The factual physical space and actual transformation mechanisms of Roeselare-West do not easily allow penetration. They are composed of highly heterogeneous parts such as the pig farm, greenhouse, field, agro-industry, houses, forest, etc. Moreover, the ad hoc way in which these components are put together means that the functional relations or the logics behind them are no longer readable as a whole. We therefore attempt to understand the landscape system in a series of partial ways.
Landscape ecologists say that it is precisely the self-repeating cluster of spatial elements that is characteristic of a landscape (Forman 1995). Likewise, we focus on landscape in its most explicit form: as a spatial interplay of elements and struc-tures in which repeating patterns are of importance. This determines the scale of our approach to Roeselare-West. A detailed reading of the territory investigates where repetition in the landscape is also, and perhaps primarily, produced: on the scale of its users, the farmer, the resident, the recreational user, the ecologist, the entrepreneur, etc.
However, on this scale we distinguish two kinds of elements, each with a specific structuring capacity. Elements exist that bring structure to the territory by bringing about dissimilarity. They are often larger scale (infra)structures such as hill ridges or highways that create a condition of exception to the surrounding landscape. The other kinds of element have structuring capacity through the way they repeat them-selves in the landscape in recurrent patterns. Examples of this kind of element are the landscape’s trees and hedges, its parcels and paths, its creeks and ponds, its single family houses and farmsteads, etc. In order to explicitly register possible recurrent patterns on the small human scale, a reference frame of 3–6 km is used (Fig. 4).
This frame reveals the characteristic spatial elements of Roeselare-West. On the one
Fig. 4 Reference frame. To explicitly include the screening of small-scale patterns in the scaled set of readings, a reference frame of 3–6 km is used: a level gauged to the tightly structured mor-phology of the Flemish landscape
hand, it shows large-scale landscape elements such as the villages Westrozebeke and Oostnieuwkerke, the slaughterhouse, a deep-freeze company and the local, recre-ational forest. On the other hand, it incorporates the spatial patterns of intensive greenhouse agriculture, pig farming, mixed crop farming and suburbanisation.
In order to render the spatial patterns intelligible, the landscape is deconstructed in layers using a map analysis: maps are divided into layers of elements and the patterns in which they occur to construct both a diachronic and a synchronic atlas.
The point of departure is each physical element present in the landscape. On the one hand, historical maps (Ferraris 1770; Vandermaelen 1845) are laid out to in-vestigate the changes in patterns. Complementary to this historical – diachronic – atlas, we practise a synchronic reading by applying a layer analysis to the NGI’s topographical map on a scale of 1/20.000. The layers distinguish the amalgamation of elements and patterns that now characterise Roeselare-West. A screening of the various contemporary uses is central to this process. For every actor active in the landscape, characteristic patterns are registered and related to a certain amount of thematic maps such as topography, soil conditions or soil suitability for different types of agricultural crops. Since every actor contributes to the production of land-scape by creating specific elements and patterns, these patterns represent his/her logic of land use.
Both the atlases (diachronic and synchronic) are considered as mirrors that bring the existing spatial structure to light or reflect it in a selective/filtered way. They start from the point of the physically perceptible. By combining historical layers with contemporary, topographical layers, with thematic layers, connections are made and the state of spatial coherence is unravelled. Together, the two atlases indicate which elements in the landscape have structural importance and which elements are merely anecdotes. In addition, to thoroughly analyse the (re)production of the landscape and understand the interaction between the different layers, the spatial deconstruction in the atlases is complemented with literature (agronomy, landscape, history, etc.), fieldwork (observation, documentation, interviews, expert consulta-tion, etc.) and an analysis of surveys (socio-economic, agro-economic, etc.) carried out by our research partners. This multilayered, multifaceted analysis allows unrav-elling of the logics behind landscape transformations. We thus look at space from different perspectives: from a bird’s-eye view of maps and aerial photographs, from a labyrinthic perspective while doing fieldwork and from the perspective of several other knowledge areas. In this sense we inscribe ourselves in the tradition of eclectic atlases (Boeri et al. 2003).
An initial cursory glance at the landscape of Roeselare-West has revealed its extremely ad hoc and fragmented nature. On the one hand, our more in depth reading of the existing space underpins this impression. The development of the region is by and large happening randomly and going along with the disintegration of the landscape on many different levels. Together with pig farms and greenhouses, a boundless industrial supply of machine manufacturing, freight transport, build-ing material for sheds, hangars, heatbuild-ing installations, storage bins and containers, etc. has evolved historically out of or near former farmsteads that were scattered in the open landscape. Flax converted to chipboard, vegetable cultivation to the
deep-freeze industry. This kind of agro-industrial transformation driven by the inter-play of individual decisions, policy measures and economic opportunities has given rise to the emergence of problems that transcend the scale of the plot. Since change in one location often has consequences for another location, problems emerged such as ecological fragmentation and drastic overexploitation of groundwater and congested road networks.
Yet, on the other hand, in contrast with the narrative of random development, multiple reading indicates some quite systematic mechanisms at work behind the (re-)production of the landscape.
One part of the synchronic atlas of Roeselare-West screens for example the logic underlying the increase in pig farms in the landscape (Fig. 5). This increase has previously been traced to the fact that pig farming was a profitable form of agricul-ture not depending on large land surfaces. In addition, this type of farming now finds itself stimulated by a regional network of mutually supporting specialised entities. In the course of agricultural intensification, pig farming has specialised and activities were split up.
Today, piglet breeding, pig rearing, the pig-feed industry and the slaughter and meat-packing industry still strongly interrelate with one another and depend on spa-tial proximity. Moreover, whereas pig farms have always been emblematic of an
‘unsettled’ agriculture, their specific locations within this network largely depend on access to groundwater and the need for buffer zones separating them from other activities. This has led to a specific location pattern of pig farms that interweaves within the less developed zones of the existing settlement pattern, colonising the least valuable agricultural land.
–5 m –10 m –15 m
GWL 500 m 1 km 2 km
distribution
3 km 4 km 5 km 6km
slaughterhouse pig breeding
cattle feed production
buffer zone pig rearing
Fig. 5 Reproduction logic of pig farming in the landscape. Whereas the spreading of pig farms shows a seemingly random character, layered analysis reveals a logic system
250m
8,353 1,853 1,8535,2466,4058,3128,3124,1082,0018,5472,3455,2483,7062,7913,9431,9015,9235,0145,5434,90854,67711,40311,5431,09117,87412,5064,653 0
Fig. 6 Greenhouse farming in the landscape. It appears that the compactness of the soil structure plays a decisive role in the location of greenhouses and ponds for domestic horticulture. However, the general absence of greenhouses with the ‘most effective surface’ of 1 ha2brings into perspective the logic of economic efficiency as a driving force
Similarly, horticulture manifests itself in the landscape in a less arbitrary way than it might seem (Fig. 6). Driven by economic reality and stimulated by agrar-ian centralities such as the regional vegetable auction, farmers gradually shift from arable farming to extensive vegetable cultivation, to intensive vegetable cultivation and finally to greenhouse farming. As far as morphology is concerned, the green-house generally relates to one farm and stands close to it, is accompanied by pond and hangar and does not have the ‘most effective surface’ which was calculated to be a square form of 1 ha for domestic agriculture. Even if mainly ground culti-vations take place in the region, fieldwork interviews have indicated that this type of horticulture develops regardless of soil characteristics since the interior condi-tions in a greenhouse are one hundred per cent man-made. However, layer analysis reveals that greenhouse and pond consequently gather along lines of shifting soil constitution. Apparently, the greenhouses are preferably not located on heavy soils, whereas the accompanying ponds for collecting rainwater are most easily facilitated on the heavy (and wet) grounds. The presence of a brook or access to the un-deep groundwater level is also an additional location factor that is drawn from.