THE CITY REGION

The Welsh Government Business, Enterprise, Technology and Science Minister, Edwina Hart, established a task & finish group in November 2011 to consider the potential role of city regions in the future economic development of Wales. Their task is; to decide, on the basis of objective evidence, whether a city region approach to economic development will deliver an increase in jobs and prosperity for Wales as a whole. If this is the case, what parts of Wales should be included and why, and what is needed for the approach to be successful?

The introduction to the Task & Finish Group’s paper - ‘City Regions’ Definition & Criteria raises a number of immediate issues, the first and foremost being the suggestion that the Welsh Government would need to see very compelling evidence before committing to such an approach. This may be my subjective (cynical?) reading of the following;

City Regions are a tool, not a panacea. The approach provides one potential solution to policy or market failure.

The city region approach is a long term one – 20, 30 or 40 years. It requires developing a vision for the future: 2030 is now closer to us than 1990 …

Access to economic mass, skills, transport are important enablers of growth,productivity and innovation.

Successful international city regions tend to have a core theme/focus: Vancouver (airport); Bilbao (culture); Lille (connectivity); Rotterdam (logistics). 

Co-operation on (a) regionally significant project(s) should come first, followed by strategy/vision. Governance should be tackled last.

I query the statement that ‘City Regions are a tool, not a panacea’ for, in my view, city regions are a given, economically, socially and culturally and have been through the course of human settlement. Great cities attract the brightest and the best, those that adapt and change remain great. Cities compete with cities for the investment and development capital, not regions against regions. Can you name what ‘regions’ Vancouver, Bilbao, Lille and Rotterdam are in? Possibly, but the point to be made is the city is the ‘bigger brand’. The suggestion is that for Wales, or its sub-regions, to prosper economically, socially and culturally we need to have strong cities. Is the Task and Finish Group then asking the right questions? Further concerns are raised with their statement that ‘Co-operation on (a) regionally significant project(s) should come first, followed by strategy/vision. Governance should be tackled last.’  

My proposition is that governance is central to the issue and is not something to be ‘tackled last’. Wales appears to have a surfeit of government and a paucity of governance. Cities should by their very nature be centres of excellence and reflect that concentration of excellence in their civic administration –governance. Strong, healthy, dynamic cities regenerate themselves but in Wales regeneration has become a byword for government intervention. We have too many small unitary authorities, perhaps too small to attract and retain the excellent.  Furthermore we have seen these authorities competing amongst each other for the investment and development capital (i.e. financial subsistence) allocated by the regional government. Tribalism and parochial interest has bedeviled constructive discussion and any progress in advancing effective city regional strategy in the past.

I will focus here on the capital, Cardiff, to explore this point further. There are those in the capital who have claimed that regional investment has been dictated by an ‘ABC policy’ (Anywhere But Cardiff) and they in turn reminded that they had many fences to mend with their neighbours. This was manifested on the publication of the document Cardiff- A Proud Capital which many outside the city interpreted differently – ‘proud’ as in ‘selfish and arrogant’. Over a long period the city has been envied and unloved by its neighbours. To advance and develop any ‘co-operation on (a) regionally significant project(s)’ we must necessarily address the ‘concentric circles of self- interest’ that exist in Wales. What little progress has been made with collaborative working must be consolidated but a city region might only succeed if Cardiff can demonstrate effective, productive and beneficial civic leadership. If its civic leaders are unable to persuade its citizens and the people of Wales of the advantages of a strong capital we cannot persuade anyone else. This relates to what JK Galbraith called ‘the bi-modal symmetry of power.’ The majority must recognize that Cardiff is the defined and established centre and be persuaded to accept that it is a credible international ‘brand’. The operative word is credible- real and achievable- not selected from the portfolio of marketing consultants. Whilst generally critical of the persistent obsession with branding, identity and image I have to concede it is an essential element.Throughout history mankind has sought a collective identity, frequently that afforded by a city. The key word here may be SOUGHT – it has to be something they want to be part of. If the ‘bi-modal symmetry of power’ is to be realized the people of Wales have to really believe in Cardiff. The challenge is therefore for Cardiff develop an identity and implement a vision that everyone wants to be part of. This may be achieved if a compelling case is made with evident and tangible benefits for all, not the publication of yet more pretentious claims. We have witnessed the manifest failure of attempting to become a clone of Barcelona, Bilbao and Baltimore (although, viewed from Penarth on a sunny day, the skyline of Cardiff Bay does now look a lot like Benidorm.)

This of course proposes that strong and effective civic leadership may be part of the solution in Cardiff but the more cynical might suggest that it may not be in the political interest of the Welsh Government to have a strong and more autonomous city. I have referred above to the perceptions of the ‘ABC Policy’ and ‘concentric circles of self- interest’. For many this was manifested in the Wales Spatial Plan (WSP) – People, Places, Futures which was originally adopted by the National Assembly for Wales in November 2004. Whilst that Plan recognized the importance of the capital city it appeared to have no practical effect. Certainly as regards the capital someone found it hard to use the word Cardiff when writing the Wales Spatial Plan. As I recall the preferred euphemism at the time was ‘capital region’. Any questioning of this at the time was met with the response by officers of the Assembly Government that such discussion would not be viewed favourably. To explicitly challenge it might prejudice the necessary investment and resources that the capital needs to succeed. Put simply the terminology used may be interpreted as an implicit but pervasive threat that the city must ‘toe the line’ as regards regional governmental policy. This may not be considered surprising if the WSP were seen only as an expression of the policy and of the priorities of Assembly. Or indeed its superior authority – that’s realpolitik for you.

However, for others, the WSP read as a catalogue of constraint not an enunciation of the opportunity afforded by the city and again this must surely need to be addressed under the term ‘governance’. As stated above the importance of the city is a given and, in my own direct experience in the property and construction industry the region is clearly defined by the property and related markets. Property values as a measure and indicator evidence the city as the apex of such markets. However both the industry and the professions also recognize that cities do not and cannot exist in isolation and the city region is a given. They must co-exist and work with and for their hinterland to prosper. High property values and the levels of economic activity that generate them are simply not sustainable without an effective engagement with the region, the most obvious example being in the available supply of suitable labour in successful urban centres. The quality of that labour force, their education, housing, entertainment, ease of access to the city and all other factors must necessarily be taken into account by the commercial property developer. The property and construction industry may only be motivated to participate in this debate through self- interest but that interest necessarily extends to the city region. It might have been wise to have had someone from that industry on the Task and Finish Group – or any commercial industry- to ensure effective engagement. That said, there are many in industry and the commercial professions in Wales now suffering from consultation fatigue.

Having focused on Cardiff to rehearse some of the governance issues we might then turn to other city regions. Swansea Bay/ Ospreylia is perhaps the most obvious candidate and one where moves have been made on cooperation on regionally significant projects. The fragility of such arrangements may best be illustrated by the proposed new research and innovation campus for Swansea University which would largely be located in the adjoining borough of Neath and Port Talbot. In that connection I will refer to only those matters in the public domain, for example, that the members of Swansea City Council overruled their officers and opposed the planning application submitted to Neath and Port Talbot. It might be suggested that they would not have opposed that application had the subject land been within the City.

At best an uneasy truce is maintained on matters which impact across current political boundaries such as the location of and access to new schools in adjoining boroughs, planning for retail parks and superstores, waste disposal, highways,etc. For this to be an effective city region the matter of governance is unavoidable for, at best, co-operation is wasteful in terms of human resources within the three authorities ‘co-operating’. The three unitary authorities in that area are to be commended for making what progress they have and we can only speculate as to whether they would have made three times the progress if they were one authority.

We then turn from Ospreylia to perhaps the more thorny subject of Carport. Newport has been designated a city, has historically served a region and continues to do so. However, in many areas- economically, socially and culturally- it clearly falls under the penumbra of Cardiff. To use again a simple anecdotal example from the property market, the received wisdom is that the business parks at J28 of the M4 – Cleppa Park, Celtic Lakes et al- would be more successful if they had a Cardiff postcode and telephone number. It might be reasonably assumed that hell will freeze solid before Newport becomes an eastern suburb of Cardiff. The Task and Finish Group then has to ask what practical benefit would the notion of ‘city region’ confer on Newport? It clearly cannot compete with Cardiff or Bristol so what rationale could be conjured up to support such a strategy? In addressing this the Group must then raise questions as to the role and purpose of these cities as the locomotives of regional regeneration. Answers may not be easily found in the proposition that ‘Successful international city regions tend to have a core theme/focus: Vancouver (airport); Bilbao (culture); Lille (connectivity); Rotterdam (logistics)’.

By my recollection Vancouver has a bit more going for it than an airport. That said none of our cities have anything going for them if we rely on our present airport. As to connectivity they are on the western side of an island to the North West of Europe so logistics would be illogical. So what, in the jargon of the marketers, is their Unique Selling Proposition? What are the features of our cities that will attract the attention of the brightest and best?

This may be broadly termed ‘culture’. In a 2006 paper on the future of Cardiff I offered three themes that I had some personal empathy with. They were entertainment, education and experiment and I outlined how the three might be interrelated as regards their contribution to a dynamic urban centre.

ENTERTAINMENT

At that time there was still discussion regarding the failure of Cardiff to secure the status as a Capital of Culture and I suggested that a problem with such contests was not least the definition of ‘culture’. I understood that it was taken in a wider sense for the purposes of that particular civic beauty parade and not solely confined to the arts. However it is defined it may be accepted that Cardiff and Wales have an established tradition of active participation and success in collective and populist entertainment. The word ‘collective’ again provides the thread in this argument in that historically we have had also had traditions of such collective participation in arts and culture whether these be choirs, brass bands or amateur theatricals. Whilst such practices have declined Cardiff and Wales evidence continued social and physical engagement with activities such as sport and other performing arts. Many people will still go to a place at some expense and personal discomfort to be part of a social event despite the availability of digital entertainment.  Welsh entertainers continue to achieve wider distinction and renown.

Continuing this theme it may be suggested that we have a particular ‘disposition to social life’ and that participation in such activity evidences a general love of life. If so then I suggest it is an attractive proposition and we may do a lot worse than reinforcing hwyl as a native tendency rather than striving to import any alien characteristics. As to the city, widespread recognition that it offers a diverse and rich range of entertainment must be considered an asset.

The Capital of Culture bid by Cardiff outlined what is needed in terms of developing and rounding out the offer, particularly in the visual arts and full engagement with the wider community - in the widest sense. The emphasis is on inclusivity not exclusivity and engaging the maximum number of people.

EDUCATION

My 2006 notes were originally prepared for people who speculate on futures through property investment and development. As with the reality of a city region many of them may take it as a given that the future is about what the young will do not what the old have done. Developing, attracting and retaining the brightest and best is essential for the future of the city. Asking what we can do to facilitate and enable greater national and international recognition as a centre of learning and research must be a central question.

It is obvious to those who accept the city region as a given as defined by its catchment area of skilled labour that this would be one of the biggest university towns in country if better defined. Linking back to the foregoing point on entertainment and amenity the attractions of Cardiff must undeniably attract and benefit students at Pontypridd and Newport. That gives the region an exciting and dynamic young population, a highly skilled workforce which might potentially provide the entrepreneurial and innovative commercial base we need. In short an available workforce which is clearly superior to that available elsewhere.

I hasten to add that this does not support the notion that merging higher education establishments in Cardiff, Treforest and Newport into a single institution may be beneficial. That is an entirely separate issue which I will be deal with in another blog.

EXPERIMENT

As with any commercial enterprise we can only succeed by innovation. A depressing aspect of Cardiff- A Proud Capital was the emphasis placed upon the development of an enlarged and enclosed shopping centre, another football stadium and an ‘international sports village’. These amenities may add to the diversity and range of entertainment outlined above but differ little from any town and city bidding to be shortlisted for a super casino. In hindsight that document did in fact appear to be merely something produced to that end.

We will not achieve distinction by borrowing ideas. Unless we can genuinely claim originality and be seen as a place where new ideas are formed we will not have a future. The caveat on Higher Education above is again relevant and the pursuit of excellence dealt with in another blog. In the context of the city region debate it is relevant in the sense that we must necessarily decide whether we are going to back winners or subsidise losers.

Coupled with these three themes there is of course the role of the city in commerce. The Task and Finish Group must necessarily consider the historic role of the city as a place of exchange and how that may be perpetuated. For as long as people have gathered together for mutual defence and worship they have also gathered at market and that function, I suggest, will continue. The National Assembly may wish to distribute wealth more evenly and it is a worthy objective. We will however by attempting to buck a trend of several thousand years if we try to prevent people gathering at the largest convenient market. Further advances in information technology will inevitably lead  to more changes in working, shopping and social habits but will not completely replace major commercial and cultural centres. That may be due in part to mankind’s disposition to social life and well established patterns of behaviour such as the collective pursuit of abundance

THE CAMBRIAN PARADOX

“Careful design of the cultural landscape is an important basis for the autonomous and confident development of peripheral regions. Nostalgia has no place in this however and nor has the schematic adoption of global concepts”
Gion Caminada 2005

The proposition is that the cultural landscape of the rural heartland, and in particular the uplands of Wales, are a repository of national identity and that these areas are increasingly threatened. Most readers of this piece will already recognise that this topic is not a simple question of development v conservation and that the foregoing quote raises several issues which grow more complicated and increasingly paradoxical by the month.

The first of these issues relates to confidence, as it frequently appears that any questioning or implied criticism of prevailing policy is dismissed as ‘talking down’ Wales. This presumption of treasonable negativity may merely evidence provincial paranoia on the part of politicians or a more general lack of national self- belief. This may then be aggravated by further questioning whether Wales has ever been, and ever can be, truly autonomous.

Mountains themselves may be synonymous with stability and security - aros mae’r mynyddoed mawr – and a consistent factor in what has been a long search for regional/ national identity.

The threat to such regions may be best rehearsed by reference to the area now known as the Cambrian Mountains, the remainder of our upland not afforded the degree of protection awarded to Snowdonia, the Brecon Beacons and Preseli Mountains as National Parks. It may be argued that the industrialisation of the Cambrian landscape by wind farming evidences both our lack of political autonomy and resolve, in short the abrogation of responsibility for stewardship of the cultural landscape by our regional government. I find it surprising if not amazed that the imposition of wind farms on Wales has not generated the same level of resistance as the flooding of its valleys to provide water for English cities. A common explanation appears to be a 'confusion of commitment’, particularly that to sustainability.
If we refer to the Brundtland definition of sustainable development as “ that (which) meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their
own needs” then perhaps we should agree that the industrialisation of the Cambrian Mountains denies future generations the beauty that we have hitherto enjoyed. This is not some sentimental notion, for nostalgia should have no place in this as Caminada suggests in the opening quotation. The argument is simply that rehearsed in the formation and designation of National Parks- that the public amenity afforded by historic and cultural landscapes has greater value in the long term than their commercial exploitation to meet short term economic objectives. In the case of the Cambrian Mountains we have not seen what Clough Williams Ellis outlined as follows;

"A wide popularity and appreciation; a democratic goodwill, an alert public opinion that would protect them from injury and maintain their integrity against the Philistine and our possibly more civilized successors, had some how to be assured. The National Parks and their younger brothers the Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, have gone a long way to fulfilling this task; they have helped in popularizing the enjoyment of their beauty by making lovely buildings and lovely places generally accessible, without somehow thereby impairing their distinctive characters." (1.)
In evoking this patrician, often patronising patron of our landscape I might digress slightly to introduce another current paradox. This is that the resistance to such development is seen as reactionary and the counter-culture as ‘conservative’, the protection of self-interest by a minority. This should not be the case but the interests of the environmental lobby, conservationists
and communities are divided by the supposed benefits of such development. There is little as yet to suggest that ‘the enjoyment of beauty’ is a cause for widespread public support.

For those committed to such resistance the Cambrians Mountains may be cherished as our ‘green desert’ and ‘last wilderness’ but they have long been commercially exploited. The appearance of today’s cultural landscape has largely been moulded by agriculture and forestry since the Middle Ages, by human occupation and the exploitation of natural resources before and after (2). Many of their most accessible and popular tourist attractions are a legacy of such development from Dolaucothi to the Elan Valley and thought needs to be given to the popularity of such sites. We may consider, for example, the importance of the former as an historical site and element in the cultural landscape and the melodramatic beauty of the latter. It may well be argued that wind farms are a fitting monument to our times and have beauty to some beholders. Unfortunately I have as yet failed to be persuaded of that or their economic/ environmental benefit.

This then leads to a further consideration of the stewardship of a landscape which has long been settled and managed and indeed the definition of ‘rural’ and ‘urban’ areas. The close proximity of domesticated countryside to urban centres in an area as small as Wales should naturally exaggerate their symbiotic relationship but this does not appear to be the case. The Cambrian Mountains are still considered to be relatively remote to the dense urban conurbations of South Wales. Accessibility will be considered further but in this context may be considered a factor in the lack of ‘ownership’ or identification with this upland area by the urban majority. There is no general recognition that the cultural landscape of areas such as the Cambrian Mountains represents perhaps our greatest economic capital, our common inheritance as a nation. It needs to be more widely recognised that this is not something our regional centres can do without.

This might be achieved by placing this local exemplar in a wider international context and, for example, the propositions and definitions outlined in initiatives such as the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) 1999. The operative word here is perspective as Wales fell within the ‘Island Zone’ briefly characterised as “generally urbanised and industrial areas with
pressure on surrounding natural environments. Important urban centres have capacity for expansion but with strong barriers and relatively weak links to global cities and gateways. Priority to strengthen global functions and corridors/ links with central zone.”

This may be applicable to South Wales – Glamorgan, Gwent and South East Carmarthenshire, but the characteristics of the outer, more peripheral ‘Open Zone’ of North West Europe may be more relevant to the greater part of Wales; “Extensive high quality natural environments, threats from depopulation, decline and intense tourism in certain locations. Poor links to urban services. Priorities are to strengthen role of regional towns, links with strategic centres, maintain low environmental pressures and build on indigenous potential.”

As classified elsewhere as ‘Highland Zone’ such regions are characterised by a specific yet varied landscape history and culture and these so called ‘structurally weak regions’ themselves lie on the periphery of nation states. It may be argued that only by addressing and developing their strengths, weaknesses, threats and opportunities can the well- being of the whole be advanced.
This concept of ‘well-being’ may be an important factor in considering the practical application of development proposals for rural Wales. There has been an increasing convergence of healthcare leisure and tourism in Europe and elsewhere particularly in the revival of luxury spa resorts. We should, as suggested by Caminada, avoid the ‘schematic adoption of global concepts’ and consider what are perhaps the more realistic and achievable precedents in Mid Wales presented by our own former spa towns. We might then further investigate the closure of rural hospitals, particularly those originally established as sanatoriums. Their locations perhaps attest the quality of the environment in the situation so selected. Those which have been closed leave a local workforce with the required skills in healthcare/ well being. These hospital closures in rural Wales result in the loss of both local amenity, employment and that skill base through emigration of the young for employment and an increasingly aging population who will, in due course, need healthcare. In addressing this paradox it might be suggested that the availability of skills in healthcare research and development be retained as the core of a wellbeing offer within the region.
The duality of this health nucleus and regional wellbeing offer then presents opportunities and facilities for the local community, health-seeking visitors and tourists, to create new local jobs, and strengthen, nationally, educational links between Mid Wales, other national academic centres and tourist destinations. There is then the opportunity to stimulate related business development ranging from research and development to care living, as well as centres of excellence retained from the existing hospitals.
Such a strategy may have the advantage of being implemented in a more evolutionary way through selective redevelopment of those buildings that are structurally and functionally obsolete and adaptive re-use of those which are capable of retention. This may then allow surplus buildings and parts of the site to be transferred to the community for their use, which may include low cost workspace, or leisure. Diversification of use also affords the opportunity to address other local issues, not least the provision of affordable housing and appropriate care facilities for the elderly in rural areas. Dignified care for an ageing population is clearly a major challenge in Wales and proper integration of suitable facilities within the community is necessary and desirable.In addition to what may be generally regarded as service industries proper consideration must be given to the potential for manufacturing premium quality products. To succeed and prove sustainable such enterprise may only be possible by specific conditions in a specific locality. We have examples of success and failure in Wales which need to be further analysed to better understand how our rural and upland regions might attain greater economic dynamism.

This then raises questions as to other forms of accommodation which may need to be provided in rural communities. For example, the need for live/work accommodation and the obstacles to such provision. Here we move from the Cambrian to the Crickhowell Paradox and the vexatious issue of its ‘Tele-Village’, a development now considered one of the most successful in the
country but which bankrupted its developer. Important lessons are there to be learned for successful sustainable development in rural communities, not least the most obvious. That is that the economic benefits of such development may only be realised once the social benefits are fully appreciated and that the ‘hit and run’ approach of most housing developers is very unlikely to produce sustainable places of the required quality. Longer term interests in the land must be retained and may require, over time, support from or the participation of regional government departments of health, environment, housing, education, economic development, corresponding local government departments, health board, third sector and community organisations. Long term ownership and, even more importantly, leadership will be critical to the success of such proposals and this would represent a departure from the ‘flatten it and flog it’ approach which has been the norm for hospital closures elsewhere which has seen potential assets such as Denbigh, Talgarth and other hospitals squandered.

It would appear that neither regional nor local government currently has the resources or expertise to facilitate such community/ stakeholder design workshops or implement the development proposals recommended over a long term. We may therefore need to determine whether the Environment/ Forestry/Countryside agglomerate will be able to facilitate and fund such community/stakeholder initiatives. At a minimum there must be a clearly stated policy that community and stakeholder dialogue will be encouraged by that body. However, in terms of long term stewardship (i.e. sustainability) of the public estate, it would be useful to determine what remit the new body will have for accommodating required rural development on that land that it manages. This might then inform the necessary budgets for the facilitation of such workshops and be justified by reference to the available evidence that the participation in such exercises by all stakeholders reduces total costs in time and fees when compared to the more adversarial process which has prevailed in rural development.

The recently published WG Green Paper, Sustaining a Living Wales, suggests a new approach to natural resource management in Wales and would appear at first blush to underpin that more holistic approach and perhaps signals a move towards bioregionalism. "The central proposal is to move to an ecosystem approach to environmental regulation and management. This will mean considering and regulating the environment and its health as a whole rather than dealing with individual aspects separately. It will mean weighing up and setting priorities for the many competing demands on our natural resources to provide different services to society – ranging from the value of the environment in itself, to food production to land for construction. And it will result in us taking steps at both local and national level that will help to maximise the environmental, economic and social opportunities available to us as a nation."

On the face of it this may then suggest action which may be welcomed as an ‘autonomous and confident development’. There is of course devil in the detail of each sentence and the success of such a strategy will again depend on its ownership and leadership. The more cynical of those concerned with’ land for development’ may predictably respond that this does indeed appear to be a Green Paper. However the principles outlined appear to address some of the issues raised above with the caveat that the detail remains to be addressed on many elements of the cultural landscape. How, for example, will other custodians of the cultural landscape such as CADW fit into the proposed new framework? However, and at risk of repetition, the suggested approach is encouraging particularly the following statement;
The fundamental principles of embedding sustainable development as a central organising principle are threefold:
• Long-termism: all decisions promote the long term, sustainable wellbeing of people and communities, now and for future generations;
• Integration: taking full account of, and where possible integrating, social, economic and environmental outcomes;
• Involvement: engaging with, and involving, the people and communities that will be affected by decisions.

As regards the practical application of this overarching policy it will be interesting to see whether this meets with greater success than other regional government initiatives such as the Wales Spatial Plan. Planning and development control will presumably remain with local government with the consequent variations of local policy, competence and pressures. The Cambrian Mountains extend into three counties currently. The existing National Parks are independent planning authorities and the Brecon Beacons, for example, extends into seven unitary authorities. It is to be assumed that the new body will be a statutory consultee in planning matters as its component bodies are currently. How much sway it will have remains to be seen as will any direct intervention in planning matters from the regional government.

Those concerned with the integrity of cultural landscapes will be mindful that guaranteeing the quality of landscape design and development is not to be confused with conservation. It must necessarily be concerned with the regulation of agricultural enterprise and, ideally, ensuring both attractive landscapes and the development of authentic and holistic agricultural economies in mountain regions. ‘Authentic and holistic’ are the operative words here. The encouragement of rural diversification, tourism and leisure development and the aforementioned industrialisation of the rural landscape may in many cases prove to be neither. The consequences are that with each development Wales becomes a lesser place. Great care must be taken in exploring, utilising and developing
the potential of our upland regions as a catalyst for raising their profile in larger regional centres. Mountain landscapes have determined the development of many generations of inhabitants and vice versa. Landscape and culture have always been and still are engaged in permanent interaction.

RHC March 2012

Notes
(1) Clough Williams Ellis . Around the World in Ninety Years, p 24

(2) Cultural Landscapes have been defined by the World Heritage Committee as distinct geographical areas or properties uniquely "..represent[ing] the combined work of nature and of man.." The World Heritage Committee has identified and adopted three categories of cultural landscape, ranging from (i) those landscapes most deliberately 'shaped' by people, through (ii) full range of 'combined' works, to (iii) those least evidently 'shaped' by people (yet highly valued). The three categories extracted from the Committee's Operational Guidelines, are as follows

(i) "a landscape designed and created intentionally by man";
(ii) an "organically evolved landscape" which may be a "relict (or
fossil) landscape" or a "continuing landscape";
(iii) an "associative cultural landscape" which may be valued because of the
"religious, artistic or cultural associations of the natural element"