<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

HAL
open science

# Landscape functionalities of agricultural activities: the case study of Lunigiana (Tuscany, Italy)

Davide Rizzo, Mariassunta Galli, Stefano Bacci, Enrico Bonari

► To cite this version:

Davide Rizzo, Mariassunta Galli, Stefano Bacci, Enrico Bonari. Landscape functionalities of agricultural activities: the case study of Lunigiana (Tuscany, Italy). Biodiversity conservation and sustainable development in mountain areas of Europe: the challenge of interdisciplinary research, Sep 2005, Ioannina, Greece. 2005, 10.13140/2.1.3719.6489. hal-05041106

HAL Id: hal-05041106

https://hal.science/hal-05041106v1

Submitted on 20 Apr 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# Landscape functionalities of farming activities
the case studies of Lunigiana (Tuscany, Italy)

Davide Rizzo*, Mariassunta Galli, Stefano Bacci, Enrico Bonari

*corresponding author
tel. +39.050.883.503
fax: +39.050.883.512
e-mail: davide@sssup.it

**Land Lab**
Saint Anna School
of Advanced Studies
p.zza Martiri della Libertà, 33
56127 Pisa (Italy)

## Study area

Lunigiana (973 km²) is the N-W part of Tuscan region, central Italy.

It is a mountainous area:

54.9% of the surface is higher than 500 m and 86,0% exceeds the 12.5% of slope.

## Aim & methodology

The **aim** was to explicit the functional relationships between farming activities and landscapes.

The **methodology** was addressed to a progressive focus on signs (generated by "farming units" and farm buildings) summarized in farming systems and related to a farm sample.

### 1 Territorial framework

* Survey of indirect sources of information to set a **cognitive framework**.

* Interviews to local stakeholders involved into the conservation and promotion of the local resources.

### 2 Agri-territorial framework

Slope and aspect data crossing with spatial analysis shapes (buffers)

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

### 3 Farming framework

On farm surveys to collect data on "farming units" and farm buildings and their combination into farming systems.

"Farming units":
land uses aggregated for homogeneous landscape attributes.

**meadows**: stable open spaces, used as pasture or for growing hay

**woods**: wide volumes with dense and homogeneous texture

**groves**: spaces with coarse texture, where each single element (tree or row) is well readable

**arable land**: open spaces seasonally modified for tilling or crop rotation.

**intensive crops**: spaces with dense and defined signs

Farm buildings:
expression of complementary activities, typifying landscape profiles.

* **livestock buildings** (e.g. barns, sheds, etc.)

* **drainage systems** on slope surface (e.g. terraces, benches, etc.)

* buildings for **food processing**

* **agritourism** accommodations

## Results and discussion

The 60% of farms has an agri-territorial surround scarcely mechanizable, both the proximal and the peripheral buffers.

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Signs recurrence (farm buildings on right and "farming units" on left) and histograms of their proportional distribution as function of the farm surroundings mechanizability.</figcaption></figure>

Outlines from the co-presence of "farming units" and farm buildings, and from their combination in farming systems:

* the great part of farms has three or two "farming units";

* the most frequent association groups meadows, woods and groves;

* the majority of the agritourisms are associated with two units and frequently located in scarcely mechanizable surroundings;

* the meadows production is almost completely (88%) used as pasture.

## Conclusions

Landscape functionalities, as answers to the agri-territorial constraints are expressed:

* mainly by a mix of matrix with different textures, based on the co-existence of meadows, woods and groves (**mixed farming systems**)

* secondarily by the concentration of dense matrix, based on intensive crops, optimizing the hill "terraced-belt" for high quality viticulture and for olive and fruit groves (**specialized cropping systems**).

* The **maintenance** of traditional fenced meadows associated with extensive livestock;

* the **active conservation** and protection of transhumance routes (**tratturi**) and summer pastures (**alpeggi**);

* the **recovery** of abandoned woods units, through innovative agricultural practices (i.e. grazing of rustic species);

* the **betterment** of rural houses and small towns through agritourism activities.

The "**active management**" of the present agrarian landscape is possible conjugating the **traditional complexity** of the farming systems and **new farming styles** needed to ensure the economic competitiveness of this system.

## Key references

Bonari E., Galli M., Rizzo D., 2005. Gestione del territorio rurale e paesaggio. In *Proceeding of the workshop* "La tutela del paesaggio tra economia e storia: dal restauro dei monumenti al governo del territorio, Pisa, 25-26 February 2005.

Bonin M., Lardon S., 2002. Recomposition des exploitations agricoles et diversification des pratiques de gestion de l'espace. In A. Torre (ed.) *Le local à l'épreuve de l'économie spatiale*. Agriculture, environment, espaces ruraux : Etud. Rech. Syst. Agraires Dév., 33: 131-148.

Deffointaines J.P., Thenail C., Baudry J., 1995. Agricultural system and landscape patterns: how can we build a relationship?. *Landscape and Urban Planning* 31(1-3): 3-10.