the use of landscape in municipal policies
TRANSCRIPT
The use of landscape in municipal policies A research towards the implementation of landscape as defined in the European Landscape Convention
Sharon Westerman - MSc thesis - October 2014
i
The use of landscape in municipal policies
A research towards the implementation of landscape as defined in the
European Landscape Convention
MSc thesis Land Use Planning Author: Sharon Westerman Student number: 910125945040 Email: [email protected] Programme: MLP Specialisation: Spatial Planning Course: LUP-80436 (36 ECTS) Supervisor: Prof. Dr. A.J.J. Van der Valk 2nd reviewer Dr. G.B.M Pedroli Wageningen University Land Use Planning Group Droevendaalsesteeg 3 A 6708 PB Wageningen The Netherlands Figure frontpage: Schippers, Wilco. (2014). Sunset at Koe in de Kost (Raalte). [Figure of a sunset in an agricultural landscape].
[online] Retrieved from: https://wilcozpics.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/koe-in-de-kost-2014.jpg [Accessed 10
October 2014]
ii
iii
ABSTRACT Landscape is a concept which is used in policies in Europe, as well as in the Netherlands. In the
Netherlands care for the landscape has unofficially been decentralised towards the provinces. How
Dutch municipalities deal with landscape in their policies has not been researched yet. In order to
find out how municipalities deal with landscape in their policies, four municipalities (located in the
province of Overijssel) have been analysed by means of a checklist. This checklist is based upon
literature considering landscape, landscape planning and management, landscape biography and
landscape identity. In general landscape is used well and how landscape is handled can be related to
the European Landscape Convention. In planning and managing the landscape, landscape identity
has frequently been used. The landscape biography concept has not been used so often. If possible
municipalities should make use of the landscape biography concept as well, since this concept
provides opportunities to integrate past landscapes with the present and future landscape.
Key words: landscape, landscape planning, landscape management, landscape biography, landscape
identity, European Landscape Convention
iv
v
ACKNOWLEDMENTS My MSc thesis is finished! The result of eight months hard work is presented in this report. At the
beginning of the process, I had no idea which topic would be interesting to deal with for such a long
period. Arnold van der Valk, who supervised me during the whole process, suggested to do
something with the European Landscape Convention. I never heard of it… After talking about this
convention and reading some literature about this topic, I got enthusiast about the topic and so I my
thesis topic was set.
At the beginning of the writing process, I struggled with the content that should be in the different
chapters. Arnold suggested to read a book on how to design a research process and I could start
writing according to scientific standards. I would like to thank Arnold van der Valk for his guidance at
the beginning of the research process, attending me to the conference of CHeriScape (which has
been a great source of inspiration) and providing me with very useful comments on my draft version.
These comments really helped me to improve my thesis.
Since, my research consists of four case study municipalities, I have arranged some interviews. I have
interviewed the policy officers who are responsible for the landscape policy. I would like to thank
these people for the time they arranged for me. Special thanks to Simon, I really appreciate it that
you read my thesis and checked for ‘Dutch grammar’ and strange words. Indeed, I meant
stakeholders and not actors. Last but not least, I would like to thank my friends and family. Thank you
for your supportive words, it really helped me to finish my thesis.
vi
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................ iii
ACKNOWLEDMENTS ................................................................................................................................. v
LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES AND BOXES ..................................................................................................... xi
ENGLISH – DUTCH GLOSSARY ................................................................................................................ xiii
SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................. xv
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Nature and landscape in the Netherlands a short history ............................................................ 1
1.2 The European Landscape Convention ........................................................................................... 2
1.2.1 Recent programmes dealing with landscape in the Netherlands .......................................... 3
1.2.2 The Dutch attitude towards the ELC ...................................................................................... 3
1.3 Problem description and problem statement ............................................................................... 4
1.4 Case studies ................................................................................................................................... 4
1.4.1 Dalfsen .................................................................................................................................... 5
1.4.2 Raalte ...................................................................................................................................... 6
1.4.3 Zwolle ..................................................................................................................................... 6
1.4.4 Deventer ................................................................................................................................. 7
1.5 Research objective, questions and relevance ............................................................................... 7
1.6 Chapter overview .......................................................................................................................... 8
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ................................................................................................................ 9
2.1 Landscape ...................................................................................................................................... 9
2.1.1 Perspectives upon the landscape ........................................................................................... 9
2.1.2 Changing landscapes ............................................................................................................ 10
2.1.3 Landscape as a connecting concept ..................................................................................... 10
2.2 Landscape planning and landscape management ...................................................................... 12
2.2.1 Difficulties in managing and planning the landscape ........................................................... 12
2.2.2 Dynamic approaches towards landscape planning and management................................. 13
2.3 Landscape biography ................................................................................................................... 14
2.3.1 History of the landscape biography concept ........................................................................ 14
2.3.2 Landscape biography in the Netherlands ............................................................................. 14
2.3.3 Landscape biography in practical situations ........................................................................ 15
2.4 Landscape identity....................................................................................................................... 16
2.4.1 Perspectives upon identity ................................................................................................... 17
2.4.2 Factors influencing the formation of identity ...................................................................... 18
viii
2.5 Concepts in relation to each other .............................................................................................. 19
3. METHODS .......................................................................................................................................... 21
3.1 Scientific literature ...................................................................................................................... 21
3.2 Policy documents ........................................................................................................................ 21
3.3 Interviews .................................................................................................................................... 22
4. EUROPEAN, NATIONAL AND REGIONAL POLICIES AND LAWS .......................................................... 23
4.1 European level ............................................................................................................................. 23
4.2 National level ............................................................................................................................... 24
4.2.1 Past national policies ............................................................................................................ 24
4.2.2 Current national policies ...................................................................................................... 25
4.2.3 Current national laws ........................................................................................................... 26
4.2.4 Future law on the environment ........................................................................................... 27
4.3 Regional level .............................................................................................................................. 28
4.3.1 Environmental vision Overijssel ........................................................................................... 28
4.3.2 Catalogue Area Characteristics............................................................................................. 30
4.3.2.1 Natural layer ................................................................................................................30
4.3.2.2 Agricultural cultivated layer .........................................................................................31
4.3.2.3 Urban landscape...........................................................................................................32
4.3.2.4 Lust and leisure landscape............................................................................................33
4.3.2.5 Concluding remarks about the Catalogue Area Characteristics ..................................33
4.3.3 Room for the Vecht ............................................................................................................. 34
4.3.4 Environmental regulation Overijssel .................................................................................... 34
4.4 Relations between the different levels ....................................................................................... 36
5. NORMS, VALUES AND IDENTIY IN PLANNING AND MANAGING THE LANDSCAPE ........................... 37
5.1 Norms and values ........................................................................................................................ 37
5.2 The periurban landscape ............................................................................................................. 38
5.3 Adding economic value to the landscape ................................................................................... 38
5.4 Managing the landscape ............................................................................................................. 39
5.5 Remarks considering norms and values in landscape planning and management..................... 40
6. BIOGRAPHY OF THE LANDSCAPE IN PLANNING AND MANAGING THE LANDSCAPE ........................ 43
6.1 Examples of regions in which landscape biography has been used actively .............................. 43
6.2 Past, present and future landscapes in the landscape biography concept ................................. 44
6.2.1 History matters ..................................................................................................................... 44
6.2.2 Immortal landscapes ............................................................................................................ 44
ix
6.2.3 Participation ......................................................................................................................... 45
6.3 Use of landscape biography on a local level ............................................................................... 46
7. LANDSCAPE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT ON A LOCAL LEVEL AND ITS RELATION TO THE ELC .. 49
7.1 Planning and managing the landscape in the case study municipalities .................................... 49
7.1.1 Landscape development plan ............................................................................................... 49
7.1.2 Spatial development strategy .............................................................................................. 51
7.1.3 External appearance of buildings note ................................................................................. 52
7.1.4 Comparison between the different municipalities .............................................................. 54
7.2 Landscape planning and management in Dutch municipal policies and their relation to the ELC
........................................................................................................................................................... 56
7.2.1 Policy documents of the case study areas and their relation to the ELC ............................. 56
7.2.2 Presence of the ELC in landscape planning and management on a local level .................... 57
8. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................ 59
8.1 Discussion .................................................................................................................................... 59
8.1.1 Findings in relation to the problem statement .................................................................... 59
8.1.2 Findings in relation to the concepts and theoretical framework ......................................... 59
8.1.3 Circumstances which might have affected the results......................................................... 60
8.2 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 60
9. BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................................... 63
ANNEX I – Example of a checklist .......................................................................................................... 69
ANNEX II – Interview questions ............................................................................................................. 73
x
xi
LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES AND BOXES LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Timeline nature and landscape issues in the Netherlands ...................................................... 2
Figure 2: Map of the province of Overijssel ............................................................................................ 5
Figure 3: Map of the municipality of Dalfsen .......................................................................................... 5
Figure 4: Map of the municipality of Raalte ........................................ ................................................... 6
Figure 5: Map of the municipality of Zwolle ........................................................................................... 6
Figure 6: Map of the municipality of Deventer ....................................................................................... 7
Figure 7: Landscape identity circle ........................................................................................................ 18
Figure 8: Diverse concepts and their relation to each other................................................................. 19
Figure 9: Birds and Habitats directive ................................................................................................... 23
Figure 10: National Ecological Network ................................................................................................ 26
Figure 11: Heritage from the past, designated with a new destination ............................................... 29
Figure 12: Natural layer of the case study municipalities ..................................................................... 30
Figure 13: Agricultural cultivated layer of the case study municipalities ............................................. 31
Figure 14: Urban landscape of the case study municipalities ............................................................... 32
Figure 15: Lust and leisure landscape of the case study municipalities ................................................ 33
Figure 16: The Vecht river in the municipalities of Zwolle and Dalfsen ................................................ 34
Figure 17: Relationship between norms, values and attitudes towards the landscape ....................... 37
Figure 18: Areas where the PDL/BBO programme was executed ......................................................... 43
Figure 19: Part of a young heath reclamation landscape located in Deventer.....................................47
Figure 20: Landscape types of the municipality of Dalfsen ..................................................................50
Figure 21: Polder of Mastenbroek .......................................................................................................53
LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Authors and their views upon landscape ................................................................................ 10
Table 2: Background information on the interviews. ............................................................................ 22
Table 3: Policies and laws on European, national and regional level ................................................... 36
Table 4: Summary of the studied policy documents of the case study municipalities ......................... 54
Table 5: Use of ELC principles in the diverse policy documents (based upon the checklists) .............. 56
LIST OF BOXES Box 1: Landscape as a unifying concept in the rural landscapes of Denmark ....................................... 11
Box 2: Cooperation between diverse cultural heritage organisations in Nijmegen ............................. 12
Box 3: Biography of the Amersfoortseweg ........................................................................................... 16
Box 4: ‘Beauty is in the eye of the beholder’ ........................................................................................ 17
Box 5: Periurban areas in the municipality of Zwolle ............................................................................ 38
Box 6: Landscape biography of a young heath reclamation landscape in the municipality of Deventer
............................................................................................................................................................... 47
Box 7: Different landscape types in Dalfsen .......................................................................................... 50
Box 8: The polder of Mastenbroek in the external appearance of buildings note of the municipality of
Zwolle .................................................................................................................................................... 53
xii
xiii
ENGLISH – DUTCH GLOSSARY English Dutch
Birds and Habitats Directive Habitat- en Vogelrichtlijn
Brook landscape Maten en flierenlandschap
Brook valleys Beekdalen
Catalogue Area Characteristics Catalogus Gebiedskenmerken
Developing landscape with quality Landschap Ontwikkelen met Kwaliteit
Environmental Act Omgevingswet
Environmental regulation Overijssel Omgevingsverordening Overijssel
Environmental vision Omgevingsvisie
European Landscape Convention (ELC) Europese Landschapsconventie
External appearance of buildings note Welstandsnota
Former bogs Hoogveengebieden in cultuur gebracht
Good physical living environment Goede fysieke leefomgeving
Habitat test Habitattoets
Integration plan Inpassingsplan
Key Planning Decision Planologische Kernbeslissing
Landscape development plan Landschapsontwikkelingsplan
Municipal environmental plan Gemeentelijk omgevingsplan
National Cultural Heritage Agency Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed
National Ecological Network Ecologische Hoofdstructuur
National Landscape Nationaal Landschap
Nature Protection Act Natuurbeschermingswet
Nature Scenery Act Natuurschoonwet
National Spatial Strategy Nota Ruimte
Old farms landscape Oude hoevenlandschap
Open fields landscape Essenlandschap
Order in Council Algemene Maatregel van Bestuur
Peat landscape Veenkoloniaal landschap
Peat reclamation landscape Laagveenontginningen
Riverbank and back lands Oeverwallen en komgronden
Room for the River Ruimte voor de Rivier
Room for the Vecht Ruimte voor de Vecht
Sand ridges and plains Dekzandvlakte en ruggen
Society for the Protection of Natural Monuments
Natuurmonumenten
Spatial development strategy Structuurvisie
Spatial development strategy Infrastructure and
Space
Structuurvisie Infrastructuur en Ruimte (SVIR)
Spatial planning act Wet ruimtelijke ordening
Special Protection Area Speciale beschermingszone
Young heath reclamation landscape Jong heide- en broekontginningslandschap
Zoning plan Bestemmingsplan
xiv
xv
SUMMARY The topic of this research is landscape in municipal policies, hereby emphasis is laid upon the
European Landscape Convention (ELC). In this convention both physical and social landscapes play a
big role. The ELC does not only focus on outstanding landscapes, but on ordinary landscapes as well.
In order to find out if landscape and the ELC play a role in municipal policies, the municipalities of
Dalfsen, Raalte, Deventer and Zwolle will be analysed. The municipal level has been chosen, since
there has not been a research on the implementation of the ELC on a municipal level.
Landscape is obviously a major concept in this research. However, other concepts like landscape
planning and management, landscape biography and landscape identity (might) play a role in the
planning and managing the municipal landscape. Landscape biography tells the story of past
landscapes. Landscape identity is about the image of the landscape.
This research consists of three different types of resources. First, scientific literature has been used
to examine landscape and related concepts. These concepts formed the basis for the theoretical
framework as described in chapter 2. Second, diverse policy documents of the municipalities of
Dalfsen, Raalte, Deventer and Zwolle are studied. In order to structure this study, a checklist has
been created in order to find out whether the landscape concept is used on a municipal level. Third,
interviews have been held with the policy officers of the case study municipalities. These interviews
served to capture the process behind the establishment of the landscape policy and the current
position of the landscape policy.
The case study municipalities are not the only level that is taking care of landscape. On a higher level
the province of Overijssel, the Netherlands and Europe can be distinguished. The provincial policies
were often used by the case study municipalities. On a national level, policies became more global
and were thus less used by the municipalities. The national laws are implemented in the municipal
landscape policies. Municipalities know of the European policies and laws, but most of them are not
directly visible in the landscape policies.
Norms and values play a role when a person is giving value or an identity to the landscape. Due to
different backgrounds and preferences, people with different backgrounds are likely to rate a
landscape different. When managing and/or planning the landscape the norms and values of the
inhabitants of the landscape should be taken in consideration. A difficult task, since people all think
different about the landscape.
Not only norms and values are important when planning and managing the landscape, history is also
an important topic which should be considered. In a biography of the landscape, a landscape can be
represented by different time periods and topics. The outcomes of this biography can be used in
management or planning decisions that have to be taken.
The case study municipalities are actively busy with landscape. In the policies landscape identity can
be identified very easily. Landscape biography is not often used, as follows from the checklists (see
the interviews and checklists report). Particularly, the landscape development plans of the case study
municipalities can be linked with the ELC very well. The spatial development plans and the external
appearance of buildings notes are not so connected to the ELC. It can be concluded that landscape
matters to municipalities, although very few municipalities have been researched.
xvi
1
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Nature and landscape in the Netherlands a short history In 1905 nature and landscape conservation officially started in the
Netherlands, with the foundation of the Society for the Protection of
Natural Monuments. Jac P. Thijsse took the initiative to prevent the
Naardermeer from becoming a waste disposal site. This society bought
the lake and the first natural monument of the society was born. Around
the 1920s the landscape began to change, due to technological
improvements and the need for jobs. Land consolidation processes took
place and the heathlands were reclaimed. The heath landscape
disappeared and land suitable for agricultural purposes was partitioned in
its place (Janssen, 2009; Van der Windt, 1995).
Dirk Hudig coordinated the first initiatives provinces had on landscape
conservation. His ideas about landscape conservation were based on the
British model of spatial planning. Not only Dirk Hudig was inspired by a
foreign spatial planning system, Hendrik Cleyndert was inspired by the
national park movement of North America. He argued the Netherlands
should have a national plan in which landscape and nature hold a central
position. These ideas were presented in Amsterdam, in 1924, during a
conference on regional planning (Janssen, 2009).
In the Netherlands nature and landscape conservation before World War
II depended largely on private initiatives. The first years after World War II
nature and landscape conservation held no priority. Rebuilding cities and
the production of food had priority. Land consolidation was again used in
order to increase the make more areas suitable for agricultural
production. In the 1960s the value nature and landscape possess were
acknowledged and in 1966 the ideas of Cleyndert were integrated in the
Second Memorandum on Spatial Planning. Its successor (1974)
emphasized the relation between nature, landscape and agriculture.
Farmers could apply for a subsidy if they kept natural and/or cultural
qualities intact. Furthermore, national landscape parks were introduced in
the Third Memorandum on Spatial Planning. In the late 1970s the regional
and local level got more authority, in order to protect the landscapes in a
more efficient way. This was done in order to involve the local community
in protecting the landscapes. Farmers felt the level of nature and
landscape protection in these landscape parks was too high. In the 1980s
national landscape parks were transformed in National Landscapes, with
less rigid protection. In 1982 a shift in nature and landscape protection
became visible. The government at that time was willing to implement
nature and landscape in the national policies. However, the national
landscape parks no longer existed (Janssen, 2009).
Foundation of Society for the Protection of natural monuments
•1905
Heathland reclamation and land consilidation processes
•1920s
Hudig and Cleyndert are inspired by foreign planning systems
•1924
Private initiatives to protect nature and landscape
•1900s till 1940
Rebuilding cities and emphasising food production
•1945 till 1960
Nature and landscape are revalued
•1960s
2nd Memorandum on Spatial planning
•1966
3rd Memorandum on Spatial planning
•1974
Nature and landscape in national policies, national landscape parks no longer exist
•1982
2
In the late 1990s cultural landscape conservation became again an issue. In
1999 the Belvedere memorandum was introduced, which stimulated spatial
planners to include culture in their policies and plans. Landscapes should be
conserved by allowing the landscape to change (Janssen, 2009). Around the
same time a scientific approach towards cultural planning established. The
Protecting and Developing the Dutch Archaeological-Historical Landscape
programme (PDL/BBO programme) was carried out from 2000 to 2010 (Van
der Valk, 2014). In 2005 the Netherlands signed the European Landscape
Convention (Council of Europe, 2014a). This treaty is about landscape and by
signing this treaty the Netherlands should fulfil the aims the Council of
Europe sketched in the convention (Council of Europe, 2000a). In figure 1 a
short summary of the Dutch nature and landscape conservation is listed.
Figure 1: Timeline nature and landscape issues in the Netherlands
1.2 The European Landscape Convention The European Landscape Convention (ELC) is a convention that is made up by the Council of Europe.
Since 2000, European member states can sign and ratify this treaty. By signing and ratifying this
treaty, the state’s goal is to meet the aims of the ELC. The ELC’s aims are protecting, managing and
planning the landscape in a way that the landscape and its inhabitants are the main points of
interest. In the convention landscape is defined as follows: ‘’an area, as perceived by people, whose
character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors’’ (Council of
Europe, 2000a). The treaty is not only focussed on ‘special’ landscapes, as described by the definition
of landscape from the Council of Europe, but the treaty also focusses on the everyday landscapes as
well (Council of Europe, 2000a).
Nowadays, forty states have signed the ELC. Two states have not ratified the treaty yet (Iceland and
Malta). The Netherlands signed and ratified the treaty in 2005 (Council of Europe, 2014a). In the ELC
some measures are mentioned which the countries who ratified the treaty should fulfil. These
measures should be taken by the Netherlands as well, since the Netherlands signed and ratified the
ELC. The topics that are discussed in these measures are linked with the aims of the convention and
the following topics: integrating landscape in a law or in multiple laws, awareness-raising, training
and education, participation, taking care of the quality of the different landscapes and implementing
the invented measures (Council of Europe, 2000a; Council of Europe, 2000b).
As De Montis (2014) mentions the implementation of the ELC depends on the government system
and its landscape planning traditions. The author states that planning systems across Europe differ
from one country to another. A general planning system which is applicable on all European
countries cannot be formulated. In the Netherlands a comprehensive planning system can be
identified (Montis, 2014). In the Netherlands, three different levels of government can be
distinguished, namely: the state, provinces and municipalities. There is a hierarchy between these
levels. The state is the highest level of government and is able to create new laws or adjust existing
ones. Provinces are the middle level and should follow the policies and laws of the state.
Furthermore, the provinces need to keep an eye on the policies and zoning plans of the
Belvedere memorandum
•1999 tilll 2009
PDL/BBO programme
•2000 till 2010
Signing the ELC
•2005
3
municipalities. In case the municipality is not following the guidelines of the province, the province
needs to point these municipalities to this case. Municipalities are the lowest level government. They
need to meet the expectations of the state and the province in their policies and zoning plans
(Kistenkas, 2010).
1.2.1 Recent programmes dealing with landscape in the Netherlands
In the Netherlands before the ELC was signed and ratified, landscape already played an important
role. A policy in which landscapes are a central issue is the Belvedere programme. The Belvedere
programme started in 1999 and ended in 2009. This programme started before the ELC was signed
and ratified by the Netherlands. Its main goal was to integrate spatial planning and heritage
conservation. Heritage in general, provides opportunities for leisure and tourism activities. An
opportunity like this asks for the involvement of spatial planners (Janssen, Luiten, Renes &
Rouwendal, 2014). The problem which the Belvedere programme tried to solve was the different
attitudes towards landscapes. On one side the rigid protection of cultural heritage can be identified,
while on the other side the landscape is changing constantly (Luiten, 2013). By the Belvedere
programme cultural planning became more appreciated and used in the Netherlands (Janssen et al.,
2014).
Another programme which has a focus on landscape too, is the Protecting and Developing the Dutch
Archaeological-Historical Landscape programme (PDL/BBO programme). As well as the Belvedere
policy, the PDL/BBO programme is considered with the thought: ‘conservation through
development’. In the PDL/BBO programme archaeologists, spatial planners and historical
geographers worked on their own area of expertise and in cooperation with other scientific
disciplines or experts. In this programme people were working together in order to make invisible
landscapes visible again. Historic elements play a central role in doing this. Whereas the Belvedere
policy had a more practical perspective, the PDL/BBO programme had a more scientific perspective
(Van der Valk, 2010).
1.2.2 The Dutch attitude towards the ELC
In 2005 after the Netherlands signed the ELC the Landscape manifesto was created. By this manifest
NGO’s of different backgrounds agreed to pay, for a minimum of three years, special attention to the
Dutch landscape. The manifest has been written in line with the ELC. Considering the Belvedere
policy and the Landscape manifesto the Netherlands succeeded quite well in complying with the
expectations from the Council of Europe. In 2008 another agreement was made between the
government, provinces, municipalities and organizations which have influence on the landscape.
Again an agreement was made for three years. In 2011 no new manifest or agreement was made. On
a national level the attention the landscape has diminished. Due to changes in policies and the
creation of new policies, more is expected from provinces and municipalities. How and if the
provinces and municipalities will cope with the care for the landscape depends on the provinces and
municipalities themselves. Although the Netherlands has no national policy anymore, the
Netherlands still has to meet the criteria of the ELC (Dessing & Pedroli, 2013).
In December 2013, the government advisor for the landscape, has given advice about implementing
the ELC in the current Dutch planning system. Luiten (2013) states that the decision of the state to
quit the active landscape policy does not have to mean that the Netherlands does not meet the
criteria of the ELC anymore. Since there is no official decentralisation of taking care for the
4
landscape, Luiten (2013) suggests that the Netherlands may only meet the criteria of the ELC
depending on the attitude and policies of the provinces (Luiten, 2013). The government quit the
national policy without consulting the provinces about the future of the landscape policy (Dessing &
Pedroli, 2013). Although, a national policy does not exist anymore, most provinces give some
directions to landscape policy (Luiten, 2013).
1.3 Problem description and problem statement From the previous paragraphs it can be argued that the Netherlands has carried out a quite efficient
policy on the landscape. Since two major programmes, the Belvedere programme and the PDL/BBO
programme, have been executed and recently ended. These programmes have had an impact on the
appearance of the Dutch landscape and the cooperation between different stakeholders. Whereas
both programmes have ended and the state has no nationwide policy anymore, it is unclear if the
Netherlands still meets the ELC in the future. Luiten (2013) argued that most provinces have said
something about the landscape in their spatial development strategy (Luiten, 2013). However, how
municipalities deal with the landscape and therefore the ambitions of the ELC is still unclear.
Whereas the Dutch policy for the landscape is unofficially decentralised, the attitude and policies of
municipalities should be taken in consideration as well. The municipal level and the implementation
of the ELC at this level have not been researched yet. Since, the responsibility of municipalities
became bigger by this informal decentralisation it is important to research the municipal level as
well. Not only from a scientific perspective, but also from a societal perspective. When people will
change something in their direct environment, the municipality is the first governmental level which
they have to deal with. At the moment there is too little knowledge about the way Dutch
municipalities handle landscape in their planning and management practices. Whereas the local level
has become more important in planning and managing the landscape it is important to conduct a
research towards this topic.
1.4 Case studies This research will focus on four Dutch municipalities, all located within the same province. In the
province of Overijssel, the municipalities of Dalfsen, Raalte, Zwolle and Deventer are selected as case
study areas. In figure 2 the location of the province and the municipalities can be viewed. The
municipalities of Dalfsen and Raalte can be considered as rural municipalities. The municipalities of
Zwolle and Deventer can be considered urban (regarding to Dutch standards).
5
Figure 2: Map of the province of Overijssel (Imergis, 2013)
1.4.1 Dalfsen
The municipality of Dalfsen is a rural
municipality, located in the Vechtdal region.
The municipality can be reviewed in figure 3.
There are about 27,000 inhabitants who live
in this municipality. The landscape of the
municipality is highly valuated by its
inhabitants. Diverse landscapes can be
identified. Along the river Vecht, near
Dalfsen, the river landscape can be identified,
while the young heath reclamation
landscapes can be found near Nieuwleusen,
see figure 3 (BMC Advies en Management,
2009).
Figure 3: Map of the municipality of Dalfsen (Imergis, 2013)
6
1.4.2 Raalte
The municipality of Raalte is
located in the region Salland and is
composed of nine villages and the
outskirts of these villages. There
are about 37,000 inhabitants who
live in this municipality. Raalte is
the biggest village, 19,000
inhabitants live in this settlement,
while the smallest village
(Lierderholthuis) only has about
400 inhabitants. The villages are all
characterised by their own
identity. In the outskirts of the
municipality the rural character is
clearly visible. In the rural area,
around Heino, see figure 4, many
estates can be noticed. Cultural
historical elements of the past are
still clearly visible around Heino
(Boersma, Ruyssenaars, Tap and
Figure 4: Map of the municipality of Raalte (Imergis, 2013) Witberg, 2012).
1.4.3 Zwolle
The municipality of Zwolle is
located in the IJsseldelta region.
About 113,000 people live in the
city of Zwolle, which is a
relatively young city. This can be
related to the higher education
facilities which are located in
the city. National Landscape
IJsseldelta is partially located in
the municipality of Zwolle. This
National Landscape consists of
the polder of Mastenbroek (see
figure 5). It is one of the key
qualities of the outskirts of
Zwolle. The historic inner city is
one of the qualities of the city.
The history of the Hanze cities
can still be noticed while
walking around the city
(Gemeente Zwolle, 2008).
Figure 5: Map of the municipality of Zwolle (Imergis, 2013)
7
1.4.4 Deventer
Figure 6: Map of the municipality of Deventer (Imergis, 2013)
The municipality of Deventer is another former Hanze city and the historical inner city of Deventer is
one of the main qualities as well. The city of Deventer is located near the river IJssel, see figure 6,
which holds a central position in the city landscape. The municipality of Deventer is located in the
region Salland. About 90,000 people live in Deventer, most of the inhabitants live in the city. In the
outskirts, many estates can be recognized which characterize the landscape (Gemeente Deventer,
2004).
1.5 Research objective, questions and relevance This research aims at providing an insight in the way Dutch municipalities deal with landscape in their
policies. The research consists of a case study towards Dalfsen, Raalte, Zwolle and Deventer. By
identifying the way of planning and managing the landscape in these municipalities, it becomes
possible to state whether these municipalities meet the requirements as stated by the Council of
Europe. Whereas, different states and Dutch provinces have been studied already, this research aims
at the way municipalities deal with landscape. In this way a complete picture of dealing with
landscape in the Netherlands can be created and it can therefore be argued to which extent the
Netherlands and in special the case study municipalities meet the requirements of the ELC.
In this research the relationship between landscape and the manner Dutch municipalities cope with
the concept landscape will be studied. In order to reach the objective of this research the following
main question will be answered:
‘How do municipalities in Overijssel cope with landscape planning and landscape management in
their policies and to what extent can this be related to the aims the Council of Europe sketched in the
European Landscape Convention?’
Landscape planning, landscape management and the ELC and its aims are the central elements in the
main question. Since, these elements are important when it comes to answering the main question
the following sub questions have to be answered first:
8
What guidelines and rules do the European Union, the Dutch government and the province
of Overijssel give towards municipalities about landscape planning and landscape
management?
o This question deals with policies and laws from higher level governments. Since,
higher level governments might have an influence on the way municipalities plan and
manage the landscape.
When dealing with landscape planning and landscape management on a local level, which
norms and values are at stake and from who?
o Norms and values that come along during a local planning or management issue are
the point of interest of this question.
What role does the biography of landscape play in planning and managing the landscape on a
local level?
o This question aims at clarifying the role the landscape biography concept plays in
planning and management issues considering landscape.
How are the municipalities of Dalfsen, Raalte, Zwolle and Deventer handling landscape
planning and landscape management in their policies?
o Several policies of the case study municipalities are assessed on the presence of
landscape, planning and management, identity and biography of landscape.
Once all the sub questions are answered it becomes possible to give an answer to the main question.
This research is scientifically relevant, since it focusses on landscape on a local level in relation to the
ELC. Towards the ELC and its implementation, many different researches have been conducted.
However, at Dutch local level there has not yet been a research. By focussing on four case study
municipalities an in-depth research is structured and conducted. The municipalities of Dalfsen,
Raalte, Zwolle and Deventer will be thoroughly explored for the presence of landscape in their
policies. Furthermore, this research is relevant to society. Since it shows the Dutch municipal attitude
towards landscape, again related to the ELC. By completing this research a coherent story can be told
on dealing with landscape in relation to the ELC, which is based on several case studies.
1.6 Chapter overview This research consists of nine different chapters. Chapter one has provided an introduction to the
ELC, the problem is stated, the case study areas are introduced, the research objective and questions
are mentioned and the scientific and societal relevance are stated. The introduction is followed by
the theoretical framework. In chapter two the relevant concepts are discussed after which the
relations between the concepts are clarified. Chapter three continues with the methods. In this
chapter it is described how the research has been carried out. A distinction in different resources can
be identified. For every resource type, the way of collecting and analysing the data is discussed. In
chapter four policies and laws of higher level governments are discussed, relations with the local
level are made as well. In chapter five the norms and values hold a central place, it is discussed in
relation to the local level as well. Chapter six is dealing with the landscape biography concept and to
what extent this concept can be identified within the local policies. Chapter seven is dealing with
landscape planning and management in the local policies. Furthermore, the relation to the aims and
definitions of the ELC are clarified. Chapter eight discusses the findings reported in the chapters four
until seven and eventually ends with the conclusion of the research. The last chapter consists of the
bibliography in which the used resources are mentioned.
9
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1 Landscape In this research the main concept is landscape. In the ELC landscape is defined as: ‘’an area, as
perceived by people, whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or
human factors’’ (Council of Europe, 2000a). In scientific literature different opinions and definitions
of the landscape concept exist. In this research the definition of the ELC is the main guiding principle.
However, other opinions and definitions will be discussed as well, in order to get a better
understanding of the definition used in the ELC.
2.1.1 Perspectives upon the landscape
Printsmann, Kõivupuu and Palang (2011) distinguish two different typologies of landscape. They
divided landscape in the ideational landscape and the physical landscape. The ideational landscape
deals with the imaginative and emotional feelings towards landscape. This type of landscape is
represented in words, pictures and feelings people have towards places. In its essence, the
imaginative landscape is more about the social landscape. On the other hand the physical landscape
can be identified. The physical landscape is related to the different elements that make up the
landscape (Printsmann et al., 2011).
Palang, Spek and Stenseke (2011) state three different perspectives from which the landscape should
be assessed in order to understand the landscape. These are the: physical landscape, social
landscape and mindscape. Again the physical landscape deals with the physical elements of the
landscape. Research towards the physical landscape is mainly done from the natural sciences. The
social landscape deals with the social world, which is related to the physical world. This perspective is
mainly researched by the social sciences. Both the physical and the social landscape show similarities
with the different landscapes of Printsmann et al., (2011). However, Palang et al., (2011) go a step
further and mention a third perspective, the mindscape. Mindscape again is related to the landscape.
Individual perception of the landscape is highly important when dealing with mindscape. Since, this
perspective deals more with the individual, mainly environmental psychologists study this
perspective towards landscape.
Palang, et al. (2011) distinguish three different perspectives from which a landscape can be analysed.
According to Jacobs (2006) it is common to analyse phenomena from three different perspectives.
Jacobs (2006) does the same for landscape. In his triple landscape ontology he distinguishes three
different modes of landscape, these are: matterscape, powerscape and mindscape. Matterscape
deals with landscape in an objective manner. The physical landscape is the main issue in this mode.
By assessing the facts provided by the landscape, an objective picture of the landscape can be made.
It can be compared with the physical landscape of Palang et al. (2011) and Printsmann et al. (2011).
The powerscape deals with the way people act and behave in the landscape. Social elements in
relation to the landscape are the most important in this way of assessing the landscape. This type of
landscape research can be compared with the social landscape of Palang et al. (2011). Mindscape is
about the way people perceive and experience the landscape. Feelings of individuals or groups are
the focus point in this landscape typology. It can be compared with the ideational landscape of
Printsmann et al. (2011) and the mindscape of Palang et al. (2011). Jacobs (2006) mentions that the
different landscape modes provide a good base for understanding the landscape. Although landscape
is a complex concept, which cannot be simply divided into three different perspectives.
10
Table 1: Authors and their views upon landscape
Jacobs (2006) Palang et al. (2011) Printsmann et al.
(2011)
Physical Matterscape Physical landscape Physical landscape
Social Powerscape Social landscape -
Personal Mindscape Mindscape Ideational landscape
In Table 1 the different dimensions and formulations of landscape are listed. It appears that Jacobs
(2006) and Palang et al. (2011) view landscape from the threefold landscape ontology as mentioned
by Jacobs (2006). Printsmann et al. (2011) distinguishes two different dimensions. The social
landscape is not mentioned by these authors. Although, it can be argued that the personal landscape
is a form of a social landscape as well.
2.1.2 Changing landscapes
Considering landscape not only different perspectives should be taken in consideration. As Antrop
(2005) mentions it is not possible to preserve past landscapes. As he states in his article: ‘’Landscapes
always change because they are the expression of the dynamic interaction between natural and
cultural forces in the environment’’ (Antrop, 2005, page 22). This quote clearly shows landscapes are
changing. From a cultural heritage perspective, Vervloet (2007) states the same. He claims every
element in the landscape (e.g. buildings, churches) is due to development affected by change, which
results in a different landscape. So it is almost impossible to preserve landscapes of the past.
Landscapes are complex, in order to understand the landscape the history of the landscape should be
understood. This history matters, because landscapes consist of elements of different time periods
(Vervloet, 2007).
According to Antrop (2005) there are four main driving forces that result in changing landscapes,
these are: accessibility, urbanization, globalization and calamities. First, accessibility, if a landscape is
not accessible for people, it can be called a natural landscape. If such a landscape becomes accessible
for people, it changes rapidly. Transportation can be linked to the accessibility of a place, because if
the transportation improves, the accessibility is also likely to improve. Second, urbanization plays a
role in changing landscapes as well. When more people leave the countryside and live in cities, the
landscape changes. This development affects villages as well as cities and therefore results in a
different landscape. Third, globalization processes which have an impact on the world might also
have an impact on the local level. These global processes might affect the local politics and can result
in a changing landscape. Fourth, calamities have an impact on the landscape as well. After a calamity,
politics will make sure such a disaster will not happen again (or reduce the impact). In order to let
people feel safe again, changes in the landscape might be necessary (Antrop, 2005).
2.1.3 Landscape as a connecting concept
Tress and Tress (2001) acknowledge the fact that landscape is a popular research object in many
different research disciplines. All disciplines make use of the term landscape and relating concepts in
diverse ways. Tress and Tress (2001) argue that landscape from different (scientific) perspectives are
important. They argue that natural and social sciences matter to landscape as well as landscape
architecture and arts. Transdisciplinary researchers are needed in order to bridge the gap between
scientific research and society. Nowadays, collaboration between different scientific and social
11
disciplines is needed, since social and landscape issues have become more complicated. In order to
make use of landscape as a unifying concept, five different dimensions in the landscape are
important. These are: landscape as a spatial entity, landscape as a mental entity, landscape as a
temporal dimension, landscape as a nexus of nature and culture and landscape as a complex system
(Tress & Tress, 2001, page 147). These different dimensions together make up a landscape. People
interact with the landscape, which makes it even more difficult to deal with landscape as a unifying
concept. When using transdisciplinary landscape research, it is important to include personal
relationships with the landscape. In this way the outcomes of the research can be used in practical
situations (Tress & Tress, 2001).
In line with the reasoning of Tress and Tress (2001), Elerie and Spek (2010) suggest to make use of
the landscape as a unifying concept. Since people feel attached to places where they live, work and
recreate, everybody can imagine something when hearing the word landscape. Therefore, landscape
is a suitable concept to integrate research from different scientific disciplines or integrate scientific
and practical knowledge. However, there is not one ultimate definition of landscape, various
interpretations of the concept can be identified. When combining different scientific disciplines or
types of knowledge with each other, these different definitions of landscape should be taken into
account as well. The ELC provides a good basis to make use of landscape as a unifying concept (Elerie
& Spek, 2010).
In the ELC landscape is treated in relation to policies, quality objectives, protection, management and
planning (Council of Europe, 2000a). By emphasizing these different perspectives on landscape a
coherent and full understanding of the concept landscape can be formulated. This allows people with
different backgrounds (not necessarily professional backgrounds) to handle, take care off and deal
with the landscape they live in (Council of Europe, 2000a; Council of Europe, 2000b). Planning and
managing the landscape will be the main point of interest in this research. Especially, how
municipalities deal with the physical landscape they have to govern. The physical landscape will be
used to learn more about the way municipalities take care of the landscape.
It can be argued that landscape can be discussed, defined and used in many different ways. These
different perspectives on the landscape, all provide different information on the landscape. Taking
these perspectives together provides a coherent story of the landscape. Whereas the focus in this
Box 1: Landscape as a unifying concept in the rural landscapes of Denmark
Agricultural activities have a huge impact on the landscape. In Denmark landscape as a unifying
concept is used to find out whether farms are willing to produce in a more organic way. In order
to find out how farmers were thinking about organic farming, the different landscape dimensions
were used as a starting point. As an example, the spatial and mental dimensions are closely
related, because the soils of the landscape are needed to let the farmer grow his crops. If this is
done in a ‘regular’ or organic way has an impact on the landscape. The research found out that
‘regular’ farmers are not willing to shift to organic production. On the other side, new organic
farmers are entering the Danish agriculture. These people were not represented in the
agricultural business before, so a new group of farmers is represented in the agricultural sector.
As this example shows, the Danish agricultural farmers are quite diverse and so a diverse
agricultural landscape can be identified in Denmark (Tress and Tress, 2001).
12
research lies mainly on the way municipalities deal with the landscape in their policies, the main
point of interest is the physical landscape. From this perspective, the landscape will be assessed in an
objective way (Jacobs, 2006). As a second perspective the social landscape will be used. After all,
society holds a central position in the ELC (Council of Europe, 2000a). The mindscape perspective will
not be used in this research, since the feelings of individual persons toward landscape will not be
studied.
2.2 Landscape planning and landscape management From the previous paragraph it can be deduced that both Antrop (2005) and Vervloet (2007) have a
positive attitude towards changing landscapes. How to manage these changing landscapes and cope
with these changes in a sufficient way is mentioned by these authors as well.
2.2.1 Difficulties in managing and planning the landscape
Antrop (2005) states that landscapes are difficult to manage. He ascribes this not only to the dynamic
relation between culture and nature. Landscapes consist of many pieces of land all owned by
different people. Whereas these pieces of land are private, landscape is perceived as something
common. Land use planning is important when managing the landscape. Since, land use changes are
directly linked with land use planning. Dealing with this difficult relation is something that land use
planners should do. A policy document is a common way to set some guidelines and thus manage the
changing landscape. In order to preserve landscapes, the functions of the landscape should be
controlled. Changes required from citizens should also be taken into account.
Citizens ask for policies in order to know what their rights are. Citizens not only request policies,
participation is important as well. During the past fifty years cultural heritage management became
less a job of the elite. People of different (cultural) backgrounds started to cooperate in order to
manage the landscape in which they live (Vervloet, 2007).
When managing the landscape Antrop (2006) points towards three main challenges policymakers,
researchers and managers should deal with when planning, researching or managing the landscape.
The first challenge deals with monitoring. In order to anticipate changing landscapes, monitoring
these changes provides an insight in previous changes. The second challenge he identifies deals with
the sustainability and multifunctional use of the landscape. The last challenge has to do with new
forms of dealing with the landscape (Antrop, 2006). Nowadays, people handle and think differently
Box 2: Cooperation between diverse cultural heritage organisations in Nijmegen
In Nijmegen many different institutions and volunteers are actively involved with cultural
heritage. In 2005, about 25 organisations decided to join the strengths of the separate
organisations and so the Cultuurhistorisch Platform Rijk van Nijmegen (CPRN) was founded. The
CPRN consists of a diversity of members and is focussed on sharing knowledge, cooperation
between organisations and taking care of the culture history of Nijmegen. In 2007, the platform
advised the municipality of Nijmegen to take care of the cultural heritage of the city based on
three different time periods, namely: the Roman past, the Middle Ages and Industrial heritage. If
possible activities concerning the cultural heritage should be combined with the renovation or
preservation of the cultural heritage. Connecting activities to the cultural heritage of the city, will
make the inhabitants more aware of the past city landscapes (CPRN, 2014).
13
about the landscape, which results in other elements that should be available in the landscape. It is
up to planners, researchers and managers to deal with this changing attitude and lead the changing
landscape in the right direction. These challenges might be complex to deal with, but dealing with
them will lead to a better understanding and use of the landscape.
2.2.2 Dynamic approaches towards landscape planning and management
Landscapes change constantly, therefore it is important to take note of landscape planning and
landscape management. These two concepts can be used to analyse and describe the current
landscape and attitude towards landscape. In this research landscape planning and landscape
management as used in the ELC will be the main point of interest. The critical notes of Antrop (2005;
2006) and Vervloet (2007) have made it clear that planning and managing the landscape is dynamic,
since landscapes are changing constantly. When planning and managing, the social landscape should
be integrated as well, since people are the main users of the landscape.
Quality of the landscape is important to consider as well. However, it is quite difficult to define a high
or low qualitative landscape. Central to the quality of landscapes are people. People rate landscapes
differently because of their different backgrounds and interests. When planning and managing the
landscape it is therefore important to consider the wishes of the inhabitants of the landscape
(Jacobs, 2006).
In the ELC landscape planning and landscape management are mentioned as well. In the ELC
landscape planning is defined as: ‘’strong forward-looking action to enhance, restore or create
landscapes’’ (Council of Europe, 2000a). It is up to the countries who signed and ratified the treaty, to
set guidelines for planning the landscape. Thereby, it is important to pay attention towards future
developments and allow interested people and governments to participate or react on the policy. In
order to reach the goal of the ELC, policies are an important measure. It is important, not only on
national level to keep the ELC and the states guidelines for landscapes in mind, because the regional
and local levels landscapes are important as well. By stating landscape explicitly in a policy, it
becomes easier to protect, plan and manage the landscape (Council of Europe, 2000b). Every
landscape has its own value, therefore it is necessary to plan and manage landscapes carefully.
Landscape management is defined as: ‘’action, from a perspective of sustainable development, to
ensure the regular upkeep of a landscape, so as to guide and harmonise changes which are brought
about by social, economic and environmental processes’’ (Council of Europe, 2000a). When dealing
with landscape management, again it is important to let citizens participate in managing the
landscape. In the policy, guidelines for managing different landscapes are given. When dealing with
landscape management it is important to handle a dynamic approach and search for ways to improve
the current landscape quality (Council of Europe, 2000b).
In this research, the definitions of the ELC will be the guiding principle. Whereas people and their
relation to the landscape are important, when dealing with landscape planning and management,
participation will be kept in mind as well. Planning and management ask for integration between
policymakers and layman. Quality of the landscape, sustainability and multifunctional use of land are
important factors to keep in mind when assessing the different policy documents.
14
2.3 Landscape biography
2.3.1 History of the landscape biography concept
Related to the definition of the ELC and the concept landscape, landscape biography is another
important concept. Landscape biography was first introduced by Samuels (1979). He argues that
people create the landscape. How a landscape biography looks, depends on the people who inhabit
the landscape. In a landscape biography it is not only about the current landscape, past landscapes
and events are important as well, because these landscapes contribute towards shaping a landscape
biography (Samuels, 1979).
Another early concept which had an impact on the formation of landscape biography is the cultural
biography of objects. Kopytoff (1986) states that objects have a biography, just like people. How the
biography of an object looks, depends on the point of view with which people examine the object. By
looking at biographies of people and objects, an understanding of the social system and its collective
understandings can be noted (Kopytoff, 1986).
In the Netherlands, landscape biography is introduced by Jan Kolen (Baas, Groenewoudt and Raap,
2011; Elerie & Spek, 2010). On the one hand the material landscape is identified, while on the other
hand the world of ideas, meanings, representations and memories given to the landscape can be
distinguished (Kolen, 1993 in Elerie & Spek, 2010). This interpretation of landscape biography
provides an opportunity to deal with the struggle between the material landscape and personal
feelings towards landscape. The concept can be used as an inspiration source, for many different
stakeholders. It can be a useful concept from a scientific perspective, a professional perspective or
from the residents perspective. Since, different types of knowledge will be combined as well as
different backgrounds. The use of language should be adapted to the stakeholders involved (Elerie &
Spek, 2010).
2.3.2 Landscape biography in the Netherlands
Kolen and Witte (2006) argue that landscape biography is a useful instrument when dealing with
regional identities and spatial planning. The different dimensions of the landscape should be made
explicit, since not only one dimension of the physical landscape matters. In order to make a solid and
thorough biography of the landscape, multiple dimensions and layers of the landscape should be
made explicit. By using different layers a right balance between material and interpretive can be
made (Kolen & Witte, 2006).
The landscape biography concept makes it possible to view, assess and describe the landscape in
different ways. Landscape will not only be assessed in a physical way, also the social and mental
reality need to be considered. Since landscape biography takes in consideration multiple perspectives
on the landscape, it can sometimes be difficult to implement the landscape biography concept in a
satisfying way (Baas et al., 2011). Elerie and Spek (2010) consider landscape biography as an inspiring
concept to deal with different stakeholders. In projects where layman, policymakers and
organizations have to deal with each other, landscape biography can be used to share different types
of knowledge in a way that all participants understand (Elerie & Spek, 2010). Also Baas et al. (2011)
see opportunities in making use of the landscape biography concept, by combining landscape history
with landscape architecture or spatial planning (Baas et al., 2011).
15
Palang et al. (2011) mention in their article that landscape biography is a concept that can be very
useful in the Dutch spatial planning system. In the Netherlands it has become a popular instrument
to describe, analyse and explain the development of the landscape. The landscape should be
explained from different views, these are: the physical elements, behaviour and cultural values.
These elements are all interrelated and together they represent the biography of landscape. Central
in the landscape biography approach is the idea that landscapes change. Landscapes change, because
the way people handle the landscape depends on the time. The past landscapes have not gone, they
can still be discovered and seen in the current landscape (Reuselaars & Van der Valk, 2009).
A programme in which landscape biography had a central role is the PDL/BBO programme. According
to Hidding, Kolen and Spek (2001) there are several aspects that need to be considered when dealing
with the biography of places. The concept is applicable in a broad way. Every community, village or
city has its own history and thus different landscapes and biographies exist. People have positive and
negative feelings towards places in their environment, mostly due to events that happened in
history, which play a role in the formation of a landscape biography. When creating a landscape
biography, the stories of the (previous) inhabitants are important. Central in the biography of
landscape concept is the idea that: landscape is a continuous phenomenon, every generation adds
their own elements to the landscape. This concept provides opportunities to integrate the past,
present and future landscape. Making use of a landscape biography might provide relics of the past
with another function in the future (Hidding et al., 2001).
Based on the PDL/BBO programme, Vervloet, van Beek and Keunen (2010) distinguish three different
viewpoints from which the biography of landscape can be assessed. These viewpoints are based on:
the perspective of the present inhabitants and users, the perspective of the past inhabitants and
users and the narrative of the landscape. The first viewpoint deals with the history of the landscape,
as perceived by the present inhabitants and users of the landscape. Stories are the central element in
this viewpoint. The second viewpoint deals with the way previous inhabitants and users perceived
and used the landscape. When making use of this viewpoint, spatial patterns and activities from
previous generations can be revealed. The third viewpoint deals with the narrative of the landscape.
In this viewpoint the dynamics of the landscape are the central element. Objects, patterns and
structures within the landscape will be described, from a scientific point of view. Which viewpoint is
taken depends on the goal of the research. In order to compile a solid biography of landscape the
goal should be kept in mind and aspects which will be researched should be connected to this
particular goal (Vervloet et al., 2010). Kolen (2007) makes clear that the biography of landscape is a
concept which can be used from different scientific disciplines. It should be taken in mind that a
biography of landscape is continuous and ever changing, since landscapes are always there and
changing (Vervloet et al., 2010).
2.3.3 Landscape biography in practical situations
An ideal landscape biography should make the long-term history of a landscape or part of a
landscape clear. It is thereby important to pay attention to the changing land use functions and
important places in the (past) landscape. Knowledge gained during the construction of a landscape
biography might be used in the promotion of a certain landscape. Furthermore, authenticity can be
useful to consider the preservation, development or preservation through development of a certain
element or landscape (Kolen, 2007).
16
Landscape biography is a complex instrument to understand the landscape. Scientists, designers,
policymakers and citizens all have knowledge of the landscape. All of these people are important
when compiling a landscape biography (Reuselaars & Van der Valk, 2009). Hidding et al. (2001) state
the importance of the use of different types of knowledge as well. According to them it is important
to make use of local knowledge and expert knowledge when compiling a landscape biography. Of the
same landscape, multiple landscape biographies can be made up. Since, people give different
meanings to landscape, different biographies will exist. Whether a landscape biography is made from
a single persons’ perspective or a group perspective will have some effect on the outcome of a
biography as well.
Different perspectives towards landscape biography have been discussed. Whereas a landscape
biography can serve many purposes and made up from different perspectives, all approaches can be
used. In this research, the work of Kolen (1993, in Elerie & Spek, 2010) will be the guiding principle.
Since, it makes a distinction between the material world (physical landscape) and the world of ideas,
meanings, representations and memories given to the landscape (social landscape). Therefore, it can
be argued that this differentiation shows similarities with the division in physical and social
landscape. Furthermore, the (cultural) history of the landscape matters, since a biography can only
be compiled when something worth remembering or tracing back has happened in the landscape.
Not only the past matters when compiling a landscape biography, the present and the future need to
be considered as well. This will be viewed from a group perspective, which will be based upon the
different policy documents that will be studied.
2.4 Landscape identity Stobbelaar and Pedroli (2011) define landscape identity as: ‘’the unique psycho-sociological
perception of a place defined in a spatial-cultural sphere’’ (page 334). It is important to keep in mind
that there exist no good or bad landscapes, since landscape is perceived by everybody on its own
manner. Landscape identity is often related to a level that people can identify themselves with, such
as a national, regional or local level (Hospers, 2013). People often feel more attached to a landscape
on a lower level, since they view and participate in this landscape from day to day. The local level can
be placed in the regional level and also in the national level (Hospers, 2013; Stobbelaar & Pedroli,
2011). Place identity and regional identity are important in researching the landscape. Place identity
deals with a small area in the landscape, which has a specific meaning shown in unique and/or
Box 3: Biography of the Amersfoortseweg
The Amersfoortseweg is already founded around 1650. This road connected Amersfoort and
Utrecht with each other. Even though the road was going through a wide heath landscape, this
road could be easily identified (this was not common in this time). In order to reach an easily
identifiable road, the road was avoiding drifting sand areas and slopes. By this road the distance
between Amersfoort and Utrecht became less. In order to provide opportunities for land
development, crossroads were established. Although the development of the heath areas failed,
this road changed the image of the landscape at that time. The designing of the village of
Soesterberg was based upon the pattern of the Amersfoortseweg with its crossroads. Nowadays,
this pattern can still be identified. At the moment built-up areas are allowed within the areas
between the crossroads, the area outside is intended to serve nature and recreation purposes
(Abrahamse, Brinkkemper & Spek, 2008).
17
historical objects of the place. Regional identity on the other hand, deals with bigger areas. In
relation to this bigger areas, the geography, natural and cultural heritage of the region are important
(Stobbelaar & Pedroli, 2011).
A landscape identity is based upon the landscape. People of different countries have different
landscapes they appreciate. Kaplan and Kaplan (1989) in Hospers (2013) have identified four factors
which people use when determining whether they like or dislike a certain landscape. These factors
are: coherence, complexity, readability and mystery. People are more likely to appreciate a
landscape if separate landscape elements tell a coherent story. A level of complexity is needed as
well, since this makes people curious to find out more about the landscape. However, landscapes
should still remain readable in order to keep people’s attention. To some extent the landscape
should have some mystery in it, since it makes people curious what they can find if they go a little
further (Kaplan & Kaplan, 1989 in Hospers 2013).
2.4.1 Perspectives upon identity
Simon (2004) has done a research towards regional identities. Two different views on regional
identities can be distinguished, namely: the essentialist and the constructivist view. In the essentialist
view, identity is defined as something that is oblivious, static and homogeneous. According to this
view, identity is something that can be viewed in an objective way. Since, there is only one
explanation of the identity in a region, the identity of a region is the same for everybody. The
constructivist view is less rigid, since identity is seen as something which is dynamic. Different people
give different meanings to places and elements, therefore different identities will exist next to each
other. This view acknowledges multiple identities for one place. Identities can change, since the
feelings of people towards places changes during time (Simon, 2004). Bloemers (2010) states that
identity is a concept which is ever changing. Time and context have an influence on the formation of
an identity (Bloemers, 2010). This is in line with the argumentation of Simon (2004).
Simon (2004) notes the essentialist view upon identity became less attractive in the 1980s. As a
reaction upon this change of thoughts, the constructivist view began to establish. In this view people
are giving identity towards a place. This can be done by an individual or a group (Bosma, 2010;
Simon, 2004). Social constructions are contributing towards creating an identity. When people are
compiling a landscape identity, different features play a role. Physical elements in the landscape,
history, traditions and the local use of symbols all play a role in the compilation of a landscape
identity. Altogether these features can be described as identity markers, they make up the identity of
a landscape (Simon, 2004).
Box 4: ‘Beauty is in the eye of the beholder’
It is not strange that landscapes possess different identities. Landscapes do not mean the same
to everybody, so different identities can exist for the same landscape. A persons history
attributes to the shaping of a landscape identity. If someone had a bad experience in Groningen,
it is likely he/she will not like a similar landscape in a different place. Whereas the same
landscape means a lot to a person who lives in Groningen. Past and current experiences play a
role in the reasons why people like or dislike a certain landscape . Indeed, ‘Beauty is in the eye of
the beholder’(Hospers, 2013).
18
2.4.2 Factors influencing the formation of identity
Considering the formation of identity, different stakeholders can be distinguished. These people are
likely to create different identities, since they cope with the landscape in different ways. First, the
perspective of the layman. This perspective has to do with the everyday life where people interpret
and construct places. The second perspective deals with the different cultural and societal groups
that can be distinguished in society. Different groups might think differently about the landscape
identity. Thirdly, the professional perspective. People related to this perspective deal with landscape
and its identity on a professional base. These people are responsible for the development of the
landscape, this might lead to changes in the perception of the landscape identity as perceived by the
layman. The last perspective, is the academic perspective. Objects within the landscape are studied
by scientists. Since, people of the different perspectives deal in different ways with the landscape, it
is likely that their landscape identities will differ (Simon, 2004).
Stobbelaar and Hendriks (2006)
viewed the impact of certain factors
considering landscape identity. In
figure 7 the landscape identity circle
created by Stobbelaar and Hendriks
(2006) can be viewed. This circle
consists of four factors (cultural,
geographical, personal and
existential), which all have an impact
on landscape identity (Stobbelaar &
Hendriks, 2006).
Related to these four factors, are the
four different landscape identities
that can be distinguished. The first,
the cultural-geographical is about the
distinct features of a region. Most
important in this identity are the
everyday features that define one
place from another. The second, the
personal-geographical landscape
identity, deals with the perceived landscape. In this perspective the features and places do not have
the same meaning to individuals. The third, the personal-existential landscape identity, deals with
the meaning people give to a place. It is about the personal attachment to a place. The last, the
existential-cultural landscape identity, is also about the meaning people give to a place. However,
this identity differs from the third. In this identity it is not about personal identity, but about a group
identity. (Stobbelaar & Hendriks, 2006; Stobbelaar & Pedroli, 2011).
According to Bosma (2010) a landscape identity can occur on four different levels, these are:
individual, group, spatial and regional and political. An individual identity is made up by an individual
person. This identity is based upon an individual's interpretation of the surrounding landscape.
Personal environment and taste play a role in the formulation of this identity. Group identities, on
the other hand, deal with multiple individuals who contribute towards a group identity. A group
Figure 7: Landscape identity circle (Stobbelaar and Hendriks, 2006, page 202)
19
identity is mostly based upon a (sub) culture. People can identify themselves with such a group
identity. When dealing with spatial identity different elements in the landscape have their own
identity based upon the history of that element. In the regional and political identity, the regional or
national memory can be identified. As far as a regional or national memory exists, it is represented in
this level of identity (Bosma, 2010).
Different levels and categories of identity have been discussed by now. Just like the other concepts,
many different interpretations can be made. Considering spatial planning and the aim of this
research the cultural-geographical quadrant of Stobbelaar and Hendriks (2006) is the most
important. Since, this quadrant focusses on elements that were or are important in the landscape
and contribute to the identity of the landscape. Furthermore, different perspectives, levels and types
from which an identity is formulated will be kept in mind. Since, it depends on context and (personal)
background how a landscape identity is formulated.
2.5 Concepts in relation to each other Landscape can be identified as a concept on its
own. However, landscape holds a central
position in the other concepts as well. By now,
landscape, landscape planning and landscape
management, landscape biography and
landscape identity have been discussed on their
own. As follows from figure 8, landscape can be
considered the overarching concept. In order to
plan and manage the landscape, landscape
biography and landscape identity are important
concepts. The different relations that can be
identified will be discussed in this paragraph.
In the definition of the ELC, inhabitants of the landscape hold a central position (Council of Europe
2000a; 2000b). Therefore it can be argued that society is an important factor considering the
landscape. Since, inhabitants of the landscape give meaning to a particular landscape (Elerie & Spek,
2010; Hospers, 2013; Jacobs, 2006). The landscape is part of people’s identity and they are the
people who create a landscapes identity. People give identity towards landscape on many different
scales. The local scale is the level people identify themselves with most (Hospers, 2013). Multiple
identities of the landscape can exist. Backgrounds of people differ, therefore different identities can
be assigned to the same landscape (Simon, 2004).
Considering landscape planning and landscape management, in the Netherlands, the landscape
biography approach is commonly used when designing a landscape policy (Reuselaars & Van der
Valk, 2009). The biography of the landscape tells a story, which can be used in the landscape policy.
History matters when constructing a landscape biography. Different elements in the landscape find
their origin in different times (Vervloet, 2007). These elements tell the story of the landscape, which
can be told by the landscape itself and by its inhabitants. It is not only about the stories connected to
the landscape, current and past elements within the landscape matter as well. In many landscapes
elements of the past can still be traced back. These elements are a part of the identity of the
Figure 8: Diverse concepts and their relation to each other
20
landscape. Elements in the landscape which have a special meaning to its inhabitants, over a long
period of time, should be mentioned in a landscape biography (Kolen, 2007). It is likely that the
landscape identity is present in this biography as well. Since, the identity of landscape is constructed
by the inhabitants of the landscape and based upon the current and past landscapes (Simon, 2004).
When compiling a landscape biography, the current and past landscapes are important (Samuels,
1979). Both the current and past landscapes matter as well when compiling a landscape identity. In a
landscape biography as well as a landscape identity, past and present landscapes are important. In
order to decide upon protecting, planning and managing the landscape, it is important to make use
of the past as well as the present landscape.
Participation is helpful to let inhabitants of the landscape and policymakers and managers think
together about the landscape. It is one of the measures mentioned in the ELC (Council of Europe,
2000a; 2000b). Landscape and taking care of the landscape affects all inhabitants. Therefore it is
important that the people who live, work and recreate in the landscape decide together with the
policymakers, about the content of the policy (Council of Europe, 2000b). In order to let people
participate, landscape identity and landscape biography provide a good starting point. As Elerie and
Spek (2010) already pointed out, landscape is something everybody knows. Landscape identity and
landscape biography may provide a starting point, to start the discussion about landscape. In that
way the identity and history of the landscape are captured, which can be used considering landscape
planning and landscape management.
In the ELC emphasis is laid on the protection, planning and management of the landscape (Council of
Europe, 2000a; 2000b). As Antrop (2005) already pointed out it is difficult to manage the landscape.
Inhabitants of the same landscape have different opinions about developing and managing the
landscape. Landscape biography and landscape identity are concepts which can be used to explore
the landscape and the meaning of different places to its inhabitants.
21
3. METHODS In this chapter it is explained how the research has been carried out. This research consists of three
types of data that have been collected and analysed: scientific literature, policy documents of the
case study municipalities and interviews with the officers who are responsible for the landscape
policy. In order to give a short description of the research process, the diverse data resources will
each be discussed in terms of data collection and data analysis.
3.1 Scientific literature The scientific literature has been collected by means of a desk study. Landscape planning and
management have been the central topic in this research. Therefore different concepts related to
landscape planning and management have been studied. Central in this research have been the
concepts of landscape, landscape biography and landscape identity. In order to tell something about
the planning and management approach of the case study municipalities landscape planning and
management have been conceptualised as well. Whereas the ELC is part of this research, the
definitions of landscape, landscape planning and landscape management have been used as a central
definition within these concepts. For landscape, the different views upon the landscape (Jacobs,
2006; Palang et al., 2011; Printsmann et al., 2011) and the changeability of the landscape have been
the central topics. Landscape planning and management have been discussed from the idea that
landscapes change (Antrop, 2005; Reuselaars & Van der Valk, 2009; Vervloet, 2007). Landscape
biography and landscape identity have been discussed, since these concepts provide opportunities to
deal with landscape on a local level.
3.2 Policy documents This research has been focussed on the municipalities of Dalfsen, Raalte, Deventer and Zwolle. The
choice for this municipalities has been a conscious choice. These municipalities are all located within
the same province. Two rural (Dalfsen and Raalte) and two urban (Deventer and Zwolle)
municipalities have been chosen as case studies, in order to assess whether differences between the
rural and urban municipalities might exist. The case study municipalities have been introduced in the
introduction. One of the sub questions is specifically about the municipalities, so they needed to be
introduced before the question was stated.
Before assessing the municipal policies, the European, national and regional policies related to
landscape have been discussed. The discussed policies and laws are deduced from the interviews and
several related policies and laws have been discussed as well.
In order to assess whether these municipalities cope with landscape in a way related to the ELC,
policies related to landscape have been studied. Originally it was the idea to only analyse the
landscape development plan and the spatial development strategy of each municipality. After the
interview with the officer of the municipality of Deventer it was decided to analyse the external
appearance of buildings as well. In order to compare the policies of the different municipalities with
each other, it was necessary that all municipalities had such a policy. All municipalities hold these
policies, so it became possible to compare the municipalities with each other.
Roe (2013) compiled a research towards the presence of ELC principles in national and regional
policies. In order to carry this research out she came up with a checklist, which served as a source of
inspiration for the checklist that is used in this research. The checklist in Annex I is created and used
22
to analyse the policy documents of the case study municipalities. This checklist is based upon the
theoretical framework of this research. Every policy document has been assessed according to this
checklist. In total eleven documents have been analysed, whereas one should expect twelve (three
different policies times four different municipalities). However, the municipalities of Raalte and
Deventer, together with the municipality of Olst-Wijhe, have created a landscape development plan
together. After the policy document had been assessed the relation with the ELC was estimated,
according to a five point Likert-scale. These outcomes have been used to give an answer on the main
question of this research. The checklist in Annex I serves as an example, in the interviews and
checklist report all checklists that are filled in can be found.
3.3 Interviews In order to know more about the process behind designing the policies and the position of the
landscape policy in the municipalities, interviews have been arranged. These interviews were
scheduled with the officers who are taking care of the municipal landscape policies. The interview
consisted of eight open ended questions in order to let the interviewees tell their story. In Annex II
the interview questions are mentioned. The worked out interviews can be found in the interview and
checklist report. The results of the interviews have been used to illustrate or clarify the different
concepts.
Personal interviews have been scheduled with three out of four municipalities. The appointment
with the municipality of Dalfsen has been made with an officer who is responsible for the spatial
planning side of the landscape policies and not with the officer involved with the policy making.
Whereas summer holiday already started it was not possible to reschedule the appointment. Instead,
both officers have answered the interview questions by email. Appointments have been made with
the officers of the municipalities of Raalte, Zwolle and Deventer. In Table 2 some background
information on the interviews is given.
Table 2: Background information on the interviews.
Municipality Location of interview Date of interview Spoken with a …
Dalfsen - 30 June, 01, 02 & 03 July 2014*
Spatial planning officer and green and landscape officer*
Raalte Town hall 07 July 2014 Public space officer
Zwolle City office 04 July 2014 Green space officer
Deventer Location Leeuwenbrug 09 July 2014 Policy officer with a background in landscape architecture
*Contact by email
In general these interviews took a little longer than thirty minutes. These interviews have been
recorded, so it was easier to listen, respond to answers and work the interviews out. The interviews
have been carried out in Dutch and afterwards translated into English, which was sometimes hard
due to typical Dutch words that were used during the interview.
23
4. EUROPEAN, NATIONAL AND REGIONAL POLICIES AND LAWS
4.1 European level In the ELC it is mentioned that: developments in agriculture, forestry, industrial and mineral
production techniques and in regional planning, town planning, transport, infrastructure, tourism
and recreation and, at a more general level, changes in the world economy are in many cases
accelerating the transformation of landscapes (Council of Europe, 2000a, preamble).
The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is mentioned by the policy officer of the municipality of Raalte
as a European programme which had an influence on the landscape policy of the municipality of
Raalte. The CAP has a long history in Europe, this policy was already founded in 1962. From 1962
until now, the CAP has been altered several times. Whereas in the first decade the CAP was focussed
on fair prices for farmers, nowadays the CAP is more focussed on economic and ecological
competitiveness. Since the 1990s food quality has become more important. Hereby, the protection
and production of local and traditional foods is an important issue. In 1992 farmers were encouraged
to take care of their environment and perform their businesses in a sustainable way. The countryside
has become an important place to recreate. Whereas the rural landscapes within European countries
differ from each other, rural landscapes have become interesting places to go on a holiday or
recreate. It are the farmers who provide the rural landscapes where people can recreate (European
Commission, 2012). Agricultural land and forests make up about ninety per cent of the European
landscape (Europe, 2014). The CAP is therefore an important policy to consider in relation with the
ELC and specifically landscape.
The policy officer of the municipality of Raalte also mentioned the Water Framework Directive (WFD)
had an influence on their landscape policy. Every river basin in the EU has its own management plans
and programs of measures. Whereas the natural borders of the water are respected, developments
within the river basin can be adjusted to that specific situation. Whereas the WFD protects all waters,
policies on national, regional and local level need to take care of the guidelines that are valid in the
river basin they are a part of. A general rule is the following: In case of water contamination the
polluter pays. Other rules and/or guidelines can be made on basis of the river basins. Sustainability is
an important point of attention considering these rules and guidelines. Many activities have an
impact on the water, therefore it is important to make use of the water in a sustainable way
(European Commission, 2002).
The Birds and Habitats Directive is an important European
nature protection law. In this directive species and areas
are protected. Species are protected in the protected
areas as well as outside these areas. The areas which are
protected are known under the name of Special Protection
Area (SPA). All European SPAs taken together make up the
Natura 2000 network. On a national level these areas and
species have to be protected, which will be regulated in a
law. In the Netherlands, Natura 2000 areas are given legal
status in the Nature Protection Act (Kistenkas, 2010). In
figure 9 the Dutch SPAs are represented. Only a very small
part of the case study municipalities is assigned with a SPA. Figure 9: Birds and Habitats directive (Compendium voor de Leefomgeving, 2012)
24
In the ELC natural and cultural heritage are mentioned as basic part of the landscape (Council of
Europe, 2000a). Protection of valuable natural areas is regulated by the designation of Natura 2000
areas. The protection of cultural heritage is regulated in the Faro Convention. In the Faro Convention,
society holds an important place. In fact, the Faro Convention argues to place people in the centre of
the cultural heritage concept. It is a logical point of view, whereas raising awareness amongst people
is one of the goals of the Faro Convention (Council of Europe, 2005). Whereas the Faro Convention
provides a starting point in order to deal with cultural heritage, the Natura 2000 areas can be
designated as a starting point to protect the natural heritage. In the ELC both natural and cultural
heritage are given a prominent place, since cultural and natural heritage are a part of local cultures
and are important when giving an identity to the landscape (Council of Europe, 2000a). The
Netherlands has signed and ratified the ELC (Council of Europe, 2014a), however the Netherlands has
not signed nor ratified the Faro Convention (Council of Europe, 2014b). Although the Netherlands
has not signed the Faro Convention, cultural heritage is an important topic in the Netherlands.
It is obvious that these policies and laws are not the only ones that will have an impact on the
landscape. The CAP, WFD and Birds and Habitats Directive are specified since these regulations are
mentioned by interviewees of different municipalities. The policies and laws mentioned in this
paragraph are about agriculture, water and protected species and areas. Other legislation will have
an impact on the landscape as well. Whereas these are not specifically mentioned by the
interviewees, they are not further explored.
4.2 National level
4.2.1 Past national policies
After the Netherlands signed and ratified the ELC, several changes in landscape policy and laws have
been made. The Belvedere policy was a national policy from 1999 until 2009, nowadays it is a task of
the National Cultural Heritage Agency (Dessing & Pedroli, 2013). Just like the Belvedere policy, the
National Landscapes are no longer a national responsibility. National Landscapes have become a
regional responsibility (Dessing & Pedroli, 2013). Although the National Landscapes are no longer
guided by the national government, National Landscape IJsseldelta holds a firm position in the
municipality of Zwolle (in Kampen and Zwartewaterland as well). During the interview with the policy
officer of the municipality of Zwolle it turned out the National Landscape IJsseldelta holds a firm
position in policies of the municipality. ‘’The National Landscape is very clear, it has a status. The
main structures of the landscape can be traced back in every plan. In Zwolle, this has been always the
case. New developments follow the history of the landscape’’ (Policy officer of the municipality of
Zwolle, interviewed on 4 July 2014). As this quote shows, the position of the National Landscape is
important in the landscape policies of the municipality of Zwolle.
The municipalities of Dalfsen, Raalte, Zwolle and Deventer all made up a landscape development
plan. In previous years municipalities could get a subsidy from the national government, in order to
design and carry out actions concerning landscape. Nowadays, the subsidy on designing a landscape
development plan is no longer available (Dessing & Pedroli, 2013).
Another policy which is no longer operative is the National Spatial Strategy. In the National Spatial
Strategy two different types of landscapes were distinguished: specific landscape policy and generic
landscape policy. Specific landscape policy was dedicated to the National Landscapes (Kistenkas,
2010). Nowadays, responsibility for the National Landscapes is placed at a regional level (Dessing &
25
Pedroli, 2013). As Kistenkas (2010) points out National Landscapes are: ‘’Areas in which a special
cohesion exists between the diverse components of the landscape, like nature, natural landscape
relief, land use forms and built-up areas’’ (page 52). The generic landscape policy was concerned with
regional and local landscape policies outside the National Landscapes. In order to stimulate provinces
to take care of the landscape, a policy named developing landscape with quality was created. This
policy intended to take care of the natural and cultural qualities of the landscape as well as the user
friendliness and the experiences in relation to the landscape (Kistenkas, 2010). The generic landscape
policy could well be linked to the ELC, since natural and cultural landscapes were important in this
policy as well as the perception and experiences of people (Council of Europe, 2000a).
4.2.2 Current national policies
Only a very small part of the National Spatial Strategy is implemented in its successor, the Spatial
development strategy Infrastructure and Space. In the Spatial development strategy Infrastructure
and Space it is announced that landscape policy has no national ground anymore. Taking care of the
landscape has become a task for the lower level governments, the provinces and the municipalities.
There are two exceptions to this decentralisation. Firstly, the natural and cultural historical qualities
of the Waddenzee, Noordzee and IJsselmeer, still remain a national task and therefore ask for
national policies. Secondly, international/national cultural historical and natural qualities are
important and should be preserved and enhanced. These areas are limited to the UNESCO world
heritage sites, remarkable town and villages scenes and cultural historical values in or on the seabed
(Ministerie van I&M, 2012).
Provinces are held responsible for finding a balance between urbanization and landscape. This
provides more opportunities for regional solutions, especially in the National Landscapes. The
diversity and the genesis of the Netherlands should remain visible in these National Landscapes,
since this is the reason why these landscapes became National Landscapes (Ministerie van I&M,
2012). In the Spatial development strategy Infrastructure and Space experiences and identity of the
landscape are hardly mentioned. Whereas liveability is a key issue in the Spatial development
strategy Infrastructure and Space, it could be expected that experiences and identity of landscapes
are important. People give meaning to the landscape and therefore help in creating a landscape
identity. Experiences and landscape identity contribute towards the liveability of a landscape,
therefore these topics should not be neglected. In the ELC society holds a strong position in which
identities and experiences play a major role (Council of Europe, 2000a). Dessing and Pedroli (2013)
state that, to which extent the Netherlands meet the requirements of the ELC is no longer a national
responsibility, it has become a provincial responsibility. They thereby refer to the provincial task of
taking care for the landscape.
With the National Ecological Network natural areas are protected and will be connected with each
other. Four different categories can be distinguished: existing nature, developing new nature,
agricultural nature and realising robust corridors. Provinces and municipalities have to imply the
boundaries of the National Ecological Network in their policies. The boundaries of the National
Ecological Network are represented in figure 10. As follows from figure 10, many parts of the
Netherlands are included in this National Ecological Network. It is not possible to build anything in
these areas or allow other activities with an impact on the nature. The development principle of the
National Ecological Network is: No, unless there are no alternatives, there is a huge public interest
and compensation has to be paid. In case a development meets these requirements, alternative
26
natural environment has to be provided and additionally
financial compensation may be required (Kistenkas, 2010). In
the Spatial development strategy Infrastructure and Space
attention is paid towards the National Ecological Network. The
Spatial development strategy Infrastructure and Space makes
clear that the accessibility, recreational value of these areas and
the cultural historical and landscape values all play a role in the
realisation of the National Ecological Network (Ministerie van
I&M, 2012). The National Ecological Network fits within the ELC,
since it is focusses on the protection, restoration and
development of natural areas. Not all areas within the National
Ecological Network could be considered natural heritage.
However, there is much attention for nature, which makes up a
large part of the landscape.
The policy officer of the municipality of Zwolle mentioned that the Room for the River programme
has an impact on the landscape policy of the municipality of Zwolle. Room for the River is a national
Key Planning Decision, which is focussed on river areas in the Netherlands. Along the major rivers
projects are/will be carried out in order to make the landscapes near the river a safer place to live.
These projects are aimed at giving the river more space to flow. This projects will give the river more
capacity to collect the water. In the future areas along the river will be safer places to live (Ruimte
voor de Rivier, 2007)
4.2.3 Current national laws
One of the general measures of the ELC is the recognition of landscape in law (Council of Europe,
2000a). As listed above there are several laws in the Netherlands in which landscape has a role. In
the Nature Protection Act the Dutch Natura 2000 areas are integrated. However, this law is not only
about the implementation of the Natura 2000 areas. Natural monuments, protected landscapes and
other protected international areas can be found in the Nature Protection Act as well. The Natura
2000 areas and the other protected international areas are directed from the European level to the
national level. It is up to the provinces (the regional level) to decide upon the designation of natural
monuments and protected landscapes. Municipalities have to imply these monuments and
landscapes in their policies and zoning plan (Kistenkas, 2010).
SPAs hold a special position in the Nature Protection Act. Development in a SPA is not easy to realise.
If a development will have a significant impact on a SPA, there are several requirements this
development has to meet. In form of the habitat test a development is critically reviewed. This test
consists of the following elements:
1. Has the development significant effects on the SPA?
2. In case of a yes, an appropriate assessment needs to be done. In case of a no, a ‘lighter’
assessment needs to be done.
3. Are there no alternatives?
4. Are there public interests?
5. Compensation has to find place (Kistenkas, 2010, page 64).
Figure 10: National Ecological Network (Compendium voor de leefomgeving, 2011)
27
If a development meets these requirements a development can be allowed (Kistenkas, 2010).
However, for businesses it is not easy to be located in a SPA. This can be illustrated by an example
the policy officer of the municipality of Zwolle mentioned. Several businesses in the municipality of
Zwolle are unable to expand. ‘’Due to Natura 2000 different companies are not allowed to grow
anymore. The conflict between nature and economy becomes heightened by this guideline. It is a pity
since, this leads to negative feelings towards nature policies’’ (Policy officer of the municipality of
Zwolle). This quote shows a practical situation of a conflict between natural and economic values.
Since, the area is designated as Natura 2000 area, expansions are prohibited. Natural values in the
area are consequently protected, while the companies cannot grow anymore due to this designation.
Conflicts between nature and economy are likely to develop, as is the case in the municipality of
Zwolle.
Already founded in 1928 is the Nature Scenery Act. This law can be defined as a finance law. Estate
owners can apply for financial resources. This act is specifically focussed on taxes. If estate owners
maintain the estate and its natural surroundings, estate owners can apply for financial resources as
mentioned in this law. By financial compensation the natural scenery of the landscape of estate areas
is preserved (Kistenkas, 2010). The Nature Scenery Act is thus specifically focussed on the landscape
at estates. The policy officers of the municipalities Dalfsen, Raalte and Deventer have all mentioned
the presence of estates as a quality of their municipality. This law is consequently applicable on these
municipalities. However, it should not be expected the municipality itself is dealing with this law.
Since, this law is primarily focussed on the estates (Kistenkas, 2010).
At the moment the Spatial planning act is an important act considering spatial planning and indirectly
the appearance of the landscape of the Netherlands. In the Spatial planning act, rules considering
spatial planning are given. The government, provinces and municipalities are all obligated to have a
spatial development strategy. The Spatial development strategy Infrastructure and Space is the
spatial development strategy of the Dutch government. In a spatial development strategy
governments describe their integral vision on the environment. This plan is only binding the
government itself. In an integration plan, the national government and provinces are providing
inhabitants with a legally binding document. On a municipal level, these rules can be found in a
zoning plan. Municipalities need to imply integration plans of the national government and province
in their zoning plans (Kistenkas, 2010).
4.2.4 Future law on the environment
In 2018 the Environmental Act will come into force. This law will focus on the environment, in the
broadest sense of the word. Nature, water, spatial planning, environmental issues, building
regulations, infrastructure, cultural heritage and monument care will all be integrated in the
Environmental Act. A ‘good physical living environment’ is the central issue in the Environmental Act.
As the concept Environmental Act looks all laws, considering the physical environment, with its
associated Orders in Council will become part of this act. The biggest changes on a municipal level
are: the spatial development strategy will no longer be a compulsory document and zoning plans will
be replaced by one municipal environmental plan. All plans should be available on the internet. In
this way inhabitants have easily access to all available plans considering the environment and can
therefore quickly view what is allowed at their property (Minsterie van I&M, 2013).
28
4.3 Regional level The national government did not officially decentralise landscape policy towards lower level
governments. Therefore, it is up to the regional and local level to decide if they carry out a landscape
policy or not (Luiten, 2013). In order to assess whether the landscape policy of the province of
Overijssel has an influence on the landscape policies of the municipalities, the highlights of the
landscape policy of Overijssel will be discussed. The interviewees have mentioned policies and laws
of different levels are used when creating a policy on a municipal level. The policy officer of the
municipality of Deventer mentioned the policies of national and provincial governments were used in
order to create the landscape development plan. The provincial policies have been used the most,
whereas the province is the level closest related to the municipal level.
4.3.1 Environmental vision Overijssel
The province of Overijssel has made its view on the physical environment clear in the environmental
vision. This document is mentioned by the policy officer of the municipality of Raalte as a document
of the province which had an impact on the landscape development plan. The policy officer of the
municipality of Deventer noted sustainability and spatial quality are important features which play a
role on the provincial level. In 2009 the environmental vision was determined, which was followed by
an update in 2013. In the environmental vision sustainability and spatial quality can be traced back in
the vision and ambition of the province of Overijssel. Developments within the landscape need to be
sustainable, so the next generation can make use of this landscape/these landscape element(s). The
province has set seven ambitions considering spatial quality. Living and working, agricultural
landscapes, nature, landscape, infrastructure, water and spatial identities are the different topics to
which the ambitions are dedicated (Provincie Overijssel, 2013a). When looking at these different
topics, it becomes clear that landscape is a topic on its own, as well as different elements within the
landscape.
Policies of the province of Overijssel, mentioned in the environmental vision, have been divided in
two different environments: the green and the urban environment. Policies related to the green
environment are about the areas that lay outside the city and village boundaries as well as the main
infrastructure network. Landscape in the green environment is focussed on the diverse landscapes
and cultural heritage. Landscape in the urban environment is highly focussed on the character of the
city or village (identity). As the province argues the character of a city or village is important for its
inhabitants, companies and tourists. Diversity, cultural heritage and (inner-) cities matter considering
the urban environment. Both diversity and cultural heritage have been mentioned as important
features to reach the ambition considering landscape. Emphasising the diversity of landscapes within
Overijssel is done by making use of the identity of the different regions. Cultural heritage and several
specific landscape elements, such as real estates, National Landscapes and areas near cities, play a
major role in preserving and strengthening the diversity between the landscapes. Two different
National Landscapes are located in Overijssel. National Landscape IJsseldelta is partially located in
the municipality of Zwolle. Key qualities of this National Landscape are: openness, the allotment and
the small height differences in form of mounds and banks of a creek (Provincie Overijssel, 2013a).
The policy officer of the municipality of Zwolle mentioned the National Park as one of the qualities of
the municipality. In the landscape development plan of the municipality, the National Landscape is
mentioned as one of the qualities of the municipalities Zwolle, Zwartewaterland and Kampen (Ten
Cate, 2010).
29
Protecting the cultural heritage is
mainly a task for the national
government and the local government.
The province of Overijssel made some
additions to the national laws. In case
of a development municipalities need
to keep archaeological and cultural
(historical) values in mind. The province
has made a cultural historical map
which points out cultural historical
areas of provincial interest. Cultural
heritage needs to be an integral part of
spatial projects. The challenge is not so
much about preserving cultural
heritage, but about finding a way to
develop the cultural heritage in a way that the current society can work with the cultural heritage.
The province of Overijssel is thereby stimulating the transformation and reuse of cultural heritage
(Provincie Overijssel, 2013a). This line of thinking can be compared to the Belvedere programme, of
which the main line of reasoning was: ‘preservation through development’ (Janssen et al., 2014). In
figure 11 an example of using heritage from the past, while adjusting its function to the present time
is given. Figure 11 shows a former church which is currently in use as a bookshop. ‘Waanders (the
name of the bookshop) in de Broeren (name of the church)’ is located in the municipality of Zwolle.
Considering the urban environment, the province has stated three different development
perspectives. The first perspective is focussed on the cities. Cities are designated as the places where
living, working and above all, major facilities are located. In case of a development, the identity of
the city should be preserved and if possible strengthened. The second perspective deals with diverse
built-up areas, which are quite diverse. In order to preserve the diversity, developments within the
built-up areas should be in line with the identity of the settlement. The last perspective deals with
the main infrastructure network. The infrastructure within the province should give people the
opportunity to travel fast and in a safe way from one place to another. Municipalities are primarily
responsible for the realisation of developments according to these development perspectives. In
cases of provincial interest, arrangements with the concerning municipality will be made (Provincie
Overijssel, 2013a).
Any development arranged in the green environment should have a positive effect on the qualitative
perception of the landscape. This is stated in the policy document Kwaliteitsimpuls groene omgeving:
een ontwikkelingsgerichte aanpak. This policy is about rules and regulations considering
development in the green environment. It is based upon the principles of efficient and careful use of
space (Provincie Overijssel, 2013a). Again, spatial quality is an important issue considering the
physical living environment. Any development has to contribute towards an improved spatial quality
and therefore opportunities for social economic development might be created. The development
has to be integrated in a way that fits the landscape. The characteristics of an area are important,
since a development can be integrated in the landscape based upon these characteristics.
Connecting area characteristics with new developments may result in new developments and even
Figure 11: Heritage from the past, designated with a new destination (Paalman, 2013)
30
new identities. By focussing on the characteristics of an area, the current qualities will be preserved
while new qualities might be added (Provincie Overijssel, 2010).
4.3.2 Catalogue Area Characteristics
The characteristics of the area are mentioned in the catalogue Area Characteristics and are divided in
four different layers: the natural landscape, the cultural landscape, the urban landscape and the lust
and leisure landscape (Provincie Overijssel, 2009a; Provincie Overijssel, 2010; Provincie Overijssel:
2013a). The catalogue Area Characteristics mentions the key qualities of the landscape of the
province Overijssel, based upon the four different layers. Per layer the characteristics, previous
developments and current status, ambitions and guidelines to reach the ambition are mentioned
(Provincie Overijssel, 2009a). Not visible in this catalogue are the changes in parcellation. The
landscape of the Overijssel has not only changed because of heath reclamation. Due to land
consolidation the landscape of the province of Overijssel has changed. However, these changes are
not visible in the catalogue area characteristics.
4.3.2.1 Natural layer
Figure 12 shows the natural layer of the
municipalities of Dalfsen, Zwolle, Deventer and
Raalte. It becomes clear from figure 12 that
sand ridges and plains form the majority of the
natural layer. Furthermore, brook valleys,
former bogs and riverbanks and back lands can
be identified.
The sand ridges and plains are the most
common in the four case study municipalities.
Preserving the natural differences between high
and lower lying areas and dry and wet areas is
the most important in these areas. The relief in
these areas should be preserved. Any
development has to be focussed on either the
height differences or the different water
systems of the dry and wet areas.
In the brook valleys the water system is the
guiding principle. The water level should be as
high as possible. However, functions within
these areas should be able to fulfil their duties.
Water storage can be realised in these areas as
well.
In the municipality of Dalfsen a small area can
be identified where peat has been cultivated. The province has given some guidelines for peat
remnants. However, within the four municipalities there are no peat remnants left.
The riverbanks and back lands, or more commonly known as the river area, are like the brook valleys
focussed on the water system. The river is the most important character in these areas. Rivers,
Figure 12: Natural layer of the case study municipalities (Provincie Overijssel, 2013a)
31
riverbanks, backgrounds and river dunes have to be protected and should remain visible in the
landscape. If a development on the riverbanks or in the floodplains finds place, it should be focussed
on the natural appearance of the river area. For example, a development in the floodplains has to
contribute to more room for the river.
In the municipality of Raalte one moraine can be identified. The village of Luttenberg is partly
situated on this moraine, where height differences can be noted. It is up to the municipality of Raalte
to preserve the relief of the moraine. In case of a development, the natural qualities of the moraine
should be strengthened and become more visible (Provincie Overijssel; 2009a).
4.3.2.2 Agricultural cultivated layer
From figure 13 it can be deduced that there are
many diverse agricultural cultivated landscapes
which can be identified. These are the: old farms
landscape, open fields landscape, young heath
reclamation landscape, peat landscape, brook
landscape, peat reclamation landscape and back
lands. The back lands have already been
discussed in the previous paragraph, so they will
not be discussed in this paragraph.
The open fields landscape is characterized by the
buildings located on the edge of dry and wet
soils. The open field itself is an open area, laying
on the dry soils. It is important the open field
remains an open area, so the open field
landscape can be recognized. On the edge
between dry and wet soils, small-scale landscape
elements, like sandy paths, hedgerows and small
scale woods, should be preserved.
The old farms landscape resembles of the open
fields landscape. Main difference is the
situation of the agricultural buildings. In the open
fields landscape agricultural buildings are
situated near each other, while the old farms
landscape is made up of separate agricultural
businesses scattered through the landscape. This small-scale landscape should be preserved and
provides opportunities for many functions. The openness of the area should be preserved, as well as
the small height differences.
The young heath reclamation landscapes are relatively new landscapes. Agricultural fields are huge
and open. In this landscape straight lines are very common. Developments within this landscape have
to contribute to the preservation and/or strengthening of the linear structures.
Figure 13: Agricultural cultivated layer of the case study municipalities (Provincie Overijssel, 2013a)
32
In the municipality of Dalfsen a small area is identified as a peat landscape. Like the young heath
reclamation landscape, this area is characterized by huge open landscapes and a linear allotment as
well. These characteristics should be preserved, so developments should fit these characteristics.
The brook landscape can be found in the lower lying areas, mainly located near brooks. Due to
upscaling of agricultural enterprises, the brook landscape is changing. The wet character of these
areas diminished, since agriculture asks for dry soils. Nowadays, the brook landscape can hardly be
identified. In order to make this landscape type visible again, the water system will act as a starting
point. In this landscape the water level will be as high as possible. Building is not allowed and the
brook is the guiding principle in these areas.
In the municipality of Zwolle a small area is identified as a peat reclamation landscape. The polder
Mastenbroek is characterized by agricultural businesses laying on mounds. This image of the polder
is protected, the wide character of the area should be preserved as well as the housing and roads
(Provincie Overijssel, 2009a).
4.3.2.3 Urban landscape
Figure 14 shows the urban landscape of the
municipalities. This map shows the cities, villages
and the main-infrastructure network.
Considering the cities and villages, the historical
city centres are important. The current road
pattern and buildings, which can be traced back,
should be preserved. History is the leading
feature in the inner cities and villages. For the
rest of the city or village, a development is
sustained as long as it fits within the current
built-up environment. At the edges of cities and
villages, most business parks are situated.
Business parks should find a balance between
the green environment and the built-up areas.
More attention needs to be paid towards the
appearance of the business parks. Green, energy,
water and parking are thereby features which
should be reviewed.
Considering the traffic lines, first, the main
infrastructure network consists of highways,
expressways, distributor roads and access roads.
The slower the traffic flows and diverse.
modes of transportation merge, the more
the landscape and its history become important.
It is for example stated that the distributor and access roads should be a part of the landscape, if
possible following the past track. Second, there are seven train stations situated in the study-area.
These stations should be easily accessible and buildings with cultural historical value should be
preserved and if necessary given another purpose. Third, the slow traffic network can be identified.
Figure 14: Urban landscape of the case study municipalities (Provincie Overijssel, 2013a)
33
This network is made-up of cycling, walking and horseback riding paths and the sailing routes.
Combining these networks altogether, a dense traffic network along the province can be identified
(Provincie Overijssel, 2009a).
4.3.2.4 Lust and leisure landscape
In figure 15 a global idea of the lust and leisure
landscape, within the study area is presented.
Most remarkable in figure 15 are the estates.
Throughout the whole study area estates can be
identified. These estates should be preserved
and restored. Some parts of an estate are even
listed as cultural heritage, since these landscape
elements show a part of the history of the
landscape.
City and village edges are important places in
terms of the lust and leisure landscape. The
edges of a city or village are closely located to
the green environment surrounding the city or
village. Cultural historical remnants of the past
are important to decide in which way the city or
village edges will develop (Provincie Overijssel,
2009a). People find edges attractive places to
recreate. In edge areas many different functions
come together, which makes these places
attractive to spend free time (Gehl, 2010).
Furthermore, darkness is clearly visible in the
case study areas. In these areas only a small
amount of people live and many people make
use of these areas. In these areas artificial light
should only be used when it is absolutely necessary. In case of a development in these areas, the
impact of artificial light should be as low as possible (Provincie Overijssel, 2009a).
4.3.2.5 Concluding remarks about the Catalogue Area Characteristics
In order to make the landscape in Overijssel even more attractive, landscape in general should
become more accessible. This is a difficult ambition to realise. Landscape is owned by many different
people, who all own their private piece of land. When talking about landscape, people perceive the
landscape as something common (Antrop, 2005). This common perception of the term landscape
makes it difficult to plan or manage the landscape.
It can be argued that a partial landscape biography of Overijssel can be deduced from the Catalogue
Area Characteristics. Different layers of the landscape have been assessed and different elements of
the landscape are explained and visible by means of multiple maps. Whereas the focus on the
different functions in the landscape are visible, the development of the landscape is not visible. It
cannot be considered a complete landscape, whereas the changes in the landscapes cannot be
discovered. Reuselaars and Van der Valk (2009) have mentioned the idea that landscapes change are
Figure 15: Lust and leisure landscape of the case study municipalities (Provincie Overijssel, 2013a)
34
central in the landscape biography concept. This is not visible in the Catalogue Area Characteristics.
Different layers have been distinguished, but to changing landscapes no attention is paid (Provincie
Overijssel, 2009a).
4.3.3 Room for the Vecht
Figure 16: The Vecht river in the municipalities of Zwolle and Dalfsen (Waterschap Groot Salland, 2014)
Room for the Vecht is a programme which is focussed on the area characteristics of a river area. The
main goal of this programme is to make the river Vecht a semi-natural lowland river (Provincie
Overijssel, 2009b). Changes in the landscape and river should be made in order to accomplish this
goal. The municipalities of Dalfsen and Zwolle are situated near the river Vecht, as follows from
figure 16. The policy officer of the municipality of Zwolle mentioned the programme had an influence
on the landscape policy of the municipality of Zwolle. The programme is based upon five different
statements, which are all focussed on the Vecht and its surroundings. Considering landscape in
relation to the Vecht, the floodplains and the image of the Vecht are important. The floodplains of
the river Vecht should remain open, with opportunities for agriculture, nature, recreation and
landscape. Agriculture is the dominant land use form in the floodplains, however opportunities for
nature and recreation in the landscape along and near the river will be used as well. Before the Room
for the Vecht programme started, the four municipalities already made plans to integrate the river
more in the appearance of their municipality. This development is integrated with the statement to
make the Vecht the front of the Vechtdal. Room for the Vecht helped the different municipalities to
create connections between these separate plans (Provincie Overijssel, 2009b). From the assessment
of the checklists, it followed the municipality of Dalfsen considers the landscape along the Vecht as
valuable. In the spatial development strategy it is one of the central goals to make the semi-natural
lowland river visible again (BMC Advies en Management, 2009).
4.3.4 Environmental regulation Overijssel
In the environmental regulation Overijssel legally defined objectives for the province of Overijssel are
stated. Municipalities have to imply measures mentioned in the environmental regulation. When a
policy of a municipality differs too much, from what the province wants, the province can give a
reactive designation as mentioned in the Spatial planning act (Kistenkas, 2010). The environmental
regulation Overijssel states what objectives the municipalities in the province have to meet. This
regulation consists of very diverse topics, which can all be related to landscape. Agriculture, nature
35
and water directives were mentioned during the interviews as directives which had an impact on the
landscape policy of all case study municipalities. In the environmental vision a short note on the
vision of the province Overijssel is given. Cities and villages provide a solid basis for culture and
employment. These cities and villages are embedded in a landscape, in which living, agriculture,
nature and water are important topics (Provincie Overijssel, 2014).
In general developments within the agricultural sector are allowed, as long as the development has a
positive effect on the spatial quality. In case a development has a (slightly) negative effect,
compensatory measures have to be taken to reach a positive effect on the spatial quality. In case of a
relocation of an agricultural company, there should be a public interest (Provincie Overijssel, 2014).
This attitude towards the agricultural businesses is mentioned in the Qualitative impulse green
environment. This document can act as a guide for municipalities to deal with developments in the
green environment (Provincie Overijssel, 2010). Agricultural businesses and developments are not
allowed everywhere. In the environmental regulation it is stated that agricultural businesses and
services are prohibited in groundwater protection areas (Provincie Overijssel, 2014). The policy
officer of the municipality of Zwolle mentioned some (agricultural) businesses, located within Natura
2000 areas, are unable to expand their businesses. This is not mentioned in the environmental
regulation, so municipalities are not able to find all European and national regulations in the
provincial regulation. There are no direct references made towards the CAP.
From the perspective of nature the National Landscape IJsseldelta, National Ecological Network and
woods and nature outside the National Ecological Network are important. The key qualities of
National Landscape IJsseldelta (openness, the allotment and the small height differences in form of
mounds and banks of a creek (Provincie Overijssel, 2013a) are not only mentioned in the vision of the
province. These qualities are also given a firm position in the environmental regulation, which means
the concerning municipalities need to take care of these qualities. The key qualities, both cultural
historical and natural characteristics, are important and show a part of the history and different
landscapes in the Netherlands. However, key qualities outside the National Landscape matter as well.
Key qualities and its supporting document, Catalogue Area Characteristics hold a firm position.
Furthermore, attention needs to be paid to landscapes of the past, since these landscapes are part of
peoples identity (Provincie Overijssel, 2014).
The National Ecological Network is divided in existing nature and nature that has yet to be realised.
Municipalities are obliged to protect these areas and make sure the nature will be realised. In order
to give the National Ecological Network a legally binding status these areas need to be designated in
a zoning plan. Woods and nature outside the National Ecological Network are protected by the focus
on spatial quality. In case of a development in a nature area outside the National Ecological Network,
the development should preserve, restore and/or develop the existing nature and landscape values
(Provincie Overijssel, 2014).
Sustainability and spatial quality are the main issues in the environmental vision of Overijssel. During
the interview with the policy officer of the municipality of Deventer, these issues were emphasised
as well. In the environmental vision both sustainability and spatial quality are extensively dealt with
(Provincie Overijssel, 2013). In programmes such as the Room for the Vecht and the programme for
the green environment, attention is paid towards both subjects as well. Sometimes it is not directly
visible, but indirectly the essence of sustainability and spatial quality can be noted (Provincie
36
Overijssel, 2009b; Provincie Overijssel, 2010). However, in the main legal binding document (the
environmental regulation), sustainability is hardly noted. Much attention is paid towards spatial
quality and the sight of the landscape. Unlike sustainability, which is not even defined in the part
about spatial quality and sustainability (Provincie Overijssel, 2014). Whereas the province of
Overijssel is focussed on both spatial quality and sustainability, it should be defined in the
environmental regulation.
4.4 Relations between the different levels It is clear that there are many policies and laws which give directions towards planning and managing
the landscape. In Table 3 the diverse policies and laws of the different levels are listed. In case a
policy or law is covering the same content, these are mentioned in the same line.
Table 3: Policies and laws on European, national and regional level
European level National Level Regional level
ELC Belvedere* & National Spatial
Strategy*
CAP
WFD Room for the River Room for the Vecht
Birds and Habitats Directive
Natura 2000 National Ecological Network &
Nature Protection Act
Spatial development strategy
Infrastructure and Space
Environmental vision Overijssel
& Catalogue Area
Characteristics
Nature Scenery Act
Spatial planning act Environmental regulation Overijssel
Environmental Act (in preparation, will enter into force in 2018)
* These policies no longer exist
As Table 3 shows several relations between the diverse governmental levels can be identified. The
ELC principles are clearly stated in the former Belvedere policy and the National Spatial Strategy.
From the perspective of water, the Room for the River policy and the Room for the Vecht policy can
be related with each other. Given the European level, several national policies can be related to this
level. The national level on its turn, can be related to the regional level, which is most used by the
municipal level as the outcomes of the interviews have proven.
37
5. NORMS, VALUES AND IDENTIY IN PLANNING AND MANAGING THE
LANDSCAPE As the approach towards landscape of the province of Overijssel shows, the landscape exists of
different layers all of which serve a different purpose. These different layers all have different groups
of people who have an interest in one particular layer or multiple. When dealing with landscape
planning and management, policymakers need to take care of these interests and corresponding
norms and values.
5.1 Norms and values In figure 17
the
relationship
between
norms,
values and
the attitude
towards
landscape
can be
reviewed. As
figure 17
shows norms
have an impact on peoples values. People can assign value to a landscape by experiencing the
landscape. These values lead to considerations concerning the landscape, people can therefore
decide whether they like the landscape or not. Values themselves have an impact on the beliefs of
people. These beliefs are formed by the knowledge people possess. Indirectly norms, values and
knowledge have an impact on peoples beliefs and thus on the landscape they prefer (Ives & Kendal,
2013). As Kaplan and Kaplan (1989) have argued, landscape preferences have to do with the way a
landscape is experienced (Kaplan & Kaplan, 1989 in Hospers 2013).
Oueslati and Salanié (2011) view landscape as an area in which recreational, residential and
productive activities find place and facilities are located. Based upon these different activities and
facilities the following groups can be identified: residents, entrepreneurs and recreationists. These
groups have different views and interests considering landscape, which might sometimes be
conflicting. Van der Valk (2014) stresses the need people feel to identify with the landscape.
Identities play a major role when dealing with landscape, which can be used in participatory
processes, research and new designs.
When dealing with norms and values people give towards a landscape, identity is an important issue.
Stobbelaar and Pedroli (2011) distinguish different identities people can identify in a landscape. In
case a planning or management decision is about the cultural-geographical identity of the landscape,
it is likely that residents, entrepreneurs and recreationists will agree upon a decision made by a
municipality. In case of a decision concerning the existential-cultural identity of a landscape, a group
of people with the same norms and values would agree with the decision. If a personal factor is
included in the landscape identity, conflicts will arise inevitably. Attitudes towards the manner of
Figure 17: Relationship between norms, values and attitudes towards the landscape (After Ives & Kendal, page 81)
38
landscape planning and management will differ and it is up to policymakers to find a way of planning
and managing the landscape in a way which is best suited with the landscape and the inhabitants of
that landscape. It is important to both keep spatial and social factors in mind when creating a policy,
since these factors have an influence on the way in which people value landscapes.
5.2 The periurban landscape Considering the attitude of residents of cities towards the periurban landscape, Ives and Kendal
(2013) have conducted a research. The periurban landscape is what Gehl (2010) would call an edge.
Whereas edges are interesting areas, people like to come often and recreate, it could be expected
the periurban area is attractive to residents of the city. Ives and Kendal (2013) state that periurban
areas are undergoing a rapid transformation, due to urban sprawl. Some landscape elements in the
periurban areas are protected by spatial planners in zoning plans. Whereas the protection and
management is only focussed on some landscape elements, it are mainly the urban residents who
can be hold responsible for the appearance of the city edge. It are their preferences which are visible
in the periurban area. Spatial planners should therefore understand the preferences, norms and
values of the urban residents in order to effectively manage the periurban area (Ives & Kendal, 2013).
Values urban residents assign towards the periurban area are broader than the values usually
considered in policy documents. Ives and Kendal (2013) laid emphasis on values related to: culture,
nature, education, aesthetic values of periurban agricultural land, the availability of food, food
security and native flora and fauna. Culture, nature, education and aesthetic values of periurban
agricultural land are about the multifunctional use of the landscape. Food availability and security are
about the nearby presence of food production. Multifunctional use of land, food production and
native flora and fauna are highly valued in periurban areas and the rural landscape. The values
assigned by urban residents towards the periurban area, shows similarities with the general values
assigned towards rural areas (Ives & Kendal, 2013).
5.3 Adding economic value to the landscape One of the major issues concerning landscape is the valuation. Landscape can be viewed from an
economic point of view or as a public good. The cost-benefit approach could be used to assign
economic values to different landscapes or landscape elements (Oueslati & Salanié, 2011). In some
cases it might be possible to give elements in the landscape an economic function. The landscape is
preserved, so residents and recreationists can enjoy the landscape, while entrepreneurs can make
money of a landscape element. Janssen et al. (2014) point towards the positive effect heritage might
have on activities in the landscape. If entrepreneurs make use of these opportunities, recreationists
and/or residents are able to enjoy these places even more. Making heritage suitable for a socio-
Box 5: Periurban areas in the municipality of Zwolle
The main infrastructure of the municipality of Zwolle, runs through the city. As a result the city
edges are free of roads and a green area can be identified. The National Landscape IJsseldelta is
almost directly located too the city. Both the river IJssel and Vecht are (partially) located near the
city edges. Furthermore, agricultural activities find place in these periurban areas. All together
these diverse land use types, nature, water, agriculture and recreation opportunities can be
identified, create a diverse periurban area where inhabitants and visitors could enjoy themselves
(Gemeente Zwolle, 2008).
39
economic function has become more interesting, since sustainability matters more. However, when
dealing with planning practices the link between history of places, heritage and future plans is only
little made (Janssen et al., 2014). In the provincial environmental vision of Overijssel sustainability
and spatial quality are the main goals (Provincie Overijssel, 2013a). As mentioned in the previous
chapter sustainability is hardly ever mentioned in the provincial environmental regulation (Provincie
Overijssel, 2014). The province of Overijssel is in favour of an integrated approach, emphasising the
sustainability and spatial quality of the different regions (Provincie Overijssel, 2013a).
Plottu and Plottu (2012) acknowledge that it is difficult take care of the landscape when letting
residents and producers participate in spatial planning issues. Residents and producers
(recreationists as well) view the landscape as a public good, to which no economic value has to be
assigned. Landscape is perceived as something public (Antrop, 2005). During the interview with the
policy officer of the municipality of Deventer it was noted that people are not used to paying for
landscape. She illustrated this with the example of a parking ticket. When people go to the city, they
pay for a parking ticket. However, for landscape this initiative is not there. As she points out the
government has taken care for the landscape for such a long time, that people are used to this
system and are not fond of paying for the landscape.
5.4 Managing the landscape A landscape management approach can be based upon profitability, strategy or identity. These
options lead to different choices related to the landscape. These different options come forward in
the management and planning approach for the landscape Plottu and Plottu (2012) suggest. Three
different approaches are suggested, namely: facilities needed for present generations, resources
needed in order to develop the landscape and elements of the past which have an influence on the
appearance of the landscape. Facilities needed for present generations focus mainly on the option of
profitability. This type of planning and management is focussed on the current status of the
landscape and focusses on the short term. Resources needed in order to develop the landscape goes
a step further. In this approach strategic decisions related to the landscape are made. The landscape
is seen as something that is dynamic. Developments of the past and the current landscape are taken
in mind when creating several options for the future landscape. Changes in landscapes are valued
and fit within the community’s needs. Van der Valk (2014) points towards a preferred development
within the cultural heritage. Focus needs to shift from preserving the past, towards conscious
management of the cultural heritage. The last approach, of Plottu and Plottu (2012), deals with
elements of the past which have an influence on the appearance of the landscape. In this approach
landscape can often be identified as a central element within a region. The inhabitants of this region
feel attached to their region. The identity is based upon past and present landscapes and
developments. These landscapes and developments play a role when making choices for the future
landscape. This is what Stobbelaar and Pedroli (2011) would call a group identity.
When dealing with landscape planning and management on a local level, participation is important.
Whereas landscape is something that is perceived as public, letting people participate in the decision
making about landscape planning and management might be difficult. Landscape is something that
has no clearly defined economic value and interests might differ. Jacobs (2006) acknowledges the
fact that public participation concerning landscape and environmental quality can be very difficult,
since groups of people have different interest and therefore value other landscape elements.
40
Selman (2006) argues that multifunctional landscapes are likely to appear. Planning and managing
the landscape has become more integrated, so functions within the landscape are likely to merge. As
a result policies and zoning plans concerning the landscape have become more integrated as well.
This can be seen in the environmental vision of the province of Overijssel as well, whereas
policymakers tried to come up with an integral vision upon the landscape (Provincie Overijssel,
2013a).
Thus, some people refer to landscape as a physical entity produced by earth processes. Others see it
as a social construction charged with cultural associations. It can be a thing of beauty or horror on a
framed canvas. It can be a planner’s spatial frame of reference. It can be recorded from a satellite or
modelled from the perspective of an insect. It has been described as a ‘hybrid’ nexus of nature and
culture in which dualities between people and their host environment dissolve. It is lived in, visited,
cherished, protected and exploited. As a visually comprehended and perhaps relatively self-contained
environmental unit, it can be used as a framework for analysis, synthesis, policy development and
plan implementation. It is an area where different groups contest the meanings and significance of
historical associations. It is a place of production, consumption, and military engagement. (Selman,
2006, page 13).
This quote of Selman (2006) illustrates the many different views people can have upon the
landscape. It can be related to Hospers (2013) as well, since he states that people are able to identify
themselves with landscapes on multiple levels. These identities can exist next to each other, which
makes it difficult to set planning and management goals.
Selman (2006) also points towards the value landscapes have. To inhabitants of a landscape, the
landscape often means a lot. Part of peoples identity can be deduced from this landscape, as well as
people give identity to the landscape they inhabit (Simon, 2004). For outsiders it is harder to see the
value of a landscape they have never been to before (Selman, 2006). Referring back to the different
groups Oueslati and Salanié (2011) distinguish, it can be stated that a landscape possesses great
values for residents of the landscape. Recreationists and/or producers from outside the landscape
might value the landscape less. Another issue when dealing with landscape values is the fact that
values of the current landscape are sometimes only noted and appreciated when the landscape
scenery is threatened by developments. For policymakers and inhabitants of a landscape it is
important to acknowledge every landscape, whether a landscape is outstanding or everyday (Selman,
2006).
5.5 Remarks considering norms and values in landscape planning and
management It is not possible to give a detailed scheme of norms and values that are at stake when dealing with
landscape planning and management. Jacobs (2006) holds three different perspectives considering
landscape. Norms and values play a role in these landscape perspectives. In the matterscape
perspective it is stressed that there is no ultimate landscape. This is in line with the perspective on
landscape Selman (2006) has. According to Selman (2006) many different perspectives on landscape
can be identified. However, there is not an ultimate landscape which has the same meaning to
everybody. Jacobs (2006) links the absence of an ultimate definition of landscape, with the norms
41
and values people have. Whether a landscape matters to people, depends on the norms and values a
person holds. Norms and values can guide people in the search for a landscape they prefer. Although
norms and values provide some guidance, it is not easy to identify a powerscape.
Secondly, the powerscape perspective can be identified. This perspective is about a landscape that is
appreciated and valid for a group of people. Norms can be assigned to all people who are part of this
group. Social interactions play a role in the norms people hold. Last, in the mindscape perspective
values and stories are the most important. How people perceive, experience and value the landscape
can be connected to the mindscape. Planning and managing the landscape requires alterations in the
powerscape. People’s perception, experiences and values considering the landscape are partially
formed in the mindscape, while planning and managing the landscape find place in the powerscape.
It is not possible to convert experiences of people to a landscape policy, since experiences cannot be
translated into landscape guidelines (Jacobs, 2006).
It is not possible to state which norms and values of certain groups of people are at stake when
dealing with landscape planning and management. Norms form the partial basis for values, values
can be related to the identity people give towards a landscape and deduce from the landscape. As
Stobbelaar and Pedroli (2011) show landscape identities can be distinguished in group identities or
an individual identity. In case individual identities come to matter in planning and managing the
landscape, conflicts between people will arise. It is up to policymakers to deal with these conflicts in
a way that satisfies the inhabitants of the landscape. The ELC (Council of Europe, 2000a; 2000b) and
diverse researchers (Baas et al., 2011; Plottu & Plottu, 2012; Vervloet, 2007) acknowledge the
importance of participation when dealing with landscape.
Different groups will have different areas within the landscape where their norms and values are
rated as high or low. In many cases the choice that is made in planning and managing the landscape,
depends on the current land use functions. In the city and periurban areas expansions related to
dwelling and production are in general more accepted. If the same expansion would find place in an
agricultural landscape it is likely inhabitants of this landscape would protest, since the values of the
agricultural landscape are in danger (Ives & Kendal, 2011). When landscape values people appreciate
are endangered, people come to realize what these values mean for them and the landscape
(Selman, 2006).
42
43
6. BIOGRAPHY OF THE LANDSCAPE IN PLANNING AND MANAGING THE
LANDSCAPE In the Netherlands the landscape biography concept is introduced by Kolen (1993 in Elerie and Spek,
2010). The main idea of this concept is that landscapes possess a biography as well as people and
objects (Kolen, 1993 in Elerie & Spek; Kopytoff, 1986; Samuels, 1979). Kopytoff (1986) stressed the
importance of manufacturing a biography of cultural objects. Combining these ideas, a landscape
biography can be used when planning and managing the landscape. Different stories the landscape
possess can be told by making use of the landscape biography concept. In landscape planning and
management, the landscape biography concept can be used to tell the past and current story of the
landscape. A landscape biography can act as a starting point to give guidelines for planning and
managing the landscape on a local level. To what extent the landscape biography approach has been
used on a local level will be discussed in this chapter.
6.1 Examples of regions in which landscape biography has been used
actively A programme in which the landscape biography concept had a central role In the PDL/BBO
programme biography of landscape had a connecting role. Connections between research and
practical implementations were made in several project areas (Van der Valk, 2010; Van der Valk,
2014). The Oer-IJ, Drentsche Aa, Southern Netherlands and Northern Netherlands are regions where
landscape biographies have been used to tell the story of the past landscapes (Elerie & Spek, 2010;
Van der Valk, 2010; Van der Valk, 2014). For the location of these regions, see figure 18.
In the Oer-IJ region, figure 18,
archaeological-historical values are
important. To establish an accurate
biography of the landscape, scientists
and policymakers worked together.
During the Oer-IJ project scientists and
policymakers cooperated to make an
inventory of the Oer-IJ landscape.
Although parties were sometimes
frustrated, this cooperation resulted in
an agenda in which the landscape
biography holds a firm position. This
biography roughly sketches the
landscape of the Oer-IJ region over four
thousand years. Special attention was
given to the archaeological-historical
landscape elements (Van der Valk,
2014).
National Park the Drentsche Aa, figure
18, has been subject of the PDL/BBO
programme as well. During a period of five years scientists with cultural and ecological backgrounds
worked together. Their main task was to apply the landscape biography concept in planning practices
Figure 18: Areas where the PDL/BBO programme was executed (Van der Valk, 2014, page 164)
44
on a local level. In order to fulfil this task residents, policymakers, designers and other interested
stakeholders were invited to participate. Besides the landscape biography other projects were
carried out as well, although landscape biography has been the main guiding principle. The results of
the diverse landscape biographies that were established are implemented in the regional policy of
the Drentsche Aa. Researchers worked together with policymakers to imply the biography of
landscape. The biography of landscape served as an element to make planning and management
decisions in the region more argued (Elerie & Spek, 2010).
6.2 Past, present and future landscapes in the landscape biography concept
6.2.1 History matters
Marcucci (2000) argues history of the landscape is essential when dealing with landscape planning. In
order to deal with changing landscapes, it is important to deal with the geography and history of the
landscape. Spatial planners should thereby not only focus on the history of the landscape, but rather
view landscape as a whole. History of the landscape is essential to consider, since changing values of
the inhabitants of a landscape and changing patterns in the landscape hold a major role in the way a
landscape is built-up and experienced. History as an instrument to guide planning and management
issues within the landscape. A landscape can be described in a more complete way, which may lead
to better augmented long-term planning decisions (Marcucci, 2000).
Not only history matters when dealing with landscape planning and management. Sustainability is
another important issue when planning and managing the landscape. In 2006 Dutch national and
provincial landscape policies, were focussed on the preservation of several landscape elements.
Landscape and its inhabitants were central in these policies, arguing for making use of the landscape
in a sustainable way (van der Valk and Bloemers, 2006). As Luiten (2013) noted the national
landscape policy has disappeared. However, most provinces are still taking care of landscape policy
(Luiten, 2013).
6.2.2 Immortal landscapes
As many researchers have acknowledged, for example Antrop (2005) and Vervloet (2007), landscapes
change. It lays in the nature of a landscape to change through time. As a result landscape biographies
change through time as well. Vervloet et al. (2010) state that: ‘’... a landscape biography is a never
ending story (page 136)’’. When planning and managing the landscape it is therefore important to
consider not only the past landscapes, but consider the impact actions might have on the landscape
as well.
In land use planning, movement of people, supplies and information has become more important. As
a result of this increased movement, people are not so bound to specific areas anymore.
Policymakers can make use of the landscape biography approach to deal with this shift in living.
Emphasis can be laid on diverse themes, like culture history or the development of the landscape.
Whereas a landscape biography deals with both the past and present landscape, important places
within the landscape can be identified. These outcomes can be used in planning, managing and
promoting the landscape. A landscape biography not only provides policymakers with a starting for
planning and management activities. It might as well show unexpected effects of spatial
interventions of the past. Policymakers could benefit from a dual approach by focussing on the
current and future situation of the landscape as well as the past situation (Kolen, 2007).
45
When making use of landscape biography as a concept in planning and managing the landscape, the
immortality of the landscape should be considered. A landscape is something that will always exist, it
never ends. This can be difficult to deal with considering landscape planning and management
(Antrop, 2005; Van der Valk & Bloemers, 2006; Vervloet, 2007). Marcucci (2000) argues to state a
long-term view on the landscape in policies. In order to create a vision upon the future landscape,
the landscape of the past hundred years is relevant. According to him a policy has more chance to be
successful if the main events of the past hundred years and a long-term view upon the future
landscape are taken in mind (Marcucci, 2000). Every generation adds elements to the landscape,
meanings of landscapes might differ between older and younger generations. Heritage can serve as a
connecting factor between different generations. Policymakers have to deal with these differences in
order to plan and manage the landscape in a sustainable way. For policymakers it might be difficult
to include the heritage of a landscape in the landscape policy. Other functions and natural values
play a role in the landscape and decision making as well (Van der Valk & Bloemers, 2006).
6.2.3 Participation
Vervloet et al. (2010) have distinguished three different perspectives, present inhabitants, previous
inhabitants and the narrative of the landscape, from which a landscape biography can be composed.
When dealing with landscape planning and management it is likely the perspective of present
inhabitants and users is present in local policies. The case study municipalities all included a form or
multiple forms of participation when creating their landscape policies. Policy officers of the case
study municipalities mentioned the following forms of participation: evenings inhabitants were
invited to discuss elements of the landscape policy with officers of the municipality were in all
municipalities held. Furthermore, advisory groups have been established. These groups advised and
thought along with the municipalities. Visitors of these evenings and members of the advisory groups
live within the municipality. By means of participation the perspective of the present inhabitants and
users is represented in the landscape policies of the municipalities. The perspective of past
inhabitants and users and the narrative perspective are not included in the policies of the
municipalities. This can be related to the local level and the financial struggle to plan and manage the
landscape properly.
Integrating cultural heritage in planning was first introduced, in the Netherlands, by the Belvedere
programme. Thereby focus is not only laid on individual buildings or elements within the landscape,
but on historical landscapes as a whole as well. Since, these landscapes possess local identities, it is
important that these landscapes are part of the landscape planning and management approach. If
possible the users of the landscape should act as stakeholders, so they feel involved with the
landscape (van Londen, 2006).
A landscape biography is well suited to let people participate in managing the landscape they live,
work or recreate in. It can therefore be related to realizing the aims of the ELC (Council of Europe,
2000a). As Van Londen (2006) argues if a landscape biography is carried out in a way that is appealing
to people. People can feel inspired by this biography and take care of managing landscapes of the
past. Features that are clearly visible in the landscape biography might attribute to the identity of a
landscape and thus a region. These elements can be used by policymakers when creating policies.
Making use of historical information helps to make elements of the past fit within the present
landscape (Van Londen, 2006).
46
6.3 Use of landscape biography on a local level Roymans, Gerritsen, van der Heijden, Bosma and Kolen (2010) argue landscape biography can serve
as a guiding principle in heritage management and spatial planning practices. Heritage deserves a
special place within managing and planning the landscape, since inhabitants of a landscape form part
of their identity based upon cultural-historical elements. However, a landscape biography should not
only focus on heritage. Other themes should be discussed as well, whereas a landscape biography is
intended to give a biography of the landscape considering a broad range of themes. What choices
policymakers will make, based upon the biography of the landscape, depends on the composition of
the landscape biography (Roymans et al., 2010).
Landscape biography is a useful instrument to use on a local level. How inhabitants used, organized
and interpreted the landscape in the past and present will become visible and can serve as a source
of inspiration considering landscape planning and management. Identity cannot be seen separately
from landscape biography. Landscape has always served as a source of inspiration for individuals and
communities to construct their identity. Combining identity and landscape biography provides
opportunities to let inhabitants be involved with the management of heritage (Roymans et al., 2010).
Whereas heritage management has been focussed on ideas and knowledge of only a small group of
professionals (Vervloet, 2007; Roymans et al., 2010). The landscape biography approach provides
heritage manager with a concept that gives local inhabitants and other interested stakeholders an
opportunity to participate in the heritage management process (Roymans et al., 2010).
This quote illustrates the importance to look at the history of the landscape as well. Landscapes have
been, are and will always exist. In order to plan and manage the landscape in a successful way, the
past landscapes should be considered as well as the current and future landscape. In order to create
a full biography of the landscape, stakeholders with diverse backgrounds should be able to cooperate
in the designation of a landscape biography.
Landscape should never be compared to a blank page. Inherent to every place – settlements,
buildings, road patterns and archaeological sites alike – is a long and complex history. What we
need is a combined effort by archaeologists, geographers, art-historians and planners for the sake
of a truly careful management of the past, with an eye on future generations. Images of the past
help us determine our past and present individuality. (Van der Valk & Bloemers, 2006, page 30).
47
Box 6: Landscape biography of a young heath reclamation landscape in the municipality of Deventer
Figure 19: Part of a young heath reclamation landscape located in Deventer (Van den Berg et al., 2011,
page 68)
In figure 19 an example of a minor landscape biography of the municipality of Deventer is given.
This landscape is located in the young heath reclamation landscape and some estates are located
in this area. From the first half of the 19th century the heath lands were reclaimed and the land
was used for agricultural purposes (Van den Berg et al., 2011). In figure 19 a shift in land use
forms can be noted, whereas in 1917 woods and heathland covered most of the areas, in 1991
the main land use form was agriculture.
48
49
7. LANDSCAPE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT ON A LOCAL LEVEL AND
ITS RELATION TO THE ELC
7.1 Planning and managing the landscape in the case study municipalities In order to assess the landscape policies of the municipalities of Dalfsen, Raalte, Deventer and Zwolle
the checklist, as mentioned in the third chapter, has been completed for the diverse policy
documents. An example of an assessment is included in Annex II. The other assessments can be
found in the interview and checklist report. This chapter consists of an analysis of the policy
documents related to the diverse concepts. As a last step a link between the concepts, policies and
the ELC is made.
7.1.1 Landscape development plan
A landscape development plan is a plan focussed on the landscape of a municipality. The vision upon
the landscape of the municipality is explained and defended in this document. Landscape qualities
hold a special role in this plan, whereas the current qualities provide a basis for future developments.
All municipalities let inhabitants participate during the construction of the document. Scenarios have
been used to discuss the content of the plan with the inhabitants of the municipalities (Gemmeke et
al., 2008; Ten Cate, 2010; Von Wersch, Koerhuis, Huls & Bontje, 2009).
Dalfsen made a landscape development plan, only focussed on the municipality of Dalfsen (Von
Wersch et al., 2009). The municipalities of Raalte and Deventer created a landscape development
plan, together with Olst-Wijhe (Gemmeke et al., 2008). The municipality of Zwolle also cooperated
with other municipalities, namely the municipalities of Zwartewaterland and Kampen (Ten Cate,
2010). Diverse topics are treated in these landscape development plans. Comparing these policy
documents with each other, a focus on diverse landscape types can be distinguished. Every
landscape has its own qualities and these qualities are used as a starting point for future
developments (Gemmeke et al., 2008; Ten Cate, 2010; Von Wersch et al., 2009). The focus on
different landscape types is visible in the interviews as well. The policy officers all mentioned the
diverse landscape types as one of the qualities of their municipalities landscape.
‘’Unique, I think, is the presence of eight different landscape types around Zwolle. The variety is
unique. In the Netherlands, you will not see it very often’’ (Policy officer of the municipality of Zwolle,
interviewed on 4 July 2014). This quote shows the presence of diverse landscape types and thus
diverse landscapes is considered as a quality of the municipality of Zwolle. The other interviewees
made similar remarks about the qualities of the landscape of the municipality they work for.
The diverse landscape types form the starting point of the different landscape development plans.
However, the municipalities use these landscape types differently in their planning and management
strategy. The municipality of Dalfsen explains for every landscape type: the characteristics of the
landscape (focussed on the aesthetics, culture history, ecology and economy), future developments,
possibilities and threats. These analyses are used in order to plan and manage the landscape. The
main goals of the municipality are to improve the landscape scenery and the preservation and
recovery of cultural-historical valuable elements (Von Wersch et al., 2009).
50
The municipalities of Raalte, Deventer and Olst-Wijhe made use of the landscape types in another
way. These municipalities have divided the landscape in landscape types as well. Instead of an
analysis of the different landscape types, the municipalities have identified landscape characteristics
according to the diverse landscape types. These landscape characteristics are seen as the baseline of
the landscape development plan. To plan and manage the landscape, different functions of the
landscape have been distinguished. These functions are: water, nature, agriculture, living and
working, periurban areas and recreation. New developments have to preserve, strengthen or
Box 7: Different landscape types in Dalfsen
In figure 20 the different landscape types of the municipality
of Dalfsen are named. As follows from this figure the municipa
-lity of Dalfsen has identified seven different landscape landsca
-pes. First, the peat reclamation landscape is characterized by
Its wide open fields and the straight road pattern. In this area
there are almost no height differences. Agriculture is the main
land use form in this area. The wide view is threatened by the
plans to locate windmills in this area. Second, the young heath
reclamation landscape is characterized by its regular pattern of
agricultural fields and roads. The agricultural fields are wide
and open and so is the view. This landscape is an area where
geese and other winter visitors are welcome. Several parcels
in this landscape are marked for these birds. Third, the open
fields landscape, the eldest built-up areas can be found in this landscape.
The village of Dalfsen, white area in the middle of figure 20, is clearly visible.
Around Dalfsen the landscape is the most urbanized. Furthermore, height
differences can be noted and a small-scale landscape can be identified. By
the small-scale woods, built-up areas and use of green plants a small-scale
landscape can be identified. Whereas the separate elements are well func-
tioning, the municipality likes to make the edges of the village more connec Figure 20: Landscape ty
-ted with the surrounding landscape. Fourth, the river Vecht and the river -pes of the municipality
-banks can be identified. An area in which water storage and recreation of Dalfsen (Von Wersch et
are the main land use forms. The straight river will be slowly transformed al., 2009, page 8)
to its natural flow, which creates opportunities to make the landscape and culture history better
visible. Fifth, the swamp reclamation landscape can be identified. Unlike the other reclamation
landscapes, this landscape is already reclaimed in the Middle Ages. The main land use form is
again agriculture. Due to technological improvements in the agricultural business, it becomes
harder to integrate the businesses with the landscape. Sixth, the forest and estates landscape is
identified. This area is located near the river Vecht, as follows from figure 20. In this area culture
history is well preserved, although it is sometimes not accessible since several areas are private
property of the estate owners. Due to the natural environment many different types of flora and
fauna can be identified in this landscape. Last, the open grounds can be identified. This landscape
is characterized by a half open landscape. Woods and open fields can both be identified in this
landscape. Furthermore, small height differences can be noted in this landscape (Von Wersch et
al., 2009).
51
develop the landscape in a way that matches the baseline, so the functions will be preserved and
strengthened (Gemmeke et al., 2008).
The municipalities of Zwolle, Zwartewaterland and Kampen are focussing on the qualities of the
different landscape types. The main goal of the municipalities is to preserve the diversity of
landscape types. To preserve this diversity and let the diversity remain visible, the qualities of the
landscape should be preserved and strengthened if possible. When planning and managing the
landscape, the municipalities have agreed to preserve the current qualitative elements and place
new elements if needed. The history of the landscape is the guiding principle in this planning and
management tasks, since the landscape types have been divided according to the historical
landscape (Ten Cate, 2010).
7.1.2 Spatial development strategy
In the spatial development strategy, municipalities give their vision upon the municipality. This
document is not primarily focussed on landscape, but on the municipality in the (far) future. All
municipalities have created their own spatial development strategy. The plan of Raalte is the most
recent (2012) and the plan of Deventer is the oldest plan (2004). However, the plan of the
municipality of Deventer will soon be updated (expected December 2014). Every municipality let
inhabitants participate when creating the spatial development strategy.
The municipality of Dalfsen created a vision upon the whole municipality. This vision has been the
basis for the spatial development plans created for the villages and the outskirts. In order to analyse
one document for each municipality, the vision upon the landscape has been analysed. In this
document different topics can be distinguished, on which the municipality gives their vision for the
future. Landscape is one of those topics, and the municipality of Dalfsen has set two ambition
concerning the landscape of the future. First, landscape and its cultural-historical values have to be
preserved and developed. New developments have to preserve and/or develop the values
mentioned in the landscape development plan. Taking these values as a guideline in planning and
management issues, the municipality is able to develop the landscape in a way the valuable elements
keep preserved. Second, the landscape near the river Vecht should be better used. In line with the
regional policy Room for the Vecht, the municipality of Dalfsen intends to create more room for the
river. Accessibility of the river landscape, quietness, nature and water are all important topics which
should be used in the development of the river landscape (BMC Advies en Management, 2009).
The municipality of Raalte holds the most recent vision upon their municipality (2012). The spatial
development strategy of the municipality is focussed upon the year 2025, if needed a vision for the
further future is sketched. The vision of the municipality of Raalte is based upon the past and present
landscape. In line with the regional landscape development plan, the past and current landscape
(baseline) play a role in future developments. Furthermore, the strategic location of the municipality
is emphasized (between the IJssel and Sallandse Heuvelrug). Above all, the rural image of the
municipality should be preserved. In order to reach this goal the agricultural landscape and the
boundaries of the villages should be managed properly (Boersma et al., 2012).
The municipality of Deventer has the oldest spatial development strategy (2004). It is expected that
at the end of this year an update of the version of 2004 will be completed. In the current spatial
development strategy a vision upon the year 2025 is given. Whereas the landscape of the
municipality of Deventer is very diverse, a division between the city and the outskirts is made. The
52
characteristics of the city are valuable and should be managed and in case of new developments
form the guidelines for these developments. Furthermore, the river IJssel should become more
connect with the city. In the periurban areas the small-scale landscapes are highly valuated, these
should be managed and form the guiding principle in new planning tasks (Gemeente Deventer,
2004).
The municipality of Zwolle, like Deventer, divided the landscape of the municipality in two different
areas. First, the city, for the city living, working and the facilities are the main points of interest. The
city of Zwolle, should be a place where inhabitants like to live, work and recreate. Second, the rural
areas, for these areas the appearance of the landscape is important. Traces of the past, which are
visible in the current landscape, should remain visible in the landscape. In order to strengthen the
qualities of the diverse areas, the municipality of Zwolle is in favour of a public-private partnership.
So, the development can be planned and managed together with the entrepreneur(s) (Gemeente
Zwolle, 2008).
7.1.3 External appearance of buildings note
In the external appearance of buildings note, municipalities give guidelines that buildings in the
landscape have to meet. Inhabitants of the municipality can consult this document, if they would like
to change the appearance of their home or business. In these documents municipalities also pay
attention to their advertising policy (Gemeente Zwolle, 2012; Heidinga and Kruiper, 2010;
Onderdelinden et al., 2014; Van den Berg, Reessink, van den Berg and Menger, 2011). Considering
this research the advertising policy has not been evaluated. Focus is laid on the presence and role of
the landscape concept in these documents.
Spatial quality is the main argumentation for the municipality of Dalfsen to create an external
appearance of buildings note. In order to maintain the spatial quality of the landscape, the landscape
has been divided in different areas. These areas are based upon the diverse landscape types and
match the landscape types used in the landscape development plan. For every landscape type,
several criteria have been established. When inhabitants are planning a new development, on their
property, they can consult this document. So, they know if a development is allowed or prohibited
because it harms the spatial quality of the landscape type. It is a task for the municipality to manage
the landscape in a proper way, so the spatial quality of the different landscape types is preserved
(Onderdelinden et al., 2014).
The municipality of Raalte has distinguished nine different areas, for which building criteria have
been mentioned. After an evaluation of an earlier version of the policy, the municipality chose to
distinguish less different areas (nine), so the document would be better readable and useable for
inhabitants. Any development within an area should suit the characteristics and present qualities of
that particular area. The landscape of the municipality has been divided in several rural landscape
areas and some built-up areas. For the built-up areas the appearance of the buildings is the most
important issue. In the rural landscape the buildings and the farmyards are the most important issues
(Heidinga and Kruiper, 2010).
The municipality of Deventer has divided the landscape in different areas as well. This division is
made in order to preserve and strengthen the spatial quality of the total landscape. In every area the
municipality cooperated with the inhabitants in order to find out what the inhabitants see as
valuable (landscape) elements. It is up to the inhabitants to consult the document if they are
53
planning a new development. The municipality of Deventer has set criteria which are the guiding
principle in case of new developments. It is up to the municipality to manage the landscape in such a
way the spatial quality of the landscape is preserved and strengthened (Van den Berg et al., 2011).
Like the other three municipalities, the municipality of Zwolle has divided the landscape in different
areas as well. For the fourteen areas the municipality of Zwolle distinguishes, different rules and
regulations have been assigned. For every area a short history is given, after which the key qualities
are mentioned. The policy choices are based upon both the history and the key qualities. Taken the
landscape of the municipality as a whole, spatial quality is the major goal of the municipality.
Landscapes of the past hold a special role within the spatial quality of the municipality of Zwolle.
These important places of the past, should remain visible in the current landscape (Gemeente Zwolle,
2012). This is in line with the landscape development plan in which the Hanze cities are mentioned as
an example of an important element of the past landscape (Ten Cate, 2010).
Box 8: The polder of Mastenbroek in the external appearance of buildings note of the municipality of Zwolle
The polder of Mastenbroek, green part in figure 21, is one of the earliest
rational parcelled landscapes. This area consists of large, wide open fields,
in which agriculture is the main use. Higher lying areas can be identified
in forms of mounds and dikes. The polder is part of the National Landscape
IJsseldelta and is situated close to a suburb of the city of Zwolle. The land
-scape characteristics will be considered if the city will expand even further Figure 21: Polder of Mast-
(Gemeente Zwolle, 2012). This example shows the municipality of Zwolle enbroek (Gemeente Zwolle
is taking care of the history of the landscape in current planning practices. ,2012, page 60)
practices.
54
7.1.4 Comparison between the different municipalities Table 4: Summary of the studied policy documents of the case study municipalities
Summary
Dalfsen Raalte
Landscape and cultural historical values are
central elements within the policies of the
municipality of Dalfsen. As a special landscape,
the river Vecht and its environment are
mentioned. This particular landscape should
become better accessible. In order to give some
rules and guidelines for the whole municipality,
the landscape has been divided in diverse areas.
The areas are based upon the different
landscape types. The main goal of the
municipality is to improve the landscape
scenery. In order to reach this goal,
characteristics of the area and place identity are
discussed in the policies. Landscape and cultural
historical qualities are central in planning and
managing the landscape.
The image of a rural municipality is the central
issue in the vision of the municipality of Raalte.
In order to preserve this image, future
developments have to be related to the past
and current landscapes. The municipality has
given some rules and guidelines a development
has to meet. In order to do this the municipality
made a division in different areas, which are
based upon the past landscape types. The
villages are viewed as places with their own
characteristics and identities. Whereas the
villages are quite diverse planning and
management guidelines have been set in order
to preserve the diversity of the municipality.
Preserving the rural image is the central goal of
the municipality of Raalte has set.
Deventer Zwolle
The landscape of the municipality of Deventer is
quite diverse, therefore the city and its
surroundings are assigned as different areas.
For both areas the characteristics of the
landscape are the guiding principle in planning
and managing the landscape. In order to
connect the cityscape with the rural landscape,
the river IJssel fulfils a major role. The
connection between both landscapes along the
river should be made more explicit. Spatial
quality is the major goal of the municipality of
Deventer. To achieve a qualitative landscape,
characteristics and identity of the different
areas are guiding elements in new plans and the
management of the landscape. For new
developments the key qualities of the
landscape are the guiding principle.
The vision of the municipality of Zwolle is
mainly focussed on the city. In case of a
development, a location within the current city
boundaries is preferred. If this is not feasible,
the development should be located directly
near the city or one of the villages. Different
landscape types and the characteristics of these
areas should remain visible. In this way the
different landscape identities of the
municipality can be identified. Every landscape
has its own characteristics and key qualities.
These are the guiding principle in planning and
management tasks. Spatial quality is one of the
main arguments to lay emphasis on the
different landscape types. Since, different
landscape types ask for different criteria.
As Table 4 shows the municipalities of Deventer and Zwolle have a similar approach to deal with
planning and management issues. Both municipalities have chosen to make a distinction between
55
the city and the rest of the mainly agricultural landscape. This is a rather logical choice, since
different planning issues play a role in the city than in the agricultural landscape. Whereas both
landscapes are part of these municipalities, a distinction between the city scape and its surrounding
landscapes have been made. Furthermore, both municipalities focus on the spatial quality of the
landscape. Maintaining and improving the spatial quality is the major goal related to the concept
landscape. However, the municipalities have a different approach to emphasis and explain the spatial
quality of the current landscape. The municipality of Deventer is focussing on the characteristics and
identity of diverse areas in the landscape. In the policy documents of the municipality of Zwolle
characteristics are mentioned as well, but instead of identity emphasis is laid upon the key qualities
of the landscape.
When comparing the rural municipalities with the urban municipalities similarities and differences
between landscape policies can be noted. When comparing the different municipalities with each
other, it becomes clear that every municipality is focussing on the spatial quality of the landscape.
Sometimes, spatial quality is not specifically mentioned in the policy. However, by focussing on
characteristics and/or key qualities a municipality is aiming at the preservation or strengthening of
the spatial quality of the municipality. The spatial quality of the landscape is based upon the different
landscape types that can be found in the municipalities. Every landscape type has its own
characteristics and qualities, and these should be preserved. Furthermore, the focus on different
landscape types is used in every policy of every municipality. Different landscape types have different
qualities and characteristics, therefore different rules and regulations should be mentioned for
different areas.
The biggest difference between the rural municipalities and the urban municipalities is the presence
of a city. The presence of the cities of Deventer and Zwolle have resulted in a distinction between
cityscape and (agricultural) landscape in the policies of the identical named municipalities. In the
municipalities of Dalfsen and Raalte there is special attention for the villages, but there are no
specific rules and regulations which are only valid in these built-up areas. Of course, planning and
management issues in the villages are different from the same issues in the rural landscape.
However, the differences between the rural landscape and the villages are smaller than the
differences between the cities and their surrounding landscapes.
56
7.2 Landscape planning and management in Dutch municipal policies and
their relation to the ELC In this paragraph the results of the research will be related to the aims of the ELC. The four case
study municipalities will be assessed by means of their landscape development plan, spatial
development strategy and external appearance of buildings note. Furthermore, the role landscape
planning and management play in these municipalities will be assessed and related to the ELC.
7.2.1 Policy documents of the case study areas and their relation to the ELC
In Table 5 an evaluation of the use of the ELC principles in the diverse policy documents is given.
Table 5 is based upon the checklists (see Annex II and the interview and checklist report). The ratings
are based upon the use of landscape and the correspondence with the ELC. In case both the use of
landscape and the relation to the ELC scored good, this policy was rated good in Table 5 as well. As
follows from Table 5, considering landscape and the principles of the ELC, the landscape
development plan is the policy document in which most attention is paid towards the landscape
concept.
Table 5: Use of ELC principles in the diverse policy documents (based upon the checklists)
Municipality Landscape development plan
Spatial development strategy
External appearance of buildings note
Dalfsen Good Average Very poor
Raalte Average/Good Good Very poor
Zwolle Good Poor Poor/Average
Deventer Average/Good Poor Poor/Average
In the landscape development plan, the term landscape is used in a way that is in line with the ELC
principles. First, the current landscape is analysed. Second, a vision upon the future landscape is
given. Last, actions the municipality will take are stated in an action plan. Diverse topics have been
analysed and explained in these landscape development plans. This analysis is used in the planning
and management guidelines considering the landscape. In order to give a good view upon the
current landscape and the diversity of the landscape, the past landscapes play a major role. The
geomorphology of the landscape is, in all municipalities, the main reasoning behind the division in
different areas (Gemmeke, et al., 2008; Ten Cate, 2010; Von Wersch et al., 2009). For the rural
landscapes, protection, planning and management issues have been carried out, according to the
ELC. However, the ELC also mentions the urban landscape as an important landscape (Council of
Europe, 2000b). Within the plans of the municipalities some attention is paid towards the edges of
the cities and villages, only the cities and villages themselves are not discussed in this plan.
For the spatial development strategy, the differences between the municipalities are bigger. The
municipalities of Raalte and Dalfsen score good and average on the use of landscape in their long-
term vision upon the municipality. These municipalities are both rural municipalities. Preserving the
rural landscape is the main goal of the municipality of Raalte (Boersma et al., 2012). It makes sense
the landscape is described and assessed from many different places and times. This is in line with the
definition of landscape as mentioned in the ELC (Council of Europe, 2000a). The municipality of
Dalfsen emphasises the cultural-historical values of the landscape. New planning and management
issues have to take care of the history of the landscape and its values (BMC Advies en Management,
2009). The municipalities of Dalfsen and Raalte pay attention to the landscape in their external
57
appearance of buildings note. However, the relation with the ELC is very poor. In the policy of
Dalfsen as well as the policy of Raalte emphasis is laid upon the buildings, the appearance and the
situation of buildings in the landscape. There is only little attention paid to the whole landscape.
The municipalities of Deventer and Zwolle score poor on the elements of the ELC that can be
identified in their spatial development strategy. Landscape is considered an important issue in the
outskirts of the city. For the city itself only minor attention is paid to the landscape (Gemeente
Deventer, 2004; Gemeente Zwolle, 2008). In the ELC it is clearly stated landscape involves all types of
landscape, whether it is a rural, urban, periurban or natural landscape (Council of Europe, 2000b).
One exception can be noted, both cities give attention to the river landscape, which is running along
the city. Connecting the city landscape with the river landscape is one of the major goals of the city
landscape of these municipalities (Gemeente Deventer, 2004; Gemeente Zwolle, 2008). The city
landscape and qualities are explained in more detail in the external appearance of buildings note
(Gemeente Zwolle, 2012; Van den Berg et al., 2011). Landscape only has a minor role in these
policies, whereas emphasis is laid upon the buildings. However, landscape and the ELC principles are
better visible in the policies of the city municipalities than they are in the policies of the rural
municipalities. The municipality of Deventer has given a minor biography of the landscape, by
focussing on the former appearance of the landscape. For several landscape types, the landscapes of
1915 or 1917, 1953 or 1956 and 1991 are given. The past landscapes might serve as a source of
inspiration for designing farm yards (Van den Berg, 2011). The municipality of Zwolle also gives a
minor biography of different landscapes, only in a different form. The biography of the landscape is
told in a story which is supported by pictures of the current landscape (Gemeente Zwolle, 2012).
Landscape hold a bigger story in these notes. For the cities a vision upon the landscape can be
identified, in this document, which contributes to the urban landscape as mentioned in the ELC.
It can be concluded that the four case study municipalities make use of the landscape concept.
Landscape types and identity of the city, village(s) or different areas play a central role in the policies
of the municipalities. The landscape development plan can directly be linked to the ELC, whereas the
aims of this policy and the aims of the ELC are quite similar. The ELC is focussed on the protection,
management and planning issues within the landscape (Council of Europe, 2000a). A landscape
development plan is consistent with these aims, whereas its main focus is laid upon the landscape
and in particular the future landscape. The analysis of the past and current landscape hold a major
role in the construction of this future landscape (ten Cate, 2010).
7.2.2 Presence of the ELC in landscape planning and management on a local level
When comparing the policies with each other, it becomes clear that the landscape development plan
is the policy in which the municipalities pay most attention to the landscape. This policy is in line with
the ELC, whereas the landscape development plan is focussed on the landscape.
The forward looking attitude, which the ELC aims for (Council of Europe, 2000b), can be found in the
spatial development strategies and in the landscape development plans. All municipalities pay
attention to the future of their municipality. Broad planning lines for the future landscape are
mentioned in these policies. However, connections between the past and the future landscape are
little made. Integrating history in current planning issues can be hard to realise (Marcucci, 2000). In
order to make this easier the landscape biography can act as a useful instrument (Elerie and Spek,
2010; Tress and Tress, 2001). In the policies of the case study municipalities the landscape biography
58
concept can only be identified in the external appearance of buildings note of the municipalities of
Deventer and Zwolle (Gemeente Zwolle, 2012; Van den Berg et al., 2011).
Managing the landscape has become harder, whereas subsidies have become less. This means
municipalities have less financial resources to spend on managing their landscape. Antrop (2005)
states landscapes are difficult to manage. In the ELC emphasis is laid upon a dynamic management
approach (Council of Europe, 2000b). All interviewees have mentioned the financial resources are
becoming less. The municipalities search for different ways to effectively manage the landscape.
Participation with other stakeholders and using the existing documents are mentioned multiple
times. The policy officer of the municipality of Deventer notes that in a time of declining resources:
From the interviews it can be noted that landscape matters to the municipalities. As all interviewees
have mentioned, the landscape development plan holds a role within other policies such as spatial
development strategies and zoning plans. The policy officer of the municipality of Raalte stated the
landscape policy is taken very seriously. The landscape policy of the municipality plays a role in many
diverse plans and regulations. Letting inhabitants participate and raising opportunities to get people
in touch with the landscape is important as well. For their efforts considering landscape and
participation, the municipality of Raalte won a prize last year. The other interviewees had similar
remarks considering the position of their landscape policy. As the policy officer of the municipality of
Zwolle states the landscape qualities of the municipality of Zwolle are the guiding principle in
planning and management issues. The spatial planning officer and policy officer of the municipality of
Dalfsen state a development, which will have an impact on the landscape of the municipality of
Dalfsen, should meet the regional and municipal policies. Landscape on a regional and local level is
therefore considered when implementing new developments. The policy officer of the municipality
of Deventer mentioned the landscape development plan is used every time an inhabitant has an idea
which affects the landscape of the municipality of Deventer. Even though there is no national
landscape policy anymore, in the case study municipalities landscape is a concept that holds a central
place.
Participation is getting more important. We need to search together, governments and
inhabitants, how we can join our strengths in order to create and finance projects. In order to
make good choices, the landscape of Salland on the long term needs to be taken in mind. What
needs to be preserved and strengthened and what functions can be combined with these needs, in
order to provide an economic base. (Policy officer of the municipality of Deventer, interviewed on
9 July 2014).
59
8. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
8.1 Discussion
8.1.1 Findings in relation to the problem statement
From the results it can be told that the municipalities care for the landscape and take care of the
landscape in their policies. In the landscape development plan, landscape as defined in the ELC holds
a central position. In the spatial development strategies and the external appearance of buildings
note, the relation with landscape is less and only minor relations with the ELC principles can be
discovered. In general, between the policies of the rural and urban municipalities only minor
differences have been identified. These differences are related to the type of municipality. The rural
municipalities focus on the landscape as a whole, while the urban municipalities chose to focus on
the city surroundings and view the city separately.
In the diverse policies, municipalities distinguish the landscape, mainly according to the
geomorphology, in different landscape types. For every landscape type targets have been set, these
suit the characteristics and quality of the past and current landscape. Planning and management
issues are in line with the different landscape types.
8.1.2 Findings in relation to the concepts and theoretical framework
Landscape, landscape planning and management, landscape identity and landscape biography are
concepts which hold a central role in this research. Different authors (Jacobs, 2006; Palang et al.,
2011; Printsmann et al., 2011) distinguish different perspectives upon the landscape. In general three
different perspectives upon landscape can be distinguished (Jacobs, 2006; Palang et al., 2011). After
Palang et al. (2011), these perspectives are: the physical landscape, social landscape and mindscape.
From the results it became clear that the physical landscape holds a central role in the external
appearance of buildings notes. The physical and social landscape can be identified in the landscape
development plans and the spatial zoning plans. Mindscape is a perspective upon the landscape that
cannot be identified in either one of these plans.
Landscapes are changing constantly (Antrop, 2005; Vervloet, 2007). In planning and managing the
landscape municipalities have to be aware of the changing nature of landscapes. In order to
effectively manage the landscape the future landscape cannot be forgotten (Council of Europe,
2000b). The landscape development plan is the plan in which past, present and future landscapes all
hold a central position. However, the urban landscape is not considered in these policies. The Council
of Europe (2000a; 2000b) has stated the ELC is about all landscapes, therefore the urban landscape
can be considered as a missing element in these policies. In the spatial development strategies, the
rural as well as the villages or cities are seen as a whole. Even though the vision is not specifically
about landscape, several landscapes hold a position in this vision. The external appearance of
buildings note is clearly focussed on managing the landscape. The image of the current landscape has
to be preserved or strengthened, whereas the buildings have to suit the landscape type.
When assessing the case study areas, it turned out that landscape biography is hardly ever used. In a
sense it is logical, whereas landscape biography is a complex instrument (Reuselaars & Van der Valk,
2009). Kolen (1993 in Elerie & Spek) distinguishes the physical (material) and social (world of ideas,
meanings and representations) landscape. As the assessments of the case study areas have proved,
the physical landscape is thoroughly described and discussed. The social landscape is lacking in these
60
policies. Palang et al. (2011) have argued the landscape biography concept is a popular concept in
the Dutch planning system. Taken the provincial policy in mind, this is an excellent observation.
However, the municipal policies are barely using the landscape biography concept in their policies.
Landscape identity is a concept all municipalities make use of. The cultural-geographical identity as
described by Stobbelaar and Hendriks (2006) can be identified very easily. According to the
geomorphology, the municipalities have divided their landscapes in different areas. The differences
between the municipalities are minimal. As appears from both the assessment and the interviews,
the landscapes and elements a municipality sees as a unique feature, can be discovered in at least
one other municipality as well. For example, the estates are mentioned as a quality by the policy
officers of the municipalities of Dalfsen, Raalte and Deventer. The other landscape identities
Stobbelaar and Hendriks (2006) have not been discussed in the assessed policies. This might have
been the reason the professional identity is the most identified in the policies. The identity of the
landscape has been assessed from a professional point of view (Simon, 2004). The perspectives of
layman and cultural and societal groups (Simon, 2004), are hardly ever used in the policies. A
scientific perspective (Simon, 2004) upon the identities of the landscapes of the municipalities
cannot be identified. This has as a result the spatial identity and regional and political identity
(Bosma, 2010) are clearly visible in the policies. The individual and group identities (Bosma, 2010)
cannot be identified. Although public participation found place in creating the landscape policies.
Landscape is the overarching concept which is actively used in the case study municipalities. The
physical landscape is clearly visible in these policies. The social landscape is not that often used,
although participation found place. For so far, landscape biography and landscape identity could be
identified, the physical landscape is the guiding principle. Considering the biography and identity
concepts, the social landscape cannot be identified at all.
8.1.3 Circumstances which might have affected the results
This research has been focussed on four municipalities, all located in province of Overijssel. All
interviewees mentioned the provincial policies had an impact on the landscape policies of the
municipalities. By deciding to focus on four municipalities all located in the same province, only a
small part of the province of Overijssel and the Netherlands can be represented in the way the local
level deals with landscape.
The interviews have been a great opportunity to find out more about the processes behind the
formulating the landscape policies. For Zwolle, Deventer and Raalte a personal appointment was
made. These interviews have taken place at the workplace of the policy officer. The interview
questions have been extendedly answered. Extended answers have been given to the questions and
many examples were used to illustrate these situations. For the municipality of Dalfsen only mail
contact occurred, because an appointment had been made with an official who had not all
information about the topic. For making a new appointment with another official it was too late,
because the summer holiday already started. The mail contact resulted in short answers, which were
much harder to use in the research.
8.2 Conclusion In the case study municipalities landscape has a central role. The landscape policies have been
implemented in other policies of these municipalities as well. From the diverse policies which have
been studied, the landscape development plan comes closest to the aims of the ELC. In the ELC
61
protecting, planning and managing the landscape are the central goals (Council of Europe, 2000a). A
landscape development plan is focussed on these aims as well. The main goal of a landscape
development plan is to make clear to the inhabitants of the municipality which development is
allowed in which landscape area (ten Cate, 2010). The spatial development strategies and external
appearance of buildings notes pay attention to landscape as well. However, these policies are less
related to the aims of the ELC, as they focus on respectively wider and smaller topics than landscape.
The municipalities are mainly taking care of the physical landscape in their policies. Landscape is
more than just the physical landscape, therefore it is recommended the social landscape is taken in
account as well. By integrating the social landscape with the physical landscape in municipal policies,
the municipalities fulfil the aims of the ELC even better. Landscape biography is a concept which can
be used to fulfil this recommendation. A landscape biography is a useful concept to let diverse
people all with their own knowledge integrate in a discussion were landscape is the central topic
(Reuselaars & van der Valk, 2009). How municipalities can best use a landscape biography to
implement the social landscape should be further researched.
62
63
9. BIBLIOGRAPHY Abrahamse, Jaap Evert. Brinkkemper, Otto. & Spek, Theo. (2008). Integreren met de
landschapsbiografie. Rooilijn, 41(4), 272-279.
Antrop, Marc. (2005). Why landscapes of the past are important for the future. Landscape and Urban
Planning, 70, 21-34.
Antrop, Marc. (2006). From holistic landscape synthesis to transdisciplinary landscape management.
In: B. Tress, G. Tress, G. Fry and P. Opdam (Eds.), From landscape research to landscape planning:
Aspects of integration, education and application. (pp. 27-50). Dordrecht: Springer.
Baas, Henk. Groenewoudt, Bert. & Raap, Edwin. (2011). The Dutch Approach. In: Michael Jones &
Marie Stenseke (Eds.), The European Landscape Convention: Challenges of participation. (pp. 45-66).
Dordrecht: Springer.
Bloemers, J.H.F. (2010). Imagination: facts and constructions: About imagination, authenticity and
identity, and the value of interpretative heritage research. In: Tom Bloemers, Henk Kars, Arnold Van
der Valk & Mies Wijnen (Eds.), The cultural landscape & heritage paradox: Protection and
development of the Dutch archaeological-historical landscape and its European dimension. (pp. 189-
202). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Bosma, Koos. (2010). Heritage policy in spatial planning. In: Tom Bloemers, Henk Kars, Arnold Van
der Valk & Mies Wijnen (Eds.), The cultural landscape & heritage paradox: Protection and
development of the Dutch archaeological-historical landscape and its European dimension. (pp. 641-
652). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
BMC Advies en Management. (2009). Bij uitstek Dalfsen: Visie gemeente Dalfsen 2020. (BMC Advies
en Management: Amersfoort).
Boersma, Jan Hein. Ruyssenaars, Barbara. Tap, Jan Willem. & Witberg, Maarten. (2012). Structuurvisie Raalte 2025+: De kracht van de kernen. (Nieuwe Gracht: Utrecht).
Compendium voor de Leefomgeving. (2012). Natura 2000 gebieden [Map of the Birds and Habitats
directive in the Netherlands]. [online] Retrieved from:
http://www.compendiumvoordeleefomgeving.nl/indicatoren/nl1308-Vogel--en-
Habitatrichtlijngebieden-in-Nederland.html?i=19-48 [Accessed: 09 October 2014].
Compendium voor de Leefomgeving. (2011). Ecologische Hoofdstructuur [Map of the National
Ecological Network]. [online] Retrieved from:
http://www.compendiumvoordeleefomgeving.nl/indicatoren/nl1298-EHS-begrenzing.html?i=19-22
[Accessed: 09 October 2014].
Council of Europe. (2000a). European Landscape Convention, Florence. CETS No. 176 (Strasbourg:
Council of Europe).
Council of Europe. (2000b). European Landscape Convention, Florence, Explanatory report. CETS No.
176 (Strasbourg: Council of Europe).
64
Council of Europe. (2005). Council of Europe Framework Convention of the Value of Cultural Heritage
for Society, Faro. CETS No. 199 (Strasbourg: Council of Europe).
Council of Europe. (2014a). European Landscape Convention: Chart of signatures and ratifications.
CETS No. 176 (Strasbourg: Council of Europe).
Council of Europe. (2014b). Council of Europe Framework Convention of the Value of Cultural
Heritage for Society: Chart of signatures and ratifications. CETS No. 199 (Strasbourg: Council of
Europe).
CPRN. (2014). Nijmegen: Een rijk verleden, met een gouden toekomst. [online] Retrieved from:
http://www.cprn.nl/ [Accessed 09 October 2014].
De Montis, Andrea. (2014). Impacts of the European Landscape Convention on national planning
systems: A comparative investigation of six case studies. Landscape and Urban Planning, 124, 53-65.
Dessing, Noor & Pedroli, Bas. (2013). Voldoet Nederland nog wel aan de Europese
Landschapsconventie?. Landschap, 30(1), 15-19.
Elerie, Hans & Spek, Theo. (2010). The cultural biography of landscape as a tool for action research in
the Drentsche Aa national landscape (Northern Netherlands). In: Tom Bloemers, Henk Kars, Arnold
Van der Valk & Mies Wijnen (Eds.), The cultural landscape & heritage paradox: Protection and
development of the Dutch archaeological-historical landscape and its European dimension. (pp. 83-
114). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Europe. (2014). Summaries of EU legislation: Agriculture. [online] Retrieved from:
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/agriculture/index_en.htm [Accessed 14 September 2014].
European Commission. (2002). Water is life. Water Framework Directive. (Brussels: European
Commission).
European Commission. (2012). The Common Agricultural Policy. A story to be continued. (Brussels:
European Commission).
Gemeente Deventer. (2004). Structuurplan Deventer 2025: Synergie van stad en land. (Gemeente
Deventer: Deventer).
Gemeente Zwolle. (2008). Structuurplan 2020. (Gemeente Zwolle: Zwolle).
Gemeente Zwolle. (2012). Welstandsnota 2012: Mooi Zwolle. (Gemeente Zwolle: Zwolle).
Gehl, Jan. 2010. Cities for people. Washington: Island Press.
Gemmeke, Maurice. Noortman, Adrian. Jobse, Gertjan. Smit, Gerdien. Van der Vegt, Loes. Spreen,
Marlies. Holtman, Francisca. Rodijk, Hennie. Veldhuis, Shirley & Terhorst, Paul. (2008). Een plus voor
het landschap van Salland. (Arcadis: Arnhem).
Heidinga, Kor & Kruiper, Paul. (2010). Welstandsnota 2010. (Gemeente Raalte: Raalte).
Hidding, Marjan. Kolen, Jan & Spek, Theo. (2001). De biografie van het landschap: Ontwerp voor een
inter- en multidisciplinaire benadering van de landschapsgeschiedenis en het cultuurhistorisch
65
erfgoed. In: Tom Bloemers & Mies Wijnen (Eds.), Bodemarchief in Behoud en Ontwikkeling: De
conceptuele grondslagen. (pp. 7-110). Assen: Koninklijke Van Gorcum BV.
Hospers, Gert-Jan. (2013). Geografie en gevoel: Wat plekken met ons doen. Assen: Koninklijke Van
Gorcum.
Imergis. (2013). Map of the province of Overijssel [Figures of the province and the case study
municipalities]. [online] Retrieved from: http://www.imergis.nl/map/2014-P04-Overijssel-k.jpg
[Accessed: 09 October 2014]
Ives, Christopher. & Kendal, Dave. (2013). Values and attitudes of the urban public towards peri-
urban agricultural land. Land Use Policy, 34, 80-90.
Jacobs, Maarten. (2006). The production of mindscapes: a comprehensive theory of landscape
experience. (Dissertation: Wageningen University).
Janssen, Joks. (2009). Protected landscapes in the Netherlands: changing ideas and approaches.
Planning Perspectives, 24(4), 435-455.
Janssen, Joks. Luiten, Eric. Renes, Hans & Rouwendal, Jan. (2014). Heritage planning and spatial
development in the Netherlands: changing policies and perspectives. International Journal of
Heritage Studies, 20(1), 1-21.
Kistenkas, F.H. (2010). Recht voor de groene ruimte (2e druk). Wageningen: Wageningen Academic
Publishers.
Kolen, Jan & Witte, Mathijs. (2006). A biographical approach to regions, and its value for spatial
planning. In: Wim Van der Knaap & Arnold Van der Valk (Eds.), Multiple landscape: Merging past and
present. (pp. 125-146). Wageningen: Ponsen & Looijen bv.
Kolen, Jan. (2007). Naar een nieuwe benadering van het erfgoed van stad en land; De biografie van
het landschap. Vitruvius, 1, 14-18.
Kopytoff, Igor. (1986). The cultural biography of things: commoditization as a process. In: Arjun
Appadurai (Ed.), The social life of things: Commodities in cultural perspective. (pp. 64-91). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Luiten, Eric. (2013). Advies Europese Landschapsconventie. [pdf] Retrieved from:
http://www.collegevanrijksadviseurs.nl/over-cra/publicaties-en-adviezen/publicatie/nieuws/advies-
europese-landschapsconventie-elc/ [Accessed 14 September 2014].
Marcucci, Daniel. (2000). Landscape history as a planning tool. Landscape and Urban Planning, 49,
67-81.
Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu, (2012). Structuurvisie Infrastructuur en Ruimte: Nederland
concurrerend, bereikbaar, leefbaar en veilig.
Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu, (2013). Memorie van toelichting ontwerp Omgevingswet. C O
N C E P T. Algemeen deel. Versie 0.60 - 28 februari 2013 (consultatieversie).
66
Onderdelinden, Rik. Haan, Linda. Unen, Frank. Lautenbach, Karin. Flentge, Jeroen & Lammertsen,
Henk. (2014). Welstandsnota gemeente Dalfsen. (Het Oversticht: Zwolle).
Oueslati, Walid & Salanié, Julien. (2011). Landscape valuation and planning. Journal of Environmental
Planning and Management, 54(1), 1-6.
Paalman, Frans. (2013). Waanders in de Broeren [Picture of a church designated with a new
destination]. [online] Retrieved from: http://www.destentor.nl/regio/zwolle/maastricht-over-
waanders-in-de-broeren-in-zwolle-na-apers-1.3925001 [Accessed 30 September 2014].
Palang, Hannes. Spek, Theo & Stenseke, Marie. (2011). Digging in the past: New conceptual models in
landscape history and their relevance in peri-urban landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 100,
344-346.
Plottu, Eric & Plottu, Béatrice. (2012). Total landscape values: a multi-dimensional approach. Journal
of Environmental Planning and Management, 55(6), 797-811.
Printsmann, Anu. Kõivupuu, Marju & Palang, Hannes. (2011). Dual character of landscape in Lahemee
national park, Estonia. In: Zoran Roca, Paul Claval & John Agnew (Eds.), Landscapes, identities and
development. (pp. 51-66). Farnham: Ashgate.
Provincie Overijssel. (2009a). Omgevingsvisie Overijssel: Catalogus Gebiedskenmerken. (Zwolle:
Provincie Overijssel).
Provincie Overijssel. (2009b). Masterplan: Ruimte voor de Vecht. (Zwolle: Provincie Overijssel).
Provincie Overijssel. (2010). Werkboek Kwaliteitsimpuls Groene Omgeving: Ruimtelijke
kwaliteitsprincipes toepassen in de praktijk van de ruimtelijke ordening in Overijssel. (Zwolle:
Provincie Overijssel).
Provincie Overijssel. (2013a). Atlas van Overijssel. [Maps of the case study municipalities] [online]
Retrieved from: http://gisopenbaar.overijssel.nl/viewer/app/atlasvanoverijssel_basis/v1 [Accessed
08 October 2014].
Provincie Overijssel. (2013b). Omgevingsvisie Overijssel: Visie en uitvoeringsprogramma voor de
ontwikkeling van de fysieke leefomgeving van de provincie Overijssel. (Zwolle: Provincie Overijssel).
Provincie Overijssel. (2014). Omgevingsverordening Overijssel 2009. [online] Retrieved from:
<http://www.overijssel.nl/loket/provinciale/omgevingsverordening_overijssel_2009> [Accessed 14
September 2014].
Reuselaars, Iris & Van der Valk, Arnold. (2009). Gereedschap voor cultuurhistorie en ruimtelijke
ordening. In: André Van der Zande & Roel During (Eds.), Erfgoed en ruimtelijke planning: Sterft, gij
oude vormen en gedachten!. (pp. 193-232). Den Haag: Sdu Uitgevers bv.
Roe, Maggie. (2013). Policy Change and ELC Implementation: Establishment of a Baseline for
Understanding the Impact on UK National Policy of the European Landscape Convention. Landscape
Research, 38(6), 768-798.
67
Roymans, Nico. Gerritsen, Fokke. Van der Heijden, Cor. Bosma, Koos & Kolen, Jan. (2010). Revitalizing
history: moving from historical landscape reconstructions to heritage practices in the southern
Netherlands. In: Tom Bloemers, Henk Kars, Arnold Van der Valk & Mies Wijnen (Eds.), The cultural
landscape & heritage paradox: Protection and development of the Dutch archaeological-historical
landscape and its European dimension. (pp. 387-406). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Ruimte voor de Rivier, (2007). Ruimte voor de Rivier: Een veiliger en mooier rivierengebied. (Utrecht:
Rijkswaterstaat Ruimte voor de Rivier).
Samuels, Marwyn S. (1979). The biography of landscape: Cause and culpability. In: D. W. Meinig (Ed.),
The interpretation of ordinary landscapes: Geographical essays. (pp. 51-87). New York: Oxford
University Press.
Selman, Paul. (2006). Planning at the landscape scale. London: Routledge.
Simon, Carola. (2004). Ruimte voor identiteit: De productie en reproductie van streekidentiteiten in
Nederland. Enschede: Febodruk bv.
Stobbelaar, Derk Jan & Hendriks, Karina. (2006). Reading the identity of place. In: Wim Van der Knaap
& Arnold Van der Valk (Eds.), Multiple landscape: Merging past and present. (pp. 199-211).
Wageningen: Ponsen & Looijen bv.
Stobbelaar, Derk Jan & Pedroli, Bas. (2011). Perspectives on landscape identity: A conceptual
challenge. Landscape Research, 36(3), 321-339.
Ten Cate, C.A.M. (2010). Landschapsontwikkelingsplan: Landschapsontwikkelingsvisie. LOP Zwolle,
Zwartewaterland en Kampen. (Royal Haskoning: Enschede).
Tress, Bärbel & Tress, Gunther. (2001). Capitalising on multiplicity: A transdisciplinary systems
approach to landscape research. Landscape and Urban Planning, 57, 143-157.
Van den Berg, Andries. Reessink, Marieta. Van den Berg, Niek & Menger, Marijn. (2011).
Welstandsnota gemeente Deventer. (Bügel Hajema: Assen).
Van der Valk, Arnold & Bloemers, Tom. (2006). Multiple and sustainable landscapes: Linking heritage
management and spatial planning in the Netherlands. In: Wim Van der Knaap & Arnold Van der Valk
(Eds.), Multiple landscape: Merging past and present. (pp. 21-34). Wageningen: Ponsen & Looijen
bv.
Van der Valk, Arnold. (2010). Planning the past. Lessons to be learned from ‘Protecting and
Developing the Dutch Archaeological-Historical Landscape’ (PDL/BBO). In: Tom Bloemers, Henk Kars,
Arnold Van der Valk & Mies Wijnen (Eds.), The cultural landscape & heritage paradox: Protection and
development of the Dutch archaeological-historical landscape and its European dimension. (pp. 21-
52). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Van der Valk, Arnold. (2014). Preservation and Development: The Cultural Landscape and Heritage
Paradox in the Netherlands. Landscape Research, 39(2), 158-173.
68
Van Londen, Heleen. (2006). Cultural biography and the power of image. In: Wim Van der Knaap &
Arnold Van der Valk (Eds.), Multiple landscape: Merging past and present. (pp.171-182). Wageningen:
Ponsen & Looijen bv.
Van der Windt, Henny. (1995). En dan: Wat is natuur nog in dit land?. Amsterdam: Boom.
Vervloet, Jelle. (2007). Some remarks about the changing position of landscape assessment. In: Zoran
Roca, Theo Spek, Theano Terkenli, Tobias Plieninger & Franz Höchtl (Eds.), European landscapes and
lifestyles: The Mediterranean and beyond. (pp. 433-438). Lisbon: Edições Universitárias Lusófonas.
Vervloet, Jelle. Van Beek, Roy & Keunen, Luuk. (2010). A biography of the cultural landscape in the
eastern Netherlands: theory and practice of acquisition and propagation of knowledge. In: Tom
Bloemers, Henk Kars, Arnold Van der Valk & Mies Wijnen (Eds.), The cultural landscape & heritage
paradox: Protection and development of the Dutch archaeological-historical landscape and its
European dimension. (pp. 133-150). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Von Wersch, E., Koerhuis, R.H.M., Huls, M.J.P.M. & Bontje, L. (2009). Beleefbaar landschap:
Landschapsontwikkelingsplan Dalfsen. (Grontmij: Arnhem).
Waterschap Groot Salland. (2014). Projectenkaart: Ruimte voor water [Map of the river Vecht in the
municipalities of Zwolle and Dalfsen]. [online] Retrieved from: http://www.wgs.nl/ruimte-
water/projectenkaart-0/ [Accessed 09 October 2014].
69
ANNEX I – Example of a checklist Evaluation sheet local policy documents
Section 1: Document information
1. Municipality: Dalfsen
2. Title of the document: Beleefbaar landschap: Landschapsontwikkelingsplan Dalfsen
3. Authors: Von Wersch, E., Koerhuis, R.H.M, Huls, M.J.P.M & Bontje, L.
4. Project agency: Grontmij
5. Year of publication: 2009
Section 2: Headline indicators & Evaluation
6. Is the ELC specifically mentioned? Yes No X
7. How is the ELC mentioned? The ELC is not mentioned
8. Is the term 'landscape' used?
Yes X No
9. Is the term 'landscape' used in a way Yes X No
consistent with the objectives of the ELC?
10. Are similar terms used to discuss the
Yes X No
principles of the ELC?
11. Level of detail/description 1 2 3 4 X 5
(of ELC principles)?
12. Is this a good use of the ELC? 1 2 3 4 X 5
Section 3: Evaluation of the use of different concepts
I: Landscape
13. Which types of landscape are discussed?
a. Physical landscape
Yes
X No
b. Social landscape
Yes
No X
14. How is dealt with the protection of the landscape?
For every landscape type, the current monuments are listed. These are protected by national and
provincial laws.
15. Are the following changes, in landscape, considered?
a. Accessibility
Yes No X
b. Urbanization
Yes X No
c. Globalization
Yes No X
d. Calamities Yes No X
16. Is there any form of awareness raising? Yes
No
X
17. Is landscape used as a unifying concept? Yes No X
70
18. Will the policy be evaluated? Yes No X
II: Landscape planning and landscape management
19. Did inhabitants participate?
Yes X No
20. How is dealt with the quality of the landscape?
The municipality has divided the landscape in different landscape types. For every type qualities are
listed. Furthermore, landscape quality holds a major role in the document.
21. How is dealt with sustainability in relation to the landscape?
Sustainability is not a goal the municipality considers in the document. It is mentioned that the Council
adds less value to the theme of sustainability in landscapes. Themes like nature, water, spatial quality,
recreation and tourism in relation with the landscape are more valuated by the Council.
22. Is the land used in a multifunctional way? Yes X No
23. Is the diversity of the landscape considered? Yes X No
24. Will the changes in landscape be monitored? Yes No X
25. Is there attention for the far future, in order to Yes No X
enhance, restore or create certain landscapes?
III: Landscape biography
26. Are the different dimensions of the landscape visible?
a. Physical landscape
Yes X
No
b. Social landscape
Yes
No X
27. Is the long-term history of the landscape visible?
a. Changing land use functions Yes
No
X
b. Important places in the (past) landscape Yes
No
X
28. Level of integration between past, present
and future landscapes 1 2 X 3 4 5
IV: Landscape identity
29. Is attention paid to the following factors:
a. Coherence
Yes No X
b. Complexity
Yes No X
c. Readability
Yes No X
d. Mystery
Yes
No
X
30. What are considered the distinctive features?
As distinctive features the municipality has identified: 'the variety in landscape types, the presence of
estates, beautiful farms, ricks and baking houses make the landscape attractive for inhabitants and
visitors. The rich flora and fauna, including a large number of protected species, are of intrinsic value and
ask for careful acting (page 9).'
31. Which perspectives on identity can be identified?
a. Layman
Yes
No X
b. Cultural and societal Yes X No
71
groups
c. Professional
Yes X No
d. Scientific Yes No X
32. Which level(s) of landscape identity are used?
a. Individual
Yes No X
b. Group
Yes X
No
c. Spatial
Yes X
No
d. Regional and political Yes X No
33. What types of identity can be identified?
a. Place identity
Yes No X
b. Regional identity Yes
X No
Section 4: Connection with other policies and laws
34. Is the document related with:
a. European policies
Yes
No X
b. European laws
Yes No X
c. National policies
Yes X
No
d. National laws
Yes No X
e. Regional policies
Yes X
No
f. Regional laws Yes X No
Section 5: Summary
In the document the landscape is the central issue. In order to formulate a well-founded vision, the
municipality divided the landscape in diverse areas. This was done according to the landscape types. For
every landscape type the characteristics (in form of image of the landscape, culture history, ecology and
economy), future developments, possibilities and threats are described.
Inhabitants of the municipality have participated. In instance the municipality had two different
scenario's considering the future landscape, called preservation and developing. After the inhabitants were
consulted, the municipality created the scenario selective development. Its generic goals are:
* Improving the landscape scenery. Buildings and farmyards are central in the realisation of this goal.
* The preservation and restauration of cultural-historical valuable elements.
When planning and managing the landscape, the municipality takes these landscape types as the guiding
principle.
73
ANNEX II – Interview questions 1. Are you familiar with the European Landscape Convention and the targets of this convention? Is there a need for a guide, on municipal level, to make it easier to reach the goals of the ELC? 2. Are there rules and/or guidelines formulated by the European Union, the national government or the provinces, which have an impact on the municipal landscape policy? 3. Did the inhabitants of your municipality cooperate when designing the landscape policy? If yes, in what way did they cooperate? If not, why not? 4. Are there sufficient (financial) resources available to complete actions regarding the landscape policy and to manage the landscape? 5. Has the attitude towards landscape changed, since the landscape policy is formulated? Is there a need to review the landscape policy? 6. What position does the landscape policy take in the municipality? 7. What is a/are unique landscape element(s) with which the municipality distinguishes itself from surrounding municipalities? 8. When the Environmental law gets into force, one municipal environmental plan is obligated. What does this mean for the landscape policy of the municipality?
72
Interview and checklist report Belonging to:
The use of landscape in municipal policies A research towards the implementation of landscape as defined in the European
Landscape Convention
Author: Sharon Westerman Student number: 910125945040
2
3
Table of Contents 1. Interviews ............................................................................................................................................ 5
1.1 Dalfsen ........................................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Zwolle ............................................................................................................................................ 7
1.3 Raalte ............................................................................................................................................. 9
1.4 Deventer ...................................................................................................................................... 13
2. Checklists ........................................................................................................................................... 17
2.1 Landscape development plan...................................................................................................... 17
2.1.1 Dalfsen .................................................................................................................................. 17
2.1.2 Raalte and Deventer ............................................................................................................. 20
2.1.3 Zwolle ................................................................................................................................... 23
2.2 Spatial development plan ............................................................................................................ 27
2.2.1 Dalfsen .................................................................................................................................. 27
2.2.2 Raalte .................................................................................................................................... 30
2.2.3 Deventer ............................................................................................................................... 33
2.2.4 Zwolle ................................................................................................................................... 36
2.3 External appearance of buildings note ........................................................................................ 41
2.3.1 Dalfsen .................................................................................................................................. 41
2.3.2 Raalte .................................................................................................................................... 44
2.3.3 Deventer ............................................................................................................................... 47
2.3.4 Zwolle ................................................................................................................................... 50
4
5
1. Interviews
1.1 Dalfsen Interviewees: Green and landscape officer(questions 1 to 5 and 7) & Spatial planning officer (questions 6 & 8) Municipality: Dalfsen E-mail contact on: 30 – 06 – 2014, 01 – 07 – 2014, 02 – 07 – 2014 & 03 – 07 – 2014 1. Are you familiar with the European Landscape Convention and the targets of this convention? Is there a need for a guide, on municipal level, to make it easier to reach the goals of the ELC? ‘Yes I am familiar with the European Landscape convention and the targets of this convention. There is not directly a need for a guide. We try to coordinate the landscape policy of Dalfsen with the regional level (the surrounding municipalities).’ 2. Are there rules and/or guidelines formulated by the European Union, the national government or the provinces, which have an impact on the municipal landscape policy? ‘Yes, the guidelines from European, national and provincial level work as a precondition in order to formulate the landscape policy of the municipality.’ 3. Did the inhabitants of your municipality cooperate when designing the landscape policy? If yes, in what way did they cooperate? If not, why not? ‘Yes, we have organised two meetings for the inhabitants. Furthermore, a we had an advisory group, which represented different institutions. Estate owners, tree workgroups, local interest groups, Landschap Overijssel and Staatsbosbeheer. This advisory group came together for three or four times.’ 4. Are there sufficient (financial) resources available to complete actions regarding the landscape policy and to manage the landscape? ‘No, there is only a limited budget of € 17,500 available. This budget is used for the Green Blue Services.’ 5. Has the attitude towards landscape changed, since the landscape policy is formulated? Is there a need to review the landscape policy? ‘Yes, the landscape development plan is used as a guideline to assess whether a project meets the rules. However, since the budget diminished, the resources for taking care of the landscape became less. There is no need to review the landscape development plan.’ 6. What position does the landscape policy take in the municipality? ‘In case of spatial developments where the zoning plan is not sufficient or a new zoning plan needs to be formulated, landscape policy has an important role. Developments have to be integrated in the landscape. Normally, we ask for a landscape plan which meets the municipal and provincial landscape policy.’ 7. What is a/ are unique landscape element(s) with which the municipality distinguishes itself from surrounding municipalities? ‘The variety / diversity considering the landscape types is huge. You can distinguish the following types: peat extraction landscape, young heath- and brook reclamation landscape, open fields landscape, Vechtdallandscape, forest- and estates landscape and camp landscape. All these different landscapes can be found within the municipal borders, so it is a huge variety of landscapes. Next to this variety, we have many estates. Another unique element is castle Rechteren, here different
6
landscape elements come together. Woods, lanes, hedgerows, monumental solitary trees, hedges and so on, can all be found at this location. It is one of the reasons why we have won the title Greenest village of the Netherlands.’ 8. When the Environmental law gets into force, one municipal environmental plan is obligated. What does this mean for the landscape policy of the municipality? ‘We have not yet decided about this. Personally, I would like to see all policies considering the environment become part of the municipal environmental plan. We do not yet know when we will work on the municipal environmental plan. I expect next year we will do a trial on something.’
7
1.2 Zwolle Interviewee: Green space officer Municipality: Zwolle Date: 04 – 07 – 2014 Time: 09:00 – 09:45 1. Are you familiar with the European Landscape Convention and the targets of this convention? Is there a need for a guide, on municipal level, to make it easier to reach the goals of the ELC? ‘To be very honest, no. A landscape development plan has recently been adopted in Zwolle. Inhabitants have been involved on the question how to take care of the landscape. Parts of this involvement have been used in our new zoning plans. Features we would like to preserve or strengthen are important in these plans. For example, if there are vacant agricultural buildings in the outskirts we would like to keep open, we will demolish these buildings and give the rights to build closer to the city. In that way we will strengthen the small scale landscapes, by concentrating the build-up areas. So, the open areas will be kept open. Policy considering the landscape is actually quite rooted in the municipality. Although it would be helpful if the national government keeps attention for landscape. Just a guide would be insufficient. From the one side care for the landscape should be something that will occur naturally. From the other side, a national or provincial level can connect arrangements which may give the municipal landscape policy a boost. The economic value of a ‘nice’ landscape has gained more value in the past years. However, you have to keep working on and interact with the landscape in order to keep a ‘nice’ landscape.’ 2. Are there rules and/or guidelines formulated by the European Union, the national government or the provinces, which have an impact on the municipal landscape policy? ‘Room for the River, Room for the Vecht, National Landscape, Natura 2000. Due to Natura 2000 different companies are not allowed to grow anymore. The conflict between nature and economy becomes heightened by this guideline. It is a pity since, this leads to negative feelings towards nature policies.’ 3. Did the inhabitants of your municipality cooperate when designing the landscape policy? If yes, in what way did they cooperate? If not, why not? ‘Considering the landscape development plan, definitely. We had an advisory group, which regularly participated when formulating the landscape development plan. The group came together for about six times, at the start, a few times discussing drafts, up until the end. Furthermore, we kept meetings in the surroundings to inform the inhabitants. We did this together with Zwartewaterland and Kampen, since it is a collective plan. Since, we are together in one National Landscape, this was a logical choice.’ 4. Are there sufficient (financial) resources available to complete actions regarding the landscape policy and to manage the landscape? ‘It is moderate. The rich years lay behind us, for example the Green Blue Services. We have many wishes mentioned in the landscape development plan, it takes a lot of effort to go on with it. In Zwolle, Zwartewaterland and Kampen a foundation has been established; SPLIJ+ (Stichting Particulier Landschapsdiensten IJsseldelta). The foundation is responsible for the funds of the Green Blue Services and in addition to this the foundation has to gain money by themselves as well. The foundation has not yet a very strong position. However, the fact that there is a foundation is nice. Since, it is an initiative from outside the municipality, so there is some pressure from the outside as well. It's origin lays within the Green Blue Services. In Overijssel there are two different ways of dealing with the Green Blue Services. Municipalities can chose to let Landschap Overijssel take care of their green blue services. Zwolle, Zwartewaterland and Kampen, chose to take care of the green
8
blue services by their own. In this way a local involvement with the landscape developed. Landschap Overijssel is a fine institution, however with Overijssel nobody identifies themselves. With the region IJsseldelta on the other hand, inhabitants can identify themselves easier with. This regional identity is shown in the name of the stadium of PEC Zwolle, which is named the IJsseldelta stadium.’ 5. Has the attitude towards landscape changed, since the landscape policy is formulated? Is there a need to review the landscape policy? ‘Yes, however this has not only to do with the landscape development plan. There are different processes ongoing around Zwolle: National Landscape, a courtyard specialist gives free advice about how to set up a yard, an area agent who represents the municipalities of Zwolle, Zwartewaterland and Kampen and gives advices about the landscape. These advices will be used in the policies. Slowly, awareness considering the landscape grows. Some plans considering landscape already started before the landscape development plan was established. However, there is more attention for the landscape than before.’ 6. What position does the landscape policy take in the municipality? ‘The National Landscape is very clear, it has a status. The main structures of the landscape can be traced back in every plan. In Zwolle, this has been always the case. New developments follow the history of the landscape. Some developments cannot directly be linked to landscape. However, there is a clear response to the qualities of the landscape. We try to preserve and strengthen the diversity of the landscape. This does not mean everything should be locked, as long as the quality of the landscape is kept in mind. We have got the complete picture of the landscape and we make use of activities from other parties to play with it.’ 7. What is a/ are unique landscape element(s) with which the municipality distinguishes itself from surrounding municipalities? ‘Unique, I think, is the presence of eight different landscape types around Zwolle. The variety is unique. In the Netherlands, you will not see it very often. We have the Veluwemassief, polders, watercourses landscape, peat-meadow landscape and the reclamation landscapes. Actually, you have got a whole pallet of landscapes. I find it the main quality of Zwolle. Next to this quality, the presence of the rivers is another quality. We have got three rivers: IJssel, Zwartewater and Vecht. Rivers cause dynamic since, they move in height as well. Sometimes, the floodplains are flooded or sandbags are needed to protect the inner city. In 1995 sandbags were needed to prevent the water flowing in the city. Furthermore, on a small scale little height difference can be noted. Along the river Vecht, there are still river dunes of approximately sixteen meters high. This are some surprises you come across in the landscape. Last but not least, the National Landscape, it is not a National Landscape for no reason. It is a polder landscape so you have to like it, but it is one from the eldest geometrical parcelled polders in the Netherlands.’ 8. When the Environmental law gets into force, one municipal environmental plan is obligated. What does this mean for the landscape policy of the municipality? ‘We have got to work on the environmental plan. I foresee, there will not change a lot considering the general principals how we handle the landscape in Zwolle. These principles stay the same. There are zones were we do not want buildings and these have to be green zones forever. It is not a discussion point. I can notice that in every spatial development strategy we have had in Zwolle, care of the green areas is fine expressed. Considering many different policy questions, I take a look the spatial development strategy very often. I see it with confidence. In Zwolle we are used to working integral.’
9
1.3 Raalte Interviewee: Public space officer Municipality: Raalte Date: 07 – 07 – 2014 Time: 09:00 – 09:35 1a. Are you familiar with the European Landscape Convention and the targets of this convention? ‘No, I have got no picture that goes along with the term. If it is about the term and the terminology, I am not familiar with that. However, the content of the ELC and how to act, I am familiar with that. The umbrella which is above these goals, I have not heard of it. How to handle the landscape and how to let inhabitants participate and be involved with the landscape, I have got a good picture of that.’ 1b. Is there a need for a guide, on municipal level, to make it easier to reach the goals of the ELC? ‘Another guide, I do not think so. If I take a look at how the landscape policy in the municipality of Raalte is embedded in diverse policy documents, whether it is about a vision on the public space (IVOR - Integrale Visie op de Openbare Ruimte) or the spatial support considering changes in the zoning plans I think the theme landscape has a permanent place. It means every time a subject is mentioned landscape / spatial quality, is treated carefully and is well embedded in the processes that lay behind. If you say another guide, no. We will not do anything with such a guide, unless something totally new comes along. But if I see landscape becomes more a responsibility for the lower level government and if I take a look at the financial resources which are more laid down at these governments, I have not the idea we need such a guide.’ 2. Are there rules and/or guidelines formulated by the European Union, the national government or the provinces, which have an impact on the municipal landscape policy? ‘Yes, definitely. On many levels you can see the impact of landscape. For instance, you can see it in the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). In this document there are certain trends visible, where one is steering more towards the greening task. If it goes about the promotion of biodiversity, if it goes about the quality task for the water (Water Framework Directive (WFD)). You can see it back in the landscape, the place where for example a water storage is realised. We have to agree upon the place and regulate it. If you look at spatial planning cases considering road development, e.g. the N35. Landscape comes along in these plans as well. Cases that come from top to bottom, from Brussels, The Hague or Zwolle, end up in Raalte. Furthermore, the provincial environmental vision has an impact on our landscape policy as well. We have only very limited influence on the rules and regulations that come from the top level(s). For example, the CAP, we had the thought there was a huge opportunity. However, in Brussels people were talking very long, so the expectations we first had in Salland could not be realised and the results are minimal. It does not mean that everything is negative. Considering the CAP, in Salland a consultancy group was formed, which will now focus on new projects. So opportunities arise as well. Considering the municipalities of Deventer, Olst-Wijhe, Raalte and the water agencies, in the past years our collaboration has grown considering the policies and management of the rural areas. What has to be done, what has priority are questions we discuss and decide about together.’ 3. Did the inhabitants of your municipality cooperate when designing the landscape policy? If yes, in what way did they cooperate? If not, why not? ‘Through various representative organisations. If it goes about policy developments individual inhabitants are not so interested. If you look at organisations, like the LTO (Land en Tuinbouw Organisatie), water agencies, IVN organisations (Instituut voor Natuureducatie en Duurzaamheid), Stichting Sallands Erfgoed, this type of organisations were represented in an advisory group and have
10
had their input. These meetings found place in 2007 and 2008, in 2008 the landscape development plan is set. A consulting agency had the assignment to make a landscape development plan for Salland, for the three municipalities. There were a few workshops, which was followed by multiple, three or four, advisory group meetings. During these meetings a short presentation was given after which the discussion considering the landscape policy for Salland found place. This is how we gained public support.’ 4. Are there sufficient (financial) resources available to complete actions regarding the landscape policy and to manage the landscape? ‘There were sufficient resources available. Due to the expire of the provinciaal Meerjarenprogramma (pMJP), the resources dry up. What we do now, is the structure that originated with the landscape development plan and the zoning plan outskirts. We use these structures to find out were opportunities and possibilities can be identified to raise the stakes considering the landscape and thus try to work these opportunities out. That is what we would like to do. In the landscape development plan some key factors are mentioned, these are nature development, water assignments, the up scaling in the agriculture. Behind these developments power and money can be identified, to realise a part of the landscape development plan. Currently this has our attention. The cooperation is there, at the moment we are facing a financial lesser period. The landscape development plan can be traced back in many different documents. The landscape development plan is anchored in the municipality.’ 5a. Has the attitude towards landscape changed, since the landscape policy is formulated? ‘If the attitude has changed. Yes. If it has to do with the landscape policy, I am not so sure about that. The landscape development plan is more seen as a helping tool, in general I can see a shift. Nowadays, people pay more attention towards the landscape. It is a part of the basic infrastructure in the rural areas, where people love to come, live, work and recreate. It gives a part of recognition, that identity you should not touch that. This consciousness is good. In the agricultural businesses, you can see a shift towards corporate social responsibility. Care for the landscape has gained a little better position. I can notice a change, but if it is due to our beautiful landscape development plan, I suspect not. There are many people who care for the landscape.’ 5b. Is there a need to review the landscape policy? ‘To review the landscape policy, not at this moment. In our landscape development plan we have chosen the geomorphology of the landscape as starting point. This is from all times. The subareas are based on the geomorphology, the area features and characteristics can be read in these subareas. The basis stays the same. Since landscape is something that should be seen on the long term, our base provides a good starting point. Do you have to review this base? The vision does not need to change, the actions might be reviewed. However, it is not urgent at the moment. I think the policy meets the expectations at this moment. Anticipating on developments is something we have to keep in mind. The vision document provides enough material, to do this.’ 6. What position does the landscape policy take in the municipality? ‘The landscape policy is taken seriously. It has been translated in all kinds of other plans and regulations. You can find it all back in these plans and regulations. People cannot deny the presence of landscape and people are not denying the landscape. Serious attention is paid towards the presence of landscape in policies. Landscape is treated very conscientious. We sometimes receive comments from inhabitants like: 'The municipality is just doing something'. If you take a look at the dynamic game, we reject some ideas as well. However, inhabitants do not see this. Inhabitants find the story behind the landscape difficult. Let it be difficult at first sight. Let inhabitants know the story behind the landscape is not that easy to explain. We try to get inhabitants involved with the landscape. For our efforts, last year, we got a prize, 'trofee de Juichwilg'. Well, we did not get this trophy for no reason. We try to get more involvement and participation considering the landscape.
11
The experience of the landscape is central, to let people get involved with the landscape. Most of the times, this occurs from local initiatives. We try to facilitate these initiatives as good as possible. The prize money, €5,000, went to such a local initiative. Two 'ommetjeswerkgroepen' in Marienheem and Luttenberg got the money to buy mowing equipment to maintain their 'ommetjes' ('ommetjes' are walking routes along a village).’ 7. What is a/ are unique landscape element(s) with which the municipality distinguishes itself from surrounding municipalities? ‘It is better to view these unique elements on the regional level of Salland. There are a few pearls that we know, I think these pearls are: the river IJssel with its levees, the estates are unique, there are a few meadow bird areas, the Natura 2000 area: Boetelerveld and last but not least variety. You can identify open and closed landscapes. In Salland you are not able to cycle for ten kilometres through a more or less similar area. Many different landscape types can be identified, this variety is unique as well.’ 8. When the Environmental law gets into force, one municipal environmental plan is obligated. What does this mean for the landscape policy of the municipality? ‘The landscape development plan should get a prominent position in the municipal environmental plan. Next to other plans, the landscape development plan should be integrated as well and become integrated in the municipal environmental plan. The landscape development plan provides part of the basis for the landscape. It is already interwoven. When a practical situation comes along you have to take the coherence in account. You cannot only take the landscape in mind, you should take a look at water, nature, infrastructure as well. You should take these elements into account as well. To come to a plan, on an individual level, sometimes you can take something, but in other cases you have to give something.’
12
13
1.4 Deventer Interviewee: Policy officer with a background in landscape architecture Municipality: Deventer Date: 09 – 07 – 2014 Time: 09:00 – 09:45 1a. Are you familiar with the European Landscape Convention and the targets of this convention? ‘It is a nice question to start with. I think I have to say no. I do not think I know this convention, maybe if you explain it to me it rings a bell. The content I am familiar with, LEADER (Liaison Entre Actions de Développement de l'Economie Rurale) is such a programme from Europe. We have done a few projects, which fell under the European flag. I think these projects are the outcomes of the convention which is signed.’ 1b. Is there a need for a guide, on municipal level, to make it easier to reach the goals of the ELC? ‘I think it is always good to have such a guide. Europe stands far away from the municipalities. There is the European level, the national level, the provinces and the municipalities. We feel Europe is far away. As I have said there are programmes where funds go to Salland or Deventer. But the targets we do not know them. The targets could be implemented in a landscape development plan or a spatial development strategy. In that way it could be helpful to know these targets and acknowledge them. When you take a look at Deventer, everybody is in favour of spatial quality for landscape values. It is important for recreationists, the business climate, inhabitants, nature. Everybody agrees, but if it goes about the finances or different interests, economy versus landscape interests. You see economic interests might win. Landscape is not perceived as something urgent. When it goes economically wrong, people start to do something with the landscape. At this moment the national government is withdrawing, considering making policies and providing funds. So the municipality is searching for ways to get people involved and new ways of gaining money. The commitment of inhabitants is high, everybody feels the landscape of Salland is valuable. However, people are not willing to pay for the landscape. For example, real estate agencies are advertising with the position of their venues. But who benefits from this? It is not the landscape. Landscape is in the mind of people, but the link towards an economic component is not yet there. I think that is a huge task. In general everybody agrees about the importance of the landscape and the targets set by the Europe.’ 2. Are there rules and/or guidelines formulated by the European Union, the national government or the provinces, which have an impact on the municipal landscape policy? ‘When we designed the landscape development plan, we took the policies of the national government and the provincial government in mind. The provincial policy was used the most. Overijssel is committed to sustainability and spatial quality. Spatial quality can be translated to utility, future and experience values. These elements are clearly visible in the landscape development plan. A very concrete example would be the protection of the open fields as open space. It is mentioned in the landscape development plan and translated in the zoning plan outskirts. It is not possible to expand the build-up areas, they have to remain open. It is a very clear rule for the users of the outskirts. The province sketched the outlines, whereas we have translated them into the zoning plan. In this way there are rules linked to the provincial outlines. The birds and habitats directives and the National Ecological Network are as a matter of course mentioned in this policies. These are legal requirements that should be taken in mind.’ 3. Did the inhabitants of your municipality cooperate when designing the landscape policy? If yes, in what way did they cooperate? If not, why not? ‘Yes. There were advisory groups, in which societal organisations took place. Furthermore, there have been newsletters, several evenings inhabitants could come by and think along with us about different scenarios. At a certain point we have sketched three scenarios. These were discussed with
14
the inhabitants. In general the idea was, a landscape does not stand still. We have to know what the qualities are and in case of a development these qualities should be taken in mind. We took this along in the plan and have mentioned the importance of development. We do not wish to view the landscape under a dome. The inhabitants agreed, since it is an area where people work, live and recreate. Developments should be possible. If developments find place, facilitate them on logical places, do it in a logical manner and make sure it fits the landscape. To us is seems quite logical. However, in practice it can be more difficult.’ 4. Are there sufficient (financial) resources available to complete actions regarding the landscape policy and to manage the landscape? ‘No, actually not. For the landscape development plan, we reserved €100,000,- to implement plans. A couple of projects have been founded by this fund. This was done from the pMJP, region own housing and heritage (the red and green parts) and an archaeological part. The Green Blue Services was an important regulation. In Salland the outcomes have been very good. The Sallandse municipalities, in cooperation with Stichting IJssellandschap, brought money together and this amount of money was doubled by the province. In total this was around eight million, which is used for managing the landscape. It is a huge amount of money, however after 21 years (around 2030) the money is gone. It is nice, since 21 years sounds like the far future. However, it is not yet sustainable. Some people might have the resources to manage the landscape elements on their property on their own. So what should be subsidized and what not? These subsidies are contracted and given by the foundation Stichting Kostbaar Salland. Hopefully, on the longer term, the foundation can pick up other elements that are important for the landscape. There are many things going on, but there is never enough, this has to do with the economical component. We are not used to pay for landscape. While we pay money if we would like to park our car or go to an amusement park. Less money is coming from the municipality, while more money is coming from Europe. Participation is getting more important. We need to search together, governments and inhabitants, how we can join our strengths in order to create and finance projects. In order to make good choices, the landscape of Salland on the long term needs to be taken in mind. What needs to be preserved and strengthened and what functions can be combined with these needs, in order to provide an economic base.’ 5. Has the attitude towards landscape changed, since the landscape policy is formulated? Is there a need to review the landscape policy? ‘It is good to have a landscape development plan, so you can refer to it. It is available which is good to make people aware of the landscape. The landscape development plan is used, when an application comes along, the advice is in line with the landscape development plan. It is good, but you have to look at the situation when there would not be a landscape development plan as well. What would have happened in such a situation? It has a value, but the people who work with the plan should be able to translate the landscape development plan to a concrete application. At this moment the landscape development plan is working fine. It is the beauty of landscape, it does not change suddenly. Furthermore, the political need to make new plans or review them is less present due to the finances. On a short term I do not expect a review of the landscape development plan. Whenever there is an initiative we should consider the impact from the perspective of the landscape development plan.’ 6. What position does the landscape policy take in the municipality? ‘It is used actively. When people come with an initiative the landscape development plan comes along. It is checked whether it is in line with this plan. It is translated in the zoning plan outskirts as well, which is more about the quantitative side. The landscape development plan focusses more on the qualities of the landscape. If developments find place, it is not precisely about what is done, but how it is done. From a designer side and a spatial planning side, you sometimes see things differently.’
15
7. What is a/ are unique landscape element(s) with which the municipality distinguishes itself from surrounding municipalities? ‘The river dunes, North of Deventer and in Deventer. In Deventer, the Bergkerk and the Lebuinus (this is where an ancient build-up area of Deventer can be found) are built on these river dunes. Furthermore, the immediate location along the IJssel. The higher grounds, river dunes and the old city direct next to the IJssel. Also the relation between city and environment, there are many estates around Deventer. This can be seen as an example of the inextricable connection between the city and its environment. Last, the tension between the river landscape and the sandy soil landscape. Along the rivers there are different elements than on the sandy soils, I think that is just fun. So, there are two major systems that come together, of which the presence in the city of Deventer can still be seen. There are a few swirls, where the impact of the river can be seen. Webbing, hedgerows and avenues. The old ancient connection from the city to its surroundings, has always been avenue planting. To preserve these becomes more difficult, since the agricultural vehicles become bigger. The diversity is not only visible in the landscapes, but also in the roads. Sandy roads and brick roads, often these roads can be found along the estates, can be identified next to asphalted roads.’ 8. When the Environmental law gets into force, one municipal environmental plan is obligated. What does this mean for the landscape policy of the municipality? ‘Landscape is already taken in mind during the whole procedure of the environmental permit. In case of a negative advice conversations find place to review, how a plan could be adjusted so it fits the landscape development plan. Or a plan is rejected since the municipality does not want that development. Landscape policy is already anchored in the processing of the environmental permits. An archaeological test, an ecological test, the water test and landscape or urbanism are separate routes, which give some advices about landscape elements.’
16
17
2. Checklists
2.1 Landscape development plan
2.1.1 Dalfsen
Evaluation sheet local policy documents
Section 1: Document information
1. Municipality: Dalfsen
2. Title of the document: Beleefbaar landschap: Landschapsontwikkelingsplan Dalfsen
3. Authors: von Wersch, E., Koerhuis, R.H.M., Huls, M.J.P.M. & Bontje, L.
4. Project agency: Grontmij
5. Year of publication: 2009
Section 2: Headline indicators & Evaluation
6. Is the ELC specifically mentioned? Yes No X
7. How is the ELC mentioned? The ELC is not mentioned
8. Is the term 'landscape' used?
Yes X No
9. Is the term 'landscape' used in a way Yes X No
consistent with the objectives of the ELC?
10. Are similar terms used to discuss the
Yes X No
principles of the ELC?
11. Level of detail/description 1 2 3 4 X 5
(of ELC principles)?
12. Is this a good use of the ELC? 1 2 3 4 X 5
Section 3: Evaluation of the use of different concepts
I: Landscape
13. Which types of landscape are discussed?
a. Physical landscape
Yes
X No
b. Social landscape
Yes
No X
14. How is dealt with the protection of the landscape?
For every landscape type, the current monuments are listed. These are protected by national and
provincial laws.
15. Are the following changes, in landscape, considered?
a. Accessibility
Yes No X
b. Urbanization
Yes X No
c. Globalization
Yes No X
d. Calamities Yes No X
18
16. Is there any form of awareness raising? Yes
No
X
17. Is landscape used as a unifying concept? Yes No X
18. Will the policy be evaluated? Yes No X
II: Landscape planning and landscape management
19. Did inhabitants participate?
Yes X No
20. How is dealt with the quality of the landscape?
The municipality has divided the landscape in different landscape types. For every type qualities are
listed. Furthermore, landscape quality holds a major role in the document.
21. How is dealt with sustainability in relation to the landscape?
Sustainability is not a goal the municipality considers in the document. It is mentioned that the Council
adds less value to the theme of sustainability in landscapes. Themes like nature, water, spatial quality,
recreation and tourism in relation with the landscape are more valuated by the Council.
22. Is the land used in a multifunctional way? Yes X No
23. Is the diversity of the landscape considered? Yes X No
24. Will the changes in landscape be monitored? Yes No X
25. Is there attention for the far future, in order to Yes No X
enhance, restore or create certain landscapes?
III: Landscape biography
26. Are the different dimensions of the landscape visible?
a. Physical landscape
Yes X
No
b. Social landscape
Yes
No X
27. Is the long-term history of the landscape visible?
a. Changing land use functions Yes
No
X
b. Important places in the (past) landscape Yes
No
X
28. Level of integration between past, present
and future landscapes 1 2 X 3 4 5
IV: Landscape identity
29. Is attention paid to the following factors:
a. Coherence
Yes No X
b. Complexity
Yes No X
c. Readability
Yes No X
d. Mystery
Yes
No
X
30. What are considered the distinctive features?
As distinctive features the municipality has identified: 'the variety in landscape types, the presence of
estates, beautiful farms, ricks and baking houses make the landscape attractive for inhabitants and
visitors. The rich flora and fauna, including a large number of protected species, are of intrinsic value and
ask for careful acting (page 9).'
19
31. Which perspectives on identity can be identified?
a. Layman
Yes
No X
b. Cultural and societal groups Yes
X No
c. Professional
Yes X No
d. Scientific Yes No X
32. Which level(s) of landscape identity are used?
a. Individual
Yes No X
b. Group
Yes X
No
c. Spatial
Yes X
No
d. Regional and political Yes X No
33. What types of identity can be identified?
a. Place identity
Yes No X
b. Regional identity Yes
X No
Section 4: Connection with other policies and laws
34. Is the document related with:
a. European policies
Yes
No X
b. European laws
Yes
No X
c. National policies
Yes X
No
d. National laws
Yes No X
e. Regional policies
Yes X
No
f. Regional laws Yes X No
Section 5: Summary
In the document the landscape is the central issue. In order to formulate a well-founded vision, the
municipality divided the landscape in diverse areas. This was done according to the landscape types. For
every landscape type the characteristics (in form of image of the landscape, culture history, ecology and
economy), future developments, possibilities and threats are described.
Inhabitants of the municipality have participated. In instance the municipality had two different scenario’s
considering the future landscape, called preservation and developing. After the inhabitants were
consulted, the municipality created the scenario selective development. Its generic goals are:
* Improving the landscape scenery. Buildings and farmyards are central in the realisation of this goal.
* The preservation and restauration of cultural-historical valuable elements.
When planning and managing the landscape, the municipality takes these landscape types as the guiding
20
principle.
2.1.2 Raalte and Deventer
Evaluation sheet local policy documents
Section 1: Document information
1. Municipality: Deventer, Raalte & Olst-Wijhe (DOWR region)
2. Title of the document: Een plus voor het landschap van Salland
3. Authors: Chapter 1, 2, 3, 4 & 6
Arcadis: Gemmeke, Maurice, Noortman, Adrian, Jobse, Gertjan & Smit, Gerdien
Chapter 5 Deventer: Van der Vegt, Loes & Spreen, Marlies
Raalte: Holtman, Francisca & Rodijk, Hennie
Olst-Wijhe: Veldhuis, Shirley & Terhorst, Paul.
4. Project agency: Arcadis
5. Year of publication: 2008
Section 2: Headline indicators & Evaluation
6. Is the ELC specifically mentioned? Yes No X
7. How is the ELC mentioned? The ELC is not mentioned
8. Is the term 'landscape' used?
Yes X No
9. Is the term 'landscape' used in a way Yes X No
consistent with the objectives of the ELC?
10. Are similar terms used to discuss the
Yes No X
principles of the ELC?
11. Level of detail/description 1 2 3 4 X 5
(of ELC principles)?
12. Is this a good use of the ELC? 1 2 3 X 4 5
Section 3: Evaluation of the use of different concepts
I: Landscape
13. Which types of landscape are discussed?
a. Physical landscape
Yes
X No
b. Social landscape
Yes X
No
21
14. How is dealt with the protection of the landscape?
The municipalities have identified several 'cultural pearls' for every area. In these areas current land-
scape values need to be preserved and the spatial characteristics should be strengthened and developed.
15. Are the following changes, in landscape, considered?
a. Accessibility
Yes X No
b. Urbanization
Yes
X No
c. Globalization
Yes
No
X
d. Calamities Yes No X
16. Is there any form of awareness raising? Yes X No
17. Is landscape used as a unifying concept? Yes X No
18. Will the policy be evaluated? Yes No X
II: Landscape planning and landscape management
19. Did inhabitants participate?
Yes X No
20. How is dealt with the quality of the landscape?
Landscape elements that can be found in the region by origin, hold a central position in the document. If possible, developments connect and strengthen the current landscape characteristics and qualities. 21. How is dealt with sustainability in relation to the landscape?
Sustainability holds a central position in the vision upon the landscape. 'By focussing on sustainability
the landscape provides qualitative opportunities for agriculture, living, working and recreation (page 9).'
If a development is executed, the landscape element should be managed in a sustainable way.
22. Is the land used in a multifunctional way? Yes No X
23. Is the diversity of the landscape considered? Yes X No
24. Will the changes in landscape be monitored? Yes No X
25. Is there attention for the far future, in order to Yes X No
enhance, restore or create certain landscapes?
III: Landscape biography
26. Are the different dimensions of the landscape visible?
a. Physical landscape
Yes X
No
b. Social landscape
Yes
No X
27. Is the long-term history of the landscape visible?
a. Changing land use functions Yes
No
X
b. Important places in the (past) landscape Yes
No
X
28. Level of integration between past, present
and future landscapes 1 2 X 3 4 5
IV: Landscape identity
29. Is attention paid to the following factors:
22
a. Coherence
Yes X No
b. Complexity
Yes No X
c. Readability
Yes X No
d. Mystery
Yes
No
X
30. What are considered the distinctive features?
In the region of Salland contrasts between the river landscape and the sandy soil landscape are clearly
visible. This plays a role when people experience the landscape. Furthermore, the region holds a highly
value for recreation. Estates and the diverse landscape types play a role in this value.
31. Which perspectives on identity can be identified?
a. Layman
Yes
No X
b. Cultural and societal groups Yes
No
X
c. Professional
Yes X No
d. Scientific Yes No X
32. Which level(s) of landscape identity are used?
a. Individual
Yes No X
b. Group
Yes
No X
c. Spatial
Yes X
No
d. Regional and political Yes
X No
33. What types of identity can be identified?
a. Place identity
Yes
No X
b. Regional identity Yes
X No
Section 4: Connection with other policies and laws
34. Is the document related with:
a. European policies
Yes X
No
b. European laws
Yes
No X
c. National policies
Yes X
No
d. National laws
Yes
No X
e. Regional policies
Yes X
No
f. Regional laws Yes
No
X
Section 5: Summary
23
The document is focussed on the landscape of the municipalities of Deventer, Raalte and Olst-Wijhe.
This area is quite diverse. In order to plan and manage the landscape well-argued, the municipalities
view the landscape characteristics as the basis of the plan.
Inhabitants of the municipalities have participated during the process. At the beginning of the process
three different scenarios were formulated. The scenario focussed on the beauty and the region specific
characteristics was favoured by inhabitants, officials involved with the project and City Council.
The municipalities have agreed, that a new development has to preserve, strengthen or develop the land-
scape in a way that matches the basis. So a sustainable landscape with high qualities for agriculture,
living, working, and recreating will be preserved and strengthened.
2.1.3 Zwolle
Evaluation sheet local policy documents
Section 1: Document information
1. Municipality:
Zwolle, Zwartewaterland & Kampen
2. Title of the document: Landschapsontwikkelingsplan: landschapsontwikkelingsvisie
3. Author:
Ten Cate, C.
4. Project agency Royal Haskoning
5. Year of publication: 2010
Section 2: Headline indicators & Evaluation
6. Is the ELC specifically mentioned? Yes No X
7. How is the ELC mentioned? The ELC is not mentioned
8. Is the term 'landscape' used?
Yes X No
9. Is the term 'landscape' used in a way Yes X No
consistent with the objectives of the ELC?
10. Are similar terms used to discuss the
Yes X No
principles of the ELC?
11. Level of detail/description 1 2 3 4 X 5
(of ELC principles)?
12. Is this a good use of the ELC? 1 2 3 4 X 5
Section 3: Evaluation of the use of different concepts
I: Landscape
24
13. Which types of landscape are discussed?
a. Physical landscape
Yes
X No
b. Social landscape
Yes X
No
14. How is dealt with the protection of the landscape?
Landscape is assessed and treated in a very broad way. Key qualities need to be preserved and if possible
strengthened. Weak qualities need to be strengthened, by adding new elements, recovering and protecting.
15. Are the following changes, in landscape, considered?
a. Accessibility
Yes X No
b. Urbanization
Yes X No
c. Globalization
Yes No X
d. Calamities Yes No X
16. Is there any form of awareness raising? Yes X No
17. Is landscape used as a unifying concept? Yes X No
18. Will the policy be evaluated? Yes No X
II: Landscape planning and landscape management
19. Did inhabitants participate?
Yes X No
20. How is dealt with the quality of the landscape?
The municipalities have divided their territory in diverse areas. This is visual represented in a map and
diverse qualities for different areas are mentioned in the description of these areas.
21. How is dealt with sustainability in relation to the landscape?
The diverse municipalities deal different with the concept of sustainability. In general are the attitudes of
the municipalities towards sustainability positive. Whereas Zwolle and Kampen lay emphasis on sustainable energy, Zwartewaterland emphasizes sustainable business parks.
22. Is the land used in a multifunctional way? Yes X No
23. Is the diversity of the landscape considered? Yes X No
24. Will the changes in landscape be monitored? Yes No X
25. Is there attention for the far future, in order to Yes No X
enhance, restore or create certain landscapes?
III: Landscape biography
26. Are the different dimensions of the landscape visible?
a. Physical landscape
Yes X
No
b. Social landscape
Yes
No X
27. Is the long-term history of the landscape visible?
a. Changing land use functions Yes
No
X
b. Important places in the (past) landscape Yes
No
X
28. Level of integration between past, present
and future landscapes 1 X 2 3 4 5
25
IV: Landscape identity
29. Is attention paid to the following factors:
a. Coherence
Yes X No
b. Complexity
Yes X No
c. Readability
Yes X No
d. Mystery
Yes
No
X
30. What are considered the distinctive features?
The diverse landscapes that can be distinguished within the municipalities. Large open fields are
alternated by small closed areas. In these open fields a pattern of waterways of the ancient past can be
identified. The human interventions of the 20th and 21st century are clearly visible in the landscape.
Furthermore, the rich cultural-history of the Hanze cities are mentioned as a quality of the area as well.
31. Which perspectives on identity can be identified?
a. Layman
Yes
No X
b. Cultural and societal groups Yes
No
X
c. Professional
Yes X No
d. Scientific Yes No X
32. Which level(s) of landscape identity are used?
a. Individual
Yes No X
b. Group
Yes
No X
c. Spatial
Yes X
No
d. Regional and political Yes
X No
33. What types of identity can be identified?
a. Place identity
Yes
No X
b. Regional identity Yes
X No
Section 4: Connection with other policies and laws
34. Is the document related with:
a. European policies
Yes X
No
b. European laws
Yes
No X
c. National policies
Yes X
No
d. National laws
Yes
No X
e. Regional policies
Yes X
No
f. Regional laws Yes
No
X
26
Section 5: Summary
The document is focussed on the municipalities of Zwolle, Zwartewaterland and Kampen. Diverse
landscapes can be identified within these municipalities. For every landscape type several qualities have
been mentioned. In order to preserve the beauty of the landscape and make sure the different landscape
types remain visible, qualities within the landscape should be preserved and where needed strengthened.
This will be done by managing and recovering the current elements and placing new elements.
The diverse landscapes of the municipalities are central in the document. So are the Hanze cities mentioned
as places where the cultural history of this period can be traced back. The polders of the area are characterized
by their multifunctionality. It is not only a place for agriculture, but for nature, recreation and living as well.
Inhabitants and organisations were invited to discuss the document with the municipalities and
project agency. Furthermore, diverse sectors (agricultural, tourism and recreation sectors and water
agencies) have been represented. A diverse pallet of people has given their opinion about this document.
27
2.2 Spatial development plan
2.2.1 Dalfsen
Evaluation sheet local policy documents
Section 1: Document information
1. Municipality: Dalfsen
2. Title of the document: Bij uitstek Dalfsen: Visie gemeente Dalfsen 2020
3. Authors: BMC Advies en Management
4. Project Agency BMC Advies en Management
5. Year of publication: 2009
Section 2: Headline indicators & Evaluation
6. Is the ELC specifically mentioned? Yes No X
7. How is the ELC mentioned? The ELC is not mentioned
8. Is the term 'landscape' used?
Yes X No
9. Is the term 'landscape' used in a way Yes X No
consistent with the objectives of the ELC?
10. Are similar terms used to discuss the
Yes No X
principles of the ELC?
11. Level of detail/description 1 2 3 X 4 5
(of ELC principles)?
12. Is this a good use of the ELC? 1 2 3 X 4 5
Section 3: Evaluation of the use of different concepts
I: Landscape
13. Which types of landscape are discussed?
a. Physical landscape
Yes
X No
b. Social landscape
Yes X
No
14. How is dealt with the protection of the landscape?
This is not explicitly mentioned in this document. The landscape of the municipality is roughly divided in
three different landscape types. Roughly, the do's and don’ts in these landscape types are mentioned.
15. Are the following changes, in landscape, considered?
a. Accessibility
Yes X No
b. Urbanization
Yes
X No
28
c. Globalization
Yes
X No
d. Calamities Yes No X
16. Is there any form of awareness raising? Yes No X
17. Is landscape used as a unifying concept? Yes X No
18. Will the policy be evaluated? Yes No X
II: Landscape planning and landscape management
19. Did inhabitants participate?
Yes X No
20. How is dealt with the quality of the landscape?
Nature and landscape are viewed as qualities of the landscape. If possible, expansions of the cores find
place within the current village boundaries. Landscape qualities of the outer areas keep preserved.
21. How is dealt with sustainability in relation to the landscape?
The idea of sustainability is not directly linked to the landscape of the municipality. However, it is
mentioned in the vision. The municipality states quality and sustainability are the most important issues creating new spatial developments. Therefore, policies of the municipality are focussed on these topics.
22. Is the land used in a multifunctional way? Yes X No
23. Is the diversity of the landscape considered? Yes No X
24. Will the changes in landscape be monitored? Yes No X
25. Is there attention for the far future, in order to Yes No X
enhance, restore or create certain landscapes?
III: Landscape biography
26. Are the different dimensions of the landscape visible?
a. Physical landscape
Yes X
No
b. Social landscape
Yes
No X
27. Is the long-term history of the landscape visible?
a. Changing land use functions Yes
No
X
b. Important places in the (past) landscape Yes
No
X
28. Level of integration between past, present
and future landscapes 1 X 2 3 4 5
IV: Landscape identity
29. Is attention paid to the following factors:
a. Coherence
Yes X No
b. Complexity
Yes X No
c. Readability
Yes No X
d. Mystery
Yes
No
X
30. What are considered the distinctive features?
29
The municipality was in 2009 in favour of creating a profile, based upon the key qualities of the
municipality. As key qualities the following characteristics are mentioned: 'A combination of social values
of a typical rural municipality (safe, social and quiet) and the distinctive spatial-economic qualities: beautiful
situated, away from the Western part of the country, but still easily accessible (page 5).'
31. Which perspectives on identity can be identified?
a. Layman
Yes
No X
b. Cultural and societal groups Yes
No
X
c. Professional
Yes X No
d. Scientific Yes No X
32. Which level(s) of landscape identity are used?
a. Individual
Yes No X
b. Group
Yes
No X
c. Spatial
Yes
No X
d. Regional and political Yes
X No
33. What types of identity can be identified?
a. Place identity
Yes
No X
b. Regional identity Yes
X No
Section 4: Connection with other policies and laws
34. Is the document related with:
a. European policies
Yes
No X
b. European laws
Yes
No X
c. National policies
Yes
No X
d. National laws
Yes
No X
e. Regional policies
Yes
No X
f. Regional laws Yes
No
X
Section 5: Summary
This document sets out the vision and ambitions the municipality of Dalfsen has. Diverse topics like:
living, economy and landscape are discussed in this document. Inhabitants have been invited to discuss
these topics, during the 'Evening of the future' and several theme evenings. In local newspapers
inhabitants have been invited to attain these evenings.
30
For every topic an ambition is formulated. For landscape the municipality set the following ambitions:
* Landscape and cultural-historical values have to be preserved and developed. New developments have
to consider these values, these are guiding principles when planning and managing the landscape.
* The landscape near the river Vecht should better be used. Accessibility, quietness, nature and water are
important topics considering this landscape.
2.2.2 Raalte
Evaluation sheet local policy documents
Section 1: Document information
1. Municipality: Raalte
2. Title of the document Structuurvisie Raalte 2025+: de kracht van de kernen
3. Authors:
Boersma, Jan Hein. Ruyssenaars, Barbara. Tap, Jan Willem & Witberg, Maarten.
4. Project agency: Nieuwe Gracht
5. Year of publication: 2012
Section 2: Headline indicators & Evaluation
6. Is the ELC specifically mentioned? Yes No X
7. How is the ELC mentioned? The ELC is not mentioned
8. Is the term 'landscape' used?
Yes X No
9. Is the term 'landscape' used in a way Yes X No
consistent with the objectives of the ELC?
10. Are similar terms used to discuss the
Yes No X
principles of the ELC?
11. Level of detail/description 1 2 3 4 X 5
(of ELC principles)?
12. Is this a good use of the ELC? 1 2 3 4 X 5
Section 3: Evaluation of the use of different concepts
I: Landscape
13. Which types of landscape are discussed?
a. Physical landscape
Yes
X No
b. Social landscape
Yes X
No
31
14. How is dealt with the protection of the landscape?
Different landscape types can be distinguished in the municipality. It depends on the landscape type,
whether a development is allowed or not.
15. Are the following changes, in landscape, considered?
a. Accessibility
Yes No X
b. Urbanization
Yes X No
c. Globalization
Yes No X
d. Calamities Yes X No
16. Is there any form of awareness raising? Yes No X
17. Is landscape used as a unifying concept? Yes X No
18. Will the policy be evaluated? Yes No X
II: Landscape planning and landscape management
19. Did inhabitants participate?
Yes X* No
20. How is dealt with the quality of the landscape?
Landscape qualities are acknowledged in the form of estates, nature areas, the diverse landscape types
and the diverse cores. Developments find place within the cores, to preserve the qualities of the outskirts.
21. How is dealt with sustainability in relation to the landscape?
Sustainable energy, in the form of wind and biogas plants, are mentioned in the document. However, it is
not further explained, since a study towards possible locations needed to be fulfilled. Furthermore, the municipality mentions the need to have sustainable agricultural companies.
22. Is the land used in a multifunctional way? Yes No X
23. Is the diversity of the landscape considered? Yes X No
24. Will the changes in landscape be monitored? Yes No X
25. Is there attention for the far future, in order to Yes X No
enhance, restore or create certain landscapes?
III: Landscape biography
26. Are the different dimensions of the landscape visible?
a. Physical landscape
Yes X
No
b. Social landscape
Yes
No X
27. Is the long-term history of the landscape visible?
a. Changing land use functions Yes
X No
b. Important places in the (past) landscape Yes
X No
28. Level of integration between past, present
and future landscapes 1 2 3 4 X 5
IV: Landscape identity
29. Is attention paid to the following factors:
a. Coherence
Yes X No
b. Complexity
Yes X No
32
c. Readability
Yes X No
d. Mystery
Yes
No
X
30. What are considered the distinctive features?
The scenic beauty of the outskirts of the villages is one of the key qualities of the municipality. The
location of the municipality is outstanding as well. Namely, between the Sallandse Heuvelrug and the
river IJssel. Nature and the estates are valuable features as well.
31. Which perspectives on identity can be identified?
a. Layman
Yes
No X
b. Cultural and societal groups Yes
No
X
c. Professional
Yes X No
d. Scientific Yes No X
32. Which level(s) of landscape identity are used?
a. Individual
Yes No X
b. Group
Yes
No X
c. Spatial
Yes X
No
d. Regional and political Yes
X No
33. What types of identity can be identified?
a. Place identity
Yes X
No
b. Regional identity Yes
X No
Section 4: Connection with other policies and laws
34. Is the document related with:
a. European policies
Yes
No X
b. European laws
Yes
No X
c. National policies
Yes X
No
d. National laws
Yes X
No
e. Regional policies
Yes X
No
f. Regional laws Yes
No
X
Section 5: Summary
The document is focussed on a long-term vision on the municipality. Diverse topics have been discussed,
in which past, present and future landscape hold a central role. Important historical places, like the
33
Overijssels kanaal and Lierderholthuis, have been discussed from the three perspectives upon landscape.
It can thus be argued that when planning and managing the landscape the relation between the past,
present and future landscape hold a central role in the municipality.
The cores are the central topic in the document. The outskirts, past and present water system and other
functions within the landscape are discussed as well. To preserve the image of a rural municipality, the
agricultural landscape should not be changed to much. For the cores, new developments should be
planned within the village boundaries.
* Not mentioned in the document itself, evidence concerning participation is mentioned on this webpage:
http://www.heino-online.nl/gember/nieuws1401.html (visited: 29-08-2014)
2.2.3 Deventer
Evaluation sheet local policy documents
Section 1: Document information
1. Municipality: Deventer
2. Title of the document: Structuurplan Deventer 2025: Synergie van stad en land
3. Authors: Gemeente Deventer
4. Sector: Ruimtelijke plannen
5. Year of publication: 2004*
Section 2: Headline indicators & Evaluation
6. Is the ELC specifically mentioned? Yes No X
7. How is the ELC mentioned? The ELC is not mentioned
8. Is the term 'landscape' used?
Yes X No
9. Is the term 'landscape' used in a way Yes No X
consistent with the objectives of the ELC?
10. Are similar terms used to discuss the
Yes No X
principles of the ELC?
11. Level of detail/description 1 2 X 3 4 5
(of ELC principles)?
12. Is this a good use of the ELC? 1 2 X 3 4 5
Section 3: Evaluation of the use of different concepts
I: Landscape
34
13. Which types of landscape are discussed?
a. Physical landscape
Yes
X No
b. Social landscape
Yes X
No
14. How is dealt with the protection of the landscape?
Several landscapes are assigned with the term protected village- or cityscape. Cultural-historical values in these areas should be protected and form the guiding principle in case of developments.
15. Are the following changes, in landscape, considered?
a. Accessibility
Yes X No
b. Urbanization
Yes X No
c. Globalization
Yes No X
d. Calamities Yes X No
16. Is there any form of awareness raising? Yes
No
X
17. Is landscape used as a unifying concept? Yes X No
18. Will the policy be evaluated? Yes X No
II: Landscape planning and landscape management
19. Did inhabitants participate?
Yes X No
20. How is dealt with the quality of the landscape?
In the municipality different landscape types can be distinguished. The landscape types are used as
a guiding principle, when a development needs to be approved or rejected. As a specific landscape,
element, estates are protected as well.
21. How is dealt with sustainability in relation to the landscape?
'Deventer tries to maintain a good balance between spatial- and environmental quality, by focussing on
an integral and area specific policy. Reaching a highly valuated living environment is the main point of interest
For future developments within the outskirts, environmental issues are important. The same is valid for
developments of the city in the outskirts (page 45).'
22. Is the land used in a multifunctional way? Yes No X
23. Is the diversity of the landscape considered? Yes X No
24. Will the changes in landscape be monitored? Yes No X
25. Is there attention for the far future, in order to Yes No X
enhance, restore or create certain landscapes?
III: Landscape biography
26. Are the different dimensions of the landscape visible?
a. Physical landscape
Yes X
No
b. Social landscape
Yes
No X
27. Is the long-term history of the landscape visible?
a. Changing land use functions Yes
No
X
b. Important places in the (past) landscape Yes
No
X
28. Level of integration between past, present
35
and future landscapes 1 2 X 3 4 5
IV: Landscape identity
29. Is attention paid to the following factors:
a. Coherence
Yes X No
b. Complexity
Yes No X
c. Readability
Yes X No
d. Mystery
Yes
No
X
30. What are considered the distinctive features?
'Deventer has always developed herself in a valuable environment. City and rural areas are closely located.
While the inner city of Deventer shows urbanity and compactness, the rural areas are represented by
quietness and space. The strength of Deventer can be found in this combination. Also the river Ijssel makes
Deventer special, due to the contrast with the relative rural side across the river (page 9).'
31. Which perspectives on identity can be identified?
a. Layman
Yes
No X
b. Cultural and societal groups Yes
No
X
c. Professional
Yes X No
d. Scientific Yes No X
32. Which level(s) of landscape identity are used?
a. Individual
Yes No X
b. Group
Yes
No X
c. Spatial
Yes X
No
d. Regional and political Yes X No
33. What types of identity can be identified?
a. Place identity
Yes
No X
b. Regional identity Yes
X No
Section 4: Connection with other policies and laws
34. Is the document related with:
a. European policies
Yes X
No
b. European laws
Yes
No X
c. National policies
Yes X
No
d. National laws
Yes
No X
e. Regional policies
Yes X
No
f. Regional Yes No X
36
laws
Section 5: Summary
This document provides the vision of the municipality upon the year 2025. Since, the landscape of the
municipality is quite divers, a division between the city and its surroundings has been made. Ambitions
considering the city are: the characteristics of the current city are guiding in planning and management
issues and the connection between the city and the river IJssel should be made more explicit. In the
surroundings of the city the small-scale character of the landscape holds a central place. New planning and
management programmes, that will find place in the outskirts, the characteristic elements of the landscape
are guiding principles.
In order to create a well-founded vision upon the future landscape of the municipality, inhabitants,
businesses and the City Council have been consulted. Outcomes of these discussions have been
implemented in the document.
* An update of the document is needed conform the wro. In 2013 the municipality published a document
in which some ideas and dilemmas were stressed for the new spatial development plan. It is expected
that this new plan will be finished at the end of 2014.
2.2.4 Zwolle
Evaluation sheet local policy documents
Section 1: Document information
1. Municipality: Zwolle
2. Title of the document: Structuurplan 2020
3. Authors: Gemeente Zwolle
4. Sector: Strategie
5. Year of publication: 2008
Section 2: Headline indicators & Evaluation
6. Is the ELC specifically mentioned? Yes No X
7. How is the ELC mentioned? The ELC is not mentioned
8. Is the term 'landscape' used?
Yes X No
9. Is the term 'landscape' used in a way Yes No X
consistent with the objectives of the ELC?
10. Are similar terms used to discuss the
Yes No X
principles of the ELC?
11. Level of detail/description 1 2 X 3 4 5
(of ELC principles)?
37
12. Is this a good use of the ELC? 1 2 X 3 4 5
Section 3: Evaluation of the use of different concepts
I: Landscape
13. Which types of landscape are discussed?
a. Physical landscape
Yes
X No
b. Social landscape
Yes X
No
14. How is dealt with the protection of the landscape?
The municipality has identified several landscape types. Every landscape type has its own key qualities
which need to be protected. Developments have to suit the landscape type.
15. Are the following changes, in landscape, considered?
a. Accessibility
Yes X No
b. Urbanization
Yes
X No
c. Globalization
Yes
No
X
d. Calamities Yes No X
16. Is there any form of awareness raising? Yes No X
17. Is landscape used as a unifying concept? Yes X No
18. Will the policy be evaluated? Yes No X
II: Landscape planning and landscape management
19. Did inhabitants participate?
Yes X No
20. How is dealt with the quality of the landscape?
The quality of the landscape is represented in different areas. These areas have been identified by their
functions. Valuable features and landscape areas are protected, e.g. In the agricultural landscape
the wide view.
21. How is dealt with sustainability in relation to the landscape?
Developing a sustainable city is one of the ambitions of the municipality. It is argued that a sustainable
city, is a place where present and future inhabitants feel at home. Developing the city and the outskirts is done, by searching for a right balance between diverse aspects (economic, social and physical).
22. Is the land used in a multifunctional way? Yes No X
23. Is the diversity of the landscape considered? Yes X No
24. Will the changes in landscape be monitored? Yes No X
25. Is there attention for the far future, in order to Yes No X
enhance, restore or create certain landscapes?
III: Landscape biography
26. Are the different dimensions of the landscape visible?
a. Physical landscape
Yes X
No
38
b. Social landscape
Yes
No X
27. Is the long-term history of the landscape visible?
a. Changing land use functions Yes
No
X
b. Important places in the (past) landscape Yes
No
X
28. Level of integration between past, present
and future landscapes 1 2 X 3 4 5
IV: Landscape identity
29. Is attention paid to the following factors:
a. Coherence
Yes X No
b. Complexity
Yes X No
c. Readability
Yes No X
d. Mystery
Yes
No
X
30. What are considered the distinctive features?
'The rivers and floodplains, the green structures that run up until the inner city and the landscape visions
are valuated and important characteristics of the municipality (page 78).' For the agricultural landscape,
there are some additional characteristics mentioned. These are: openness, darkness and silence.
31. Which perspectives on identity can be identified?
a. Layman
Yes
No X
b. Cultural and societal groups Yes
No
X
c. Professional
Yes X No
d. Scientific Yes No X
32. Which level(s) of landscape identity are used?
a. Individual
Yes No X
b. Group
Yes
No X
c. Spatial
Yes X
No
d. Regional and political Yes X No
33. What types of identity can be identified?
a. Place identity
Yes
No X
b. Regional identity Yes
X No
Section 4: Connection with other policies and laws
34. Is the document related with:
a. European policies
Yes X
No
39
b. European laws
Yes
No X
c. National policies
Yes X
No
d. National laws
Yes X
No
e. Regional policies
Yes X
No
f. Regional laws Yes
No
X
Section 5: Summary
The document shows the vision of the municipality for the long-term. Several topics have been discussed,
divided in city landscape and agricultural landscape. For the city attention is paid to living, working and
the facilities. For the surroundings of the city, attention is paid to the image of the landscape and the
value for the inhabitants of the municipality. The municipality is in favour of developing areas, while
participating with public stakeholders. So, when planning new developments the municipality is in favour
of a public-private partnership.
Inhabitants have been invited to react upon draft versions of the document, thinking of the future of the
city and its environment (in form of a scenario) and participating in debate sessions.
The main target of the municipality is to allow new housing and businesses, if possible, within the city.
In case a development cannot be realized within the city, it find place next to the city or in one of the
villages. In this way the image of the landscape is preserved. Three landscape types have been identified,
the cityscape, the business park (Hessenpoort) and the natural and agricultural landscapes. There should
remain visible differences between these landscapes.
40
41
2.3 External appearance of buildings note
2.3.1 Dalfsen
Evaluation sheet local policy documents
Section 1: Document information
1. Municipality: Dalfsen
2. Title of the document: Welstandsnota gemeente Dalfsen
3. Authors: Het Oversticht:
Onderdelinden, Rik. De Haan, Linda & Van Unen, Frank
Gemeente:
Lautenbach, Karin. Flentge, Jeroen & Lammertsen, Henk.
4. Project agency: Het Oversticht
5. Year of publication: 2014
Section 2: Headline indicators & Evaluation
6. Is the ELC specifically mentioned? Yes No X
7. How is the ELC mentioned? The ELC is not mentioned
8. Is the term 'landscape' used?
Yes X No
9. Is the term 'landscape' used in a way Yes No X
consistent with the objectives of the ELC?
10. Are similar terms used to discuss the
Yes No X
principles of the ELC?
11. Level of detail/description 1 X 2 3 4 5
(of ELC principles)?
12. Is this a good use of the ELC? 1 X 2 3 4 5
Section 3: Evaluation of the use of different concepts
I: Landscape
13. Which types of landscape are discussed?
a. Physical landscape
Yes
X No
b. Social landscape
Yes
No X
14. How is dealt with the protection of the landscape?
The landscape has been divided in different landscape typologies. Every landscape has its own criteria,
which can be used to define whether a development is allowed or prohibited. The criteria are formulated
as specific as possible.
15. Are the following changes, in landscape, considered?
a. Accessibility
Yes No X
b. Urbanization
Yes No X
c. Globalization
Yes No X
42
d. Calamities Yes No X
16. Is there any form of awareness raising? Yes
X No
17. Is landscape used as a unifying concept? Yes No X
18. Will the policy be evaluated? Yes X No
II: Landscape planning and landscape management
19. Did inhabitants participate?
Yes No X
20. How is dealt with the quality of the landscape?
'The municipality takes care of a level of quality which takes the developed and undeveloped environment in
consideration. In some areas the present qualities could be tightened (page 5).'
21. How is dealt with sustainability in relation to the landscape?
Sustainability in relation to landscape is not mentioned in this document.
22. Is the land used in a multifunctional way? Yes No X
23. Is the diversity of the landscape considered? Yes X No
24. Will the changes in landscape be monitored? Yes X No
25. Is there attention for the far future, in order to Yes No X
enhance, restore or create certain landscapes?
III: Landscape biography
26. Are the different dimensions of the landscape visible?
a. Physical landscape
Yes X
No
b. Social landscape
Yes
No X
27. Is the long-term history of the landscape visible?
a. Changing land use functions Yes
No
X
b. Important places in the (past) landscape Yes
X No
28. Level of integration between past, present
and future landscapes 1 2 3 X 4 5
IV: Landscape identity
29. Is attention paid to the following factors:
a. Coherence
Yes X No
b. Complexity
Yes No X
c. Readability
Yes No X
d. Mystery
Yes
No
X
30. What are considered the distinctive features?
Every area consists of its own characteristics. These are represented in small photographs, which show
the identity of the area in its essence. People who submit a plan are encouraged to make creatively use
of these characteristics and criteria. E.g. in the former heath areas the straight lines and situation of
buildings are characteristic and future developments should meet criteria concerning these topics.
43
31. Which perspectives on identity can be identified?
a. Layman
Yes
No X
b. Cultural and societal groups Yes
No
X
c. Professional
Yes X No
d. Scientific Yes No X
32. Which level(s) of landscape identity are used?
a. Individual
Yes No X
b. Group
Yes X
No
c. Spatial
Yes X
No
d. Regional and political Yes X No
33. What types of identity can be identified?
a. Place identity
Yes X No
b. Regional identity Yes
X No
Section 4: Connection with other policies and laws
34. Is the document related with:
a. European policies
Yes
No X
b. European laws
Yes
No X
c. National policies
Yes
No X
d. National laws
Yes X No
e. Regional policies
Yes
No X
f. Regional laws Yes No X
Section 5: Summary
In this document focus is mainly laid on the buildings within the landscape. The landscape has been
divided in several landscape types. Criteria buildings and advertisement have to fulfil are mentioned
according to these landscape types. Spatial quality is the main target the municipality wishes to reach by this
document. Criteria considering the diverse areas can be traced back to spatial quality. In order to
effectively manage the landscape, criteria have been formulated as concrete as possible.
Diverse professional stakeholders and the City Council have been involved creating this document. There
is no evidence of inhabitants participating.
44
2.3.2 Raalte
Evaluation sheet local policy documents
Section 1: Document information
1. Municipality: Raalte
2. Title of the document: Welstandsnota 2010
3. Authors: Heidinga, Kor & Kruiper, Paul.
4. Sector: Gemeente Raalte
5. Year of publication: 2010
Section 2: Headline indicators & Evaluation
6. Is the ELC specifically mentioned? Yes No X
7. How is the ELC mentioned? The ELC is not mentioned
8. Is the term 'landscape' used?
Yes X No
9. Is the term 'landscape' used in a way Yes No X
consistent with the objectives of the ELC?
10. Are similar terms used to discuss the
Yes No X
principles of the ELC?
11. Level of detail/description 1 X 2 3 4 5
(of ELC principles)?
12. Is this a good use of the ELC? 1 X 2 3 4 5
Section 3: Evaluation of the use of different concepts
I: Landscape
13. Which types of landscape are discussed?
a. Physical landscape
Yes
X No
b. Social landscape
Yes
No X
14. How is dealt with the protection of the landscape?
In order to maintain the landscape, different levels of protection have been assigned. These levels have to
do with the function of the landscape. E.g. in estate areas the highest level of building criteria is maintained, since these areas are special. Attention is even paid to details of new buildings.
15. Are the following changes, in landscape, considered?
a. Accessibility
Yes No X
b. Urbanization
Yes X No
c. Globalization
Yes No X
d. Calamities Yes No X
16. Is there any form of awareness Yes No X
45
raising?
17. Is landscape used as a unifying concept? Yes No X
18. Will the policy be evaluated? Yes X* No
II: Landscape planning and landscape management
19. Did inhabitants participate?
Yes X No
20. How is dealt with the quality of the landscape?
The landscape is divided in nine different functions. Every function has its own set of criteria a
development has to fulfil.
21. How is dealt with sustainability in relation to the landscape?
Sustainability in relation to landscape is not mentioned in this document.
22. Is the land used in a multifunctional way? Yes No X
23. Is the diversity of the landscape considered? Yes X No
24. Will the changes in landscape be monitored? Yes No X
25. Is there attention for the far future, in order to Yes No X
enhance, restore or create certain landscapes?
III: Landscape biography
26. Are the different dimensions of the landscape visible?
a. Physical landscape
Yes X
No
b. Social landscape
Yes
No X
27. Is the long-term history of the landscape visible?
a. Changing land use functions Yes
No
X
b. Important places in the (past) landscape Yes
X No
28. Level of integration between past, present
and future landscapes 1 2 3 X 4 5
IV: Landscape identity
29. Is attention paid to the following factors:
a. Coherence
Yes X No
b. Complexity
Yes X No
c. Readability
Yes No X
d. Mystery
Yes
No
X
30. What are considered the distinctive features?
These features are not mentioned for the landscape as a whole. Instead, every landscape function owns
its own distinctive features. If there are national or municipal monuments in a landscape function,
these monuments are mentioned.
31. Which perspectives on identity can be identified?
a. Layman
Yes
No X
b. Cultural and societal groups Yes
No
X
46
c. Professional
Yes X No
d. Scientific Yes No X
32. Which level(s) of landscape identity are used?
a. Individual
Yes No X
b. Group
Yes
No X
c. Spatial
Yes X
No
d. Regional and political Yes X No
33. What types of identity can be identified?
a. Place identity
Yes X No
b. Regional identity Yes
X No
Section 4: Connection with other policies and laws
34. Is the document related with:
a. European policies
Yes
No X
b. European laws
Yes
No X
c. National policies
Yes
No X
d. National laws
Yes X No
e. Regional policies
Yes
No X
f. Regional laws Yes No X
Section 5: Summary
This document is focussed on the appearance of the landscape. It is specifically focussed on the private
properties of the inhabitants of the municipality. For the cores rules and regulations are related to the
building blocks, for the outskirts building blocks and farmyards.
Developments within the municipality have to suit the characteristics and quality of the area, the
development finds place. There are nine different areas distinguished, the broad focus is already mentioned.
This document is based upon an earlier version of 2004. Users of this document, the inhabitants of the
municipality, were asked to give their opinion about the previous version. According to their wishes the
current document was created.
* The policy is based upon an earlier version of 2004. In order to create a more comprehensive document
the version of 2004 is evaluated. The outcomes are included in this document.
47
2.3.3 Deventer
Evaluation sheet local policy documents
Section 1: Document information
1. Municipality: Deventer
2. Title of the document: Welstandsnota gemeente Deventer
3. Authors: Bügel-Hajema
4. Project agency: Bügel-Hajema
5. Year of publication: 2011
Section 2: Headline indicators & Evaluation
6. Is the ELC specifically mentioned? Yes No X
7. How is the ELC mentioned? The ELC is not mentioned
8. Is the term 'landscape' used?
Yes X No
9. Is the term 'landscape' used in a way Yes X No
consistent with the objectives of the ELC?
10. Are similar terms used to discuss the
Yes No X
principles of the ELC?
11. Level of detail/description 1 2 X 3 4 5
(of ELC principles)?
12. Is this a good use of the ELC? 1 2 3 X 4 5
Section 3: Evaluation of the use of different concepts
I: Landscape
13. Which types of landscape are discussed?
a. Physical landscape
Yes
X No
b. Social landscape
Yes
No X
14. How is dealt with the protection of the landscape?
The landscape of the municipality is divided in several landscape types. Every type has its own characteristics
and protective elements. E.g. In the rural areas, different landscape types ask for different situating of buildings, in the landscape. Several examples have been given of good environmental implementation.
15. Are the following changes, in landscape, considered?
a. Accessibility
Yes
X No
b. Urbanization
Yes
X No
48
c. Globalization
Yes
No
X
d. Calamities Yes No X
16. Is there any form of awareness raising? Yes No X
17. Is landscape used as a unifying concept? Yes No X
18. Will the policy be evaluated? Yes No X
II: Landscape planning and landscape management
19. Did inhabitants participate?
Yes X* No
20. How is dealt with the quality of the landscape?
Quality of the landscape is maintained, by giving of examples of good environmental implementation. This
is done for the outskirts of the municipality. For the whole municipality criteria a development has to meet are mentioned. In this way the quality of the landscape is preserved and where possible strengthened.
21. How is dealt with sustainability in relation to the landscape?
Sustainability in relation to landscape is not mentioned in this document.
22. Is the land used in a multifunctional way? Yes No X
23. Is the diversity of the landscape considered? Yes X No
24. Will the changes in landscape be monitored? Yes No X
25. Is there attention for the far future, in order to Yes No X
enhance, restore or create certain landscapes?
III: Landscape biography
26. Are the different dimensions of the landscape visible?
a. Physical landscape
Yes X
No
b. Social landscape
Yes
No X
27. Is the long-term history of the landscape visible?
a. Changing land use functions Yes
X No
b. Important places in the (past) landscape Yes
X No
28. Level of integration between past, present
and future landscapes 1 2 3 4 X 5
IV: Landscape identity
29. Is attention paid to the following factors:
a. Coherence
Yes X No
b. Complexity
Yes X No
c. Readability
Yes No X
d. Mystery
Yes
No
X
30. What are considered the distinctive features?
The inner city of Deventer is a protected city view. In the outskirts of the municipality, diverse landscape
49
types can be identified, each with its own characteristics and qualities. The estates have been mentioned
as areas that possess great natural and cultural values.
31. Which perspectives on identity can be identified?
a. Layman
Yes
No X
b. Cultural and societal groups Yes
No
X
c. Professional
Yes
X No
d. Scientific Yes No X
32. Which level(s) of landscape identity are used?
a. Individual
Yes No X
b. Group
Yes
No X
c. Spatial
Yes X
No
d. Regional and political Yes X No
33. What types of identity can be identified?
a. Place identity
Yes X
No
b. Regional identity Yes
X No
Section 4: Connection with other policies and laws
34. Is the document related with:
a. European policies
Yes
No X
b. European laws
Yes
No X
c. National policies
Yes
No X
d. National laws
Yes X
No
e. Regional policies
Yes
No X
f. Regional laws Yes
No
X
Section 5: Summary
The document is focussed on the situating of buildings in the landscape. In order to give clear criteria,
the municipality has been divided in several areas. So the municipality and the inhabitants know what is
approved in case of a development. For the protected city and village images, a heavier test has to be
fulfilled.
Preserving and strengthening the spatial quality of the municipality, is the major gaol of this document.
Whereas buildings placed within the landscape have a major role on the perception of the landscape, it
50
is important the criteria will be maintained. These criteria are guiding when new developments find
place. So when managing the landscape, this document is important to consider.
Together with inhabitants and entrepreneurs of the municipality is decided upon the qualities of the
diverse areas. These outcomes have been used in the document.
* Not mentioned in the document. However, it is mentioned in the following document: Gemeente Deventer, (2011). Nota voor burgemeester en wethouders. Onderwerp: Welstandsnota gemeente
Deventer, welstands- en reclamebeleid.
2.3.4 Zwolle
Evaluation sheet local policy documents
Section 1: Document information
1. Municipality: Zwolle
2. Title of the document: Welstandsnota 2012: Mooi Zwolle
3. Authors: Gemeente Zwolle
4. Sector: Gemeente Zwolle
5. Year of publication: 2012
Section 2: Headline indicators & Evaluation
6. Is the ELC specifically mentioned? Yes No X
7. How is the ELC mentioned? The ELC is not mentioned
8. Is the term 'landscape' used?
Yes X No
9. Is the term 'landscape' used in a way Yes No X
consistent with the objectives of the ELC?
10. Are similar terms used to discuss the
Yes No X
principles of the ELC?
11. Level of detail/description 1 2 X 3 4 5
(of ELC principles)?
12. Is this a good use of the ELC? 1 2 X 3 4 5
Section 3: Evaluation of the use of different concepts
I: Landscape
13. Which types of landscape are discussed?
a. Physical landscape
Yes
X No
b. Social
Yes No X
51
landscape
14. How is dealt with the protection of the landscape?
Monuments and the protected city image of Zwolle are protected. Relations with other policies of the
municipality are made (a policy about care for the monuments and a zoning plan considering the city).
15. Are the following changes, in landscape, considered?
a. Accessibility
Yes No X
b. Urbanization
Yes
X No
c. Globalization
Yes
No
X
d. Calamities Yes No X
16. Is there any form of awareness raising? Yes X No
17. Is landscape used as a unifying concept? Yes X No
18. Will the policy be evaluated? Yes No X
II: Landscape planning and landscape management
19. Did inhabitants participate?
Yes No X
20. How is dealt with the quality of the landscape?
The landscape of the municipality is divided in fourteen areas. These are based upon the functions and
difference between city and villages. For the city Zwolle, the different expansion areas (years) are divided as well. Developments with in these areas have to be connected to the characteristics of the area.
21. How is dealt with sustainability in relation to the landscape?
The municipality sees the document as a way to inspire its inhabitants to build or expand businesses.
The spatial quality of the municipality is the guiding principle.
22. Is the land used in a multifunctional way? Yes No X*
23. Is the diversity of the landscape considered? Yes X No
24. Will the changes in landscape be monitored? Yes No X
25. Is there attention for the far future, in order to Yes No X
enhance, restore or create certain landscapes?
III: Landscape biography
26. Are the different dimensions of the landscape visible?
a. Physical landscape
Yes X
No
b. Social landscape
Yes X
No
27. Is the long-term history of the landscape visible?
a. Changing land use functions Yes
No
X
b. Important places in the (past) landscape Yes
X No
28. Level of integration between past, present
and future landscapes 1 2 3 X 4 5
IV: Landscape identity
52
29. Is attention paid to the following factors:
a. Coherence
Yes X No
b. Complexity
Yes No X
c. Readability
Yes X No
d. Mystery
Yes
No
X
30. What are considered the distinctive features?
'The city of Zwolle has a few special qualities: a historic valuable inner city, diverse outskirts and a strategic
position along the river IJssel, between the Randstad and the Northern- and Eastern Netherlands (page 15).
For the diverse areas other features are mentioned. Considering the municipality as a whole, the above
mentioned qualities can be considered the distinctive features.
31. Which perspectives on identity can be identified?
a. Layman
Yes
No X
b. Cultural and societal groups Yes
No
X
c. Professional
Yes X No
d. Scientific Yes No X
32. Which level(s) of landscape identity are used?
a. Individual
Yes No X
b. Group
Yes
No X
c. Spatial
Yes X
No
d. Regional and political Yes
X No
33. What types of identity can be identified?
a. Place identity
Yes X
No
b. Regional identity Yes
X No
Section 4: Connection with other policies and laws
34. Is the document related with:
a. European policies
Yes
No X
b. European laws
Yes
No X
c. National policies
Yes
No X
d. National laws
Yes X
No
e. Regional policies
Yes
No X
f. Regional laws Yes
No
X
53
Section 5: Summary
The document is divided in different areas. For these areas different rules and regulations are valid. The
division in these areas, is based upon different layers. These are: the surface, networks and occupation.
Fourteen different areas have been distinguished. For every area a short history is given, after which the
key qualities are mentioned. The policy choices are based upon both the history and the key qualities.
Spatial quality is the main argument which can be identified behind this document. The landscapes of
the past are visible along the whole municipality. In order to preserve these qualities, the municipality
has updated the policy.
* In 2004, when the previous version of the document was created, participation did find place. Whereas,
there were no huge changes in the previous policy and the current one, the municipality argued a public
consultation procedure would be sufficient.