遺產景觀的韌性設計
——歷史莊園景觀保護與發展的景觀導向區域設計方法

著：（荷）斯特芬·奈豪斯 （荷）保羅·西森 （荷）愛麗茲·斯托默-斯密斯 譯：張清然 校：蔡佳秀

1 介紹

莊園景觀遺產中的區域景觀特征是由多個歷史鄉村莊園決定的[1]，例如歷史悠久的城堡、鄉村別墅、莊園及其附屬花園、農田和森林等。莊園是塑造世界各地區域、景觀與社會的強大媒介。德國、英國、比利時、意大利、法國、丹麥、葡萄牙和西班牙都有絕佳的例子，同時我們在俄羅斯、日本和中國也找到一些案例（圖1、2）[2-4]。莊園及其景觀的建設一直由貴族階級控制，這種土地所有權是他們權力的基礎[5]。一處土地若沒有建設鄉村住宅，那它幾乎沒有什么用處，這些鄉村住宅承載著商業活動，是休閑娛樂的“發電站”。莊園景觀是為聯系宮廷或教皇的住所、狩獵小屋、公園和農場所設置的，貴族們通過空間設計、社會和經濟的手段組織領土而彰顯其權利。因此，鄉村的莊園和景觀之間有著直接的關系，在這里，水網與路網的建設實現了人類對于領土的掌控，同時這些交通網絡實現了與城市中心更好的連接，讓貴族階級可以輕松地在城市和鄉村莊園之間穿行。

1 意大利都靈附近作為區域整體景觀設計一部分的皇家獰獵宮——StupinigiStupinigi, a royal hunting palace as part of a regional designed landscape near Torino, Italy

2 1810年意大利都靈莊園景觀，一個區域性設計的國土系統——通過軸線組織的皇家住宅、花園、獵場和農場The estate landscape around Torino (Italy) around 1810. A regional designed territorial system of royal residences, gardens, hunting grounds and farming organised by axial road patterns

莊園景觀分布在荷蘭的各地（圖3），其中很多修建在阿姆斯特丹（Amsterdam）和海牙（The Hague）這類大城市的周圍，還有一些散落在相對偏遠的荷蘭北部和東部。然而，相比歐洲的其他地方，荷蘭的鄉村別墅和莊園的規模要小得多。例如在英國，超過1 200 hm2才稱為莊園。在荷蘭，大多數鄉村莊園在5～200 hm2之間，很少有超過1 000 hm2的大型莊園。除了規模較小這一特征外，荷蘭的莊園還具有區域意義，因為莊園景觀是由地理位置相近的鄉村別墅與莊園共同組成的，其景觀特征與鄉村別墅和莊園的外觀直接相關，居民和游客也都非常珍視、喜愛這些景觀。

3 荷蘭的莊園的分布與地質形態特征和水網布局密切相關The allocation of the estates in the Netherlands is closely related to geomorphological features and water networks

荷蘭國家遺產局已經列明了一些名勝古跡，如鄉村別墅、馬車房、莊園農場、茶館、花園小品、公園和（部分）鄉村莊園。在荷蘭有552個經過國家認證并編輯在冊的鄉村莊園，被稱為鄉村莊園綜合體。

格爾德蘭省位于荷蘭中東部區域，面積為5 137 km2，是荷蘭12個省中占地面積最大者，其包含51個自治市，共擁有200萬人口，風景多樣，有森林、大河和鄉村。擁有國際中學和大學的阿納姆市（Arnhem）、奈梅亨市（Nijmegen）和瓦赫寧根市（Wageningen）作為該地區的中心城市支撐起了該地的知識型經濟。超過500座鄉村別墅和莊園坐落于該地區（圖4）。格爾德蘭省擁有119個國家級鄉村莊園綜合體，超過全國總數的1/5。這些鄉村莊園綜合體中，有97個城堡和鄉村別墅的主體建筑被認證為國家名勝古跡。

4 格爾德蘭歷史著名鄉村和莊園地圖Map of known historic country and landed estates in Gelderland

自中世紀晚期以來，該地區一直深受當地精英歡迎，特別是在被稱為世外桃源的格爾德蘭省首府阿納姆周圍，沿著埃塞爾河（the river IJssel），即該省最東部的一個縣。那里起伏的景觀、河流與小溪、肥沃的土地被認為是理想的農業與公園用地。直至今日，城堡、鄉村別墅和莊園仍然裝點著格爾德蘭，這其中有2/3仍為私人財產（圖5），其他的則由信托機構（如格爾德蘭信托）、國家組織、政府和商業企業所有。

5 De Wiersse——游客絡繹不絕，仍為私人所有的國際知名紀念性莊園De Wiersse, a monumental estate that is still privately owned and inherits an internationally famous historical garden that attracts many visitors

這些莊園景觀及其組成要素——紀念性建筑、花園和其他景觀元素，具有很高的遺產價值：莊園景觀之中蘊含了珍貴的自然景觀，這些莊園景觀更好地保留了自然和人文特色；莊園景觀為旅游、休閑和運動提供了豐富的機會；莊園景觀作為歷史城堡、鄉村別墅和莊園的聚集，具有很高的經濟價值。

在遺產的保護方面，荷蘭有著悠久的傳統。但自20世紀30年代以來，莊園景觀逐漸遠離了人們的視野[1]，人們更關注紀念碑般的建筑，而不是在景觀環境中的建筑。但為了可持續地保護和發展城堡、鄉村別墅和莊園，在景觀環境中認知它們是至關重要的。這需要將單個鄉村別墅與其周邊環境——花園、公園、庭園聯系起來作為整體對待，也需要在一個區域范圍內，綜合考量多個鄉村別墅的整體環境及它們之間的關系。在歷史景觀中，城堡、鄉村別墅等建筑物與其附屬功能空間如馬棚、花園等與大地景觀交織在一起，它們以大地景觀作為本底，并依托大地景觀的空間、美學屬性，塑造空間序列，實現獨特的視覺效果；反之，這些建筑物及其附屬功能空間也為大地景觀帶來新的美學與功能價值[1]。

氣候變化對莊園景觀的水資源管理有顯著影響，特別是水資源的豐裕和短缺，以及由于氣溫升高引起的植被變化。與此同時，持續的城市化與人類日益增長的休閑需求也給莊園景觀帶來了空前的壓力。如何應對由城市化帶來的空間碎片化問題，以及如何回應不可避免的因休閑旅游需求的增加而帶來的莊園產權轉換和功能置換等問題，是現如今莊園景觀面臨的巨大挑戰。本文作者認為，這些挑戰的復雜性需要從區域或“直升機”視角來理解，同時也需理解莊園之間的內涵和系統性關系，從而找到各利益相關方可協作的平臺。本研究提出的基于景觀的區域設計方法通過跨尺度的設計研究與設計思維，解讀和認知景觀的空間結構與空間連貫性，并依托這些空間特征和空間組織邏輯探討鄉村別墅的未來發展。然而，我們應如何從空間的角度來理解莊園景觀呢？我們該如何應用這些知識來保護以及適用其未來呢？

2 作為文化景觀的莊園景觀

莊園景觀不僅是投資、享樂的對象或權力的表達，而且是真正意義上的文化景觀。由歐洲委員會界定的文化景觀的標準定義是：“一個被人們感知的區域，其特征是自然或人為因素作用或兩者相互作用的結果。[6]”定義強調了2個方面：1）景觀是人類與環境互動的結果；2）景觀的動態本質——無論有無人為干預，景觀都會發生變化，這些變化有時影響深遠，有時影響較小，比如氣候變化影響的后果，需要很長時間才能顯現出來。而一些變化也可以迅速發生，比如在原農業地區開發新的住房建造項目。

這就是為什么景觀可以被視為一個復雜的動態系統，這個系統由眾多相互作用、動態變化的子系統組成。這些子系統時刻動態回應自然變化、社會需求以及技術的發展。從這個角度來看，我們應該把莊園景觀理解為自然和社會的界面，是兩個子系統結構與進程的外在表現形式。

一種實用且已被廣泛應用的方法是對景觀進行分層分析，將不同要素置于不同的圖層中，并探討不同分層之間的互動關系。分層的依據是這些要素在時間維度上演進變化的頻率，以及這些要素在變化時對建成環境的影響[7]。逐層拆解莊園景觀是把握不同系統和子系統及其關系的一種方式，這種劃分不應該被看作是一種靜態的或單純的分層安排；相反，這些分拆的層次和子系統是一個或多或少會相互影響的離散層，也可能伴隨著時間的變化發生改變。在這里，了解莊園景觀及其起源——物理環境（硬件）、人類活動（軟件）、文化、制度和概念性理念之間的關系被認為是必不可少的[8]（圖6）。

6 哈克福特周圍的莊園景觀，一個歷史悠久的“分層”文化景觀的案例，是人類及與自然環境互動的產物The estate landscape around Hackfort, a centuries-old layered cultural landscapes as a product of the action and interaction of humans with their natural environment

2.1 自然環境層

自然環境是地形、水、土壤、地質基礎結構和氣候，及其相互關聯的子生態系統。自然環境不應被視為由多個離散的因素組合起來的系統，而應被視為核心和不可分割的組成部分，它決定了景觀應如何被對待。這一主要條件（即自然環境）的動態特點是緩慢的，通常察覺不到其演變、重復迭代以及自然循環的過程。

2.2 人類的調整與干預層

利用自然環境進行生活、工作和娛樂是人類活動的重要組成部分。人類通過耕種、修建鄉村莊園及花園、修繕道路、開鑿水道等方式利用自然環境，這種利用過程有時會使景觀發生一系列的劇烈變化。

2.3 文化、組織和政治層

這一層含有自然環境的文化、精神和宗教概念，以及人類與之的互動，包括科學技術的現狀、組織形式、政治運動、設計理念和審美理想。例如，水在不同的文化中有不同的含義，這可以在公園和花園的景觀設計處理中窺見一斑。文化、組織和政治層的變化周期相對較短，因為這與人的參與介入和政治變動相關。

對莊園景觀的理解是由各個圖層及各層之間的關系所決定的（圖7）。莊園景觀是一種關系結構，連接并影響尺度、空間、生態、功能和社會。莊園景觀是一個整體系統，是一個空間尺度體系，我們只能通過觀察不同的空間尺度及其相互關系來理解。也就是說，單個的鄉村別墅，連同它們的花園、公園和庭園，構成一所莊園，而多所莊園構成一處莊園景觀，多處莊園景觀則構成了一個區域（圖8）①。因此，鄉村莊園是這個尺度連續體的一部分，相互之間的關系是通過在不同尺度的環境中特定地點或位置的依附、連接和嵌入而形成的。

7 自然地形和水文與莊園景觀密切相關，其決定了城堡、鄉村別墅和莊園的位置和分布，以及土地使用的可能性。左邊是與有關于含沙冰脊的莊園景觀，中間是伊塞爾河和山谷景觀，右邊是覆被沙子和縱橫小溪的莊園景觀Estate landscapes are closely related to natural topography and hydrology, determining the location and allocation of castles, country houses and estates, and possibilities for land use. To the left the estate landscape related to the sandy ice-pushed ridge, in the centre the estate landscape of the Ijssel river and valley, and to the right the estate landscapes of cover sands and brook system

8 作為空間尺度體系的莊園景觀Estate landscapes as scale-continuum

3 莊園景觀的歷史

時間是了解莊園景觀的基本要素。隨著時間的推移，莊園景觀經歷了基于發展可能性和價值評判的演變。部分空間結構、肌理規則和空間形態被保存下來；其他的或繼續發展，或被新的形態所取代，促成了豐富的歷史與空間類型演變[8]。在空間演變的過程中，那些相對穩定的景觀結構與那些快速變化的空間結構之間相互制衡影響，并在演變中達到一種平衡[9]。更持久則更傾向于抗拒改變，經時間周轉便會變得更“健壯”（甚至具有鈍性，即與其他物質幾乎沒有相互反應）。而這些不同步的變化將景觀變成一個分了層的整體，其由時間留下的物理痕跡或相互促進，或相互排斥[10]。

格爾德蘭的莊園景觀建設大致分為3個關鍵階段：中世紀—1600年，貴族（有土地的精英）擁有的占據大量土地的城堡；1600—1800年，城市居民的鄉村別墅和莊園；1800—1940年，金融、商業和工業精英所建造的小型鄉村別墅。

這些階段為一系列的事件提供了窗口，連接傳統與當代、有形與無形。從這方面來看，一個莊園景觀具有十分豐富的意義，它可以被“讀”作“傳記”“重寫本”，闡述了促成自身形成的關鍵活動[11-12]。

莊園景觀作為解讀歷史的關鍵是其包含的“長期”（法語：Longue durée）的概念，景觀作為一個長期的結構，在“連續居住”[13-14]的過程中隨著時間的推移而變化，對于這些歷史痕跡的掌握是實現莊園景觀更新的抓手之一，即需要在此基礎上添加新的“層”。莊園景觀的演變是“與生俱來的”對歷史的“抹去”與“書寫”。正如我們現在所看到的，莊園景觀是一個漸進選擇的結果，在這個過程中，一些元素被保留下來，另一些元素發生變化或被取代。

4 實現富有韌性的莊園景觀

氣候的變化、旅游休閑需求的增加等挑戰，都需要謹慎處理應對，因為快速的空間擴張和功能置換可能會影響莊園景觀的層次及其“可讀性”，文化認同就有消失的危險。為了避免這種情況發生，我們需要針對變化進行管理（“變化管理”法），以創造一個能適應未來的莊園景觀，讓過去以某種形式繼續發揮適當的作用[15]。這是一個動態的、需要不斷調整的過程，不同利益相關者參與其中，除景觀領域專家外，也需要莊園所有者、政府官員、企業和當地利益相關者的積極參與。適應性規劃和設計是促進社會生態包容性、多樣性和靈活性的有力工具。適應性規劃和設計的總體目標是通過建立實驗室（實踐社區）來提高莊園景觀的韌性和適應能力，在這些社區中，共同思考、設計和實施不同規模的可持續解決方案是核心。而為實現這一總體目標，相關的研究和設計以及重要利益相關者的參與和可視化的溝通是必不可少的（圖9）[16]。

9 業主、業界專家和政府代表在研討會上共同思考Estate owners, experts and government representatives think together in a workshop

韌性被定義為系統在不改變其主要狀態的情況下對外界變化或干擾作出反應的能力[17]。適應是指在實踐過程或生態系統結構中對預測或實際的氣候變化可進行調整的程度。適應可以是自發的，也可以是規劃的；可以是對反應的變化，也可以是對預測的變化所做的反應[18]。我們需要正確理解自然和生態系統如何運作，并采用前瞻性、“先發制人”的方法，來引導、協調和塑造由社會、經濟和環境變化帶來的莊園景觀的動態變化，這種適應性規劃和設計過程基于4個迭代階段：收集信息、解讀信息、預期發展、采取行動（圖10）[16]。

10 增加韌性和適應能力的過程中的4個關鍵階段Four essential phases in the process to increase the resiliency and adaptive capacity

我們的假設是，通過以設計為導向的多尺度和跨學科的方法，在空間結構、人、知識和治理方面建立韌性和適應能力。通過運用該方法，就可以結合部門活動來引導變革性的空間發展過程，以實現更協調的可持續成果。基于景觀的區域設計被認為是發展韌性和適應能力的基本策略[19]：1）以景觀的形態變化過程為基礎，自然和莊園景觀的“生理學”作為塑造空間變化的指導；2）創建和再生生命系統，生物多樣性和多功能作為社會生態包容和水敏性莊園景觀的基礎；3）發展韌性和適應性空間框架，為該地區的協調發展（長期戰略）建立強有力的結構，同時為當地項目（短期干預）創造條件；4）是以設計為導向的多尺度、跨學科的方法，是以認知為基礎的空間設計，是一種整合市民、學者、商界人士和決策者等各界參與的實踐。

韌性和適應能力的實現還需要建設適應性強的社會基礎設施。一方面，在面對社會經濟變化和干擾時，確保有效和公平公正的公眾參與；另一方面，在規劃和政策決策中，保證不同利益相關者的有效參與[20]。通過增加生物多樣性、使用模塊、采取即時反饋的方式，可以加強韌性能力、社會資本、慢變量、臨界值和創新能力[17]。創新則可通過建立可靠的實驗室（實踐社區）、發展監督文化和從一定的失敗中學習來實現[20]。在實驗室中，以共同思考、設計和實施可持續解決方案為核心，由相關的研究和設計人員、重要利益相關者參與，通過可視化、溝通交流來促進發展。該實驗室（實踐社區）可以被理解為一個物理空間——實體實驗室；也可以在方法論層面上被理解為一種交叉的研究設計方法。市民、學者、商界人士和決策者在一個由地理和制度界定的生活化環境中進行實驗、共同創造和測試[21]。但這在實踐中是如何應用的呢？

5 案例研究：3所Living實驗室

目前，歷史莊園面臨的挑戰是多方面的。我們與當地利益相關者（如莊園所有者、遺產專家、市政當局、水資源委員會和省政府）一起，確定了格爾德蘭莊園景觀保護和開發面臨的三大挑戰：氣候適應、遺產旅游以及城市化帶來的空間碎片化問題。如何在尊重遺產價值的同時應對這些挑戰？我們認為，這些挑戰不能在單一的莊園尺度上解決，而是需要一個基于景觀的區域設計方法。這種假設意味著項目過程中需要區域層面的相關機構的參與，如省政府和水資源委員會。

為了能夠建立一個為應對當地特定問題，由當地利益相關者參與，利用基于景觀的區域設計方法產生解決方案的Living實驗室，我們將3個莊園景觀與主要的三大挑戰聯系對應起來，得出了以下3個針對3種挑戰的研究設計實驗室：1）氣候適應——巴克斯溪（Baakse Beek）遺產莊園景觀實驗室；2）遺產旅游——格爾德蘭世外桃源（Gelders Arcadia）遺產莊園景觀實驗室；3）空間碎片化——特韋洛（Twello）遺產莊園景觀實驗室。

在這3個實驗室中，來自當地利益相關者、專家和代爾夫特理工大學的學生界定了每個地區的具體問題和發展潛力，并提出了未來發展策略。參與者們在實驗室提供的協作、共建、實證平臺上，使用真實案例實施解決方案。每個實驗室根據自身實際情況，都有一系列利益相關者和發展動態變化，其中大多數目前仍在運行。這些實驗同時也是在EU-interreg項目框架下進行的，這為進一步在歐洲范圍內交流項目經驗提供了機會。

在方法論層面，這3所Living實驗室為如何通過設計來進行研究從而應對特定挑戰提供了案例參考[22]。此外，也探索了在景觀領域內，政府機構在維護、發展和改善歷史鄉村房屋、城堡、莊園中的角色。

5.1 氣候適應：Baakse Beek遺產莊園景觀實驗室

這個實驗室主要討論氣候適應性，特別強調莊園遺產的水資源相關問題，討論莊園環境應對長期干旱與偶爾強降雨的處理方法。目標包括使莊園景觀成為可調節的水系統的一部分，使新系統更具有氣候適應性，找出地方當局可以承擔的最佳角色，并從分析到提到解決方案的全過程中，使用基于景觀的區域設計方法。

Baakse Beek地區由莊園群和農業用地組成，通過Baakse Beek溪互相聯系（圖11），當地大部分莊園的建設可以追溯到中世紀，其中部分莊園的所有權屬于信托機構，但大多數為私人所有。大部分莊園是建筑、花園、公園和水景的綜合體。近年來，氣候變化導致了莊園長時間的干旱和短時間強降雨。為了解決這個問題，Living實驗室研究了水資源議題對莊園遺產的重要性。地區水務局、市政當局、個人及其他業主一同合作，尋找目前應對水資源管理、自然和農業方面的挑戰的解決方法。重點關注如何在莊園景觀歷史悠久的水資源管理結構框架下儲存水資源。

11 當地尺度上的景觀分析，從分布和朝向方面分析了莊園如何與巴克斯溪的水系相關聯。De wiersse位于溪谷之間，該花園的設計表達了開放的特點。視廊連接了不同的風景Landscape architecture analysis on the local scale on how the estates relate to the water system of the Baakse Beek in terms of allocation and orientation. De Wiersse is located in the brook valley, and the open character is articulated by the garden design. Vistas connect different parts of the landscape

Baakse Beek案例表明，自然、遺產、水資源管理、土地產權交換等問題可在莊園更新保護設計過程中進行探討。空間品質是解決當今莊園景觀面臨挑戰的首要條件，良好的空間品質也為旅游業和娛樂業提供了機會。Living實驗室表明，多尺度的空間設計促成了土地所有者、水資源委員會、自然保護團體和地區當局共同努力才能實現的整體短期和長期解決方案。

這次實驗室的成果包括：1）制定并實施區域水資源管理聯合計劃，修復歷史景觀結構和文化元素，在新的規劃中起到緩沖和涵養水資源的作用；2）建立監測試點，監測干旱對構成莊園景觀的鄉村別墅和歷史遺產的影響；3）確定莊園內需要通過采取施工措施解決干旱問題的區域及其具體情況。

5.2 遺產旅游：Gelders Arcadia遺產莊園景觀實驗室

在Gelders Arcadia的莊園景觀中（圖12），Renkum市、Rheden市、Rozendaal市 和 瓦 赫寧根市等市政當局以及米德赫滕和格爾德蘭信托基金（Middachten and the Gelderland Trust）等莊園所有者，一起在尋找發展遺產旅游和保存遺產價值之間的良好平衡。目標包括將Gelders Arcadia開發成一個連續的公共可達體驗區，將城堡和鄉村莊園遺產與景觀和自然品質聯系起來。通過“權力與榮耀”的省級旅游主題，講述Gelders Arcadia的故事來拓寬和深化遺產旅游事業，這其中便含有權利景觀與“二戰”的故事。然而，發展一種現實的組織模式是基于主要利益相關者、市政當局、遺產所有者和企業家之間的合作。

12 Gelders Arcadia莊園景觀空間發展的區域愿景Regional vision for the spatial development of the estate landscape of Gelders Arcadia

該地區以含沙冰脊（由冰的隆起而推動的山脊，荷蘭語：Veluwezoom）為特色，自中世紀以來深受荷蘭精英的喜愛。在這里遍布中世紀的城堡和莊園、18世紀攝政時期的鄉村莊園以及19世紀和20世紀的現代鄉村住宅，共有超過100個國家和當地莊園。此外，這里還可以找到重要的景觀遺產，比如荷蘭第一批景觀花園之一——Biljoen市附近的Beekhuizen莊園。

此處莊園景觀的獨特之處是由省長和他們的貴族朋友所創造的景觀結構，比如“國王之路”。國王威廉三世在他的狩獵場威盧威修建了多條連接各種狩獵小屋和城堡的道路。這類“權力景觀”的維護和旅游推廣是相當復雜的，因為“國王之路”目前屬于不同的個人和機構，且分布在好幾個行政區范圍內。要實現共同的愿景并對它們進行管理具有相當大的挑戰性。而且，很少有游客知道這些權力景觀的歷史，這些特征并不總是很容易被識別的。維持及合作非常困難，因為很多合作關系是通過臨時項目建立的，通常情況下，在項目終止的時候合作關系也隨之終止了。有5個市政當局嘗試發揮帶頭作用，但這并不是一項容易的任務。莊園景觀對區域經濟效益具有積極促進作用，可以加強區域遺產旅游事業的發展。遺產旅游也可以成為莊園業主的寶貴收入來源，從而在一定程度上確保遺產維護工作的開展。因此，整合不同地方政府，在區域層面上實現旅游愿景是十分必要的。

從Gelder Arcadia的案例中我們了解到，由莊園所有者和當局政府共同參與的區域合作伙伴關系，可以有效地交流知識和經驗。此外，企業（博物館、酒店、餐廳等）也對區域性方法感興趣并愿意參與其中。然而同時，沒有人想帶頭發展區域旅游，因此區域政府的作用是至關重要的，它們是啟動、刺激和促進區域發展的關鍵。針對上述情況，該項目采取了以下措施：通過建立一個基金會或信托基金，確保Gelder Arcadia地區合作的連續性；建立聯合旅游，讓當地鄉村住宅的業主參與到Gelder Arcadia的“權力景觀”中來；為“國王之路”制定聯合管理計劃，以明確潛在的挑戰、機遇、解決方案和合作。

5.3 空間碎片化：Twello遺產莊園景觀實驗室

該莊園景觀位于Apeldoorn市– Zutfen市– Deventer市城市三角群（圖13），基礎設施建設和城市擴張導致了空間碎片化問題。在這里，區域官方部門、市政府和Twello莊園周圍的業主致力于加強莊園區域的空間融合，目標是保持莊園景觀作為一個整體以應對空間碎片化增加和空間品質降低的風險。Living實驗室的建立是為了幫助市政府創建新的保護與發展的地方立法，促進不同的業主和政府之間合作，并制定一個莊園景觀聯合管理計劃。

13 特韋洛莊園景觀開發分析Analysis of the development of the estate landscape Twello

Twello區域被描述為“城市三角群的綠心”，由Apeldoorn、Deventer和Zutphen三個城市包圍。從Veluwe到IJssel山谷的高砂地質景觀過渡區中涵蓋各種各樣的景觀。人們很早就發現了該地區的美麗。18—19世紀，居住在周邊城市的富裕家庭購買此處的土地來建造鄉村別墅和鄉村莊園。Twello擁有廣闊的莊園景觀（也稱為Green Carré）——在公園般的景觀中布滿了宏偉的建筑。其豐富的文化歷史是該地域特征的重要組成部分，人們希望保留并在可能的情況下加強這一特征。然而，在這片莊園景觀上，正在大規模修建道路和房屋，莊園遺產正在被城市化進程所威脅。

此時此刻，我們需要一個共同的目標和計劃，并確保一個活躍且有行動力的工作團體保證目標與計劃的執行。因此，區域官方部門已制定新法例，以加強該地區的特色，并將莊園景觀視為優質地帶。在所有的新發展目標中，空間質量和文化價值應處于主導地位。這需要人們能夠系統綜合地看待和理解這些景觀集合，而不是只關注個別的具有紀念意義的建筑。因此，創建社區意識和促進公眾參與至關重要：創建人們對該地區歷史和未來（潛在機會）的認識。同時，將不同利益相關方團結在一起也是至關重要的，這可以作為開發該地區的一個基礎和起點。然而，除了空間品質，其他方面也至關重要。例如，討論遺產所能帶來的經濟價值可以引起人們對遺產的興趣，從而可以在項目發展過程中嘗試納入他們。此外，在維護方面的協作成本會更低。

Twello這個案例向我們展示了當區域官方部門、莊園所有者和Voorst市政府密切合作時，開發了新的空間政策工具“莊園生態圈”以保護和發展莊園景觀的遺產品質。在這個案例中，“莊園生態圈”的概念得到了進一步的探索。“莊園生態圈”有助于界定現有村莊和莊園以及它們之間的連接區域，加強莊園景觀（通常是以前的莊園土地）以及具有“影響范圍”的區域。“莊園生態圈”確定了鄉村別墅的選址和朝向，以及景觀組成元素，如小巷和遠景。這些信息對于市政府保護莊園景觀和單個莊園現有的品質至關重要，并有助于為政府在調查決策新的開發機會時提供參考。

本次Living實驗室的重要成果包括：1）地方當局和市政當局評估和開發新的空間政策工具“莊園生態圈”；2）與Twello莊園景觀的當地利益相關者一起完成協作后，將Twello莊園生態圈嵌入到區域遺產保護和發展政策中；3）省政府將通過進一步的適用性（設計）研究，并與市政當局和其他遺產景觀的利益相關者討論這一概念，探索在該地區的其他遺產景觀中實施這一政策工具的可能性。

6 空間設計的作用

在這3個Living實驗室中，設計扮演著重要的角色，其以綜合的空間設計來應對上述挑戰的復雜性。莊園景觀的保護和發展所面臨的挑戰對地方和區域范圍有所影響，因此建立一個針對這些尺度和廣泛利益相關者的設計過程，被證明將有助于制定設計任務書以及確定潛在空間的效果[23]。我們在Living實驗室中采用了結構操作框架，在確保整體研究有序進展的同時，也為正式的設計過程留有發展空間。共同創作的各階段設計活動由莊園所有者、區域和當地政府、風景園林師、專家、學生和其他參與者共同完成。因此，Living實驗室就像一個設計工作坊，由一系列的公共會議或研討會組成。這些會議或研討會強調了設計的運用，以及在一個更寬泛、更持久的探索、解決和實施方案的過程中融入設計。此外，風景園林學生的加入是有價值的，因為他們提供了新鮮而公正的視角，并激發了其他參與者的創造力和想象力。在常規的官方組織框架之外，在項目中創造這種非正式交流和工作方式很好地適應了荷蘭現有的社會和政治需求：在政策和實際層面探尋解決方案[23]。

在這種情況下，每個莊園景觀的設計都為人們能夠坐在一起對話、觀察和建造提供了一個平臺，這不僅體現在空間層面，更是在認知層面。設計通過研討和實驗不同方面的事物，以此來幫助聚焦相關的問題或發展的可能性，并且嘗試探討這些事物會在什么樣的背景和情景下發生關聯（構建想法、認知）[24]。設計過程可以明確用戶和利益相關者在不同尺度上對未來發展的看法。

在室外空間嘗試落實設計理念、功能和需求，可以讓我們發現項目中的可行性、局限性以及需要進一步探索的問題[22]。在這方面，設計被用來系統地尋找空間問題的可能解決方案，目的是為設計師頭腦中尚未存在的問題設想一個創新的解決方案[22]，同時，也是讓那些過去沒有被人們發現的解決方案顯現的基礎。比起一個簡單的過程，該設計過程是迭代的，需要經過多輪周期循環形成。一個周期基本包括3個步驟：設計想法產生、圖示表達想法、驗證這些被圖示化的設計想法，進行更正調試后，再開始下一個循環[22]。在這個過程中，產生了3種認知類型：基于項目、基于形態和基于想法（表1）[22]。

表1 通過設計產生的認知類型Tab.1 Types of knowledge generated via design

“基于項目”的相關知識主要產生于那些關注周圍環境和綜合解決方法的設計項目。例如，在Baakse莊園景觀中，景觀導向的設計方法有助于理解和創建各個莊園之間的系統性關系，通過激活歷史景觀要素，賦予場所新意義的同時也加強了水系統的韌性。這不僅僅促進了生態系統，也增強了人在景觀中的空間體驗（圖14、15）。而那些看起來與計劃相互沖突的利益相關者，在這個過程中則實現了為彼此助力，就像水資源管理與遺產保護那樣。

14 設計探索關注于：如何將水資源管理、生態開發和游憩整合為一個景觀系統，同時重新激活歷史水元素，如溝林、水草甸等Design exploration on how water management, ecological development and recreation can be integrated as a landscape system while re-activating historical water elements like groove forests and water meadows

15 可視化設計顯示了這個整合的空間視覺潛力（這種類型的可視化使利益相關者能夠討論法律、政治、文化、功能、經濟和生態方面及其關系）Design visualisation showing spatial-visual potentials of this integration (This type of visualisations enables stakeholders to deliberate about legal, political,cultural, functional, economic and ecological aspects and their relations)

“基于形態”主要指2個方面：如何采取有效的視覺化工具進行表達與溝通，以及如何將設計具體實施建設。本研究對依托該項目所做的園林綠化方案和技術建設質量的評價、探索和實現作了進一步的探討。例如，不同的景觀設計原則是通過設計發展并測驗的。設計原則可理解為一個基本的思想或規則，它控制事情如何發生或如何工作。例如：可持續水管理的設計原則、基于自然的解決方案、歷史生態等。這些設計原則來源于實地研究、前人研究以及與研究遺產、水資源管理和生態專家的對話（圖16）。通過設計探索和“繪制與計算”程序，可生成基于當地文脈特征的設計原則，并進一步進行測驗（圖17）。

16 一套莊園景觀發展的設計原則Set of design principles for the development of the heritage estate landscape

17 根據“繪圖和計算”程序對適用的滯流池和河岸帶進行設計探索Design explorations of the applicable retention ponds and riparian zones following a ‘drawing and calculating’procedure

最后值得一提的是代爾夫特理工大學風景園林專業碩士研究生依托設計課對本研究項目進行的探討。設計課中的研究與設計為項目提供了前瞻性的設計想法和解決方案。想法導向的知識既包含創造性、直覺性、推測性知識，也包含形成空間策略的結構性知識。在Living實驗室中，認識到單個莊園是區域景觀系統的一部分是至關重要的。在對單個莊園進行積極介入時，風景園林師是可以對區域層面的空間結構和演進過程做出貢獻的。區域設計的探索基于所有利益相關者對情況的適當評估；場域中問題的結構與界定基于利益相關者們提出的可行性方案（圖18）。

18 對生態、水管理、遺產和林業協同作用下的莊園景觀的區域空間性和生態一致性的思考Speculating about the regional spatial and ecological coherence of an estate landscape in which ecology,water management, heritage and forestry synergise

通過對過程和結果的反思，我們發現如果風景園林師在政治背景下具有戰略思維、行動力與想象力，他們便可以在Living實驗室的各個階段做出有價值的貢獻。在歷史遺產景觀保護和開發的背景下，設計可以幫助人們預想和描繪一個全新的未來。設計過程則可由更廣泛的市民群體與不同領域專家參與的合作機制開展。

7 總結

盡管地方當局成功地針對一些宜建、綠色的紀念碑般的建筑物設定了投資計劃，但這些計劃仍無法應對一些挑戰，例如：水系統是一個區域層面的系統，那么針對鄉村莊園中的花園和公園的干旱問題，則只能通過區域層面的方法來解決；此外，過度旅游所帶來的壓力是無法僅通過設計一個旅游景點式的鄉村莊園來緩解的，這同樣需要在區域層面上，多個鄉村莊園協同來解決，比如可以通過激發、提升區域內各個莊園的特色，并打造多條連接這些有趣莊園的景觀線路來實現；同樣，在當下新型冠狀病毒肺炎疫情的危機中，健身房等室內密閉公共空間被迫關閉，越來越多的公園和森林承載了人們日常休閑娛樂健身的需求，這同樣需要一種區域性的方法來分解和承載這些需求。

因此本研究介紹了基于景觀的區域設計方法。這是一種針對鄉村住宅、城堡和莊園等遺產的空間組織與設計方法。它強調在景觀語境下，分層并跨尺度解析遺產的歷史演進過程。這種空間視角著眼探討不同利益相關方和牽制力如何在具體物質空間上影響地區發展并塑造地區特征的同時，也被它們影響和塑造著。此外，它還探討了更全面的進程：如何在地方、區域和省一級影響某一特定地區的發展。空間方法還可以幫助政府促進鄉村住宅和莊園的保護和創新進程，從而將區域層面的目標和挑戰與地方層面的目標和挑戰聯系起來。通過采用空間方法，我們將著眼于鄉村住宅和莊園和它們所依托的其他層面空間，例如該地區的社會、經濟和政治背景。

除此之外，這種方法從以保護和發展為目的的設計角度來實施，提高了莊園景觀的韌性和適應能力。在這方面，基于景觀的區域設計是解決氣候適應性、旅游業壓力和遺產景觀空間碎片化的十分具有價值的工具。關鍵在于將莊園景觀理解為一個“系統”是空間設計原則的基礎，這些原則適用于單個莊園、莊園綜合體、區域結構等多個尺度。設計導向的Living實驗室被證明可以為業主、市政當局和其他利益相關者提供一起學習和面對當前挑戰的便捷平臺。同時，它還有助于建立適應性強的社會平臺，以確保利益相關方在規劃和決策過程中的有效參與。在這里，地方當局、當地私人和機構（土地所有者）、學生和專家可進行區域莊園研究、設計和決策，以及在教育和藝術項目中進行合作。Living實驗室的研究成果一方面支撐當地遺產政策條例修編，另一方面也為面向未來的莊園遺產景觀的保護與更新建立法規和提供資金補助。

該方法也適用于其他文化遺產景觀，如圩田景觀、不能以紀念碑方式保護的考古景觀、歷史村落及其周邊環境等。這些珍貴的文化遺產景觀必須得到保護。而“通過設計而保護”的方法與知識開發為其提供線索，以承認和培育地方多樣性和區域一致性的方式保護和改造。格爾德蘭省的案例表明，以歷史景觀結構等空間發展為基礎，執行核心利益相關者全過程參與機制，采用通過規劃保護的方法，可以成功地塑造具有適應未來和韌性的遺產景觀。

致謝：

本文展示了一個由格爾德蘭省資助的、在“特色和可持續遺產”（KaDEr）項目與EU-Interreg項目框架下的研究設計。我們誠摯地感謝所有利益相關者，代爾夫特理工大學學生和他們的導師，感謝他們對living實驗室的寶貴意見和建議。

注釋：

① 1）一處村莊或莊園屬于一個地區或區域。從這個空間層面來看，可以很容易地縮小到省級和國家級，如果需要，還可以擴大到國際級；2）村莊或莊園作為更廣泛的文化景觀的一部分（包括鄰國的莊園、村莊等）；3）村莊或莊園可視為一個遺產集合（包括鄉村別墅、城堡、公園、林地、農場等）；4）鄉村別墅或城堡是主要建筑，村莊與莊園的核心。

圖表來源：

圖1由Alessandro Bosio和Alamy拍攝；圖2來源于《都靈地形圖》，拍攝者為Carta；圖3、7、10由斯特芬·奈豪斯提供；圖4由愛麗茲·斯托默-斯密斯提供；圖5由Leontine Lamers提供；圖6由Pieter van den Berg提供；圖8由斯特芬·奈豪斯和愛麗茲·斯托默-斯密斯提供；圖9由格爾德蘭省提供；圖11由斯特芬·奈豪斯、Mich ielPoederoijen和 劉 慧 穎 提 供；圖12由Gelders Genootschap和Poe MansReesink提供；圖13由愛麗茲·斯托默-斯密斯、Sazya Zeefat和Elise Holtma、格爾德蘭協會提供；圖14、15由劉慧穎提供；圖16由Yingjie Zhang提供；圖17由Alia Shaded提供；圖18由王顏嬌提供；表1引自參考文獻[22]。

（編輯/王亞鶯 王一蘭）

Designing Resilient Heritage Landscapes: A Landscape-based Regional Design Approach for the Preservation and Development of Historical Estate Landscapes

Authors: (NLD) Steffen Nijhuis, (NLD) Paul Thissen, (NLD) Elyze Storms-Smeets Translator: ZHANG Qingran Proofreader: CAI Jiaxiu

1 Introduction

This article contends a landscape-based regional design approach to understanding, planning,and designing cultural heritage landscapes. It elaborates a preservation-through-planning approach that takes spatial development with historical landscape structures as a basis and engages in a process with meaningful stakeholder engagement and visualisation/communication to invent spatial strategies and principles founded on co-creation and collaboration using design research and research through design as an essential means. In this article,we use the protection and development of heritage estate landscapes in the Province of Gelderland, The Netherlands, as an example.

The proposed approach, and the lessons learned from its application, provides valuable clues for the development of methods for management and protection of other cultural heritage landscapes,such as polder landscapes, historical villages and their surroundings, or archaeological landscapes that cannot be protected as a single monument.

In heritage estate landscapes, the regional landscape character is determined by several historic country estates[1]. Here historic castles,country houses and estates together with their gardens, agricultural land, forests, etc. (landed estates) are powerful agents that shaped regions,landscapes and societies across the world. Great examples of these territorial systems can be found in Germany, UK, Belgium, Italy, France, Denmark,Portugal and Spain, but also in Russia, Japan and China, we find beautiful exemplars (Fig. 1, 2)[2-4].Building estates and their landscapes were for centuries dominated by the nobility for whom land ownership was a basis for power[5]. The land was of little use without one or more country houses on it. These were “power houses” for ruling, business and leisure. The estate landscapes are the setting for court or papal residences, hunting lodges and parks, and farming. These are expressions of power that organised the territory in spatial, social, and economic ways. Thus there is a direct relationship between the country estates and the landscape.Here networks of water and roads organised the territory for control, providing resources and good connections to urban centres. Transport networks over land and water allowed the nobility to travel easily between the city and their country estates.

In the Netherlands, there also quite a few estate landscapes located in different parts of the country (Fig. 3). Examples can be found around the cities of Amsterdam and The Hague, but also in the North and East of the country. Here, however,country houses and landed estates are much smaller than most European counterparts. Whereas, for instance, in the UK, estates are regarded as over 1,200 hectares. In the Netherlands, most country estates are between 5 and 200 hectares, with some great landed estates of over 1,000 hectares as exceptions. Despite the modest estate sizes, there is a tremendous regional impact as country houses and estates are often located close together and makeup estate landscapes. Here the identity of the landscape is directly related to the castles, country houses and estates. Inhabitants and visitors highly appreciate these landscapes.

Regarding country houses and estates,the Dutch National Heritage Agency has listed monuments, such as country houses, coach houses,estate farms, tea pavilions, garden ornaments, parks and (parts of) country estates. There are 552 listed country estates in the Netherlands, called complex or ensemble of nationally listed country estates.

The province of Gelderland lies in the east of the centre of the Netherlands. In terms of area(5,137 km2), it is the largest of the twelve provinces of the Netherlands. Gelderland’s 51 municipalities are home to 2 million inhabitants. The region has a varied landscape with forests, large rivers and rural areas. Urban hubs like Arnhem, Nijmegen and Wageningen with international secondary schools and universities support the knowledgebased economy. In Gelderland, over 500 country houses and landed estates exist (Fig. 4). The province of Gelderland has 119 nationally listed country estates or more than a fifth of the national total. Furthermore, for 97 castles and country houses, solely the main building is listed as national monuments.

The area has been popular amongst the landed elite since the late Middle Ages. Particularly around the provincial capital of Arnhem (called Gelders Arcadia), along the river IJssel and in the easternmost part of the province, known as Graafschap (county). The undulating landscape,the rivers and brooks, and the fertile lands proved to be ideal for making the agricultural lands and aesthetic parks. Castles, country houses and landed estates still adorn the province, of which twothirds are currently still privately owned (Fig. 5).Others are owned by trusts (such as the Gelderland Trust), state organisations and governments, and commercial businesses.

These estate landscapes represent: 1) They constitute high heritage values, including monumental buildings, gardens and other landscape elements; 2)Valuable nature is concentrated in these landscapes.Nature and cultural landscapes retained their identity,much more than in other landscapes; 3) The estate landscapes offer plentiful opportunities for tourism,recreation and sport; 4) The concentrations of historic castles, country houses and landed estates are of high economic value.

In terms of conservation and protection of estates, there is a long tradition in the Netherlands,but since the 1930s, people have turned away from the estate landscapes in their entirety[1]. The focus is on the building as a monument and not on the building in the landscape context. For sustainable conservation and development of castles, country houses, and estates, it is crucial to understand them in their landscape context. This is to relate individual country houses to their immediate surroundings — garden, park, grounds — and on a regional scale, where ensembles of several country houses are considered in their surroundings. In historic estate landscapes, the buildings and other functions are interwoven with the landscape, as it were. They are part of the whole from which they derive their picturesque effect, which they in turn partly give back to the whole[1].

Climate change has a significant effect on the water management of estate landscapes, especially the abundance and shortage of water, and causes changes in vegetation due to temperature increases.At the same time, the pressure is increasing due to ongoing urbanisation and related recreational needs. Also, rural landscapes have to deal with spatial fragmentation due to urbanisation, changing ownership, change of function, etc. The complexity of these challenges needs a regional perspective or “helicopter view” to understand the coherence and systemic relationships between the estates and find common ground in which stakeholders can work together. In such an approach, knowledge of the landscape structure and coherence are linked to development opportunities of country houses through design research and design thinking across scales. Nevertheless, how can we understand estate landscapes from a spatial point of view?Furthermore, how can we apply this knowledge in protecting and future-proofing them?

2 Estate Landscapes as Cultural Landscape

Estate landscapes were not only expressions of investment, enjoyment, or power; they are also genuinely cultural landscapes. A standard definition of cultural landscape is adopted by the Council of Europe: “an area, as perceived by people, whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors.”[6]This definition emphasises two aspects: landscape as the result of interaction humans with their environment and the dynamic nature of the landscape.

Landscape changes with and without human intervention. Sometimes the changes are farreaching, sometimes less so. Some changes, such as the consequences of climate change, take a long time to become visible. Nevertheless, change can also occur swiftly, as when a new housing development is built in a former agricultural area.This is why landscape can be conceived as a living system, which is to say, a complex and dynamic network of subsystems that are constantly changing in response to natural processes, social demands and technical possibilities. In this perspective, we should understand estate landscapes as an interface between nature and society, which manifests itself in a material space of both structures and processes.

A practical and widely used method entails analysing the landscape in layers and organising them according to the influence and dynamics of change[7].Unpacking the estate landscape in layers is a way of grasping the different systems and subsystems and their relationships. This dissection into layers should not be seen as a static or hierarchical arrangement. Instead, it is about discrete layers that influence one another to a greater or lesser degree,and that influence may also change with time. Here the relation between the layers of the physical environment (hardware), human activity (software),and cultural, institutional and conceptual ideas(orgware) is regarded as essential to understanding the estate landscape and its genesis[8](Fig. 6).

2.1 Natural Context

The natural context is relief, water, soil,geological substructure and climate, and the connected ecosystems. The natural context should not be regarded as a discrete factor but as a central and inextricable component of the system that determines how the landscape can be used. The dynamics of this primary condition are characterised by a slow, often almost imperceptible,process of change, repetition and natural cycles.

2.2 Human Modifications and Interventions

Human activity is part and parcel of using the natural context for living, working and recreation.Human beings appropriate the natural environment through agriculture, building country estates and their gardens, road building, canalisation of watercourses, etc. Throughout history, that appropriation process has led to a succession of sometimes drastic changes in the landscape.

2.3 Culture, Organisation and Politics

This layer comprises the cultural, spiritual and religious conceptions of the natural context and our engagement with it, including the state of science and technology, organisational forms,political movements, design concepts and aesthetic ideals. Water, for example, has different meanings in different cultures, which can find expression in landscape architectural treatments in parks and gardens. The dynamics of this layer relate to the relatively short term, linked to people and politics.

An understanding of estate landscapes is inherent to the concept of the layers and their relationships that constitute the landscape system(Fig. 7). The estate landscape is a relational structure that connects and influences scales and spatial,ecological, functional and social entities. The estate landscape is a holistic system and a scale continuum that we can only understand by looking at different spatial scales and their relationships. That is to say that individual country houses, together with their gardens, parks and grounds, make up an estate, and that multiple estates make up an estate landscape,and the estate landscapes make up a region (Fig. 8)①.Thus country estates are part of a scale-continuum in which relationships are shaped via the attachment,connection, and embedment of a specific site or location into the broader context at different scale levels.

3 Estate Landscapes as History

Time is an essential factor in understanding estate landscapes. Over time estates landscape underwent transformations resulting from selections based on possibilities and evaluation.Some structures, patterns, and forms were preserved; others continue to develop or are replaced by new ones, resulting in a rich historical and typological variation[8]. Spatial transformation or series of transformations usually balance more permanent landscape structures and others more prone to rapid change[9]. The more permanent ones tend to be resistant to change and, over time,become more robust (and even inert). Those asynchronous transformations turn the landscape into a layered whole in which physical traces of time can reinforce or contradict one another[10].

Broadly three critical phases of estate building can be identified in Gelderland: 1) Middle Ages—1600: castles with large landed estates for nobility (landed elite); 2) 1600—1800: country houses and estates for city regents; 3) 1800—1940:smaller country houses for elite borne of finance,commerce and industry.

These phases provide a window on a range of chronologies, events and meanings that connect the traditional and the contemporary, the tangible and the intangible. In that respect, an estate landscape is so rich in meaning that it can be “read” as a biography, as a palimpsest that illustrates the key activities that have contributed to the formation of that landscape[11-12].

Key to the estate landscape as history is the notion of the Longue durée, the landscape as a long-term structure that changes over time in the process of “sequent occupance”[13-14]. A knowledge of these historical traces is one of the starting points for new transformations of the estate landscape: the addition of new “layers”. The evolution of the estate landscape is inherent in the“erasure” and the “writing” of history. As we see it now, the estate landscape results from a gradual process of selection in which some elements remain, and others change or are replaced.

Time is an essential factor in understanding estate landscapes. Over time estates landscape underwent transformations resulting from selections based on possibilities and evaluation.Some structures, patterns, and forms were preserved; others continue to develop or are replaced by new ones, resulting in a rich historical and typological variation. Spatial transformation or series of transformations usually balance more permanent landscape structures and others more prone to rapid change. The more permanent ones tend to be resistant to change and, over time,become more robust (and even inert). Those asynchronous transformations turn the landscape into a layered whole in which physical traces of time can reinforce or contradict one another.

4 Towards Resilient Heritage Estate Landscapes

Climate change, increasing tourism demands,etc., calls for a careful approach because rapid spatial development and functional change can compromise the layering and legibility of the estate landscape. There is a danger that the cultural identity will disappear. To avoid this requires a “management of change” approach to create a future-proof estate landscape in which the past, in one form or another, continues to play an appropriate role[15].This demands a dynamic and political process that is not confined to the domain of the landscape experts but in which estate owners, government officials, business, local stakeholders are also actively involved. Adaptive planning and design is a powerful vehicle to foster socio-ecological inclusivity, diversity and flexibility. The overall aim of adaptive planning and design is to increase the resiliency and adaptive capacity of heritage estate landscapes by establishing communities of practice, where thinking together and generation and implementation of sustainable solutions at different scale levels are central and is facilitated by research and design, meaningful stakeholder involvement and visualisation/communication (Fig. 9)[16].

Resilience is defined as the capacity of a system to respond to change or disturbance without changing its primary state[17]. Adaptation is the degree to which adjustments are possible in practices, processes, or structures of systems to projected or actual climate changes. Adaptation can be spontaneous or planned and can be carried out in response to or anticipating changes in conditions[18]. This implies a proper understanding of how natural and systems function and a forward-looking, pro-active approach that guides,harmonises, and shapes changes and dynamics in the estate landscape, which are brought about by social, economic, and environmental processes.Such an adaptive planning and design process is based on four iterative phases: collecting information, gaining understanding, plan development, and action perspective (Fig. 10)[16].

The assumption is that through a designoriented multi-scale and transdisciplinary approach,resiliency and adaptive capacity can be built up in terms of the development of spatial structures and people, business, knowledge, and governance.Doing so can steer transformative spatial processes through a combination of sector activities aimed towards more coordinated sustainable outcomes.Landscape-based regional design is considered to be an essential strategy for developing resiliency and adaptive capacity by[19]: 1) Taking the landscape form and process as fundament; physiology of the natural and estate landscape as a guide to shaping spatial transformations; 2) Creating and regenerating living systems; (bio)diversity and multi-functionality as the basis for socio-ecological inclusive and water sensitive estate landscapes;3) Developing of resilient and adaptive spatial frameworks; strong structures for the coherent development of the region (long-term strategy)while setting conditions for local projects (short term intervention); 4) A design-oriented multiscale and transdisciplinary approach: knowledgebased spatial design as integrating practice,involving people, academia, business, professionals,government officials.

Resiliency and adaptive capacity also require building an adaptable social infrastructure to assure meaningful participation and achieve equity in the face of socio-economic change and disturbance and meaningful participation by stakeholders in planning and policy decisions[20]. Biodiversity,modularity, and tight feedback can strengthen resilience capacity, social capital, slow variables and thresholds, and innovation[17]. Resilience capacity is well-suited to an adaptive approach to planning and design. Innovation is pursued through responsible experimentation, developing a culture of monitoring,and learning from modest failures[20]. This can be achieved by setting up a living laboratory where thinking together, generation and implementation of sustainable solutions are central and is facilitated by research and design, meaningful stakeholder involvement and visualisation/communication. The living lab or community of practice can be considered both physical location and joint approach. Citizens,academia, business and policymakers experiment,co-create, and test in a life-like environment, defined by geographical and institutional boundaries[21]. But how does this work in practice?

5 Three Living Labs as Learning Cases

The present-day challenges that face historic estates are manifold. Together with local stakeholders, such as estate owners, heritage experts, municipalities, water boards, and the Provincial Authority, we identified three significant present-day challenges for protecting and developing the estate landscapes in Gelderland:climate adaptation, heritage tourism, and spatial fragmentation due to urbanisation. How can these challenges be met with respect for the heritage values? We presume that these challenges cannot be solved on a single estate but require a landscapebased regional approach. This presumption implies a role for (governmental) organisations that work on the regional scale, such as the provincial government and the water boards.

In order to be able to set up a living lab that can involve local stakeholders, address specific issues,and generate solutions utilising the landscape-based regional design approach, we connected the main challenges to three particular estate landscapes. This resulted in the setup of the following three living labs: 1) Climate adaptation: heritage estate landscape Baakse Beek; 2) Heritage tourism: heritage estate landscape Gelders Arcadia; 3) Spatial fragmentation:heritage estate landscape Twello.

In these three living labs, local stakeholders,experts, and students from TU Delft identified each region’s specific problems and potentials and generated ideas for future development. Each living lab provided a platform to collaborate,co-create and experiment while using real cases and implementing solutions. Each of these labs has its own set of stakeholders and its dynamic,and most of them are still running. The labs are also connected to the EU-Interreg project Innocastle which gave the opportunity to exchange experiences in a European context.

The three living labs are learning cases that shed light on how to deal with specific challenges and enabled us to explore the power of research through design[22]. Moreover, to discuss and improve government agencies’ role in maintaining,developing, and improving historic country houses,castles, and landed estates in a landscape context.

5.1 Climate Adaptation in the Heritage Estate Landscape of the Baakse Beek Area

This living lab addresses the significance of the estate heritage for water issues, particularly climate adaptation: dealing with long periods of drought and occasionally heavy rain in the estate environment.Objectives include: making heritage part of changing the water system towards climate adaptivity, finding out what role the regional authority can play best,and introducing landscape design as a contribution to move from analysis to solutions.

The Baakse Beek area consists of landed estates and agricultural land, interconnected by the Baakse Beek, a brook (small river, Fig. 11).The majority of the estates date back to Medieval times. Trust organisations own some, but most of them are privately owned. Most of the estates are A-listed as ensembles of buildings, gardens, parks and water features. In recent years, climate changes have led to long periods of drought and short intervals of intense rainfall. In order to address this issue, the living lab looked at the significance of the estate heritage for water issues. The regional water authority and the municipality, and private and other owners collaborate to find solutions for present-day challenges on water management,nature, and agriculture. The focus is on water retention within the context of historic water management structures in the estate landscapes.

The learning case of Baakse Beek showcases that an estate landscape such as this one has many opportunities to combine and connect various themes: nature, heritage, water management,exchange of landed property. Spatial quality is a primary condition in addressing the present-day challenges at estates. There is also an opportunity for tourism and recreation. The living lab shows that the multi-scale spatial approach facilitates integral short- and long term solutions that the joint efforts of landowners can only achieve,the water board, nature conservation groups and the regional authority. The following actions are the result of this collaboration: 1) They are developing and implementing a joint regional water management plan. Historical landscape structures and cultural elements are rehabilitated and play a role in buffering and retaining water in the region.2) Setting up monitoring-pilot of the impact of drought on the heritage of country houses and historic estates that make up the estate landscape;3) Identify situations in estate zones where construction measures need to be implemented to solve problems caused by drought.

5.2 Heritage Tourism and Spatial Quality in the Estate Landscape Gelders Arcadia

In the estate landscape Gelder’s Arcadia(Fig. 12), the municipalities of Arnhem, Renkum,Rheden, Rozendaal and Wageningen and owners such as Middachten and the Gelderland Trust work on finding a good balance between strengthening heritage tourism in the estate landscape and preserving heritage values. Objectives include the development of Gelders Arcadia into a coherent publicly accessible experience zone that links the heritage of castles and rural estates to the qualities of landscape and nature. Including the broadening and deepening of heritage tourism by telling stories of Gelders Arcadia, among them power landscapes and WWII, through the provincial tourist theme“Power and Splendor”. However, the development of a realistic model of organisation based on cooperation between the main stakeholders, the municipalities, heritage owners and entrepreneurs.

Characterised by the relief of the ice-pushed ridge (Veluwezoom), the area was popular among the Dutch elite from the Middle Ages onwards.Medieval castles and landed estates, 18th-century regent country estates and modern 19th- and 20thcentury country houses can be found. In total, over one hundred country and landed estates have been identified. Also, important landscape architecture heritage can be found here, like one of the first landscape gardens in the Netherlands, Beekhuizen,near Biljoen.

Special features in this estate landscape are the landscape structures created by the stadtholders and their noble friends, such as the so-called King’s roads. Stadtholder king William III constructed long roads on the Veluwe, his hunting grounds, to connect various hunting lodges and castles. The maintenance and touristic promotion of such“power landscapes” are complex as the King’s roads are owned by various private and institutional owners and are situated in several municipalities.A joint vision and management are challenging to realise. Also, not many (heritage) tourists are aware of the history of these power landscapes. The features are not always well recognisable.

The continuity of initiatives is demanding as the partnerships arise with temporary projects but standstill at the end of a project. The five municipalities try to take the lead, but this is not an easy task. Estate landscapes have a positive effect on regional economic benefits and can strengthen regional heritage tourism. Heritage tourism can also be a valuable source of income to estate owners,thus helping to sustain these estates. A regional tourism vision is necessary.

The learning case of Gelders Arcadia showcases that a regional partnership on estate landscapes, in which both estate owners and authorities participate,can be successful in the exchange of knowledge and experiences. Entrepreneurs (museums, hotels,restaurants etc.) are interested in a regional approach and willing to participate. At the same time, no one wants to take the lead towards regional tourism.Therefore the role of the provincial government is crucial to initiate, stimulate and facilitate regional development. In order to do so, the following actions are taken: 1) Ensuring continuity in regional collaboration in Gelders Arcadia by setting up a foundation or trust; 2) Setting up a joint touristic approach to the power landscapes of Gelders Arcadia,enabling local country house owners to participate;3) Setting up a joint management plan for the King’s Road to distinguish possible challenges, opportunities,solutions and collaborations.

5.3 Spatial Fragmentation of the Country and Landed Estates in the Estate Landscape Twello

This living lab is about combatting spatial fragmentation of the estate landscape of Twello in the middle of the urban triangle Apeldoorn-Zutphen-Deventer (Fig. 13). Spatial fragmentation has occurred through infrastructural and urban expansion. Here the regional authorities, the municipality and owners around Twello worked on strengthening the spatial cohesion of the estate zone. The goal is to keep the estate landscape as a whole as there is a risk that fragmentation increases and quality disappears. This living lab is established to help the municipality create new local legislation for the protection and development,facilitate collaboration between various owners and governments, and develop a joint estate landscape management plan.

The region around Twello is described as“the green heart of the city triangle” enclosed by the cities of Apeldoorn, Deventer and Zutphen.The area offers various landscapes in the high sand transition area from the Veluwe to the IJssel Valley.The beauty of this rural area was recognised early on. In the 18thand 19thcentury wealthy families from the surrounding cities bought plots of land to build country houses and country estates.Twello has an expansive- ranging estate landscape(also called the Green Carré), full of monumental buildings in a park-like landscape. This rich cultural history is a crucial part of the region’s identity that it wants to retain and – where possible –strengthen. This estate landscape is threatened by building roads and houses.

A common goal and plan are needed and make sure to keep this alive through an active community. Therefore, new legislation is in place to reinforce the character of the area and recognise the estate landscape as a quality zone. In all new developments, the spatial quality and the cultural values should be leading. This requires knowledge of the collection rather than knowledge of the individual monuments. For this reason, it is vital to create awareness amongst the community and involvement of the public: creating awareness of the history and future of the area (the potential opportunities). It is also crucial to bring the different parties together. This can be used as a base to develop the area. However, it is vital to not only talk about quality but other interests as well. Economic arguments, for example, can convince some people who are not interested in the heritage argument. In addition, collaboration on maintenance is cheaper.

This learning case Twello showcases that where regional authorities, estate owners and the municipality of Voorst closely collaborate, new spatial policy tools can be developed to protect and develop the heritage qualities of the estate landscape. In this case, the concept of the “estate biotope” was explored further. The estate biotope helps define the existing country and landed estates and connecting areas, areas with opportunities to strengthen the estate landscape (often former estate lands), and areas with a “sphere of influence”.The estate biotope identifies essential aspects of the country houses’ location and orientation and landscape architecture composition elements such as lanes and vistas. Having this information is vital for the municipality to preserve the estate landscape and individual estates’ existing estate qualities and helps to offer insights when investigating new development opportunities.

Important outcomes of this living lab include:1) The regional authorities and municipality will evaluate and develop the new policy tool ‘estate biotope’ together with local stakeholders of the estate landscape Twello; 2) When finalised,embedment of the estate biotope Twello in the regional policy on heritage protection and development; 3) The province will explore the possibility to implement this policy instrument also in other heritage landscapes in the region through further (design) research on applicability and meetings to discuss the concept with municipalities and stakeholders in the other estate landscapes;

6 The Role of Spatial Design

In the three living labs, design plays an essential role to get a grip on the complexity of the mentioned challenges and addressing them in an integrated and spatial way. The challenges for the preservation and development of the heritage estate landscapes have impacts that cut across local to regional scales, so setting up a design process that addresses these scales and engages a wide range of relevant stakeholders proved helpful for formulating design briefs and identifying potential spatial outcomes[23]. In the living lab, a structured but informal design process was employed. Various co-creation rounds are gone through by estate owners, regional and local authorities, landscape designers, experts, students,and other participants. As such, the living lab was like a design studio that consisted of a range of public meetings or workshops that addressed the challenges of utilising design and integrates them into a more extensive and more protracted process of developing solutions and implementing them. Also, the input of landscape architecture design student was valuable as they provided fresh,unbiased perspectives and stimulated the creativity and imagination of the involved participants. The informal space created, independent of everyday hierarchies, fits in well with the social and political conditions needed to generate solution on a policy level and practical levels[23].

In this context, the design outcomes for each estate landscape provided a context for conversation, observation and construction, not only in spatial terms but also in cognitive terms.The design helps to set the problem or possibility by “naming” the things that will be attended to and frame the context in which they will be attended(framing of thoughts)[24]. The design process identifies what users and stakeholders think about future developments at different scale levels.

Positioning ideas, programs, and demands in outdoor space make it possible to discover the possibilities, limitations, and questions that call for further exploration[22]. Designing in this regard is employed as a systematic search for possible solutions to a spatial problem. This activity aims to visualise an innovative solution to a problem that does not yet exist in the designer’s mind[22]. It is also the base for the representation of solutions that were not previously visible. Rather than a straightforward process, the design is iterative and runs through various cycles of idea formation,drawing up representations and testing visualised ideas[22]. While going through this process, three types of knowledge were generated: project-based,form-based, or idea-based (Tab. 1)[22].

Project-based knowledge generated by design concerns the situation in its surroundings and the integrated solutions provided for it. In the estate landscape Baakse Beek, for instance, the landscapebased design approach helped to understand and create systemic relations amongst the individual estates in order to increase the sponge capacity of the water system while re-activating historical landscape elements, but also to boost the ecosystem and the spatial experience within the landscape(Fig. 14, 15). Seemingly conflicting agendas and stakeholders, such as water management and heritage protection, strengthened each other.

Form-based knowledge involves visual communication and the materialisation of the design (that is, how can it be created?). Here the assessment, exploration and realisation of qualities of landscaping schemes and technical constructions are explored further. For instance, different sets of landscape design principles were developed and tested through design. Design principle refers to a basic idea or rule that explains or controls how something happens or works. Examples include design principles for sustainable water management,nature-based solutions, historical ecology, etc. These design principles were derived from field study,precedent study and conversations with heritage,water and ecology experts (Fig. 16). Through design explorations and “drawing and calculating”procedures, the possibilities of the design principles are contextualised and tested (Fig. 17).

Last but not least, the design studios resulted in idea-based knowledge. Ideas-based knowledge consists of creative, intuitive, and speculative knowledge and the structured knowledge that results in a spatial strategy. In the living labs, it became vital to understand that individual country estates are part of a regional landscape system.While working on individual estates, one can contribute to regional structures and processes. The regional design explorations are based on a proper assessment of the situation by all stakeholders; the problem is structured and defined based on the feasible solutions that have been proposed (Fig. 18).

Reflecting on the process and the outcomes,the observation is that landscape architects can make valuable contributions in all phases of a living lab if they have an affinity for strategic thinking and acting in a political context, in addition to the power of imagination. In the context of historical estate landscape protection and development,design can describe prospective futures based on new forms of collaboration between stakeholders and expertise from more extensive civic and professional networks.

7 In conclusion

Though the regional authority has a successful program of investing in (built and green) monuments,some challenges cannot be met by this policy, e.g.the problem of drought that affects the gardens and parks of individual rural estates can only be solved by a regional approach since the water system is a regional one. Moreover, the challenge of durable tourism cannot be met by an individual country estate but also requires a regional approach that connects interesting places by routes through attractive landscapes. Furthermore, there is increasing use of parks and forests for recreational use in the presentday corona crisis, with lockdowns and closed gyms. A regional approach for spreading visitors is needed.

That is why a landscape-based regional design approach has been introduced. This implies a spatial approach to heritage, specifically to country houses,castles and estates, analysing historical and modern developments and processes on various spatial levels in a landscape context. A spatial view focuses upon how different actors and forces interact in particular places, shaping the character of these places yet at the same time being shaped by them. Furthermore,it explores how more comprehensive processes influence developments in a particular place at a local, regional and provincial level. A spatial approach can also help governments stimulate conservation and innovation processes of country houses and estates, thereby connecting goals and challenges on a regional level to those on a local level. By taking a spatial approach, one will look at particular places (country houses and estates) and the space in which these places exist: the social,economic and political contexts of the region.

This approach also increases the resiliency and adaptive capacity of the estate landscapes by providing a perspective on protection and development through design. In this regard,regional landscape design is a valuable tool to address climate adaptation, tourism, and spatial fragmentation of heritage estates landscapes. The key is that understanding estate landscapes as systems are the basis for identifying spatial design principles that address multiple scales ranging from individual estates, ensembles of estates to regional structures and processes. The designoriented living labs proved to be a handy platform to learn based on current challenges, together with owners, municipalities and other stakeholders. It also helped build an adaptable social infrastructure to assure meaningful participation by stakeholders in planning and policy decisions. Here regional authorities, local private and institutional landowners, students and experts have been working together in regional estate research,design and policy-making, and educational and art projects. The findings of the living labs support the regional authority in renewing their heritage policy program and provide regulations and subsidies to contribute to the protection and development of future-proof heritage estate landscapes.

The presented approach is also applicable to other cultural heritage landscapes such as polder landscapes, archaeological landscapes that cannot be protected as monuments, historical villages and their surroundings etc. These valuable cultural heritage landscapes must be safeguarded too. The discussed planning preservation-through-planning approach and knowledge development can provide clues for preserving and transforming them in ways which acknowledge and cultivate their local variation and regional coherence. The cases from Gelderland illustrate that a preservation-throughplanning approach that takes spatial development with historical landscape structures as a basis and engages in a process with meaningful stakeholder engagement can successfully lead to future-proof and resilient heritage landscapes.

Acknowledgments:

This article reflects a research and design project that the Province of Gelderland funds (The Netherlands) in the framework of the “Characteristic and Sustainable Heritage(KaDEr)”-program and the EU-Interreg project Innocastle.We like to thank all involved stakeholders, TU Delft students and their mentors for their valuable input to the living labs.

Notes:

① 1) A region or regional zone to which the country/ landed estate belongs. From this spatial level, one can easily zoom out to provincial and national level, and if needed, the international level; 2) The country or landed estate as a part of a broader cultural landscape (including neighbouring country and landed estates, villages, etc.); 3) The country or landed estate as a heritage ensemble (including a country house or castle, parklands, woodlands, farms, etc.); 4) The country house or castle is the main building, the core of the country or landed estate.

Sources of Figures and Table:

Fig. 1 ? Alessandro Bosio /Alamy stock photo ; Fig. 2 ?Carta topografica di Torino e dei dintorni；Fig. 3, 7, 10 ?Steffen Nijhuis; Fig. 4 ? Elyze Storms-Smeets; Fig. 5 ?Leontine Lamers; Fig. 6 ? Pieter van den Berg; Fig. 8 ?Steffen Nijhuis ＆ Elyze Storms; Fig. 9 ? Province of Gelderland; Fig. 11 ? Steffen Nijhuis, Michiel Pouderoijen＆ Huiying Liu; Fig. 12 ? Gelders Genootschap ＆ Poelmans Reesink; Fig. 13 ? Elyze Storms-Smeets, Sazya Zeefat ＆Elise Holtman; Fig. 14, 15 ? yinghui Liu; Fig. 16 ? Yingjie Zhang; Fig. 17 ? Alia Shaded; Fig. 18 ? Yanjiao Wang;Tab. 1 ? reference [22].

(Editor / WANG Yaying, WANG Yilan)