Human Needs as an Approach to Designed Landscapes

Abstract

The traditional approach of landscape architecture has always focused on the aesthetic and visual aspects of landscapes while giving less attention to other aspects. This view has limited the benefits that can be derived from designed landscapes, despite the wide-ranging potential they carry for humans; socially, environmentally and economically. As a result, many researchers and practitioners are currently challenging this view to develop a more holistic and multidimensional approach. The present research therefore aims at proposing a new perspective for public designed landscapes based on fundamental human needs. The study methodology was comprised of critical content analysis for three main domains: sustainable development, human needs in specific relation to public landscapes, and significant approaches to fundamental human needs. Reconciliation among these domains was achieved based on a modified version of Max-Neef’s matrix of fundamental human needs. Human needs in public landscapes were merged into the matrix to reach a comprehensive yet specific perspective. The study concluded with a conceptual framework that can provide a wider perspective to human needs in designed landscapes. It proposes a new tool for the analysis of the benefits of public landscapes and their value for humans, which can be further used in various applications.

An ecocentric approach to defining a public park system

“…Furthermore, Aly et al (2018) attempted to define these relationships by establishing a framework that relates designed landscapes to human needs. Max-Neef’s matrix of fundamental human needs (Costanza et al , 2007; Max-Neef, 1991) was used to conceptualise this relationship.…”

“…In the field of landscape ecology, attempts to separate the side of natural elements and humans are common; in differentiating between function and purpose or between function and service. In this case, function describes a process an element performs or the dynamics of a system, while service explains how the functionality benefits human beings (Aly et al , 2018; Bolliger and Kienast, 2010; de Groot et al , 2010; Hermann et al , 2011; Selman, 2009). Forman and Gordon (1968) also provide a definition for function which is processes-oriented, descriptive and does not include any human-related elements by not using terms as capacity or services (Forman and Godron, 1968 in Brandt and Vejre, 2003).…”

“…The matrix structure was also influenced by the ecosystem services (ES) perspective. Despite including multiple aspects and making connections that were not shown in previous lists of qualities, it does not show interrelations and dependencies between its entities (Aly et al , 2018). It also inherited the simple linear format of Max-Neef’s matrix and ES perspective.…”

Regenerativescapes: Incremental Evaluation for the Regeneration of Unresolved Territories in East Naples

“…From Lyle's first introduction of the concept of "design for regeneration" [38], through the radical ecologist movements, humans are seen as an integral part of nature and partners in the processes of co-creation and co-evolution instead of being mere users of various ES [39]. Integrating FHN, ES, and landscape functions, "capacity of an ecosystem to provide goods and services that satisfy human needs, directly or indirectly", in planning [40,41] is a support to the decision-making for environmental regeneration.…”