Whose landscape?
Human diversity & historic landscape decision-making
Oxford Botanic Garden, 2018
In April 2021, we held our first online event as part of the AHRC-funded Unlocking Landscapes Network, exploring human diversity and historic landscape decision-making.
As discussed in our earlier news piece, the Unlocking Landscapes network aims to explore opportunities to complement UK landscape decision-making approaches that foreground biodiversity with a focus on human diversity.
This initial event provided the opportunity to discuss priorities, challenges and/or opportunities for embedding sensory, social and cultural inclusion into historic landscape decision-making.
This news piece offers a whistle-stop tour of some of the key themes discussed during the event, which we hope to build on in future network activities.
1. Landscape use and tensions
When do landscape interactions become defined by what is accepted and expected in certain locations i.e. by a prescriptive sense of how landscape should be used? Is there a need to return to how we experience landscape before those early ways of perceiving the world are educated or acculturated out of us? Might that allow space for narratives that are more permissive and accommodating of the diverse sensory, social and cultural practices that people may seek to engage in across different landscapes?
Are we aiming for universality in landscape experience? Some people have very specific priorities e.g. low sensory stimulation? There is a tension in moving away from segregated experiences, while also ensuring opportunities for ‘safe’ experiences in perhaps part of a landscape to nurture a sense of familiarity and ownership over time, without closing off access to (or comfort in accessing) the more expansive qualities of that landscape.
2. Language and meaning
Importance of language and linguistic diversity in place-making and place-storying, and also in recognising that not everyone communicates through the spoken word. Language and cultural tropes can affect people’s way into the story of a landscape.
How can we better understand the cultural linguistic histories of landscape? How are linguistic histories eroded in certain landscapes? How do place, plant and other naming conventions act to erase historic place-making and shaping?
By prioritising spoken language in the stories that are created and shared, are we missing the stories (and experiences) of people who use non-spoken forms of communication? How can their stories become part of the story of the landscape and its co-constituents? BSL, for example, does not currently include signs for many plants that we might find in these types of landscapes (and probably not just plants). Can we use sensory stories to bring people who do not communicate verbally to the heart of landscape interpretation too? How do we create a library of sensory stories of different genres and purposes?
Underpinning the event, and this work more broadly, are the widely recognised and discussed risks of conflating discussions of landscape with those of nature or environment – what do they mean to different people? How are they coded differently? The term 'access to nature' is used for a huge variety of greenspaces and misses many more uses, as well as historic and cultural landscape importance.
3. Role of culture and cultural histories
To what extent does landscape engagement rely on a sense of landscape belonging or ‘home’ (or the Welsh sense of ‘Hireath’)? What activities can foster a sense of belonging, and what undermines it? Does belonging require shared landscape meanings? Landscapes can come to belong to a wide range of groups in different ways and on their own terms. Can we move beyond fixed binaries in how we understand landscape, landscape access and inclusion - in/out of place, abled/disabled, welcome/unwelcome etc.?
Thinking of historical landscapes means thinking of the story of that place and those who live and work within it, but visitors also come with their own stories—how do we connect those stories? Whose landscapes are lost through the narratives told?
Could greater efforts to share the untold stories of how places were used in the past – perhaps even before the current landscape was imprinted – offer a broader access point for place-making by a range of groups? When are stories of transformation helpful, or stories of longevity? How can we better understand how the landscapes we encounter now were perhaps imposed and imprinted on potentially very different landscapes in the past? What are the implications of that for how those landscapes become coded and used? How can we bring to life the landscapes that existed before their current form?
There are growing moves to recognise the colonial histories of many nationally celebrated landscapes (and their co-constituents e.g. plants gathered from other parts of the world) in how they are shared and interpreted. How do we best tell those stories? So many important discussions around these contested histories become confrontational (overtly or softly) and fracture very quickly. How do we enable and encourage non-violent empathetic discussion in a way that promotes engagement and reparative action?
It’s also important to recognise how colonial pasts and the literature of empire continue to dominate perceptions of what is a ‘natural’ and/or ‘beautiful’ landscape, within and beyond the UK. This includes the colonial education system - e.g. Derek Walcott, a Saint Lucian poet, writes of being taught an 'English' curriculum whilst growing up in the Caribbean, such that he felt more familiar with daffodils than the palm trees and landscapes in his immediate environment. How can we ‘unlearn’ what we are taught?
Can we emphasise the dynamic qualities of landscape through the stories told? Thinking about parallels between displacement, migration, home, landscape change – plants, birds, people all move and are 'replaced' through all sorts of positive (and negative) dynamics. Are there strengths in this as a way of meaning-making?
4. Working collaboratively and challenging power structures
How can we reflect a sense of landscapes being for groups who do not usually feel welcome or safe (recognising that not everyone will wish to visit – but ensuring that is not a result of internalised exclusion over time, and trying to dismantle barriers amongst those who do).
Efforts to reach out to varied groups (e.g. in co-productive ways) need to be considered early and properly resourced to build the conditions and collaborations needed for genuine person-centred approaches – both in terms of time to build trust and shared understanding, but also in terms of factoring in necessary resources. These kinds of changes also require a willingness amongst funding organisations to genuinely support the time and flexibility needed to support inclusive co-creative processes.
5. Re-evaluating success
Why would people choose to engage with historic landscapes as part of their everyday lives or even as more infrequent ‘special’ visits? How can we promote a plurality of stories of entanglement of people and place? We wouldn't go into a restaurant without reading the menu. How can we share the menus of a landscape – the ingredients, the seasonal specials and the experiences people may have?
It is not enough to ask people about their priorities/interests – there needs to be a process of active listening followed by genuine efforts to enact what might be quite major forms of transformation in response. This can require organisations to re-distribute the power in landscape decision-making and commit to doing things differently rather than falling back to their default position, and to recognise the benefits of making these changes. Thinking and working inclusively offers opportunities for inspiration and creative collaborations that can benefit people from many different backgrounds and experiences. A commitment to nurturing greater diversity within decision-making organisations – and within training and education pathways for these types of roles – is also important. How do we build constituencies involving children and young people? Particularly where nature is viewed as an object of danger (whether real or imagined). Perhaps the youth climate change movement will have a positive impact on ideas of landscape and belonging. Yet, more needs to be done by embedding education in the areas of access and inclusion within professional and higher education.
Perhaps we need to re-evaluate what constitutes 'success' in this area? Organisations are so often driven by targets linked to efficiency and cost-effectiveness. How can the metrics of success be shifted to recognise that these processes take time, flexibility and that the process is often more (if not just as) important as the outcome? And that sometimes the process will fail and that can be just as important in terms of learning and moving forwards?
6. Sharing examples
A key ambition of the Unlocking Landscapes Network is to gather and share relevant initiatives and writing that reflect the types of issues discussed in the event and that offer examples of innovative approaches to these issues. Some examples shared to date with a focus on historic landscapes include:
Reflecting on the literature of empire landscapes.
Embedding sensory and neurodiversity in historic landscape interpretation, National Trust Croome’s ‘Potter and Potter’ map.
Working with historic artefacts related to disability to welcome people that may otherwise feel excluded, Top Cottage.
An insight into the complexities of sensory engagement with historic landscapes from people with visual and hearing impairments.
We are keen to build on these examples as the network develops so just get in touch if you would like to share any!