Landscape Character Assessment across scales: insights from the Portuguese experience on LCA in policy and planning

Abstract

This chapter aims at providing insights on the challenges arising from articulating LCA across scales in Portugal. Landscape is already acknowledged in Portuguese legislation since the 1976 constitution - article 66 on the right to quality of life. Despite some experiences in identifying and characterizing landscapes at an ad hoc basis, only following the signature of the European Landscape Convention the Portuguese public authorities called for a systematic approach covering the whole territory. A LCA was carried out using a combination of automated GIS analysis, together with interpretative refinement by experts and regional stakeholders, producing a nation-wide map at 1:250,000 scale. This work, published in 2004, still sets a milestone is LCA approaches in Portugal. The final map has been used (in varying degree) to inform policies in multiple sectors, as agriculture and forestry, heritage, nature conservation and spatial planning. However, the latter stands out. The Directorate responsible for spatial planning represents Portugal in the Convention and establishes since 1999 legislation and guidelines for the use LCA in spatial planning documents – those of strategic nature, as regional planning documents (NUT 2 level) and at local land use plans (LAU 1 level) as Municipal Master Plans – typically, zoning plans at 1:25,000 or 1:10,000 scale, including both rural and urban areas. This chapter draws on the authors’ experience in carrying out LCA across scales and landscape types – from national to urban scale and from deep rural to urban landscapes. Besides the nation-wide approach, other local experiences are scrutinized and used as example. As there is far more experience and literature in LCA at broad-scale rural or natural landscapes, methodological approaches need to be reviewed and adapted in the downscaling process to urban landscapes. Thus, this chapter aims at discussing arising issues, as for instance: what landscape characteristics and features should be considered relevant to the identity of the landscape at each scale, how to articulate landscape and administrative boundaries, how to decide who is the relevant “public” or how to bridge the gap between science and practice, meaning, how to ensure the usefulness of LCA in the overall planning process without compromising conceptual aspects. Ultimately, the main challenge is ensuring coherence and consistency across scales and simultaneously avoiding losing specificity of the local context. Concluding, the authors wish to reflect on how this downscaling experience can also provide useful insights on how to upscale in the progress towards a European LCA approach.