Besides being a concept, ‘landscape’ can be interpreted as a verb: it transmits the active connotation of making and shaping the land. In ‘landscaping’ as a continuous activity, we can see both nature’s law and political ideologies at work. From an ecological perspective, we learn how climate, relief, water, flora and fauna are fundamental to our environment. Interactions between the environment and the social-historical context are another basic aspect. Recent historical research has emphasized how, during the 20th century, the social-historical influence on landscaping is affected by political ideologies (Olwig & Mitchell 2009; Van de Grift 2015). Closely connected to ideologies are different kinds of knowledge, offered by experts who often take an influential role in landscape planning (Leendertz 2008). The influence of experts and ideologies has been connected to the theme of landscape history and planning already (Mels 2002; Doevendans & Lörzing 2007; Kupper 2007; De Jonge 2009). These contributions, however, still leave space for a better integration of ecological and political perspectives.
The 17th IPHS conference, with its head topics History - Urbanism – Resilience, offers an opportunity to discuss the relation between ecology and politics further. Landscape planning ambitions were often formulated in political centres, and are closely connected to wider frameworks of spatial, regional and urban planning. ‘Resilience’, or other concepts related to resilience, have been used to legitimize landscape politics and/or nature policies. This session aims to bring interdisciplinary research together on spaces which are known for its value for nature, recreation, and/or heritage and are protected by political measures as such. One can think of, among others, national parks, recreational zones or UNESCO world heritage. It invites papers who deal with such categories and relate the ecological history of natural spaces to the political process of categorizing, ordering, law making and marketing. We particular welcome papers with an interdisciplinary and/or comparative perspective, but papers on single case-studies are also welcome.
Submission procedure and deadline
Proposals should be prepared in the form of an abstract of no more than 500 words exclusive of references. A short biographical statement (500 words) or an abbreviated CV needs to be submitted with the abstract, including full contact information (address, email, phone). The session organizers will collect and select the abstract before 20 December 2016. The IPHS-conference organization will decide upon the session proposal no later than 5 February 2016.
Session Organizer
Dennis Worst & Marijn Molema
Fryske Akademy, Leeuwarden (the Netherlands)
dworst@fryske-akademy.nl
http://planninghistory.org/conferences/delft-2016/
References
- Doevendans, K., H. Lorzing, et al. (2007). "From modernist landscape to new nature: planning of rural utopias in The Netherlands." Landscape Research 32(3): 333-354; Grift, L. van de(2015). Introduction: Theories and Practices of Internal Colonization. The Cultivation of Lands and People in the Age of Modern Territoriality. International Journal for History, Culture and Modernity, 3 (2): 139-158; Jonge, J. de. (2009). Landscape architecture between politics and science. Wageningen; Kupper, P. (2009). "Science and the national parks: a transatlantic perspective on the interwar years." Environmental History 14(1): 58-81; Leendertz, A. (2008). Ordnung Schaffen. Deutsche Raumplanung im 20. Jahrhundert. Göttingen; Mels, T. (2002). "Nature, home and scenery: the official spatialities of Swedish natural parks." Environment and planning D: Society and space 20: 135-154; Olwig, K. R. and D. Mitchell (2009). Justice, Power and the political landscape.