Advisory report
RLG 05/1a: National Landscapes: a Steady Course and Ceaseless Effort
Advisory report on the Instrumentation of National Landscapes - February 2005
Summary of the advice
At the request of the Minister of Agriculture, Nature Management and Food Quality of the Netherlands, the Council for the Rural Area drew up an advice on the realisation of National Landscapes, a category of areas in the Memorandum on National Spatial Strategy (Nota Ruimte 2004). The Council judge s the concept of National Landscapes as an appealing perspective: National Landscapes will not be 'locked up', but are areas where, more than elsewhere, quality is the basis for development and to which the government will offer extra stimuli to maintain and reinforce the national heritage.
Landscape has finally been recognised as a fully-fledged policy target objective
With its policy for National Landscapes in the Memorandum, the government recognises the value of a priceless and indispensable asset: the Dutch landscape. The landscape is a vital carrier of our cultural heritage and has economic importance for international tourism and as location factor for enterprises. Furthermore, the Dutch landscape is for its 16 million inhabitants invaluable for knowing and experiencing their own identity and history. The Council considers the policy on the National Landscapes as the fulfilment of the emancipation of the landscape now that it is finally embedded in the spatial policy with an independent position next to nature as a policy objective. To the Council, it is the premise that the National Landscapes policy is an important and urgent assignment to maintain the cultural heritage of the Dutch culturo-historical landscape.
National Landscapes represent a rich diversity
The twenty National Landscapes represent a wide diversity of values. The Council advises that within this scope, both internationally unique (aficionado) landscapes and nationally highly valued public landscapes with good recreational prospects be distinguished. The Council also believes that diversity is a target: in the 'veenweide' areas, the slightly acidic peat and clay soils in the low-lying west of the Netherlands, it is the vitality and continuity of the land-related dairy farms that play a pivotal role in maintaining the landscape and nature values. There are a number of other landscapes that also centralise the management of the present values, while in other National Landscapes emphasis is placed on steering towards the quality of specific elements and the protection of networks, or on investments such as reinforcing a dominant arrangement (de 'Nieuwe Hollandse Waterlinie' - a military inundation area and the 'Stelling van Amsterdam' - the Defence Line of Amsterdam). By designating this diversity of values and targets, the Council offers a framework for fleshing out plans for the areas and establishing priorities.
National Landscapes must distinguish themselves while maintaining development
The Council believes that the qualities of the landscape must be the guiding principle in defining and detailing the policy for National Landscapes. Within these National Landscapes, the existing landscape must be the guiding principle as far as developments are concerned; beyond these Landscapes, the developments have dominance over the existing landscape. However, this should not lead to tightly closed borders and closing off areas. National Landscapes are no islands, but are related to their surroundings: economically, as a contrast and as a connection of urban and more natural areas, and administratively. This needs a strategy for 'preservation while being in a developmental process': managing and developing with respect for the genesis of the area and its values, but also adding new contemporary culture to the existing one.
The selection of areas is basically realistic
On the whole, the selection of the twenty areas is reasonable. The Council does not wish to reopen the discussion on the entire selection as such, but, on the basis of a test for consistency, it can make some recommendations to optimise the selection: two National Landscapes seem to have been primarily selected as an addition to and a buffer zone around the National Ecological Network (the Veluwe) or in consideration of nature development (Gelderse Poort wetlands). Considering the necessity to set priorities, the Council believes that this is a matter of a less successful overlapping and fusion of nature policy and landscape policy. On the other hand, a number of Belvedere areas and areas designated as World Heritage are missing as National Landscapes. Examples are: West-Friesland (in the province of North-Holland), the Noordoost Polder and Kiel-Windeweer (in southeast Groningen).
Criteria for planning must be area-specific
The Spatial Strategy Memorandum gives for the National Landscapes the following criteria: development yes, provided that the quality is respected and enhanced. For the National Landscapes, the Council recognises the quality test for the development, which it first formulated in the year 2000, and endorses the principle of aiming at economic vitality, even for National Landscapes. However, the Spatial Strategy Memorandum advises to apply a more restrained policy for large-scale building projects. The Council recommends that for each National Landscape this policy be concretely detailed for the various functions: agriculture, recreation, housing, employment, etc. The Council recognises that this may cause some tension, e.g. when the Spatial Strategy Memorandum allows housing projects only for the needs of the local population, whereas in practice the municipalities do not have the instruments to allocate new housing exclusively to the local population. This holds particularly in the urbanised western and southern parts of the Netherlands.
Ambition requires money
With the policy on the National Landscapes, the Spatial Strategy Memorandum shows a great ambition that has not yet sufficient funds. The Council believes that the ambition and the aims must be the guidelines. Shortage of funds must be dealt with by setting priorities: between areas, within areas, and in time. Areas that are currently endangered and where values are on the decline must be given priority. Administrative history may play a part as well; some areas already have an area-oriented policy, such as the Valuable Culturo-historical Landscapes [Waardevolle Cultuurlandschappen] for which much preliminary work has been done. The available funds can be directly and effectively employed there.
Make the necessary funds gradually available
The Council estimates that, all in all, investment and management will require an average of € 225 million a year for the next twenty years. This may seem much, and these funds are not yet available, but this problem is not insoluble. Part of the required funds can be found by employing the existing budgets for investment and management specifically and purposefully for the National Landscapes, and in addition to government funds (the central, provincial, municipal governments and the EU), the Council sees possibilities for contributions from the private sector. The Council appreciates that the government can hardly allocate extra funds in the present economic situation. However, the government must express the intent to gradually earmark more money when the national coffers are filled as a result of the chosen socio-economic policy. Practically speaking, this means in the next coalition agreement.
Instruments: a favourable balance of possibilities and restrictions
As to the instruments, the Council recommends that one important starting-point be applied: the landscape deserves an appealing policy which does not only prescribe rules for dealing with the landscape but also inspires and offers prospects to connect new developments harmoniously with the past. A National Landscape must not be characterised by what is forbidden, but by what we want to achieve, and by a number of advantages that are specific for a National Landscape. The advantages are attractive surroundings and a good living and working environment. But these advantages must also be embedded in the instruments: money-wise, tax-wise and by providing incentives for developing, introducing and marketing new products and services. The possibilities for investment from private sources may be found in applying the 'direct benefit principle', sponsoring and tax rebates on green investments. On balance, a situation must be created in which the persons involved would rather function within the National Landscape than outside.
The Council makes the following suggestions for the instruments for the realisation of National Landscapes:
• The government must concentrate the employment of means focussed on landscape and cultural history in the National Landscapes.
• Provinces must anticipate the new Act on Spatial Planning (WRO) by developing their policy on spatial planning for the areas that have been designated as National Landscapes, and link this to the further details of the plans for the area.
• Municipalities located in National Landscapes must give priority to updating their land-use plans and pay extra attention to the relation between the built-up area and the countryside.
• These views on spatial planning and land-use plans must be based on the core qualities of the National Landscapes and on the aim to preserve in development.
• Designing pilots schemes with transferable development rights, both in high-dynamic and low-dynamic situations.
• Fiscal facilities in the field of capital, investments, and income, must be linked to the description of core qualities of National Landscapes and the existing chain systems. An additional advantage is that administration expenses and implementation costs will be low:
* the possibility to class land-related agriculture in National Landscapes under the Estates Act (open to the public, cows in the fields, etc.);
* increasing the tax-exemption facility in Box 3 of the Income Tax for culturally and historically valuable constructions;
* investment tax credit for regional buildings, construction of paths, restoring plot boundaries, and the like;
* include the above-mentioned investments in 'Groenfinanciering' - the tax rebate scheme for green investment;
* exemption from income tax for compensations based on the Nature Management in Agriculture Subsidy Scheme (SAN);
* extending the tax rebate scheme on green investment on lands under the Nature Management in Agriculture Subsidy Scheme.
• A 'Land Bank' must be freely employed as instrument for three objectives in each National Landscape: land exchange within the agricultural sector, land exchange focussed on the change of function, and land acquisition to let out land on long lease to enable profitable nature management in agriculture.
• An additional landscape package must be added to the Nature Management in Agriculture Subsidy Scheme, which should be specifically substantiated for each National Landscape.
• An adequate substantiation must be given to the provision for agriculturally less favoured areas, the application of which is located for at least two-thirds in the National Landscapes:
* the amount per hectare varies and depends on the seriousness of the handicaps;
* for the peat-and-clay pasture soils, the Council recommends that the amount presently set on € 94 be doubled till the maximum amount of € 200 allowed by the EU.
• Communication strategies must be supported by an explicit branding of the National Landscapes, also by recognition of regional products, and applying this branding also to the tourist and recreational market.
• Communication with entrepreneurs, residents of the area and the surrounding cities, and visitors must take place about the value of the area and the advantages it has for them, and to call on them for providing a - financial - contribution in return.
• The landscape must be made measurable by a simple method to reveal the quality and the effectiveness of the policy.
• A learning network must be realised for every National Landscape and be linked to a network at the national level, both administratively and professionally, and have the efforts and support by knowledge institutes steered by the network.
• The Government must establish each National Landscape to seal the agreements between the provinces and the central government.
Provinces take care of the direction, the government has the final responsibility
The Council has good faith in the provinces' role of executive to define the precise boundaries of National Landscapes and the development and implementation of the plans for the region. In the implementation, the objectives must be formulated operationally and accountable so that the central government and the provinces can make clear agreements about the objectives and the means, and the central government can report to the national Parliament on the output and the outcome of the policy, as required. As it is, National Landscapes are part of the National Spatial Structure for which the central government is not only responsible for setting up a proper system but can also be called to account for the outcome.
Social support by involving the stakeholders
For the effects and the realisation it is of paramount importance to involve the population, civil organisations and entrepreneurs in the National Landscapes as broadly as possible. The Council believes that the social support can be further enhanced by improving public accessibility with walking and cycling tracks, and boating facilities. More knowledge of the area and its local history will contribute to wide appreciation and will create a social basis and the willingness to contribute financially. A communication strategy is therefore of vital importance for each and every National Landscape.
A dynamic start with a recognisable status
The provinces must be asked to have operational plans ready within two years so that an appeal can be made for EU co-financing in time. National Landscapes must therefore be in line with the European policy framework to profit first from the European rural area policy as rural landscapes. The Council advises that National Landscapes be given a recognisable and durable status by letting the government, in consultation with the province, designate each landscape within five years.
For each National Landscape an own organisation and one nationwide network
Together with local authorities and the social midfield, the provinces as the executives, must form an appropriate organisation and delegate the advisory, coordinating and executive tasks. A 'quality team' must be formed for every National Landscape to give guidance to developments in the area in order to safeguard or enhance the quality of landscape and environment. These teams may be attached to a national network for monitoring the progress, for exchanging knowledge and practice, and for pointing out bottlenecks in rules and policy frameworks. The various tiers of governmental and societal organisations must participate in this network. It must be supported by a temporary nationwide programme organisation that can make use of institutions such as the Planning Bureau for Nature and the Environment and the Belvedere Bureau. The efforts of the knowledge institutions must preferably be linked with this network so that generating and transferring knowledge can be guided as much as possible by the needs of stakeholders.