The farmer as a landscape steward: Comparing local understandings of landscape stewardship, landscape values, and land management actions

March 2016, Volume 45, Issue 2, pp 173–184

• Authors
• Authors and affiliations

• Christopher M. RaymondEmail author
• Claudia Bieling
• Nora Fagerholm
• Berta Martin-Lopez
• Tobias Plieninger

• Christopher M. Raymond
  • 1
  • 2
  Email author
• Claudia Bieling
  • 3
• Nora Fagerholm
  • 1
  • 4
• Berta Martin-Lopez
  • 5
  • 6
• Tobias Plieninger
  • 1

1. 1.Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource ManagementUniversity of CopenhagenFrederiksberg CDenmark
2. 2.Barbara Hardy InstituteUniversity of South AustraliaStirlingAustralia
3. 3.Institute of Social Sciences in Agriculture, Chair of Societal Transition and AgricultureUniversity of HohenheimStuttgartGermany
4. 4.Department of Geography and GeologyUniversity of TurkuTurkuFinland
5. 5.Environmental Change InstituteOxford University Centre for the EnvironmentOxfordUK
6. 6.Social-Ecological Systems Laboratory, Department EcologyUniversidad Autónoma de MadridMadridSpain

Report

First Online:

07 September 2015

DOI: 10.1007/s13280-015-0694-0

Cite this article as:

Raymond, C.M., Bieling, C., Fagerholm, N. et al. Ambio (2016) 45: 173. doi:10.1007/s13280-015-0694-0

• 5 Citations
• 1 Shares
• 495 Downloads

Abstract

We develop a landscape stewardship classification which distinguishes between farmers’ understanding of landscape stewardship, their landscape values, and land management actions. Forty semi-structured interviews were conducted with small-holder (<5 acres), medium-holders (5–100 acres), and large-holders (>100 acres) in South-West Devon, UK. Thematic analysis revealed four types of stewardship understandings: (1) an environmental frame which emphasized the farmers’ role in conserving or restoring wildlife; (2) a primary production frame which emphasized the farmers’ role in taking care of primary production assets; (3) a holistic frame focusing on farmers’ role as a conservationist, primary producer, and manager of a range of landscape values, and; (4) an instrumental frame focusing on the financial benefits associated with compliance with agri-environmental schemes. We compare the landscape values and land management actions that emerged across stewardship types, and discuss the global implications of the landscape stewardship classification for the engagement of farmers in landscape management.

Keywords

Conservation behavior Social values Environmental management Pro-environmental behavior Production behavior 

References

1. Andersson, E., S. Barthel, and K. Ahrné. 2007. Measuring social–ecological dynamics behind the generation of ecosystem services. Ecological Applications 17: 1267–1278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Bieling, C., and M. Bürgi. 2014. List and documentation of case study landscapes selected for HERCULES. EU-Project Deliverable GA No. 603447. Accessed Online 10 February, 2015, from http://www.hercules-landscapes.eu/tartalom/HERCULES_WP3_D3_1_ALUFR_final.pdf.
3. Boyatzis, R.E. 1998. Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
4. Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2013. Successful qualitative analysis: A practical guide for beginners. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
5. Brown, T.C. 1984. The concept of value in resource allocation. Land Economics 60: 231–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Brown, G. 2012. Public Participation GIS (PPGIS) for regional and environmental planning: Reflections on a decade of empirical research. URISA Journal 24: 7–18.Google Scholar
7. Brown, G., and L. Brabyn. 2012. An analysis of the relationships between multiple values and physical landscapes at a regional scale using public participation GIS and landscape character classification. Landscape and Urban Planning 107(3): 317–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Brown, J., and B. Mitchell. 2000. The stewardship approach and its relevance for protected landscapes. The George Wright Forum 17: 70–79.Google Scholar
9. Chapin, F.S., S.T.A. Pickett, M.E. Power, R.B. Jackson, D.M. Carter, and C. Duke. 2011. Earth stewardship: A strategy for social–ecological transformation to reverse planetary degradation. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences 1: 44–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Coeterier, J.F. 1996. Dominant attributes in the perception and evaluation of the Dutch landscape. Landscape and Urban Planning 34: 27–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Conrad, E., M. Christie, and I. Fazey. 2011. Understanding public perceptions of landscape: A case study from Gozo, Malta. Applied Geography 31: 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Daugstad, K., K. Rønningen, and B. Skar. 2006. Agriculture as an upholder of cultural heritage? Conceptualizations and value judgements—A Norwegian perspective in international context. Journal of Rural Studies 22: 67–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. DEFRA. 2014. Farm Business Survey. Data collected by Rural Business Research on behalf of, and financed by, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Accessed Online 30 May 2015, from http://www.farmbusinesssurvey.co.uk/DataBuilder/.
14. Emtage, N., J. Herbohn, and S. Harrison. 2006. Landholder typologies used in the development of natural resource management programs in Australia—A review. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management 13: 79–94.Google Scholar
15. Fagerholm, N., and N. Käyhkö. 2009. Participatory mapping and geographical patterns of the social landscape values of rural communities in Zanzibar, Tanzania. Fennia 187: 43–60.Google Scholar
16. Folke, C., F.S. Chapin, and P. Olsson. 2009. Transformations in ecosystem stewardship. In Principles of ecosystem stewardship: Resilience-based natural resource management in a changing world, 103–125. New York: Springer.
17. Folke, C., S. Carpenter, B. Walker, M. Scheffer, T. Elmqvist, L. Gunderson, and C.S. Holling. 2004. Regime shifts, resilience, and biodiversity in ecosystem management. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 35: 557–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Folke, C., T. Hahn, P. Olsson, and J. Norberg. 2005. Adaptive governance of social–ecological systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 30: 441–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Folke, C., Å. Jansson, J. Rockström, P. Olsson, S.R. Carpenter, F.S. Chapin, A.-S. Crépin, G. Daily, et al. 2011. Reconnecting to the Biosphere. Ambio 40: 719–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Fry, G.L.A. 2001. Multifunctional landscapes – towards transdisciplinary research. Landscape and Urban Planning 57: 159–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Future Earth. 2015. About Future Earth. Accessed Online http://www.icsu.org/future-earth.
22. Guest, G., and K.M. MacQueen. 2012. Introduction to applied thematic analysis. In Applied thematic analysis, ed. G. Guest, K.M. Macqueen, and E.E. Namey. UK: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Kofinas, G.P., and F.S. Chapin. 2009. Livelihoods and human well-being during social–ecological change. In Principles of ecosystem stewardship: Resilience-based natural resource management in a changing world, 55–75. New York: Springer.
24. Lindborg, R., J. Bengtsson, Å. Berg, S.A.O. Cousins, O. Eriksson, T. Gustafsson, K.P. Hasund, L. Lenoir, et al. 2008. A landscape perspective on conservation of semi-natural grasslands. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 125: 213–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25. Lockwood, M. 1999. Humans valuing nature: Synthesising insights from philosophy, psychology and economics. Environmental Values 8: 381–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26. Milfont, T.L., J. Duckitt, and C. Wagner. 2010. A cross-cultural test of the value–attitude–behavior hierarchy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 40: 2791–2813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. Nassauer, J.I. 2011. Care and stewardship: From home to planet. Landscape and Urban Planning 100: 321–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28. Natori, Y., and R. Chenoweth. 2008. Differences in rural landscape perceptions and preferences between farmers and naturalists. Journal of Environmental Psychology 28: 250–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29. Ode Sang, Å., and M.S. Tveit. 2013. Perceptions of stewardship in Norwegian agricultural landscapes. Land Use Policy 31: 557–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30. Ode, Å., M.S. Tveit, and G. Fry. 2008. Capturing landscape visual character using indicators: Touching base with landscape aesthetic theory. Landscape Research 33: 89–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31. Plieninger, T., T. Kizos, C. Bieling, L. Le Dû-Blayo, M.-A. Budniok, M. Bürgi, C.L. Crumley, G. Girod, P. Howard, and J. Kolen. 2015b. Exploring ecosystem-change and society through a landscape lens: Recent progress in European landscape research. Ecology and Society 20(2): art. 5.
32. Plieninger, T., C. Bieling, N. Fagerholm, A. Byg, T. Hartel, P. Hurley, C.A. López-Santiago, N. Nagabhatla, E. Oteros-Rozas, C.M. Raymond, D. van der Horst, and L. Huntsinger. 2015a. The role of cultural ecosystem services in landscape management and planning. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 14: 28–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33. Pretty, J. 2003. Social capital and the collective management of resources. Science 302: 1912–1914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34. Primdahl, J., L.S. Kristensen, and A.G. Busck. 2013. The farmer and landscape management: Different roles, different policy approaches. Geography Compass 7: 300–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35. Raymond, C.M., and G. Brown. 2006. A method for assessing protected area allocations using a typology of landscape values. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 49: 797–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36. Raymond, C.M., G. Brown, and G.M. Robinson. 2011. The influence of place attachment, and moral and normative concerns on the conservation of native vegetation: A test of two behavioural models. Journal of Environmental Psychology 31: 323–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37. Raymond, C.M., G.G. Singh, K. Benessaiah, J.R. Bernhardt, J. Levine, H. Nelson, N.J. Turner, B. Norton, et al. 2013. Ecosystem services and beyond: Using multiple metaphors to understand human–environment relationships. BioScience 63: 536–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
38. Renting, H., W.A.H. Rossing, J.C.J. Groot, J.D. Van der Ploeg, C. Laurent, D. Perraud, D.J. Stobbelaar, and M.K. Van Ittersum. 2009. Exploring multifunctional agriculture. A review of conceptual approaches and prospects for an integrative transitional framework. Journal of Environmental Management 90: S112–S123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
39. Robinson, G.M. 2006. Canada’s environmental farm plans: Transatlantic perspectives on agri-environmental schemes. Geographical Journal 172: 206–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
40. Robinson, G.M. 2008. Sustainable rural systems: An introduction. In Sustainable rural systems: Sustainable agriculture and rural communities, ed. G.M. Robinson, 3–40. Basingstoke: Ashgate.Google Scholar
41. Schwartz, S.H., and A. Bardi. 2001. Value hierarchies across cultures—Taking a similarities perspective. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 32: 268–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
42. Schwartz, S.H., and W. Bilsky. 1987. Toward a universal psychological structure of human values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53: 550–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
43. Seastedt, T.R., K.N. Suding, and F.S. Chapin. 2013. Ecosystem stewardship as a framework for conservation in a directionally changing world. In Novel ecosystems: Intervening in the new ecological world order, 326–333. New York: Wiley.
44. Setten, G., M. Stenseke, and J. Moen. 2012. Ecosystem services and landscape management: Three challenges and one plea. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management 8: 305–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
45. Strauss, A.L., and J. Corbin. 1990. Basics of qualitative research techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
46. Tengö, M., E.S. Brondizio, T. Elmqvist, P. Malmer, and M. Spierenburg. 2014. Connecting diverse knowledge systems for enhanced ecosystem governance: The multiple evidence base approach. Ambio 43: 579–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
47. Turner, J.C., P.J. Oakes, S.A. Haslam, and C. McGarty. 1994. Self and collective: Cognition and social context. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 20: 454–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
48. Tveit, M., Å. Ode, and G. Fry. 2006. Key concepts in a framework for analysing visual landscape character. Landscape Research 31: 229–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
49. Worrell, R., and M.C. Appleby. 2000. Stewardship of natural resources: Definition, ethical and practical aspects. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 12: 263–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
50. Zube, E.H. 1987. Perceived land use patterns and landscape values. Landscape Ecology 1: 37–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2015