Environmental Humanities Ecosemiotic Landscape Almo Farina ISSN 2632-3125 (online) ISSN 2632-3117 (print) ElementsinEnvironmentalHumanities editedby LouiseWestling UniversityofOregon SerenellaIovino UniversityofNorthCarolinaatChapelHill TimoMaran UniversityofTartu ECOSEMIOTIC LANDSCAPE A Novel Perspective for the Toolbox of Environmental Humanities Almo Farina University of Urbino UniversityPrintingHouse,CambridgeCB28BS,UnitedKingdom OneLibertyPlaza,20thFloor,NewYork,NY10006,USA 477WilliamstownRoad,PortMelbourne,VIC3207,Australia 314–321,3rdFloor,Plot3,SplendorForum,JasolaDistrictCentre, NewDelhi–110025,India 79AnsonRoad,#06–04/06,Singapore079906 CambridgeUniversityPressispartoftheUniversityofCambridge. ItfurtherstheUniversity’smissionbydisseminatingknowledgeinthepursuitof education,learning,andresearchatthehighestinternationallevelsofexcellence. www.cambridge.org Informationonthistitle:www.cambridge.org/9781108819374 DOI:10.1017/9781108872928 ©AlmoFarina2021 Thispublicationisincopyright.Subjecttostatutoryexception andtotheprovisionsofrelevantcollectivelicensingagreements, noreproductionofanypartmaytakeplacewithoutthewritten permissionofCambridgeUniversityPress. Firstpublished2021 AcataloguerecordforthispublicationisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary. ISBN978-1-108-81937-4Paperback ISSN2632-3125(online) ISSN2632-3117(print) CambridgeUniversityPresshasnoresponsibilityforthepersistenceoraccuracyof URLsforexternalorthird-partyinternetwebsitesreferredtointhispublication anddoesnotguaranteethatanycontentonsuchwebsitesis,orwillremain, accurateorappropriate. Ecosemiotic Landscape ANovelPerspectivefor theToolboxofEnvironmental Humanities ElementsinEnvironmentalHumanities DOI:10.1017/9781108872928 Firstpublishedonline:January2021 AlmoFarina UniversityofUrbino Authorforcorrespondence:AlmoFarina,[email protected] Abstract:Thedistinctionbetweenhumansandthenaturalworldisan artifactandmoreamatteroflinguisticcommunicationthana conceptualseparation.ThisElementproposesecosemioticsasan epistemologicaltooltounderstandbettertherelationshipbetween humanandnaturalprocesses.Ecosemiotics,withitsaffinitytothe humanities,ispresentedhereasthebestdisciplinaryapproachfor interpretingcomplexenvironmentalconditionsforabroadaudience, acrossamultitudeoftemporalandspatialscales.Itisproposedasan intellectualbridgebetweendivergentsciencestoincorporatedifferent paradigmswithinauniqueframework.Theecosemioticparadigmhelps toexplainhoworganismsinteractwiththeirexternalenvironments usingmechanismscommontoalllivingbeingsthatcaptureexternal informationandmatterforinternalusage.Thisparadigmcanbe appliedinallthecircumstanceswherealivingbeing(human,animal, plant,fungi,etc.)performsprocessestostayalive. Keywords:complexity,uncertainty,information,ecosemiotics,landscape ©AlmoFarina2021 ISBNs:9781108819374(PB),9781108872928(OC) ISSNs:2632-3125(online),2632-3117(print) Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 EnvironmentalComplexity:AnEcosemioticVision 4 3 EnvironmentalUncertainty:ContrastingStrategiesand SpeciesAdaptation 6 4 InformationTheoryandMeaning 9 5 TheRoleofEcologyintheEcosemioticArena 14 6 LandscapeDimension:SomeRelevantCharacteristicsof Landscape 18 7 Resources:AGeneralTheory 25 8 AnEcosemioticApproachtoLandscapeDescriptionand Interpretation:FromZoosemioticstoanEco-fieldModel 32 9 FundamentalsofEcoacoustics:ANewQuantitative ContributiontotheEcosemioticNarrative 45 10 CulturalLandscapes 55 11 Conclusions 67 References 70 EcosemioticLandscape 1 1Introduction The natural world is overstressed and degraded by growing human intrusion intothemajorityofecologicalprocesses,reducingtheireffectiveness(Crutzen &Stoermer2000).Also,asanagentofecosystemservices,“nature”isnotfully representedinhumansocialandculturalcontextsdominatedbyeconomicand politicalpriorities.Humanconsiderationsamounttoadiffuseunderestimation oflife’sprocessesintheentireEarthsystem,andthuscauseweaknessinhuman strategies for preserving natural resources and biodiversity, maintaining eco- system services, and finally assuring a satisfactory level of well-being to all humansocietiesforthelongterm. Totrytoremediateandreducethisculturalgap,Iproposeanarrativebased onthespiritofDescartes’scatenascientiarum(FoucherdeCareil1859–1860) inwhichwell-explainedrulescouldidentifyspecificscientificelementstoform a shared human understanding. This Element therefore aims to develop a coherent set of ecological and semiotic theories and principles focused on landscape as a fundamental dimension in which environmental and human processes can find coherent life strategies. In particular, this effort offers a reasoned guide to theories, principles, and models that have been proposed recently by scholars from disciplines ranging from ecology, to biosemiotics, ecosemiotics, landscape ecology, and conservation biology as an epistemo- logical model to be placed side-by-side with humanities like anthropology, archeology,history,etc.(Figure1). Themainargumentstobediscussedare: Complexity(Section2):Complexityisauniversalparadigmthatresultsfrom interactionsofaplethoraofabioticandbioticprocessesfarfromequilibrium. Thesearestatisticallyhighlyimprobableandgenerateaconditionofapparent slowdownoftheentropicdisorderthatSchrodinger(1944)callednegentropy, richwithsurpriseandinformation(Lloyd2007).Complexityisthehumuson whichlifeblooms,evolves,differentiates,andeventuallysuffersfromextinc- tion in some particular traits and organizational forms. Complexity is neces- sarytoassurecontinuityforeverylifeformandtheirfunctionalassemblages on the Earth. At the same time, intra- and interspecific interactions feed turnover and evolution in the composition of biological assemblages. Uncertainty (Section 3): Uncertainty is a characteristic of the universe that every species must face. It means that unexpected events can occur at any time and cause the possible incapacity of a species when it is exposed to previously unknown risks. At the same time, uncertainty can stimulate pro- cesses/mechanismsofadaptation. 2 EnvironmentalHumanities Information(Section4):Ifcomplexityisapropertythatemergesfromaggre- gation and organization across spatial, temporal, and functional scales of organisms, its quantification is represented by the amount of information expressedbythesystem.Thus,informationisthecurrencyexchangedbetween organismsandtheiraggregations/assemblages. Someecologicalparadigms(Section5):Theroleofecologicalparadigmsisof firstmagnitudeinmydiscussionandinparticularwill bepresented usingr/K strategiesofselectionbyorganismsforsurvival(Pianka1970),thesource-sink model (Pulliam 1988), and ecological niche theory (Hutchinson 1957).These paradigmshaveanecosemioticcounterpartandthereforecreatethenecessary backgroundforanecosemiotictheory. The Landscape dimension (Section 6): Inthe present narrative weconsiderthe landscape as the phenomenological context, the common arena or container in which complexity emerges and differentiates. Landscape isa perfect candidate for this role because it is the spatial, temporal, and cultural context in which differentagents(humans,animals,plants,bacteria,viruses)findrealpossibilities todeeplyexchangeinformationwithabioticlifesupportandbioticassemblages. Giventhatnoorganismscanescapetheperceptive/semioticmechanismsthatlink the individual to its surroundings, the concept of landscape is implicit in the definitionoflife(Barbieri2008).Inparticular,thedecisiontouselandscapeasthe phenomenological context for connecting ecological and semiotic principles is encouragedbytheuniversalitywithwhichthelandscapeprocessesareconsidered byallorganisms. Complexity Uncertainty information Landscape Ecosemiosis Resources Figure1–Themainingredientsoflandscapeecosemiosis,whereComplexity isthemaincharacterofsystems,includeUncertaintyastheconstraintthatthe organismfaces,Informationasthecurrencyexchangedbetweenthesystemand organismsformaintaininganactivechannelofcommunication,andLandscape asthephysicalandcognitivespatialdimension.Ecosemiosisistheprocessof signification,andResourcesarematerialorimmaterialentitiesthatnourish life’sautopoiesis. EcosemioticLandscape 3 The landscape dimension is based upon the principles of landscape ecol- ogy, a relatively young discipline that has gained great popularity since the 1980s (Wu & Hobbs 2007). The multiplicity of visions that have been presented in this discipline pose serious problems of synthesis between different paradigmatic approaches ranging from geographical to semiotic perspectives(Lindstrometal.2011). A general theory of resources (Section 7): After the description of the salient qualities of a landscape, the general theory of resources seeks to explain how resources are necessary for autopoietic processes, i.e. reproduction and self- maintenance.Theparticularitiesandroleofresourcesfororganismsareobvi- ous,astheyrepresentthenecessaryfuelforlife(Varela&Maturana1980). Elementsofecosemiotics(Section8):“Ecosemioticsstudiestheroleofenviron- mentalperceptionandconceptualcategorizationinthedesign,construction,and transformationofenvironmentalstructures”(Maran&Kull2014).Ecosemioticsis the use of a zoosemiotic paradigm that has its fundamentals in biosemiotics, in communicationtheory,andinanimalbehavior(Maranetal.2011,2016). Weproposethatecosemiosiscanfunctionasanintellectualbridgebetween divergent sciences to incorporate within a unique framework different para- digms born of separate perspectives (Eder & Rembold 1992), and to demon- strate the efficiency and utility of an approach that assures connectedness amongsignalsfromdifferentsources. Ecosemiosis is at the basis of food chains, connecting species to their environments by semethic (semion-sign and ethos-habit) interactions, estab- lishing “personal” reciprocal knowledges among different organisms as they communicateinparticularsituations(Hoffmeyer2008,p.189).Ecosemiosisis responsible for environmental changes producedby thesecreatures according totheirspecificsensoryabilities. Human culture is an important agent in these ecosemiotic processes by increasing knowledge between species. However, paradoxically, the diversity that results from communication processes that can accommodate species in close ecological spaces together, may become a risk because of too many communications,ortoomuchnoise(Kull2005). Fundamentals of ecoacoustics (Section 9): Recently the role of sounds in ecologicalprocesseshasbeenemphasizedonatheoreticalbasisinecoacoustics (Farina 2018a). Soundis a semiotic toolfor communication between individ- ualsandspecies,fornavigation(especiallyintheabsenceoflight),forperform- ance of reproductive behaviors, and for transmission of cultural messages. Soundscapesaretheemergingacousticcharacteristicsoflandscapesandimpart complexitytoenvironmentalsystems. 4 EnvironmentalHumanities Cultural landscapes (Section 10): Recognizing some landscape configur- ations as the result of cultural human stewardship associated with historical processes places cultural landscapes in a privileged position. Cognitive, cultural, and spiritual qualities enrich the signs that emerge from landscape. Culturallandscapesmaintainahighlevelofbiodiversityresultingfromlong- term coadaptation of humans with other living beings and demonstrate how the integration of separate concepts as those above is guided by a thinking rooted in the humanities (Smith 2014). A serious attempt to bring natural processes – especially ecological processes – within the purview of the humanities is an activity absolutely necessary to assure the durable and sustainable development of human societies (Eder & Rembold 1992). A new ecosemiotic framework, powered by an integrated epistemology, can forestallaplanetarycatastrophecreatedbydevelopmentbasedonthedoctrine ofnecessarycontinuousincreaseofgrossproductionandfromwhichevident signsofecosystemdegradationandbiologicalimpoverishmentaregrowingat an alarming frequency (e.g. Hallmann et al. 2017, Lister & Garcia 2018, Sanchez-Bayo&Wyckhuys2019).Suchecosystemdegradationisalsoasso- ciated with the growing difference of well-being between poor and rich societiesandcountries. 2EnvironmentalComplexity:AnEcosemioticVision 2.1Synthesis Complexityisanemergentpropertyofenvironmentalsystemsandisassociated with their order, diversity, and resilience. Recent human intrusion reduces complexityandthusputsmanylifeformsatriskandcompromiseshumanwell- being. Although complexity is an elusive concept, it characterizes the majority of physical,biological,economic,andsocialsystems.Itmanifestsitselfatevery level of hierarchical scale by which we perceive and describe our known universe.Complexityemergesattheborderbetweendifferentlevelsoforgan- izationandhasbeencomparedbyLloyd(1990)toafirebreakthatretardsthe inexorablethermodynamicdissolutionoftheworld. Complexity is the result of interactions between different scaled systems eitherinthemacrocosmorinthemicrocosm;energy,matter,andinformation are its fundamentals. Environmental complexity emerges as a property from intra- and interspecific interactions between individuals, species, and their assemblages,occurringalongabroadrangeoftemporal,spatial,andfunctional scales(Figure2).