Landscape and Urban Planning 100 (2011) 98–108

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Landscape and Urban Planning

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/landurbplan

Mapping traditional cultural landscapes in the Mediterranean area using a

combined multidisciplinary approach: Method and application to Mount Etna
(Sicily; Italy)
Sebastiano Cullotta ∗ , Giuseppe Barbera
Dipartimento di Colture Arboree, Viale delle Scienze, Edificio 4, 90128 Palermo, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Traditional cultural landscapes (TCLs) are prominent in Mediterranean countries. The abundance of this
Received 9 July 2010 landscape type, however, is not reflected by broad-scale inventories and mapping tools. The aim of this
Received in revised form paper is to highlight the need for a multidisciplinary approach to landscape analysis, with special refer-
11 November 2010
ence to the Mediterranean area. We propose an integrated method that combines deductive and inductive
Accepted 22 November 2010
processes to define and map TCLs in a study area (Mount Etna, Sicily, Italy). We also develop a procedure to
Available online 19 December 2010
characterize the primary components of these landscapes as a reference to be used in cultural-landscape
descriptions. For mapping purposes, three different scales of analysis were examined to select appropri-
Keywords:
Landscape inventory
ate data-sets of interest. At the broadest scale (1:250,000–100,000), land systems of territorial contexts
Multi-disciplinary approach (LSTCs) were detected by overlaying climatic, lithomorphological and topological maps. At the second
Hierarchical classification level (1:100,000–25,000), landscapes of main agroforestry systems (LMASs) were identified by adding
Traditional land-use primary land-cover and land-use maps. At the third and most detailed scale (1:25,000–10,000), TCLs were
Rural heritage features specified using detailed land-use maps of traditional agro-forestry systems. This procedure provides a
Agroforestry systems tool to define and characterize the primary components of TCLs and to designate specific characters of
importance (e.g., landscape composition and configuration, traditional techniques of land-management,
and heritage features). By following this procedure, we detect a large number of TCLs in the Mt. Etna
region, an important and representative area of Mediterranean cultural landscapes.
© 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Contemporary European policies that aim to enhance knowl-
edge about and conservation of cultural landscapes (e.g., the
European Landscape Convention; Council of Europe, 2000) are par-
ticularly relevant for regions such as Sicily. Because of its central
position in the Mediterranean Basin, its ecological diversity and bio-
diversity, and its longstanding history of exchanges among major
agricultural civilizations, Sicily encompasses several agricultural
landscapes and agroforestry systems. As a consequence of different
natural and historical settings intersecting for millennia, Sicily can
be viewed as representative of the Mediterranean area as a whole,
particularly its agricultural landscapes.
Owing to its location and the variability of its physiography,
lithology, and pedology (Fierotti, 1988) and therefore of its meso-
and micro-climates, Sicily has been a major reservoir of biodi-
versity since the Tertiary period (Groves and Di Castri, 1991).
For example, Sicily is home to approximately 2700 vascular-plant
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +39 091 23861229; fax: +39 091 23861211.
E-mail addresses: cullotta@unipa.it (S. Cullotta), barbera@unipa.it (G. Barbera).
species (of which 11% are endemic), making it one of the pri-
mary biodiversity hotspots in the Mediterranean Basin (Médail
and Quézel, 1997). Substantial diversity is also present in culti-
vated species and intraspecific varieties and landraces. Moreover,
Sicily has hosted continuous and intensive agricultural activity
since the Neolithic Age (Sereni, 1961), leading to remarkable
growth of its autochthonous species in terms of both quantity
(with varieties brought from other regions as a result of historical
events) and intraspecific biodiversity (through anthropic selec-
tion). These characteristics are common in many areas around
the Mediterranean Basin (e.g., Blondel, 2006; Geri et al., 2010a;
Grove and Rackham, 2002; Mazzoleni et al., 2004a; Sirami et al.,
2010).
Sicily’s high environmental variability is particularly visible
in locations where plains, hills, high mountains, the sea, and
sizeable human settlements all occur within a small area. Tra-
ditional landscapes (sensu Antrop, 1997) are often encountered
in such areas, showing historical identities that were largely sta-
ble until the mid-twentieth century (Antrop, 2005; Bignal et al.,
1995; Vos and Meekes, 1999) but that have in recent years been
subject to either agricultural intensification or abandonment (re-
naturalization) and degradation (e.g., urbanization). Through these

0169-2046/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.11.012
 S. Cullotta, G. Barbera / Landscape and Urban Planning 100 (2011) 98–108
Fig. 1. Geographic location of Sicily in the heart of the Mediterranean Basin showing the study area of Mt. Etna.
processes, traditional landscapes are now shrinking and gradually
disappearing (Aalen, 2001; Agnoletti, 2007; Green and Vos, 2001).
Traditional agricultural and agroforestry landscapes are charac-
terized by low-intensity systems and land-management activities,
providing a high degree of multifunctionality (Jones-Walters, 2008;
Pinto-Correia and Vos, 2004; Vos and Klijn, 2000) in terms of pro-
duction (typical products), environment (e.g., soil protection and
biodiversity), and culture (distinctive landscapes).
The cultural and ecological relevance of traditional cultural
landscapes (TCLs) makes it necessary to increase our knowl-
edge of these landscapes through an integrated, multidisciplinary
approach (Farina and Naveh, 1993; Naveh and Liebermann, 1994).
Such an approach involves a multi-tiered classification of their
environmental variability (both natural and anthropic); landscapes
are first identified on the basis of their primary natural features and
then on the basis of anthropic activities over time (Antrop, 1997;
Vogiatzakis et al., 2006).
Similar integrated approaches have been employed in several
inventories and similar initiatives at the European (Bunce, 2001;
Meeus, 1995; Stanners and Bourdeau, 1995) and national (APAT,
2003; Blasi, 2007; Firmino, 1999; Hooke, 1998; Van Eetvelde and
Antrop, 2009) levels. These studies differ in the particular method-
ologies used in terms of data inputs and in-depth analyses. A
classification of TCLs in Italy has not yet been produced (Barbera
and Cullotta, 2009). Devising such a classification is the first step
in the characterization and integrated assessment of their function
and conservation.
To address this gap, which exists at various territorial levels,
the present study emphasizes the importance of an integrated,
multidisciplinary, and multi-scale approach to TCLs in a region
with high environmental and cultural diversity that make it rep-
resentative of the Mediterranean area. This approach incorporates
inventories and mapping as well as functional characterization,
99
thus integrating landscape-ecology analyses and traditional cul-
tural land-management descriptions.
Here, we describe a case study in which TCLs were identified on
Mount Etna (E Sicily) (Fig. 1), a volcano that is one of the highest
mountains in the Mediterranean Basin. Because of its planime-
try and orography, Mt. Etna is representative of many natural and
cultural Mediterranean landscapes as well as agricultural and agro-
forestry systems.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Study area
Mt. Etna is roughly a right-circular volcanic cone (Fig. 1), extend-
ing over about 137,859 ha and ranging from 0 m to 3350 m a.s.l.
Because of its size, Mt. Etna is highly variable in physiography
and slope and in natural and anthropogenic biological richness, and
it encompasses a great diversity of cultural systems and landscapes
(Barbera et al., 2010; Busacca, 2000; Chester et al., 1985; Patanè
et al., 2004; Poli Marchese, 1982; Poli-Marchese and Patti, 2000;
Regione Siciliana; 1996; TCI, 1977).
Our study area consists of the volcanic cone and its old and
recent lava flows (effusive vents) (Allard et al., 2006; Chester et al.,
1985; Favalli et al., 1999; Salvi et al., 2006). The margins of the
study area include small landscape patches that are otherwise
widespread elements of the surrounding region, such as fluvial and
fluvial-lake incoherent systems and clayey substrates. The study
area also includes all recent, old, and/or terraced lava deposits;
the latter include marly-clay deposits, varicolored clays, and are-
naceous clay or clayey-silt soils (Fierotti, 1988; Regione Siciliana,
1996).
Since the Neolithic Age, the study area (as well as all of Sicily)
has hosted continuous and intensive agricultural activity, which
100 S. Cullotta, G. Barbera / Landscape and Urban Planning 100 (2011) 98–108
Fig. 2. Phases and scales of the applied methodology (gray background) and their connections with other landscape-mapping processes (e.g., vegetation-pattern landscapes).
has produced the wide range of landscape systems and forms that
characterizes the island. Indeed, the Sicilian landscape has been
enriched by diverse influences that, in terms of both crops and cul-
ture, have come with the various stages of local history (including
the dominion of Greece and Carthage, the Roman Empire, the “Arab
Agricultural Revolution” of the Middle Ages, the introduction of
American species, 18th- and 19th-century scientific research) (e.g.,
Barbera, 2000; Di Pasquale et al., 2004).
Mt. Etna is the highest volcano in Europe and by many accounts
the most aesthetically regarded volcano in the world. The beauty
of its landscape is the result of a unique natural and an excep-
tional human history that has inspired many great philosophers,
artists, scientists from Homer and Plato in the Ancient Greek era to
contemporary times. For Romantic-era European travelers of the
“Grand Tour” and today’s tourist alike, Mount Etna has often been
referred to as: “the solemn moment that makes the heart beat of
any trip to Sicily” (Tuzet, 1988). Of the aesthetic qualities of the Mt.
Etna landscape that draw such acclaim, perhaps most notable is the
contrast provided between the rocky sublime of the volcano itself
and the rolling, pastoral mix of cultivated fields and woodlands
that surround it. Historically, the landscape of Etna area evolved
through continuous ruptures represented by lava flows that period-
ically upset ownership and land use. This counterpoint between the
“death” of the sterile lava and the “life” of the woods and fields pro-
vide for a visually complex landscape mosaic that has high cultural
and historic value.
The present landscape matrix of Mt. Etna is characterized by a
mixture of different traditional land uses and land covers. In gen-
eral, natural and semi-natural communities (especially forests and
shrublands) prevail above 1000 m a.s.l. (Poli-Marchese and Patti,
2000). Below 1000 m a.s.l., the matrix is agricultural and contains
various combinations of closed agro-forestry systems (i.e., coltura
promiscua) (Barbera et al., 2004; Busacca, 2000).
2.2. Multidisciplinary approach
In landscape ecology, researchers usually employ a hierarchical-
classification approach to analyze discrete environmental units
according to a set of applied controlling factors (Howard and
Mitchell, 1980; Klijn and Udo de Haes, 1994; Zonneveld, 1995). The
idea is to identify homogeneous environmental units according to
the scale of observation.
A set of informative factors that match the relevant geo-
informative level can provide a further description of landscapes in
geographical, ecological, and cultural terms. These factors include
geomorphology, geology, climate, soil, vegetation, agricultural land
use, history, and cultural perceptions (Forman and Godron, 1986;
Zonneveld, 1995).
First, landscapes are identified on the basis of their primary
abiotic natural factors (physiography, lithology, climate, and ter-
ritorial topology). Second, landscapes can be classified based on
their biotic features and anthropic activity over time (natural veg-
etation cover, agricultural land use, and other thematic maps may
be useful) (Antrop, 1997; Vogiatzakis et al., 2006).
For example, the landscape character assessment (LCA)
approach tends to define landscape character as a distinct, recognis-
able and consistent pattern of elements in the landscape that makes
one landscape different from another (Swanwick, 2002). Unique
 S. Cullotta, G. Barbera / Landscape and Urban Planning 100 (2011) 98–108 101

Table 1
Primary landscape components and features in traditional cultural landscapes (TCLs) and in non-TCLs, especially in Mediterranean areas.

Main components TCLs Modern cultural landscapes Natural and semi-natural landscapes

Landscape composition and configuration:

Patch composition Agronomic and forestry land-uses/covers Only agronomic land-uses Largely forest and pre-forest stands
(domus-hortus-ager-saltus-sylva) (domus-ager) (saltus-sylva)
Patch shape Heterogeneous (topography) Regular (geometric) Heterogeneous
Patch configuration Mostly dispersed/clumped Mostly uniform Mostly uniform
Corridors Mostly present Mostly not present Present
Remnant natural patches Mostly present Absent (Only natural cover)

Traditional techniques of land management:

Mechanisation Usually not employed Employed Employed/not employed
Local plant varieties Employed Usually not employed Natural varieties
Crop rotation Employed Not employed /
Crop promiscuity Employed Not employed /
Fertilization Organic Chemical /
Animal traction Present (today mostly remnant/relict) Absent Present (mostly remnant)
Livestock grazing Present (in rotation) Absent Present
Local animal races Employed Usually not employed Employed

Specific and intra-specific biodiversity:

Natural species High (plants and animals) Absent (or very low) High (flora and fauna)
Cultivated species Medium-high (polyculture) Low (monoculture) Low-absent
Cultivated varieties Medium-high (polyculture) Low (monoculture) low-absent

Rural linear elements and features:

Stonewalls Widespread (according to the presence of Absent Absent
rock outcrop)
Terraces Generally widespread Absent Absent
Dry-stone enclosures Generally widespread Absent Absent
Hedgerows and ecotones Generally widespread Mostly absent Present
Green belts Generally present Mostly absent (Natural cover)
Tracks and footpaths Highly present Present Present
Small ponds Present Mostly not present /
Small animal and human shelters Present Absent Present

Material heritage features:

Old rural country houses and settlements Present/widespread Absent Absent or isolated
Local agronomic and forestry manual tools Employed Not employed Employed
Old tools and machines (wine presses, Present and mostly employed Absent Absent
water mills, water tanks, etc.)
Manuscripts Present/widespread Absent Present
Poems Present Absent Present
Historic paintings and pictures Present/widespread Absent Present

Non-material heritage features:

Toponyms Present/widespread Absent Present
Dialects Present (words and phrases linked to rural Absent Present
life)
Music Present Absent Present
Other oral tradition Present Absent Present

combinations of geology, landform, soils, vegetation, land use, field
patterns and human settlement create the character, which makes
different landscapes distinct from each other and gives each its
particular sense of place (Swanwick, 2004). This process aims to
identifying areas of similar character, classifying and mapping them
and describing their particular landscape type.
Following these considerations, various hierarchical frame-
works for land classification and mapping have been designed
(Blasi et al., 2000; Zonneveld, 1995). From a higher to a lower
level of abstraction, the following environmental units have been
delineated (see Blasi et al., 2000): land regions (detected by
macroclimatic features – scale > 1:250,000); land systems (primar-
ily defined according to significant lithological and geographical
differences – scale 1:500,000–1:250,000); land facets (identified
according to morphology and bioclimatic types and showing units
where major vegetation series and land-cover types prevail – scale
1:250,000–1:50,000); and land units and land elements (includ-
ing vegetation series and syntaxonomic associations, respectively
– scale < 1:50,000).
In defining landscape-typological models for the mapping of
vegetation patterns, Blasi et al. (2005) have proposed a combined
approach including both deductive (for abiotic ecological factors)
and inductive (for vegetation types) processes.
Here, we suggest a possible methodology for the definition of
TCLs based not only on land-cover and land-use maps (sectorial
approach) but also on a combination of deductive and inductive
processes (combined multidisciplinary approach). This procedure
identifies and defines TCLs within homogeneous environmental
units (in terms of climatic, lithological, and geomorphological fac-
tors) and arranges them within a hierarchical classification system.
Fig. 2 shows the integrated methodology for mapping TCLs. The
interactions between biophysical features and human activities
(see the methodological explanations below) and their differ-
entiation compared to other landscape-mapping processes (e.g.,
landscape of vegetation patterns) are highlighted.
2.3. Definition and characterization of a traditional cultural
landscape (TCL)
For a TCL inventory, it is necessary to begin by defining a tra-
ditional landscape. The word “traditional” refers to landscapes
with long histories and slow rates of change in accordance with
102 S. Cullotta, G. Barbera / Landscape and Urban Planning 100 (2011) 98–108
the environment (Antrop, 1997; Antrop, 2005). Traditional land-
scapes are partly natural and partly cultural, resulting from the
long-term interaction between humans and nature (Farina, 1998;
UNESCO, 1999). They are often characterized by a small spatial
scale, limited technology, low use of fertilizers and pesticides,
high biodiversity with a mosaic of important wildlife habitats,
and amenity value (Altieri and Nicholls, 2002; Moreira et al.,
2006; Vos and Klijn, 2000). Such structural and functional char-
acteristics separate traditional land uses from modern agricultural
systems.
Most traditional agricultural systems, and the traditional
landscapes where they occur, remained unchanged in Euro-
Mediterranean countries (e.g., Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, Greece)
until the mid-twentieth century (Geri et al., 2010b; Gomez-
Limon and Fernandez, 1999; Grove and Rackham, 2002; Kizos
and Koulouri, 2006; Mazzoleni et al., 2004b; Moreira et al.,
2001; Petanidou et al., 2008; Pinto-Correia, 2000; Sereni, 1961;
Sirami et al., 2010). These systems were based on locally avail-
able resources and on multi-crop and multifunctional production
models. In Italy, for example, the number of modern landscapes
and agricultural systems increased remarkably from the mid- to
late-1950s onward (Agnoletti, 2007; Di Gennaro, 2007), when the
country underwent substantial industrialization.
In a pan-European landscape inventory, Meeus placed these
landscapes among the most typical in the region (“regional
landscapes”), giving them names such as Coltura promiscua, Monta-
dos/Dehesa, Polder, Bocages, Semi-bocages, Mountains, and Terraces
(Meeus, 1995). All of these types are cultural, man-made land-
scapes, each with distinguishing features.
According to the European Landscape Convention (Article 1;
Council of Europe, 2000), it is crucial to examine both ecological
and socio-economic landscape attributes and features. Therefore,
our work includes both aspects, aiming to define a more compre-
hensive and global landscape inventory that can be used as a basic
knowledge set for the development of dynamic strategies, holistic
planning initiatives, and cultural landscape conservation.
In defining a cultural landscape, aspects such as its structure,
configuration, scenery, biodiversity, and economic value should be
taken into account because they all contribute to the interactions
between natural and cultural features. In this study, we considered
the following primary components (see Table 1 and Moreira et al.,
2006):
• Landscape composition and configuration.
• Traditional techniques of land management.
• Rural linear elements and features.
• Other material and non-material heritage features.
Landscape patches and their configuration are particularly rel-
evant in cultural landscapes. Land-cover and land-use types (both
natural and anthropogenic) and their spatial patterns significantly
contribute to environmental sustainability and historical/scenic
identity within a cultural landscape.
Traditional land-management practices and techniques have
formed these landscapes across centuries. The agricultural,
forestry, and agroforestry systems that have been employed show
ecological stability over time, often maintaining a high level of
biodiversity (at the species and structural levels) (Table 1). Manage-
ment practices and techniques include types of animal husbandry
and livestock grazing, uses of local breeds (Moreira et al., 2006),
local agronomic tools, and crop rotation and mixing.
Specific management practices and the best uses of land space
(which are particularly important in the Mediterranean area for
physiographical reasons) have produced various types of small
(punctual) and linear rural heritage features. Usually constructed
from local lithological or vegetal materials, these structures include
stone walls, terraces, dry-stone enclosures, stone towers, small ani-
mal and human shelters, hedgerows, tracks and footpaths, ponds.
Other important heritage features include material and non-
material elements: traditional architecture (old rural country
houses and settlements and their distribution patterns) (Cañas
et al., 2009; Fuentes et al., 2010), manuscripts, poems, historic
paintings and pictures, toponyms, dialects, forms of social organi-
zation, music, oral traditions, and tools such as wine presses, water
mills, and water tanks.
A preliminary analysis suggests that TCLs and natural or semi-
natural landscapes show many similarities (see Table 1).
2.4. Data processing and mapping
The spatial data layers used in this study to classify and map the
Mt. Etna-area TCLs (see Fig. 3) include geomorphology (substrates
and soils, climate, land cover and land use) and selected histor-
ical documents hinting at important rural processes (a detailed
map of terraced systems in Sicily). These data sources include the
following:
• a map of the land systems of Italy (Sistemi di Paesaggi d’Italia)
(Blasi, 2007), with 37 land systems detected in Sicily and 4 in the
Mt. Etna area;
• the division of Sicily into 18 territorial contexts (sensu sub-
regional areas) (Regione Siciliana, 1996) on the basis of key
geomorphological factors and general cultural characteristics,
such as territorial units considered for sub-regional environmen-
tal and landscape planning;
• a map of the most recurrent agricultural landscapes in Sicily
(mainly an aggregation of land uses) drafted for the Linee Guida del
Piano Territoriale Paesistico Regionale (Guidelines for the Regional
Landscape Plan; Regione Siciliana, 1996);
• the CORINE Land Cover 2000 database (EEA, 2000) and its techni-
cal implementation throughout Italy, including the relevant map
and a detailed classification system (CLC 2005 – APAT, 2005);
• a map of terraces in Sicily (Barbera et al., 2010), the first inventory
of terraced areas in the whole region;
• a map of land uses in Sicily, with greater detail for agricultural
uses, drafted for the 1994 Agricultural Census (Regione Siciliana,
1994);
• several detailed land-use maps drafted for local agricultural uses
and forest management practices.
All data were referenced to the same geographic system (UTM
32N datum WGS84) and combined in a Geographic Information
System (GIS) using ArcGIS - ArcView 9.2 software (ESRI). Within
this framework, the vector layers were used in the different phases
of the hierarchical procedure to detect TCLs (Fig. 3).
In phase 1, the climatic, lithological, and geomorphological fac-
tors (as shown in the land system map; Blasi, 2007) and a map of
the eighteen primary territorial contexts in Sicily (Regione Siciliana,
1996), which includes the Mt. Etna area, were overlaid in a GIS
to geographically divide the land systems into sub-regional areas,
thus defining “Land Systems of Territorial Context” or LSTCs (scale
1:250,000–1:100,000; Figs. 2 and 3).
In phase 2 (scale 1:100,000–1:25,000; Figs. 2 and 3), only the Mt.
Etna study area was considered (sub-regional scale). “Landscapes
of Main Agroforestry Systems” (LMASs) were outlined within LSTCs
through a map-overlaying procedure involving overall land-cover
and land-use maps and thematic maps of relevant rural features
(including the map of primary agricultural landscapes, the Corine
Land Cover map, and the terraced-areas map). An LMAS, therefore,
includes all relevant landscapes with different degrees of:
• naturalness or anthropization;
 S. Cullotta, G. Barbera / Landscape and Urban Planning 100 (2011) 98–108 103

Fig. 3. Phases of dataset processing according to the three scales of analysis and the hierarchical definition and mapping of landscape units (for landscape-unit numbers,
see Table 2).

• agricultural intensification or extensification (i.e., monoculture
vs. mixed crops and agroforestry systems), and
• the absence or presence of rural features (e.g., stonewalls, ter-
races, and hedgerows).
Finally, in phase 3 (scale 1:25,000–1:10,000; Figs. 2 and 3), TCLs
were identified within the agro-forestry systems through an over-
laying procedure entailing the LMAS map and a detailed regional
land-use map of both agricultural uses and forestry or agroforestry
practices. The presence of traditional agricultural land uses was ver-
ified from a checklist of traditional and historical practices carried
out at the regional level.
Reference units and their denominations identified during the
three processing phases are reported in Table 2. Fig. 3 shows a graph
comparing the different landscape units in spatial terms, thus tak-
ing into account the greater detail incorporated as we progress from
phase 1 to phase 3.
3. Results: Mt. Etna as a case study
On a territorial scale, the first phase led to the identification of
four LSTCs, all showing a prevalence of volcanic substrate; in the
second phase, seven LMASs were detected (Fig. 3). Their denom-
104 S. Cullotta, G. Barbera / Landscape and Urban Planning 100 (2011) 98–108
Table 2
Hierarchical classification system for landscape types (s.l.) detected in different phases for the study area of Mt. Etna.
Land system of territorial contexts (LSTC)
(Phase 1)
1. Basic and intermediate volcanos of Mt. Etna
2. Coastal plains and fluvial deltas of Mt. Etna
3. Mainly arenaceous-conglomeratic compact reliefs of Mt. Etna
4. Marly rock reliefs of Mt. Etna
inations reflect their physiography and the distribution of major
crops and/or vegetative cover. Interestingly, LMASs (i.e., macro-
agriculture landscapes) seem to match particular altitudinal ranges
(Table 2). The landscapes detected in this phase are listed below.
1.1 – High-altitude extra-forest volcanic landscape. Located
above 2000 m, this LMAS is characterized by high-altitude open
pulvini (prostrate) vegetation and volcanic desert.
1.2 – Mountain-forest volcanic landscape. With an altitude rang-
ing from 1100 to 2000 m a.s.l., this type of landscape may vary in
terms of prevailing species (deciduous and evergreen oaks, chest-
nut, European beech, laricio pine, various endemic shrubs) and
forestry-management or structural systems (currently maintained
coppice, old and abandoned coppice, coppice in conversion to high
forest, high forest, and forest stands undergoing natural succession
dynamics).
1.3 – Submountain-basal volcanic landscape with fine-grained
land mosaic of agroforestry systems (coltura promiscua) and a con-
siderable presence of rural heritage features (terraces). Located
in the foothills (400/500–1000/1100 m), this LMAS shows a high
density of terraced areas and a diversified landscape mosaic (see
Fig. 5a and b). Mixed fruit crops and other traditional crops, such
as pistachios, hazelnuts, and vineyards, prevail. Several currently
uncultivated agricultural areas are visible between forest patches,
within variable-structural patches, or within zones that are difficult
to categorize. Here, forest regeneration and human settlements are
the main causes of landscape transformation (Fig. 4).
Landscape of main agroforestry systems Traditional cultural landscapes (TCL)
(LMAS)
(Phase 2) (Phase 3)
(only the epithet of the traditional characteristic
land use, which is added to the denomination
detected in phase 2 (middle column), is reported)
1.1. High-altitude extra-forest volcanic /
landscape
1.2. Mountain forest volcanic landscape 1.2.1 . . .. . .. . . of beech coppice
1.2.2 . . .. . .. . . of chestnut coppice
1.2.3 . . .. . .. . . of deciduous and evergreen oak
coppice
1.2.4 . . .. . .. . . of laricio pine high forest
1.3. Submountain-basal volcanic landscape 1.3.1 . . .. . .. . . of vineyards
with fine-grained land mosaic of agroforestry
systems (coltura promiscua) and a considerable
presence of rural heritage features (terraces)
1.3.2 . . .. . .. . . of pistachio-nut orchards
1.3.3 . . .. . .. . . of hazelnut orchards
1.3.4 . . .. . .. . . of mixed orchards and crops
1.4. Subcoastal-basal volcanic landscape with 1.4.1 . . .. . .. . . of citrus orchards
generally irrigated agricultural systems and a
considerable presence of rural heritage
features (terraces)
1.4.2 . . .. . .. . . of mixed orchards and crops
2.1. Coastal-plain volcanic landscape with 2.1.1 . . .. . .. . . of citrus orchards
intensive irrigated agricultural systems and a
considerable presence of artificial surfaces
(human settlements)
2.1.2 . . .. . .. . . of mixed orchards and crops
3.1. Mainly sandy-conglomerate relief 3.1.1 . . .. . .. . . of mixed orchards and crops
landscape (the Alcantara River Basin) with
diversified agroforestry systems and a
considerable presence of rural heritage
features (terraces)
3.1.2 . . .. . .. . . of sowable fields and
pastureland
4.1. Marly, terraced, and alluvial relief 4.1.1 . . .. . .. . . of mixed orchards and crops
landscape (the Simeto River Valley) with
diversified agroforestry systems and little
presence of rural heritage features
4.1.2 . . .. . .. . . of sowable fields and
pastureland
1.4 – Subcoastal-basal volcanic landscape with generally irri-
gated agricultural systems and a considerable presence of rural
heritage features (terraces). Usually located below 300–400 m,
these landscapes often show a high density of terraced areas and
a diversified landscape mosaic. Irrigated fruit crops (citrus fruits)
and mixed crops (such as olive and almond trees, pistachios, and
cactus pears) prevail. Here, the abandonment of agriculture, urban-
ization, and the building of new infrastructure are the main causes
of landscape transformation.
2.1 – Coastal-plain volcanic landscape with intensive irrigated
agricultural systems and a considerable presence of artificial sur-
faces (human settlements). This type of landscape is characterized
by fruit orchards (citrus groves), vegetable gardens, and artificial
surfaces. Here, the abandonment of agriculture, urbanization, and
the building of new infrastructure are the main causes of landscape
transformation.
3.1 – Mainly compact sandy-conglomerate relief landscape (the
Alcantara River Basin) with diversified agroforestry systems and a
considerable presence of rural heritage features (terraces). This set
of areas is heterogeneous due to diverse physiography and land-
cover and land-use types. These areas predominantly feature fruit
crops such as pears, apples, plums, chestnuts, walnuts, cactus pears,
almonds, hazelnuts, olives, mulberries, and grapes.
4.1 – Marly, terraced, and alluvial relief landscape (the Simeto
River Valley) with diversified agroforestry systems and little
presence of rural heritage features. This set of areas is also het-
 S. Cullotta, G. Barbera / Landscape and Urban Planning 100 (2011) 98–108
Fig. 4. Renaturation through the encroachment of shrub-tree cover in natural vegetation.
erogeneous in terms of its land-cover and land-use types and
predominantly features fruit crops such as pears, apples, almonds,
cactus pears, pistachios, olives, and grapes as well as locally
widespread grazing pastures.
In general, LMAS conservation appears to decrease as altitude
decreases (Fig. 3). For example, within the most widespread LMASs
in our study area (types 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4; Fig. 3), the major
changes in land cover and use occur along the foothills (type 1.3)
and the coast (type 1.4), where agroforestry systems and rural
features prevail. The primary explanation for such changes is the
abandonment of agriculture, which has resulted in landscape trans-
formation due to widespread renaturation (Fig. 4), especially in
low-altitude forested areas, and anthropization (i.e., urbanization
and the building of new infrastructure), especially along the coast
and near areas with high population densities.
In the third phase (Fig. 3), sixteen TCLs were identified. Their
denominations are the same as in Phase 2, with the addition of
descriptive phrases designating their traditional land uses (Table 2).
As an example, one of the most widespread TCLs in our study area
is described below.
1.3.1 − TCL consisting of a “submountain-basal volcanic land-
scape with a fine-grained land mosaic of coltura promiscua and
a considerable presence of rural heritage features (terraces) of
vineyards” (Fig. 5). This TCL is a subunit of LMAS 1.3 from Phase
2. Its landscape composition and configuration are characterized
by a small-scale land-use mosaic of crops, shrubland, and forests
(Fig. 5a and 5b). The proportions of these primary land-use classes
have changed over the last century. Traditional vineyard sys-
tems were particularly widespread during the nineteenth century
and the first half of the twentieth century (Busacca, 2000). Sub-
sequently, diffuse land abandonment occurred, resulting in the
105
progressive regeneration of shrubland (Fig. 4). Vineyards are now
mainly distributed along the foothills of the northern and north-
eastern slopes of Mt. Etna, with small to medium-sized patches
of both pure and mixed (coltura promiscua) crops. Traditional land-
management techniques include irregularly spaced grapevines and
old grapevine plants (Fig. 5c and 5d). Linear and point rural fea-
tures are often detected, especially dry-stone terraces and walls
(Fig. 5a–d), dry-stone enclosures, small stone towers (from stone
gathering), stone-paved pathways (flagstones) and small stairs
or staircases connecting different terracing levels, stone water
tanks, and small votive artifacts (as documented in a sizable lit-
erature). The scattered old rural settlements in each vineyard
property include small and simple structures (i.e., single or double
rooms) and larger houses with several rooms (e.g., winery, wine
cellar, storeroom for agronomic cultivation tools, courtyard, and
sharecropper (mezzadro) rooms, all of which make up the coun-
try residence of a middle- or noble-class landowner; Barbera et al.,
2010) (see Fig. 5g and h). In the local dialect, much of the terminol-
ogy is related to agronomic techniques, tools (Fig. 5f), and layouts
of a traditional farm, and various local economic activities are still
linked to traditional land-management techniques, such as the use
of chestnut coppices for wood production along the vegetated belt
of Mt. Etna (included in the “mountain forest landscapes”; Table 2).
The wood thus obtained is used to make barrel staves and grapevine
supports (Fig. 5c and 5d).
4. Discussion and conclusions
The conservation of traditional landscapes is an issue of growing
importance. A preliminary inventory is an essential tool to acquire
106 S. Cullotta, G. Barbera / Landscape and Urban Planning 100 (2011) 98–108

Fig. 5. Components and features of a traditional cultural landscape (TCL) of type 1.3.1 (“Submountain-basal volcanic landscape with fine-grained land mosaic of coltura
promiscua and a considerable presence of rural heritage features (terraces) of vineyards”) (NE slope of Mt. Etna): (a–b) landscape composition and configuration of land-use
mosaics in agroforestry systems (coltura promiscua) dominated by vineyards, with widespread forest and pre-forest patches; (c–d) details of a traditional vineyard for local
production with dry-stone walls, terraces, and old grapevine plants fastened to chestnut stakes; (e) illustration of the historic landscape with terraces (Escher, 1932); (f) a
rural monument built with parts of a large old wine press made of local chestnut and oak wood; (g) a landowner’s country residence with winery and wine cellar on the
ground floor; (h) a common rural country house with winery, wine cellar, storeroom, and a small residence.
 S. Cullotta, G. Barbera / Landscape and Urban Planning 100 (2011) 98–108
more complete knowledge of the consistency and variability of the
landscapes in a given area, whether in a single nation or throughout
Europe.
The European Landscape Convention of Florence (2000) implied
the need for an overall knowledge of European landscapes, in con-
trast to previous locally focused endeavors in this field.
However, few studies have catalogued traditional agroforestry
landscapes through a multidisciplinary approach at either the
national or the regional level in Italy and other Mediterranean
countries. In Sicily, for example, efforts to define and classify TCLs
have been inconclusive despite the existing literature on land
management in particular geographical areas and on major local
agroforestry systems.
In more general terms, there is currently no uniform method-
ology for landscape-inventory and description initiatives in Italy.
Such a methodology is greatly needed to guide policy making and
to provide consistency in cross-border landscape connection and
classification at different levels.
The proposed methodological approach, which integrates abi-
otic and biotic parameters to identify TCLs on and around Mt. Etna,
represents an advanced standardization procedure.
In particular, basing the identification of TCLs on a robust
and wide-ranging ecological analysis (i.e., through the detec-
tion of homogeneous environmental units, sensu Land Systems) is
an important achievement. This procedure makes it possible to
interrelate and combine (based on the scale involved) different
landscape-classification systems (e.g., ecoregions and landscape
units of real vegetation cover). This eco-environmental strati-
fication defines TCLs in successive stages on the basis of the
anthropic activity that shapes each land-cover and land-use type.
The identification of traditional landscape components (landscape
composition and configuration, land-management techniques, lin-
ear and point rural features, and other heritage features) makes
it possible to define traditional cultural landscapes consistently
and efficiently. From this point of view, the analysis conducted
on the territory of Mt. Etna illuminates the history and role this
area played in the formation of the idea of the Mediterranean
landscape. By characterizating the most significant material and
non-material elements of rural heritage features (traditional man-
agement practices and tools, stone-made buildings and walls,
dry-stone enclosures and terraces, manuscripts and poems, paint-
ings and historic pictures, dialects and other oral tradition, etc...),
the analysis shows the key roles that historical and cultural
resources play as part of the multidisciplinary approach to TCL
formation.
The present case study of the Mt. Etna area is representa-
tive of the variability found throughout the Mediterranean Basin.
The study area exhibits an extremely rich physical and biologi-
cal environment combined with interesting historical and cultural
processes that are evident in the several TCLs identified.
Considering the highly diversified land-use patterns and agro-
forestry practices in Mediterranean cultural landscapes, the
drafting of an inventory and a classification system should be given
more attention, and further technical and scientific research is
needed. Of course, adjustments will be needed to create a uniform
TCL language and to reduce (but not eliminate) the subjective ele-
ments in the combined mapping process, especially in the inductive
procedure.
Acknowledgements
The research was partially supported by PRIN 2007 – prot.
2007S2CNC4 (University Programs of Scientific Relevance, Italian
Ministry of Research and University Education), and by the Regional
Project “Catalogo dei paesaggi tradizionali agrari e agroforestali” (A
catalogue of traditional agricultural and forest landscapes).
107
References
Aalen, F.H.A., 2001. Landscape development and change. In: Green, B., Vos, W. (Eds.),
Threatened Landscapes, Conserving Cultural Environments. Spon Press, London,
pp. 3–20.
Agnoletti, M., 2007. The degradation of traditional landscape in a mountain area of
Tuscany during the 19th and 20th centuries: Implications for biodiversity and
sustainable management. Forest Ecol. Manag. 249, 5–17.
Allard, P., Behncke, B., D’Amico, S., Neri, M., Gambino, S., 2006. Mount Etna
1993–2005: Anatomy of an evolving eruptive cycle. Earth-Sci. Rev. 78,
85–114.
Altieri, M.A., Nicholls, C.I., 2002. The simplification of traditional vineyard based
agroforests in northwestern Portugal: some ecological implications. Agroforest.
Syst. 56, 185–191.
Antrop, M., 1997. The concept of traditional landscapes as a base for landscape eval-
uation and planning. The example of Flanders Region. Landscape Urban Plan. 38,
105–117.
Antrop, M., 2005. Why landscapes of the past are important for the future. Landscape
Urban Plan. 70, 21–34.
APAT, 2003. Il Progetto Carta della Natura alla scala 1:250000: Metodologia di
realizzazione (The Carta Natura Project at scale 1:25000: Methodology). APAT,
Manuali e Linee Guida 17, Roma. [in Italian].
APAT, 2005. La realizzazione in Italia del progetto Corine Land Cover 2000 (The
Corine Land Cover 2000 Project in Italy). APAT, Rapporti 36, Roma [in Italian].
Barbera, G., 2000. Sistemi tradizionali dell’arboricoltura da frutto in Sicilia (Tradi-
tional systems of arboriculture fruit in Sicily). Ed. L’Epos, Palermo [in Italian].
Barbera, G., Cullotta, S., Pizzurro, G., 2004. Agroforestry Systems of Mt Etna, Italy:
Biodiversity Analysis at Landscape, Stand and Specific Level. In: Marchetti, M.
(Ed.), Monitoring and Indicators of Forest Biodiversity in Europe – From Ideas to
Operationality. EFI Proceedings 51, Joensuu, pp. 481–492.
Barbera, G., Cullotta, S., 2009. Classificare i paesaggi culturali tradizionali: cri-
teri metodologici e applicazione (Inventoring Traditional Cultural Landscapes:
Methodology and Application), vol. II. III Congresso Nazionale Selvicoltura, AISF,
Florence, pp. 960–967.
Barbera, G., Cullotta, S., Rossi-Doria, I., Rühl, J., Rossi-Doria, B., 2010. I paesaggi a
terrazze in Sicilia: metodologie per l’analisi, la tutela e la valorizzazione (The
Sicilian terraced landscapes: methodology for the analysis, the protection, the
valorisation). ARPA Sicilia, Collana Studi e Ricerche 7, Palermo [in Italian].
Bignal, E.M., McCracken, D.I., Corrie, H., 1995. Defining European low-intensity farm-
ing systems: the nature of farming. In: McCracken, D.I., Bignal, E.M., Wenlock,
S.E. (Eds.), Farming on the Edge: The Nature of Traditional Farmland in Europe.
Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough, pp. 29–37.
Blasi, C., 2007. Biodiversity and landscape. In: Blasi, C., Boitani, L., La Posta, S., Manes,
F., Marchetti, M. (Eds.), Biodiversity in Italy – Contribution to the National Biodi-
versity Strategy. Ministry for the Environment Land and Sea Protection, Nature
Protection Directorate. SBI, Ed. Palombi, Roma, pp. 97–103.
Blasi, C., Carranza, M.L., Frondoni, R., Rosati, L., 2000. Ecosystem classification and
mapping: a proposal for Italian Landscapes. Appl. Veg. Sci. 2, 233–242.
Blasi, C., Capotorti, G., Frondoni, R., 2005. Defining and mapping typological models
at the landscape scale. Plant Biosyst. 139, 155–163.
Blondel, J., 2006. The ‘Design’ of Mediterranean Landscapes: A Millennial Story
of Humans and Ecological Systems during the Historic Period. Hum. Ecol. 34,
713–729.
Bunce, R.G.H., 2001. An environmental classification of European landscapes. In:
Green, B., Vos, W. (Eds.), Threatened Landscapes, Conserving Cultural Environ-
ments. Spon Press, London, pp. 31–40.
Busacca, P., 2000. Il racconto del territorio–l’Etna tra le Aci e l’Alcantara (The Etna
land between the Aci and Alcantara). Ed. Gangemi, Roma [in Italian].
Cañas, I., Ayuga, E., Ayuga, F., 2009. A contribution to the assessment of scenic quality
of landscapes based on preferences expressed by the public. Land Use Policy 26,
1173–1181.
Chester, D.K., Duncan, A.M., Guest, J.E., Kilburn, C., 1985. Mount Etna: The Anatomy
of a Volcano. Chapman and Hall, London.
Council of Europe, 2000. European Landscape Convention and Explanatory Report.
Council of Europe, Document by the Secretary General established by the
General Directorate of Education, Culture, Sport and Youth, and Environment,
Florence.
Di Gennaro, A., 2007. La grande trasformazione del territorio rurale (The great
transformation of rural areas). In: Di Bene, A., D’Eusebio, L. (Eds.), Paesaggio
agrario–Una questione non risolta. Gangemi Editore, Roma, pp. 49–59 [in Ital-
ian].
Di Pasquale, G., Garfì, G., Migliozzi, A., 2004. Landscape dynamics in South-eastern
Sicily in the last 150 years: the case of the Iblei mountains. In: Mazzoleni, S., Di
Pasquale, G., Mulligan, M., Di Martino, P., Rego, F. (Eds.), Recent Dynamics of the
Mediterranean Vegetation and Landscapes. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Chichester,
pp. 73–80.
EEA, 2000. CORINE land cover technical guide–Addendum 2000. European Environ-
mental Agency, Technical Report 40, Copenhagen.
Farina, A., 1998. Principles and Methods in Landscape Ecology. Chapman & Hall,
London.
Farina, A., Naveh, Z., 1993. Landscape approach to regional planning: the future of
the Mediterranean landscapes. Landscape Urban Plan. 24, 1–295.
Favalli, M., Innocenti, F., Pareschi, M.T., Pasquarè, G., Mazzarini, F., Branca, S., Ribaldi,
A., 1999. The DEM of Mt. Etna: geomorphological an structural implications.
Geodin. Acta 12, 279–290.
Fierotti, G., 1988. Soil Map of Sicily. University of Palermo, Palermo.
108 S. Cullotta, G. Barbera / Landscape and Urban Planning 100 (2011) 98–108
Firmino, A., 1999. Agriculture and landscape in Portugal. Landscape Urban Plan. 46,
83–91.
Forman, R., Godron, M., 1986. Landscape Ecology. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Fuentes, J.M., Gallego, E., García, A.I., Ayuga, F., 2010. New uses for old traditional
farm buildings: the case of the underground wine cellars in Spain. Land Use
Policy 27, 738–748.
Geri, F., Amici, V., Rocchini, D., 2010a. Human activity impact on the heterogeneity
of a Mediterranean landscape. Appl. Geogr. 30, 370–379.
Geri, F., Rocchini, D., Chiaruccia, A., 2010b. Landscape metrics and topographi-
cal determinants of large-scale forest dynamics in a Mediterranean landscape.
Landscape Urban Plan. 95, 46–53.
Gomez-Limon, J., Fernandez, J., 1999. Changes in land use and landscape preferences
on the agricultural-livestock landscapes of the central Iberian Peninsula Madrid,
Spain. Landscape Urban Plan. 44, 165–175.
Green, B., Vos, W. (Eds.), 2001. Threatened Landscapes: Conserving Cultural Envi-
ronments. Sponpress, London, New York.
Groves, R.H., Di Castri, F., 1991. Biogeography of Mediterranean Invasions. Cam-
bridge University Press, Cambridge.
Grove, A.T., Rackham, O., 2002. The Nature of Mediterranean Europe: An Ecological
History. Yale University Press, New Haven.
Hooke, D., 1998. The Landscape of Anglo-Saxon England. Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Howard, J., Mitchell, C., 1980. Phyto-geomorphic classification of the landscape.
Geoforum 11 (2), 85–106.
Jones-Walters, L., 2008. Biodiversity in multifunctional landscapes. J. Nat. Conserv.
16, 117–119.
Kizos, T., Koulouri, M., 2006. Agricultural landscape dynamics in the Mediterranean:
Lesvos (Greece) case study using evidence from the last three centuries. Environ.
Sci. Policy 9 (4), 330–342.
Klijn, F., Udo de Haes, H.A., 1994. A hierarchical approach to ecosystems and its
implications for ecological land classification. Landscape Ecol. 9, 89–104.
Mazzoleni, S., Di Pasquale, G., Mulligan, M., Di Martino, P., Rego, F., 2004a. Recent
dynamics of the Mediterranean Vegetation and Landscapes. John Wiley & Sons
Ltd., Chichester, UK.
Mazzoleni, S., Di Martino, P., Strumia, S., Buonanno, M., Bellelli, M., 2004b. Recent
changes of coastal and sub-mountain vegetation landscape in Campania and
Molise regions in Southern Italy. In: Mazzoleni, S., Di Pasquale, G., Mulligan, M.,
Di Martino, P., Rego, F. (Eds.), Recent Dynamics of the Mediterranean Vegetation
and Landscapes. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Chichester, pp. 145–155.
Médail, F., Quézel, P., 1997. Hot-spots analysis for conservation of plant biodiversity
in the Mediterranean basin. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 84, 112–127.
Meeus, J.H.A., 1995. Pan-European landscapes. Landscape Urban Plan. 31, 57–79.
Moreira, M., Rego, F.C., Ferreira, P.G., 2001. Temporal (1958–1995) pattern of change
in a cultural landscape of northwestern Portugal: implications for fire occur-
rence. Landscape Ecol. 16, 557–567.
Moreira, F., Queiroz, A.I., Aronson, J., 2006. Restoration principles applied to cultural
landscapes. J. Nat. Conserv. 14, 217–224.
Naveh, Z., Liebermann, A., 1994. Landscape Ecology. Springer Berlin, Heidelberg,
New York.
Patanè, G., La Delfa, S., Tanguy, J.C., 2004. L’Etna e il mondo dei vulcani (The Etna and
the volcanos). Ed. Maimone, Catania [in Italian].
Petanidou, T., Kizos, T., Soulakellis, N., 2008. Socioeconomic dimensions of changes
in the agricultural landscape of the Mediterranean Basin: a case study of the
abandonment of cultivation terraces on Nisyros Island, Greece. Environ. Manage.
41, 250–266.
Pinto-Correia, T., 2000. Future development in Portuguese rural areas: how to man-
age agricultural support for landscape conservation? Landscape Urban Plan. 50,
95–106.
Pinto-Correia, T., Vos, W., 2004. Multifunctionality in Mediterranean landscapes –
past and future. In: Jongman, R.H.G. (Ed.), The New Dimensions of the European
Landscape. Springer, Wageningen, pp. 135–164.
Poli Marchese, E., 1982. Zonation altitudinale de la vegetation de l’Etna comparée
avec d’auters hauts volcans (Altitude vegetation belts of Mt Etna and other high
volcanos). Ecol. Mediterr. 8 (1/2), 339–354 [in French].
Poli-Marchese, E., Patti, G., 2000. Carta della vegetazione dell’Etna (Vegetation map
of Mt. Etna). University of Catania, Catania [in Italian].
Regione Siciliana, 1994. Land Use Map of Sicily. Regione Siciliana, Florence.
Regione Siciliana, 1996. Linee guida del Piano Territoriale Paesistico Regionale
(Guidelines of the Regional Landscape Plan). Regione Siciliana, Palermo [in Ital-
ian].
Salvi, F., Scandone, R., Palma, C., 2006. Statistical analysis of the historical activity of
Mount Etna, aimed at the evaluation of volcanic hazard. J. Volcanol. Geoth. Res.
154, 159–168.
Sereni, E., 1961. Storia del Paesaggio Italiano (History of Italian Landscape). Ed.
Laterza, Bari [in Italian].
Sirami, C., Nespoulousa, A., Cheyland, J.P., Martya, P., Hvenegaarda, G.T., Geniezh,
P., Martina, J.L., 2010. Long-term anthropogenic and ecological dynamics of a
Mediterranean landscape: Impacts on multiple taxa. Landscape Urban Plan. 96,
214–223.
Stanners, D., Bourdeau, P., 1995. Europe’s Environment: The Dobris Assessment. EEA,
European Commission, Copenhagen.
Swanwick, C., 2002. Landscape Character Assessment. Guidance for England and
Scotland. The Countryside Agency, Scottish Natural Heritage, Edinburgh.
Swanwick, C., 2004. The assessment of countryside and landscape character in
England: an overview. In: Bishop, K., Philipps, A. (Eds.), Countryside Plan-
ning New Approaches to Management and Conservation. Earthscan, London,
pp. 109–124.
TCI, 1977. I paesaggi umani: itinerari (The human Landscapes). Touring Club Italiano,
Milan (in Italian).
Tuzet, H., 1988. Viaggiatori stranieri in Sicilia nel XVIII secolo (Foreign travelers in
the eighteenth century in Sicily). Sellerio Editore, Palermo [in Italian].
UNESCO, 1999. Operational guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage
Convention, Paris.
Vogiatzakis, I.N., Griffiths, G.H., Melis, M.T., Marini, A., Careddu, M.B., 2006. Land-
scape typology in the Mediterranean context: a tool for habitat restoration.
Journal of Mediterr. Ecol. 7, 23–30.
Van Eetvelde, V., Antrop, M., 2009. A stepwise multi-scaled landscape typology and
characterisation for trans-regional integration applied on the federal state of
Belgium. Landscape Urban Plan. 91, 160–170.
Vos, W., Meekes, H., 1999. Trends in European cultural landscape development:
perspectives for a sustainable future. Landscape Urban Plan. 46, 3–14.
Vos, W., Klijn, J., 2000. Trends in European landscape development: Prospects for
a sustainable future. In: Klijn, J., Vos, W. (Eds.), From Landscape Ecology to
Landscape Science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 13–29.
Zonneveld, I.S., 1995. Land Ecology: An Introduction to Landscape Ecology as a Base
for Land Evaluation, Land Management and Conservation. SPB Academic Pub-
lishing, Amsterdam.
Sebastiano Cullotta is a contract researcher at the University of Palermo (Italy).
He hold a PhD in Forest and Landscape Ecology in 2003 at the Mendel Univer-
sity of Brno (Czech Republic). Currently, his main research fields are on forest and
agroforestry types and traditional landscape unit classification, focusing on forest
and agroforestry management planning development, especially for biodiversity
assessment.
Giuseppe Barbera is Full Professor of Horticulture at the University of Palermo. Main
research interest is focused on traditional agricultural systems and cultural land-
scapes of the Mediterranean agriculture. In the last years his interest was focused
on safeguard and valorization of traditional citrus orchards and archeological land-
scapes.