2004
  1. Home
  2. Publicaties
  3. Journal of European Landscapes
  4. Volume 6, Nummer 3
  5. Artikel
Volume 6, Issue 3
  • E-ISSN: 2452-1051
file format pdf download PDF

Samenvatting

Abstract

The European Landscape Convention (ELC) has made participation the cornerstone of democratic and inclusive landscape governance. However, 25 years after its adoption, the question arises as to the extent to which ELC promotes genuine community empowerment or perpetuates top-down control under participatory rhetoric. This systematic mapping synthesizes 39 peer-reviewed publications and book chapters (2007–2024) that examine participatory design, barriers and enabling factors, and implementation and implementation outcomes. The analysis revealed a wide range of participatory practices, yet empowered forms, such as delegated decision-making and self-management, are rare. Full community involvement correlates strongly with successful implementation, yet structural barriers—bureaucracy, centralized power, limited resources, and policy misalignment—often limit the depth of participation. Enabling factors include a supportive policy environment, capacity-building, and mobilization of local knowledge, with innovative tools such as participatory GIS enhancing engagement. Although examples of transformative co-governance exist, participation often remains procedural rather than genuinely redistributive. Strengthening the legal framework for co-decision-making and applying robust empowerment indicators are essential for moving from symbolic inclusion toward meaningful governance. This study offers an integrated understanding of how the participatory aims of ELC are realized, informing efforts to foster resilient, equitable, and democratic landscape governance across Europe.

© Mimi Urbanc
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/JEL2025.3.003.URBA
2025-12-01
2026-04-01
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/24521051/6/3/JEL2025.3.003.URBA.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5117/JEL2025.3.003.URBA&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Aimar, Fabrizio, FrancescaCavagnino, and MarcoDevecchi. 2022. “Conservation and Management of Agricultural Landscapes through Expert-Supported Participatory Processes: The ‘Declarations of Public Interest’ in an Italian Province.”Sustainability14 (14): 8843. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148843.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Antrop, Marc, JesperBrandt, IsabelLoupa-Ramos, EmilioPadoa-Schioppa, JonathanPorter, VeerleVan Eetvelde, and TeresaPinto-Correia. 2013. “How Landscape Ecology Can Promote the Development of Sustainable Landscapes in Europe: The Role of the European Association for Landscape Ecology (IALE-Europe) in the Twenty-First Century.”Landscape Ecology28: 1641–47 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-013-9914-9.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Baas, Henk, BertGroenewoudt, and EdwinRaap. 2011. “The Dutch Approach: Public Participation and the Role of NGOs and Local Authorities in the Protection, Management and Development of Cultural Landscapes in the Netherlands.” In: The European Landscape Convention. Landscape Series, vol. 13, edited by MichaelJones and MarieStenseke. Dordrecht: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Brown, Greg and Christopher M.Raymond. 2014. “Methods for Identifying Land Use Conflict Potential Using Participatory Mapping.”Landscape and Urban Planning122: 196–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.11.007.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Butler, Andrew and UllaBerglund. 2014. “Landscape Character Assessment as an Approach to Understanding Public Interests within the European Landscape Convention.”Landscape Research39 (3): 219–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2012.716404.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Cassatella, Claudia. 2024. “Twenty years of Landscape Policy and Governance in Europe, and the Way Ahead.” In: Cultivating Continuity of the European Landscape. Environmental History, vol. 15, edited by MauroAgnoletti, SašaDobričič, TessaMatteini, Juan ManuelPalerm. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25713-1_21.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Cepollaro, Gianluca and BrunoZanon. 2024. “Implementing Landscape Policies by Promoting Sustainability, Democracy, and Participation: Awareness Raising and Landscape Education in Trentino, Italy.” In: Cultivating Continuity of the European Landscape. Environmental History, vol. 15, edited by MauroAgnoletti, SašaDobričič, TessaMatteini, Juan ManuelPalerm. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25713-1_16.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Christou, Eirini, AntigoniParmaxi, and PanayiotisZaphiris. 2025. “A systematic exploration of scoping and mapping literature reviews.”Universal Access in the Information Society24: 941–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-024-01120-3.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Civitarese Matteucci, Stefano and Gian FrancoCartei. 2022. “The Impact of the European Landscape Convention on Landscape Planning in Spain, Italy and England.”Journal of Environmental Law34 (2): 307–30. https://doi.org/10.1093/jel/eqac004.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Clementsen, Morten, ErlingKrogh, and Kine HalvorsenThorén. 2011. “Landscape Perception Through Participation: Developing New Tools for Landscape Analysis in Local Planning Processes in Norway.” In: The European Landscape Convention. Landscape Series, vol. 13, edited by MichaelJones and MarieStenseke. Dordrecht: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Collier, Marcus and MarkScott. 2008. “Industrially Harvested Peatlands and After-Use Potential: Understanding Local Stakeholder Narratives and Landscape Preferences.”Landscape Research33 (4): 439–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426390801948406.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Conrad, Elisabeth, Louis F.Cassar, MichaelJones, SigridEiter, ZitaIzakovicová, ZuzanaBarankova, MichaelChristie, and IoanFazey. 2011a. “Rhetoric and Reporting of Public Participation in Landscape Policy.”Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning13 (1): 23–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2011.560449.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Conrad, Elisabeth, MichaelChristie, and IoanFazey. 2011b. “Is Research Keeping up with Changes in Landscape Policy? A Review of the Literature.”Journal of Environmental Management92 (9): 2097–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.04.003.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Council of Europe. 2000. European Landscape Convention. Florence: Council of Europe. Available at https://www.coe.int/en/web/landscape.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Daugstad, Karoline. 2011. “The Participatory Dimension in Nature Conservation Processes: Examples of Ideology and Practice from Norway.” In: The European Landscape Convention. Landscape Series, vol. 13, edited by MichaelJones and MarieStenseke. Dordrecht: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. De Ros, Giorgio and AstridMazzola. 2012. “Networking With Landscape: Local Initiatives in an Italian Alpine Valley.”Mountain Research and Development32 (4): 400–10. https://doi.org/10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-12-00060.1.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. DeepL SE. 2025. DeepL Translator (Accessed April15, 2025). www.deepl.com/translator.
  18. Déjeant-Pons, Maguelonne, ed. 2017. Landscape Dimensions: Reflections and Proposals for the Implementation of the European Landscape Convention. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Available at https://rm.coe.int/landscape-dimensions-reflections-and-proposals-for-the-implementation-/1680714487.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Dempsey, Kara E. and Stephanie M.Wilbrand. 2016. “The Role of the Region in the European Landscape Convention.”Regional Studies51 (6): 909–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2016.1144923.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Di Giovanni, Luca. 2024. “One Territory, One Plan, Many Authorities: The Future of Really Protecting the Landscape.” In: Cultivating Continuity of the European Landscape. Environmental History, vol. 15. edited by MauroAgnoletti, SašaDobričič, TessaMatteini, Juan ManuelPalerm. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25713-1_11.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Ducci, Marta, RonJanssen, Gert-JanBurgers, and FrancescoRotondo. 2023. “Codesign Workshops for Cultural Landscape Planning.”Landscape Research48 (7): 900–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2023.2204222.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Eiter, Sebastian and Marte LangeVik. 2015. “Public Participation in Landscape Planning: Effective Methods for Implementing the European Landscape Convention in Norway.”Land Use Policy44: 44–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.11.012.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Fiskevold, Marius. 2024. “Enclosing the Horizon: Land Privileges and the Right to Landscape.” In: Cultivating Continuity of the European Landscape. Environmental History, vol. 15. edited by MauroAgnoletti, SašaDobričič, TessaMatteini, Juan ManuelPalerm. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25713-1_13.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Haddaway, Neal R., ClaudiaKohl, Natalie Rebeloda Silva, JoachimSchiemann, ArminSpök, RuthStewart, Jeremy B.Sweet, and ReinhardWilhelm, R. 2017. “A Framework for Stakeholder Engagement During Systematic Reviews and Maps in Environmental Management.”Environmental Evidence6: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-017-0089-8.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Henningsson, Marianne, MalgorzataBlicharska, HansAntonson, GrzegorzMikusiński, GörgenGöransson, PerAngelstam, LennartFolkeson, and SofiaJönsson. 2014. “Perceived Landscape Values and Public Participation in a Road-Planning Process – a Case Study in Sweden.”Journal of Environmental Planning and Management58 (4): 631–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2013.876391.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Jones, Michael. 2007. “The European landscape convention and the question of public participation.”Landscape Research32 (5): 613–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426390701552753.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Jones, Michael. 2011. “European Landscape and Participation – Rhetoric or Reality?” In: The European Landscape Convention. Landscape Series, vol. 13, edited by MichaelJones and MarieStenseke. Dordrecht: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Jones, Michael. 2019. “The European Landscape Convention and the Question of Public Participation.” In: Justice, Power and the Political Landscape, 231–51. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Jones, Michael and MarieStenseke, eds. 2011. The European Landscape Convention: Challenges of Participation. Cham: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Kizos, Thanasis, TobiasPlieninger, TheodorosIosifides, MaríaGarcía-Martín, GenevièveGirod, KristaKarro, HannesPalang, AnuPrintsmann, BrianShaw, JuliannaNagy, and Marie-AliceBudniok. 2018. “Responding to Landscape Change: Stakeholder Participation and Social Capital in Five European Landscapes.”Land7 (1): 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/land7010014.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Krauss, Werner. 2010. “The ‘Dingpolitik’ of Wind Energy in Northern German Landscapes: An Ethnographic Case Study.”Landscape Research35 (2): 195–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426390903557972.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Labat, Didier. 2013. “L’identification des représentations habitantes au service de l’évaluation des politiques publiques de paysage.”Journal of Urban Research4. https://doi.org/10.4000/articulo.2261.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Larcher, Federica, SilviaNovelli, PaolaGullino, and MarcoDevecchi. 2013. “Planning Rural Landscapes: A Participatory Approach to Analyse Future Scenarios in Monferrato Astigiano, Piedmont, Italy.”Landscape Research38 (6): 707–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2012.746652.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Larsson, Anders, AnnaPeterson, ElinorBjärnborg, ChristineHaaland, and MatsGyllin. 2011. “Regional Landscape Strategies and Public Participation: Towards Implementing the European Landscape Convention in Sweden.” In: The European Landscape Convention. Landscape Series, vol. 13, edited by MichaelJones and MarieStenseke. Dordrecht: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Laviscio, Raffaella. 2024. “The Daily Governance of Landscape: The Contribution of Local Landscape Commissions.” In: Cultivating Continuity of the European Landscape. Environmental History, vol. 15, edited by MauroAgnoletti, SašaDobričič, TessaMatteini, Juan ManuelPalerm. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25713-1_12.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Lennox, Laura, LynneMaher, DerekBell, and JulieReed. 2016. “The Sustainability Landscape: A Systematic Review of Sustainability Strategies and their Impact in Healthcare Settings.”PROSPERO, International prospective register of systematic reviews. CRD42016040081.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. McClelland, Andrew. 2019. “Spaces for Public Participation: Valuing the Cross-Border Landscape in North West Ireland.”Irish Geography52 (2): 193–211. https://doi.org/10.55650/igj.2019.1401.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Mellqvist, Helena, RolandGustavsson, and AllanGunnarsson. 2013. “Using the Connoisseur Method During the Introductory Phase of Landscape Planning and Management.”Urban Forestry & Urban Greening12: 211–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2012.10.001.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Mercado-Alonso, Inmaculada, AlfonsoFernández-Tabales, and OlgaMuñoz-Yules. 2018. “Perceptions and Social Valuations of Landscape. Objectives and Methodology for Citizen Participation in Landscape Policies.”Landscape Research43 (1): 95–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2017.1302570.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Michelin, Yves, ThierryJoliveau, and ClairePlanchat-Héry. 2011. “Landscape in Participatory Processes: Tools for Stimulating Debate on Landscape Issues? A Conceptual and Methodological Reflection from Research-Action Projects in France.” In: The European Landscape Convention. Landscape Series, vol. 13, edited by MichaelJones and MarieStenseke. Dordrecht: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Newig, Jens and OliverFritsch. 2009. “Environmental Governance: Participatory, Multi-Level – and Effective?” Environmental Policy and Governance 19 (3): 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.509.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Oles, Thomas and KarinHammarlund. 2011. “The European Landscape Convention, Wind Power, and the Limits of the Local: Notes from Italy and Sweden.”Landscape Research36 (4): 471–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2011.582942.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Oliva-Serrano, Jesús and Iso TinocoAndoni. 2014. “Methodological designs for participatory landscape planning: Methodological designs for participatory landscape planning.” In: The European Landscape Convention. Landscape Series, vol. 13, edited by MichaelJones and MarieStenseke. Dordrecht: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. OpenAI. 2025. ChatGPT40 (Accessed April15, 2025). https://chat.openai.com/.
  45. Page, Matthew J., Joanne E.McKenzie, Patrick M.Bossuyt, IsabelleBoutron et al. 2021. “The Prisma 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews.”bmj 372: n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Pascolini, Mauro. 2019“Oltre la norma: la parte strategica del Piano Paesaggistico Regionale del Friuli Venezia Giulia.”Rivista2. https://doi.org/10.13128/rv-8313-www.fupress.net/index.php/ri-vista/.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Planchat-Héry, Claire. 2011. “The Prospective Vision: Integrating the Farmers’ Point of View into French and Belgian Local Planning.” In: The European Landscape Convention. Landscape Series, vol. 13, edited by MichaelJones and MarieStenseke. Dordrecht: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Ploder, Andrea. 2018. “Geschichte der qualitativen und interpretativen Forschung.” In: Interpretativ Forschen. Ein Handbuch für die Sozialwissenschaften, edited by LeilaAkremi, NinaBaur, HubertKnoblauch and BorisTraue. Weinheim: Juventa.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Prieur, Michel, YvesLuginbuehl, Florencio ZoidoNaranjo, BertrandDe Montmollin, BasPedroli, Jan DiekVan Mansvelt, and SylvieDurousseau. 2006. Landscape and Sustainable Development Challenges of the European Landscape Convention. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing. Available at https://rm.coe.int/landscape-and-sustainable-development-ch-2-landscape-and-individual-an/16808cd574.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Reed, Mark S.2008. “Stakeholder Participation for Environmental Management: A Literature Review.”Biological Conservation141 (10): 2417–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Santé, Inés, José MaríaTubío, and DavidMiranda. “Public Participation in Defining Landscape Planning Scenarios and Landscape Quality Objectives (Lqo): Landscape Guidelines for Galicia (NW Spain) Case Study.”Land Use Policy94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104559.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Saraiva, Maria Graça, IsabelLoupa-Ramos, and VeerleVan Eetvelde. 2024. “Governance Challenges of a Local Landscape Observatory Initiative in a Remote Landscape: Ways Ahead.” In: Cultivating Continuity of the European Landscape. Environmental History, vol. 15. edited by MauroAgnoletti, SašaDobričič, TessaMatteini, Juan ManuelPalerm. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25713-1_50.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Sevenant, Marjanne and MarcAntrop. 2010. “Transdisciplinary Landscape Planning: Does the Public Have Aspirations? Experiences from a Case Study in Ghent (Flanders, Belgium).”Land Use Policy27: 373–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.05.005.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Søderkvist Kristensen, Lone and JørgenPrimdahl (2020). “Landscape Strategy Making as a Pathway to Policy Integration and Involvement of Stakeholders: Examples from a Danish Action Research Programme.”Journal of Environmental Planning and Management63 (6): 1114–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2019.1636531.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Sowińska-Świerkosz, Barbara Natalia, and DawidSoszyński. 2014. “Landscape Structure Versus the Effectiveness of Nature Conservation: Roztocze Region Case Study (Poland).”Ecological Indicators43: 143–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.02.018.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Spencer, Neil. 2011. “Participation Within the Landscape of the River Dart Catchment, Devon, England.” In: The European Landscape Convention. Landscape Series, vol. 13, edited by MichaelJones and MarieStenseke. Dordrecht: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Stenseke, Marie. 2009. “Local Participation in Cultural Landscape Maintenance: Lessons from Sweden.”Land Use Policy26 (2): 214–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.01.005.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Stenseke, Marie and MichaelJones. 2011. “Conclusion: Benefits, Difficulties, and Challenges of Participation Under the European Landscape Convention.” In: The European Landscape Convention. Landscape Series, vol. 13, edited by MichaelJones and MarieStenseke. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9932-7_15.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Ternell, Anna, BosseLagerqvist, Anders M.Nilsson, Mauricio SagastuyKlie, MartinBerg, Martin AndreBae Pedersen, SandorNemethy, AgnesHorvath, ZsuzsannaBene, CsabaOlah, Boglarka BanneGal, GaborMolnar, and BulcsuRemenyik. 2023. “Possibilities and Challenges for Landscape Observatories.”Ecocycles9 (1): 61–82. https://doi.org/10.19040/ecocycles.v9i1.267.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Typeset. 2025. SciSpace (Accessed from April2 to April15). https://scispace.com/.
  61. Valánszki, István and Krisztina FilepnéKovács. 2018. “PPGIS módszer alkalmazhatóságának vizsgálata különböző táji értékek azonosítására.”TÁJÖKOLÓGIAI LAPOK16 (1): 13–22. https://doi.org/10.56617/tl.3573.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Vik, Marte Lange. 2017. “Self-Mobilisation and Lived Landscape Democracy: Local Initiatives as Democratic Landscape Practices.”Landscape Research42 (4): 400–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2017.1290223.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Vik, Marte Lange. 2024. “Landscape and Public Participation in Norwegian Local Planning—An Example of Implementing the European Landscape Convention.” In: Cultivating Continuity of the European Landscape. Environmental History, vol. 15, edited by MauroAgnoletti, SašaDobričič, TessaMatteini, Juan ManuelPalerm. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25713-1_15.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Waterton, Emma and LaurajaneSmith. 2010. “The Recognition and Misrecognition of Community Heritage.”International Journal of Heritage Studies16 (1-2): 4–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527250903441671.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Wu, Chia-Jung, KarolinaIsaksson, and HansAntonson. 2017. “The Struggle to Achieve Holistic Landscape Planning: Lessons from Planning the E6 Road Route Through Tanum World Heritage Site, Sweden.”Land Use Policy67: 167–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.05.036.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. James, K.L., Randall, N.P. and Hardaway, N.R., 2016. A methodology for systematic mapping in environmental sciences. Environmental Evidence, 5(1), p.7.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Bayliss, H.R., Hardaway, N.R., Eales, J., Frampton, G.K. and James, K.L., 2016. Updating and amending systematic reviews and systematic maps in environmental management. Environmental Evidence, 5(1), p.20.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Haddaway, N.R., Kohl, C., da Silva, N.R., Schiemann, J., Spök, A., Stewart, R., Sweet, J.B. and Wilhelm, R., 2017. A framework for stakeholder engagement during systematic reviews and maps in environmental management. Environmental Evidence, 6(1), p.11.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Collaboration for Environmental Evidence. 2018. Guidelines and Standards for Evidence synthesis in Environmental Management. Version 5.0. www.environmentalevidence.org/information-for-authors.
  70. Leeds Institute of Health Sciences. https://medhealth.leeds.ac.uk/info/639/information_specialists/1500/search_concept_tools. Accessed 12/11/2017.
  71. Christou, E., Parmaxi, A. & Zaphiris, P., 2025. A systematic exploration of scoping and mapping literature reviews. Universal Access in the Information Society Univ Access Inf Soc 24, 941–951 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-024-01120-3
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.5117/JEL2025.3.003.URBA
Loading
Participatory Governance under the European Landscape Convention: Between Rhetoric and Empowerment
JEL 6, 48 (2025); https://doi.org/10.5117/JEL2025.3.003.URBA
/content/journals/10.5117/JEL2025.3.003.URBA
/content/journals/10.5117/JEL2025.3.003.URBA
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Soort artikel: Research Article
Keyword(s): Co-Governance; Community Participation; Environmental Governance; Institutional Support; Landscape Policy; Local Empowerment; Public Involvement; Systematic Mapping

Meest geciteerd Most Cited RSS feed

Dit is een verplicht veld
Graag een geldig e-mailadres invoeren
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error