Connecting natural and cultural heritage practices. Is integration always a good idea?

Marjo J. Schlaman

doi:10.32028/exnovo.v4i0.374

Authors

Marjo J. Schlaman University of Amsterdam, ACASA - Department of Archaeology, Amsterdam

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32028/exnovo.v4i0.374

Keywords:

Cultural Heritage, Landscape, Historical Garden, Research Disciplines

Abstract

Integrated approaches in landscape management are often seen as the way forward to provide solutions for complex heritage problems that are related to policy, climate change, tourism, environmental planning and involving the public. This has led to a range of interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary projects aiming to add value to disciplinary approaches and gain new insights. Although interdisciplinarity is a promising research approach, there are many obstacles that may affect the quality of the project outcomes, slow down the overall organisation or create substantive errors.

This raises therefore the question: is integration always a good idea? In this paper, I will show the complexity of cultural-historical landscapes and examine interdisciplinary approaches for their value as framework for historical landscapes. The role of historical assessments methods in landscape design is discussed. Finally, the example of two historical gardens and the process of their restoration and conservation will demonstrate how interdisciplinary and disciplinary approaches are related to each other in the garden design process.

References

Ahern, J., 2006. Theories, methods and strategies for sustainable landscape planning. From landscape research to landscape planning. Aspects of integration, education and application, Dordrecht, Springer, 119-131.

Bell, M., 2004. Archaeology and Green Issues, in: J. Bintliff (ed.) A Companion to Archaeology, Malden (MA), Oxford (UK), Victoria (AU): Blackwell Publishing, 509-531.

Bloemers, T., 2010. Introduction, in: T. Bloemers, H. Kars, A. Van der Valk, M. Wijnen (eds), The Cultural Landscape & Heritage Paradox. Protection and Development of the Dutch Archaeological-Historical Landscape and its European Dimension. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 3-16.

Bloemers T., Kars, H., Van der Valk, A. & Wijnen, M., (eds), 2010. Preface, in: T. Bloemers, H. Kars, A. Van der Valk, M. Wijnen (eds), The Cultural Landscape & Heritage Paradox. Protection and Development of the Dutch Archaeological-Historical Landscape and its European Dimension. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, XI-XII.

COST 2010. Landscape in a Changing World. Bridging divides, integrating disciplines, serving society. Science policy briefing (41). Brussels: European Science Foundation.

Council of Europe 2000. European Landscape Convention. Florence, Italy.

Council of Europe 2006. Landscape and sustainable development: challenges of the European Landscape Convention.

De Wit, S., Huls, M., Van der Meulen, B., 2011. Gestapelde tijd. Historische tuinen als eigentijdse ontwerpopgave. Blauwe Kamer 5, 36-41.

Drury P., 2002. The historic and cultural dimensions of landscape. Naturopa 98, 12-13.

European Environment Agency 2010. 10 messages for 2010. Cultural landscapes and biodiversity heritage. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.

Egoz, S., Makhzoumi, J., Pungetti, G., (eds) 2011. The right to landscape: contesting landscape and human rights. London: Ashgate.

Jacobs, J.A., 2017. The Need for Disciplines in the Modern Research University, in: Frodeman, R. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity (2nd ed.). Accessed January 2018.

Online Publication Date: March 2017. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 36-40.

Klein, J.T., 2017. Typologies of Interdisciplinarity: The Boundary Work of Definition, in: Frodeman, R. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity (2nd ed.). Accessed January 2018.

Online Publication Date: March 2017. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 21-35.

Krohn, W., 2017. Interdisciplinary Cases and Disciplinary Knowledge: Epistemic Challenges of Interdisciplinary Research, Frodeman, R. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity (2nd ed.). Accessed January 2018. Online Publication Date: March 2017. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 41-53.

Londen, H. van, Schlaman, M. J., Travaglia, A., 2015. Survey of good Vocational Education & Training practices and learning needs in the Dutch cultural and green heritage sectors ANHER Project_O1-A3 Dutch National Report Output 1. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.

Luiten, E., 2006. Tot hier... en nu verder: ruimtelijk ontwerp en historisch besef. Oration held in acceptance of the chair of Cultural History and Design at the Faculty of Architecture at Delft University of Technology, Delft.

Ndubisi, F., 2014. A synthesis of approaches to Ecological Planning, in Ndubisi, F. (ed.), The ecological design and planning reader. Washington DC: Island Press, 404-426.

Province South-Holland, 2010. Tussen ‘Rust en Vreugd’ en ‘In de Werelt is veel Gevaar’, Actualisatie buitenplaatsen CHS; de buitenplaatsbiotoop in Zuid-Holland. The Hague: Province South-Holland.

Province Utrecht, 2014. De Utrechtse Buitenplaatsbiotoop, Kenmerken en Ambities. Utrecht: Province Utrecht.

Ronnes, H., 2010. Authenticiteit en authenticiteitsbeleving: de presentative en receptieve van museum Paleis Het Loo. Bulletin KNOB 109 (5), 190-199.

Ronnes, H., 2015. The quiet authors of an early modern palatial landscape: Transformation without reconstruction at King William’s Het Loo, in: J. Kolen, H.Renes & R. Hermans (eds), Landscape Biographies. Geographical, Historical and Archaeological Perspectives on the Production and Transmission of Landscapes. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 205-233.

Skoglund, P. & Svensson, P., 2010. Discourses of nature conservation and heritage management in the past, present and future: Discussing heritage and sustainable development from Swedish experiences. EJA 13 (3), 368-385.

Tilley, C.,1994. A phenomenology of Landscape. Oxford (UK), Providence (USA): Berg Publishers.

Tress, G., 2003. On policy expectations, in: B. Tress, G.Tress, A. Van der Valk & G. Fry (eds), Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Landscape Studies: Potential and Limitations. Accessed January 2016. Wageningen: Delta Series 2, 18. http://www.tress.cc/delta/series2.html

Tress, B., Tress, G., & Fry, G., (eds) 2003. Potential and limitations of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary landscape studies, in: B. Tress, G. Tress, A. Van der Valk & G. Fry (eds), Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Landscape Studies: Potential and Limitations. Accessed January 2016. Wageningen: Delta Series 2, 18. http://www.tress.cc/delta/series2.html 182-192.

Tress, B., Tress, G. & Fry, G., 2004. Clarifying integrative research concepts in landscape ecology. Landscape Ecology 20, 479-493.

Turner, T., 2005, Design philosophy 2000 BC–2000 AD, in: Garden History Philosophy and Design 2000 BC–2000 AD. London, New York: Spon Press, 1-33.

Van der Valk, A., 2010. Planning the past. Lessons to be learned from ‘Protecting and Developing the Dutch Archaeological-Historical Landscape’ (PDL/BBO), in: T. Bloemers, Kars, H., Van der Valk, A. & Wijnen, M., (eds), The Cultural Landscape & Heritage Paradox. Protection and Development of the Dutch Archaeological-Historical Landscape and its European Dimension. Amsterdam: Amsterdam, University Press, 21-51.

Van Doesburg, J., Lensvelt, N., Van der Heiden, M., 2015. Het park van Kasteel Duivenvoorde, Tuingeschiedenis gaat ondergronds in Tuinarcheologie. Tijdschrift van de Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed 7(3). Amersfoort: RCE, 4-7.

Von der Dunk, T., 2006. De moeizame vormgeving van ons verleden. Bulletin KNOB 105 (4), 108-122.

Verschuure-Stuip, G.A., 2015. De Buitenplaatsbiotoop of landgoedbiotoop. Nieuwe allianties in de bescherming van buitenplaatsen en landgoederen (Zuid-Holland en Utrecht).

Vitruvius 9 (33). Rotterdam: Educom, 14-19.