Retrospect and Forecast Remarks on the Occasion of the 25th Anniversary of Landscape Journal

Land

scap

e Jo

urna

l28:1

–09

ISS

N 0

277-2

426

© 2

009 b

y th

e B

oard

of

Reg

ents

of

the

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

isco

nsin

Sys

tem

ing, James Palmer, and their many assistants (SUNY Col-lege of Environmental Science and Forestry) beginning in Fall 2002. At the end of volume year 28 (Fall 2009), after seven years at SUNY ESF, Landscape Journal will move to a new home. We look forward to welcoming the next editor(s), trusting that the Journal will continue to fl ourish and evolve along with changing technological and intellectual currents.

INTRODUCTION: THE CELA PANEL

In recognition of the Journal’s silver anniversary, and to kick off the planned editorial transition, during CELA’s annual meeting at Pennsylvania State University (Au-gust 2007) several CELA members were invited to refl ect on the fi rst quarter- century of Landscape Journal, and to speculate on the next. The panel was organized and moderated by current editor Elen Deming, and featured four pairs of distinguished panelists. Each pair refl ected on a developmental stage in the life of Landscape Jour-nal: Darrel Morrison and Arnold Alanen refl ected on the founding and early days, Matthew Powers and Jason Walker presented trend analysis of content and author-ship patterns from the past quarter- century (see their full research article published this issue—28:1, Spring 2009), and Joan Iverson Nassauer and Frederick Steiner speculated on current and future impacts of academic publishing. Respondents Patrick Miller and, later, Anne Whiston Spirn (who could not be present at the origi-nal discussion) refl ected on the relationship between Landscape Journal and the profession of landscape architecture.

Because every editorial team has navigated con-siderable challenges in their respective tenures, the panel discussion offers a look back at some of those early challenges, as well as a look ahead at the radically changing landscape of academic publishing. Panel ob-jectives were straightforward: to identify and improve strategies for ensuring the continued vitality and rel-evance of Landscape Journal for the next twenty- fi ve years, including the re- examination of the LJ mission, identifi cation of relevant content, quality of scholar-

ABSTRACT This extended editorial refl ection is adapted from remarks prepared for a panel discussion at the annual meeting of the Council of Educators in Landscape Architecture (CELA), hosted at Pennsylvania State University, August 18, 2007. In rec-ognition of the silver anniversary of Landscape Journal (LJ), CELA members were asked to comment on its fi rst quarter- century and to speculate on the next. Panel objectives were to identify and improve strategies for ensuring the continued vitality and rel-evance of Landscape Journal, including re- examining the LJ mis-sion, identifying relevant content, ensuring quality of scholarship, serving new readers, and improving delivery systems, among other things. What emerged from the discussion was a valuable formative historical narrative, as well as a shared sense of com-mitment to the Journal as a disciplinary resource. Remarks have been modifi ed slightly from the original and an additional re-sponse has been added.

In recognition of its 25th anniversary, Landscape Journal received the National Honor Award in Com-

munications from the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA), in October 2008. Arne Alanen and Elen Deming prepared the award submittal on behalf of all those who have made the Journal what it is to-day—past and current supporters, advocates, authors, editors, designers and advisors, guest editors, reviews editors, editorial assistants, Council of Educators in Landscape Architecture (CELA) administrators, and of course the very capable staff of the University of Wisconsin Press. We are very proud of this recognition for Landscape Journal and our grateful thanks go out to all.

The occasion seems to warrant a slight pause, a moment for refl ection on the past and the future of the publication. Because our landmark fi rst issue (1:1, Spring 1982) had such a long gestation period, much more than a quarter century has passed since members of CELA fi rst conceived of the Journal. Since inception, the editorship of Landscape Journal has been supported by a succession of institutions. Beginning with founding editors Arne Alanen and Darrel Morrison (University of Wisconsin- Madison), the editorship was assumed in 1989 by Robert Riley assisted by Brenda Brown (Univer-sity of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign), followed by Rob-ert Melnick and Kenny Helphand assisted by Rene Kane (University of Oregon) in 1994, and fi nally by Elen Dem-

Retrospect and ForecastRemarks on the Occasion of the 25th Anniversary of Landscape Journal

M. Elen Deming, Arnold R. Alanen, Patrick A. Miller, Darrel G. Morrison, Joan I. Nassauer, Anne W. Spirn, Frederick R. Steiner

08_LJ281_LJeditors.indd 108_LJ281_LJeditors.indd 1 11/25/08 4:13:31 PM11/25/08 4:13:31 PM

2 Landscape Journal 28:1–09

and that more journals are better for our fi eld. We also assume CELA wants us to maintain our basic niche—traditional scholarship.

Content, quality and format. The content of the Jour-nal generally refl ects the interests and work of our con-tributors, and because it “fl oats” on a sea of contempo-rary thinking, topics and themes may rise and fall with those tides. As editors, however, we do try to ensure that every article is seaworthy and can weather both time and critical scrutiny. We continue to uphold our original standards of quality and format, and our manuscript guidelines make it very explicit: “Peer reviewed papers are based on sound scholarship: many are oriented to traditional research, and have a typical academic for-mat. There are fi ve general categories: deductive em-pirical research; inductive empirical research; critical evaluation; emerging techniques or models; and refl ec-tions.” In other words, the types of articles we publish tend to conform to accepted academic conventions. We don’t plan to change that. Despite a growing number of promising “alternative” venues, this is our niche, and it seems to serve our academic needs. But let me ask you: should we be having that discussion?

Intake. The number of manuscript proposals we re-ceive has risen every year for the past fi ve years: in 2006 we received more than 50. Every article (that we deem appropriate) is subjected to a double- blind peer review (typically three readers). Our initial acceptance ratio averages about one paper in four submitted, although many papers will be successful after subsequent at-tempts. Obviously, most of our contributors are CELA members, but a signifi cant number (about one in six) are not. Since inception, about 10 percent of the articles in the Journal have originated from practitioners in both private and public sectors, with another 5 percent from independent scholars and artists. Many contributors come from outside North America—particularly from Europe, Israel, South Asia, and the English- speaking Pa-cifi c Rim (for a more complete profi le of our authors, see Powers and Walker’s article, this issue).

ship, locating and serving new readers, and improved delivery systems, among other things. What emerged from the discussion was a valuable formative historical narrative, as well as a shared sense of commitment to the Journal as a disciplinary resource.

The Community of Landscape Journal: Remarks by Elen Deming

This CELA session celebrates the achievement of all the stewards and contributors to Landscape Journal, but especially its early advocates and its most committed advisors. These panelists represent a much larger corps of editors and their staff, colleagues, peer reviewers, and advisors. All of us maintain a collective responsi-bility to foster various forms of scholarship within our discipline. And this is simply to say, Landscape Journal is a community enterprise.

Obviously, the purpose of this session is more than just celebration. It aims at a larger perspective on the challenges that face Landscape Journal. Many of these challenges are technical and fi nancial, and respond to the shifting pressures on academic publishing at large. Other challenges, however, test the relevance of Land-scape Journal to the academy and the larger discipline. The Journal has to balance the contradictory demands of one set of industries—landscape planning, design, development, and management, with another—higher education and the formation of knowledge. So, to con-tribute to the larger perspective for this panel, let me present a brief “State of the Journal” report.

Mission and niche. The Journal may look slightly differ-ent, but our mission has remained virtually unchanged, in all its glorious vagueness: to publish “the results of research and scholarly investigation relating to land-scape design, planning, and management.” Landscape Journal remains a traditional academic publication—I would venture to call it fairly conservative. Alterna-tive venues, such as Landscape Review (founded 1995) and the European Journal of Landscape Architecture (founded 2006) support different critical emphases. We assume diversity is important, choices are good,


LJ Editorial Board 3

editing that seems to have served CELA members well. This style has helped to raise the level of scholarship in a discipline where research and structured inquiry was not traditionally taught. Although the discipline is now changing, and becoming more intellectually sophisti-cated, it is still necessary to work closely with authors. However, in addition to the usual gatekeeping and mentoring roles, the editors of Landscape Journal also still serve as production or managing editors, serving CELA and UW Press by formatting content and review-ing page design. The special challenges that arise from our small, independent, not- for- profi t status make ed-iting Landscape Journal quite different than many other academic journals, especially those kept in a stable of publications owned by the large commercial houses (e.g. Elsevier, Taylor & Francis, Springer, etc.).

Happily, because UW Press is a not- for- profi t or-ganization, all excess revenues realized by the Journal are returned as part of the annual operating budget of CELA. In other words, there is a symbiotic fi nancial relationship between the editors, the Press, and the sponsor. Right now, this three- way relationship is very healthy and open. If everyone does a good job, it can be a good fi scal arrangement. We are pleased to report that, over the past few years, Landscape Journal has generated a reliable annual income. But revenues are tied directly to production costs (which always seem to be increasing) and subscription numbers (which defi nitely aren’t). Ultimately, the real costs of editing Landscape Journal can not be fully counted in dollars and cents: they are shared by the community—by the editors, their advisory board, the peer reviewers—all of you and your institutions.

One thing only remains to be said: to be part of such a community is profoundly rewarding.

RETROSPECT: INVENTING LANDSCAPE JOURNAL

With that, we turn now to the panelists. This group was convened for the purpose of “mapping” the evolution of Landscape Journal, and suggesting its possible fu-ture trajectory. With the help of our fi rst pair of speak-

Access and impact. Although academic interest in publishing in Landscape Journal remains fi rm, pro-fessional interest in reading Landscape Journal seems distressingly soft. We have a subscriber base of slightly more than one thousand (about half are CELA mem-bers). There has been a slow, but steady decline in sub-scriptions from a high of close to 1800 (in the late 1980s). Only about two hundred of our current non- CELA sub-scribers are individuals (and probably less than that will be in professional design or planning fi rms).

Partly in response to this, University of Wisconsin (UW) Press is moving toward electronic subscriptions and pay- per- view for single issues and articles. Land-scape Journal is now searchable electronically by both keywords and full text. Online and full- text articles (back to 2001) are available through HighWire (online content provider since January 2008). Although the Journal appears in important indices like Avery Archi-tectural Index and EBSCO’s environmental planning and policy index, we are not currently included in the Thomson family (Web of Science) of citation indexes. This means traditional citation indexing is not available to Journal authors although, quite arguably, alternative means (such as Google Scholar and Ask.com) provide equivalent measures of an individual article’s impact. Yet we are quite aware that many academic programs use the Thomson indices to assess the “impact factor” of journals and individual articles, and that this may have considerable bearing on promotion and tenure cases. Both the editors and the Press regard this as a sig-nifi cant issue, and are working to understand and serve the needs of our community better.

In summary, in order to thrive, Landscape Journal has to respond to demands from three interdependent industries: the practice demands of environmental de-sign, business demands of academic publishing, and evaluation demands of higher education.

Editorial costs and benefits. Let me add a fi nal word about the nature of the editorship. During the fi rst twenty- fi ve years, editors of Landscape Journal have developed a distinctly proactive, hands- on model of



of ecological thought. The statistical analyses in many of the papers intimidated me, but with Evelyn’s help, I was able to glean from this literature valuable informa-tion and insights that had real application potential in the work we were initiating in landscape management and restoration.

Increasingly, I thought, “what if we in landscape ar-chitecture could have our own journal which would (1) “translate” research from adjacent disciplines to make it useful to landscape architecture academicians, stu-dents and practitioners, much as Evelyn had helped me to translate ecological literature for application in our work; and (2) help to build a body of knowledge and, over time, record the evolution of thought in our own discipline. So, in planning for the 1980 CELA meeting, with the concurrence of the faculty, I assigned myself a spot on the conference program, during which I would once again propose the development of a journal. I did this, I must say, with a great deal of naiveté, audacity, and a generous amount of optimism (warranted or not).

The commitment to put this session on the CELA conference program led me to the doorstep of Stephen Miller, then the Director of the Journals Division of the University of Wisconsin Press. I approached him with a certain amount of trepidation (what if he said CELA would have to come up with $50,000–plus,up- front be-fore UW Press would consider publishing a journal?). In fact, the idea of a journal in a design fi eld intrigued Steve. He pointed out that the Journals Division already had a stable of a dozen journals in a variety of other dis-ciplines, and hence, many of the costs of their journals were distributed among them, keeping them reason-able. He worked out the numbers, and came up with his own proposal: if CELA could provide $5000 up front, UW Press would provide a $7100 subsidy initially to get a semi- annual journal off the ground.

So, at the 1980 meeting, there on the shores of Lake Mendota, I made my pitch, and brought Steve Miller along to lay out the numbers during a Friday afternoon session. On Saturday morning the membership voted in favor of forging ahead (unanimously, as I remember

ers, we begin by looking backward. These two eminent and productive fi gures, quite literally, set the stage and raised the curtain on the future of academic publishing in landscape architecture.

Establishing Landscape Journal: Remarks by Darrel Morrison

While the fi rst issue of Landscape Journal appeared twenty- fi ve years ago, the inception of the Journal oc-curred twenty- seven years ago, at the 1980 meeting of CELA hosted by the University of Wisconsin. Some of you in the room today were there; others of you are far too young to have been there. In the years leading up to 1980, a recurring topic of discussion at annual CELA meetings was the need to establish a scholarly journal in the discipline of landscape architecture. The discus-sion usually ended when the subject of start- up fund-ing was broached. I recall hearing fi gures upwards of $50,000 as the up- front funding that would be required to get a journal off the ground.

At this point, I need to get a bit autobiographical. I do this knowing that with time, we become very selec-tive in what we remember. Or as I once heard author Jill Ker Conway, whose books include autobiography, say, “Memoirs are a special type of fi ction.” Nevertheless, I will give you my recollection of some of the infl uences that led to the inception of LJ at that 1980 CELA meeting on the shores of Lake Mendota in Madison.

In 1980, I was in the second year of a three- year term as Chairman of the Landscape Architecture De-partment at Wisconsin. Within our faculty meetings and retreat sessions, the subject of a need for a schol-arly journal was a recurrent topic of discussion, just as it had been at CELA meetings. My own teaching role at the time included co- teaching with Dr. Evelyn Howell, ecologist on the landscape architecture faculty. Through my work with Evelyn in our courses dealing with native plant communities, vegetation management and resto-ration, I had become familiar with ecological literature that was relevant to our work. Such journals as Ecology and Ecological Monographs had a long history, and as such they served over time to document the evolution



during the late 1960s when, as a Fulbright graduate stu-dent, the editors of two Finnish academic publications asked me to assist them with various publication du-ties, primarily copyediting. Shortly thereafter, as a PhD candidate at the University of Minnesota, I closely ob-served the inner workings of a major research journal (Annals of the Association of American Geographers), which was then being edited by one of my professors. Both of these experiences gave me an understanding of the blind review process, and of the key role that a journal plays in furthering the image and direction of a discipline and its membership.

In 1980, when our department hosted that year’s CELA conference, it clearly was time for us to take di-rect action on the journal front. The timing was also ap-propriate, given that the conference theme, “Research in Landscape Architecture,” had never been addressed directly at any previous CELA meeting. In addition, the conference gave me an opportunity to organize, again for the fi rst time in CELA’s history, a program that was arranged completely along professional meeting lines. Early during that year I submitted a call to CELA’s mem-bership, asking for paper proposals that addressed some aspect of landscape- related research. After numerous individuals submitted abstracts, multiple session tracks were developed and session chairs were appointed—procedures that CELA conferences have followed ever since. Since the new journal required a corpus of papers that could be reviewed for publication, several of the initial articles came from that conference.

The editing process proceeded throughout 1981, and by the end of the year Darrel and I were compos-ing Volume 1, Number 1 of Landscape Journal, which appeared in Spring, 1982. Although the three- column format had already been prepared as part of the over-all design for the Journal, we were responsible for the actual layout of that issue. Since no computer- or desktop- based publishing programs were available at the time, the printer sent us rolls of typeset copy that we then laid out in columns. Space for the numerous images—either one, two or three columns wide—also had to be plotted out carefully. One of the most striking

it now). There were some years of rough sledding during the early days of the Journal, but Steve Miller remained steadfast in his support of it. As I see it, Steve is the great unsung hero in both the initiation and the early survival of Landscape Journal (Steve has subsequently retired and is doing two of his favorite things in Madison, Wis-consin: writing poetry and duck- hunting).

A second unsung hero I want to acknowledge is my brother, Ken Morrison, who was doing graphic design in the Twin Cities in 1980. For a miniscule honorarium, he did the graphic design for Landscape Journal. I told Elen recently that I approve of the modifi cations she has recently instigated. And I am pleased that the cover re-tains that crisp black- and- white format with the famil-iar typeface that has worn so well for a quarter- century.

Certainly the Journal would not have become the scholarly journal it has become without the initial intel-lectual and scholarly guidance—not to mention hun-dreds of hours of tedious copyediting—provided by my faculty colleague, friend, and initial co- editor (and still consulting editor), Dr. Arnold Alanen of the UW faculty. If I provided the naiveté, the audacity, and the optimism that was needed to get the Journal off the ground back in 1980, Arne provided the on- going intellectual rigor that was so essential to its success.

The Early Days: Remarks by Arnold Alanen

When I joined the Department of Landscape Architec-ture at the University of Wisconsin–Madison in 1974, my new colleagues were already engaged in discussions concerning the need for a research journal that would serve the emerging discipline of landscape architecture. Although I had no idea as to how such a journal could be sponsored and funded (that would later occur through Darrel’s astuteness), I was immediately intrigued by the possibility of being on the ground fl oor of an entirely new and exciting venture. I not only had a strong inter-est in the publication process, but also felt that I might be able to make some contribution to the project be-cause of previous experiences with journal production in Europe and America.

My activities in the journal arena began in Finland



the geographic distance we successfully co- edited the publication until 1988. Following this, I served as co- editor for one year with Bob Riley before he assumed leadership of the Journal along with Brenda Brown. As a consulting editor since 1989, it has been my pleasure to interact with all the Journal’s editors, and to observe the publication mature and maintain its vital role in the discipline of landscape architecture.

PUBLISHING PATTERNS IN LANDSCAPE JOURNAL

The second important segment of the panel discussion was an overview of actual publishing trends over the fi rst 25 years of Landscape Journal. Panelists Matthew Powers (Florida A&M University) and Jason Walker (Mis-sissippi State University) had already proposed an ab-stract on an analysis of content and authorship patterns in Landscape Journal for one of the regular 2007 CELA conference program tracks. When the editors learned of it, we invited them to join our panel, to complete their work, and to bring it into our discussion. And although Powers and Walker did present their results during the panel session, their data were so robust, with some ex-pected and occasionally surprising fi ndings, we decided to treat their paper (published in this issue) as a sepa-rate, stand- alone, peer- reviewed article. The full text of their article “Twenty- Five Years of Landscape Journal: An Analysis of Authorship and Article Content,” and their biographies immediately precede this essay (28:1, Spring 2009). Now would be a good time to read it.

FORECAST: SIGNIFICANCE OF LANDSCAPE JOURNAL

The third part of the CELA panel discussion was staged as a “conversation” between Joan Iverson Nassauer and Frederick Steiner—two loyal advisors to Landscape Journal and strong advocates for scholarship in land-scape architecture. Among other things, the charge for this pair was to examine the relationship between Land-scape Journal and other competing journals, as well as the Journal’s overall impact on the discipline.

memories I have of that time is the both of us, up to our elbows in rolls of paper copy, snipping and cutting to compose the page columns. I’m still amazed that pieces of the articles by Erv Zube, Catherine Howett, and oth-ers didn’t get mixed up in the process!

Once the fi rst issue was completed, the printer at-tempted to follow a similar format in laying out subse-quent issues. Nevertheless, this proved diffi cult (the jag-ged column bottoms were entirely foreign to them), and often it was necessary to send the initial layout back to the printer. This resulted in some additional costs, al-though Steve Miller, the journals manager for the UW Press, gracefully accommodated the budget overruns.

Nevertheless, when CELA’s Executive Committee expressed concerns about increased manufacturing costs, I was asked to attend one of their meetings in 1984. At that time, I received a close interrogation con-cerning my views of the Journal’s future fi nancial direc-tions. Most major concerns about monetary issues dis-sipated after several departments and individuals made direct cash contributions to the Journal in 1986, and Anne Whiston Spirn secured an NEA grant for the fi rst special issue—“Nature, Form and Meaning”—which appeared in 1988. The fact that Landscape Journal also received an American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA) Merit Award for Communication in 1983 offered some assurance that the profession itself recognized the importance and aspirations of its closely affi liated discipline.

I would be remiss without mentioning the impor-tant role that Signe Holtz, a graduate student in our department, played in managing the day- to- day opera-tions of the Journal during the fi rst four years of pub-lication. George Thompson, also a graduate student, established the book review section in 1983. George would later go on to found the Center for American Places, where he has overseen the publication of hun-dreds of landscape- related books.

Shortly after we launched Landscape Journal, Dar-rel moved to the University of Georgia to serve as the Dean of the School of Environmental Design. Despite



From our perspective, inside our discipline, we might think of Landscape Journal at the center con-necting other sets of literature that include other refer-eed journals that focus on design, including design of landscapes, other refereed journals that focus on design and planning including landscape planning, other ref-ereed journals that focus on the ecological science of landscape interventions including design and planning interventions, and other refereed journals that focus on natural science or engineering science in ways that frequently have important implications for landscape architecture. In addition, a wide array of design maga-zines, including our American fl agship Landscape Ar-chitecture, is regularly consulted by practitioners, and the profession produces an enormous ‘grey literature’ of reports that could contribute more broadly to the ad-vance of the discipline. Of course, the diagram does not even begin to address the relationship of the Journal with existing web resources or with books, which are so essential to our visual discipline and are also evolving in the digital era.

I believe that to achieve its potential the Journal must be attentive to and gain the attention of the au-diences for each of these other sets of literature, and that it is important for Landscape Journal to achieve its potential because landscape architecture is so im-portant to the well- being of the planet. I can offer no

The Power of Relationship: Remarks by Joan Iverson Nassauer

Since its inception more than 25 years ago, Landscape Journal has dramatically infl uenced the evolution of our discipline, and it must continue to do this and more. Looking ahead, my aspiration for the Journal is for its infl uence to expand even further—for the Jour-nal to be a vital source of new knowledge for practition-ers of landscape architecture as well as academics, and to be a scholarly journal that is regularly consulted by scholars and practitioners in collaborating disciplines like architecture, conservation biology, engineering, landscape ecology, planning, and restoration ecology. This is an ambitious but also utterly achievable goal at a time when digital connectivity dramatically and quickly multiplies the effects of print media.

To approach this goal, I suggest that we consider the future of the Journal in relationship to other schol-arly journals, along with other print and digital media that are integral to the content of our discipline. If we conceive of landscape architecture as a discipline and profession that intervenes in landscapes to achieve desirable change—from small gardens to continental plans, then we should view our journal in relationship to the content and communication strategies of many other publications (Figure 1 is an incomplete represen-tation of these).

Figure 1. A map of the scholarly lit-erature in landscape architecture. (Courtesy of Joan Nassauer)



Landscape Journal & Global Change: Remarks by Frederick Steiner

Landscape is a concept with fresh scholarly legs. Ecolo-gists, geographers, and historians embrace the spatial synthesis of natural and cultural processes. Meanwhile, the discipline of landscape architecture continues to advance with new graduate programs being established across North America and around the world. As a result, Landscape Journal is positioned well to contribute to several overlapping fi elds of study. Among the many challenges to be faced by Landscape Journal:

1. What is the future of a printed journal in a digital world?

2. How will the contributors to the journal respond to the big drivers of global change?

3. How green will the journal be?

Instead of going to the library and consulting an encyclopedia, we sit before our computer screen and launch a Google search. Faculty and students alike in-creasingly depend on the Web for their research. Some journals have become totally online. I believe there is an important role for beautifully produced academic journals in the design community broadly and, more specifi cally, within landscape architecture. Designers are visual and tactile. As such, high quality photographs and imaginative illustrations communicate as impor-tantly as clear prose to the design reader. The skillful layout and integration of images and words stimulate design scholars in a manner similar to the clever site design of an urban plaza. However, there are clear effi -ciency advantages to adapting to current technologies. For example, the electronic submission and review of papers can improve the process. After an article is published, its digital retrieval is useful. If one consults “Google Scholar” and types in “greenway” or “urban park,” Landscape Journal articles should be the fi rst ones listed.

We live in a world of change. Several global drivers will affect landscapes, including urbanization, popula-

concrete plan to achieve this potential, but perhaps we might begin by thinking about our success in terms of the criteria suggested by Cash, et al., in their National Academy of Sciences publication, “Knowledge systems for sustainable development” (Cash et al. 2003). Speak-ing to scientists (rather than designers), they say that boundary- spanning institutions or procedures are nec-essary for science to meet the needs of decision makers and also respect the values and beliefs of people whose lives are affected by the advice of experts. They say that successful work will be credible to other experts in a dis-cipline, relevant to the questions and concerns of deci-sion makers, and legitimate in incorporating perspec-tives of everyday people. Recently, Paul Opdam and I have discussed design in these same terms (Nassauer and Opdam 2008).

Using these criteria, we can begin by thinking specifi cally about digital opportunities. For Landscape Journal to support the credibility of landscape architec-ture as a scholarly discipline within American universi-ties (and entry- level scholars in particular), we should be attentive to the “impact factor” of the Journal, mak-ing all past issues as well as current and in press issues digitally available for downloading and citation. To make the Journal more relevant, these issues should be available in the same way to ASLA and International Federation of Landscape Architects (IFLA) members free- of- charge. To enhance legitimacy, we might con-sider inviting Journal authors to post short digital, blog- style versions of their papers on a free public LJ website, linked to the ASLA webpage, and perhaps also to other magazines that address a broader public. These thoughts, of course, only scratch the surface of our potential.

The content and format of the Journal over the past 25 years show that the discipline has benefi ted enor-mously from the generous devotion and wisdom of its editors. Their work has established the foundation from which we can build landscape architecture scholarship to have an even more profound effect on the world we inhabit.


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225638141_Design_in_science_extending_the_landscape_ecology_paradigm_Landsc_Ecol?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-4437431a06f5fa29c4f995d5ec148b5c&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI1MDIzMTkwNjtBUzoxMDIyMTI5ODY0NzQ0OTZAMTQwMTM4MDg4MzA4Ng==


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/10732922_Knowledge_systems_for_sustainable_development_Proc_Nat_Acad_Sci_USA?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-4437431a06f5fa29c4f995d5ec148b5c&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI1MDIzMTkwNjtBUzoxMDIyMTI5ODY0NzQ0OTZAMTQwMTM4MDg4MzA4Ng==


equivalent of “a central nervous system for the planet,” but, he adds, “without a brain.” Landscape Journal can contribute some of the necessary grey matter. These global drivers underscore the need for more sustainable approaches to design and planning. The late John Lyle (1994) suggested that we should go beyond sustainabil-ity and produce regenerative systems.

If this is the case, we might then ask: “How green will Landscape Journal be?”

Landscape architects argue that we have been on the vanguard of sustainable / green / regenerative de-sign. Past issues of the leading academic journal in the discipline are unconvincing in this regard. Certainly, ecological concerns are present. However, green design and planning has not advanced as far in the pages of the Journal as, say, landscape history has. Leadership in green design will require more scholarship to advance the fi eld. For example, in partnership with the Lady Bird Johnson Wildfl ower Center and the US Botanic Garden, the ASLA launched the Sustainable Sites Initiative in 2006 (see www.sustainablesites.org). This initiative has the potential to change how landscapes are designed as much as the US Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Program has changed architecture and building design.

However, energy and environmental concerns are only part of the sustainability triad that also en-compasses social equity and economic prosperity. The potential for scholarship in this triple bottom line of ecology, equity, and economics is immense. Landscape Journal will grow in stature and relevance only to the extent its editors and contributors embrace this oppor-tunity.

CRITICAL RESPONSES

Patrick Miller (Virginia Tech) and Anne Whiston Spirn (MIT) were asked to serve as respondents to the panel, commenting on what they had heard and to add ad-ditional insights. Particularly in light of the fi ndings of the content analysis presented by Powers and Walker, they were asked to take a more critical stance on missed

tion growth, environmental and climate change, and connectivity. For the fi rst time in human history, over half of the world’s population lives in urban regions. The number of people continues to escalate in this fi rst urban century. At the beginning of the twentieth century, there were two billion people on Earth. Now there are over 6.7 and this number continues to grow. In the United States, we have grown to over 300 mil-lion and are on our way to 400 million. Like the rest of the world, the United States has become more urban. The Regional Plan Association and the University of Pennsylvania project that 70 percent of the population growth and 70 percent of the economic growth will oc-cur in 10 mega- regions by mid- century (Regional Plan Association 2006). The consequences of such growth on landscapes are evident. For instance, in a study for the Brookings Institute, Chris Nelson projects that half the buildings that will exist in 2030 will have been built since 2000 (Nelson 2004).

The environmental and climate impacts of all these new buildings are evident. As Ed Mazria (2003) notes, approximately 48 percent of the energy consumed and 46 percent of the CO

2 gases produced in the United

States come from buildings. When the transportation sector is added, then around 75 percent of our energy and greenhouse gas challenge comes from the built en-vironment. Greenhouse gases are changing the planet. As a result, global and local environmental change has reemerged as an important public policy issue. As the planet continues to heat up, as biodiversity declines, as air and water quality are threatened, and as farmlands disappear and soils erode, the environment will likely remain a focus of political debate. Landscape design and planning remain hopeful actions that may help to mitigate the deleterious consequences of climate and other environmental changes.

Another global driver that can assist such posi-tive design and planning is connectivity. Through the World Wide Web, the Internet, geographic information systems (GIS), and remotely sensed imagery, we live in an increasingly interconnected world. GIS pioneer Jack Dangermond has observed that we have created the



But is the research being done by the academics serving the needs of the profession?

If landscape architecture is to grow and advance as a profession it would seem that leading the profes-sion with new knowledge is critical. Instead of worry-ing about whether we are graduating enough students to grow the profession, we might be better served by focusing on how to lead the profession by demonstrat-ing our relevance to society in helping to solve some of these bigger problems. As you read the thoughts of the other authors who are refl ecting on this special occa-sion, I encourage you to think about what it tells us—not only about who we are, but more importantly, who we want to be as a profession.

Bridges, Critical Prospects, and Research that Informs Practice: Response from Anne Spirn

The diverse areas of knowledge from which landscape architecture draws pose a formidable challenge not only for scholars and practitioners, but also for a jour-nal whose mission is to publish “the results of research and scholarly investigation relating to landscape design, planning, and management.” It is not possible to keep up with the relevant literature in all the fi elds germane to the practice and teaching of landscape design, plan-ning, and management. It is diffi cult enough within a particular fi eld.

At my fi rst CELA meeting in 1980, I presented a paper on the challenges posed and the potential af-forded by the literature on the urban natural environ-ment: written in the languages of disparate disciplines, inaccessible to the uninitiated, and sequestered in doz-ens of specialized journals and conference proceed-ings, yet offering rich insights into how cities might be designed in concert with natural processes. I argued the need for landscape architects who could mine this knowledge, translate it, integrate it, and apply it to ur-ban design and planning. Twenty- eight years later, the bridge between knowledge and its application is now strong in some fi elds of landscape architecture but weak to non- existent in others.

Special issues of Landscape Journal have helped

opportunities, as well as potential for greater relevance of Landscape Journal to the fi eld of practice. This they have done with their customary fl air and vision.

A Mirror of the Profession: Response by Patrick Miller

The 25th anniversary of Landscape Journal provides a special opportunity—an opportunity not only to cel-ebrate the success and accomplishments of the Jour-nal, but also to refl ect on the role that the Journal has played in shaping our profession. Certainly the editors are a driving force in the content of the Journal, but the content is also dependent on what is submitted by au-thors and by what reviewers fi nd acceptable to publish. What authors and reviewers believe to be important is related to their education and training, thus the content of the Journal is also related to how we educate land-scape architects. In this way, the Journal is a mirror or a refl ection of who we are as a profession.

When Landscape Journal is viewed in this way it leads to several interesting questions. As researchers and scholars who publish in the Journal, are we lead-ing the profession by expanding knowledge or simply serving the status quo? As researchers and scholars are we taking on the bigger issues and problems of the day, for example: what are the drivers of global change, or how can we fi x a land development system in this coun-try that is essentially broken, in terms of serving the long- term needs of our society? It would seem that if the Journal is playing a role in leading the profession then we should be writing about these issues. If we are not taking on these issues and problems in our research and scholarly writing, one must ask “Why not?”

Perhaps it is the way we have been educated or the way we educate our students. Do we teach them to ask the bigger questions? Perhaps we, as researchers and scholars, are weighed down by the pragmatics or real world constraints of serving the profession. After all, most clients don’t pay us to ask the bigger questions. Or perhaps there is a disconnect between professional practice and academic practice. With a few exceptions most practitioners have left research to the academics.



rum for research from many perspectives (history and culture, social and behavioral sciences, planning and design). But do the majority of articles relate directly to “landscape design, planning, and management?” Do they inform and advance the teaching and practice of landscape architecture? Is the journal fulfi lling its mission? Walker and Powers’s analysis of each article’s “conclusion and summary” (and the dwindling number of practitioners who subscribe to the journal) suggest that it is not. They report that 65 percent of the articles provide no recommendations or guidelines for action; of these, 20 percent provide no conclusion at all, they just “essentially end.” Not all contributions need speak directly to the practice (and teaching) of landscape de-sign, planning, and management, but the great major-ity should.

For a landscape architect, landscape must be many things at once: a dynamic physical place, a habitat, a historical artifact, an ecological and cultural resource, a medium of expression, and, fundamentally, a sphere of action. The need to act places special demands on re-search and theory: a profession that makes landscapes requires theories, methods, and knowledge that sup-port that practice. We cannot escape the integrative and shaping imperatives of the discipline.

As stewards of the principal scholarly journal of landscape architecture, the editors of Landscape Jour-nal have an awesome responsibility. For their wisdom, dedication, and enormous effort, the profession of landscape architecture owes each of the past and pres-ent editors a profound debt. May we be so fortunate in our journal’s future editors as they face the challenge of building bridges, providing critical prospects, and promoting the publication of research that informs practice.

REFERENCES

Arnfi eld, John. 2003. Two decades of urban climate research. In-

ternational Journal of Climatology 23 (1): 1–26.

Cash, D. W., W. C. Clark, F. Alcock, N. M. Dickson, N. Eckley, D. H.

Guston, J. Jager, and R. B. Mitchell. 2003. Knowledge sys-

greatly to build and fortify such bridges, but, with only two issues per year, this is not an adequate or compre-hensive solution. I believe that what landscape archi-tecture now needs is a series of review articles on partic-ularly important or newly emerging areas of research. For many disciplines, from the humanities to the social and natural sciences, review articles are the primary mode for advancing and defi ning a fi eld. A review ar-ticle is a major contribution. It is usually written by a senior scholar who surveys hundreds of books and ar-ticles and presents a synthetic overview of this compre-hensive bibliography, probing such questions as: What are the principle themes and threads of inquiry, and what are the keys works and contributions in each area? What are the regions of agreement and the disputed ter-ritories? What are the gaps in knowledge and which are potentially fertile areas of inquiry?

Richard White’s “American Environmental History: The Development of a New Field,” (Pacifi c Historical Review 54, 1985) is a classic review essay: in a survey of publications from diverse disciplines, including history, geography, and landscape architecture, White defi ned environmental history as a fi eld. Another infl uential ex-ample with relevance for landscape architects is John Arnfi eld’s “Two Decades of Urban Climate Research” in the International Journal of Climatology 23 (2003). Without such articles for our own discipline, how can we arrive at an understanding of the status of the many fi elds within landscape architecture?

The primary audience of Landscape Journal in-cludes academics in landscape architecture and the al-lied fi elds of architecture and planning. An important secondary audience for the journal is researchers in other disciplines whose work informs landscape de-sign, planning, and management. Review articles in specifi c fi elds within landscape architecture would give such researchers a fresh perspective on their own work and, perhaps, help sharpen and refi ne their research questions in light of potential applications.

The content analysis of Landscape Journal over the past twenty- fi ve years by Jason Walker and Matt Powers (LJ, this issue) suggests that the journal provides a fo-



earned a BA in architectural studies and holds a PhD in cultural geography from the University of Minnesota. Arne is the recipi-ent of six ASLA research and communications awards, and was named CELA’s Outstanding Educator for 2001. Included among his numerous publications are the co- edited volume, Preserving Cultural Landscapes in America (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000). Arne currently serves on the advisory board of the Land-scape Chapter of the Society of Architectural Historians, and re-mains consulting editor for Landscape Journal.

JOAN IVERSON NASSAUER, FASLA, is Professor of Landscape Ar-chitecture in the School of Natural Resources and Environment at the University of Michigan. She has been named Fellow by the ASLA (1992) and CELA (2007), Distinguished Scholar by the International Association of Landscape Ecology (IALE) (2007), and Distinguished Practitioner of Landscape Ecology (1998) by US-IALE. Her numerous publications, and work on the relation-ship between aesthetics and ecology offers important strategies for interdisciplinary collaboration between designers and scien-tists. Her research on the cultural sustainability of landscape change has received numerous awards, including National ASLA Merit Awards for Research. Her new book with Mary Santelmann and Don Scavia, From the Corn Belt to the Gulf (Resources for the Future Press, 2007), discusses ways that alternative agricultural policies could improve the water quality and biodiversity of agri-cultural landscapes.

FREDERICK STEINER, FASLA, is Dean of the School of Architecture, and Henry M. Rockwell Chair in Architecture, at the University of Texas–Austin. He has sustained a research focus on ecological planning, as a Fulbright- Hays scholar in 1980 at the Wageningen University, The Netherlands. In 1998, he was a Rome Prize Fel-low in Preservation at the American Academy in Rome. Dean Steiner received his PhD and MA degrees in city and regional planning and a Master of Regional Planning from the University of Pennsylvania. He earned a Master of Community Planning and a BS in Design from the University of Cincinnati. Dean Steiner is also committed to the development of international programs in landscape architecture and is currently a visiting professor at Tsinghua University in Beijing, China.

PATRICK MILLER is a Past President of ASLA. He has worked in public, private, and academic practice in both the United States and Canada, and has held faculty appointments at four major universities, including the University of Washington, the Univer-sity of Michigan, and the University of British Columbia. For the past 17 years, Patrick has taught in the Landscape Architecture Department at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University where he was head of the department for 13 years. He is cur-rently Associate Dean for Graduate Studies and Outreach in the College of Architecture and Urban Studies. Patrick has a BSc in landscape architecture from California State Polytechnic Univer-sity, an MLA from the University of California at Berkeley and a

tems for sustainable development. Proceedings of the Na-

tional Academy of Science 100 (14): 8086–8091.

Lyle, John Tillman. 1994. Regenerative Design for Sustainable De-

velopment. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Mazria, Edward. 2003. It’s the architecture, stupid. Solar Today

May / June:48–51.

Nassauer, J. I., and P. Opdam. 2008. Design in science: Extending

the landscape ecology paradigm. Landscape Ecology In

press.

Nelson, Arthur C. 2004. Toward a New Metropolis: The Opportu-

nity to Rebuild America. Washington, DC: The Brookings

Institute.

Powers, Matthew, and Jason Walker. 2009. Twenty- fi ve Years of

Landscape Journal: An analysis of authorship and article

content,” Landscape Journal 28(1): forthcoming

Regional Plan Association. 2006. America 2050: A Prospectus.

New York: Regional Plan Association.

White, Richard. 1985. American environmental history: The

development of a new fi eld. Pacifi c Historical Review

54:297–335.

AUTHORS M. ELEN DEMING, DDes, ASLA, is Editor of Landscape Journal, and Professor and Head of the Department of Landscape Architecture at the University of Illinois, Champaign- Urbana. For-merly Associate Professor of Landscape Architecture at SUNY ESF, in Syracuse, New York, she began teaching design, history, and theories of landscape architecture in 1993. Prior to teaching, she was Associate and Project Designer at Sasaki Associates, Boston, MA, from 1985 to 1992.

DARREL MORRISON, FASLA, is Professor and Dean Emeritus of the School of Environmental Design at the University of Georgia. He began his teaching career at the University of Wisconsin- Madison, where he earned his MLA in 1969. He served as Chair of the department from 1978 to 1981, as Landscape Journal was be-ing conceived and established. In 1983 Darrel joined the Uni-versity of Georgia as Professor and Dean, serving from 1983 to 1992. Since then, Darrel has taught as a visitor at a number of other programs, most recently at Rutgers University (where he has taught since 2004) and the Conway School (offering an-nual design workshops since 1994). He was recognized with the Outstanding Educator award from CELA in 1994, and numer-ous other awards for his work in horticulture, design, and native plants awareness.

ARNOLD (ARNE) ALANEN is Fellow of the ASLA and CELA, and founding co- editor of Landscape Journal. As Professor of Land-scape Architecture at the University of Wisconsin- Madison, where he has taught since 1974, his teaching and research have fo-cused on landscape history and historic preservation. Arne


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44407545_Regenerative_design_for_sustainable_development_John_Tillman_Lyle?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-4437431a06f5fa29c4f995d5ec148b5c&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI1MDIzMTkwNjtBUzoxMDIyMTI5ODY0NzQ0OTZAMTQwMTM4MDg4MzA4Ng==

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44407545_Regenerative_design_for_sustainable_development_John_Tillman_Lyle?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-4437431a06f5fa29c4f995d5ec148b5c&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI1MDIzMTkwNjtBUzoxMDIyMTI5ODY0NzQ0OTZAMTQwMTM4MDg4MzA4Ng==

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270142638_American_Environmental_History_The_Development_of_a_New_Historical_Field?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-4437431a06f5fa29c4f995d5ec148b5c&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI1MDIzMTkwNjtBUzoxMDIyMTI5ODY0NzQ0OTZAMTQwMTM4MDg4MzA4Ng==






https://www.researchgate.net/publication/250231912_Twenty-Five_Years_of_Landscape_Journal_An_Analysis_of_Authorship_and_Article_Content?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-4437431a06f5fa29c4f995d5ec148b5c&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI1MDIzMTkwNjtBUzoxMDIyMTI5ODY0NzQ0OTZAMTQwMTM4MDg4MzA4Ng==






worked at Wallace McHarg Roberts and Todd on diverse proj-ects, including Woodlands New Community. Her books include The Granite Garden (Basic Books, 1984), The Language of Land-scape (Yale University Press, 1998), and Daring to Look: Doro-thea Lange’s Photographs and Reports from the Field (University of Chicago Press, 2008). Since 1986, Spirn has directed the West Philadelphia Landscape Project. She was awarded the 2001 In-ternational Cosmos Prize for “contributions to the harmonious coexistence of nature and humankind.”

PhD from the University of Michigan. Patrick has lectured nation-ally and internationally on landscape architecture topics and pro-fessional education, most recently in China, Australia, Malaysia, and the Middle East. Through his writing, teaching, and practice Patrick has been a tireless advocate of creating landscapes that are good for people the environment and the economy.

ANNE WHISTON SPIRN is Professor of Landscape Architecture and Planning at MIT. She received a BA cum laude from Harvard University and the MLA from the University of Pennsylvania, and has taught at both these universities. Prior to teaching, Spirn


Retrospect and Forecast Remarks on the Occasion of the 25th Anniversary of Landscape Journal

Documents

Transcript of Retrospect and Forecast Remarks on the Occasion of the 25th Anniversary of Landscape Journal