The LAF Declaration, New LAF Declaration, and everything in Between.

2017_wasla_newsletter_february_2

The Landscape Architecture Foundation have developed two “declarations of concern” one in 1966 and one in 2016 with 60 years different. Write in no more than two pages, your assessment of the original declaration, and the new declaration, and compare and contrast the similarities and differences between both in the light of the times they were developed. End with a paragraph sharing your own opinion if we as landscape architects are making progress in addressing the concerns in both declarations or not? And are we moving forward progressively / positively, or not?

Review the Declaration, the New Declaration and the Lecture/Video titled: “Less a Declaration than Some Thoughts” (all on the class-material tab) then write your reflections and critical overview on the directions we are heading to.   #Env_Plan #Landscape

10 thoughts on “The LAF Declaration, New LAF Declaration, and everything in Between.

  1. The first and second “declaration of concern” had many similarities and contrasts. First, I would like to mention that the amount of “concerned landscape architects” who wrote each document demonstrated how much the field of landscape architecture grew between 1966 and 2016. The first declaration was written by “a small group of landscape architects who shared a concern for the quality of the American environment and its future…” (LAF, 1966). This small number in contrast to the 700 participants in the 2016 declaration is stunning. In one hand, one must remember that the field of landscape architecture was just beginning to bloom in the late 17th century therefore it makes sense that such a small number of people were “concerned” about the American landscape, on the other hand, one must wonder how in the world 700 people wrote one declaration- all in agreement.

    Secondly, the 1966 declaration mentioned very specific landscape issues that were occurring during that time. Some of these issues were Lake Erie becoming septic, how New York was low on water, the Potomac River filled with sewage and lastly, air pollution. It is interesting that most of the issues mentioned in the declaration were all water related whereas, in the 2016 declaration, broader issues such as climate change, rising seas, species extinction, and human ethic were mentioned.

    One topic both declarations mentioned though was the depletion of natural resources. The 1966 version referred to the depletion of natural resources as landscape architect’s responsibility to be educated, aware of the process, to “clean it up” and that only then can landscape architects interpret the landscape correctly. In my opinion, the profession of landscape architecture was so small at this time that the declaration of 1966 was to inform the public about the responsibilities of, as well as the need for more landscape architects. When the declaration was written, America was just entering the industrial age, a time of economic growth but not with the best environmental practices. Only once does the document mention anything about the people’s role in the environment stating, “He [Landscape Architecture] is essential in maintaining the vital connection between man and nature” (LAF, 1966). Even in this statement, the responsibility of change is on the backs of the profession to make the connection between people and the landscape.

    In contrast, the 2016 declaration, wrote of natural resources as if we have already ruined what we can and now we have to change our way of living. This is a complete different perspective than the 1966 document, putting the responsibilities of change in the hands of the people writing, “…appreciate humanity’s role as integral to its stability and productivity, we can build a new identity for society as a constructive part of nature” (LAF, 2016). This statement really shows, that the mindset of landscape architecture indeed changed from educating and recruiting landscape architects to, now essentially, education and recruiting the people.

    Overall, I believe both declarations had valid concerns and arguments for their respectable times. I am convinced that the first declaration was to expand the profession of landscape architecture. I really liked how their “call to action” was about the education of new landscape architects and created a 4-point program to bridge the gap between knowledge and practice. For this time in history, it was important to recruit more landscape architects, educate them well, and only then, think about implementation of practice. I think that the 1966 declaration’s “call to action” was successful as landscape architecture is one of the leading professions in the world today and the professionals working in the field are highly educated on how to implement change.
    The 2016 declaration was/is much more about the implementation of this knowledge and change that needs to occur putting the pressure on the “land ethic.” I think this statement is a powerful one, “… landscape architects are uniquely positioned to bring related professions together into new alliances to address complex social and ecological problems” (LAF, 2016). I think we are still at work on the 2016 declaration’s “call to action” as we have succeeded in extending research to prove environmental issues but we haven’t completely and successfully created a communion between humans and the natural world. This will be the biggest challenge for today’s generation of landscape architects to overcome.

    Looking into the future, which the film “Less a Declaration than Some Thoughts” talked about, I see many opportunities and constraints. As the speaker, Marc Treib spoke about, we can continue to talk about landscape architecture in a way of bringing people and nature together or bringing different disciplines together to create something better but in doing this, we are also contradicting ourselves. We tend to view our policies, implementation, and advocacy in many categories or as the Treib referred to it as “either/ ors.” As natural as it is to have options, I think he was trying to bring to the viewer’s attention that we must stop looking at change in options.

    As landscape architects, we must stop viewing sustainability and beauty as two options because, in reality, they need to work together. As the Treib noted “…We [people] don’t care about the sustainability, we care about the beauty” (Treib, 2016) and it is completely true. But instead of wasting our time thinking about the “either/ors” of which is more important- sustainability or beauty- and instead do what we know is right- creating landscapes that are beautiful and sustainable- why aren’t we thinking about the “both/ands”? We have to knowledge, tools, and professionals to make landscapes achieve both aspects which in turn will please both the natural world and society. If 700 landscape architects can come together to create a cohesive, integrated call to action plan for the profession of landscape architecture, why can’t we create the same for implementation of change? (Of course this is a much bigger question than can be answered because there are so many outside political and economic factors that determine how landscape architects can implement change- but I suppose it’s worth a thought).

    Liked by 2 people

  2. The original declaration starts by focusing on the next generation of Americans, and
    trying to get more people involved in the field of landscape architecture. It goes on to talk about
    how the authors are concerned about the future state of the environment, if people continue the
    same path of destruction. In order to prevent further environmental degradation people who are
    planning for the future need to understand the natural processes. Along with knowledge of the
    natural processes landscape architects need to solve these problems in an artistic way. At the
    time demand for people who had the skills to deal with these problems were in high demand.
    This early declaration also sought to find a way to share their successful projects, so that these
    solutions could be adapted and then applied to other situations.
    The new declaration speaks to the fact that the landscape is an international phenomenon
    that is impacted by everyone and impacts everyone. Since we acted so carelessly in the past we
    have to attempt to lessen the damage that we have caused. Unfortunately, the things that we have
    done have lead to inequity and has a heavier impact on people in the lower income bracket. But
    there is hope because an increasing number of people are becoming concerned about the state of
    the environment and are interested and trying to make a difference. Landscape architects are just
    the people to work on these types of projects because they can bring people from all different
    fields together. Landscape architects vow to create designs that function both ecologically and aesthetically. They will also advocate for social justice and try to help people understand how valuable their set of expertise is.
    Both of the decelerations talk about making change through collaboration, because it is truly impossible to for one person or even a small group of people to solve this problem. They also examine the current state of the environment and discuss how bad things are getting. Then go on to mention different ways of solving these problems that involve not only ecological solutions but aesthetically pleasing ones as well. They also both suggests that landscape architects are very valuable to this movement because they have experience in a variety of fields that are important to planning cities, which allows them to bring together other professionals with competing interests.
    The two decelerations do differ in some ways as well, the original version paints the picture that if things keep going the way they are, the future is going to be pretty bad. The 2016 version comes from the point of view that things are already very bad and we need to mitigate what we did and try and stop things from getting worse. The older version also emphasizes a need to get more people involved in the profession and educate them well. While the newer one talks about educating other people about how valuable the profession is. The newer deceleration is also a lot more global thinking, where the older one only mentions what is happening in the united states. The older version also refers to landscape architects as “He,” which shows how male dominated the profession once was. The newer version is also much more concerned with social equity that the first. The new version is also mentions the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration, while the old one only talks about working with other landscape architects to share information.
    I think that the new deceleration is an example of how we have began to accomplish some of the goals form the 1966 version. Many of the goals have just evolved into a next step or more progressive point of view. The profession has expanded and so now we need to advocate its importance to others. Not only do we collaborate with other landscape architects, but now we collaborate with people from all sorts of professions. Obviously there is still a long way to go and we will probably never be fully sustainable. But I think that we are making good progress, and in sixty years when people look back at where we are now, I think they will realize that this generation helped make progress towards a better society.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. While many things have changed over the last 60 years, the message of the two declarations is essentially the same. However, the delivery of the message is rather different. In the 1966 declaration, it is apparent right away that the writers wanted to convey intense urgency. The words are lamenting the state of the world with vivid imagery and specific examples cited. Each example is presented as a tragedy. On the other hand, the 2016 declaration states similar concerns with a vague tone. Clearly, the environment has not improved at all since 1966. The way problems are presented in the second declaration seems as though environmental issues have grown so big that they can’t even be named. It is like the authors are so overwhelmed by the long list of issues, they cannot pinpoint the worst.

    Both declarations state hopes for the future. However, the 1966 version declares hope with optimism and gusto. They seem to really have hope that the state of the environment can be turned around. Not so with the current group. There is a sense of resignation in their words of hope. It feels like they are trying to be brave in the face of the impossible. Do they really believe that there is hope for the environment in the future? Are their words empty? Regardless, it is admirable that a profession would continue to work out solutions to the daunting task of saving the planet from human-inflicted destruction.

    Although a much greater number of people had become landscape architects in the time following the 1966 declaration (it went from a “small group” to “over 700”), they both still end with a call for more people to join the profession. They seek more people to educate about the state of the world and pass on the knowledge to others. One big difference is that the 2016 declaration has broadened their scope to include the entire world. They have realized that even if sustainable practices are adopted in the United States, it is meaningless unless the rest of the world follows. The authors now recognize the relationship of people to the land which is illustrated when they say, “what we do to our landscapes, we ultimately do to ourselves.” Additionally, the 2016 declaration emphasized the importance of maintaining beauty and artistry in landscape design while being sustainable at the same time.

    Personally, I think landscape architects have generally good intentions. However, clients are demanding, materials are scarce and money is necessary for society. There are so many stressors pressuring designers to take short-cuts and make harmful environmental decisions. I think we would also like to believe that there is something we can do. We believe that more awareness and persistence will change things. In reality, it’s probably futile. But I think it’s important that we still try to save the environment in any way we can. I’m sure that some of the efforts of previous landscape architects have paid off in ways we can’t see. While it is easy to see the negative things happening in the world, perhaps the work we are doing is having positive impacts that we will never know.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. In 1966 “Declaration of Concern”, they are realizing that lifestyles need to change and landscape practices are needing to improve to support the damage humans have caused to the environment. Some of the effects that made people recognize this were: water shortages in New York City, septic in Lake Eerie, pollution, and more. Even in the past, people understood that it was landscape architects that were the connection to creating a healthier, stronger Earth.
    In the 2016 “Declaration of Concern” the problems had already been recognized and people were working to solve them. Landscape architects have been collaborating with other disciplines for decades to find new and improved ways to protect the environment. Today, we are more focused on designing to withstand the conditions of climate change and mitigate problems that caused it to arise in the first place. We are determined to find solutions to successfully integrate human spaces into ecological context, due to excessive population growth. The population did not seem like it was as large of an issue in previous years.
    The declarations both had very similar intents. They understand that man relies on nature for survival and that we need to change our practices to reduce the negative impacts that we have induced. They both mention the different skills that are necessary to make a difference. The present day have already implemented the use of these skills in practice, while it appears that the older declaration states that we will need them to be successful in making a difference. There are similar concerns in 1966 as there were in 2016, including the need for water and resource conservation methods and lessening pollution in the environment.
    According to Marc Treib, humans have a “Declaration of dependence” on the world, meaning that we would be unable to survive without its resources and natural systems. The video talks about how we don’t care for things outside of the quality it contains or the benefits that we receive from it. We as designers will not be able to please everyone because “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder”. Landscape architects will not be able to connect and agree with everyone, but we have to design for the people that will be exposed to the area the most. Time, money, and politics are large influences on the design of the landscape and there are more issues that are present today than what there were in the past. In the end of the video, Mark Trieb, mentions the importance of “pairing responsibility and beauty”. This comment is important because if people don’t take responsibility of their actions and want to maintain the beauty of the landscape, it will never endure the oppression that we cause. This video relates to the readings because it talks about the impacts of design and the importance of connecting to surrounding people to protect beauty within the environment.
    I believe that both declarations and the video were accurate in portraying the issues needing to be addressed within those time periods. During the time of the first declaration, I feel like landscape architects were still understanding the importance of their ability to connect nature to man, the steps that were needing to be taken, and the level of collaboration that was going to need to exist. The second declaration mentioned more specific issues they were addressing as to just stating that there needed to be a change because new problems were arising. Landscape architects have made positive progress in the expansion of knowledge and the skills that we have learned to better protect the environment. We continue to progress because technology is quickly advancing. We have far more capabilities than what we have had access to in the past, and this is going to continue to grow. There is still a large demand for landscape architects and this is the case now more than ever with the amount of development needed within urban landscapes and to restore damaged ecosystems.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. The 1966 Landscape Declaration begins by talking about coming together as a society to lower crises, which began to occur throughout America. The declaration specifically mentions how “Lake Erie is becoming septic, New York City’s shortage of water, and the Potomac River has sewage and silt (LAF, 1966).” With all the problems that began to form throughout America, one solution may not be able to be the only solution. We as humans are dependent of nature, so it is our duty as humans to take care of our environment (LAF, 1966). The 2016 Landscape Declaration begins by discussing the fact that humans need “food, water, oxygen (LAF, 1966),” which should come from and return back to the landscape (LAF, 1966). The reading goes on to discuss how climate change has affected the environment dramatically with problems, such as “rising sea tides, resource depletion, desertification, and species extinction (LAR, 1966).” Although climate change is changing the environment, it is our duty as Landscape Architectures, “to create placers that nourish our deepest needs for communion with the natural world, with one another, and to serve as the health and well being of all communities (LAF 2016).” It is important that as Landscape Architects, we take care of our environment and continue to design cities that will be able to change with how human population is changing.

    The 1966 and 2016 Landscape Declarations have many similarities to each other. In each declaration, it talks about the importance of taking care of our environment. The only way that anything will be accomplished is if we rally together, as landscape architects to make a change. I was amazing to see the change in how many landscape architects that were concerned about our environment compared to 1966. When the 1966 Landscape Declaration was written, there was a only a few landscape architects who expressed their concern, but in the 2016 Landscape Declaration, a vast amount were concerned. Another common trend that was mentioned throughout each declaration, was that each expressed the fact that many of our natural resources are depleted and our way of living will have to change. In the 2016 Landscape Declaration, when they said, “we will work to cultivate a bold culture of inclusive leadership, advocacy and activism in our ranks (LAF, 2016),” it shows exactly how committed that Landscape Architects have become in not only fighting this battle by the use of other architects, but also encouraging those outside of this job title to take a hard look at how they are treating the natural environment.

    Overall, I believe that we as Landscape Architects are making progress in addressing the concerns in both declarations. I think that there is still a long way to go when looking at the bigger picture surrounding our natural environment, but the amount of people with growing concerns has rose, which helps to get the word out. Continuing to make conscious efforts throughout our designs, will help continue to make a more sustainable world. Although we may never be able to completely come back from the hurt that we have done to our environment, we can continue to make changes that will start to reverse some of the negative effects.

    In the film, “Less a Declaration Than Some Thoughts” began to take a look at the future. The speaker, Marc Treib talked about the fact that many people don’t care about sustainability throughout our designs and are more worried about the beauty of it. As Landscape Architects, we should not just focus on the beauty behind our designs, just because that is the focus of many people, but we should create designs that achieve both beauty and sustainability. This is our “responsibility and opportunity (Treib, 2016)” to make landscapes that are both appealing to all and are efficient for our environment.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. In my original assessment of the 1966 Landscape Architecture Foundation declaration, I was immediately taken aback by the diction and decription used throughout the document. I feel like it poetically and urgently addressing their desire for more landscape architecture, as well as attention by the public to understand the severity of current conditions and deterioration of the environment. The first sentences of each point/paragraph are straight to the point— a “sense of crisis”, “no single solution”, and that man is “not free of nature’s demand”—all demonstrate with powerful language the current problems and threats to everyday life if our lifestyles continue of their trajectory. After the first paragraph, the rest of the declaration begins to directly link landscape architecture to this battle (of sorts), and define them as one of the most important tools for addressing this looming and all-consuming problem. While most of the declaration has a very honest and harsh look at reality, the ending note promises hope and promise for the future: “We pledge our services. We seek help from those who share our concern”. The whole document inspires trust and confidence in the field of landscape architecture for others to follow their direction, as works as an introduction and instruction to other professions, institutions, and regular people to the capabilities of this field.
    The 2016 Landscape Architecture Foundation declaration, written 50 years later, is very similar to the 1966 declaration in that it emphasizes the role of landscape architects and their involvement in planning for a better a better future. This later version explicitly names climate change and specific environmental disturbance such as “rising seas, resource depletion, desertification and unprecedented rates of global extinction”. As noted in Marc Treib’s presentation, the second declaration definitely focuses more on the connection between the environmental and humanitarian aspects of landscape architecture, as it becomes more related to ecological systems, as well as “complex social problems”. In the third paragraph, it already begins to be hopeful for the future, saying “there is profound hope for the future”, and giving the remained of the document a very different feeling to the earlier declaration.
    Both declarations share fundamental similarities that unite them as the Landscape Architecture Foundation, but distinct differences as well. Both emphasize the same scope, initially in the beginning taking about human’s reliance of the environment, but the later declaration seems to be more grounded in global problems and extends past the American-centric references noted in the 1966 declaration. One thing that Caleb pointed out was the lack of diversity within the 1966 declaration, as signed by all men and having used “he” to encompass the landscape architecture profession. I think that this a small part of it and probably not intentional, but it’s interesting to see how the 2016 declaration’s looks more broadly and becomes more socially inclusive. In Marc Treib’s presentation, he notes that the challenge of landscape architecture was to “elevate the pragmatics to the level of poetics”. Whereas the first declaration is a powerful and emotional note to others about the power of landscape architecture, it seems that the second declaration is a reminder to current and aspiring landscape architects about their duty and how the profession needs to be focused.
    After analyzing the two declarations, I feel like the greatest concerns addresses are the preservation of ecological systems through social integration, creating more advocacy and credit to landscape architects, and regulating humanity’s impact on the environment with future development. I do think that landscape architects are doing a much better job of keeping the natural environment in mind when making designs, but that’s mostly just what I see from an educational point of view. Landscape architecture is definitely seeing more advocacy and than the 1960’s which is why I think that the second declaration doesn’t address this problem as much, but it’s important for professions to have confidence in speaking up to others and having their voices heard. Finally, with dealing with people’s relationships with the environment, I think there is more to be said and done. I think if we want real change to happen, then landscape architecture needs to keep extending outside of its current limit of a simple profession. Many of these changes regarding the environment require fundamental attitude and legislative alterations, in which landscape will need more publicity than it already has to achieve. The declarations should require and expect more from their people, which I think we are available to provide.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. Both declarations have the same general outlook and conclusion on the effects of the situation at the time: we are in a state of general ecological crisis, and our role is crucial to responding to it in an educated and ethical manner. The distinct difference between the two is the state the current situation is in. The first declaration was developed during a time in American history of vast expansion and resource use. In the decades before and during the creation of this declaration, suburban expansion and the creation of the interstate system brought with it an extreme increase in sprawl, vehicle use, and resources required to sustain our society. Those who designed this declaration saw the need to first communicate with those concerned with the rapid evolution of our society and become educated on all the factors within this situation. They understand that we are reliant on these resources and that the ability to acquire these will inevitably lead to political, economic, and ecological concerns. The goal of those who created the first declaration are to increase the number of people who are educated and concerned with these issues so that they can better advise the use of these resources. They sought to do this through organization of like minded people, education to better understand the problems and possible solutions, and to use their combined knowledge to change the course of the issues at hand.

    Sixty years later, the passion and drive for ecological justice and the well-being for our society has done nothing but increase. In those sixty years, we have made many advances in practice and education but the problems we originally set out to solve are all but diminished. Resources are still diminishing at an alarming rate and the world is feeling the repercussions of it. The new declaration is now more focused towards research and practice that “serves the higher purpose of social and ecological justice for all peoples and all species.” Our presence and influence have grown significantly as a community in the last sixty years. The new declaration works towards same future that we have worked towards for decades, and now we have the tools, awareness, and education to do so. We now know that our communities are part of a much larger system and that we need to redesign our society to fit that system. Instead of seeing our society as a burden on the natural world and depleting our resources, as we did sixty years ago, we must reimagine ourselves as a productive part of nature and manage our resources. We must also maintain the integrity of our society by also providing for the social and cultural needs. By doing all of this, we will create a balance within our own society so that we can better maintain our relationship with the natural environment we live in.

    I see these two declarations as different chapters of the same story. Sixty years ago, we needed to know more about the overbearing situation we brought on the world in the form of expansion, resource use, and irresponsibility for nature. Now we are feeling the long-term effects of those problems, but we also have developed the means to counter them and are striving to improve ourselves as a community within nature. Landscape architects have the knowledge and the passion to help move the world into a future that prioritizes education, communication, and strong relationships so that all manner of life can be improved.

    Mark Treib also expresses that understanding our complex relationship with each other and with the landscape will generate an improve efficiency in our role to preserve all factors of life on Earth. Our role as stewards of the land is moving towards the safekeeping of nature and of our moral, cultural, and social integrity. He expresses the importance of the combination of aspects one thought to be conflicting or opposite, such as sustainability and beauty, pragmatics and poetry, and so on. This symbiotic mindset is the complex and higher thinking that will advance us to put aside many conflicts and move us into a better age of education and morality.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. The Landscape Declarations of 1966 and 2016 have both attempted to summarize the values that landscape architects practice the profession by: concern for the environment, the people and the connections between them. The Landscape Declaration of 1966 is a declaration of concern; the one of 2016 is written as a call for action, thus expressing more exigence. While both declarations express a sense of urgency in regards to the environment, in the 60 years gap between the two declarations, the issues that the profession deals with have augmented in terms of magnitude. The declaration of 1966 talks of localized problems related to lakes and rivers in the US being polluted with sewage and septic waste. The declaration of 2016 talks about more large-scale problems like climate change, desertification, sea level rise, species extinction and resource depletion, which are pressing issues in the US and throughout the world. This indicates that there have been positive efforts to resolve the problems that were considered urgent in the 20th century, and people have started to shift their concerns to more global issues. The Big Pipe Project in Portland, OR, to treat Combines Sewage Overflow (CSO) is an example of an action taken to deal with such issues that have had positive impacts on the environment.

    The increase in the magnitude of problems also demands more professionals trying to solve them. The two declarations demonstrate a difference in the number of landscape architects involved in its conception, ranging from a small group to 700 professionals. This shows that the profession has been growing through the years. The 1966 declaration compared landscape architects with architects to establish the scope of our practice. Today, the profession is more well-known and respected as one that deals with the design and understanding of built and natural environmental spaces, systems and processes.

    The Landscape Declaration of 2016 mentions that it builds off of the original 1966 one. Both of these declarations express apprehension for the environment and about the unwise use of natural resources, which is a valid concern considering their deteriorating condition. A lot of what we do as landscape architects is related to nature and incorporating the natural environment with built form to shape spaces for the people. The 1966 Landscape Architecture Declaration focuses mostly on environmental issues, also hinting at the importance of the connection between man and nature. The 2016 declaration also emphasizes the socio-cultural aspect of landscape architecture in addition to the environmental, and advocates for social and ecological justice for humans as well as species of flora and fauna.

    Both declarations acknowledge the necessity of collaboration in the field of landscape architecture. In practice, professionals from different disciplines and with different skills need to come together to realize a project. It also necessitates a collaboration of ideas, values and interdependent environmental and built systems to produce solutions to complex social, cultural and natural problems. This collaboration mandates the coexistence of different aspects of the landscape such as sustainability, resiliency, equity and democracy. Mark Treib, in his 2016 talk at the Landscape Architecture Foundation Summit, talked about the importance of a consensus between the functional, and cultural values of a landscape, sustainability and beauty. While most people perceive sustainability and beauty to be separate entities, Treib expresses his thoughts on how important he thinks the functional, sustainable, and experiential values of landscapes need to be in unison with its aesthetic aspects. He advocates for an inclusive domain in landscape architecture instead of an exclusive one, which is coherent with the Landscape Declaration of 2016, which notes that “landscape architects bring different and often competing interests together so as to give artistic physical form and integrated function to the ideals of equity, sustainability, resiliency and democracy.” (LAF 2016)

    With increasing urbanization, public and green spaces are becoming sparse, natural resources are dwindling, and people are getting to spend less time outdoors interacting with the environment. In my opinion, people are realizing these problems and the role of landscape architects in solving them. Moreover, with climate change increasing the temperature on earth, puncturing holes in the ozone and raising sea levels, people are realizing the significance of environment-responsive development. We have more knowledge and resources today, to tackle these problems, than we did in the past. We also have more challenges. The problems we are trying to tackle are paramount, and we are a young profession. Moreover, we have to balance our perception of landscape architecture as an income generating profession, with our values concerning the environment and the people who we serve. However, the importance of landscape architecture is being realized throughout the world, due to its unique problem-solving approaches that are informed by creative design, natural processes and human interactions with place. I think landscape architecture is headed in the right direction in many ways. We just need to come together to implement our vision for the environments that we seek to improve.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. Progression in Addressing Concerns:
    The original 1966 Declaration of Concern is very reminiscent of the American dream and our ability as a nation to come together and enact the changes we want to see through sheer brawn and our initiative to be a voice for the land. It brings to light both broad and wide-ranging problems the nation was facing and very specific locations of high fidelity. The new 2016 Call to Action is a global infatuation with societal relations the environment and ecological processes occurring all around us. The magnetism of this prompt is the inclusivity and grandeur of the profession, a selfless field of scholars, stewards, and visionaries.

    Both Declarations are eerily similar in tone and assertiveness to the deeply embedded implications our actions have at a planetary scale. They coax designers and other relevant professions to ascertain the self-awareness necessary to be diligent in our practices and beneficiaries for the environment. Ideologically, each declaration has an ambient accession to the literacy of our landscapes and an antithesis to we believe to have forsaken our subsequent generations.

    The ’66 declaration is notably a small group of male figureheads hand selected by the Landscape Architecture Foundation (LAF) of the time. Its breathing is an anecdotal response to the purlieus status most large post-industrial cities were stigmatized by. The ’16 declaration is the culmination in a surplus of seven hundred landscape architects in conjunction with related design and construction fields, governmental agencies and advocates of our natural world to enact change. Through multicultural recognition of a global impotence and the concession of liberation from the incarcerating borders separating the empathetic rapport our profession has with nature. The text is aim is to be generative of commitment and insight action today.

    Landscape architecture in the modern-day instills the core concepts eloquent in each declaration confirming our role as dreamers, educators, and thought leaders within our communities. Primarily, as a discipline to challenge ourselves to better focus efforts on the knowledge of our surrounds and be more cognizant of its needs and to be adaptive to change. Champion our efforts to become educators and promoters of our field to better inform the coming generations about the effect they can have on their community’s future for the better. Embrace collaboration with other professional fields on a global scale. Only through this seminal process will we better-equipped individuals with the mentality to enact change in communities, certitude for their beliefs and the ability to share their concerns openly with others.

    I perceive future landscape architects to be the communicators, mediating across cultures, communities, and social classes promoting an equitable public realm.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s