Places and Landscape in a changing places

Abstract

This Places and Landscape in the Changing World paper attempts to “coin” and “translate”

“theory” into “practice.” So that as mankind live on earth may be able to “transform” words into action.
All doings made by man to nature may be “helpful” in building a better place to live. Thus, the
geographic variables may be understood according to they are made. To give pride to those who are
living in their respective places and landscape both rural and urban areas. Attached to the landforms
and water-forms of the land may the variability on the changing identity made into pluralistic way with
full of respect and reverence. As rural inhabitants compete their urban counterpart in terms of their
value-laden places and landscape.

As nature provide sceneries that the rural are blessed may all men seen places and landscape full of life
to the fullest as their urban counterpart mainstreaming development as by-product of man’s
partnership to creation. However, there are also instances that the urban locale can landscape the
needs and wants of an individual that the rural cannot. With that, may this study will help the individual
to “foresee” and “predict” the variability of such places and landscape in the changing modern world.
May the multimedia infrastructure resilient enough to flatten the places and landscape as the WIFI and
PSYFI increases in the road-mapping on the superhigh-link Netizens of the world.

In conclusion, as everybody learn the places and landscape in a changing world may they instill and
inculcate to the G-Alpha; G-Z; G-I and Boomlets generation the real roadmap towards WIFI and PSYFI
places and landscape identity to culturally clone identical to nature despite of being pluralistic. Thus, in
this paper one may be able to see the energy of preservation and standby who we are in the beginning
and continually doing the right thing and doing what is right to the mother-earth as we continually living
a better place for us to live.

Introduction

The course explores the concepts and dynamics of people and activities from various locations,
describing the locations and patterns of human activity, exploring process and patterns with historical
lens, and understanding the relationship of the natural environment to the other aspects of human
behavior which encompasses on the diversity of interconnections of people and places in a globalizing
world as mediated by cultures, politics and historical developments.

To discuss the multiple and a sociologically and politically constructed diverse ways in the society where
places and landscape is formed, reformed, and transformed by space, location, regional, and glocal
(global & local) agendas. As this paper addresses how landscape’s change affects people engagement on
various activities as anchors on the glocal (global & local) agendas may the multi-method approach in
gathering data from the google and eLibrary materials to the primary and secondary sources available
within the local’s may roadmap the places and landscape in the changing world, which function as
anchors on how and why changes interplay between practice and identity in the community.

Thus, the Changing landscapes, Places, Identity, change, and practices matters a lot in the Places,
Landscape in a Changing World. As the geographic factors interplay in the surrounding environment of
man, the challenging “mantra” of man’s life creates cultural diversity. The residential, commercial,
agricultural and industrial classification of the land matters in the changing landscape identity. These
variables may be able to give pride to those who are living in the rural and urban areas as they
mainstream their everyday living. Attached to the landforms and water-forms of the land, it gives the
variability on the changing identity into pluralistic way where rural may compete their urban
counterpart partners in terms of their value-laden. Nature provide sceneries that the rural can depict
while urban locale cannot. However, there are variables that cannot be done visa-versa. With that, may
this study will help the individual to “foresee” and “predict” the variability of such places in the changing
landscape in the modern world while everybody is resilient in the nature’s activity. Below are the details
on the theory to be translated into practice.

Changing landscapes

Places and Landscape in a Changing World cannot be static as it represents the dynamic interaction
between cultural and natural processes (Buchanan, 2019). The reason for that matter because man
cannot be separated himself/herself by culture. As culture shape and reshape man’s total personality.
Landscape has always been in constant flux; yet, historically; landscape change was local, gradual, and
nested within existing landscape structures within. Meaning, where there are transformation,
convergence, divergence and subduction on the landforms may affect the living condition of the
inhabitants. By contrast, contemporary landscape changes are often seen as threatening, characterized
as abrupt, unpredictable, and highly dynamic transformations with little relation to locality (Raine, et al
2015; Fraser, 2018). E.g. the adaptation of the multimedia infrastructure in the locals. Such
transformations are driven by interrelated factors including globalization (offshoring, outsourcing,
insourcing, informing, supply chaining, intellectual migration), population growth (natality, morbidity,
mortality, mobility), urbanization (growth of socio-political factors), level of accessibility (living
condition), calamitous events (earthquake and eruption of volcanos), economic factors (increases of
price commodities, supply and demands), technological development (multimedia infrastructure), as
well as changing cultural values (tradition & beliefs system) (Eiter & Potthoff, 2016; Plieninger et al.,
2016).

The publication of the Butler, et al assessment of 2018, documenting the state of landscape changes
across the continent, acted as a “wake-up” call for politicians and planners for social legislation
throughout the continent (Coulon, et al 2015). The character of the contemporary landscape change
impacts on how individuals perceive and value their surrounding-environment, influencing their ability
to maintain and sustain connections with their everyday surroundings and undertakings. Landscape is
constantly contested and reworked in relation to individual experiences, social understanding, and
political circumstances. Even if the physical does not change, how individuals and communities perceive
the landscape will change over time, through altered cultural appreciation. E.g. how an increasingly
urban society appreciates an agrarian landscape (Cote, 2017). Meaning does not meet the need and
wants of the locale.

Transformation of the landscape influences how individuals engage with their surrounding environment,
influencing social interactions in the landscape (Cosgrove, et al 2018). Meaning, when an individual
abode is in the shoreline the means of livelihood is fishing, in farm is farming. So, it’s not logical to raise
livestock in the urban landscape. For the school curriculum landscape must “fit and merit” the needs of
the locale and business, industry and company counterpart partners to where the school is established.
Offer only the curriculum of “fishing” and “maritime” if the needed “common ground” to maintain and
sustain the sea and the facilities are provided.

Places, Landscape Identity

Through the interactions with others, we develop and establish identity creating constant flux between
‘us’ and ‘the others’ as we are confronted with how ‘others’ see us. However, relationships and
connections to others are always geographically located, as Stark (2018) says that,‘to be human is to
have and know your place’. The relations we develop with our surrounding-environment create and
establish belonging, meaning, and security. Consequently, stronger bonds result in more sustainable
landscapes, as individuals and groups build ownership of the landscape. Meaning, it’s the environment
who give the identity of an individual humanity.

People–environment connections are increasingly considered important within social, political and
planning spheres. In academic studies, two distinct forms of relationships to place dominate: ‘place
identification’ (identity of place) and ‘place-identity’ (identify with place) (Frzier, 2017; Cayuela, et al
2017, Consentino, et al 2016). The second form, ‘place-identity’, represents the relationship
individualshave ‘with’ place (Cheptou, et al 2017; Clauzel, et al 2015; Cornelius, et al 2017; Fairclough, et
al 2018). Cayuela, et al (2016) propose that ‘place-identity’ consists of dimensions of self, developed in
relation to the physical surrounding environment through patterns of beliefs, preferences, feelings,
values, and aspirations. ‘Place-identity’ becomes one of the elements underwriting personal identity
(Stark, 2018), allowing actions to be made understandable, preferences to be articulated, and providing
space for questioning alterations to our environment. Place-identity does not just happen; it requires
work, repeated acts which establish relations between people and place (Egoz, et al 2018).

The concept ‘landscape identity’ builds on both “place identity” RRLS (Review of the Related Literature
and Studies) and landscape studies, developed through both theoretical exploration and practical
development (Butler, et al, 2018). Within landscape studies, landscape identity has traditionally been
treated as the visual and physical character of the landscape (Olwig, 2016; Theroux, 2016), exemplified
in practice through Landscape Characterization, classification, categorization and attributes (Fairclough,
et al 2018). Recognized as a visual and physical entity means that landscape identity relates to identity
‘of’ landscape, recognizing which characteristics, classification, categorization and attributes make one
area similar or dissimilar from another (Frazier, 2017). Thus, this would influence “self-identity.” Later,
becomes places, landscape identity.

Recently, several studies have attempted to bridge the dichotomy between landscape character and
landscape identity as an existential development (e.g. Loupa, et al 2016; Dossche, et al 2016; Butler et
al. 2018). A significant step in the landscape identity concept comes from the work of Theroux (2016),
defining landscape identity as ‘. . .the unique psycho-sociological perception of a place defined in a
spatial– cultural space’. Stobbelaar and Pedroli’s definition builds on how individuals and groups
understand a landscape as both a physical entity and a vessel for existential meaning. E.g. city or urban
inhabitants are assumed that they are technologically literate and high on socio-economic status of
living.
Landscape identity and change

This happens due to the personal knowledge, freedom, voluntariness and intent of an individual

person to exercise choice. May this choice bring an individual for good. Alterations to the landscape
affect how people see themselves. If changes are negative or nondemocratic, they undermine the
relationships individuals and communities have to their surrounding environment (Egoz, et al 2018).
Changes to the landscape’s physical may result in continued connection becoming untenable or only
possible to maintain through increased effort, as the practice no longer fit the landscape (Butler et al.,
2018).

Loupa Ramos et al. (2016) speculate on there being a ‘tipping point’ to landscape identity where through
change new identity forms. Such change has the potential to create ‘landscape induced alienation’ or
Solastalgia, homesickness without leaving home (Olwig, 2016). Recognizing the psychological impact can
help explain why landscape change arouses resistance. Yet, identity can also be constructed through
change (Butler et al., 2018; Dossche et al., 2016; Loupa Ramos et al., 2016), with such change having a
positive effect if it provides increased self-esteem. Meaning preferences counts very much in the
landscape identity and change. If it’s not favorable to an individual mobility is always an option for
identity and change.

Practicing landscape identity

Action and engagement help develop landscape identity (Llewellyn, Rohse, Bere, Lewis, & Fyfe, 2017),
developing new understandings and discourses in and of the landscape (Butler et al., 2018). An
interrelation develops between landscape change, the practices which are undertaken, and the
legitimation of these practices like the intermarriages, employment, schooling and settlement (Butler et
al., 2018; Dossche et al., 2016; Llewellyn et al., 2017). In this issue, Butler et al. contribute with a study
revealinghow individual’s connection to the landscape is strengthened through specific activities and
question the impact that practices have on identity. Their study identifies foraging in the Swedish forest
as a strengthener of identity; a tradition which defined connection to the landscape but which has been
severed after a catastrophic landscape change.

The ‘content’ of the landscape is pivotal for informing spheres of activities and spheres of perceptions,
influencing relations to the landscape and practices recognized by communities. Such as developing the
sceneries attraction in Southeast Asia to be the “tourist attraction” as tourism spot. They explore the
action and interaction between people and their surrounding environment; the identification of the
‘content’ of identity becomes pivotal and converging venue for a practice common to all.

To practice landscape identity is made habitual act by an individual person directed to “communal”
action by the community. The establishment of an institution such as “hospital,” “school,” “churches,”
“Municipal Hall,” “Capitol,” “Theatre arts,” “Sports Arena,” “cemetery and etc practices landscape
identity common to the area on such action, like “fiesta,” “sports game,” “fellowship,” “paying of
government obligations and etc. which made peoples action directed towards the communal “norms.”
Thus, such practice established landscape identity.
Impact of Places and Landscape in the Changing World

Contemporary landscape identities are situated in a world characterized by mobility where

identities undergo a perpetual process of ‘rewriting.’ The awareness of being part of global flows and
systems undermines local place identity (Cayuela, et al 2019). Landscape change makes the local
obsolete when local products and practices no longer fit the global systems driving such change
(Dossche et al., 2016; Llewellyn et al., 2017). Social identities including landscapes identity are a
recognition of the ‘other’. Consequently, outsider impact on landscape identity through development of
a place’s narrative, not necessarily related to the landscape as perceived by inhabitants. Local
communities and those with a connection to a place who are essential for ensuring sustainability of
these landscapes and associated identities (e.g. school, churches, hospital and etc). However, in spite
and also as a response to glocal drivers, local identities and landscape distinctiveness become more
significant as they provide a sense of safety and security like food, clothing and shelter (Loupa, et al
2016). As such, location-based identities have to be seen as solid and fixed in order to provide anchors
where collective practices, traditions, and shared material can form. Therefore, culture strongly
landscape by the material and immaterial practices made by the inhabitants of the community.

The identity of the individuals draws on depends to the issue being addressed as individuals and groups
draw on identity from various sources; places of residency, social standing, ethnicity, practices, etc.
Consequently, as individuals, we position ourselves on many axes at the same time depending on the
issue at hand like the employment (Llewellyn, 2017). Multiple identities entail power structures, with
different value holders for recognition, with glocal community values taking priority over glocal agendas
and informing landscape identity (Mels, 2014; Olwig, 2016). This raises a need to question the drivers or
actors in order to understand what instigates change in identity (Egoz, et al 2018).

Although landscape identity is generally perceived as having positive connotations, joining people
together and developing shared values (Eiter, 2016), it also constructs exclusion through the distinction
of ‘I’, ‘We’ and ‘the Other’ (Dossche, et al 2016; Buttler, 2018). Identity, including landscape identity,
becomes utilized as a means for classification, categorization and attributes of an objectifying scientific
tool, masking the conflicts and ignoring the question of who belongs, who has a right to engage in
landscape activities, legitimizing their identity in their surrounding environment (Olwig, 2016).

Lastly, the Impact of Places and Landscape in the Changing World conventionally impacted to the visible
features on the landforms (lithosphere), and how they integrate with man-made features. A landscape
includes the geographical factors that are defined such as mountains, hills, valleys, plateau, canyons,
slopes, ridges, gorges, plains, peninsula, and etc. The water bodies (hydrosphere) such as brooks, spring,
streams, rivers, lakes, ponds, swamps, marshy, geyser, aquifer, straits, bay, lagoon, the sea, ocean and
etc. The living elements of land cover including both lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere to form
life (biosphere) on the indigenous vegetation, the fishes and other forms of an animals which human
elements including different forms of land use such as: residential, agricultural, commercial and
industrial. The buildings, and structures, and transitory elements such as lighting and weather conditions
that landscape the living condition of mankind. Combining both the atmosphere, lithosphere,
hydrosphere form part of the entire places and landscape on biosphere of human presence. These
reflect a living synthesis of people, places, events, location, space and regions that is vital to glocal
identity.
The character, categorization and attributes of places and landscape helps define the self-image
(identity) of the people who inhabited and a sense of place (identity of the place) that differentiates
people, places, events, location, space and regions from other regions. It is the dynamic personality to
people's lives. Landscape can be as varied as located in the rural, urban and metropolitan area. The
Earth has a vast range of landscapes, including the seven continents. The north and south polar regions,
the torrid (cancer at the north and Capricorn at the south) zone, the temperate zone (spring, summer,
autumn and winter at the north and the south) vast arid desert at Sahara (hottest) and Antarctic
(coldest) of which four types of deserts landscape the surface of the earth are: subtropical deserts are
hot and dry year-round; coastal deserts have cool winters and warm summers; cold winter deserts have
long, dry summers and low rainfall in the winter; the polar deserts are cold for the yearround. Forest,
coastal, islands and water densely landscapes the home of mankind. The activity of modifying the visible
features of an area of land is referred to as landscaping.

The wild fire burn the thick forest in Australia, Amason and other continents around the world creates
new landscape on the new settlement of animals included man and the vegetation. The eruption of
volcanos, earthquake, avalanche, flood, tsunami and other natural catastrophe creates new places and
landscape in the changing world.

Conclusions

Factors affecting Places, Landscape in the Changing World are complex and interrelated. The reasons for
this are the sources of places and landscape that effects change connections. This would mean that, “it
has an individual issue on their personal vision and mission. Yet, the concepts of both places and
landscape ability to frame complexity and add analytical depth to issues can be categorically understood
by looking the perspective on political, economic, social, cultural and even to the extent on their
educational upbringing.

As becomes evident from this study, present landscape identity has not developed theoretically.
However, as the papers reveal, places and landscape in the changing world has great potential as an
analytical tool for addressing multiple connections to the places and landscape and how change
impacted on such changing world. Helping these place and landscape who loses and wins landscapes
change. It provides a frame for questioning who defines the places and landscape in the changing
world? Who has a right to define the places and landscape? How can change develop new world? What
happens when the population changes? And what conflicts of identity can we expect to encounter
through landscape change?

Thus, other field from the lens of social studies may be able to coined and translate this science into a
body of knowledge. So, for now, the changing world is at hand our mother earth needs a respectable
and committed companion on “Cora personales.”