1. Points made in discussions What interests and values in the landscape do we want to monitor? Integrated landscape approach takes account of different landscape functions, such as: social e.g. cultural heritage, landscape aesthetics economic e.g. agriculture, tourism ecological e.g. biodiversity, soil quality Land cover is not landscape Desire to monitor future changes, even though these may be difficult to predict What are the demands from decision-makers? May change according to political agendas May be conflicts between different decision makers

2. What is an indicator? A variable that tells us something about a value of interest An index is a mathematical relationship - an index may be used as an indicator, but not all indicators are indices… Alternative interpretation: An index is an aggregate expression of two or more indicators. Some variables may be indicators for several values (multi- purpose) What are the criteria for successful indicators? Simplification objectivity communication repeatability sensitivity to change quantification transparency

3. What are the limitations to producing indicators from image data? Qualitative data are difficult to extract e.g. Habitat quality, landscape aesthetics Pattern can be derived but not always process Indicators must be validated from other data sources How should we express indicator results to different users? Do we need environmental journalists to translate for the scientists? One set of indicators for scientists, one for politicians?… but then the scientists have to make the value judgements! One conclusion: we need better dialogue between scientists and politicians

4. What is the role of a landscape typology? - as an indicator in its own right? - as a background for reporting indicators? How do actual indicators fulfil the ‘criteria for good indicators’? Indicator diagrams as a means of communicating complex landscape change Indicator profiles showing relationships according to e.g. the DPSIR framework New topics for discussion