Landscape Planning, 11 (1984) 243-249 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.. Amsterdam -Printed in The Netherlands

243

News and Views

THE TEACHING OF LANDSCAPE ARCIIITECTCJRE AND THE NEED TO DEVELOP LANDSCAPE PLANNING AS A SPECIALISM

ANNE R. BEER

Department of Landseape Architecture, University of Sheffield, Sheffield St 0 2TN (Ct. Britain)

(Accepted for publication 21 May 1984)

Beer, A.R., 1984. The teaching of landscape architecture and the need to develop land- scape planning as a specialism. Landscape Plann., 11: 243-249.

INTRODUCTION

The relations~p between landscape architecture and landscape planning has rarely been considered in any detail. As Turner (1983) has shown, prob- lems with terminology create difficulties when a definition is sought for landscape planning. Similarly, it is difficult to give an exact definition for landscape architecture. Indeed this article does not attempt to do so; instead it is concerned more narrowly with the nature of landscape architecture as an academic discipline, and the link between landscape architecture as it is now taught and landscape planning.

Landscape architecture as a field of academic study is based on the needs of professional work. As an academic field, it aims to encourage the develop ment and testing of theories in relation to the practice of planning, design- ing and managing the external environment of urban areas, the countryside and the wilderness. The theories that it develops derive from studies of the inter-relationship between man and the land in particular locations at par- ticular times. It is an applied subject, and so allows for constant live-testing of ideas and theories, and it is this which provides the basic data for future academic developments in the subject.

Landscape architecture is a professional discipline which aims to help people construct habitats which meet their social needs, but to do so in ways which minimise the impact on the natural environment and ensure the de- velopment of an appropriate and satisfactory visual environment. As land- scape architecture is essentially about constructing new environments or adapting existing ones, design skills remain at the core of the discipline, the core around which the teaching of landscape architecture has developed.

The landscape architect is trained to manipulate the external environment, but can only ao so within the constraints set by society and in particular the

0304-3924/84/$03.00 0 1984 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.

244

cultural, financial and political constraints. It is therefore a profession which has to work with the other professions involved with the environment. Land- scape architects need a sound understanding of their relationship with archi- tects, planners and civil engineers if they are to be effective in helping to bring about any improvement in the “quality of life”.

THESCOPEOFTHESUBJECT

Landscape architecture is a truly m~tidi~iplin~y subject. It could be further than either of these combinations. It is a field of study which spe- cifically concerns itself with how to plan and design any external environ- ment in relation to the needs of society, and taking full account of the natu- ral environment. It is concerned with the space outside the dwelling, factory or shop, and the space experienced by the traveller as well as the landscapes of the countryside and wilderness. It is concerned with the totality of the shop, and the space experienced by the traveller as well as the landscapes of the countryside and wilderness. It is concerned with the totality of the experience of being in a particular place at a particular time. It is not, as many appear to believe, exclusively about the visual experience of any given en~onment. It is about trying to identify, preserve and reproduce the experiences of the environment which add satisfaction and pleasure to the act of living. The landscape designer, therefore, has to be able to produce more than a sameness of a “standardised” beautiful landscape everywhere; awareness of the role of diversity and contrast is essential.

Landscape architects can be asked to work on a vast variety of different scales. They can have to work on projects which deal with national planning issues, or work on regional structure plans, or they can have to work on the designing of minute city spaces. It would take a person of great maturity to be able to cope with such a range of problems, and perhaps it would be wrong to expect anybody to do so in more than a superficial manner, and for that reason specialisms such as landscape planning have begun to develop. It could, I think, be suggested that the landscape profession in Britain has up to now only been able to cope with the great diversity of the work with which it has been involved because of the wide range of academic and pro- fessional backgrounds found amongst its members. In Britain, about half the entry into the landscape profession is of people who train as landscape architects on post-graduate level taught courses. These courses take Bota- nists, Natural Environmental Scientists, Geographers, Psychologists, Agri- culturalists, Horticulturalists and Foresters as well as Civil Engineers, Archi- tects and Town Planners, and in a Z-year period train them to work as pro- fessional landscape architects. It has become common, therefore, to find a particularly wide range of knowledge about the natural and social environ- ment among the groups of landscape architects working in various offices throughout Britain. What they have developed in common through studying landscape architecture is a way of thought about man’s relationship to the

245

environment and the importance of the natural environment for mankind. This has developea into a recognisable landscape methodology governing the making of planning and design decisions.

THE FACTORS WHICH INFLUENCE THE WAY IN WHICH LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE IS TAUGHT

The common methodology, which has been developed by the landscape architecture profession, is taught in all schools, but is not widely understood outside the profession. It can perhaps best be explained by looking at the way in which the landscape architect deals with site planning. The landscape profession has developed what it considers to be a straightforward and understandable approach to site planning and design. It is an approach which can be applied with benefit to a high proportion of development proposals. It is based on: firstly, a thorough assessment of the natural environmental and other physical characteristics of the site; secondly, a detailed analysis of the users and their requirements in terms of external environments; and thirdly, an assessment of the potential of the site. This assessment of the potential of the site is based on the relationship between the possibilities inherent in the physical characteristics of the site and the way in which the user-requirements have to be adapted to fit the site. This assessment is seen by landscape architects as the crucial part of the site-planning process, and one that must be carried out before any design decisions are made. It is the balancing of the needs of the natural environment and the user of the site which allows the creation of a special character for each site. Without “character” being taken into account, there can only be the dull uniformity with which we have all become too familiar.

Other professions carry out similar, but often more limited, versions of this site-planning process. It is suggested that many architects, planners and engineers practising today have not been trained to consider fully the natural environmental, as well as the social and technological, aspects of a proposed development; nor have they been trained to be concerned about the way in which time will change the use and appearance of townscapes and landscapes. The landscape architect therefore has special skills which complement those of the other professions involved in site planning.

The way in which the landscape architect approaches site planning ana the information produced by this approach aims to enable the site planners, who may be a group of people from a variety of professions, to generate a num- ber of different site layout solutions. These options can then be examined by assessing the impact of the different site-planning solutions on the natural and visual environment as well as the social environment. Seen in this way, the landscape architect’s role in the site-planning process is not merely to do with subjectively derived decisions about the aesthetic aspects of a site, it can instead be seen to be a well-reasoned process which can be understood and reacted to by the layman. It is a method by which the mystique about

246

landscape design can be dispelled, as it can be shown that design is mainly about the right thing in the right place at the right time. This is not to aeny the aesthetic judgement of the landscape designer, but to create a context within which the decisions of all the designers involved in the site-planning process can be evaluated.

Landscape design follows on from site planning, and is approached by using knowledge of the way people react to certain environments and how they are likely to perceive those environments to produce a detailed layout and design. The detailed design of any external area requires that the land- scape designer has a sound knowledge of the characteristics of construction materials, and particularly the characteristics of plants, if appropriate design decisions are to be made. In addition, the landscape designer cannot operate without a “feeling” for the way in which the local climate changes from day to day and influences the site. The effect of time also has to be considered, as the size and shape of the plants continually changes, as does the colour and sometimes the texture of the other materials. This means that the landscape designer has to be constantly aware of how the scheme will de- velop after it has been implemented. Operating at this level, it is suggested that the landscape architect becomes an artist, but one for the most part tied to the reality of a particular piece of earth, in a certain environment with certain users.

It is important that the courses training landscape architects do not neg- lect to ensure that the student also has an opportunity to consider the pro- fession’s contribution to the total land-use planning process. In our society, many decisions are taken about the location of various land uses long before any detailed site plan is considered necessary. Therefore, many landscape architects and others involved in site planning find themselves in the position of trying to make the best of having to design for a particular land use on what it rapictly emerges is a poor site for the proposed development. The natural environment and visual quality are particularly vulnerable to “broad brush” planning decisions taken on the basis of the information in strategic or local plans. Greater involvement by the landscape architect in local planning should be seen as essential if such plans are to include an adequate level of information on the natural and visual environment. Involvement at this level requires landscape planning skills, but not necessarily design skills.

Planning, designing and managing landscape is no simple process which can be learnt in a 4- or &year period of study. Academic courses can only provide the foundation for the later development of the individual as a lana- scape designer or planner. They can do this by encouraging rigorous analysis of planning and design problems, and by teaching the students to assess critically their own and their professions achievements. It is suggested that academic courses cannot produce a “finished” landscape designer or planner; that can only be achieved by many years in practice, and learning from making and re-making decisions about the environment in relation to how people use it.

241

THE DEVELOPMENT OF LANDSCAPE PLANNING AS A SPECIALISM WITHIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

In Britain, the dearth of landscape architects trained to work on pro- ducing the detailed design solutions required by environmental improve- ment and protection projects has had an almost inevitable influence on the way in which the education of landscape architects has evolved. The result has been that the landscape schools have considered themselves obliged to produce graduates whose main skill is in the design field, but who have also had an introduction to the problems involved in making the land-use plan- ning decisions that relate to the landscape, as well as the problems inherent in the management of any area of landscape. The shortage of landscape architects has, until very recently, meant that there has been no leeway to allow the development of specialisms. It is not just the undergraduate courses in Britain which have been producing students trained mainly as landscape designers; the post-graduate taught courses have also done this, as the latter are in the main designed to be conversion courses for graduates from other disciplines. This pattern has meant that any specialism has had to be done in research projects not in courses. This situation is likely to change in the near future, as several of the Universities and Polytechnics involved in teaching landscape architecture are considering the possibilities of specialist courses.

The question of how professionals should be educated to tackle landscape planning issues needs careful consideration. Is the traditional design-based training of the landscape architect, with its strong emphasis on design, necessarily the best or only basis for developing a landscape planning skill? If it is considered to be so, what possibility is there of the present courses being altered so that some students, at least, spend more time on landscape planning and management issues? There is little doubt that people trained in both landscape design and planning could be very useful to society. For instance, observation of the way in which local authority offices function in England has shown that if landscape architects are to be effective in influ- encing the workings of the planning process, they need to be better prepared for multi-disciplinary work with economic, social and physical planners, and better able to explain design constraints to planners (Beer, 1979).

In relation to the teaching of landscape planning, it might well be desir- able, for the reasons outlined above, that the students on the landscape design courses are the recipients of more teaching related to the specialism. However, if those courses are to continue to produce skilled people able to work as landscape architects, it has to be recognised that they must be skilled at design, and therefore need to learn the skills taught on the courses as they are at present structured. The question becomes one of where can the time be found when, as in Britain, the length of course is strictly limited. For, if every part of their present course is considered essential to the train- ing of landscape architects as designers, it will be difficult to fit any extra work into already crowded timetables.

248

If, in the interests of ensuring no dilution of the courses training land- scape designers, landscape planning is to be taught as a separate specialism and not an extension of existing courses, then the question of to whom such courses are to be addressed has to be faced. To what extent do those work- ing on landscape planning issues need to understand the way in which the designer works? Is it possible for someone without any design training to operate as a landscape planner? Would it be possible to take non-landscape architects and teach them how to work as landscape planners? If so, how long would the courses have to be? What should be the content of such courses? In this latter context, can anything be learnt from examining the present planning system and analysing the sort of work that a landscape planner would be expected to do, or does the very lack of trained personnel mean that no need to do certain types of work has been recognised?

The problems posed for the landscape profession by the fact that other professions do not always recognise the need for advice on matters related to the landscape have to be recognised. To give an example, the lack of recognition of landscape problems can be seen to be an important factor in the way in which the development control system operates. It operates in Britain for the most part without involving landscape architects, or often any other skilled designers. This was shown in a study undertaken in the late 1970’s, which examined the functioning of the various aspects of the development control process and revealed the lack of landscape and other professionals trained to work at the interface between planning and design (Beer, 1983). That study emphasiseci the need for local authorities to be aware that they required staff to be trained in the aspects of the planning process which relate to the natural, as well as the visual, environment (Beer and Booth, 1981). It is only when staff are available to carry out a proper consideration of these aspects, and relate that analysis to the potential needs of the user, that designers are likely to be presented with the sort of site- planning briefs which will enable them to use their skills at resolving con- flicts between user and site to the full,

The problems of defining the scope of any course in landscape planning has been well illustrated in Turner’s article (1983). It has to be recognised that planning aecisions involv~g the lanoscape, both as something we per- ceive ano as the env~onment in which we live, are made at all levels of the planning process, from national to regional to local level. We do question whether this aspect of planning has been adequately dealt with up to now and, therefore, the need to consider the type of specialist training which would help improve the situation.

It could be argued that the best way in which to resolve the present problem of a lack of U.K. planning office staff with landscape planning skills (Beer, 1979) is to set up post-experience courses. Such courses would be part-time or modular, and designed to meet the needs of people from a variety of professions whose common characteristic would be that they are working on problems concerned with landscape planning issues. These

249

courses could complement the development of the full-time landscape plan- ning course, which would aim to be at the same academic level as the present landscape architecture courses. For students who have previously qualified in landscape architecture, relatively short full- or part-time conversion courses would be possible, as so much of the factual information required as a basis for landscape design work is the same as that needed for landscape planning. For students from other disciplines, however, the courses would have to be more lengthy if they were to allow an understanding of the development of landscapes, as well as how man interacts with the landscape. Such students would also require an understanding of what the landscape designer needs to know before design decisions can be made, and of the con- straints that limit what a designer can do. It would not, however, be neces- sary for such a person to be skilled in design, the use of plant material or construction material, or have detailed knowledge of landscape maintenance techniques.

In parallel with the development of taught courses in landscape planning, there is a need for much more research into a whole multitude of issues which relate to how we make decisions about the landscape aspects of land- use planning and land management, and the impact of those decisions on the natural environment and man. The landscape profession in Britain is beginning to move from a situation where, because of lack of manpower, all that it has been able to do is to react to the planning and management decisions made by other professionals. It increasingly becomes apparent that the landscape profession has to be involved in land-use policy making as well as the detailed site-selection and design process. Restricting the profession’s role to the detailed design of individual sites can be seen not to be in the best interest of the protection or improvement of the natural or visual environ- ment. However, to be able to properly influence the planning process, new skills need to be developed and new research needs to be undertaken.

REFERENCES

Beer, A.R., 1979. Landscape work in local government offices. LAB, Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, 126 pp.

Beer, AR., 1983. Attitudes to design. Town Plann. Rev., 54: 383-404. Beer, A.R. and Booth P., 1981. Development Control and Design Quality. Rep. 1, Major

Findings. Rep. 2, Use of Conditions. Rep. 3, Attitudes to Design, Rep. 4, Case Studies. Rep. 5, Residents’ Attitudes. Centre for Environmental Design, University of Shef- field, Sheffield.

Turner, T.H.D., 1983. Landscape planning: a linguistic and historical analysis of the term’s use. Landscape Plann., 9: 179-192.