Chapter 12

Cultural Landscapes as Heritage: A Landscape-Based

Approach to Conservation
Ayşegül TANRIVERDI KAYA*

INTRODUCTION
What is landscape? Cultural landscape?
The last ten decades have seen an incredible growth of cities. It is significant that
more than half of the world’s population now live in cities. According to UN-Habitat, in
the next two decades, five billion people will be living in cities. Therefore, due to this
mass urbanization and its consequences, over the past two decades international interest
and attention has been focused on urban areas. At the same time, the way of looking at
cultural heritage conservation has been changed. Firstly, the approach in the field of
conservation was merely on monumental buildings and artifacts rather than on their
settings and their values and meanings according to the belief systems of the
inhabitants, all of which constitute cultural landscapes. Cultural landscapes are
distinctive landscapes which evoke the intimate relationships of human beings with
their natural environment and which reflect the combined work of man and nature.
Moreover, they embody the collective memory of humanity (Banderin & Oers, 2012).
This study analyzes the changing approach to heritage management and points to
the new tendency to base landscape approach on heritage management. Thus, first to be
discussed are the meanings of “landscape” and “cultural landscape.” According to the
European Landscape Convention definition, the landscape is “an area, as perceived by
people, whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or
human”. Another important quote from this convention defines landscape protection as
“action to conserve and maintain the significant or characteristic features of a
landscape, justified by its heritage value derived from its natural configuration and/or
human activity” (Bloemers, 2010).
The descriptions of "10 different versions of the same scene” were noted while
observing the reactions of people to ordinary landscapes. Cultural geographers,
planners, landscape architects, biologists, ecologists, archaeologists, psychologists,
ethnologists, and others have written about landscapes from the perspectives of their
disciplines and professional interests. This diversity of perspectives on landscape
creates a challenge for identifying cultural landscapes (Buckle, 2004).
The landscape can be considered as a perspective which leads to the view on
heritage as the outcome of transformations and opens integrative and participatory
approaches and challenging vistas. Because of the dynamic interactions between
humans and nature, landscapes change; thus, they are the remnants of culture and nature
from the past, and thereby our basic heritage. As a consequence, information on
landscapes gives an opportunity to understand and conserve the built heritage and can

*
Dr., Düzce University, Faculty of Architecture, Turkey
also be a guide to future design. There is also more than can be seen in the various
layers of landscape, which can be likened to a palimpsest. Landscapes provide the
setting for our habitus. Whether of aesthetic value or not, they link people to nature and
establish interaction with the environment. Because the existence of tangible and
intangible values in landscapes belongs to humans, the landscape notion is highly
cultural. Human beings are one element of nature, among others, and the presence of a
wide variety of relations between humans and the landscape are expressed by the notion
of cultural landscapes. The term “cultural” refers to the extended meaning of all the
forms of these relations (Antrop 2005; Mitchell, Rössler & Tricaud, 2009; Tudor 2014).
To begin with, it is necessary to discuss what cultural landscapes are. The concept
of a “cultural landscape” is not new. Landscape which was not strictly natural became a
field of scientific research which can be traced to the early writings of geographers,
mainly in the English, French and German schools of geography and related disciplines
in the second half of the 19th century. Geographers evaluated the landscape in terms of
time and place as they related to each other in a continuous process of development,
dissolution or replacement. Because of this process, landscape was considered as having
an organic quality. Moreover, their approach to landscape was distinctly
anthropocentric, as human beings were a part of it, lived with it and modified it
(Leighly, 1969).
In particular, the American geographer Carl Sauer developed the concept of
cultural landscape in 1925 (Leighly, 1969). According to his approach, cultural
landscape is a geographic area which is formed by all of the works of man that
characterize the landscape. However, this definition neglects the energy, customs or
beliefs of man. As shown Table 1, the type of population and their density and
migration form landscapes. The type of structures used for housing and form on the
ground, either dispersed as in many rural districts or agglomerated into villages or
cities, have different plans and layouts. They all show the accumulation of knowledge
and techniques of past lives. This approach can be summed up via the quote: “The
cultural landscape is fashioned out of the natural landscape by a cultural group.
Culture is the agent, the natural area is the medium, the cultural landscape is the
result” (Leighly, 1969). This approach made it possible to link people with natural
interactions that were not yet specified in terms of landscape and paved the way for the
dedication of cultural landscapes to distinguished universal values (Mitchell et al.,
2009).
The United States National Park Service (USNPS) provides a definition of cultural
landscapes that they put into practice with their programs. They define cultural
landscape as "a geographic area (including both cultural and natural resources, and
the wildlife or domestic animals therein), associated with an historic event, activity, or
person or exhibiting other cultural or aesthetic values." This definition also emphasizes
the broader definition of being "impacted by human activity." The USNPS classifies
cultural landscapes into four major types: historic sites, historic designed landscapes,
historic vernacular landscapes, and ethnographic landscapes. These are defined in
Table 1 (Birnbaum, 1994).
Furthermore, Robert Melnick prepared the report of Cultural Landscapes: Rural
Historic Districts In the National Park Service, which includes the following
perspective: "In a cultural landscape, the factor is culture, as it interacts, over time with
the medium of the natural landscape finally resulting in the landscape we see and

206
experience" (Melnick, 1984). This definition is quite similar to Sauer's except that it
includes consideration of visual perceptions and experience of the landscape. One of the
most important advantages of Melnick's view is the description of the characteristics of
the rural landscape and how these can be used for research and inventory of sites.
Basically, Melnick's characteristics are the starting point for the assessment and
mapping of cultural landscapes (Buckle, 2004).
Table 1. Typology used by the United States National Park Service to categorize landscapes
(Birnbaum, 1994)
United States National Park Service: Landscape Typology
Historic Site
A landscape significant for its association with an historic event activity or person.
Examples include battlefields and presidential properties.
Historic Designed Landscape
A landscape that was consciously designed or laid out by a landscape architect, a master
gardener, architect, engineer, or horticulturist according to design principles, or an amateur
gardener working in a recognized style or tradition. The landscape may be associated with a
significant person, trend, or event in landscape architecture or illustrate an important
development in the theory and practice of landscape architecture.
Historic Vernacular Landscape
A landscape that evolved through use by people whose activities or occupancy shaped it.
Through social or cultural attitudes of an individual, a family, or a community, the
landscape reflects the physical, biological, and cultural character of everyday lives. Function
plays a significant role in vernacular landscapes. This can be a farm complex or a district of
historic farmsteads along a river valley. Examples include historic rural districts and
agricultural landscapes.
Ethnographic Landscape
A landscape containing a variety of natural and cultural resources that associated people
define as heritage resources. Examples are contemporary settlements, sacred religious sites,
and massive geological structures. Small plant communities, animals, and subsistence and
ceremonial grounds are often components.

Additionally, the Canada National Capital Commission (NCC) developed a study

about cultural landscapes intended to bring in a set of guidelines for the identification
and assessment of cultural landscapes on NCC lands. This report outlines a
methodology for search, analysis, identification of cultural landscapes, and suggests
related management strategies. The key essence in a cultural landscape approach is to
find out the relationship between people and landscapes in order to develop appropriate
management tools. This relationship creates the identity, the sense of place and place
attachment that form the concept of meaning and social values. Canada NCC defines
cultural landscape as "any geographical area that has been modified, influenced, or
given special cultural meaning by people as a set of ideas and practices, embedded in a
place” and then goes on to classify three basic categories: designed, evolved and
associative. This classification is similar to that of the UNESCEO World Heritage
Convention (WHC, 1972). The NCC’s definition is used to comprehend the relationship
between the intangible and tangible qualities of these sites and it brings in the notion of

207
meaning in addition to the natural and cultural characteristics. A landscape may be
important as a cultural landscape by virtue of its having sentimental or spiritual
meaning for a group of people, whether or not there are any physical relics in the
landscape (NCC, 2004).
Amos Rapoport discusses the cultural landscape in general as the subject matter of
environment-behavior relations, and of traditional dwellings and settlements in
particular. He argues that the cultural landscape is explained by discussing its two
components - "landscape" and "cultural". All landscapes are lived in and are modified
through human actions which give them meaning, and this makes them “cultural”, since
culture defines all human beings, while at the same time dividing them into groups.
Cultural landscapes are the result of a complex history because the different populations
and groups produce derivative interaction, over time, with a variety of physiographic
and ecological specifics of the land (i.e., geographic, biotic, resource, social, and other
opportunities and constraints). This interaction produces different and specific culture
complexes called “cultural landscapes” (Rapoport, 1992).
According to Rapoport, cultural landscapes can be suggested as organizations of
space, time, meaning and communication. Spatial organization reflects and influences
communication among people; relationships among elements are as important as the
elements themselves. Cultural landscapes must be understood as the result of a historic
layering of cultural and natural values and attributes. It must be studied in its entirety
and include the broader urban or vernacular context and setting. Any vernacular
dwelling must be studied with its yard, streets, village, fields, and so on, and has to be
considered together with the whole house/settlement system or system of settings. The
origins of a cultural group and their impacts on landscape can often be identified not
only through local dwellings, land use, field forms, street patterns, gardens and plants,
but also through the names given to such things and places. Humanity continues to
produce and changes the landscape by the help of technological improvements; thus,
nowadays, a high-style landscape becomes influential in our life. The cultural landscape
must be studied as the unit of analysis not only to look simultaneously at
archaeological, traditional and contemporary landscapes, but also to examine
relationships between high style and the vernacular, both of which may be very
significant.. Moreover, perception of the landscape is not merely visual, but
multisensory, including textures, smells, air movement, temperature, kinesthetics and
sounds. The combination of all these perceptions is the distinctive feature of the
landscape, and so provides the identity and ambiance of cultural landscapes (Rapoport,
1992).
Consequently, we can say that the term “cultural landscape” has been used with
many different meanings because of the notion that cultural landscape indicates a wide
variety of relations of populations with their environment and its natural elements. As a
result, the term embraces four distinctive characteristics (Melnick, 1984; Tudor 2014;
Mitchell et al., 2009; Bloemers, 2010; Rapoport, 1992), as listed in Table 2. In
summary, a cultural landscape has:
 natural elements such as climate, soil, vegetation, geomorphology, and
drainage, which are important components to understanding the backdrop of the cultural
landscape. The natural environment provides the biological and ecological framework
for the cultural landscape, i.e., Natural Factors.
 a distinctive character that has proceeded from human cultural activity over

208
time. Cultural influences are the tangible results of changes such as settlements,
transportation, land use, roads and boundaries as a combination of social, political and
economic facilities, i.e., Cultural/Social Factors.
 a meaning formed over time from layers of additional experience and feelings.
The character is connected with meaning, i.e., Cultural Association.
 a unique visual, aesthetic quality and authenticity due to natural and cultural
relics, i.e., Perceptional Aesthetic Factors.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In the period following World War II, cities faced high rural migration flow,
increasing car ownership and mass production of residential developments that
threatened historic urban areas. A reaction to this ongoing destruction was generated in
many countries resulting in an awareness of the need to conserving historic urban
values. This conservation movement gradually suggested an understanding within a
broader context. Consequently, a set of instruments and principles was established with
the help of various charters and conventions.
Over the years the conservation prınciples and approaches towards heritage have
changed. These changes are revealed and discussed in this study. How did the
conservation process relating to landscapes evolve over the past decades? First, a
literature review was conducted covering the concept of cultural landscapes as
categorized into four distinctive properties in a matrix. Selected key doctrinal
documents were then used in a comparative analysis with these distinctive properties in
order to identify the context of conservation relevant to cultural landscapes.
The study examined selected regulations from the 1962 Paris UNESCO
resolutions, including recommendations concerning the safeguarding of the beauty and
character of landscapes and sites, up to the November 2011 UNESCO proposals
concernıng the desirability of a standard-settıng instrument on historic urban
landscapes. Their content was systematically analyzed using a descriptive-analytical
method. Results were presented in a matrix, searched for and compared with the
evolution of the subject of conservation. The results were correlated and the changes in
the heritage conservation and management process were determined (Veldpaus &
Roders, 2014).
The documents of the seven regulations analyzed and compared according to the
assessment of the cultural landscapes are given in Table 3. They were selected as
follows: first document, an initial recommendation concerned with landscapes
(UNESCO, 1962) is a recommendation concerning the safeguarding of the beauty and
character of landscapes and sites, which involves not only the natural beauty of places,
but also urban landscapes as a man-made product. The Venice charter (ICOMOS, 1964)
is a founding document within international principles, focused on the conservation of
historic monuments and their settings. Later, the comprehensive document of the
Washington Charter (1987) was the first international regulation exclusively dealing
with historic urban areas and their conservation. In this sense, it brings in many
important innovations in context of the urban heritage. By this time, awareness of the
importance of intangible heritage had increased, and in 2003 the Safeguardıng of the
Intangıble Cultural Herıtage Convention became an important addition to the
international conservation policy.

209
 Table 2. Distinctive characteristics of cultural landscape

210
 This Convention was different in that it recognized the role of identity and other
intangible viewpoints in cultural landscapes and historic urban landscapes as well as in
some others.
Table 3. List of regulations analyzed in this study
Organizations & Regulations Date
UNESCO, Records of The General Conference, Twelfth Session, Paris, Resolutions,
recommendatıon concernıng the safeguarding of the beauty and character of 1962
landscapes and sites.
ICOMOS, International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of
1964
Monuments and Sites
ICOMOS, Charter for the Conservation of Historic Towns and Urban Areas
1987
(Washıngton Charter)
UNESCO, Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage
2003
Paris
UNESCO, International Conference, World Heritage and Contemporary
2005
Architecture
ICOMOS, The Valletta Principles for the Safeguarding and Management of Historic
2011
Cities, Towns and Urban Areas
UNESCO, Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape ( HUL) 2011

The 2005, the Vienna Memorandum revised urban conservation policy and
updated the Washington Charter approximately twenty years later. It provided the basis
of the historical urban landscape approach (HUL). This memorandum is important
because it reflects a change towards sustainable development in the management of
historic cities and brings in a wider approach to urban heritage that embraces cultural
landscapes. The 2011 Recommendation on the HUL has been the peak point of
conservation policy over the years. The Recommendation brings to conservation a new
vision by taking the social and economic functions of settlements or urban areas into
consideration. Moreover, it seeks a change in order to maintain a balance between
growth and quality of life.
Conventions, charters and recommendations relevant to cultural landscapes
In the 19th and 20th century the pioneer environmentalist movements began and in
addition to landscapes becoming an important field of study, protection strategies were
simultaneously developed within the protection movements. After the Second World
War, the first international conservation achievement was realized. In 1962, a UNESCO
“Recommendation Concerning the Safeguarding of the Beauty and Character of
Landscapes and Sites” was accepted by the members. For the purpose of this
recommendation, the beauty and character of landscapes and sites was taken to mean
the preservation and, where possible, the restoration of the aspect of rural and urban
landscapes and sites, whether natural or man-made, which had a cultural or aesthetic
interest or form typical of natural surroundings (UNESCO, 1962).
The Recommendation mentioned the growing concern of the human negative
impact on the beauty and character of landscapes and sites forming part of their natural
environment, including damage by:

211
  Impoverishment of the cultural, aesthetic and even vital heritage,
 Cultivation of virgin land,
 Ill-regulated development of urban centers,
 Vast schemes for industrial and commercial development and equipment,
 Destruction of wildlife (UNESCO, 1962).
This document pointed out that the beauty and character of landscapes and sites
play a crucial role in the life of humans, for whom they embody a physical, spiritual and
moral regenerating influence. They are important universally known examples that bear
witness to their age. Landscapes and sites are an important factor in the economic and
social life of many countries, and are largely valuable in ensuring the health of their
inhabitants. The General Conference requested that member states bring this
recommendation to the attention of the authorities and bodies concerned with the
protection of landscapes and sites and with regional development (UNESCO, 1962).
The safeguarding of landscapes and sites should be ensured by use of the following
methods:
 General supervision by the responsible authorities,
 Insertion of obligations into development plans and planning at all levels,
regional, rural and urban,
 Organizing of extensive landscapes by “zones”,
 Organizing of isolated sites,
 Creation and maintenance of natural reserves and national parks; acquisition of
sites by communities (UNESCO, 1962).
The 1964 International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of
Monuments and Sites adopted by ICOMOS is the basic document which frames the
issue of urban conservation within a system of international principles. This document
focused on historical monuments and their settings and emphasized that “The concept of
a historic monument embraces not only the single architectural work but also the urban
or rural setting in which is found the evidence of a particular civilization, a significant
development or a historic event. This applies not only to great works of art but also to
more modest works of the past which have acquired cultural significance with the
passing of time”. The Charter emphasized that it was essential to preserve ancient
buildings from changes and that restoration must be done to reveal the aesthetic and
historic value of the monument. According to the Charter, conservation and restoration
of monuments must have appeal to all the sciences and techniques which can support
the safeguarding of the architectural heritage (UNESCO, 1964).
The Charter for the conservatıon of historic towns and urban areas (Washington
Charter, 1987) was adopted by the International Council on Monuments and Sites
(ICOMOS) General Assembly in Washington, DC, in October 1987. This charter
emphasized that all urban settings, whether developed step by step over time or
intentionally created, are an accumulation of the diversity of societies throughout
history. This charter regards large or small cities, historic urban areas, including, towns
and historic centers or quarters, together with their natural and man-made environments
(Ahunbay, 1996). The values of traditional urban cultures are embedded into these areas
which created them over the centuries; however, today, many such areas are being
threatened, physically damaged or even destroyed by the results of the urban
development that followed industrialization in societies everywhere (ICOMOS, 1987).
The conservation of historic towns and historic urban areas should be an integral

212
part of compatible policies of economic and social development and of urban and
regional planning at every level. These historic towns also have qualities which express
their identity and character, which must be preserved, especially:
 Urban patterns as defined by lots and streets,
 Relationships between buildings and green and open spaces,
 The appearance of buildings as defined by scale, size, style, construction,
materials, color and decoration,
 The relationship between the town or urban area and its surrounding setting,
both natural and man-made,
 The various functions that the town or urban area have acquired over time
(ICOMOS, 1987).
The Charter suggests that planning for the conservation of historic towns and
urban areas should be carried out by employing multidisciplinary studies. Conservation
plans must handle all relevant disciplines including archaeology, history, architecture,
sociology and economics. All those professions related to conservation should provide
specialized training and meanwhile, a general information program should be set up for
all residents ın order to encourage their participation and involvement, beginning with
children of school age (ICOMOS, 1987).
The 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage is
also relevant to cultural landscapes. UNESCO adopted this convention referring to the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 1966, and the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights of 1966. The purposes of this Convention are:
 to safeguard the intangible cultural heritage,
 to ensure respect for the intangible cultural heritage of the communities, groups
and individuals concerned,
 to raise awareness at the local, national and international levels of the
importance of the intangible cultural heritage, and to ensure mutual appreciation
thereof,
 to provide for international cooperation and assistance.
The Convention defines intangible cultural heritage as the “practices, expressions,
knowledge, skills – as well as the instruments, artifacts and cultural spaces associated
therewith – that communities, groups and, in some events, individuals recognize as part
of their cultural heritage”. The definition also points out that it:
 is transmitted from generation to generation,
 is constantly recreated by communities and groups in response to their
environment, their interaction with nature and their history,
 provides them with a sense of identity and continuity,
 promotes respect for cultural diversity and human creativity,
 complies with international rights regulations (UNESCO, 2003).
The Vienna Memorandum on World Heritage and Contemporary Architecture
conveyed the notion of Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) which “refers to ensembles of
any group of buildings, structures and open spaces, in their natural and ecological
context, including archaeological and paleontological sites, constituting human
settlements in an urban environment over a relevant period of time, the cohesion and
value of which are recognized from the archaeological, architectural, prehistoric,
historic, scientific, aesthetic, socio -cultural or ecological point of view. This landscape

213
has shaped modern society and has great value for our understanding of how we live
today. The historic urban landscape is embedded with current and past social
expressions and developments that are place – based”. This document defines the
composition of urban landscapes that include spatial organization and land uses, visual
relationships, topography, vegetation, and all elements of the technical infrastructure,
including small-scale objects and details of construction (UNESCO, 2005). According
to the Vienna Memorandum, HUL provides a connection between nature and the man-
made environment in a historical continuity.
The Valletta Principles for the Safeguarding and Management of Historic Cities,
Towns and Urban Areas was adopted by the 17th ICOMOS General Assembly on 28
November 2011. These principles updated the approaches and considerations contained
in the Washington Charter (1987) and the Nairobi Recommendation (1976), based on
the existing set of reference documents. The Assembly redefined the objectives,
attitudes and tools needed. The updates emphasized a broader context of the issue of
historic heritage on a regional scale rather than being confined to urban areas, of
intangible values such as continuity and identity, of traditional land use, the role of
public space in communal interactions, and of other factors such as those of integration
and environment. The new approach questioned the role of landscape as common
ground, or evaluation of the townscape, including its topography and skyline, as a
whole. Another important issue, especially in fast-growing cities, took into account the
problems of large‐scale developments, which alter the traditional lot sizes and threaten
the unity of historic urban morphology (ICOMOS, 2011). This document points out the
elements to be preserved, and includes:
 The authenticity and integrity of historic towns all their tangible and intangible
elements,
 The relationships between the site and the parts making up this context,
 Social fabric, cultural diversity,
 Minimized consumption of the non‐renewable resources and encouragement of
their reuse and recycling (ICOMOS, 2011).
The Recommendation of the HUL, which was adopted on 27 May 2011 at the
UNESCO Headquarters, noted that historic urban areas are among the most numerous
and diverse expressions of our common cultural heritage, shaped by generations and
constituting a key assertion of humankind’s endeavors and aspirations through space
and time. However, under the processes of demographic shifts and globalization, as
well as climate change, cities have been subject to rapid and uncontrolled urbanization.
This has frequently resulted in social and spatial fragmentation and in a drastic
deterioration of the quality of the urban environment and of the surrounding rural areas.
This approach addresses the policy, governance and management concerns involving a
variety of stakeholders, including local, national, regional, international, public and
private actors in the urban development process (UNESCO, 2011).
The Recommendation defines the historic urban landscape as “the urban area
understood as the result of a historic layering of cultural and natural values and
attributes, extending beyond the notion of ‘historic center’ or ‘ensemble’ to include the
broader urban context and its geographical setting”. This wider definition denotes the
geomorphology, topography, hydrology and natural features of the site, in addition to
built environments, both historic and contemporary, open spaces and gardens, land use
and spatial organization, perceptions and visual relationships, as well as all other

214
elements of the urban or rural structure. It also includes social, cultural and economic
values, and the intangible dimensions of heritage as related to diversity and identity
(UNESCO, 2011).
The Recommendation addresses the landscape approach for conservation taken
from the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the World Wide
Fund for Nature (WWF). This approach is a model for making landscape-level
conservation decisions, which suggests assessment of the historic areas within their
broader urban context by considering the mutual relationships of their physical forms,
spatial organization, their natural features and settings, and also their social, cultural and
economic values. When the landscape-based approach is applied to historic cities and
towns, a more holistic sense of scale can be obtained beyond the architecture of cities.
The historic urban landscape is a sort of wide lens for understanding the city, as an
outcome of natural, cultural and socio-economic processes that construct it spatially. It
is not only about buildings and spaces, but it is also about rituals and meanings that
people bring together into the city. This concept comprehends layers of symbolic
significance, intangible heritage, perception of values, and interconnections between the
composite elements of the historic urban landscape, as well as local knowledge
including building practices and management of natural resources. Its value resides in
the notion that it embodies a capacity for change. The landscape-based approach refers
to the necessity of interdisciplinary action, and there is an acceptance that conceiving
the city as a cultural landscape would help in revealing other sets of tangible elements
(UNESCO, 2011; Banderin & Oers, 2012).
The World Heritage Convention and cultural landscapes
The notion of Heritage as an idea revived with the establishment of modern nation
states after the world wars. The new nation states needed to define their own identities.
Inıtially this new approach did not concern the historic city at all, but was merely
focused on monumental buildings. Therefore, urban conservation as a modern idea has
evolved from the 19th century to the present (Banderin & Oers, 2012).
After World War II, the idea of creating an international movement for protecting
heritage emerged, protection ideas were converted to a national legislation and the first
international conservation guide took shape. UNESCO assisted the convention managed
by the World Heritage Committee (WHC) in Paris in 1972. The committee consisted of
21 countries and was concerned with the protection of world cultural and natural
heritage. The Committee’s purpose was to encourage countries to sign the World
Heritage Convention and to ensure the protection of their natural and cultural heritage.
UNESCO defines heritage as “the designation for places on Earth that are of
outstanding universal value to humanity and as such, have been inscribed on the World
Heritage List to be protected for future generations to appreciate and enjoy. Heritage is
our legacy from the past, what we live with today, and what we pass on to future
generations. Our cultural and natural heritages are both irreplaceable sources of life
and inspiration” (WHC, 1972).
The WHC pointed out at the convention that cultural heritage and natural heritage
were increasingly threatened with destruction, not only by the traditional causes of
decay, but also by changing social and economic conditions which were causing
damage or destruction. However, natural and cultural places were brought together
under a framework. At the beginning, there was no guidance on how they were

215
recognized. When the cultural landscapes were put in the world heritage context, the
cultural criteria were broadened because cultural landscapes cover a variety of
interactions between humankind and the natural environment. The Committee added
three categories of World Heritage Cultural Landscapes to the list in 1992 (Table 4).
Cultural landscapes can be seen as a documentary that shows the evaluation of
human society historically. They contain special techniques of sustainable land use and
accumulation of rules, norms and ideas over time. They can maintain natural values and
biological diversity, so they must be protected in order to pass on the knowledge to
future generations.
Table 4. Typology of World Heritage Cultural Landscapes
UNESCO Cultural Landscapes Categories
1. Clearly Defined Landscape
Landscape designed and created as a result of intentional human intervention, This
embraces garden and parkland landscapes constructed for aesthetic reasons, which are
often (but not always) associated with religious or other monumental buildings and
ensembles.
2. Organically Evolved Landscape
Results from an initial social, economic, administrative, and/or religious imperative and
has developed its present form by association with and in response to its natural
environment Such landscapes reflect the process of evolution in their form and
component features. They fall into two sub-categories:
Relict Landscape
A relict (or fossil) landscape is one in which an evolutionary process came to an end at
some time in the past, either abruptly or over a period of time. Its significant
distinguishing features are, however, still visible in material form.
Continuing Landscape
A continuing landscape is one which retains an active social role in a contemporary
society closely associated with the traditional way of life, and in which the evolutionary
process is still in progress. At the same time it exhibits significant material evidence of
its evolution over time.
3. Associative Cultural Landscape
Justifiable by virtue of the powerful religious, artistic, or cultural associations of the
natural element rather than material cultural evidence, which may be insignificant or
even absent

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Change of the conservation context
When the conservation process was examined from 1962 to the present, it was
seen that the conservation policy suffered from the derivation of architectural
conservation principles. At the beginning, the monument and its restoration was the
main problem. First, the aim was to preserve and tolerance to change was limited, so
conservation policy was focused only on restoration, with no approval for modifications
if required, which precisely meant the reuse of heritage without changing the essential
quality. Comparing the documents has shown that new regulations are completing the

216
older ones. In time, the understanding of changes and the general scope of conservation
will widen the comprehensive system formulated by the historical, geomorphologic and
social relationships of man with his environment. Therefore, it can be admitted that the
most important evaluation is that of the toleration of change (Table 5).
Heritage is taken as a broad concept which includes the natural environment as
well as cultural –social factors. In this sense, it is fundamental to consider heritage as an
essential resource and part of the urban ecosystem. It embraces urban or rural
settlements with their cultural practices, picturesque value of landscapes as well as
biodiversity and living experiences. Furthermore, it is concerned with the identity and
collective memory of settings (UNESCO, 2011).
The approaches and considerations contained in the Charters and Recommendation
based on the existing set of reference documents have been updated over the decades
and these modifications reflect a greater awareness of the issue of historic heritage on a
wide territorial scale rather than just narrowed down to urban settlements, of intangible
values such as continuity and identity; of traditional land use, the role of public space in
communal interactions, and of other socioeconomic factors such as integration and
environmental factors. The role of landscape as common ground, to deal with urban-
rural interactions and the conceived townscape, including its topography and skyline, as
a whole, seem more important than before (UNESCO, 2011). At the beginning, the
monuments alone were the basic issue, and then it was realized that monumental sites
and their settings go together, and it was accepted that rural and urban settlements are
made up of tangible and intangible elements. The tangible elements include, in addition
to the urban structure, architectural elements, the landscapes within and around the
town, archaeological remains, panoramas, skylines, view‐lines and landmark sites.
Intangible elements include activities, symbolic and historic functions, cultural
practices, traditions, memories, and cultural references that constitute the substance of
their historic value (ICOMOS, 2011). All these elements can be characterized in context
of the cultural landscapes (Table 6).
Change of heritage management
The last 10 years of conservation policy comes to the conclusion that there have
been dynamic changes in our rural and urban areas, and these changes have made the
historical areas vulnerable. Dynamic changes and developments such as rapid and
uncontrolled urbanization, mass transportation etc. are a result of social and spatial
fragmentation and the drastic deterioration of the rural areas surrounding urban areas.
The management of these changes needs to be precise, with understanding and careful
consideration; in addition, it needs to take a culturally and historically sensitive
approach, utilizing stakeholder consultations and expert know-how. Therefore, the
management of heritage needs interdisciplinary participation. The principal actors ın the
process of heritage management are governments, public service providers and those of
the private sector, international organizations, and national and non-governmental
organizations. The concepts of sustainability, climate change, and tolerance to change
are handled by a variety of stakeholders, government, public and private actors in the
process seeking a wide involvement in heritage management. Moreover, the UNESCO
(2011) Recommendation advised the member states to adopt these strategies into their
national development policies and agendas.

217
 Table 5. Comparative analysis matrix of regulations

218
 Table 5. (Continued) Comparative analysis matrix of regulations

219
 Table 6. Context of analyzed regulations relevant to cultural landscapes
Natural Cultural/ Social Cultural Perceptional Aesthetic
Conservation
Factors Factors Association Factors
Paris 1962
 
Recommendation
Washington Charter,

1987
Intangible Cultural

Heritage , 2003
Vienna Memorandum
 
2005
Valetta Principles
  
2010
HUL 2011
   
Recommendation

CONCLUSION
It can be understood from the analysis of the regulations that historical settlements
have seen not only the unity of architectural monuments, but also their layers of
meanings connected to the natural environment and to the geological structure. This
approach aims to integrate the planning of urban development and the heritage
conservation process and to generate a landscape-based approach to conservation and
urban planning. This can be a way to balance urbanism with nature and the expression
of history with the needs of modern life. The goal is an integrated ecosystem that adopts
the relationships and exchanges between the urban area and the surrounding landscape.
The regulations when analyzed exhibit a continuum and a step-by-step debate of an
integrated approach linking contemporary architecture, sustainable urban development
and landscape integrity based on existing historic relics and modern settlements within
a broader context. Historic city meets globalization and urban heritage conservation
points to conservation and development together in the theory and practice of urban
planning. The key factor for the conservation of the historic city is the establishment of
a balanced, integrated and sustainable management process.
The 2011 HUL Recommendation is the pinnacle of the conservation agenda. It
proposed a landscape approach for historical areas within their broader urban context in
order to identify, conserve and manage them. The Recommendation considers the
relationships between natural features, settings and social, cultural and economic
values.
REFERENCES
Ahunbay, Z. (1996). Tarihi Çevre Koruma ve Restorasyon, Yem Yayınevi, 195 s., İstanbul.
Antrop, M. (2005). Why Landscapes of the Past Are Important for the Future. Landscape
and Urban Planning 70: (1-2), 21-34.
Banderin, F. & Oers R.V. (2012). The Historic Urban Landscape, Managing Heritage in an
Urban Century. 216 pp., Wiley-Blackwell: UK.
Birnbaum, C.A. (1994). USNPS Preservation Brief 36: Protecting Cultural Landscapes:
Planning, Treatment and Management of Historic Landscapes, 20 pp. NPS. [Online]
http://www.cr.nps.gov/hps/tps/briefs/brief36.htm [access: 12.05.2016]
Bloemers, T. (2010). Protection and Development of the Dutch Archeological-Historical
Landscape and Its European Dimension. In: Tom Bloemers; Henk Kars; Arnold Van
der Valk, and Mies Wijnen (Eds.) The Cultural Landscape and Heritage Paradox. p. 3-
16, The University of Amsterdam Press: Amsterdam.

220
Buckle, R. J. (2002). Managing cultural Landscapes: A case study of Stirling, Alberta.
University of Calgary (Canada), Master Thesis.
ICOMOS (1964). International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments
and Sites (The Venice Charter 1964) http://www.icomos.org/charters/venice_e.pdf
ICOMOS (1987). Charter for the Conservation of Historıc Towns and Urban Areas
(Washington Charter) 1987 http://www.icomos.org/charters/towns_e.pdf
ICOMOS (2011). The Valletta Principles for the Safeguarding and Management of Historic
Cities, Towns and Urban Areas, 2011,
http://www.icomos.org/Paris2011/GA2011_CIVVIH_text_EN_FR_final_20120110.pdf
Leighly, J. (1969). Land and Life, A Selection from the Writings of Carl Ortwin Sauer. p.
315-350, University of California Press: Berkeley and Los Angeles.
Melnick, R.Z. (1984). Cultural Landscapes: Rural Historic Districts in the National Park
System, Washington, D.C. 50 pp. Park Historic Architecture Division, Cultural
Resources Management, U.S. Department of the Interior.
Mitchell, N.; Rössler, M.; Tricaud, P.M. (2009). World heritage Cultural Landscapes, a
Handbook for Conservation and Management. 105 pp, UNESCO, ISBN 978-92-3-
104146-4.
NCC (2004). www.nccccn.gc.ca/sites/default/files.
Rapoport, A. (1992). On Cultural Landscapes, Traditional Dwellings and Settlements
Review. IASTE Berkeley III (II), 33-47.
Tudor, C. (2014). An approach to landscape character assessment. 57 pp. Natural England,
www.gov.uk/natural-england
UNESCO (1962). Records of the General Conference, Twelfth Session, Paris, resolutions,
recommendation concerning the safeguarding of the beauty and character of landscapes
and sites.http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-
URL_ID=12026&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=-471.html
UNESCO (2003). Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage Paris,
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-
URL_ID=12025&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=-471.html
UNESCO (2005). International Conference, World Heritage and Contemporary Architecture
2005 http://whc.unesco.org/en/activities/48
UNESCO (2011). Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape (HUL) 2011,
http://whc.unesco.org/en/activities/638
Veldpaus, L. & Roders, A. P. (2014). The historic urban landscape: learning from a legacy.
4th International Conference on Heritage and Sustainable Development, Green Lines
Institute for Sustainable Development, Guimares-Portugal, Proceedings, p. 129-141.
World Heritage Convention (1972). http://whc.unesco.org/en/convention/

221