17.1Towards a Circular Paradigm for the Regeneration of Terraced Landscapes

Terraced landscapes represent all over the world a particular type of multifunctional, historic–cultural agrarian landscapes, today at risk of abandonment (Varotto 2009).

Terraced landscapes are an ancient example of a “circular” model in using resources, able to be productive in multiple dimensions (economic, environmental, social, aesthetic–cultural…): rainwater is channelled and conserved into cisterns, stones are reused in building dry-stone walls, and energy comes from local sources. The work of man and nature created hybrid dramatic landscapes that are a source of identity for local communities.

However, globalization, agricultural intensification and socio-economic changes turned agricultural terraces from a productive resource into an unsustainable heritage conservation cost. The beauty of terraces attracts tourists, but the high costs of maintenance and labour effort reduce their attractiveness for productive uses, generating progressive abandonment processes, multidimensional poverty, increased environmental risks and the loss of cultural resources, thus reducing community well-being.

Today terraced landscapes are geographic–economic marginal areas. Youths tend to abandon these landscapes to seek for qualified jobs in urban centres, contributing to growing urbanization costs and further impoverishment of lands in a vicious circle. Since the problem is systemic, it requires a systemic approach to transform a vicious into a circular process: which plural interconnected models are able to break this vicious circle and to enhance the resilience in these landscapes? How to integrate economic growth (e.g. growth of enterprises) with social and environmental sustainable development?

New economic models are needed to recover the multifunctionality of terraced landscapes, balancing investment cost and the costs of maintenance and management with the returns from agricultural/touristic/multifunctional productivity.

The thesis here is that the reuse of terraced landscapes can be operationally implemented in the perspective of the circular economy: of the circular city/territory model, of the circular agriculture, of circular tourism, of circular building economy.

The “circular model” is based on reduced ecological resources consumption, reuse of all available resources, no waste. It increases productivity in multiple dimensions, creating new jobs and enhancing environmental health and well-being of people.

In this paper, we explore how the circular model can be operationalized in terraced landscapes, which notion of multidimensional value can support its implementation, rebalancing costs, and which economic instruments can be adopted to turn the actual costs into economically, socially and environmentally productive investments.

17.1.1 Circular Economy and Circularization of Processes

The non-used cultural terraced landscape is a “cost” under many points of view. Its creative and systemic functional reuse can reduce this “cost”, turning it into an investment. It becomes effective if it is incorporated in a circular economy perspective/strategy: circular city economy, circular tourism, circular urban/ territorial agriculture, circularization of building sector. Here, the proposal is to adopt circular processes (applied in particular to specific “commons”) through creative functional reuse that can generate new values, jobs, positive ecological impacts, using new evaluation tools in choices.

The circular processes are those that mimic the organization of natural systems, which are able to self-reproduce themselves, and ‘support’ other systems at the same time.

Circular economy is gaining increasing attention as a potential way for our society to increase prosperity, while reducing dependence on primary materials and energy (Le Moigne 2014; Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2015). At the same time, a lively debate is going on about the attractiveness of a circular economy model of production/consumption for different stakeholders and its implications for employment, growth and the environment (Rizos et al. 2015).

The linear economic development model, based on infinite resources consumption, is no longer sustainable (Costanza et al. 2014). Circular economy enriches the mainstream economics (with its traditional linear model), introducing it into a multidimensional space.

The circular economy model reduces/avoids social and environmental negative impacts, promoting economically, socially and environmentally convenient activities based on closed short loops at local level through the production and enhancement of synergies/relationships (between the single human being and the community, human beings and the environment, human beings and the landscape). This model replaces current linear models, reducing raw materials consumption, energy consumption and waste production by reusing existing assets/structures. It includes the reuse of the embedded energy and the reuse of knowledge itself.

Thus, in the circular model we can recognize:

•the reduction of materials resources—reducing the need of new land, water, energy, and thus reducing costs;

•reuse (and shared use) of existing resources with new functions;

•maintenance of existing resources (buildings, stones, walls, etc.) ensuring longer life;

•energy recovery—valorizing the embodied energy and using renewable energy sources;

•recreation of value through the use of parts of existing (ancient, historical) buildings (refurbishing/remanufacturing);

•reuse of the specific local knowledge for valorizing the identity of territories in the regeneration of the city/territory system.

Considering costs and benefits, as well as impacts and externalities, in a multidimensional and multi-actor perspective (not only economic–financial flows), circular economic models increase the overall productivity of territorial systems (Fusco Girard 2016).

The circular economy has some main characteristics:

1.It is oriented to enlarge the lifetime of resources, assigning them new functions (in a long-time perspective);

2.It is based on synergies/symbioses between actors in fostering closed loops of value creation: economic costs are reduced, and new wealth is created through the multiplication of relationships;

3.It enhances the productivity, decoupling wealth production from negative environmental impacts.

4.It takes into account/incorporates the external effects on the natural and social environment in generating economic wealth;

5.It expresses a form of co-evolutionary capitalism that makes integration of environmental, social, development goals (Porter and Kramer 2011);

6.It projects the conventional economy in a multidimensional space in which, therefore, economic, ecological and social values coexist;

7.It modifies and enriches the very notion of value towards a complex economic, ecologic and social value (Complex Value);

8.It modifies the choices of investment/design/planning that necessarily become systemic;

9.Technological innovation fosters innovation reducing costs/enhancing performances.

The closed loop is the key principle of this circular model that can be applied not only to industrial processes, but also to financing, business and management models, creating synergies between multiple actors.

The empirical evidence shows that circular economic processes are linked to the reduction of costs (investment costs, management and operating costs, environmental and sociocultural costs) first of all because of the creation of productive synergies/symbiosis (Fujita et al. 2013) between actors (professionals, entrepreneurs, policy-makers, investment funds, civil society).

The circular paradigm is assumed here not only for the economic co-evolutive growth with natural ecosystems, but also for promoting the human development paradigm: no “waste of people” (and not only of resources).

Circular economy is thus able not only to reduce different forms of poverty, but more in general to integrate concretely beauty, economy and fairness because it conserves the quality of the natural/cultural environment, producing new jobs and economic wealth.

Many cities and regions are shifting to a circular economy model (Amsterdam, Paris, Vienna, Rotterdam, Helsinki, Barcelona, Brussels, Peterborough…). Recent research and policy practice show how circular territorial models can be applied in the city-region (European Commission 2015; ESPON et al. 2016; Ellen MacArthur

Foundation 2017; Partnership Circular Economy 2018). A circular model can be adopted in terraced landscapes for regenerating their multifunctionality and multidimensional productivity, starting from the recognition of their complex value through a systemic landscape approach.

17.1.2 The Landscape Systemic Approach

“The ‘complex systemic (urban/territory) landscape’ consists of combinations of, and interaction amongst, six landscapes: natural, man-made, man-made/cultural, financial, social, and human landscape. The specific character of a city/territory, its particular identity (its attractiveness) derives from the particular intensity and reciprocal combinations of these landscapes” (Fusco Girard 2016). The landscape approach offers a unifying, holistic and relational notion/concept/idea for facing all the goals of local development.

The landscape can be considered the synthetic/holistic indicator of the sustainable, inclusive, safe, resilient city/territory. The more important challenges of our time (e.g. health, safety, climate change, migration flows, urbanization, energy, pollution, social disparities, poverty) are embedded in the landscape. The “health” of a city/territory and the human well-being can be read in the landscape. All the values/goals/interests of a society are reflected in the landscape: here, we can recognize the culture itself of a society. As the result of mutual combination of different forms of capital, for example of the expertise and skills of a territory, it shapes the comparative advantage of an area compared with others.

The landscape has thus a particular development potential. It can become key for launching a smart sustainable development model, starting from local resources to activate creative processes of circular economy through a synergistic approach, combining the touristic, economic, local productions activities with cultural heritage regeneration, with the creativity of its inhabitants.

In the landscape, perspective is intrinsically embodied also an aesthetic dimension: the landscape itself evokes this specific aesthetic perspective. The particular beauty of the landscape (connected to its shapes, colours, microclimate, light values, local materials, and life that build its “image”, its soul) expresses the combination of human and natural creativity and characterizes the true identity of a territory.

The terraced landscapes are good examples of beauty all over the world: in China, Morocco, Yemen, Japan, Peru, Canary Islands, etc. In Italy, Cinque Terre, Amalfi coast, Gargano, Euganei Hills, Valtellina are well known (Scaramellini and Varotto 2008; Bonardi and Varotto 2016).

The circular processes contribute to the beauty of a system because they allow that each component is linked to the other ones in a comprehensive order and in a dynamic harmony: the visual impacts of this systemic harmony are perceived as their beauty.