In the past decades the Swiss landscape has changed with different rates. People shape the vernacular landscape according to their needs. This process is crucial for people's identity that can only be developed when individuals are able to draw their own personal stories on the landscape. Therefore, on the one hand landscape is the result of people's political and economical principals as well as an expression of the Swiss culture and history. On the other hand, landscape has an effect on people's sense of place. But how do people perceive and value their influence on landscape transformation? Is there a certain rate of transformation that does not need to be transgressed?
It was a methodological challenge to do qualitative research about a topic most individuals are not particularly conscious about. I investigated four Swiss communities that have undergone different transformation rates. In each research area I undertook ten in-depth problem-centered interviews including a tour through the community.
As a theoretical framework I used Weichhart's (1998) space concept. According to his concept of people's lifeworld, the spatial reality is made out of subjective perception of the physical and the social reality. Furthermore, landscape is not only a picture in our heads (Cosgrove 1998) nor the visual features of the surface but, according to Olwig (2003), the social and political area of activity and/or discourse.
Landscape transformation is perceived on the basis of landscape elements such as elements of settlement and transportation as well as elements like meadows, creeks and forests. I distinguished between universally valid and symbolic landscape features. The transformation of the universally valid ones is compared between the four communities. The symbolic ones have a special meaning to the inhabitants of a community.
People perceive different transformation rates: fast and slow transformations. But as I have found out the transformation rate has no influence on the evaluation of a change. It is the economic benefit of an element that is mostly valued. In some cases it is also the ideological or symbolic function.
Generally, people underestimate their influence on landscape change. They are usually not aware of their powerful position: neither policy makers on the community level nor the residents that influence landscape transformation with their every day activities. This is a crucial finding that must be considered in the future landscape planning: people's awareness of their influence on landscape transformation must be increased.