Search

Context Cultural landscapes evolve over time. However, the rate and direction of change might not be in line with societal needs and more information on the forces driving these changes are therefore needed. Objectives Filling the gap between single case studies and meta-analyses, we present a comparative study of landscape changes and their driving forces based in six regions across Europe conducted using a consistent method. Methods A LULC analysis based on historical and contemporary maps from the nineteenth and twentieth century was combined with oral history interviews to learn more about perceived landscape changes, and remembered driving forces. Land cover and landscape changes were analysed regarding change, conversions and processes. For all case study areas, narratives on mapped land cover change, perceived landscape changes and driving forces were compiled. Results Despite a very high diversity in extent, direction and rates of change, a few dominant processes and widespread factors driving the changes could be identified in the six case study areas, i.e. access and infrastructure, political shifts, labor market, technological innovations, and for the more recent period climate change. Conclusions Grasping peoples’ perception supplements the analyses of mapped land use and land cover changes and allows to address perceived landscape changes. The list of driving forces determined to be most relevant shows clear limits in predictability: Whereas changes triggered by infrastructural developments might be comparatively easy to model, political developments cannot be foreseen but might, nevertheless, leave major marks in the landscape.

Context: The design of effective responses to safeguard cultural landscape values in Europe needs collaborative action among the stakeholders involved. Despite considerable progress triggered by the European Landscape Convention (ELC) and other initiatives to link landscape science, policy and practice, a joint research–action agenda is still lacking. Objectives and methods: We respond to this challenge by identifying common priority questions for the sustainable management of cultural landscapes in Europe. To this end, we gathered, in a first phase, the most relevant research questions through a Delphi-like process with the research community in this field. In a second phase, the questions were prioritized by three stakeholder groups: scientists (Ss), policy-makers (PMs) and practitioners (Ps). The importance ranks and the similarity between groups’ priorities were calculated and analyzed. Results: We found that the research question that addressed the issue of how to secure sustainable cultural landscapes where they are not economically profitable was the most important, with high level of agreement among all stakeholders. Alignment among the three groups was generally high; being higher between Ps–Ss and Ps–PMs than between Ss and PMs. Conclusions: Our exercise can assist the implementation of the ELC by outlining the potential direction of future applied research and by strengthening the ties between the multiple stakeholders involved in the stewardship of European cultural landscapes.