Abstract
For a quarter of a century, sustainable development has been on the political and research agendas. Within the field of landscape ecology, a wide array of research has documented the effects of alternative land uses, analysed driving forces of land use change and developed tools for measuring such changes, to mention but a few developments. There have also been great advances in technology and data management. Nevertheless, unsustainable land use continues to occur and the science of landscape ecology has had less influence on landscape change than aimed for. In this paper we use Norwegian examples to discuss some of the reasons for this. We examine mismatches in the spatial and temporal scales considered by scientists, decision-makers and those who carry out land use change, consider how this and other factors hinder effective communication between scientists and practitioners, and urge for a stronger focus on what it is that motivates people to action. We suggest that the concept of landscape services can be useful not only for researchers but also provide valuable communication and planning tools. Finally, we suggest more emphasis on applying adaptive management in landscape ecology to help close the gaps, both between researchers and policy and, even more crucially, between researchers and practitioners.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ahern J (1999) Spatial concepts, planning strategies and future scenarios: a framework method for integrating landscape ecology and landscape planning. In: Klopatek JM, Gardner RH (eds) Landscape ecological analysis: issues and applications. Springer Verlag, New York, pp 175–201
Ahern J (2006) Theories, methods and strategies for sustainable landscape planning. In: Tress B, Tress G, Fry G, Opdam P (eds), From landscape research to landscape planning. Aspects of integration, education and application, pp 119–131. Springer, Dordrecht
Bedimo-Rung AL, Mowen AJ, Cohen DA (2005) The significance of parks to physical activity and public health: aA conceptual model. Am J Prev Med 28:159–168
Bolliger J, Kienast F (2010) Landscape functions in a changing environment. Landsc Online 21:1–5
Burton RJF, Kuczera C, Schwarz G (2008) Exploring farmers’ cultural resistance to voluntary agri-environmental schemes. Sociol Rural 48:16–37
Bye AS, Aarstad PA, Løvberget AI, Skjerpen C, Hoem B (2011) Jordbruk og miljø. Tilstand og utvikling 2011. Statistics Norway, Oslo-Kongsvinger
Carr S, Tait J (1991) Differences in the attitudes of farmers and conservationists and their implications. J Environ Manag 32:281–294
Döös BR (2002) Population growth and loss of arable land. Glob Environ Chang Hum Policy Dimens 12:303–311
Duff G, Garnett D, Jacklyn P, Landsberg J, Ludwig J, Morrison J, Novelly P, Walker D, Whitehead P (2009) A collaborative design to adaptively manage for landscape sustainability in north Australia: lessons from a decade of cooperative research. Landscape Ecol 24:1135–1143
Fjellstad W, Dramstad WE (2005) 3Q: Endringer i jordbrukets kulturlandskap-Østfold, Oslo/Akershus og Vestfold. Norwegian Institute of Land Inventory, Ås
Gifford R, Scannell L, Kormos C, Smolova L, Biel A, Boncu S, Corral V, Guntherf H, Hanyu K, Hine D, Kaiser FG, Korpela K, Lima LM, Mertig AG, Mira RG, Moser G, Passafaro P, Pinheiro JQ, Saini S, Sako T, Sautkina E, Savina Y, Schmuck P, Schultz W, Sobeck K, Sundblad EL, Uzzell D (2009) Temporal pessimism and spatial optimism in environmental assessments: an 18-nation study. J Environ Psychol 29:1–12
Gifford R (2011) The dragons of inaction psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. Am Psychol 66:290–302
Goldman RL (2010) Ecosystem services: how people benefit from nature. Environment 52:15–23
Goulson D, Rayner P, Dawson B, Darvill B (2011) Translating research into action; bumblebee conservation as a case study. J Appl Ecol 48:3–8
Guldin RW (2003) Forest science and forest policy in the Americas: building bridges to a sustainable future. For Policy Econ 5:329–337
Holling CS (1978) Adaptive environmental assessment and management. Wiley, Chichester
Janse G (2008) Communication between forest scientists and forest policy-makers in Europe: a survey on both sides of the science/policy interface. For Policy Econ 10:183–194
Leitão AB, Ahern J (2002) Applying landscape ecological concepts and metrics in sustainable landscape planning. Landsc Urban Plan 59:65–93
Lokhorst AM, Staats H, van Dijk J, van Dijk E, de Snoo G (2011) What’s in it for Me? motivational differences between farmers’ subsidised and non-subsidised conservation practices. Appl Psychol (International Review-Psychologie Appliquee-Revue Internationale) 60:337–353
Losey JE, Vaughan M (2006) The economic value of ecological services provided by insects. Bioscience 56:311–323
McNie EC (2007) Reconciling the supply of scientific information with user demands: an analysis of the problem and review of the literature. Environ Sci Policy 10:17–38
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2003) Ecosystems and human well-being: a framework for assessment. Island Press, Washington, DC
Nassauer JI (1988) The aesthetics of horticulture: neatness as a form of care. HortScience 23:973–977
Nassauer JI, Opdam P (2008) Design in science: extending the landscape ecology paradigm. Landscape Ecol 23:633–644
Nassauer JI, Wang ZF, Dayrell E (2009) What will the neighbors think? Cultural norms and ecological design. Landsc Urban Plan 92:282–292
Nassauer JI (2011) Care and stewardship: from home to planet. Landsc Urban Plan 100:321–323
Norges lover (1928, 1995) The Land Act. Available from www.ub.uio.no/ujur/ulovdata/lov-19950512-023-eng.html Accessed 15 Mar 2012
Norwegian Ministry of Finance 2008. Norway’s Strategy for Sustainable Development. Published as part of the National Budget 2008. Government Administration Service, Oslo
Opdam P, Foppen R, Vos C (2002) Bridging the gap between ecology and spatial planning in landscape ecology. Landscape Ecol 16:767–779
Ostrom E (1998) A behavioral approach to the rational choice theory of collective action. Am Political Sci Rev 92:1–22
Pannell DJ, Roberts AM (2009) Conducting and delivering integrated research to influence land-use policy: salinity policy in Australia. Environ Sci Policy 12:1088–1098
Potschin M, Haines-Young R (2008) Sustainability impact assessments: limits, thresholds and the sustainability choice space. In: Helming K, Pérez-Soba M, Tabbush P (eds) Sustainability impact assessment of land use changes. Springer-Verlag, Berlin
Riksrevisjonen (2002) Riksrevisjonens undersøkelse av bygging i 100-metersbeltet langs sjøen. Riksrevisjonen, Oslo
Riksrevisjonen (2006) Riksrevisjonens undersøkelse av myndighetenes arbeid med kartlegging og overvåking av biologisk mangfold og forvaltning av verneområder. Riksrevisjonen, Oslo
Riksrevisjonen (2007) Riksrevisjonens undersøkelse av bærekraftig arealplanlegging og arealdisponering i Norge. Dokument nr. 3-serien 3:12 (2005–2006). Riksrevisjonen, Oslo, p 100
Schenk A, Hunziker M, Kienast F (2007) Factors influencing the acceptance of nature conservation measures: a qualitative study in Switzerland. J Environ Manag 83:66–79
Schreiber ESG, Bearlin AR, Nicol SJ, Todd CR (2004) Adaptive management: a synthesis of current understanding and effective application. Ecol Manag Restor 5:177–182
Schultz PW (2011) Conservation means behavior. Conserv Biol 25:1080–1083
Stankey GH, Clark RN, Bormann BT (2005) Adaptive management of natural resources: Theory, Concepts, and Management Institutions. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-654. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station
Stanners D, Bourdeau P (eds) (1995) Europe’s environment: the Dobříš assessment. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen
Stewart GB, Coles CF, Pullin AS (2005) Applying evidence-based practice in conservation management: lessons from the first systematic review and dissemination projects. Biol Conserv 126:270–278
TEEB (2010) The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: mainstreaming the economics of nature: a synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. Progress Press, Malta
Termorshuizen JW, Opdam P (2009) Landscape services as a bridge between landscape ecology and sustainable development. Landscape Ecol 24:1037–1052
Termorshuizen JW, Opdam P, van den Brink A (2007) Incorporating ecological sustainability into landscape planning. Landsc Urban Plan 79:374–384
Theobald DM, Spies T, Kline J, Maxwell B, Hobbs NT, Dale VH (2005) Ecological support for rural land-use planning. Ecol Appl 15:1906–1914
Walters CJ (1986) Adaptive management of renewable resources. McMillan, New York
WCED (1987) Our Common Future. World Commission on Environment and Development, Oxford
Wiens JA (2009) Landscape ecology as a foundation for sustainable conservation. Landscape Ecol 24:1053–1065
Wu JG (2006) Landscape ecology, cross-disciplinarity, and sustainability science. Landscape Ecol 21:1–4
Acknowledgments
We are very grateful to the three anonymous reviewers who provided valuable comments on the first draft of this manuscript. Part of this work was funded by the Norwegian Research Council (178371/I10).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dramstad, W.E., Fjellstad, W.J. Twenty-five years into “our common future”: are we heading in the right direction?. Landscape Ecol 28, 1039–1045 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-012-9740-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-012-9740-5