Landscape analysis as a tool for risk reduction

Francesca Romana Lugeri; Piero Farabollini; Nicola Lugeri; Francesca Romana Lugeri; Piero Farabollini; Nicola Lugeri

doi:10.3934/geosci.2019.3.617

AIMS Geosciences

2019, Volume 5, Issue 3: 617-630. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2019.3.617

Previous Article Next Article

Research article Special Issues

Landscape analysis as a tool for risk reduction

1.
ISPRA Institute for Environmental Protection and Research, Italy
2.
UNICAM University of Camerino, Italy

Received: 31 March 2019 Accepted: 22 July 2019 Published: 06 August 2019

We live in an era defined as postmodern. Socio-economic developments require a knowledge that keeps pace with the dizzying speed of technological evolution. The disconnect between progress, society, and environment triggers unpredictable side effects on the planet: that is the Anthropocene paradigm. How can this be changed? Shared awareness seems to be the only possible solution that can be only reached through knowledge, which is provided by science. Landscape, as the perceivable expression of our planet, becomes a strategic tool in communicating Territorial Sciences, aiming at involving society in a common action toward a sustainable future. The awareness of being part of an ecosystem is achieved through the knowledge and the experience of the environment. The risk prevention must necessarily be based on cognitive processes that activate in society conscious knowledge, as well as virtuous practices. Knowledge is wisdom, the first step towards the so-called “civil self-protection”. A lot of initiatives have been started in the last years, all around the world. Most of them are devoted to the school activities. However, the facies sociale of the decision makers is not enough involved in the topics we have talked about. So the voters, the policymakers, the territorial planners, are more interested in those problems related to the “here and now”. They have to be sensitized on what prevention means, on environmental protection, on territorial valorization. The landscape encompasses a lot of meanings and trigger emotions, thus it provides us with the most effective tools to share the essential concept of Earth Sciences, especially those ones that can help individual/community/society to better behave, toward a healthier planet and a shared well-being.
- landscape analysis,
- society,
- risk reduction,
- GIS
Citation: Francesca Romana Lugeri, Piero Farabollini, Nicola Lugeri. Landscape analysis as a tool for risk reduction[J]. AIMS Geosciences, 2019, 5(3): 617-630. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2019.3.617

Related Papers:

Abstract

We live in an era defined as postmodern. Socio-economic developments require a knowledge that keeps pace with the dizzying speed of technological evolution. The disconnect between progress, society, and environment triggers unpredictable side effects on the planet: that is the Anthropocene paradigm. How can this be changed? Shared awareness seems to be the only possible solution that can be only reached through knowledge, which is provided by science. Landscape, as the perceivable expression of our planet, becomes a strategic tool in communicating Territorial Sciences, aiming at involving society in a common action toward a sustainable future. The awareness of being part of an ecosystem is achieved through the knowledge and the experience of the environment. The risk prevention must necessarily be based on cognitive processes that activate in society conscious knowledge, as well as virtuous practices. Knowledge is wisdom, the first step towards the so-called “civil self-protection”. A lot of initiatives have been started in the last years, all around the world. Most of them are devoted to the school activities. However, the facies sociale of the decision makers is not enough involved in the topics we have talked about. So the voters, the policymakers, the territorial planners, are more interested in those problems related to the “here and now”. They have to be sensitized on what prevention means, on environmental protection, on territorial valorization. The landscape encompasses a lot of meanings and trigger emotions, thus it provides us with the most effective tools to share the essential concept of Earth Sciences, especially those ones that can help individual/community/society to better behave, toward a healthier planet and a shared well-being.

References

[1]	Cannizzaro S (2018) Geographical and historical processes of human settlements in the Etna Region. A person-place relation approach, In Antronico L, Marincioni F (a cura di), Natural Hazards and Disaster Risk Reduction Policies, 1: 69–87.
[2]	Crutzen PJ (2006) The "Anthropocene". In Ehlers E, Krafft T, Eds., Earth System Science in the Anthropocene, Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 3–6.
[3]	Bauman Z (1997) Postmodernity and its discontents. Polity, Cambridge.
[4]	Lugeri FR, Farabollini P, Amadio V, et al. (2018) Unconventional Approach for Prevention of Environmental and Related Social Risks: A Geoethic Mission. Geosciences 8: 54. doi: 10.3390/geosciences8020054
[5]	Kertzer DI (1983) Generation as a Sociological Problem. Annu Rev Sociol 9: 125–149 doi: 10.1146/annurev.so.09.080183.001013
[6]	Levy-Strauss C (1957) Tristes Tropiques. Librerie Plon, France.
[7]	Forman RTT, Godron M (1986) Landscape Ecology. Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 620.
[8]	Naveh Z, Lieberman A (1994) Landscape Ecology Theory and Application; Series on Environmental Management; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 99–103.
[9]	Odum EP (1961) Fundamentals of Ecology. Cengage Learning, Boston, USA.
[10]	Amadio V, Amadei M, Bagnaia R, et al. (2002) The role of Geomorphology in Landscape Ecology: the Landscape Unit Map of Italy, Scale 1: 250,000 ("Carta della Natura" Project). In Allison RJ Ed., Applied Geomorphology: Theory and Practice, Wiley: London, UK, 265–282.
[11]	Amadio V (2003) Analisi di Sistemi e Progetti di Paesaggio, Franco Angeli: Milano, Italy, 23.
[12]	APAT (2003) Il Progetto Carta della Natura alla scala 1:250,000 Manuali e linee guida 17/2003.
[13]	APAT (2004) Carta della natura alla scala 1:50,000. Metodologia di realizzazione Manuali e linee guida 30/2004.
[14]	Sieber R (2006) Public Participation Geographic Information Systems: A Literature Review and Framework. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 96: 491–507. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8306.2006.00702.x
[15]	Marincioni F (2008) Information Technologies and the Sharing of Disaster Knowledge: The Critical Role of Professional Culture. Disasters 31: 459–476.
[16]	Lugeri FR, Aldighieri B, Testa B, et al. (2012) WebGIS territoriale: per non perdere contatto con la realtà-webGIS territorial: pour ne pas perdre le contact avec la réalité, in AAVV Geografia sociale e democrazia-La sfide della comunicazione a cura di Claudio Cerreti, Isabelle Dumont. Massimiliano Tabusi, 95–104.
[17]	De Pascale F (2017) Geoethics and Sustainability Education Through an Open Source CIGIS Application: the Memory of Places Project in Calabria, Southern Italy, as a Case Study. In: Albert MT, Bandarin F, Roders A (Eds.), Going beyond-sustainability in Heritage Studies No 2, Springer Heritage Studies.
[18]	Haines-Young R, Green DR, Cousins SH (1993) Landscape Ecology and Geographical Information System. Taylor and Francis, 57–74.
[19]	Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Springer-Verlag, New York.
[20]	ISPRA (2006) Basilicata Region. Data from the Carta della Natura Geographic Information System.
[21]	ISPRA. Available from: http://www.isprambiente.gov.it/en/environmental-services/map-of-the-naturesystem/map-of-the-nature-at-the-scale-1-250.000/indicators-and-indices.
[22]	Lugeri N, Amadei M, Bagnaia R, et al. (2000) Environmental quality and territorial vulnerability assessment through the GIS of Landscape Units of Italy: the experience of the Map of Nature project.
[23]	Rossi PF, Amadio V, Rossi O, et al. (2006) The Map of Italian Nature: The Detection of the Hotspots of Ecological Attention. Center for Statistical Ecology and Environmental Statistics, 27–28.
[24]	Petraitis PS, Latham RE, Niesenbaum RA (1989) The maintenance of species diversity by disturbance. Q Rev Biol 64: 393–418. doi: 10.1086/416457
[25]	Ratcliffe DA (1976) Thoughts towards a Philosophy of Nature Conservation. Biol Conserv 9: 45–53. doi: 10.1016/0006-3207(76)90073-2
[26]	Nilsson CN, Grelsson G (1995) The fragility of ecosystems: a review. J Appl Ecol 32: 677–692. doi: 10.2307/2404808

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2019 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)