This essay examines traditional farm buildings as they apply to heritage and landscape, the psychology behind farmers mind-sets in relation to their desire to stay associated with the land when they reach retirement age and how EU legislations pertaining to agricultural heritage and landscape have evolved over recent decades. Examples of the benefits of maintaining and restoring traditional farm buildings throughout the EU are explored, giving examples from Ireland, Spain, Italy and the UK. The enormous benefits of grant schemes designed to facilitate the preservation of traditional farming landscapes and buildings are enjoyed by farmers and the general public alike. For example, tourists can enjoy the novelty of scattered hotels, or albergo diffuso, in southern Italy and holiday makers in Spain can dine in the romantic ambience of an old wine-cellar that has been converted into a restaurant. Important too are the actual bureaucratic policies implemented throughout the years concerning farming, especially the CAP or Common Agricultural Policy of the EU, and it becomes apparent that certain policies such as incentives for elderly farmers to retire from agricultural work have not been thought out carefully enough by bureaucrats.
Conway et al (2018) explore the concept of ‘insideness’ as it applies to the psychological mindset of farmers who have lived and worked the land all of their lives. Drawing upon the work of Rowles (2016) and Rowles and Chaudhury (2005) who’s research centres around home and identity in later life, they examine the reasons why farmers in Ireland are reluctant to retire and show that this is a global phenomenon in farming communities where the land has been passed down through the family intergenerationally (Conway et al, 2018, 3). They explain how elderly farmers have a special bond with the land and despite financial incentives are reluctant to give up their agricultural activity as it is central to their identities occupationally, socially and recreationally. They used problem-focused interviews with Irish farmers and information obtained from the international FARMTRANSFERS survey to highlight precisely the main reasons for this reluctance on the part of older farmers (ibid: 3). Overall, the idea that the land represents a mosaic of the farmers life-long achievements and has a strong nostalgic attraction for them were recurrent sentiments and the primary reasons for the farmers unwillingness to retire (ibid: 3). In 2017, Phil Hogan, the European Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development, stated that a main focus of future CAP reform policies must be to ensure the generational renewal of family-owned farms. As Conway et al (2018, 4) point out however, CAP incentives to encourage the handover of family farms to a younger generation concentrated on financial benefits but seemed to lack understanding of the older farmers psyche when it came to their attachment to the land and reluctance to relinquish managerial control of their farms regardless of substantial monetary gains (ibid: 4). The symbolic capital and emotional attachment to changes and improvements of the farm land and buildings over the years, or the ‘embodied contents’ as Conway et al (ibid: 4) term them, were reasons for elderly farmers unwillingness to part ways with their lifelong occupation and their seems to be a cultural expectation that ‘farmers don’t retire’ (Conway et al, 2016, 172). The concept of ‘insideness’, as defined by Rowles (1990, 107), involves an ‘intimate involvement with a place that is grounded in personal history and qualitatively differentiates the place from space outside.’ In his study of a rural Appalachian community in the USA, Rowles determined that ‘insideness’ has three key dimensions of place attachment, which are physical, social and autobiographical. He goes on to state that these are what allows an individual to be able to ‘wear the setting like a glove’ (Rowles, 1983, 114).
The Heritage Act of 1995 established the Heritage Council of Ireland to advise government on various issues such as climate change, farming, forestry and landscape management They are based in Kilkenny and provide numerous schemes that encourage community involvement and liaising with local partners such as local authorities to enhance heritage management at every level. One such scheme is called the Green Low-Carbon Agri-Environment Scheme (GLAS) that provides an annual grant to farmers for the restoration, upkeep and maintenance of traditional farm buildings. Farmers interested in applying for the grant are required to provide photographs of both the interior and exterior of the buildings and include a site map of the area under consideration. The grant can provide funding of up to €25,000 annually for the work but cannot exceed 75% of the total cost for repairs. Finance can also be requested for the restoration or upkeep of historic yard surfaces, walls and gate pillars. The traditional farm buildings grant scheme is highly competitive and only 50-70 projects receive funding each year. The Department of Agriculture has allocated a total of €6 million to the scheme for 2019 (Moran, 2018). The application process takes into consideration the heritage interest of the building or structure, if there is a public view of the building or anything that would benefit the public by carrying out the project. Applicants are asked if any wildlife are using the building or if birds are using it for nesting, especially bats, because they are a protected species in Ireland. There is no requirement to hire a conservation consultant but the Heritage Council recommends that the farmer should have a conversation with one about the intended project during the application process.
A noteworthy aspect of the GLAS traditional farm buildings grant scheme is that funding is provided by the state through the Heritage Council for the restoration and preservation of buildings owned by private individuals with no obligation whatsoever for recipients of the grant to provide access for viewing or interact with the public in any way in connection with the restorations, although these factors are taken into consideration during the competitive application process. This is a positive indicator that the Irish government appreciates the importance of traditional buildings in the landscape and this official stance might have been shaped due to the various conventions over recent decades concerning heritage, architecture, environment and landscape. The attitude of the Irish government in particular towards funding farm schemes with taxpayer money can be traced back to the government of De Valera in the 1930/40s when an aggressive programme of building necessary agricultural facilities was implemented in a drive for self-sufficiency (Murray 2006). Following on from this we had the Rural Environmental Protection Scheme or REPS and in more recent years the traditional farm buildings scheme through the auspices of the Heritage Council of Ireland. Murray (2006, 31) highlights the change in public consciousness with regards to traditional farm buildings over time from “contemptible through amusing to the point where it is puzzling and needs to be explained”.
Positive testimonies from recipients of the grant include a family from a farm at Creggs, east Galway, who after repairing a building that had a boarded ceiling with an ‘A’ pitched roof had a pair of barn owls settle in to breed who produced two young in their byre. The byre is used for animal housing and the family continue their best efforts to keep the building in the best shape possible (Allen 2017). A Co. Clare farmer restored a pre-1837 outbuilding which was marked on the Ordinance Survey map of that year as a milking parlour. The building was originally in a very dangerous condition with slates falling off the roof, but with the help of GLAS funding was restored to its former glory and is now being used as a storage shed for machinery and farm supplies. (Allen 2018).
A comparable scheme to the Irish traditional farm buildings grant concerns landscape conservation policy in the UK where a case study has been carried out by Gaskell and Tanner (1998) on field barns in the Yorkshire Dales national park. They examine the effectiveness of policies aimed at protecting the built environment in rural Britain where some areas have a local Barns and Walls Conservation Project. For their research they analysed the data obtained from a 1985 baseline study of 100 barns in three regions and compared the results with a subsequent survey of the same areas in 1997, showing that many field barns had retained their traditional appearance but many had deteriorated structurally within the given time span (Gaskell & Tanner,1998, 289).
As the authors explain, traditional farm buildings are the defining characteristic of some of the most scenic and attractive countryside areas of Britain, providing a unique sense of identity to the rural landscape. The main policy of these conservation schemes in the UK is to identify rural features most at threat and as Brunskill (1987, 15) has pointed out, “vernacular farm buildings are ‘even more vulnerable than the hedge and hedgerow trees, the coppice and ponds which fall victim to modern farm practices”. Harvey (1985) made a report for the British Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries and Food (MAFF) and noted the lack of any research concerning the structural state of traditional farm buildings (Gaskell & Turner, 1998, 290), and this has major implications for the implementation of landscape conservation policies. It is noted by the authors that a primary reason for the lack of evidence concerning the state of traditional farm buildings is that the appearance of these structures are slow to change in comparison with other components of the landscape (ibid:290). In the Yorkshire Dales a series of dispersed valley homesteads have field systems with drystone walls and almost all of the farms have field barns. The Yorkshire Dales National Park was established in 1954 and has been designated an environmentally sensitive area (ibid: 290). It was found that deterioration of the barns happened over time, not as a result of deliberate action, but because many of the barns were left in disuse or neglected by farmers (ibid: 294). The conservation scheme set up in the park depends upon voluntary management arrangements where farmers agree to maintain a set of specified landscape components including vernacular farm buildings and field barns. In 1989 another scheme set up between the Yorkshire Dales National Park Association and English Heritage made the park a designated Barns and Walls Conservation Area (BWCA) (ibid:292), and in 1995 a further scheme was introduced to cover an additional 91 km2 of the area. As a result of these successful conservation schemes the traditional rural landscape of the Yorkshire Dales has been maintained to the benefit of locals and visitors alike.
In Spain much work has been carried out to restore underground wine cellars that since the 1950s have fallen into disuse due to the introduction of modern technologies in the production of wine (Fuentes et al, 2010, 738). The production of wine in Spain is very much part of their cultural heritage since the introduction of the grapevine by the Phoenicians between the 6th and 9th centuries BC (ibid: 739). Many of these wine cellars are now used for the production of high quality artisanal wines, cheeses and cured meats. Other uses for the cellars include the production of mushrooms and some have been refurbished and turned into restaurants or other cultural uses (ibid: 738). As Fuentes et al (ibid: 738) argue, the retention of the vernacular architecture is important for the continuity of the rural landscape. These wine cellars were a popular way to store wine traditionally and were often built under houses or on the outskirts of villages. For example, the town of Aranda de Duero which had a population of approximately 5,000 people in the 16th century, had an underground network of wine cellars more than 4km long where an estimated five million litres of wine could be stored (ibid: 739). Traditionally the entrance ways to these wine cellars were used as meeting or gathering places for the local community, and it was common to have wooden benches installed in the open air just outside the entrances. Because many of the wine cellars are family owned and part of their heritage, many Spaniards are reluctant to sell them off and many have fallen into disuse (ibid: 742).
Vernacular underground wine cellars in Spain have also seen new life as museums or exhibition rooms and possibilities exist for them to be used for other leisure and cultural activities. However, special care must be taken to maintain their traditional form, especially in the types of building materials used to renovate them, their shapes, colours and textures, in order to avoid undesired visual contrasts with the surrounding landscape (ibid: 746). During the later 20th century there was intensive scientific debate about the preservation of traditional architecture and the importance of preservation. Various organisations such as The European Council, ICOMOS, SPAB, Europa Nostra, and many more, raised public awareness about the importance of conventions, recommendations and guidelines to deal with the preservation of vernacular buildings. Fuentes et al (2010, 746) mentions The Venice Charter of 1964, the UNESCO World Heritage Convention in Paris in 1972 concerned with the protection of the world’s cultural and national heritage, the European Charter of the Architectural Heritage (Amsterdam 1975), the Convention for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage of Europe (Granada 1985), the Charter on the Conservation of the Built Vernacular Heritage (Mexico 1989) and the European Landscape Convention (Florence 2000) among others.
In the southern Italian regions of Apulio and Basilicata there are some extraordinary examples of architecture where the use of limestone dry-stone walling was commonly used in the construction of vernacular buildings According to Picuno (2016, 451) recent increases in the sensitivity about sustainable development has stimulated a drive to use locally available materials for agricultural construction, especially sun-dried earth brick called adobe that are traditionally mixed with barley or wheat straw before they are hardened (ibid: 449). The author points out that even in Europe new earthen structures are a large niche market of the construction industry, providing comfort to occupants and ensuring architectural compatibility with traditional built environments. He also highlights the fact that some 10% of the UNESCO World Heritage properties includes earthen structures (ibid: 454). In his study of vernacular farm buildings of the Basilicata region, Picuno (2012) visited many farms with the purpose of identifying and classifying them typologically. This research showed that many of the buildings had structural or functional degradation. Some of these buildings have now been successfully restored and converted into Albergo Diffuso or ‘scattered hotels’ which is a new way to attract tourists. This type of hotel provides guests with all the traditional services of regular hotels, but the actual rooms are scattered throughout the historical landscape with the intention of giving residents a ‘sense of being local’ during their stay (ibid: 137).
From about the early 1990s onwards there has been a shift towards exploring the multifunctional aspects of agriculture and attitudes towards the conservation of rural landscapes has changed. People are increasingly utilising the rural landscape for all types of cultural and recreational activities and there is an increased awareness of the importance of sustainability, environmental protection, and maintaining traditional architectural features of the built environment. The 1996 European Conference on rural development which was held in Cork was a catalyst for an increased emphasis and awareness about the importance of landscape preservation while drafting and implementing official EU policies (Howley et al, 2012, 704). It was argued at this conference that there was a need to encourage farmers to manage land in a socially desired manner. This line of thinking led to the Agenda 2000 reforms where rural development policies were put in place through the second pillar of the EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The 2003 EU review of the CAP upgraded the status of non-agricultural objectives from ‘optional extras’ to ‘intrinsic component’ (ibid: 704). We can see a worldwide trend towards an appreciation and conscientiousness of the importance of preserving rural landscapes and associated vernacular buildings and there has been real headway made in recent decades in helping European farmers take up their multifunctional role as custodians of the countryside (ibid: 704).
Bibliography:
About the Heritage Council. Available online at https://www.heritagecouncil.ie/about (Accessed 2nd March 2019).
GLAS Traditional Farm Buildings Grant Scheme. Available online at https://www.heritagecouncil.ie/projects/traditional-farm-buildings-grant-scheme (Accessed 2nd March 2019).
Allen, C. (2018). GLAS funding sees Clare farmyard’s character restored. Available online at http://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/glas-funding-sees-clare-farmyards-character-restored/ (Accessed 3nd March 2019).
Allen, C. (2019). Barn owl bonus for Galway family on outbuilding conservation drive. Available online at http://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/barn-owl-bonus-for-galway-family-on-outbuilding-conservation-drive/ (Accessed 3nd March 2019).
Conway et al (2018) Till death do us part: Exploring the Irish farmer-farm relationship in later life through the lens of ‘Insideness’. In International Journal of Agricultural Management, Volume 7 Issue 1..
Fuentes et al (2009) New uses for old traditional farm buildings: The case of the underground wine cellars in Spain, In Land Use Policy 27 (2010) 738–748.
Gaskell, P. and Tanner, M. (1998) Landscape conservation policy and traditional farm buildings: a case study of field barns in the Yorkshire Dales national park, In Landscape Research, 23:3, 289-307
Howley et al (2012) Countryside Preferences: Exploring Individuals’ Willingness to Pay for the Conservation of the Traditional Farm. In Landscape, Landscape Research, 37:6, 703-719.
Moran, C. (2018). Department confirms return of grant aid scheme for restoring traditional farm buildings. Available online at https://www.independent.ie/business/farming/schemes/department-confirms-return-of-grant-aid-scheme-for-restoring-traditional-farm-buildings-37259529.html (Accessed 2nd March 2019).
Murray, C. (2006). Caring for Farm Buildings. In Landscape Highlights, Heritage Outlook 2004-2009. Available online at https://www.heritagecouncil.ie/content/files/landscape_higlights_heritage_outlook_2004_2009_10mb.pdf (Accessed 2nd March 2019).
Picuno, P. (2012) Vernacular farm buildings in landscape planning: a typological analysis in a southern Italian region. In Journal of Agricultural Engineering 2012; volume XLIII:e20.
Picuno, P (2016) Use of traditional material in farm buildings for a sustainable rural environment In International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2016) 5, 451–460.
Rowles,G and Chaudhury, H. (2005) Home and Identity in Late Life, International Perspectives. Springer Publishing Company, Inc, NY.
Rowles, G. (2016) Habituation and Being in Place. In The Occupational Therapy Journal of Research, Supplement 2000, Volume 20.
Discover more from Galway Civic Trust - Dúchas Na Gaillimhe
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
0 Comments