Traditional land-use and nature conservation in
European rural landscapes
Tobias Plieninger
, Franz Ho¨chtl
, Theo Spek
a
Albert-Ludwigs-University, Department of Forest and Environmental Sciences, Institute for Landscape Management,
Tennenbacher Str. 4, D-79106 Freiburg, Germany
b
National Service for Archaeological Heritage, Department of Landscape and Heritage, P.O. Box 1600,
NL-3800 BP Amersfoort, The Netherlands
1.
Introduction
Rural Europe offers a great diversity of cultural landscapes. This
landscape diversity is, for the most part, a result of the variety of
land-uses that have overlaid, refined or replaced each other
throughout history. In European landscape history five basic
stages are distinguished (
): the natural,
prehistoric landscape (from Palaeolithic till ancient Greek
times); the antique landscape (from ancient Greek times till
early Mediaeval times); the mediaeval landscape (from early
Mediaeval times till Renaissance); the traditional agricultural
landscape (from Renaissance till 19th century, sometimes till
today); and industrial landscapes (mostly from mid-18th till
mid-20th century, in many places till today). The analysis of the
function, the changes and the development of European rural
landscapes has been the commitment of the Permanent
Conference for the Study of the Rural Landscape (PECSRL) since
1957 (
). In this issue we present a series of
papers from PECSRL’s 2004 meeting. The issue focuses on the
changes that traditional rural landscapes have experienced and
on the challenges of controlling their development.
2.
Interactions of traditional land-use and
conservation
Traditional land-uses include all ‘‘practices which have been
out of fashion for many years and techniques which are not
generally part of modern agriculture’’ (
). They
are supposed to have had their maximum extent in the second
half of the 19th century (
). Two common
characteristics of most forms of traditional land-use are
e n v i r o n m e n t a l s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 9 ( 2 0 0 6 ) 3 1 7 – 3 2 1
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Published on line 19 April 2006
Keywords:
Countryside
Cultural landscapes
Europe
Land-use
Nature conservation
a b s t r a c t
Europe’s countryside is characterised by a rich diversity of cultural landscapes and has been
shaped by traditional land-uses. These landscapes provide numerous ecological services,
e.g. the support of high levels of biodiversity. However, many traditional land-use systems
have been lost or diminished in past decades, as land-uses have polarised either toward
extensification and land abandonment or intensification. Remaining traditional land-use
systems continue to be at risk. This paper introduces a special issue of six contributions that
address land-use and landscape changes across Europe. The paper advocates a double-track
strategy in cultural landscape development: first, some remaining traditional land-use
systems should be preserved, and new tools for their economic viability be designed.
Second, the key elements of traditional land-use that provide ecological services should
be identified and integrated into future, more productive land-use systems.
#
2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
* Corresponding author. Present address: Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Ja¨gerstr. 22/23, D-10117 Berlin,
Germany. Tel.: +49 30 20370 538; fax: +49 30 20370 214.
E-mail address:
(T. Plieninger).
a v a i l a b l e a t w w w . s c i e n c e d i r e c t . c o m
j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / e n v s c i
1462-9011/$ – see front matter # 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:
relatively low nutrient inputs and relatively low output per
hectare. Therefore, traditional land-use systems are also
termed
‘‘low-intensity
land-use
systems’’
). However, ‘‘traditional land-use’’ is not in
all cases completely congruent with ‘‘low-intensity land-use’’
as there are traditional land-use systems that have been very
labour-intensive and had high nutrient and labour inputs.
Examples can be found in late medieval and early modern
Flanders, northern Italy, the Netherlands and southwest
England (and on a more local scale in many densely populated
areas of Europe). These traditional high-intensity systems also
had a high biodiversity, caused by the many gradients of
nutrient and labour inputs at a local and regional scale.
Although traditional land-use techniques vary consider-
ably throughout Europe, a rough categorisation into livestock
systems, arable and permanent crop systems, and mixed
systems can be made (
). Traditional land-use systems
have mainly persisted in upland and remote areas where
physical constraints have prevented a modernisation of
agriculture. The most extensive and diverse low-intensity
land-use systems can be found in Spain and Portugal (
have analysed a number of
basic principles that are characteristic for traditional land-use
systems. These are important for understanding the function-
ing of such systems and, additionally, can serve as guidelines
for the design of new land-use systems (
Principle of multiple uses: Traditional land-use systems
optimise resource use and minimise risks through poly-
culture and other forms of multiple uses. Another important
aspect of historical cultural landscapes has always been the
interaction between public, common and private land-use.
The extensive use of common lands (forests, heathlands,
grasslands and marshes) has been extremely important for
biodiversity in northwest Europe and has changed a lot over
the centuries, due to changes in agricultural systems,
economy and common rights (
Principle of rotational uses: In traditional systems land-use is
intended to meet individual needs more than to maximise
economic profit. Therefore, traditional land-use systems
involve numerous uses that are spatially and temporally
differentiated, but applied on the whole land. This leads to a
discontinuous change between periods of human impact
and periods of regeneration.
Principle of recycling: In traditional land-use, external inputs
of agrochemicals or fodder are low. Nutrient emissions and
water losses are minimised, and production wastes are re-
used as fertilizers.
Principle of low-energy economy: Traditional systems are
stamped by a scarcity of energy and transport resources.
Principle of spatial fuzziness: In traditional systems different
land-use structures and processes intermingle, although
ecological and land-use settings provide a gradient of
variation.
add principles such as a slow rate of
change that produces long periods of relative stability, man-
agement techniques that enhance the structural diversity of
vegetation, the maintenance of a high proportion of semi-
natural vegetation, and low use of agrochemicals.
The high nature-conservation value of most traditional
land-use systems is without controversy (see, for example,
, for a study on birds). Under these
circumstances it seems paradoxical that the provision of rich
biodiversity was never the primary aim of traditional land-use,
but that it was nothing more than an unintended by-product
(
). Today these amenities are considered
externalities that are uncoupled from agricultural or forestry
production and must be specially managed and financed
(
). The fact that traditional land-use in
Europe has, instead of damaging biodiversity, even fostered
habitat and species richness is remarkable as this contrasts
with the evidence from most other parts in the world
(
). Correspondingly most non-Europeans
understand conservation as an activity to restore conditions
of pristine wilderness with a complete absence of human
impact. What distinguishes traditional cultural landscapes in
Europe from other human-shaped landscapes in the world is
the long history of land-use since the retreat of the glaciation
that has facilitated the co-evolution of species, ecosystems
and man (
). Nowadays European agri-biodi-
versity is considered just as valuable as wild biodiversity
(
In addition to their nature-conservation value, cultural
landscapes are also appreciated due to their cultural values
bound to the history of a place and its cultural traditions
(
). There is an increasing recogni-
tion of the necessity to include the values and priorities of
people in any activity of natural or cultural resources
conservation. Likewise, cooperation between actors of nature
and cultural heritage conservation have been increasing
recently.
e n v i r o n m e n t a l s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 9 ( 2 0 0 6 ) 3 1 7 – 3 2 1
318
Table 1 – Traditional land-use systems in Europe
Livestock systems
Arable and permanent crop systems
Mixed systems
Low-intensity livestock raising in
upland and mountain areas
Low-intensity dryland arable cultivation
in Mediterranean regions
Low-intensity mixed
Mediterranean cropping
Low-intensity livestock raising in
Mediterranean regions
Low-intensity arable cultivation
in temperate regions
Low-intensity, small-scale traditional
mixed farming
Low-intensity livestock raising in
wooded pastures
Low-intensity rice cultivation
Low-intensity livestock raising in
temperate lowland regions
Low-intensity tree crops
Low-intensity vineyards
Source:
.
A central dilemma of Europe’s traditional cultural land-
scapes is their instability, i.e. their dependence on a medium
degree of human impact. If land-use is extensified or
abandoned traditional landscapes are displaced by sponta-
neous vegetational succession. In Portugal, for example, land
abandonment and consecutive shrub encroachment have led
to the disappearance of more than 245,000 ha of low-intensity
farmland in the 1980s (
). Con-
versely, too intensive human impact will lead to the conver-
sion of traditional landscapes to more simplified landscapes.
For instance, at least 1,400,000 ha of low-intensity farmland
has been converted into highly productive irrigated fields in
Spain since 1973 (
). This polarisa-
tion of land-use trends, with extensification or land abandon-
ment on one side (
) and mechanisation
and intensification on the other (see, for example,
), puts many traditional land-use systems seriously at
risk. Although some agri-environmental schemes provide
financial assistance for the maintenance of traditional cultural
landscapes, their impact has so far been narrow (
).
3.
The Permanent Conference for the Study of
the Rural Landscape
The Permanent European Conference for the Study of the
Rural Landscape is an international network of about 350
landscape researchers from more than 30 European countries
whose interests focus on the past, present and future of
European cultural landscapes. It was established in 1957 and
has been a constant factor in European landscape research
since. Initially, it consisted mainly of historical geographers,
but during the last few decades its membership has diversified
to include ecologists, social scientists, rural planners, land-
scape architects, human geographers, physical geographers,
historians, archaeologists, landscape managers, as well as
other scholars and practitioners interested in European
landscapes. Members undertake both fundamental and
applied research on all aspects of the rural landscape or have
a position in landscape or heritage management. PECSRL
covers Pan-Europe connecting researchers from all parts of the
continent. The main objectives of PECSRL are: (1) to facilitate
personal contacts and information exchange between Eur-
opean landscape researchers; (2) to improve interdisciplinary
cooperation between landscape researchers from various
scientific and human landscape disciplines; (3) to improve
cooperation between landscape researchers and landscape
managers; (4) to function as a platform for new initiatives in
European landscape research and landscape management. An
important medium for our network is the international
PECSRL conference, organised every two years in a different
European country. Recent conferences took place in Trond-
heim (1998), London/Aberystwyth (2000), Tartu/Otepa¨a¨ (2002)
and Lesvos/Limnos (2004). The next conference will be in
Berlin/Brandenburg (September 2006). More information
about this European landscape network is available at
. Membership is free for all those who
are interested in the field of cultural landscape research and
landscape planning.
4.
Papers on land-use and conservation in
rural areas
This issue collects some of the papers presented at the 21st
session of the Permanent Conference for the Study of the Rural
Landscape, held in Lemnos and Lesvos, Greece, in September
2004.
The array of contributions is opened with a paper by
having a methodological focus. Against the
background of a project undertaken in the Italian Alps, the
authors describe and discuss methodological procedures, as
well as the advantages and disadvantages of transdisciplinary
research. Transdisciplinarity, that is interdisciplinary inves-
tigation engaged in by academic researchers from different
disciplines and also involving non-academic participants
(
), is a buzzword currently resounding
throughout the academic landscape. It would appear to be
the final destination of applied research par excellence. Still, the
authors argue that transdisciplinarity is in no way a panacea.
Many problems, especially within basic research, can be better
analysed by applying the approved methods of one discipline.
The concept is well suited to solving problems related to the
management of public goods, however. This refers to goods
the holder cannot prevent another from consuming and in
which numerous and greatly differing individuals partake.
One such public good is the landscape.
The historical developments that still determine today
the agricultural landscape dynamics of rural regions in the
Mediterranean are the subject of
contribution. Traditional Mediterranean terraced
agricultural landscapes, as represented by the authors’
study area, the Greek island of Lesvos, have been in a steady
state of decline and in other cases have already been
completely degraded due to changes in the prevailing land-
use systems occurring in the last 150 years. Based on the
analysis of the driving forces behind Mediterranean land-
scape change caused by social, political, technological and
economic developments, the authors define cornerstones for
political intervention to counteract the negative effects of
land-use intensification on the one hand and the complete
abandonment of entire landscapes in the Mediterranean on
the other.
Since the mid-1980s there has been an intensive debate in
central Europe on the issue of nature-conservation strategies
that seek to exclude humans and their activities from the rural
landscape. Wilderness advocates have called for the establish-
ment of so-called wilderness areas in which nature may
develop completely unhindered, without human intervention,
as a means of combating progressive biodiversity loss (
). Against this backdrop, the paper presented by
Olsson and Thorvaldsen (this issue)
represents an apparent
paradox in that they have demonstrated that nature-con-
servation principles based on the exclusion of anthropogenic
influence can even lead to an acceleration in species decline.
The results of the authors’ research into eider (Somateria
mollissima L.) population dynamics, its dependence upon
habitat quality, as well as past and present human land-use
practices reveal the hazards associated with focusing on very
narrow guiding principles when dealing with nature con-
servation.
e n v i r o n m e n t a l s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 9 ( 2 0 0 6 ) 3 1 7 – 3 2 1
319
How can the ecological and cultural values of Scandinavian
semi-natural grasslands be maintained and developed? This is
the leading question in
paper entitled
‘‘Biodiversity and the local context. Linking semi-natural
grasslands and their future use to social aspects’’. Over the last
century there has been a substantial loss in the area of semi-
natural grasslands in Sweden as a consequence of widespread
land abandonment and a drastically diminishing number of
grazing animals. Therefore, science is required to find
strategies that ensure the persistence of this valuable
ecosystem. Stenseke suggests an interdisciplinary research
strategy, namely the application of a broad spectrum of
geographical methods which helps to bridge the gap between
social and natural science in natural resource management
research. Her call for flexible landscape policies allowing
adaptive management in various local contexts is an
important conclusion in the light of an often strongly
equalising European common agricultural policy.
Throughout the world Europe is noted for its art treasures,
monuments and also for its multifaceted and impressive
rural landscapes. Whereas the book market is inundated
with art-related tour guides, there is no comparable guide to
Europe’s cultural landscapes. This deficiency is the fulcrum
of
article ‘‘Recording rural land-
scapes and their cultural associations: some initial results
and impressions’’. Over a number of years the author has
compiled basic information for a Pan-European visual-
cultural guide to be used as a source of information for
planners, educators and the general public. More than
simply informing, it could potentially help to motivate
broader public support for endangered rural landscape types
such as bocage (hedgerows, enclosed fields), coltura promiscua
(central Italian mixed cropping) and dehesas/montados (oak
woodland supporting the Iberian hog–sheep–grain–cork
agroforestry system). Furthermore, Zimmermann charac-
terises the perceptions of local people in relation to land-
scape change and decline as determined from his study trips
through Europe and over the course of many informal
interviews.
Taking as an example the Causse Me´jan, one of the few
remaining open steppe habitats in France and the hilly,
profoundly ravined Valle´e Francaise in the Cevennes
National Park,
calls into question the
commonly held, traditional image of closed, autarchic
agrarian societies in upland communities, which was long
used to reinforce the equilibrium-centred model of human–
nature interdependencies. She argues that landscape
research should be geared toward conceptual models in
order to identify future perspectives for upland communities.
In contrast to the idealised notion of sustainability, as
suggested in equilibrium-based models, this approach repre-
sents a more useful theoretical platform based on an
awareness of the fact that in complex systems even small-
scale changes or random events may have notable repercus-
sions for the system as a whole. Against this background, the
author highlights the flexibility and resilience developed over
centuries by mountain communities in their daily struggle
with the environment. Her paper reveals these character-
istics as fundamental prerequisites for successful future
mountain landscape policies.
5.
Outlook
What is the future of high nature-value rural landscapes such as
traditional olive groves on Lesvos, the coltura promiscua in Italy,
the dehesas and montados on the Iberian Peninsula or Scandi-
navia’s semi-natural grasslands? Are they ‘‘exemplars’’ or
‘‘anachronisms’’ (
) in the modern landscape?
The collection of papers shows that land-use, and especially
agriculture, is the most important driving force that shapes
landscape sceneries. In agreement with the existing landscape
ecological literature the papers stress the considerable ecolo-
gical amenities that traditional low-intensity land-use delivers
to society. At the same time they show that cultural landscapes
have been in constant change, both in history and present. The
papers give a two-fold orientation: first, the integrity of the
remaining traditional land-use systems should be conserved,
and strategies need to be developed so that the ecological
services they provide are rewarded by society. We only can
preserve parts of traditional land-use systems well, after we
have a thorough insight into the complex interaction between
land-use and biodiversity. This leads to a plea for an
interdisciplinary historical–ecological approach in which ecol-
ogists and landscape historians closely cooperate. Moreover,
there is a need to link these ‘‘old-fashioned landscapes’’ with
new economic objectives, e.g. with rural tourism. Nevertheless,
it is neither feasible nor desirable to maintain traditional land-
use systems in their historical spatial extent (
).
Therefore, second, it will be necessary to determine the key
elements of traditional land-uses that provide ecological
services and to integrate these into future land-use systems.
Still, there are many potential trajectories of landscape
development, and particular landscapes will develop for each
specific societal and ecological setting.
predicted a complex mosaic of future landscapes, including
commodity-output oriented industrial landscapes, over-
stressed multifunctional landscapes, museum-like landscapes,
marginalised vanishing landscapes and wilderness landscapes.
One common insight of all authors in this issue is that a
sustainable landscape development is impossible without the
involvement of land-users and local people, i.e. of the sculptors
of the landscape. The papers give some hints for a fruitful
exchange between landscape research and the land-use
practice.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank Peter Howard for proof-
reading all papers in this special issue.
r e f e r e n c e s
Baldock, D., Beaufoy, G., Clark, J., 1995. The Nature of Farming:
Low Intensity Farming Systems in Nine European
Countries. Institute for European Environmental Policy,
London.
Bignal, E.M., McCracken, D.I., 1996. Low-intensity farming
systems in the conservation of the countryside. J. Appl. Ecol.
33 (3), 413–424.
e n v i r o n m e n t a l s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 9 ( 2 0 0 6 ) 3 1 7 – 3 2 1
320
Bignal, E.M., McCracken, D.I., Corrie, H., 1995. Defining European
low-intensity farming systems: the nature of farming. In:
McCracken, D.I., Bignal, E.M., Wenlock, S.E. (Eds.), Farming on
the Edge: The Nature of Traditional Farmland in Europe. Joint
Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough, pp. 29–37.
Carruthers, S.P., 1993. The dehesas of Spain—exemplars or
anachronisms? Agroforestry Forum 4 (2), 43–52.
Green, B.H., Vos, W., 2001. Managing old landscapes and making
new ones. In: Green, B.H., Vos, W. (Eds.), Threatened
Landscapes: Conserving Cultural Landscapes. Spon Press,
London, New York, NY, pp. 139–149.
Hampicke, U., 2006. Efficient conservation in Europe’s
agricultural countryside—rationale, methods and policy
reorientation. Outlook Agric. 35 (2), in press.
Heath, M.F., Tucker, G.M., 1995. Ornithological value and
pastoral farming systems. In: McCracken, D.I., Bignal, E.M.,
Wenlock, S.E. (Eds.), Farming on the Edge: The Nature of
Traditional Farmland in Europe. Joint Nature Conservation
Committee, Peterborough, pp. 54–59.
Herzog, F., 1997. Stand der agroforstlichen Forschung in West-
und Mitteleuropa. Z. Kulturtechnik Landentwicklung 38 (4),
145–148.
Ho¨chtl, F., Lehringer, S., Konold, W., 2005. ‘‘Wilderness’’: what it
means when it becomes a reality—a case study from the
southwestern Alps. Landscape Urban Plan. 70, 85–95.
Ho¨chtl, F., Lehringer, S., Konold, W. Pure theory or useful tool?
Experiences with transdisciplinarity in the Piedmont Alps.
Environ. Sci. Policy 9 (4), this issue
Kizos, T., Koulouri, M. Agricultural landscape dynamics in the
Mediterranean: Lesvos (Greece) case study using evidence
from the last three centuries. Environ. Sci. Policy 9 (4), this
issue.
Konold, W., Schwineko¨per, K., Seiffert, P., 1996. Zuku¨nftige
Kulturlandschaft aus der Tradition heraus. In: Konold, W.
(Ed.), Naturlandschaft—Kulturlandschaft. Die Vera¨nderung
der Landschaften nach der Nutzbarmachung durch den
Menschen. Ecomed, Landsberg, pp. 289–312.
Kristensen, S.P., 1999. Agricultural land and landscape changes
in Rostrup. Denmark: process of intensification and
extensification. Landscape Urban Plan. 46, 117–123.
MacDonald, D., Crabtree, J.R., Wiesinger, D., Dax, T., Stamou, N.,
Fleury, P., Gutierrez-Lazpita, J., Gibton, A., 2000. Agricultural
abandonment in mountain areas of Europe: environmental
consequences and policy response. J. Environ. Manage. 59
(1), 47–69.
Mitchell, N., Buggey, S., 2001. Protected landscapes and cultural
landscapes: taking advantage of diverse approaches. George
Wright Forum 17 (1), 35–46.
O’Rourke, E. Changes in agriculture and the environment in an
upland region of the Massif Central, France. Environ. Sci.
Policy 9 (4), this issue.
Olsson, E.G.A., Thorvaldsen, P. The eider conservation paradox
in Tautra—a new contribution to the multidimensionality
of the agricultural landscapes in Europe. Environ. Sci. Policy
9 (4), this issue.
Palang, H., Helmfrid, S., Antrop, M., Aluma¨e, H., 2005. Rural
landscapes: past processes and future strategies. Landscape
Urban Plan. 70, 3–8.
Phillips, A., 1998. The nature of cultural landscapes—a nature
conservation perspective. Landscape Res. 23 (1), 21–38.
Stenseke, M. Biodiversity and the local context. Linking
seminatural grasslands and their future use to social
aspects. Environ. Sci. Policy 9 (4), this issue.
Tress, G., Tress, B., Fry, G., 2004. Clarifying integrative research
concepts in landscape ecology. Landscape Ecol. 20, 479–493.
Vos, W., Meekes, H., 1999. Trends in European cultural
landscape development: perspectives for a sustainable
future. Landscape Urban Plan. 46, 3–14.
Wilson, O.J., Wilson, G.A., 1997. Common cause or common
concern? The role of common lands in the post-productivist
countryside. Area 29 (1), 45–58.
Zimmermann, R.C. Recording rural landscapes and their
cultural associations: some initial results and impressions.
Environ. Sci. Policy 9 (4), this issue.
Tobias Plieninger studied forestry and environmental sciences
and completed his PhD degree at the University of Freiburg (Ger-
many) in 2004, specialising in landscape management. He is now a
research fellow at the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences
and Humanities and investigates how the emergence of bioenergy
changes agriculture and forestry in rural areas. His research inter-
ests include rural development, land-use planning and landscape-
level conservation.
Franz Ho¨chtl, PhD, graduated in agricultural biology at the Uni-
versity of Stuttgart-Hohenheim (Germany) in 1997. Since 1998 he
has been working as a junior scientist at the University of Freiburg.
From 1999 to 2003 he was collaborating in two research projects
about landscape development strategies for alpine communities
in Piedmont (Italy). At present his work encompasses the analysis
of the social and ecological effects of forest expansion in south
Germany and the design of instruments for its control. Further-
more, he is the coordinator of a research project about the syner-
gies of monument and nature conservation in traditional
vineyards and historical parks.
Theo Spek is a senior researcher in landscape history and soil
science at the National Service for Archaeological Heritage Man-
agement in Amersfoort (the Netherlands), where he also leads an
interdisciplinary research programme at the interface between
heritage management and landscape studies. His research inter-
ests include landscape history of northwest Europe, anthropo-
genic soil formation and historical ecology. He is Secretary-
General of the Permanent European Conference for the Study of
the Rural Landscape (PECSRL).
e n v i r o n m e n t a l s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 9 ( 2 0 0 6 ) 3 1 7 – 3 2 1
321
Document Outline
Wyszukiwarka
Podobne podstrony:
INTERNET USE AND SOCIAL SUPPORT IN WOMEN WITH BREAST CANCER
No Man's land Gender bias and social constructivism in the diagnosis of borderline personality disor
Compare and contrast literature of Whitman and Dickinson in terms of God, man and nature
Kwiek, Marek The University and the State in Europe The Uncertain Future of the Traditional Social
The Name and Nature of Translation Studies In James S Holmes
Kwiek, Marek The University and the State in a Global Age Renegotiating the Traditional Social Cont
Pye D Polarised light in science and nature (IOP)(133s)
Phillip Cary Inner Grace Augustine in the Traditions of Plato and Paul 2008
No Man s land Gender bias and social constructivism in the diagnosis of borderline personality disor
Ziyaeemehr, Kumar, Abdullah Use and Non use of Humor in Academic ESL Classrooms
Tsitsika i in (2009) Internet use and misuse a multivariate regresion analysis of the predictice fa
How to use format function built in U100version emulator and
the development and use of the eight precepts for lay practitioners, Upāsakas and Upāsikās in therav
The development and use of the eight precepts for lay practitioners, Upāsakas and Upāsikās in Therav
Functional Origins of Religious Concepts Ontological and Strategic Selection in Evolved Minds
2008 4 JUL Emerging and Reemerging Viruses in Dogs and Cats
Angielski tematy Performance appraisal and its role in business 1
Kissoudi P Sport, Politics and International Relations in Twentieth Century
więcej podobnych podstron