenure systems.
All these options can pave the way to new governance experiences.
The specialization of TL3 requires policies on product quality, but above all on quality farming practices, in order to contain the negative externalities and protect traditional knowledge and maintenance skills. It is therefore pivotal for market prices of TL3 products to be sensitive to these factors. In such case, forms of public–private partnership for the cultural development of TL can be easily activated (Table 20.1).
Taking into account the topics discussed above on planning, policies and governance, some general guidelines can be summarized as follows.2
1.Policies and social innovation should be based on an identification of the variety of meanings, functions and values of TL in terms of agricultural production, history and culture, and environmental components. These functions and values are specific features of TL as eco-systemic infrastructure.
2.Identification and attribution of values should follow evaluation and monitoring, including risk management at the local and large-scale spatial level.
3.Any successful achievement so far, thanks to policies and social innovation, should be properly acknowledged (see, for instance, local practices, experiments, programmes, policies, plans and governance approaches). An international focus should be activated to encourage knowledge transfer and communication on policies and social practices.
4.Governments and public administrations at all levels should be involved. In Europe, since many States share the principles of the Convention of Landscape, they should be actively engaged in promoting actions and practices for the protection and regeneration of TL involving local communities. So far, experience is still very limited and scattered.
5.A TL platform backed by the National Governments should be designed to favour and support integrated and areal projects that place TLs within local eco-systems. This approach will help farmers, local communities and experimental initiatives to initiate a dialogue with institutional powers. Moreover, this will encourage regional and local administrations to include TL into planning strategies into a transcalar perspective. Such integrated approach might help to adopt a multi-functional policy, facilitate access to financial resources and tackle the recurrent ownership and land access issues.
6.To contrast the demographic aging phenomenon and attract younger actors, special attention should be given to technological, institutional and social innovation such as
a.selection of profitable crop mix with attention to organic and ecological production, not only and necessarily market oriented;
2The general guidelines can be drawn from the report “Policies and social innovation—WG 5”, III World Meeting on Terraced Landscapes (Padua), by E. Fontanari, D. Patassini and D. Zanotelli.
Table 20.1 |
General guidelines |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TL1 (irreversibility) |
TL2 (reversibility) |
TL3 (development) |
|
|
|
|
|
Planning |
|
– Eco-systemic reacquisition |
– Provision of eco-systemic |
– Reducing negative externalities |
|
|
– Risk management |
services |
– Spatial frame |
|
|
– Rules and regulations (i.e. preventive |
– Spatial frames |
– Traditional maintenance skills and technologies |
|
|
ecological compensation) |
– Hydro-geological efficiency |
– Energy balance |
|
|
|
– Energy balance |
– Rules and regulations |
|
|
|
– Rules and regulations |
|
Policies |
|
– Recolonization |
– Market versus “off market” |
– Mitigate specialization and monoculture |
|
|
– Re-naturalization |
– Circular economy |
– Quality of product and process |
|
|
|
– Parallel currency |
– Export |
|
|
|
– Land and time banking |
– Adjustment of market prices (real value, not only |
|
|
|
– Food balance |
parametric rural prices) |
|
|
|
– Innovation |
|
|
|
|
– Taxation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Governance |
|
– Management of naturalness gradients, risk and |
– Institutional design |
– Design and implementation partnerships |
|
|
compensation |
– Third sector |
|
|
|
|
– Integration among land |
|
|
|
|
tenure systems |
|
|
|
|
|
|
… Terraced for Governance and Policies Planning, 20
329