No abstract

Reconciling productive agricultural practices with nature conservation is not only an ecological challenge, but also a demanding matter of governance. This paper analyses the potential as well as the limitations of various governance arrangements, and explores ways to enhance the governance of nature conservation in agricultural landscapes. We assume four conditions to contribute to the performance of these arrangements: farmers should be motivated, demanded, enabled, and legitimized to participate in arrangements that promote nature conservation by farmers. We analyse 10 distinct Dutch governance arrangements in the period 2000-2016, including agri-environment schemes but also privately initiated arrangements. The arrangements target a large but unknown share of farmers and farmlands, but nature conservation ambition levels are generally low to moderate. The expected low-to-moderate performance is associated with a low-tomoderate motivation, demand, and ability. Underlying are stronger forces driving towards intensification and problems farmers face in recuperating the cost of nature conservation. New greening requirements in the EU Common Agricultural Policy and in agri-food supply chains are first, cautious steps addressing these fundamental drivers of ecological degradation. More ambitious greening requirements may contribute to a higher motivation and ability of larger groups of farmers to implement nature conservation measures.

The compact city has become a leading concept in the planning of peri-urban areas. The compact city concept is often advocated as 'sustainable', because of claims that include lower emissions and conservation of the countryside. The literature shows, however, that there are certain trade-offs in striving for compaction, especially between environmental and social aspects of sustainability. In this paper, we describe expressions of the compact city concept in the planning practice of several European urban sample regions, as well as policies and developments that contradict the compact city. We look at examples of positive and negative impacts of the compact city that were observed in the sample regions. Further, we discuss attempts by planners to deal with sustainability trade-offs. Being aware that developments in the peri-urban areas are closely connected to those in the inner city, we compare the sample regions in order to learn how the compact city concept has been used in planning peri-urban areas across different contexts in Europe: in Western, Central and Mediterranean Europe, and with growing, stable or declining populations. We conclude with recommendations with respect to balance in applying the compact city concept.

No abstract

In this paper we address two challenges that are faced by scientists who engage in transdisciplinary landscape planning. In building a common understanding and application of the knowledge they bring in, they face the need to integrate knowledge from a range of scientific disciplines to create comprehensive solutions, while aligning the diverging values and perspectives on the future of involved actors. Boundary management has been proposed as a strategy to support the decision-making of actors by reconfiguring the boundaries between different forms of academic and non-academic expertise and between facts and opinions, interests and values. In this paper we investigate how landscape concepts can play a role as a boundary concept in transdisciplinary landscape planning. By analysing three Dutch case studies, we conclude that collective views and coordinated actions within the local planning groups grew during the planning process. We argue that the characteristics of the landscape concepts contributed to this emerging collaboration by creating a discursive space for actors with different values and knowledge bases. We find that this role evolved during the planning process, from conceptually binding, via broadening the planning focus and the coalition, towards facilitating the implementation of collective action to adapt the landscape. Thus, whereas in the early phases of the planning process the concept linked landscape value to landscape functioning, later on it connected landscape functioning to landscape structure.

No abstract

Agrienvironmental schemes (AES) have been a predominant manifestation of environmental policy integration in the EU. However, rather than strictly following formal AES policy, farmers across Europe have taken various other initiatives to integrate environmental and agricultural practices. Mostly, these integrative initiatives were based on dynamic actor networks at various levels, responding to local problems and challenges. Compared with situations where, from the top down, one (mostly weaker) policy domain is integrated into another, the kind of integration taking place in these examples may be called more 'fundamental'. Here, integration is already embedded in the practical outcomes envisioned in specific places. The parts of the outcome require each other. However, this fundamental form of integration may render problems at other levels and sectors of governance. In this paper we present a case study of an initiative called Farming for Nature. The initiative aimed to integrate farming and nature more thoroughly than EU and national policies and incorporated some important other characteristics of the area, such as its water dynamics and relationships with the urban environment. However, it also involved some key differences from mainstream policy; and although it resonated with EU support for participative governance, these differences rendered a lengthy process towards implementation lasting more than half a decade. We use the concept of 'landscape governance'-operationalized as the interplay of discourses, institutional practices, and natural-spatial conditions-to understand the politics of scale involved when mainstream government policies and local integrative initiatives meet. Particular attention is paid to how the local ideas toned down some of their integrative ingredients in order to comply with mainstream sectoral policy discourse. We find that the type of landscape governance implemented shaped the initiatives into a form that contributed to their implementation, but simultaneously displaced and contained political conflict in a way that prevented public debate.

No abstract