Paradigm Shift of Scale in Landscape Architecture—Towards a Planetary Observation

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper might work as an introduction for a larger research or case study.

It is a recollection of the literature on its main theme with no personal contribution. I must also note that this literature review is quite biased, as it does not provide with different opinions that might disagree with the main thesis of the text.

Author Response

I appreciate the time and effort that you have dedicated to providing your feedback on my manuscript. I have highlighted the changes within the manuscript. The manuscript has been revised according to the comments from other reviewers. 

The manuscript is a commentary paper that discusses different practical and theoretical studies regarding the "Planetary Scale" of design in landscape architecture. It is based on the trio of urbanisation, ecology and landscape, aimed to open further debates on practical sides of such Planetary scale. As highlighted through the text, the importance of holism in different fields has been widely discussed and well accepted by practitioners from different fields, making it challenging to provide opponent opinions that disagree with such a scale shift. However, the main difficulties regarding such scale shift are due to the geopolitical administration. The commentary aims to debate a scale of design adequate to the scale of the environmental apocalypse and the tsunami of urbanisation.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper is interesting and well structured.

The title seems a bit pretentious, or not self-explaining. Maybe adding a subtitle which clarifies the topic: what kind of paradigm shift?

Author Response

I appreciate the time and effort that you have dedicated to providing your valuable feedback on my manuscript. I have highlighted the changes within the manuscript according to the feedback from one of the reviewers. 

As you suggested,  the short subtitle of "Towards a Planetary Observation" has been added to express the content of the commentary immediately.

Reviewer 3 Report

1. Overview and general impressions:

This theory paper focuses on the paradigm shift of scale in landscape architecture. The topic is original, significant, and with potential interest to readers, especially policymakers and different professionals involved in policy design, delivery, and implementation as well as spatial planning and design professionals.  The research design is not well explained and the methods used are not adequately described. The aims and the results are not enough clearly presented in terms of potential takeaways and future policy formulation and recommendations. Nevertheless, the title accurately reflects the content.

2.1. Major comments:

The paper needs to go beyond the answer to the question of figuring out to what extent Landscape Architecture can operate, in line with the emergence of the "Global" scale, but also how and who. The second questions refer to grounding visions and intents thus departing them from utopian visions. Territoriality and governance are also important issues that shape the planning and implementation of large-scale intents. What are the relevant levels identified so far before reaching the global scale (covering two continents)?

2.2. Minor comment:

• Reference of works of the mentioned authors listed in lines 52-54 on p. 2 is needed.
• References to the case described on p. 10, lines 341-347 needed
• New authors concepts from the recent 5-7 years are missing as well as 20th-century authors as Doxiadis are missing
• The case with the regional landscape park in Easter Europe can also be considered as a god example grounded on relatively preserved resources
• Recommended additional literature and sources:

https://rm.coe.int/090000168093e66a

https://www.europeangreenbelt.org/european-green-belt/balkan/

https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/id/0fa60291-9c4d-48aa-809d-ab0195e0c7fd/648631.pdf

https://www.europeangreenbelt.org/european-green-belt/

Engels, Barbara, Angela Heidrich, Jürgen Nauber, Uwe Riecken, and Heinrich Schmauder. Perspectives of the Green Belt, Chances for an Ecological Network from the Barents Sea to the Adriatic Sea? Proceedings of the International Conference 15th of July 2003 in Bonn on the Occasion of the 10th Anniversary of the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN). Bonn, Bad Godesberg: BfN, 2004.

Terry, Andrew, Karin Ullrich, and Uwe Riecken. The Green Belt of Europe: From Vision to Reality. Gland: IUCN, 2006. View PDF

C.A. Doxiadis, “The Emerging Great Lakes Megalopolis”, Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 56, No. 4 (April 1968), 2-4/

A. Doxiadis, “Ecumenopolis Tomorrow’ s City” (1968), 5/C.A. Doxiadis, “Ecumenopolis: The coming world-city”, A reader on ekistics (2005)

 

3. Conclusion:

I came away with comments that restrict me from recommending this paper for publication as it stands. Therefore, I recommend that a major revision be warranted.

Author Response

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to submit a revised draft of my manuscript titled Paradigm Shift of Scale in Landscape Architecture to Special Issue "Constructed Natures: Shaping Ecology through Landscape Design" . I appreciate the time and effort that you have dedicated to providing your valuable feedback on my manuscript. I am grateful for your insightful comments on my paper. I have highlighted the changes within the manuscript. Here is a point-by-point response to your comments and concerns.

Point 1: Overview and general impressions:

This theory paper focuses on the paradigm shift of scale in landscape architecture. The topic is original, significant, and with potential interest to readers, especially policymakers and different professionals involved in policy design, delivery, and implementation as well as spatial planning and design professionals.  The research design is not well explained and the methods used are not adequately described. The aims and the results are not enough clearly presented in terms of potential takeaways and future policy formulation and recommendations. Nevertheless, the title accurately reflects the content.

Response 1: The research design and the methods have been implemented between lines 61-81 of the resubmitted manuscript. It is a commentry/theoretical paper which discuss different practical and theoretical studies regarding "Planetary Scale" of design in landscape architecture, taking into the consideration other relevant disciplines like urbanisation and ecology. The aim of this commentary paper is to open further debates on the practical sides of such a Planetary Scale of design. Future potential studies and policy-making recommendations have been discussed further in Section 4. Today, the planetary landscape design is still at the academic level, although the Planetary Urbanisation and Global conservation initiative are further beyond transboundary scales.      

Point 2: Major comments

The paper needs to go beyond the answer to the question of figuring out to what extent Landscape Architecture can operate, in line with the emergence of the "Global" scale, but also how and who. The second questions refer to grounding visions and intents thus departing them from utopian visions. Territoriality and governance are also important issues that shape the planning and implementation of large-scale intents. What are the relevant levels identified so far before reaching the global scale (covering two continents)?

Response 2: For more than a century, the "Planetary Scale" has been widely discussed in Architecture, Urbanisation and Ecology. Nevertheless, Landscape Architecture is a relatively young discipline, and consequently, the concept of scale is not well defined. The commentary draws attention to the timeline of all these fields and highlights litrature reviews and examples of "planetary" initiatives.

Most of the Ecological connectivity projects benefit from the transboundry cooperations, resulting from more than a century of activism. Likewise, Capitalism defined the main trajectory in the urbanisation process, the location of global cities, and Architecture followed the opportunities in this study.

It is necessary to highlight that Landscape Architecture overlaps either with a pure "conservative" approach in hotspots connectivity or "aesthetic" observation of design in urbanisation. However, Landscape Design is not supposed to compensate for the urbanisation footprint, but it should be the driver of the urbanisation process and include ecological advocacy. As mentioned, the commentary goes through different disciplines to highlight the main reasons why Landscape Architecture is still at its initial steps of recognition in being effective. The commentary recommends opening the debates on "planetary-scale" at the academic level to find the right voice at the administartion level (Section4). Today, most territorial administration, governance, and policy-making are widely encouraging sustainable urbanisation and hotspots conservation (section 2,3). To answer the comment of “How and Who”: Landscape Architecture should strengthen its ground through interdisciplinary vision as it has been explained in Sections 2 and 3, to take into account the planetary studies from Ecology and urbanisation.

To answer the comment regarding Territoriality and governance, Landscape Architecture stands beside the Conservative Biodiversity Organisation to be supported in its environmental advocacy mission, and it needs financial support from Capitalism to be effective. Such support from these fields could create a solid ground for territorial and governance in a global scale. 

Point 3: Minor comments

• Reference of works of the mentioned authors listed in lines 52-54 on p. 2 is needed.

Response: The mentioned lines has been deleted and addressed differently within the text to make clear the names of sages with the topics.

• References to the case described on p. 10, lines 341-347 needed

Response: The references have been added.

• New authors concepts from the recent 5-7 years are missing as well as 20th-century authors as Doxiadis are missing

Response: Section 2 and 3 has been extensively edited to include the recent authors in different fields, between lines 765-795.

• The case with the regional landscape park in Easter Europe can also be considered as a god example grounded on relatively preserved resources

Response: European Green Belt and other international hotspots connectivity examples have been implemented, between lines 461- 638 and between lines 995-1006.

• Recommended additional literature and sources:

Response: Recommended additional literature has been widely appreciated and implemented to the text, in different parts of Section 2, and Section 3.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank for your work and revision of the text.