Landscape as an Area Perceived through Activity: Implications for Diversity Management and Conservation

Abstract

This article uses an activity-based understanding of landscape to explore values related to perceived land cover diversity. Perceptions within two user groups, members of landowner families and hiking tourists in a mountain area in western Norway, were related to a simultaneous land cover survey, and compared to experts' evaluations of land cover and to the aims of landscape protection in the area. Users perceived the area as being significantly more diverse and valuable than experts did, which stresses the importance of taking user perception into account in landscape protection and management. Some central landscape values were dependent upon land use outside the boundaries of the protected area. This illustrates that measures within structurally defined land units are not necessarily sufficient for maintenance of landscape values experienced by users. Land use in both respects, as an upholder of values and as a way of experiencing or perceiving them, should receive an increased role in the determination of management units.

Key Words:

• Land cover
• land use
• landscape diversity
• Norway
• perception

Acknowledgements

Thanks are due to Kerstin Potthoff for assisting in plot and transect mapping, the Bergen Mountain Touring Association for permission to carry out the questionnaire survey at their cabins and for the provision of statistical data, and all personal informants for offering their time to share their knowledge and opinions. Hans Rønning provided kind assistance on behalf of the Norwegian Archive for Satellite Data (Norsk Satellittdataarkiv). Moreover, thanks are due to Anders Lundberg, Kenneth Olwig, Kerstin Potthoff and two anonymous reviewers for valuable comments on the manuscript, and to Wendy Fjellstad for careful proof-reading. Fieldwork was supported financially by the Research Council of Norway (grant no. 127837).

Notes

1. Actually, there are numerous studies within the ecological sciences that demonstrate how, for example, classification systems, scales of study, and technological effects may influence the outcome of analyses (see e.g. Wu, 2004; Tews et al., 2004). However, this ‘internal’ awareness does not necessarily affect seeming objectivity ‘outwards’.

2. This term follows Fremstad (1997). Other authors use snow bed vegetation.

3. Few sharply delineated property boundaries exist in the area. Those that are present have generally been agreed on in connection with compensation payments for hydropower development (Figure 1b).

4. The investigation is based on the EUREF89 (WGS84), Zone 32N, map datum, which is the standard of the UTM-grid of recent map sheet editions by the Norwegian Mapping Authority (here: Statens kartverk, 2000). The UTM-grid of older editions (here: Statens kartverk, 1987, 1988a, 1988b) is based on the ED50 map datum: N_ED50 = N_EUREF89+ 207 m and E_ED50 = E_EUREF89+ 81 m respectively (Statens kartverk, 2000).

5. In the study area, transect mapping has been used previously in an inventory of grazing resources (Frøystad, 1951).

6. These evaluations apply to a national Norwegian reference frame. Within western Norway, the area still contains a rather rich flora, not least due to the variety in bedrock with nutrient-rich mica schist, as well as serpentine and gneiss.