Table Of ContentEnvironmental
Humanities
Ecosemiotic
Landscape
Almo Farina
ISSN 2632-3125 (online)
ISSN 2632-3117 (print)
ElementsinEnvironmentalHumanities
editedby
LouiseWestling
UniversityofOregon
SerenellaIovino
UniversityofNorthCarolinaatChapelHill
TimoMaran
UniversityofTartu
ECOSEMIOTIC
LANDSCAPE
A Novel Perspective for the Toolbox
of Environmental Humanities
Almo Farina
University of Urbino
UniversityPrintingHouse,CambridgeCB28BS,UnitedKingdom
OneLibertyPlaza,20thFloor,NewYork,NY10006,USA
477WilliamstownRoad,PortMelbourne,VIC3207,Australia
314–321,3rdFloor,Plot3,SplendorForum,JasolaDistrictCentre,
NewDelhi–110025,India
79AnsonRoad,#06–04/06,Singapore079906
CambridgeUniversityPressispartoftheUniversityofCambridge.
ItfurtherstheUniversity’smissionbydisseminatingknowledgeinthepursuitof
education,learning,andresearchatthehighestinternationallevelsofexcellence.
www.cambridge.org
Informationonthistitle:www.cambridge.org/9781108819374
DOI:10.1017/9781108872928
©AlmoFarina2021
Thispublicationisincopyright.Subjecttostatutoryexception
andtotheprovisionsofrelevantcollectivelicensingagreements,
noreproductionofanypartmaytakeplacewithoutthewritten
permissionofCambridgeUniversityPress.
Firstpublished2021
AcataloguerecordforthispublicationisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary.
ISBN978-1-108-81937-4Paperback
ISSN2632-3125(online)
ISSN2632-3117(print)
CambridgeUniversityPresshasnoresponsibilityforthepersistenceoraccuracyof
URLsforexternalorthird-partyinternetwebsitesreferredtointhispublication
anddoesnotguaranteethatanycontentonsuchwebsitesis,orwillremain,
accurateorappropriate.
Ecosemiotic Landscape
ANovelPerspectivefor theToolboxofEnvironmental
Humanities
ElementsinEnvironmentalHumanities
DOI:10.1017/9781108872928
Firstpublishedonline:January2021
AlmoFarina
UniversityofUrbino
Authorforcorrespondence:AlmoFarina,[email protected]
Abstract:Thedistinctionbetweenhumansandthenaturalworldisan
artifactandmoreamatteroflinguisticcommunicationthana
conceptualseparation.ThisElementproposesecosemioticsasan
epistemologicaltooltounderstandbettertherelationshipbetween
humanandnaturalprocesses.Ecosemiotics,withitsaffinitytothe
humanities,ispresentedhereasthebestdisciplinaryapproachfor
interpretingcomplexenvironmentalconditionsforabroadaudience,
acrossamultitudeoftemporalandspatialscales.Itisproposedasan
intellectualbridgebetweendivergentsciencestoincorporatedifferent
paradigmswithinauniqueframework.Theecosemioticparadigmhelps
toexplainhoworganismsinteractwiththeirexternalenvironments
usingmechanismscommontoalllivingbeingsthatcaptureexternal
informationandmatterforinternalusage.Thisparadigmcanbe
appliedinallthecircumstanceswherealivingbeing(human,animal,
plant,fungi,etc.)performsprocessestostayalive.
Keywords:complexity,uncertainty,information,ecosemiotics,landscape
©AlmoFarina2021
ISBNs:9781108819374(PB),9781108872928(OC)
ISSNs:2632-3125(online),2632-3117(print)
Contents
1 Introduction 1
2 EnvironmentalComplexity:AnEcosemioticVision 4
3 EnvironmentalUncertainty:ContrastingStrategiesand
SpeciesAdaptation 6
4 InformationTheoryandMeaning 9
5 TheRoleofEcologyintheEcosemioticArena 14
6 LandscapeDimension:SomeRelevantCharacteristicsof
Landscape 18
7 Resources:AGeneralTheory 25
8 AnEcosemioticApproachtoLandscapeDescriptionand
Interpretation:FromZoosemioticstoanEco-fieldModel 32
9 FundamentalsofEcoacoustics:ANewQuantitative
ContributiontotheEcosemioticNarrative 45
10 CulturalLandscapes 55
11 Conclusions 67
References 70
EcosemioticLandscape 1
1Introduction
The natural world is overstressed and degraded by growing human intrusion
intothemajorityofecologicalprocesses,reducingtheireffectiveness(Crutzen
&Stoermer2000).Also,asanagentofecosystemservices,“nature”isnotfully
representedinhumansocialandculturalcontextsdominatedbyeconomicand
politicalpriorities.Humanconsiderationsamounttoadiffuseunderestimation
oflife’sprocessesintheentireEarthsystem,andthuscauseweaknessinhuman
strategies for preserving natural resources and biodiversity, maintaining eco-
system services, and finally assuring a satisfactory level of well-being to all
humansocietiesforthelongterm.
Totrytoremediateandreducethisculturalgap,Iproposeanarrativebased
onthespiritofDescartes’scatenascientiarum(FoucherdeCareil1859–1860)
inwhichwell-explainedrulescouldidentifyspecificscientificelementstoform
a shared human understanding. This Element therefore aims to develop
a coherent set of ecological and semiotic theories and principles focused on
landscape as a fundamental dimension in which environmental and human
processes can find coherent life strategies. In particular, this effort offers
a reasoned guide to theories, principles, and models that have been proposed
recently by scholars from disciplines ranging from ecology, to biosemiotics,
ecosemiotics, landscape ecology, and conservation biology as an epistemo-
logical model to be placed side-by-side with humanities like anthropology,
archeology,history,etc.(Figure1).
Themainargumentstobediscussedare:
Complexity(Section2):Complexityisauniversalparadigmthatresultsfrom
interactionsofaplethoraofabioticandbioticprocessesfarfromequilibrium.
Thesearestatisticallyhighlyimprobableandgenerateaconditionofapparent
slowdownoftheentropicdisorderthatSchrodinger(1944)callednegentropy,
richwithsurpriseandinformation(Lloyd2007).Complexityisthehumuson
whichlifeblooms,evolves,differentiates,andeventuallysuffersfromextinc-
tion in some particular traits and organizational forms. Complexity is neces-
sarytoassurecontinuityforeverylifeformandtheirfunctionalassemblages
on the Earth. At the same time, intra- and interspecific interactions feed
turnover and evolution in the composition of biological assemblages.
Uncertainty (Section 3): Uncertainty is a characteristic of the universe that
every species must face. It means that unexpected events can occur at any
time and cause the possible incapacity of a species when it is exposed to
previously unknown risks. At the same time, uncertainty can stimulate pro-
cesses/mechanismsofadaptation.
2 EnvironmentalHumanities
Information(Section4):Ifcomplexityisapropertythatemergesfromaggre-
gation and organization across spatial, temporal, and functional scales of
organisms, its quantification is represented by the amount of information
expressedbythesystem.Thus,informationisthecurrencyexchangedbetween
organismsandtheiraggregations/assemblages.
Someecologicalparadigms(Section5):Theroleofecologicalparadigmsisof
firstmagnitudeinmydiscussionandinparticularwill bepresented usingr/K
strategiesofselectionbyorganismsforsurvival(Pianka1970),thesource-sink
model (Pulliam 1988), and ecological niche theory (Hutchinson 1957).These
paradigmshaveanecosemioticcounterpartandthereforecreatethenecessary
backgroundforanecosemiotictheory.
The Landscape dimension (Section 6): Inthe present narrative weconsiderthe
landscape as the phenomenological context, the common arena or container in
which complexity emerges and differentiates. Landscape isa perfect candidate
for this role because it is the spatial, temporal, and cultural context in which
differentagents(humans,animals,plants,bacteria,viruses)findrealpossibilities
todeeplyexchangeinformationwithabioticlifesupportandbioticassemblages.
Giventhatnoorganismscanescapetheperceptive/semioticmechanismsthatlink
the individual to its surroundings, the concept of landscape is implicit in the
definitionoflife(Barbieri2008).Inparticular,thedecisiontouselandscapeasthe
phenomenological context for connecting ecological and semiotic principles is
encouragedbytheuniversalitywithwhichthelandscapeprocessesareconsidered
byallorganisms.
Complexity
Uncertainty information
Landscape
Ecosemiosis
Resources
Figure1–Themainingredientsoflandscapeecosemiosis,whereComplexity
isthemaincharacterofsystems,includeUncertaintyastheconstraintthatthe
organismfaces,Informationasthecurrencyexchangedbetweenthesystemand
organismsformaintaininganactivechannelofcommunication,andLandscape
asthephysicalandcognitivespatialdimension.Ecosemiosisistheprocessof
signification,andResourcesarematerialorimmaterialentitiesthatnourish
life’sautopoiesis.
EcosemioticLandscape 3
The landscape dimension is based upon the principles of landscape ecol-
ogy, a relatively young discipline that has gained great popularity since the
1980s (Wu & Hobbs 2007). The multiplicity of visions that have been
presented in this discipline pose serious problems of synthesis between
different paradigmatic approaches ranging from geographical to semiotic
perspectives(Lindstrometal.2011).
A general theory of resources (Section 7): After the description of the salient
qualities of a landscape, the general theory of resources seeks to explain how
resources are necessary for autopoietic processes, i.e. reproduction and self-
maintenance.Theparticularitiesandroleofresourcesfororganismsareobvi-
ous,astheyrepresentthenecessaryfuelforlife(Varela&Maturana1980).
Elementsofecosemiotics(Section8):“Ecosemioticsstudiestheroleofenviron-
mentalperceptionandconceptualcategorizationinthedesign,construction,and
transformationofenvironmentalstructures”(Maran&Kull2014).Ecosemioticsis
the use of a zoosemiotic paradigm that has its fundamentals in biosemiotics, in
communicationtheory,andinanimalbehavior(Maranetal.2011,2016).
Weproposethatecosemiosiscanfunctionasanintellectualbridgebetween
divergent sciences to incorporate within a unique framework different para-
digms born of separate perspectives (Eder & Rembold 1992), and to demon-
strate the efficiency and utility of an approach that assures connectedness
amongsignalsfromdifferentsources.
Ecosemiosis is at the basis of food chains, connecting species to their
environments by semethic (semion-sign and ethos-habit) interactions, estab-
lishing “personal” reciprocal knowledges among different organisms as they
communicateinparticularsituations(Hoffmeyer2008,p.189).Ecosemiosisis
responsible for environmental changes producedby thesecreatures according
totheirspecificsensoryabilities.
Human culture is an important agent in these ecosemiotic processes by
increasing knowledge between species. However, paradoxically, the diversity
that results from communication processes that can accommodate species in
close ecological spaces together, may become a risk because of too many
communications,ortoomuchnoise(Kull2005).
Fundamentals of ecoacoustics (Section 9): Recently the role of sounds in
ecologicalprocesseshasbeenemphasizedonatheoreticalbasisinecoacoustics
(Farina 2018a). Soundis a semiotic toolfor communication between individ-
ualsandspecies,fornavigation(especiallyintheabsenceoflight),forperform-
ance of reproductive behaviors, and for transmission of cultural messages.
Soundscapesaretheemergingacousticcharacteristicsoflandscapesandimpart
complexitytoenvironmentalsystems.
4 EnvironmentalHumanities
Cultural landscapes (Section 10): Recognizing some landscape configur-
ations as the result of cultural human stewardship associated with historical
processes places cultural landscapes in a privileged position. Cognitive,
cultural, and spiritual qualities enrich the signs that emerge from landscape.
Culturallandscapesmaintainahighlevelofbiodiversityresultingfromlong-
term coadaptation of humans with other living beings and demonstrate how
the integration of separate concepts as those above is guided by a thinking
rooted in the humanities (Smith 2014). A serious attempt to bring natural
processes – especially ecological processes – within the purview of the
humanities is an activity absolutely necessary to assure the durable and
sustainable development of human societies (Eder & Rembold 1992).
A new ecosemiotic framework, powered by an integrated epistemology, can
forestallaplanetarycatastrophecreatedbydevelopmentbasedonthedoctrine
ofnecessarycontinuousincreaseofgrossproductionandfromwhichevident
signsofecosystemdegradationandbiologicalimpoverishmentaregrowingat
an alarming frequency (e.g. Hallmann et al. 2017, Lister & Garcia 2018,
Sanchez-Bayo&Wyckhuys2019).Suchecosystemdegradationisalsoasso-
ciated with the growing difference of well-being between poor and rich
societiesandcountries.
2EnvironmentalComplexity:AnEcosemioticVision
2.1Synthesis
Complexityisanemergentpropertyofenvironmentalsystemsandisassociated
with their order, diversity, and resilience. Recent human intrusion reduces
complexityandthusputsmanylifeformsatriskandcompromiseshumanwell-
being.
Although complexity is an elusive concept, it characterizes the majority of
physical,biological,economic,andsocialsystems.Itmanifestsitselfatevery
level of hierarchical scale by which we perceive and describe our known
universe.Complexityemergesattheborderbetweendifferentlevelsoforgan-
izationandhasbeencomparedbyLloyd(1990)toafirebreakthatretardsthe
inexorablethermodynamicdissolutionoftheworld.
Complexity is the result of interactions between different scaled systems
eitherinthemacrocosmorinthemicrocosm;energy,matter,andinformation
are its fundamentals. Environmental complexity emerges as a property from
intra- and interspecific interactions between individuals, species, and their
assemblages,occurringalongabroadrangeoftemporal,spatial,andfunctional
scales(Figure2).
