Paper short abstract:

This paper uses examples of archaeological landscape assessments from the planning system to highlight the problems of over reliance on the visual/physical characteristics of landscapes to determine their value and to flag the research potential of the growing body of evidence of alternative forms of valuation emerging from non-academic arenas.

Paper long abstract:

This paper takes as its starting point the contention expressed in the session abstract that an over emphasis on the visual experience of a -scape as the critical characteristic is potentially problematic. It is further contended that, in the context of archaeological landscapes, despite much work on other aspects of understanding and interpretation, the predominant assumption outside of academia is that a landscape is definable essentially by a combination of visibility of what is physically present and human responses to it. Such a stance becomes highly problematic in contexts where the value of landscapes is at issue and advocates of particular valuations are required to quantify their judgements. Using case studies drawn from engagements in the planning system involving archaeological landscapes, an attempt will be made to highlight and briefly examine some of these problematic issues. It will be contended that while these engagements give rise to a series of short-term tensions (most obviously in adversarial planning disputes), an opportunity exists to draw on this increasing body of evidence to provide the means for further study and deeper analysis of the basis upon which landscapes may be interpreted and valued, which would help to refine intellectual approaches to this wide ranging and ever-contentious subject area.