ABSTRACT
Hans, Elina, Ingrid and the others convey their praise for one of the most criticised residential landscapes across the Western world. Whilst their praising is based on their daily immersion, senses and sympathy for this landscape, they also defend it against planners, architects, politicians and a number of scholars. A distinctive contribution to the field of 'landscape and social justice' is the work of Kenneth R. Olwig. Olwig's etymological dissection of the landscape concept represents a reconsideration of scenic and territorial definitions of landscape, and a troubling of their seemingly natural hegemony. Seeing landscapes as morally constituted by people, polity and place offers some radical insight, but has only to a limited extent been demonstrated or radically theorised. With an overall aim of establishing 'a true landscape democracy', the strength of the Convention is down to the success or failure of people's abilities and willingness to participate in assessing the qualities of their local landscapes.
