Notes on the evolution of the concept of Landscape

Notes on the evolution of the concept of landscape

Stefania Landi (ICOMOS Italia)

The concept of landscape has evolved since the 1960s. The Venice Charter of 31 May 1964, although mainly focused on the concept of monument, did not fail to emphasise that ‘The notion of historic monument includes both the isolated architectural creation and the urban or landscape environment’ (Art. 1) and, further on, under the heading ‘Monumental environments’, it prescribed that ‘Monumental environments must be the object of special care’, singularly anticipating Article 136 c) of the current Italian protection legislation (Legislative Decree 42/2002) that considers, among landscape assets, ‘complexes of immovable things that make up a characteristic appearance having an aesthetic and traditional value, including historic centres and districts’.

In several cases there is a convergence of international attention, which are integrated with national protection regulations for sites recognised by UNESCO as of ‘outstanding universal value’, included in the so-called ‘world heritage of mankind’, according to the 1972 Paris Convention. In Italy, for example, ‘the Botanical Garden of Padua, the Royal Palace of Caserta, the Villa d'Este in Tivoli’ (M. Brocca, Aedon, no. 3, 2022), the Historic Centre of Naples, are UNESCO sites. With the European Landscape Convention, which was signed in Florence on 20 October 2000 and came into force internationally on 1 September 2006, the concept of ‘landscape’ is further expanded, considering a new subject, the community that inhabits the territory. In other words, the Florence Convention assumes ‘the idea that every part of the territory is capable of expressing a landscape, on condition that it is connoted ... in the perception of the population’ (G. Sciullo, Aedon, no.3, 2008). In particular, Article 2 states that ‘natural, rural, urban and peri-urban spaces’, including ‘inland and marine waters’ may constitute landscape. This implies that a gradation of different territorial situations can be considered: ‘exceptional’ landscapes, ‘everyday’ landscapes and ‘degraded’ landscapes. Community participation as a component of landscape value would imply ‘horizontal subsidiarity’: ‘The real guardians of the landscape are the organised citizens ... who guard the territory and ensure a certainly more stringent and effective vigilance than any public office (although) ... horizontal subsidiarity ... must support the public function, not replace it’ (P. Carpentieri, Aedon, no. 2, 2018).

Related to the Florence Convention is the 2005 Faro Convention, which introduces the notion of a ‘heritage community ... made up of people who value specific aspects of cultural heritage, which they wish, within the framework of public action, to sustain and pass on to future generations’ (Article 2 - Definitions, letter b). The evolutionary lines briefly described here have led to a concept of landscape far removed from that contemplated in the first decades of the last century, linked to the concretely visible perspectives summarised in the so-called ‘postcard view’. Since the dawn of the third millennium, the landscape, although qualified by the identity value that implies its consideration from a conservation point of view, is an ‘essential component of the living context of populations ... an important element of the quality of life ... a key element of individual and social well-being’ (Florence Convention, art. 5, lett. a). This may entail the admissibility of transformations with a view to more suitable contexts for improving living conditions and, therefore, the transfer of the concept of identity to certain processes of change.