ABSTRACT
The ancient Greek landscape of Athens provides some clues as to the concept of interaction between landscape and people which is of key importance in relation to the focus of this chapter. The Pnyx (the assembly) is often identified as the inspiration for democratic government around the world. The Acropolis, on the higher ground, was regarded as a sacred site long before the ancient Greek temple that still adorns it was built; it has provided a focus for spirituality in the community, and is still the main focus of attention in the landscape drawing thousands of visitors every year. Looking out from the Acropolis to the Pnyx, one can’t help being struck by the landscape relationship between these two important aspects of ancient Greek life (see Figure 29.1). The enhanced natural auditorium of the oratory and open space on Pnika Hill was the offi-
cial meeting place of the Athenian democratic assembly (ekklesia). No speaker could have avoided looking both at the Acropolis and out towards the wider city and its inhabitants; the onlookers would have seen the orator as a performer silhouetted against the sky. The concept and practice of democracy is said to have become established through the practice of discussion and decision making in this space. However, Sennett (1995) has suggested that democratic ideas and practice developed primarily as a result of interactions that occurred in the ancient Agora. This was a large open square situated at the foot of the Acropolis hill. It was surrounded by public buildings and is a space often described as a market place open to a larger part of the population than the Pnyx, which was only open to selected well-to-do native-born Athenian men.1 The indication from such analysis is that the nature of spaces and places that people inhabit can have considerable affect on how democracy develops in society. Landscapes can provide opportunities – or ‘affordances’ – for interaction with other humans and activities within the landscape, and with the landscape itself. It is these two aspects of human participation or involvement with the landscape that are considered here. Overall, participation and landscape as an area of theory is somewhat fragmented. In the past,
research into landscape participation fell fairly squarely in the bracket of social science research, but is now emerging as a cross-disciplinary area of interest. Thus theory that is now drawn from a number of disciplines is crossing over into the ‘hard sciences’ and much has emerged from applied participatory work. There is an assumption that through the interaction with landscape, ways of more sustainable and democratic living can be learned and achieved. This has in turn
led to discussion about how participation can create more sustainable landscapes and about the nature of democracy in the landscape (see Roe 2007). There has been a general assumption that participation in landscape decision making is a ‘good thing’ with little questioning of an alternative view or robust assessment as to what difference participation makes in the longer term. However, there is also a view that embodied within what we regard as ‘human’ is the need for interaction with the natural world; that we are an integral part of the natural ‘system’, not separate from it, and that our own nature, culture and many understandings spring directly from this relationship. This chapter provides an overview of the key theoretical areas relating to participation and
the landscape, and in particular highlights these two sub-areas of increasing interest which are now, most importantly, recognized and supported by the European Landscape Convention (ELC); that landscape is a reflection of human interaction with natural forces, and that people’s participation in the landscape has a potential role in relation to democracy, decision making and justice (see Figure 29.2).
