Table Of ContentEcology, Cognition and Landscape
LandscapeSeries
Volume11
SeriesEditors:
HenriDe´camps
CentreNationaldelaRechercheScientifique
Toulouse,France
Ba¨rbelTress
TRESS&TRESSGbR
Munich,Germany
GuntherTress
TRESS&TRESSGbR
Munich,Germany
AimsandScope
Springer’s innovative Landscape Series is committed to publishing high-quality
manuscriptsthatapproachtheconceptoflandscapefromabroadrangeofperspec-
tives. Encouraging contributions on theory development, as well as more applied
studies,theseriesattractsoutstandingresearchfromthenaturalandsocialsciences,
andfromthehumanitiesandthearts.Italsoprovidesaleadingforumforpublica-
tionsfrominterdisciplinaryandtransdisciplinaryteams.
Drawing on, and synthesising, this integrative approach the Springer Landscape
Series aims to add new and innovative insights into the multidimensional nature
of landscapes. Landscapes provide homes and livelihoods to diverse peoples; they
house historic – and prehistoric – artefacts; and they comprise complex physical,
chemical and biological systems. They are also shaped and governed by human
societieswhobasetheirexistenceontheuseofthenaturalresources;peopleenjoy
the aesthetic qualities and recreational facilities of landscapes, and people design
newlandscapes.
As interested in identifying best practice as it is in progressing landscape the-
ory, the Landscape Series particularly welcomes problem-solving approaches and
contributionstolandscapemanagementandplanning.Theultimategoalistofacil-
itateboth theapplication oflandscape researchtopractice, and thefeedback from
practiceintoresearch.
Forothertitlespublishedinthisseries,goto
www.springer.com/series/6211
Almo Farina
Ecology, Cognition
and Landscape
Linking Natural and Social Systems
1 3
Prof.AlmoFarina
UrbinoUniversity
DepartmentofMathematics,Physics
andInformatics
CampusScientificoSogesta
61029Urbino,Italy
[email protected]
ISBN978-90-481-3137-2 e-ISBN978-90-481-3138-9
DOI10.1007/978-90-481-3138-9
SpringerDordrechtHeidelbergLondonNewYork
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2009938169
©SpringerScience+BusinessMediaB.V.2010
Nopartofthisworkmaybereproduced,storedinaretrievalsystem,ortransmittedinanyformorby
anymeans,electronic,mechanical,photocopying,microfilming,recordingorotherwise,withoutwritten
permissionfromthePublisher,withtheexceptionofanymaterialsuppliedspecificallyforthepurpose
ofbeingenteredandexecutedonacomputersystem,forexclusiveusebythepurchaserofthework.
Printedonacid-freepaper
SpringerispartofSpringerScience+BusinessMedia(www.springer.com)
Contents
1 The State of Art of Landscape Ecology:
20YearsofParadigmsandMethods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
From the Ecosystem Concept to the Landscape:
HistoricalandScientificMotives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
BriefHistoryofLandscapeEcology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
ANewModelLinksLandscapeEcologytoEcosystemEcology . . . . 6
EmergingPropertiesoftheLandscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Ecological Theories and Models Incorporated into the
LandscapeEcologyParadigm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
ConcludingRemarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
SuggestedReading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2 Toward the Essence of the Landscape:
AnEpistemologicalPerspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
TheNecessityofDefiningaNewScienceoftheLandscape . . . . . . . 16
TheLandscapeDomain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
ThreePhenomenologicalDomainsofLandscape. . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
ComplexityandDomains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
IstheLandscapeaUnitoraSystem? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
AssessingtheCharacteristics oftheLandscape: Ecosystem
VersusLandscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
TheLandscapeasaMatrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
SpaceandLandscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
MemoryandLandscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
NewPerspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
SuggestedReading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3 TowardaTheoryoftheMosaic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
EcologicalComplexityandMosaics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
v
vi Contents
DefinitionofMosaic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
HeterogeneityandMosaic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
HeterogeneityversusMosaicandDisorderversusOrder. . . . . . . . . 34
Rules Governing Structure and Dynamics
oftheEcologicalMosaics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
WhatProcessesCreateMosaics? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
TheMatrixasthe“Container”oftheEcologicalComplexity . . . . . . 39
TheMosaicasaLeveloftheEcologicalMatrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
AdvantagesofLivinginaMosaic-LikeSystem . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
EnergyandInformationAcrossaMosaic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
DevelopingtheMosaicTheoryfromaPlantPerspective . . . . . . . . . 44
Discontinuities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
ComplexityoftheEcologicalMosaics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
TheMaintenanceofPatchinessInsideaMosaic . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Self-OrganizingofMosaicsandtheFifthDimension . . . . . . . . . . 50
ConnectivityInsidetheMosaic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
SuggestedReading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4 PropertiesofEcologicalMosaics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
HierarchicalOrganizationofEcologicalMosaics . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
ScalingPropertiesofMosaics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
AgentsofTemporalChangesoftheMosaicStructures. . . . . . . . . . 59
GrazingbyLargeHerbivores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
WindthrowDisturbanceandMosaic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
FiresandMosaics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
PatchDynamicsandAnimalResponses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
ResilienceandOtherPropertiesofEcologicalMosaics . . . . . . . . . 63
Temporal Characters of Ecological Mosaics
(Ephemeral,Seasonal,Multiyear). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
PatternedandProcessMosaics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
ScalingtheMosaicsbySpecies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
HumanMosaicing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
MosaicForecasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
SuggestedReading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
5 Ontogenesis and Changes of the Landscape:
AProbabilisticView . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
TheFunctionalCircleoftheLandscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
TheCompositionoftheLandscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
TheProbabilisticModel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
LandscapeChanges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
TheDualNatureofComplexSystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Contents vii
TheNatureoftheChanges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
The“Human”PerceptionofChanges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
ChangesandDynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
SuggestedReading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
6 TheEcotones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
TypesofEcotones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
TheSpatialArrangementofEcotones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
TheNatureofEcotones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
MatrixandEcotones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
TheOriginoftheEcotone(Effect) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
ShapeofEcotones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
SuggestedReading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
7 MeasuringandEvaluatingtheEcologicalMosaics:General
Assumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
ThePatchSize. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
ThePatchShape. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
ThePatch-MatrixContrast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
TheTurnover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
TheContagion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
TheLacunarity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
TheDiversityIndex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
TheEvenness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
TheDominance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
SuggestedReading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
8 TheCognitiveLandscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Behavior:PerceptionandAction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
AboutEcologicalNicheandHabitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
TheDefinitionofEco-Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
TheIndividualEco-FieldandtheDefinition
oftheCognitiveLandscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
ScoringtheCognitiveLandscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
EvolutionaryProcessEpistemologyandCognitiveLandscape . . . . . . 114
TheGeneralTheoryofResources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
ConservationandtheCognitiveLandscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
Changes at Individual Resolution: The Application
oftheEco-FieldModeltoIndividualsandSystems . . . . . . . . . . . 119
viii Contents
Individual Displacement, Individual Extinction,
or Change of Functional Traits: Three Possible
OutcomesofChangeintheEco-Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
Source-SinkModelandEco-Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
CognitiveLandscapeand“NeutralLandscape” . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
Individual-BasedCognitiveLandscapeandtheSocietal-Based
Landscape:TheHumanCase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
TheEmergent-PropertiesBasedLandscape(EPBL) . . . . . . . . . . . 124
Eco-SemioticandCognitiveLandscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
SignsfromtheLandscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
The“Dimension”oftheSigns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
TheSoundscape:APeculiarLandscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
ConservingNaturalSoundscapes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
CognitiveLandscapeVersusGeographicalLandscape . . . . . . . . . . 135
Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
SuggestedReading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
9 TheLandscapeasaHumanAgency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
TheLandscapeandHumans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
Sustainability,Biodiversity,andLandscapeEthics . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
TheCognitiveLandscapeandtheEco-SemioticApproach . . . . . . . 145
Landscape as an Eco-Semiotic Interface: A New
Human-OrientedPerspectivefortheLandscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
The Cognitive Landscape and the Theory of Resources:
ANewFrontierforEcology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
SocietyandLandscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
DevelopingtheTheoryofResources:LandscapeandSenseofPlace . . 150
Resources and Cognitive Landscape: The Special
CaseofTherapeuticLandscapes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
SuggestedReading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
Epilogue: From Paradigm Dynamics Towards Landscape
EcologyOntogenesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
Introduction
Itismoreandmoreevidentthatourlivingsystemiscompletelydisturbedbyhuman
intrusion.Suchintrusionaffectsthefunctioningofentiresystemsinwayswedonot
yetfullyunderstand.Weuseparadigmssuchasthedisturbancetocoverlargeand
deepgapsinourscientificknowledge.
Human ecology is an uncertain terrain for anthropologists, geographers, and
ecologists and rarely is expanded to include the social and economic realms. The
integration of different disciplines and the application of their many paradigms to
problems of environmental complexity remains a distant goal despite the many
efforts that have been made to achieve it. Philosophical and semantic barriers are
erectedwhensuchintegrationispursuedbypioneeringscientists.
Recently,evolutionaryecologyhasshowngreatinterestinthespatialprocesses
well described by the emerging discipline of landscape ecology. But this interest
takestheformofpurecuriosityoratworst,ofskepticismtowardtherealcapacity
oflandscapeecologytocontributetotheadvancementofecologicalscience.
The past two centuries have been characterized by huge changes occurring in
the entire ecosphere. Global changes are the effects of human intervention at a
planetary scale, with consequent degradation of the environment creating an eco-
logicaldebtforfuturegenerations.Ontheothersideoftheissue,newtechnologies
haveimprovedthewelfareofbillionsofpeopleandhavegivenhopetomanyother
billionsthattheymayalsoseesuchimprovementinthenearfuture.
New economics, faster movement of populations, resource deterioration, and
global nets of rapidly moving information are some of the relevant effects of this
time.
Recently, J.Lawton invoked the birthof anew science known asEarth System
Science.Iagreewiththisidea,althoughnotonthetitle,todevelopamoreintegrated
scienceabletolinktogetherdifferentprocessesincludingthosefromeconomicsand
politics.
Humansocietiesarefacingstructuralandorganizationalchangesatanincreased
rate and demand new visions of these changing realities.We must become able to
anticipate future scenarios, and to arrange new and more efficient tools to reduce,
compensate,andremediatetheenvironmentaldeterioration.
ix
