3 Landscape Emerging: A Developing Object of Study
31
given little recognition until recently. The change occurred in the 1990s, through the
concepts of “geosystem” (Beroutchachvili and Bertrand 1978) and “ecocomplex”.
To Blandin and Lamotte (1988), the reality of human-induced pressure and the
problem of land planning called for reflection with greater integration of the population, settlements and ecosystems. Between geosystem, which involves a strong
perceptive and subjective dimension, and ecocomplex, they suggest using the latter
for its degree of integration allowing “an assembly of ecological systems in interaction in an area” to be studied. This notion of ecocomplex encompasses, jointly and
outside all cultural filters, a natural and human history in a given area. However, these
three references -landscape, geosystem and ecocomplex- are apparently still little in
use in the various branches of ecology, except for those claiming to take their roots
in landscape ecology (Rougerie and Beroutchachvili 1991; Burel and Baudry 1999).
In fact, according to P. Dury (1999), while the two words landscape and geosystem
only seldom appear in ecological publications and only since the 1990s, they both
represent a conceptual and semantic enhancement and a scientific opportunity. The
change of perspective accelerated in the years 2000 (Zacharias and Roff 2000; Roff
and Taylor 2000; Roff et al. 2003; I.C.E.S 2005; Pitmann et al. 2011; Teixidó et al.
2011), reasserting with conviction the benefit of landscape ecology-related concepts
based on the association of landscape spatial structures with ecological processes,
particularly via the combined matrix—patch—corridor model. This development
narrowed the gap between ecology and geography and provided a better response to
social and environmental challenges. Hesitations in terms of conceptual references
are inherent in the formation of emerging references but they emphasize the extent to
which it is sometimes important to define a clear corpus leaving no room for subjective interpretation. Objectively expressing the subjectivity of the landscape and its
components is a real scientific challenge, particularly in terms of systemic approach.
3.5 The Landscape System, an Effective Synopsis
Landscape study led the THEMA laboratory (Théoriser et Modéliser pourAménager)
to propose a combined integrated analysis based on four aspects, “production”,
“visible landscape”, “perception” and “use”, representing the four keys to understanding the system. Each one consists of structuring variables expressing the various
aspects of apprehending the landscape, such as its materiality through biotic, abiotic or anthropic features or the cultural filters involved in the study of perceptions
(Fig. 3.1). This matrix is an operational synopsis used to convey every dimension of
the landscape object and to convey it a broader context.
To test this model against the underwater landscape, greater regard must be had
for the observation framework required to tackle the marine and more precisely the
submarine world. Observation takes place in a constantly multidimensional space
that invariably follows a vertical, ascending-descending, and horizontal course. As
the landscape unfurls, the biotic and abiotic components are the principal attractions
as in the case of Gorgonians (Fig. 3.2).
31
given little recognition until recently. The change occurred in the 1990s, through the
concepts of “geosystem” (Beroutchachvili and Bertrand 1978) and “ecocomplex”.
To Blandin and Lamotte (1988), the reality of human-induced pressure and the
problem of land planning called for reflection with greater integration of the population, settlements and ecosystems. Between geosystem, which involves a strong
perceptive and subjective dimension, and ecocomplex, they suggest using the latter
for its degree of integration allowing “an assembly of ecological systems in interaction in an area” to be studied. This notion of ecocomplex encompasses, jointly and
outside all cultural filters, a natural and human history in a given area. However, these
three references -landscape, geosystem and ecocomplex- are apparently still little in
use in the various branches of ecology, except for those claiming to take their roots
in landscape ecology (Rougerie and Beroutchachvili 1991; Burel and Baudry 1999).
In fact, according to P. Dury (1999), while the two words landscape and geosystem
only seldom appear in ecological publications and only since the 1990s, they both
represent a conceptual and semantic enhancement and a scientific opportunity. The
change of perspective accelerated in the years 2000 (Zacharias and Roff 2000; Roff
and Taylor 2000; Roff et al. 2003; I.C.E.S 2005; Pitmann et al. 2011; Teixidó et al.
2011), reasserting with conviction the benefit of landscape ecology-related concepts
based on the association of landscape spatial structures with ecological processes,
particularly via the combined matrix—patch—corridor model. This development
narrowed the gap between ecology and geography and provided a better response to
social and environmental challenges. Hesitations in terms of conceptual references
are inherent in the formation of emerging references but they emphasize the extent to
which it is sometimes important to define a clear corpus leaving no room for subjective interpretation. Objectively expressing the subjectivity of the landscape and its
components is a real scientific challenge, particularly in terms of systemic approach.
3.5 The Landscape System, an Effective Synopsis
Landscape study led the THEMA laboratory (Théoriser et Modéliser pourAménager)
to propose a combined integrated analysis based on four aspects, “production”,
“visible landscape”, “perception” and “use”, representing the four keys to understanding the system. Each one consists of structuring variables expressing the various
aspects of apprehending the landscape, such as its materiality through biotic, abiotic or anthropic features or the cultural filters involved in the study of perceptions
(Fig. 3.1). This matrix is an operational synopsis used to convey every dimension of
the landscape object and to convey it a broader context.
To test this model against the underwater landscape, greater regard must be had
for the observation framework required to tackle the marine and more precisely the
submarine world. Observation takes place in a constantly multidimensional space
that invariably follows a vertical, ascending-descending, and horizontal course. As
the landscape unfurls, the biotic and abiotic components are the principal attractions
as in the case of Gorgonians (Fig. 3.2).