Renewable Energies Inbetween Landscape and Landmark: Case Studies

Elisabetta Ginelli, DABC Politecnico di Milano, Italy Alessandra Bianchi, DABC Politecnico di Milano, Italy

Gianluca Pozzi, DABC Politecnico di Milano, Italy

The Asian Conference on Sustainability, Energy & the Environment 2015 Official Conference Proceedings

Keywords: energy landscape and landmark, renewable energy sources, eco-efficiency, multi-functionality, multi-objective, multidimensional analysis, requalification.

iafor The International Academic Forum

www.iafor.org

Introduction When do renewable energies become architecture and landscape? When can they be considered a plus for a landscape? These are the key questions of the study carried out by the local unit of the Politecnico di Milano as part of the Program of National Interest (PRIN) financed by the Ministry of Education, University and Research1. After the identification of an organized information system, several case studies were analysed and this led to a first classification of the energy systems, based on the size, source, power, ... it was then studied a method that could allow to define which system, more than others, could be positive and appropriate for a given territory. Many are, in fact, the techniques for the analysis and management of the impact that changes can have on a man-made system: multidimensional investigations, multi-criteria2 , multivariate analysis 3 , complex assessments borrowed from landscape ecology4. All these techniques, however, seem to assume that the landscape is an unmodifiable good to be preserved and that any human action, especially related to energy systems, should be related to the production of the minimum possible impact. The starting point here wants to be different, as different is the concept of landscape and different is the idea of Energy Systems (ES), considered not as just plants, but as indivisible union of the plant with its support and its functions and therefore with the place in which it is located. In this sense, the ES has all the features to be considered a landmark, as marker of land and reference point. (Golledge 1987). The concept of landscape From the European Landscape Convention, it is necessary to introduce an extensive and dynamic concept of landscape. It can also be said that the need to define landscape should be strongly criticized and that the landscape should instead be read as what by nature can never be a fixed and always considerable element, but is instead subject, as all the elements that are part of a pattern to all the possible mutations, both with creative and destructive effects (Zagari 2006). Landscape is not to be considered as a notion, but as a faithful expression of existence, a revealed truth itself, not a geographical theory or aesthetic value (Dardel 1986). It is clear and universally accepted that all5 the landscapes are defined by man: from the places that belong to them, human beings modify the existing determining landscapes, which are therefore a not only aesthetic situation (figurative and strongly

                                                                                                                         1 The National research project “La difesa del paesaggio tra conservazione e trasformazione. Economia e bellezza per uno sviluppo sostenibile” (Coordinatore Nazionale prof. Carlo Truppi), involves 7 research local units (Università degli Studi di CATANIA, Università degli Studi NAPOLI FEDERICO II, POLITECNICO DI MILANO, II UNIVERSITÁ DI NAPOLI, Universitá degli Studi di GENOVA, Università degli Studi di PALERMO, Università telematica UNINETTUNO). Prof. Elisabetta Ginelli is the responsible of Milan local unit “Gestione del rapporto tra sistemi energetici e paesaggi”. 2 Cf. Nijkamp 2008, Jorgensen 2008, Theodor 2013. 3 Cf. Paolillo 2013, Harris 2014. 4 Nadai and Van der Horst, 2010; Stremke, 2010; Van der Horst and Vermeylen, 2011; Blaschke et al. 2012; Pasqualetti, 2012; Howard et a. 2013. 5 Even in extreme places, considered natural, is possible to trace human actions: even in Antarctica or on Everest can be found inorganic wastes and residual gases produced by human actions.

connected to appearance) but they are primarily an ethical situation, as human actions that create landscape are actions directed and designed towards an aim from nature in its cosmic expression man has shaped the landscape forms, both those observed, beyond his control, both those freely created. Theoria6 has always transferred an anthropic essence on natural environment. Landscape is therefore, also, "result of man’s activity on nature" (Venturi Ferriolo 2002, p.11). In these terms, therefore, it is to reject that the notion of landscape was born in romanticism as aesthetic vision of nature. It is a cross-referring topic, even if considered with different focuses, in all eras of human activities. For the ancients it represented the overall scope of human life. In a specific society, interest and taste for landscape painting rise and fall in close association with the interests and tastes that society manifests with a more or less defined imprinting in the natural landscape. From the social point of view and perception of the landscape, it is interesting to consider the concept of the "law of inertia of the landscape" (Sereni 1961): the landscape, once fixed in determined shapes, tends to perpetuate them, even when technical, productive and social relations that have influenced its origin are not there anymore, until new and more decisive development of these relationships don’t come over. One of the few definitions that can certainly be attributed to landscape is that it is an abstraction of man caught between ethics and aesthetics: man creates a landscape (one of many that can be created) contemplating (aesthetic) a portion of that reality in which it is immersed, to which it belongs and in which it operates (ethics) in absolute freedom. In these terms, therefore, we can consider landscape as a "contemplation horizon, product of freedom, a result of art, the effect of action of men" (Venturi Ferriolo 2002, p.16), or "nature changed by man throughout history "(Venturi Ferriolo 2002 p.143). It can therefore be said that man creates landscape with a dual connotation: on one hand, he shapes the places in which he lives according to the spirit of their time and on the other, he gives the places he observes an aesthetic imprint that distorts and unifies at the same time the places themselves. When it comes to energy landscapes, this is even more undeniable. The ES between energy landscape and energy landmark People have always changed and shaped the places they lived in for energy purposes: dug the earth to extract coal and oil, cut trees to produce heat, changed the course of rivers by harnessing the power of water to produce kinetic energy, built immense waterways (Roman aqueducts and others) to quench and entertain entire cities, has built windmills to wrest land from the sea. The transformation of resources into energy is therefore an aspect of the landscape that can be traced through the centuries of history and comes up to the present days, validating the adjective of "energy" landscape.                                                                                                                          6 Theoria is the contemplation of the divine in the world, but in the direction of Greek ethos as all active life and contemplation, where the sacred and the landscape found an immanent undisputed unity. Cf. Meschiari 2008.

Usually "energy landscape" is recognized by the scientific community as the shape it can take a molecular entity or the spatial interrelation of molecules and molecular forces. Here, instead, we give the term "energy landscape" the same dignity of the term landscape in a broad sense, recognizing the strategic role of the ES in modelling and defining landscape, both a profoundly anthropic landscape (cities) or a para-natural landscape. Within the energy landscape are then identified some elements that stand out compared to others because they are dimensionally larger or more salient or more meaningful: these landmarks are here considered in perception and functional terms (Mainardi 1994). Perceptual because they depend on the relationship they have with the subject-observer and on the cognitive value that is attributed to them; functional as they are important for the subject who must carry out certain actions in that given context (Axia 1986).

Figure 1: Bilbao Guggenheim Museum (source: www.guggenheim-bilbao.es) A famous example of a building that has become iconically landmark of a city is the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, which has assumed the same value of the Eiffel Tower in Paris: the building is both a symbol, a reference point for moving within the city. If the Eiffel Tower wanted to be a sign of the provisional value of the French technique for a temporary7 event, the Guggenheim was consciously wanted to give the opportunity to know the Capital of the Basque Country in the world, for an economic and cultural purpose. If, however, a Roman aqueduct is seen as an integral part of the landscape and is reasonably protected as a World Heritage Site, different is the perception of the new energy production systems of the recent years. But what is the difference between a hydroelectric plant built in the early '900 and any of todays hydropower plants that get continuous attacks because they change irreparably the land we live in? In the end

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!7 Built for the Universal Exhibition of 1889, it was supposed to be demolished the following year.

even the sluices designed by Leonardo da Vinci on the Adda River and on the Navigli canals in Italy have heavily modified the landscape, but they are today protected and a museum was opened (Eco-museum Leonardo da Vinci). With this point of view, the established systems of analysis of the impacts of energy systems, borrowed from environmental assessment regulations, are difficult to apply. This paper aim is to try to identify a methodological analysis that can help unravel the apparent conflict between energy systems and landscapes. Following the idea of landscape as described above, the ES can be considered as landscape when their number and their distribution8, their historical sedimentation9, their perception addiction10 makes them recognized as part of the landscape, where nothing particularly relevant stands out among the rest. However, if an ES is able to emerge in the surrounding landscape, and to leave a substantial and recognizable mark that influences the entire context and that orients the perception and the movements of men, then we are facing an energy landmark. This is not necessarily positive: sometimes the ES have positive effects on their area of influence, sometimes negative. The analysis methodology will try to highlight the indicators and the factors that can help generate consistent and conscious choices on the overall judgment of an ES, from certain categories that consider the relationship between ES11 and the landscape in which it is placed. These categories have been identified in: conservative static, energocratic and refounding, as shown in the following table.

                                                                                                                         8 Such as the transport of electricity pylons. 9 The hydroelectric power plants of the early '900. 10 TV antennas on the roofs of houses. 11 Both as landscape and as landmark.

Table 1. The relationship energy/landscape

This initial categorization appears certainly to consider all the ES, but it can, maybe, be further articulated to outline the useful categories for the definition of design and landscape programming guidelines. For this reason it was necessary to introduce a method of analysis for the definition of categories that can provide more detailed and advanced interpretation keys.

Analysis methodology for energy systems and landscapes The method adopted for the analysis of the ES can be summarized as follows: step 1) structuring of the information apparatus for the analysis of the energy system step 2) identification of methodological principles, objectives and requirement categories: the eco-sustainable approach. step 3) functional parameters for a "perceptual" classification step 4) interpretation method step 5) results Step 1 Structuring the information system for the analysis of the energy system and first results The method has provided a definition of the parameters that could allow the collection, the accurate selection and, subsequently, the classification of case studies in parallel with investigations on the currently used methods in the planning and evaluation of the impacts of infrastructure in a determined area. More than 150 case studies were selected and ranked according to the energy source, the size, geographic field and scale, to cover an extremely broad scenario including: significant case studies acknowledged as positive, the less known and significant cases and the cases considered negative for their impacts on the surroundings. The following are the analysis parameters for the case studies:

Table 2. Analysis parameters for the selection of case studies12

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!12 Each plant system can have various sizes, which are not related to the comparison between the different systems, but related to individual systems taken into account.

This series of parameters allowed to structure an information system able to place any case study within its reference scenario, creating an information sheet structured in four parts: • heading information: provide the specific case study position within the scenario of

reference cases and detect the consistency and the specific nature of the case; • definition of case study: in addition to the energy source data, are here provided

technical / physical data, the typology of intervention, production data, the degree of reversibility, the players involved, the procedures and the realization process, the year of implementation;

• geographical area: Identifies the context in which the energy system is placed,

through climatic, energetic, landscape and geography parameters; • energy system: it expresses precisely the specific characteristics of the analyzed and

contextualized system. The result is providing information on the ES according to the relationship between area, context / building in which it is placed, as well as information techno-typological detailed data. Step 2 Identification of methodological principles, objectives and requirement categories: the eco-sustainable approach. Eco-efficiency is the main concept for this research and is the major goal. It’s considered here as the way in which energy resources are managed to meet human needs (OECD 2001), in a logic of greater welfare with a reduced use of nature through performance, better effectiveness and in relation to the lower energy requirements postulated by technological innovation. Eco-efficiency, following whose definition are interpreted the four dimensions of sustainability (environmental, economic, social, institutional), adds an additional category, the "physical" dimension, recreating a pentagon that starting from the work of Nijkamp (Nijkamp 2008) or Gülümser (Gülümser 2009) is set up in five inalienable requirement classes13 (Tab. 1) related to the prevailing interpretive approaches borrowed from the five dimensions of sustainability: Eco-compatibility, multifunctionality, profitability, utility, cultural consensus, social acceptability and institutional partecipability.

                                                                                                                         13 Cf. Project no.217213, Project acronym: SMILE, Project title: Synergies in Multi-scale Inter-Linkages of Ecosocial systems. Socioeconomic Sciences and Humanities (SSH). Collaborative Project FP7-SSH-2007-1. Stakeholder-based PENTAGON models. Deliverable 19, WP 5. Project coordinator: Jarmo Vehmas.

Tab. 3. Eco-efficiency dimensions

These dimensions, that are the equivalent of macro-categories of analysis, allow a first interpretive reading of the analyzed interventions. They also allow the selection of some paradigmatic case studies that indicate an energy system characterized by an ability to repay the value of the different considered dimensions and in which results clear a number of objectives. The degree of eco-efficiency of each case was examined in the different components of the overall performance, elaborating detailed swot analysis for each of the five dimensions and a synthesis for a final comparison. The comparison of the analysis for the various dimensions provides a comprehensive and multidisciplinary description of the ES and is useful as a starting point for a systematic complex analysis, as a basis for the development of useful tools and behavioral patterns for the development of policies / projects (Ginelli and Daglio 2014). The most significant cases that have emerged from this step of the analysis are discussed and analyzed from other points of view in the third phase. Step 3 Functional parameters for a "perceptual" classification The analysis of case studies, both as general categories of PS, and as ES of significant and specific case studies, disclosed common denominators that can highlight those cases that, more than others, were welcomed favorably by stakeholders. During this step recurring events emerged. They have been synthesized and summarized in the following table in general categories and sub-categories. Please note that the examples are not exhaustive of the class but were considered significant to explain, through images, the illustrated concept.

Tab. 4. Parameters for a "perceptual" classification of case studies14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

                                                                                                                         14 Image source: www.patrimonioculturale.enea.it 15 Image source: www.mimoa.eu 16 Image source: www.moradavaga.com 17 Image source: www.moradavaga.com 18 Image source: www.jourda-architectes.com 19 Image source: www.smartcityitalia.net 20 Image source: www.fbm.it 21 Coverage of the Library of the School of Architecture at the Politecnico di Milano. Photo of the author (© G. Pozzi). 22 Image source: www.a2a.it 23 Image source: www.rinnovabili.it 24 Image source: www.buffalo.edu 25 Image source: www.autobrennero.it 26 Image source: www.greenrail.it 27 Image source: www.rinnovabili.it 28 Image source: www.a2a.it 29 Image source: www.skyscraperpage.com 30 Image source: www.coopcomunitamelpignano.it 31 Image source: www.a2a.it 32 Image source: www.a2a.it 33 Photo of the author (© G. Pozzi). 34 Image source: www.newsenergia.com 35 Armadillo system installed in Monza IT, Photo of the author (©G. Pozzi). 36 Image source: www.theguardian.com 37 Image source: www.theguardian.com

The table above clarifies some parameters that can be used in the classification of ES from a point of view of their perception. The different exposed general categories are commented as follows: Visibility Not necessarily an invisible ES is well accepted: assigning resources for an invisible object could be a not appreciated choice if the purpose of the intervention is to

promote renewable energy or publicize the actions of the stakeholders or whether the intervention wants to be iconic and easily recognizable. Time (age) Since landscape has a great inertia38, the ES that are part of the landscape from a long time are perceived as an integral part of the landscape itself. Contrariwise what is introduced quickly or simultaneously is perceived by the observer as extraneous and negative. Each transformation should therefore be guided slowly and introduced gradually (with the appropriate involvement and participation of the population). Time (duration) = transportability This category is closely linked to the concept of transportability. If we consider time as duration it results clear that a temporary intervention that responds to targeted needs for short periods is likely to be welcomed in any case better than long-lasting or permanent interventions. Conversely, temporary interventions often have much higher economic and management costs in proportion than long-term interventions that make them less attractive. Level of anthropogenic stratification This category tries to clarify the relationship between the ES and the place/support in which it is placed. The introduction of an ES from scratch is, especially in a fragile and stratified area, almost always the most critical choice. The ES can and should be an opportunity to regenerate an area, a neighborhood, a building, facing therefore the proposed project not only as a location for a new facility but as an opportunity to insert an object that creates profitable relationships within that area. Manufacturability (size) The size determines, for most of the energy systems, the problems and the potentials linked to the size of the ES (in terms of physical size and power): for each size there is an establishment of bonds and relationships with the landscape that are different and sometimes in conflict, so that the variation of size can vary the perception and the quality of the intervention. The size of an ES is a key element in the evaluation of its impact: not always the optimal size on a purely engineering point of view is the best for the area in which it is placed. The tendency nowadays goes towards small sizes, linked in a network, able to gather more support and reduce the possible negative effects connected with energy concentration. Usability The ES are not only technical systems: they are necessarily objects that can offer other benefits. They can provide shade, shelter from the rain, protect from falls or noise, or may form the floors to walk on.

                                                                                                                         38 In physics object with a great mass effort to change their status (from stillness to motion and vice versa); in the same way landscape that remains in stasis for a long time struggles to accept changes.

Physical proximity The NIMBY phenomena are often the main obstacle to the new ES: everyone is ready to support the needs of modern and useful plants, but if you put them far from their home or from their neighborhood is better. Decisional proximity Think global, act local: the acceptance of an ES is subject to the knowledge of the changes that it implies, in a positive or negative direction (what can I give up to get more ...) by the population involved in decision-making. Appearance The architectural design of the first hydroelectric power stations were entrusted to Italian great architects (Piero Portaluppi and Gio Ponti among all). After that, unfortunately, the power stations have abandoned the need to give the architectural object a special care, considering only plant and engineering needs. In recent years there has been a return to the care of the ES: the redevelopment of a plant considers today also the rehabilitation of the building envelope, giving the appearance of the plant a key role of interface with the landscape. It is also true, however, that these operations are sometimes only of green-washing, aimed mostly to direct more attention to the "body" that the content of an ES. Target Every ES has itself 'the opportunity to pursue multiple objectives: the basis is necessarily the economics and energy aspects along with regulatory compliance. Some interventions may have a not sustainable energy or economic efficiency, instead they are born with the purpose, not always explicit, to be interventions in some way didactic, in which the expected results are not directly economic or energy oriented. Functionality A PS is usually only monofunctional. An ES must be multi-functional: it must be able to bring to itself or generate, directly or indirectly, synergies and secondary functions that justify the presence, investment and costs, and that will have returns in terms of global surplus value, not only directly for the investor, but also for all the citizens. Step 4 The interpretation method The Lynch analysis (Lynch 1969) is still useful and contemporary. Born to define the cities’ categories of interpretation, it resulted useful for an ES analysis. In fact, it provides keys to understand the relationship the ES have with their environment. From the various parameters that emerged in the previous stage, it is easy to deduce the categories and sub-categories that reflect the work of Lynch and that are are inspired by his expectations and impressions.

We here report as an example two categories: margin and series. These two categories suggest why power lines (that can be considered as a series because separate objects and distant - the cables are invisible) are considered having less impact than wind turbines. These are often placed on a ridge, side by side, marking a border or a margin, and they cut a landscape and fragment the continuity of perception, making them usually unpopular and not accepted. Table 5: Classification of the perception image of the ES in landscapes. Interpretations, definitions and related study cases.

Find below, some significant case studies relative to the definition of the image they are related to, divided according to the interpretations described above, in the awareness of a biased partiality and incompleteness.

Conclusions Step 5 Results The classifications proposed can be further developed and enhanced by a final categorization that is of a wider range compared to what has been proposed. To this categorization belong ES that establish a relationship with the landscape identity: they are born with the will to be iconic and "special". They can be single design objects, thus connoting strongly a point in the landscape (landmark). Or they can be a series of objects, coordinated or repeated, though always with a strong formal characterization and, sometimes, unquestionably artistic, in which the study of the shape is not functional to the purpose of energy but a true art installation (landart). Or they can be common objects, repeated in space and/or stratified over the years, but that undeniably mark the landscape and its use (landscape). The table below attempts to illustrate some case studies in these categories reading across the three categories of relationship with the landscape (landscape, landmark and landart).

Table 6: Landscape – landmark – landart. Systemic reading of peculiar cases39.

                                                                                                                         39 Image source: www.flickrhivemind.net

The study of the proposed method is not meant to be objective or aseptic: each category can be a meta-planning orientation for the ES. It can guide the choices also during the ES planning phase, pointing out the influence margins in addition to the expected performance. The identified categories can guide stakeholders for their planning choices and can help resolve the conflicts that arise when an innovation is proposed in the field of energy conversion and production.

References Axia, G., Baroni, M. R., & Mainard-Peron, E. (1986). Children’s and adults’ memory for places. Elsevier: Advance in Environment, Behavior, and Design. Blaschke, T., Biberacher, M., Gadocha, S., Schardinger, I. (2013), Energy landscapes: Meeting energy demands and human aspirations, Biomass and Bioenergy, Elsevier, 55, 3-16. Dardel, É., Buttimer A., Copeta C., (1986). L'uomo e la terra: natura della realta geografica, a cura di Clara Copeta. Milano: Unicopli. DeWall, R. M., Stremke, S. (2014). Energy Transition: Missed opportunities and emerging challenges for landscape planning ad designing, Sustainability 2014, 6, 4386-4415; doi: 10.3390/su6074386. Ginelli, E. Daglio, L. (2014). Energyscapes: Developing a Multiscalar Systemic Approach to Assess the Environmental, Social and Economic Impact of Renewable Energy Systems on Landscape, in: Proceedings of the 2nd ICAUD International Conference in Architecture and Urban Design Epoka University, Tirana, Albania, 08-10 May 2014, pp. 152/1-152/8. Ginelli, E., Daglio, L. (2014). Relationship between energy systems and landscape. Guidelines and tools for design and management, TECHNE (ISSN: 2239-0243) Vol 8. Ginelli, E., Daglio, L. (2015). A multidimensional analysis to manage the relation between energy and landscape. Paper accettato per il convegno: The Fifteenth International Conference on Civil, Structural and Environmental Engineering Computing, Prague 1-4 September 2015 (http://civilcomp.com/conf/conf2015/cc2015.htm). Golledge, R. G., Stimson, R. (1987). Analytical Behavioural Geography. London: Croom Helm. Gülümser, A.A. (2009). Rural Areas as Promising Hot Spots: Sustainable Rural Development Scenarios. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Istanbul Technical University. Harris, L. R., Watts, M. E., Nell. E., et alii (2014). Using multivariate statistics to explore trade-offs among spatial planning scenarios. Journal of Applied Ecology 2014, 51, 1504–1514. Howard, D. C., et al. (2013), Energyscapes: Linking the energy system and ecosystem services in real landscapes, Biomass and Bioenergy, Elsevier, 55, 17-26. Jorgensen, S.E., Costanza, R., XU, F.L. (2008). Handbook of Ecological Indicators for Assessmen of Ecosystem Health. Boca Raton, FL CRC Press. Lynch, K. (1960). The Image of the City. Cambridge MA: MIT Press Mainardi Peron, E., Falchero, S. (1994). Ambiente e conoscenza. Aspetti cognitivi della psicologia ambientale. Roma: Carocci.

Meschiari, M. (2008). Sistemi selvaggi, antropologia del paesaggio scritto. Palermo: Sellerio. Nadaï, A., Van der Horst, D. (2010), ‘Introduction: Landscapes of Energies’, Landscape Research, Elsevier, 35 (2), 143-55. Nijkamp, P. (2008). XXQ factors for sustainable urban development: a system economics view, Romanian Journal of Regional Science, 2 (1), 1-34. OECD (2001), Working Party on National Environmental Policy. The Firm, The Environment, and Public Policy, available at: http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments. Paolillo, P.L., Rossati, M., Rudini, M. A. (2013). Multivariate Applications in the Evaluation of the Discipline of Agriculture: Extra-Urban Spaces and the Resistivity Index. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Pasqualetti, M. J. (2011). Social barriers to renewable energy landscapes, in Geographical review 101 (2): pp. 201-223. NY: American Geographical Society of New York. Ritter, J. (1994). Paesaggio, uomo e natura nell’età moderna, a cura di Venturi Ferriolo, M. Milano: Guerini e Associati. Rosario, A. (1976). Paesaggio-Ambiente-Territorio. Un tentativo di precisazione concettuale, in Bollettino del Centro Internazionale di Studi di Architettura Andrea Palladio, XVIII, pp. 45-48. Rosario, A. (1994). Il paesaggio e l’estetica. Palermo: Novecento. Sereni, E. (1961). Storia del paesaggio agrario italiano. Bari: Editori Laterza. Simmel, G. (1985). Filosofia del paesaggio (1912-13), in Il volto e il ritratto. Saggi sull’arte. Bologna: Il Mulino. Stremke, S., Van den Dobbelsteen, A. (2013). Sustainable Energy Landscape. NY: CRC press. Theodor, J., Stewart, S., French, J. R. (2013). Integrating multicriteria decision analysis and scenario planning. Elsevier, Omega. Van der Horst, D., Vermeylen, S. (2011), Local rights to landscape in the global moral economy of carbon, Landscape Research, Elsevier, 36 (4), 455–70. Venturi Ferriolo, M. (2002). Etiche del paesaggio. Il progetto del mondo umano. Roma: Editori Riuniti. Venturi Ferriolo, M. (2009). Percepire paesaggi. La potenza dello sguardo. Torino: Bollati Borignhieri Editori. Zagari, F. (2008). Questo è paesaggio. 48 definizioni. Roma: Gruppo Mancosu Editore.