Landscapes of Challenge and Change: Contested Views of the Cairngorms National Park

Abstract

The Scottish model of national parks reflects wider changes in the management of special or protected landscapes. This paper uses Ingold's dwelling conceptualisation of landscape to reflect on how material and cultural processes affect stakeholders' perceptions of the Cairngorms National Park in Scotland, UK. Important to understanding different views, is the separation, unique to the Cairngorms, of ‘the park’ from its management organisation. The paper argues that this separation creates a conceptual space for the negotiation of contested claims regarding the park. Such claims reflect not only the relationship between people and place, or as Ingold (2000) puts it, the landscape as it is known to those who dwell in it; they also represent vested interests and regimes of power concerning what happens in specific places. These claims do not reproduce simple splits between, for example, public/private or conservation/development but show a more complex picture.

Key Words:

• Cairngorms National Park
• landscape
• dwelling
• contested views

Notes

1. Partners involved in developing the Park Plan are: Aberdeenshire Council, Angus Council, Communities Scotland, Deer Commission for Scotland, Forestry Commission Scotland, Highland Council, Highlands and Islands Enterprise, Historic Scotland, Moray Council, Scottish Enterprise, Scottish Environment Protection Agency, Scottish Natural Heritage, Scottish Water, Sport Scotland, UHI Millennium Institute, Visit Scotland (CNPA, 2007).

2. These four aims are: to conserve and enhance the natural and cultural heritage of the area; to promote sustainable use of the natural resources of the area; to promote understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of the area by the public; and to promote sustainable economic and social development of the area's communities.

3. The southern boundary extension, to include Highland Perthshire and Glenshee, occurred on 4 October 2010, making the park one-fifth bigger and covering about 6% of Scotland. From 2003 until 2010 the park was 3800 sq. km.

4. Responsibility for most large upland areas is shared amongst several local authorities so it is difficult to tackle pressures in a coherent, or joined-up, fashion.

5. The separation of the park management authority from the day-to-day management of the park, its plan and branding, may be unusual for a national park, but is found in some UNESCO Biosphere Reserves (BRs), which are also multi-tenured sustainable development-oriented landscape designations. BR branding for products and services is documented for BRs in the regions of Entlebuch in Switzerland, Riverland in South Australia, the Fitzgerald River in Western Australia, the West Estonian Archipelago, the Rhône in Germany and Niagara Escarpment and Clayoquot Sound in Canada (ACT Legislative Assembly, 2007). It is also worth noting the apparent confluence of BR designations with the new landscape-scale/ecosystem approach to the Cairngorms National Park.

6. Although the Cairngorms National Park Authority has taken a facilitative rather than a directive approach to managing and implementing the park plan, the provisions of the National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000 seem to be such that this unusual separation could change in the future, with the Authority authorised by the Act to deliver services, enter into management agreements, request transfers of staff from other local authorities and so on, which are more traditional roles for a park authority.