著：（瑞典）安德魯·巴特勒 譯：張文宇 于倩 校：趙燁

最近10年，北歐地區(qū)日益受到氣候變化的嚴(yán)重影響，其中包括洪水、風(fēng)暴、干旱和野火等災(zāi)害事件[1]。據(jù)預(yù)測(cè)，未來(lái)幾十年內(nèi)這些事件的發(fā)生頻率將會(huì)進(jìn)一步增加，它們將導(dǎo)致巨大的災(zāi)難性風(fēng)景變化，對(duì)人類與周圍環(huán)境的關(guān)系產(chǎn)生深遠(yuǎn)影響，這引發(fā)了對(duì) “新型”風(fēng)景未來(lái)發(fā)展的探討。

瑞典位于北歐地區(qū)，以森林為主。國(guó)土面積約70%被森林所覆蓋，其中生產(chǎn)用森林占國(guó)土面積的58%，這凸顯了林業(yè)在瑞典經(jīng)濟(jì)中的重要性。森林作為主要的土地覆蓋類型，對(duì)人和社區(qū)以及他們對(duì)風(fēng)景的識(shí)別和聯(lián)系產(chǎn)生了深遠(yuǎn)影響。雖然大部分土地歸私人所 有，但“公 共 使 用 權(quán)”（瑞 典 語(yǔ)：Allemansr?tten）的存在促進(jìn)了人與森林的密切關(guān)系。公共使用權(quán)使當(dāng)?shù)厝藢敉庑蓍e視為一種必需品[2]， 森林在日常休閑中扮演著重要角色[3]。公共使用權(quán)本身也經(jīng)常被視為國(guó)家認(rèn)同和自我形象的推動(dòng)力，這項(xiàng)權(quán)利為所有人提供了接觸大自然的機(jī)會(huì)，也是非物質(zhì)風(fēng)景遺產(chǎn)的一部分。

本研究旨在從風(fēng)景變化的角度闡述如何認(rèn)識(shí)森林火災(zāi)后的風(fēng)景遺產(chǎn)，揭示并塑造風(fēng)景的多種要素，并探討風(fēng)景的定義及其自明性。通過(guò)介紹2014 年韋斯特曼蘭地區(qū)的火災(zāi)案例，簡(jiǎn)要概述風(fēng)景作為遺產(chǎn)的認(rèn)知方式。在此基礎(chǔ)上，論述火災(zāi)前后韋斯特曼蘭地區(qū)風(fēng)景遺產(chǎn)話語(yǔ)和特質(zhì)的變化。最后，從過(guò)去的聯(lián)系和未來(lái)的遺產(chǎn)兩個(gè)方面討論與火災(zāi)地區(qū)相關(guān)的遺產(chǎn)話語(yǔ)的發(fā)展。

2014年8月4日，瑞典媒體齊聚瑞典中部的韋斯特曼蘭（圖1）。5天前，這里還是一片默默無(wú)聞的普通森林，2014年7月31日，由于長(zhǎng)時(shí)間的炎熱干燥天氣，森林火災(zāi)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)達(dá)到了極端水平（5E，瑞典6級(jí)指數(shù)中的最高級(jí)別），在伐木區(qū)進(jìn)行林業(yè)工作時(shí)，不慎引發(fā)火災(zāi)。11 天后，隨著天氣條件的改善，風(fēng)力減弱、濕度增加，再加上大批消防隊(duì)員的共同努力，火勢(shì)才得以控制。

1 韋斯特曼蘭大火的位置及范圍Location and extent of V?stmanland fire

這一場(chǎng)突如其來(lái)的大火徹底改變了這一地區(qū)的自然環(huán)境，改變了人們賴以生存的實(shí)踐方式、經(jīng)驗(yàn)和觀念。大火摧毀了主要的生物群落，嚴(yán)重影響（并產(chǎn)生了新的）考古遺址，并導(dǎo)致各種物理變化，包括表土枯竭和河道淤塞，20多座房屋被夷為平地，近1 200人需要撤離。由于社會(huì)和自然限制條件的改變，韋斯特曼蘭地區(qū)的風(fēng)景發(fā)生了巨大變化，曾經(jīng)界定風(fēng)景功能的人類實(shí)踐活動(dòng)和習(xí)俗不再適用。為各種活動(dòng)、情感和身份提供空間的風(fēng)景消失了；覓食、狩獵、散步和勞作的區(qū)域變得面目全非。

1 風(fēng)景作為特質(zhì)和遺產(chǎn)的載體和來(lái)源

風(fēng)景價(jià)值的喪失取決于如何認(rèn)識(shí)風(fēng)景，以下本研究將簡(jiǎn)要概述如何理解風(fēng)景?！稓W洲景觀公約》（ELC）推動(dòng)了“風(fēng)景是可以感知的實(shí)體”理念，將風(fēng)景定義為“人們所感知的區(qū)域，其特征是自然或人為因素作用和互動(dòng)的結(jié)果”[4]。

每個(gè)體驗(yàn)和感知風(fēng)景的人都有自己的理解體系，從而對(duì)同一風(fēng)景產(chǎn)生多種主觀認(rèn)知。通過(guò)參與風(fēng)景所建立的聯(lián)系，在支持和形成風(fēng)景自明性方面發(fā)揮著重要作用[5]。這種復(fù)雜性導(dǎo)致了在風(fēng)景價(jià)值、身份特質(zhì)和言論之間的潛在沖突[6]。

由于風(fēng)景是“自然或人為因素相互作用”[4]的結(jié)果，它們代表了社會(huì)的共同遺產(chǎn)。風(fēng)景為社會(huì)的過(guò)去提供了歷史的記憶；為當(dāng)代社會(huì)解讀共同遺產(chǎn)提供了紀(jì)念性遺跡和文獻(xiàn)參考。風(fēng)景蘊(yùn)含著文化傳統(tǒng)和習(xí)俗，具有多重意義。

風(fēng)景為歷史權(quán)力結(jié)構(gòu)提供了有形和無(wú)形的痕跡，代表了存在于風(fēng)景中的實(shí)踐以及當(dāng)?shù)胤俏镔|(zhì)性的法律和習(xí)俗[7]。這些習(xí)俗受到地區(qū)、國(guó)家和國(guó)際議程的制約，因此地域風(fēng)景形成的原因不一定是其自身演化，而是可持續(xù)發(fā)展議程、森林政策等倡議及其背后的政策。

由于風(fēng)景代表了“文化與自然進(jìn)程之間的動(dòng)態(tài)互動(dòng)”[4]，其并非是靜態(tài)的。風(fēng)景變化影響著人類與周圍環(huán)境的互動(dòng)方式[8]。風(fēng)景變化的特質(zhì)會(huì)影響人對(duì)周圍環(huán)境的感知和評(píng)價(jià)，并影響他們與風(fēng)景保持聯(lián)系的能力。因此，建立在風(fēng)景基礎(chǔ)上的特質(zhì)和遺產(chǎn)也是動(dòng)態(tài)的，反映了社會(huì)變革和文化習(xí)俗，產(chǎn)生了風(fēng)景和圍繞風(fēng)景展開(kāi)的論述。

盡管變化是不可避免的，但變化會(huì)讓人對(duì)被改變的事物產(chǎn)生消極態(tài)度。尤其是當(dāng)變化是不可預(yù)測(cè)的、劇烈的，如野火等自然災(zāi)害時(shí)[1]。災(zāi)后的風(fēng)景變化及其感知反映了風(fēng)景的價(jià)值。

2 瑞典風(fēng)景變化的驅(qū)動(dòng)因素：森林火災(zāi)前后的風(fēng)景變化

2.1 韋斯特曼蘭火災(zāi)發(fā)生的背景

與所有風(fēng)景區(qū)域一樣，韋斯特曼蘭的防火區(qū)域從來(lái)都不是固定的。該地區(qū)的動(dòng)態(tài)范圍受到景觀管理（這里指的是林業(yè)制度和實(shí)踐）以及地方、地區(qū)、國(guó)家甚至國(guó)際議程和話語(yǔ)的影響和界定。

火災(zāi)發(fā)生區(qū)域以及其周圍的大部分地區(qū)都以生產(chǎn)性森林為主；在20世紀(jì)，生產(chǎn)性森林不斷發(fā)展，擴(kuò)張日益嚴(yán)重[9]。瑞典和世界上許多國(guó)家一樣，數(shù)百年來(lái)一直在開(kāi)發(fā)森林，用于提供燃料、建筑木材、狩獵區(qū)，生產(chǎn)鉀肥、焦油、木炭，進(jìn)行森林放牧等。根據(jù)歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)，森林是一個(gè)真正的多功能場(chǎng)所，其活動(dòng)和價(jià)值與當(dāng)?shù)厣a(chǎn)活動(dòng)以及環(huán)境相關(guān)。然而，林產(chǎn)品工業(yè)、鋸木廠、紙漿和造紙廠以及其他工業(yè)原料的增加意味著林業(yè)在瑞典19世紀(jì)的工業(yè)化進(jìn)程中扮演了重要角色。韋斯特曼蘭就是典型案例，該地區(qū)被認(rèn)為是瑞典工業(yè)最發(fā)達(dá)的地區(qū)之一，但過(guò)度開(kāi)發(fā)導(dǎo)致森林資源枯竭，引發(fā)了旨在解決森林覆蓋面積減少的森林政策性活動(dòng)，從而對(duì)瑞典工業(yè)發(fā)展造成了巨大的影響。因此，包括補(bǔ)植在內(nèi)的國(guó)家管理理念應(yīng)運(yùn)而生。在同一時(shí)期，農(nóng)業(yè)合理化意味著森林放牧不再可行。迫于國(guó)際壓力，人們開(kāi)始在生產(chǎn)力較高的土地上強(qiáng)化農(nóng)業(yè)，這導(dǎo)致邊緣農(nóng)田被放棄[9]。

在全球需求的推動(dòng)下，國(guó)家管理理念和農(nóng)業(yè)合理化這兩項(xiàng)國(guó)家議程都使森林覆蓋率上升，而這一結(jié)果是通過(guò)植樹造林和自然再生來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)的。這極大地改變了風(fēng)景，形成了大面積的森林覆蓋，也使風(fēng)景淪為單一的主要用途：木材生產(chǎn)。

然而，國(guó)家行使的公共使用權(quán)意味人和社區(qū)與他們附近的風(fēng)景形成了密切的關(guān)系，并通過(guò)一系列的風(fēng)景設(shè)計(jì)提升了當(dāng)?shù)貙?duì)風(fēng)景的管理水平，盡管這與當(dāng)前的森林產(chǎn)業(yè)相悖。通過(guò)公共使用權(quán)開(kāi)展的活動(dòng)不僅對(duì)人與周圍環(huán)境的聯(lián)系非常重要，而且對(duì)于人類福祉的發(fā)展也非常重要[10]。

2.2 韋斯特曼蘭火災(zāi)前后的風(fēng)景

2.2.1 韋斯特曼蘭火災(zāi)前的風(fēng)景特質(zhì)

韋斯特曼蘭地區(qū)擁有豐富的考古遺產(chǎn)，最早可以追溯到石器時(shí)代。發(fā)生火災(zāi)的貝格斯拉根區(qū)域位于韋斯特曼蘭地區(qū)，包括至少4個(gè)縣（圖1），雖然邊界不明確，但面積廣闊。該地區(qū)工業(yè)景觀的利用可以追溯到2 000多年前的金屬生產(chǎn)。然而，目前該地區(qū)正在探索將生態(tài)和文化遺產(chǎn)作為鄉(xiāng)村發(fā)展的基礎(chǔ)，這些“公共”身份已融入居住和體驗(yàn)該地區(qū)的人們的意識(shí)中。然而，火災(zāi)的影響范圍僅僅是韋斯特曼蘭地區(qū)的一小部分。

在歷史上，該地區(qū)曾是西部大型鋼鐵廠與東部小規(guī)模農(nóng)業(yè)的分界線，這種分界在當(dāng)前的所有權(quán)模式中仍然十分明顯。該地區(qū)在歷史上曾隸屬于4個(gè)獨(dú)立的教區(qū)，而如今則位于Norberg，Sala，F(xiàn)agersta和Surahammar這4個(gè)不同的城市管轄之下。盡管這些城市的邊界是由立法和政治手段確定的，但它們無(wú)形之中形成了一個(gè)框架。在這個(gè)框架中，既能夠形成共同的身份，提供一個(gè)公認(rèn)的邊界，又能夠各自獨(dú)立，形成“我們”和“他們”的區(qū)別。

這些“公共”身份在該地區(qū)的風(fēng)景中得到了體現(xiàn)，并取決于與特定地方、市政當(dāng)局、教區(qū)的關(guān)聯(lián)，以及地方、地區(qū)、國(guó)家或國(guó)際議程對(duì)該地區(qū)的定義。因此形成了多重強(qiáng)烈的“我們”身份。

風(fēng)景具有自明性，通常被稱為“風(fēng)景特質(zhì)”（圖2）。風(fēng)景特質(zhì)評(píng)估描述了界定一個(gè)地區(qū)獨(dú)特性的共同遺產(chǎn)、過(guò)程和元素。在2012年對(duì)當(dāng)前火災(zāi)影響區(qū)域進(jìn)行了風(fēng)景特質(zhì)評(píng)估，該評(píng)估采用廣泛、通用和客觀的術(shù)語(yǔ)，將森林火災(zāi)區(qū)域描述為沼氣地（瑞典語(yǔ)：Nedre Bergslagen）和森林工廠（瑞典語(yǔ)：Brukens Skogar）兩個(gè)獨(dú)立的風(fēng)景特質(zhì)區(qū)域?！霸摰貐^(qū)地勢(shì)起伏，海拔為50～100 m。河谷、小平原、涼亭區(qū)、濕地區(qū)和荒野區(qū)等共同構(gòu)成了森林地區(qū)的風(fēng)景多樣性，但該地區(qū)很少有關(guān)鍵的生物群落，根本原因在于森林所有者進(jìn)行的大規(guī)模森林生產(chǎn)，使生物生存空間遭到破壞”。對(duì)森林工廠的描述也是類似的，只是有一些細(xì)微的差別：“（擁有）布局緊湊的森林道路網(wǎng)絡(luò)，范圍廣闊的沼澤區(qū)以及種類豐富的自然保護(hù)區(qū)”。

2 火災(zāi)前該地區(qū)的特征Character of the area prior to the fire

2.2.2 新地理，新遺產(chǎn)：韋斯特曼蘭火災(zāi)后的風(fēng)景特質(zhì)

自然力量不會(huì)考慮人類在風(fēng)景中構(gòu)建的邊界、身份和話語(yǔ)權(quán)?；馂?zāi)的發(fā)生是快速的，然而，無(wú)論是物理影響還是感知影響，火災(zāi)都會(huì)導(dǎo)致風(fēng)景發(fā)生長(zhǎng)期的、災(zāi)難性的變化[8]。韋斯特曼蘭大火造成的物理影響包括地下水位變化和洪水泛濫[11]，土壤、植被急劇流失，植被組成變化，以及對(duì)該地區(qū)動(dòng)物群的影響（圖3）。然而并非所有變化都是糟糕的，生物多樣性的長(zhǎng)期增長(zhǎng)和對(duì)該地區(qū)遺產(chǎn)的進(jìn)一步了解都被視為積極結(jié)果。

3 火災(zāi)后一年的特征Characteristics of one year after the fire

在火災(zāi)發(fā)生前，當(dāng)?shù)鼐用褚恢痹谑褂眠@片森林，然而火災(zāi)的發(fā)生切斷了他們與森林風(fēng)景之間的情感紐帶，導(dǎo)致他們與該地區(qū)的聯(lián)系急劇減少。個(gè)人受火災(zāi)影響的程度取決于多種因素，包括性別、年齡、從事的活動(dòng)以及火災(zāi)前對(duì)風(fēng)景的參與程度。火災(zāi)發(fā)生前，該地區(qū)是一系列活動(dòng)的舉辦場(chǎng)所，然而火災(zāi)發(fā)生后，當(dāng)?shù)鼐用耖_(kāi)始將其視為一個(gè)缺乏活動(dòng)的、需要回避的地方?；馂?zāi)和媒體的關(guān)注塑造了新的身份認(rèn)同感，因?yàn)樵摰貐^(qū)的居民開(kāi)始意識(shí)到別人是如何看待他們這些火災(zāi)地區(qū)的居民的，以及他們認(rèn)為別人是如何看待他們的。

2016年，該地區(qū)的風(fēng)景特質(zhì)評(píng)估有了更新。該評(píng)估文件將受火災(zāi)影響的地點(diǎn)確定為一個(gè)獨(dú)立的特征區(qū)域。對(duì)于當(dāng)?shù)鼐用窈屯鈦?lái)者而言，風(fēng)景是被單一事件塑造的?；馂?zāi)在風(fēng)景中還賦予了一種新的時(shí)間性，即火災(zāi)前的記憶和經(jīng)歷過(guò)火災(zāi)后的體驗(yàn)。

大火創(chuàng)造了新的地理環(huán)境，包括自然環(huán)境和感知環(huán)境。森林中的邊界、路徑和地貌，以及它們所參與的活動(dòng)都已消失。與此同時(shí)，出現(xiàn)了一個(gè)新的風(fēng)景邊界，為災(zāi)后遺產(chǎn)的認(rèn)知?jiǎng)?chuàng)造了一個(gè)潛在的領(lǐng)域，為對(duì)新身份和未來(lái)遺產(chǎn)的認(rèn)知提供了載體。

2.3 局外人的議程：其他人對(duì)該事件的評(píng)議

現(xiàn)在，我們將進(jìn)一步探討該事件的發(fā)展?；馂?zāi)地區(qū)的風(fēng)景特質(zhì)和未來(lái)遺產(chǎn)是怎樣的？誰(shuí)將決定政策議程，哪些未來(lái)價(jià)值將得到認(rèn)可？災(zāi)難性事件改變了該地區(qū)的邊界，使它變得模糊不清。在火災(zāi)后，該地區(qū)的風(fēng)景經(jīng)歷了徹底的變革，成為文化、政治實(shí)體展示和宣揚(yáng)其無(wú)形影響力的場(chǎng)所。舉例來(lái)說(shuō)，21位學(xué)者在瑞典發(fā)行量最大的報(bào)紙上提議將火災(zāi)地區(qū)開(kāi)發(fā)為自然保護(hù)區(qū)：“（這是）獨(dú)一無(wú)二的機(jī)會(huì)，韋斯特曼蘭的火災(zāi)給人類帶來(lái)了災(zāi)難性后果，但同時(shí)也為我們提供以低成本創(chuàng)建斯堪的納維亞半島南部最大的森林保護(hù)區(qū)的機(jī)會(huì)。我們敦促環(huán)境部長(zhǎng)盡快采取行動(dòng)，以免錯(cuò)過(guò)這個(gè)歷史性的時(shí)刻?！盵12]

相關(guān)部門在地表溫度較高、火災(zāi)后的控制和限制措施仍在實(shí)施的情況下，提出了一個(gè)森林保護(hù)提案：野化議程。這一提議的核心是經(jīng)濟(jì)成本，而忽略了當(dāng)?shù)鼐用褚研纬烧J(rèn)知的本土風(fēng)景價(jià)值觀。為了響應(yīng)建立自然保護(hù)區(qū)的號(hào)召，土地所有者組織和當(dāng)?shù)鼐用竦拇碓俅螌?duì)該提案進(jìn)行了爭(zhēng)論，重點(diǎn)關(guān)注在本土工作的利益相關(guān)者。然而，當(dāng)前的辯論主要圍繞建立自然保護(hù)區(qū)展開(kāi)，僅限于野化議程的討論。由于媒體等方面的爭(zhēng)論，該議程頗具爭(zhēng)議，這不僅與當(dāng)前的行動(dòng)有關(guān)，還與風(fēng)景所代表的意識(shí)形態(tài)有關(guān)，包括人們的依戀、愿望和倡議。

大火被撲滅一年多后，政府決定將火災(zāi)現(xiàn)場(chǎng)的大部分區(qū)域劃為自然保護(hù)區(qū)。在該地區(qū)的西部，大型林業(yè)公司通過(guò)用他們的土地?fù)Q取該地區(qū)其他地方的森林資源，為保護(hù)區(qū)創(chuàng)造了一個(gè)明顯的邊界；然而，在該地區(qū)的西部，小規(guī)模森林所有者對(duì)森林的商業(yè)價(jià)值需求較少，對(duì)土地的依戀程度也在不斷提高。從鋸齒狀的邊緣可以看出，所有者們選擇保留對(duì)土地的所有權(quán)（圖4）。目前，火災(zāi)區(qū)域主要由縣行政委員會(huì)指定的H?lleskogsbr?nnan自然保護(hù)區(qū)（6 420 hm2）和國(guó)有林業(yè)公司Sveaskog擁有的生態(tài)公園?jesj?br?nnan（1 570 hm2）組成。盡管公共使用權(quán)在理論上仍然占主導(dǎo)地位，但保護(hù)區(qū)和生態(tài)公園的非經(jīng)營(yíng)性質(zhì)限制了人們進(jìn)入該地區(qū)，且枯死的樹木有著再次引發(fā)火災(zāi)的安全隱患，未來(lái)大量密集的再生先鋒樹種將更加限制人們的進(jìn)入。

4 H?lleskogsbr?nnan自然保護(hù)區(qū)地圖，顯示自然保護(hù)區(qū)東部有爭(zhēng)議的邊界Map of Halleskogsbr?nnan, showing the disputed boundary to the east of the nature reserve

外來(lái)者主導(dǎo)了受災(zāi)地區(qū)風(fēng)景變化的評(píng)議，強(qiáng)調(diào)了風(fēng)景的動(dòng)態(tài)性和與之相關(guān)的價(jià)值觀。然而，這種論述卻忽略了當(dāng)?shù)鼐用竦亩嘣瘍r(jià)值觀和愿望。游客中心的設(shè)計(jì)反映了外界對(duì)此次事件的態(tài)度，該建筑就是當(dāng)?shù)仫L(fēng)景的標(biāo)識(shí)物，它為觀察火災(zāi)區(qū)的活動(dòng)和風(fēng)景提供了視野，協(xié)調(diào)了火災(zāi)區(qū)的活動(dòng)和風(fēng)景（圖5）。這種風(fēng)景只能通過(guò)自身體驗(yàn)來(lái)感知，是一種無(wú)法觸摸的、抽離的體驗(yàn)，與公共使用權(quán)的理念截然不同。

3 結(jié)語(yǔ)

在韋斯特曼蘭地區(qū)，火災(zāi)被描繪成一種具有破壞性力量的事件，它揭示了該地區(qū)風(fēng)景演變的歷史進(jìn)程，加深了人們對(duì)該地區(qū)歷史的認(rèn)識(shí)，同時(shí)也創(chuàng)造了一張空白的畫布，讓當(dāng)?shù)鼐用窨梢詫?duì)場(chǎng)地賦予新的價(jià)值和愿望。在韋斯特曼蘭大火之后，外來(lái)學(xué)者們的聲音主導(dǎo)了討論的進(jìn)程，正是這些外來(lái)者決定了該地區(qū)的發(fā)展方向，最終塑造了該地區(qū)的遺產(chǎn)導(dǎo)向。該地區(qū)從當(dāng)?shù)厣鐓^(qū)的風(fēng)景資源轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)檠芯咳藛T、利益群體和好奇的外來(lái)者的討論資源，而國(guó)家議程和利益戰(zhàn)勝了當(dāng)?shù)氐娘L(fēng)景價(jià)值觀。

自然保護(hù)區(qū)的設(shè)立延續(xù)了森林火災(zāi)的歷史，這與被破壞和充滿回憶的事件相關(guān)。然而，火災(zāi)區(qū)域也象征著煥發(fā)活力和創(chuàng)造新事物的地方。設(shè)立自然保護(hù)區(qū)是基于火災(zāi)和復(fù)興的觀念，但卻忽視了這片景觀中已經(jīng)存在并將繼續(xù)存在的各種微妙而多樣的實(shí)踐活動(dòng)[1]。那些曾經(jīng)受到公眾使用權(quán)和非物質(zhì)遺產(chǎn)屬性支持的實(shí)踐，如今被野化實(shí)踐和對(duì)以火災(zāi)遺產(chǎn)作為新起點(diǎn)的期望所取代。

圖片來(lái)源：

圖1 從 Lantm?teriet 網(wǎng)站下載，經(jīng)瑞典農(nóng)業(yè)科學(xué)大學(xué)許可；圖4從 JG Media 21網(wǎng)站下載，由Jonas Lundin繪制；圖2、3、5由作者拍攝。

（編輯 / 項(xiàng)曦）

著者簡(jiǎn)介：

（瑞典）安德魯·巴特勒 / 男 / 博士 / 瑞典農(nóng)業(yè)科學(xué)大學(xué)農(nóng)村與城市發(fā)展系副教授 / 研究方向?yàn)榫坝^規(guī)劃的身份認(rèn)同和公眾參與問(wèn)題

作者郵箱： andrew.butler@slu.se

譯者簡(jiǎn)介：

張文宇 / 男 / 青島理工大學(xué)建筑與城鄉(xiāng)規(guī)劃學(xué)院在讀碩士研究生 / 研究方向?yàn)闉I海山地生態(tài)園林與景觀設(shè)計(jì)

于倩 / 女 / 青島理工大學(xué)建筑與城鄉(xiāng)規(guī)劃學(xué)院在讀碩士研究生 / 研究方向?yàn)闉I海山地生態(tài)園林與景觀設(shè)計(jì)

校者簡(jiǎn)介：

趙燁 / 女 / 博士 / 青島理工大學(xué)建筑與城鄉(xiāng)規(guī)劃學(xué)院副教授 /研究方向?yàn)轱L(fēng)景園林遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)、風(fēng)景園林規(guī)劃設(shè)計(jì)、國(guó)家公園與自然保護(hù)地

BUTLER A.Which Heritage Is Recognized After Catastrophic Events: A Study of the Aftermath of Forest Fire in Sweden[J].Landscape Architecture, 2023, 30(12):105-113.DOI: 10.12409/j.fjyl.202310260482.

Which Heritage Is Recognized After Catastrophic Events: A Study of the Aftermath of Forest Fire in Sweden

Author: (SWE) Andrew Butler Translators: ZHANG Wenyu, YU Qian Proofreader: ZHAO Ye

Abstract:[Objective] This paper describes how to recognize the legacy of landscapes after forest fires from the perspective of landscape change,revealing the multiple factors that shape landscapes, discourses about landscapes, and associated identities.[Methods] A case study approach was used to analyse the driving factors in the landscape of V?stmanland, Sweden;and the development of heritage discourse in relation to the fire area was discussed in terms of both past connections and future heritage.

[Results]Landscapes, as carriers and sources of identity and heritage, are characterized as a result of the action and interaction of natural or human factors.The drivers of change in the Swedish landscape are influenced and defined by landscape management.[Conclusion] The legacy of the forest fires continues with the establishment of nature reserves, but for a place like the fire zone, which represents a place of rejuvenation and creation of something new, it is important to first understand the values and aspirations of the local population, and then define the goals of the post-disaster landscape legacy in conjunction with the “external actors”.

Keywords:landscape change; forest fires; landscape heritage; V?stamanland of Sweden

?BeijingLandscape ArchitectureJournal Periodical Office Co., Ltd.Published byLandscape ArchitectureJournal.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license.

Acknowledgments: Thanks to ZHAO Ye, the associate professor in the College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Qingdao University of Technology, for her assistance of the commissioning the manuscript for this paper.

Over the past decade, Northern Europe has increasingly been exposed to the effects of climatic change through: flooding, storms, drought and wild fires[1].Such events, which are predicted to increase over the coming decades, create dramatic and catastrophic landscape change impacting on how individuals relate to their surroundings and at the same time instigating discussions on the futures of these “new” landscapes.

Sweden, located in Northern Europe, is predominantly forested.Approximately 70% of the land is tree-clad with production forest covering 58% of the nation’s land area.Consequently,forestry represents a significant economic concern.The dominance of forest as landcover, has also informed the identity and connections that individuals and communities develop to their landscape.Despite the majority of land being in private hands, theses connections to the forest are allowed to flourish due to “Allemansr?tten”.Allemansr?tten (Swedish), frequently translated as“the right of public access”, provides access to nature for all.Allemannsr?tten has resulted local outdoor recreation being viewed as a necessity[2],with forest having an Important role in everyday recreation[3].Allemansr?tten is also frequently seen as a driver of national identity and self-image, in its own right.It forms part of the intangible landscape heritage.

This paper lifts the plurality of factors at play which have formed the landscape, discourses on the landscape and associated identities.In the next section it introduces the case which will be addressed in the paper, the 2014 fire in V?stmanland.This is followed by a brief overview of how landscape is used in the paper and its relevance for the case.A brief overview of the discourses and identities at play in the landscape of V?stamanland before the fire is then presented,both before and after the impact of the fire.Finally it discusses the developing discourse relating the fire area, in relation to the past connections and future heritage.

On the 4th of August, 2014, the Swedish media gathered in V?stmanland in central Sweden(Fig.1), in area which had 5 days previously been a relatively unknown forest.On the 31st of July 2014, after a prolonged period of hot, dry weather when the forest fire risk reached an extreme level(5E, the highest, on the Swedish six scale index), a fire was inadvertently started during forestry work on an area of clearcut forest.Eleven days later following improvements in the weather conditions brought about a reduction in wind and increased humidity combined with a concerted effort from an extensive team of fire fighters helped to contain the fire.

A single dramatic event catastrophically changed the physicality of this area, altering the elements on which practices, experiences, and perceptions have been built.The fire destroyed key biotopes, severely impacted (and revealed many new) archaeological sites and brought about a variety of physiological changes including depletion of topsoil and silting of watercourses, razed over 20 houses and required almost 1,200 people to be evacuated.The landscape drastically changed and the individual practices and customs which once defined the use of the landscape no longer fit, as social and physical constraints altered.The landscape which provided a space for activities,attachments and on which identities were formed,disappeared; areas for foraging, orienteering,hunting, walking and working were now unrecognizable.

1 Landscape as a Bearer and Source of Identity and Heritage

Loss of landscape values is reliant on how we recognize landscape; in the following section this study briefly outlines how landscape is understood.In a European context, theEuropean Landscape Convention(ELC) has pushed the rhetoric of recognizing landscape as a perceived entity in policy.TheELCdefines landscape as: “an area, as perceived by people, whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors”[4].

1 Location and extent of V?stmanland fire

Each individual who experiences and perceive the landscape creates their own meaning of the landscape, leading to a multitude of subjective understandings of the same landscape.The connections developed through engagement in the landscape plays a significance role in supporting and forming identity[5].This complexity results in potential conflict over what values,identities and discourses are recognized in the landscape[6].

As landscapes are areas whose character is the result of “action and interaction of natural and/or human factors”[4], they represent a society’s common heritage.The landscape provides a living history of a societies past; a monument and documentation of a shared heritage, which is read by contemporary society.A landscape is loaded with cultural traditions and customs fashioning a multiplicity of meanings.

The landscape provides both tangible and intangible traces of historic power structures,representing the practices which exist in the landscape and the immaterial laws and customs which lie over the land[7].These customs are framed by regional, national, and international agendas hence the place where a landscape is created is not necessarily the point where it exists.Initiatives such as the sustainability agenda, forest policies and the politics behind them all shape the landscape.

As landscape represents the “dynamic interaction between cultural and natural processes”[4]landscape cannot be static.The transformation of the landscape influences how individuals and communities interactions with their surroundings[8].The character of the landscape change influences how individuals perceive and value their surroundings, and influencing their ability to maintain connections with their landscape.Consequently, the identities and the heritage which are founded on landscape are also dynamic,reflecting societal changes and cultural practices which shape the landscape and the discourses which revolve around it.

Although inevitable, change can cause a sense of loss for that which has been altered.This is especially true when alterations are unpredictable and dramatic, as exemplified by natural disasters,such as wildfires[1].Change or perceptions of change to the landscape also bring to the fore values attached to the landscape, as made evident post disaster.

2 Drivers of Landscape Change in Sweden: Landscape Change Before and After Forest Fires

2.1 Background to the V?stmanland Fire

As with all landscapes, the fire area in V?stmanland has never been static.The dynamism of this area has been influenced and defined through the management of the landscape in this case the forestry regimes and practice, and the local, regional, national and even international agendas and discourses that define the regime.

2 Character of the area prior to the fire

The area containing the fire area along with much of the wider region is dominated by production forest; a picture which has increasingly developed over the past century[9].In Sweden, as through much of the world, forests have been exploited for centuries for fuel, construction timber, hunting grounds, production of example potash, tar, charcoal and use for forest grazing.Historically, the forest was truly a multifunctional place with activities and values relating local production to the local context.However, an Increase in forest product industries; saw mills,pulp and paper plants as well as raw material for other industries meant that forestry played a large role in the industrialization of Sweden during the 19th century.This was especially true in V?stmanland, historically considered one of Sweden’s most industry rich areas.Excessive exploitation led to depletion of the forest resources.This brought about a forest politics aimed at addressing the diminishing tree cover and the repercussions this had for the bourgeoning industries of Sweden.Consequently, national ideas of management including replanting were developed.During the same period, rationalization of agriculture meant that forest grazing was no longer a viable proposition.The move to intensify agriculture on the more productive lands in response to international pressures led to the abandonment of marginal agricultural lands[9].

Both of these national agendas, driven by global demand, led to increased forest coverage,brought about through planting and naturally regenerate.This drastically changed the landscape,resulting in extensive forest coverage, reducing the landscape to a single dominate use: timber production.

Yet at the same time Allemansr?tten, the national right to roam, means that individuals and communities develop strong bonds to their near landscapes.Through a series of acts of landscaping(practices undertaken in the landscape) meaning,connections and even a sense of ownership develops.A level of local stewardship of the landscape is formed, which is at times at odds with the rational forest industry.The activities developed through Allemansr?tten are important not just for connection to the landscape but also for individuals wellbeing[10].

2.2 View of V?stmanland Before and After the Fire

2.2.1 The Pre-Fire Landscape of V?stmanland

V?stamanland has an archeological heritage,etched across the county stretching back to the earlier settlers of the Stone Age.The fire area also lies in Bergslagen (Fig.1), a broad and ill-defined area encompassing at least 4 counties with a history of industrial landscape use that began with production of metals more than 2,000 years ago.However, the region is currently in the process of exploring new forms of development, building on the ecological and cultural heritage as a base for rural development.These “public” identities become subsumed in the consciousness of those inhabiting and experiencing this region.However,the fire affect area was only a small part of these larger region identities.

Historically this landscape represented a border between the large iron works of ?ngelsbreksbruk and Virsbo in the West and the small scaled farms in the east, a division still evident in the ownership pattern today.The landscape was historically part of four separate parish and today the area falls within the borders of four different municipalities: Norberg, Sala,Fagersta and Surahammar.Although these municipal boundaries are formed by legislation and political decision, as opposed to customary actions,the municipalities form a frame in which joint identity can form providing an accepted boundary in which an “us” and “them” can materialize.

These “public” identities have all been played out on this landscape, reliant on where it is related to, which municipality, which parish or how the local, regional national and even international agendas has defined the area.Creates a multiplicity of strong “we” identities.

It has also been claimed that the landscape has an identity in its own right, often refers to a landscape character (Fig.2).Landscapes character assessments describe the common heritage,processes and elements which define an areas uniqueness.A character assessment of what is now the fire affected area was undertaken in 2012.The assessments recognize the forest fire area as small parts of two separate character areas Nedre Bergslagen (Swedish) and Brukens Skogar(Swedish), which are described in very broad,generic and objective terms: “Rolling topography,ranging from between 50-100 meters above sea level.Contains river valleys and small plains that stand out in the forested landscape….Areas of summerhouses, wetland areas, heathland create diversity in the forest area with few key biotopes.Predominantly large-scale forest production,distributed among a few large forest owners”.The description for Brukens skogar is in a similar vein with slight nuances “Relatively tight network of forest roads.Rich in marshes, big marshes, rich with nature reserves”.

2.2.2 A New Geography, a New Heritage：Landscape Qualities After the V?stmanland Fire

Natural forces take no account of these constructed boundaries, identities and discourses that humans lay over the landscape.Fire represents a quick acting phenomenon.However, the impact on the landscape, both the physical and perceived can result in long-lived, calamitous change[8].The physical impacts of the fire in V?stamanland included change to the water table and flooding[11];dramatic loss of soil cover; changes to the vegetation composition; and impact to the fauna of the area (Fig.3).Not all changes were for the worst.Long-term increase in biodiversity and increased knowledge of the heritage of the area are seen as positive consequences.

3 Characteristics of one year after the fire

The local residents who utilized this landscape prior to the fire, experienced a dramatic loss of connection to the area after the fire as their emotional bonds to the landscape were severed.The degree to which individuals were impacted by the fire relied on numerous factors including gender, age, activities undertaken and level of engagement in the landscape prior to the fire.Before the fire, the area represented a series of places where activities were undertaken, yet in the of the aftermath the area was recognized by local residents as an area void of activities, a landscape to avoid.New identities have been built by the fire and the media focus, as inhabitants of the area became recognized how others see them, as residents of the fire area, and how they perceive others see them.

In 2016, the landscape character assessment was updated.The document which was produced identified the fire impacted site as a character area in its own right.For both locals and outsiders, a landscape was created by a single event.The fire has also developed a new temporality in the landscape, there now exists a remembered before as well as an experienced after.

The fire created a new geography, both physical and perceived.Boundaries, routes and features within the forest, and the activities they facilitated disappeared from the forest.Familiar places were no more.At the same time a new boundary was created in the landscape, creating a potential area for discussion, a vessel for aspirations of new identities and future heritage.

2.3 An Outsiders Agenda

Where does the story go now? What is the next chapter for the identity and the future heritage of this area? Who defines the agenda and which future values are recognised? After catastrophic events restrictions in the area are transformed and blurred.After the dramatic changes of the fire the landscape became the sites where cultural and political entities manifested and asserted their unseen influence.This is exemplified by a proposal from 21 academics, in the largest circulated newspaper in Sweden, to develop the fire area into a nature reserve and the subsequent opposition to the proposal the discourse became around a rewilding agenda either for or against: “Unique opportunity.The fire in V?stmanland had disastrous human consequences yet at the same time provides the opportunity to create by far the largest protected forest area in southern Scandinavia at low cost.We urge the Minister of the Environment to act quickly, before the historical moment is missed.”[12]

This proposition for a protected forest came forth while the ground was still warm and post fire controls and restrictions were still in place, focused on a completely new agenda for the area; a rewilding agenda.What was central to this proposal was the financial cost of achieving this with little consideration for the values for those who had recognized this as their local landscape.In response to the call for a nature reserve, representatives for different landowner organizations and local residents argues again the proposal, focusing on those who work and engage in the landscape.However the debate was now build around the creation of a nature reserve, limiting the discussion to a rewilding agenda.Thanks to such debates in the media etc.the area became a struggle over a symbolic space, not relating only to the action at hand but also the ideology the landscape represents including people attachment, aspirations and agendas.

4 Map of Halleskogsbr?nnan, showing the disputed boundary to the east of the nature reserve

5 Viewing tower at Halleskogsbr?nnen, a site for viewing
landscape rejuvination

A little over a year after the fire was extinguished, the decision was made to designate a large portion of the fire areas as a nature reserve.In the west of the area large forest companies traded their land for forest resources elsewhere in the county, creating a clear edge to the reserve.However, in the west of the area, small-scale forest owners had less commercial demand from the forest and developing attachment to the land.This can be seen in the serrated edge revealing owners who chose to retain their ownership of their land(Fig.4).Today the fire area is dominated by the nature reserve, H?lleskogsbr?nnan (6,420 hm2)designated by the county administrative board and an ecopark ?jesj?br?nnan (1,570 hm2) owned by the state-owned forest company, Sveaskog.While Allemansr?tten still in theory prevails in the area,the non-management of reserve and the eco-park inhibit access.It is recognized that the standing dead trees pose a safety risk, and then in the ensuing years extensive and dense regeneration of pioneer species will restrict access to once familiar sites.

Outsiders have defined the discourses of this local landscape impacted by catastrophic change.Dynamism of the landscape is at the fore of the values promoted， however they miss the pluralistic values, views and aspiration of residents which still lie across this landscape.The discourse on this landscape from the outside is manifested in the design of a visitor’s centre, a beacon of what this landscape is and who it is for.Boardwalks and viewing platforms (Fig.5) orchestrate movement and vistas of the fire area.The landscape is to be observed but not touched, a removed experience,counter to the ideals of allemanr?tten.

3 Conclusion

In the context of V?stmanland, fire has been portrayed as a destructive force; a process that revealed the past, deepening the understanding of history of the area; and an event which created a blank canvas on to which to project new values and aspirations.After the fire in V?stamanland it was the voices of academics, removed from this landscape, who dominated the developing discourse.It is these outsiders who have appropriated this space and defines the direction for this area and ultimately its heritage.The area turned from a landscape resource for the local community to a resource for researchers,communities of interest, and curious outsiders.National agenda and interests have trumped over local values.

Placement of the nature reserve perpetuates the forest fire legacy.A landscape discourse linked to destruction and an event loaded with memories.Yet the fire area also represents a site of rejuvenation and creation of new.The nature reserve builds on the discourse of the fire and rejuvenation, but ignores the nuanced and diverse practices which have existed and continue to exist in this landscape[1].The practices once supported by the intangible heritage of Allemansr?tten have been trumped by practices of rewilding and an aspiration for a heritage based on the fire as a new beginning.

Sources of Figures:

Fig.1 was downloaded from Lantm?teriet, which permission was obtained through Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences license; Fig.4 was downloaded from JG Media 21, and Illustrated by Jonas Lundin; Fig.2, 3, 5 were photographed by the author.