44 holders (as Piemonte Region, River Basin Autority, 11 Municipalities) and the population directly affected by the transformation of the landscape. Using the TABLE 2, we recognize the acknowledgement of: • the consolidated or identity values analyzed in the three approaches as the geo-morphological aspect of the river territory, the natural and rural landscape and some important cultural buildings (as Stupinigi Hunting Castle) that constitute a common patrimony of the population. The river is at the moment not perceived by the urban territory of the 11 Municipalities, involved in the valorisation project, that promotes their integration, • Regulative values as the “legal binding” values of the river territory as the Po River Park, the SIC and ZPS; the institutional actors and the population investigated in this analysis promote the protection of the Historical Hunting paths, partially non connected for the urban sprawl and decide to create new system of attractiveness networks (linked to the Green Belt Project of the Turin Province and the ‘Contract of the Sangone River Basin’) • the values to be implemented are linked to limited the environmental quality of the river habitat, the functional and hydro-geological weaknesses, the degraded and disused areas along the river; this problems need the integration among ecological, cultural and physical system of values and networks, create a new relation among the social and institutional perception of the territory, the landscape, the river belt. Each phase analysis contributed to define the thematic cartography, specialist studies and it is based on the participation of institutional actors and local population categories (such as policy makers, universities scholarship and students, associations), involved in some workshop activities and internet session and forum. (see the following link: www.provincia. torino.it/ambiente/risorse_idriche/progetti/idra2). References Alexander, E. R. (Ed.) (2006): Evaluation in planning: Aldershot: Ashgate. Bailly, A., Raffestin, C., Reymond, H. (1980): ‘Les concepts du paysage : problématique et représentations’. L’Espace géographique, IX (4) : 277-286. Brunetta, G. (2006): ‘Valutazione e pianificazione. Verso l’integrazione?’ [Evaluation and Planning. Towards the integration?]. Italian Journal of Regional Science, 5 (3): 119-126. Brunetta, G. and Peano, A. (Eds.) (2003): Valutazione ambientale strategica. Aspetti metodologici, procedurali e criticità [Strategic Environmental Assessment in Spatial Planning. Methodologies, procedures and weaknesses]. Milan: IlSole24ore. Brunetta, G. & Voghera, A. (2007): ‚Per una metodologia di valutazione dei paesaggi‘ [A methodology for the landscape evaluation]. Archivio di Studi Urbani e Regionali: 88 (XXXV<strong>III</strong>): 15-33. Brunetta, G. and Voghera, A. (2008): ‚Evaluating <strong>Landscape</strong> for Shared Values: Tools, Principles, and Methods‘. <strong>Landscape</strong> Research. 33:1:71 <strong>–</strong> 87. CoE (2000): European <strong>Landscape</strong> Convention. Florence. CoE (2008): Recommendation CM/Rec (2008)3 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the guidelines for the implementation of the European <strong>Landscape</strong> Convention. Coppola Pignatelli, P. (1992) L’identità come processo [Identity as a process]. Rome: Officina. Cosgrove, D. (1984): Social Formation and Symbolic <strong>Landscape</strong>. London: Croom Helm. Fusco Girard, L. (1998): ‘Conservation of cultural and naturale heritage. Evaluation for good governance and democratic control’. in Lichfield, N., Barbanente A., Borri, D., Khakee, A., Prat, A. (ed.s) (1998): Evaluating in Planning: Facing the Challenge of Complexity. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press. Gorgeu, Y., Jenkins, C. (edit.) (1995): La charte paysagère outil d’aménagement de l’espace intercommunal. Paris : La Documentation Francaise. Higuchi, T. (1989): The visual and spatial structure of landscapes. Cambridge (USA): The MIT Press. Jakle J. (1987): The visual elements of landscape, The University of Massachusetts Press, Amherst. Kaplan R., Kaplan S., Brown T. (1989), “Environmental Preferences. a Comparison of Four Domains of Predictors“, in Environment & Behavior, 5 (XXI): 509-530. Oneto, G. (1987): Valutazione di impatto sul paesaggio [<strong>Landscape</strong> Impact Evaluation]. Milan: Ed. Pirola. Oneto, G. (1997): Manuale di pianificazione del paesaggio [<strong>Landscape</strong> Planning Handbook]. Milan: Il Sole 24 Ore. Peano, A. (Ed.) (2007): Atlante per la valorizzazione dei paesaggi piemontesi [Atlas for the valorisation of Piedmont <strong>Landscape</strong>s], (Turin: Inter-University <strong>Department</strong> Of Territorial Studies And Planning). CD-rom. Farjon, H. (2007): ‘Monitoring Program of perception and valuation of landscape changes in the Netherlands’. <strong>Landscape</strong> Indicators. Challenges and Perspectives. Barcelona: 29th and 30th of November. Participation process of the Sangone <strong>Landscape</strong>, in: http://www. provincia.torino.it/ambiente/risorse_idriche/progetti/idra2.
45 Papers
- Page 1 and 2: University of Natural Resources and
- Page 3 and 4: Authors of the papers are fully res
- Page 5: 3 Day 2 Thursday, April 30, 2009 Se
- Page 8 and 9: 6 The “Landscape-Infrastructure
- Page 10 and 11: 8 a) b) Fig. 2 : Study of the perme
- Page 12 and 13: 10 Endnotes [1] Bernetti, Casini, M
- Page 14 and 15: 12 Urban landscapes need great idea
- Page 16 and 17: 14 the term “overall expression
- Page 18 and 19: 16 Fig. 2: Initial overall pictures
- Page 20 and 21: 18 Evaluation of Open Space Form an
- Page 22 and 23: 20 Fig. 5: Other vegetation This st
- Page 24 and 25: 22 Type of activity: • Exercise/p
- Page 26 and 27: 24 Landscaped, Modern, or Social? T
- Page 28 and 29: 26 Fig. 2: Rose and Perennial Show
- Page 30 and 31: 28 Herbert Bayer’s Megastructures
- Page 32 and 33: 30 a large extent the Japanese deve
- Page 34 and 35: 32 A Fertile Wilderness: The CPR’
- Page 36 and 37: 34 Fig.3 as their destination. The
- Page 38 and 39: 36 The Method of Structuralist Land
- Page 40 and 41: 38 Fig. 2: SLA implements gender eq
- Page 42 and 43: 40 Landscape Evaluation Process. A
- Page 44 and 45: 42 systematic application of certai
- Page 48 and 49: 46 Frameworks - Preparing rural lan
- Page 50 and 51: 48 The issues are organized into fa
- Page 52 and 53: 50 Do Landscape Architects make the
- Page 54 and 55: 52 within the larger landscape piec
- Page 56 and 57: 54 Landscape as Urban Structure: th
- Page 58 and 59: 56 city extension area but also in
- Page 60 and 61: 58 housing neighborhoods. Construct
- Page 62 and 63: 60 “massive change, required - ni
- Page 64 and 65: 62 architecture’s ability to conc
- Page 66 and 67: 64 cape Journal 6 (1): 4-12 Jackson
- Page 68 and 69: 66 Green Idea/Grey Reality Carl Smi
- Page 70 and 71: 68 argument was put forward for omi
- Page 72 and 73: 70 Green Streets Potential for Down
- Page 74 and 75: 72 size of rain garden through the
- Page 76 and 77: 74 Climate Change asks for Sustaina
- Page 78 and 79: 76 Fig. 2: Simplified example (livi
- Page 80 and 81: 78 Sustainability in Park Design -
- Page 82 and 83: 80 Fig 2: Integrative Design Approa
- Page 84 and 85: 82 Preserving community gardens in
- Page 86 and 87: 84 the City applied the military so
- Page 88 and 89: 86 Endnotes [1] Anyone interested i
- Page 90 and 91: 88 Urban imageability & open space
- Page 92 and 93: 90 ning up degraded wetlands, plant
- Page 94 and 95: 92 How to balance the multiple role
- Page 96 and 97:
94 to the site. The public domain i
- Page 98 and 99:
96 public spaces in the HBA, and by
- Page 100 and 101:
98 Questions of scale for sustainab
- Page 102 and 103:
100 Fig. 4: Nested structure of an
- Page 104 and 105:
102 Fig. 8: Fragmentary planning mo
- Page 106 and 107:
104 Moving Land: International Buil
- Page 108 and 109:
106 Fig. 3: Concept Desert/Oasis We
- Page 110 and 111:
108 Exploring a New Mode of Sustain
- Page 112 and 113:
110 Serveral private sectors initia
- Page 114 and 115:
112 Structuring the Concept of Land
- Page 116 and 117:
114 transformation; the regulative
- Page 118 and 119:
116 Anti-planning, anti-design? Exp
- Page 120 and 121:
118 ate them, provided they still r
- Page 122 and 123:
120 Complexity Ethos + Strategies:
- Page 124 and 125:
122 cher” from a twenty-five foot
- Page 126 and 127:
124 Great Ideas in Landscapes Seen
- Page 128 and 129:
126 Depending on motivation, these
- Page 130 and 131:
128 The traditions of landscape sch
- Page 132 and 133:
130 Landscape Insertions: Operation
- Page 134 and 135:
132 Fig. 02: Llorca Stéphanie, AXY
- Page 136 and 137:
134 and creative innovation that in
- Page 138 and 139:
136 Significance of the post-mining
- Page 140 and 141:
138 Designing the post-industrial c
- Page 142 and 143:
140 Hidden landscapes - The Enclose
- Page 144 and 145:
142 Fig. 3: Paley Park is an inters
- Page 146 and 147:
144 House and Exterior in the archi
- Page 148 and 149:
146 Fig. 4 architectonical work“
- Page 150 and 151:
148 The socio-cultural role of peri
- Page 152 and 153:
150 Ecological networks representat
- Page 154 and 155:
152 Veneto integrated water landsca
- Page 156 and 157:
154 Fig. 2: Ponte di Piave 2025 (A)
- Page 158 and 159:
156 Observing the Landscape Roland
- Page 160 and 161:
158 Fig. 2: signalman house and rai
- Page 162 and 163:
160 Mobility and Territory Sanja Cv
- Page 164 and 165:
162 Kevin Lynch’s Openness of the
- Page 166 and 167:
164 Phytoremediation as an Experien
- Page 168 and 169:
166 Fig. 2: Rhizotron: An undergrou
- Page 170 and 171:
168
- Page 172 and 173:
170
- Page 174 and 175:
172
- Page 176 and 177:
174
- Page 178 and 179:
176
- Page 180 and 181:
178
- Page 184:
Many Thanks to our Supporters ILA -