Cited by 30Landscape and Cultural StudiesLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesArchaeological Research and Protection

From landscape affordances to landscape connectivity: contextualizing an archaeology of human ecology

Open access
Kempf, Michael·2020·Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences

Abstract

To understand the connectivity in human–landscape ecosystems, a multidirectional concept of landscape transformation, sociocultural development, and human response cycles needs to be considered. In this context, societal decision-making is controlled by the ecosystem’s functionality; the human perception, experience, memory, and tradition; and the individual configuration of landscape components: a conceptual framework that is herein referred to as landscape affordances. In contrast to defining environmental components as passive resources, the concept of landscape affordances entails dynamic and processual feedbacks of an individual and the environment in the moment of mutual interaction—thus actively integrating human ingenuity in the production of landscapes, biological processes, and sociocultural patterns. This article contextualizes the concepts of landscape affordances and functional ecosystem connectivity to evaluate human behavioural patterning and the production of landscapes in a methodological landscape archaeological approach.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12520-020-01157-4

Cites

97 of 97 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Gibson JJ (1986) The ecological approach to visual perception. Erlbaum, Hillsdale
  2. Gillings M (2007) The Ecsegfalva landscape: affordance and inhabitation. In: Whittle A (ed) The Early Neolithic on the Great Hungarian Plain: Investigations of the Körös culture site of Ecsegfalva 23, County Békés, vol 2. AKAPRINT Nyomdaipari Kft., Budapest, pp 31–46
  3. Jung M (2018) ‘Das objektepistemologische Potential des Affordanzkonzeptes James Gibsons und seine Bedeutung als Grundlage von ,Objektbiographien‘. Methodologische Anmerkungen und exemplarische Fallstudie’, in Hilgert, M., Hofmann, K. and Simon, H. (eds.) Objektepistemologien. Zur Vermessung eines transdisziplinären Forschungsraums. (Berlin Studies of the Ancient World, 59). Berlin: Pro Business digital printing, pp. 135–178
  4. Knappett C (2004) The affordances of things: a post-Gibsonian perspective on the relationality of mind and matter. In: DeMarrais E, Gosden C, Renfrew C (eds) Rethinking materiality: the engagement of mind with the material world. (McDonald Institute monographs). McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge, pp 43–51
  5. Mäckel R et al (2002) Environmental changes and human impact on the relief development in the Upper Rhine valley and Black Forest (south-west Germany) during the Holocene. Zeitsch Geomorphol 128:31–45
  6. Meyer WJ, Crumley CL (2011) Historical ecology. In: Moore T, Armada X-L (eds) Atlantic Europe in the first millennium BC: Crossing the divide. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 109–134 (Accessed: 24 June 2020)
  7. Müller J (2005) 'Soziale Grenzen und Zeichensysteme in prähistorischen Gesellschaften', in Kienlin, T.L. (ed.) Die Dinge als Zeichen: Kulturelles Wissen und materielle Kultur
  8. internationale Fachtagung an der Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main, 3.-5. April 2003. (Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie, 127). Bonn: Habelt, pp. 255-261
  9. Sielmann, B. (1972) ‘Die frühneolithische Besiedlung Mitteleuropas’, in Schwabedissen, H. (ed.) Die Anfänge des Neolithikums vom Orient bis Nordeuropa Westliches Mitteleuropa: bearb. von Jens Lüning. Köln: Böhlau, pp. 1–65

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kempf, M.
Affiliations
University of Freiburg (DE)
Corresponding author
Kempf, Michael
Venue
Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences
Published
2020-07-20
Volume
12
Issue
8
ISSN
  • 1866-9557 (ISSN-L)
  • 1866-9565
OpenAlex
W3045401967
Cited by
30
References
97
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2
FWCI
24.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Informationszentrum Lebenswissenschaften (ZB MED) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg im Breisgau
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Landscape and Cultural Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Space and Planetary Science › Archaeological Research and Protection
Keywords
landscape connectivity, landscape change, human ecology, landscape archaeology, human-nature relationship, ecosystem functioning, landscape production, sociocultural development

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review