How can Landscape Architecture contribute to a new professional free market?

Landscape Architecture for Landscape Architects Forums PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE How can Landscape Architecture contribute to a new professional free market?

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 33 total)
  • Author
  • #157317
    Gabino Carballo

    But you cannot tell me what law specifically protects Landscape Architecture?

    Basically, Portugal rules and Europe is shit, in your opinion. That’s about it.

    I am sorry but I am responsible for your inferiority complex.

    European Directives are binding, for your information.

    Stop making stuff up, please.

    Andrew Garulay, RLA

    I think that LA can contribute to the “free market” just like any other profession. The companies and individuals in the LA profession have to look at what needs there are in the current economy and find a way to be valued by the people with those needs. You supply to an existing demand in a free market.


    Coming up with new regulations and requirements is not a “free market” solution. If regulation is the goal, the question needs to be rewritten.

    Gabino Carballo

    I think that you have a problem.

    Gabino Carballo

    How would you rewrite it?

    Landscape Architecture is not regulated, and is therefore outside the professional market.

    Architecture and Engineering are regulated and enjoy all the advantages of free market.

    Why professional regulation is incompatible with a free market in the light of these events?

    Gabino Carballo

    Can you please copy my racist comments here, so I can see them?

    Maybe you haven’t noticed but my surname, Carballo, is the Galician spelling of Carvalho.

    My father’s ancestors come from Camba, north of the Portuguese border and they themselves haul from Portugal.

    How can I be racist, when I have a considerable amount in Portuguese in me, is beyond me. Suit yourself.

    As for your knowledge of Portuguese legislation and professional regulation, you make me laugh. You know nothing about your country.

    Shut up and get working.

    Gabino Carballo

    As I said, you have a problem.

    I told you to shut up because your are calling me a racist.

    I will say again, shut up and get working, your country is bankrupt.

    As far as I am concerned, there is nothing to defend.

    There is either a law that regulates Landscape Architecture as a profession in Portugal or there is not. All the Portuguese Landscape Architects that I know say that there is not and I know a few.

    The European database of regulated professions says that there are only five countries that regulate LA. You can check this at the EU website or write to the Commissioner Michel Barnier, as we have done.

    You say that there is one law regulating Landscape Architecture and you mention an article of it (theoretically, because I don’t know where it comes from)

    I would like to know what law is that one, what date it is from and what is about and where i can find it so we can write to the Commissioner at the IMCO and ensure that Portugal is included in the database.

    This will have advantages for other European countries that do not list LA as a profession. All precedents count.

    Your reply to all this is something to do with Brazil, countries in Africa, Portugal being better off without Europe, etc.

    You clearly are incapable of providing any coherent information.

    You want me to believe what you say simply because you are Portuguese.

    I don’t even know if you are Portuguese.

    You could be a Spaniard trying to embarrass Portugal.

    You certainly behave like one.

    Andrew Garulay, RLA

    Registration, in my opinion, should be designed to meet a set of criteria that is valued in the market place so that those looking for people who are identified to meet such a standard can be confident that a registered (licensed, certified, or whatever you want to call it) LA meets that standard.


    If there is to be a new standard to be made, it should overwhelmingly be influenced by what is valued by people who are currently developing land.


    There has been a tendency, in my opinion, at least here in the US, to try to force the market to use LAs through regulation and denying others from being able to do certain things under the guise that only an LA is qualified. That is not free market.


    Another mistake that I believe is being made here is to try to project a public image to appeal to the masses which is not necessarily appealing to many people who would otherwise hire us – most notably an image of putting the agenda of the environmental movement. above all other values that in many cases scares developers away from our profession.


    The answer to your question “How can Landscape Architecture contribute to a new professional free market?” is to be responsive to it. It is that simple.

    Your second question “how would you rewrite it?” I can not answer because I do not know the market over there, thus could not write a standard that could be responsive to it.

    Andrew Garulay, RLA

    … and we can do so while being good stewards of the environment.

    Andrew Garulay, RLA

    I sat in a hearing room as part of the civil engineer’s staff with a group of developers and attorneys prior to a hearing where no one was aware that I was an LA. One attorney suggested that an LA should be brought in on the project. That set off a negative clamoring by the developers who did not want “someone turning the project into a “bunny park” at the expense of what was necessary for the project. The project was being heavily regulated by the regional commission that regulates development of regional impact and all standards were going to be met in order to gain approval no matter who did the work. It turned out that they had already hired an LAwithout knowing it (me).


    Many people think you are either with the environmental movement 100% or you are going to do everything to rape and pillage mother nature. The truth is that most, if not all, in this field are sensitive to the environment and do a great job and blending the objectives of a developer (anyone building anything) with good stewardship. There is no reason outside of ego to jump up and down screaming about the environment. If you want to participate in designing, you have to be effective at gaining the results that those investing in it find valuable. Meeting the needs of regulatory bodies is a hugely valued skill along with all else that makes a site profitable.

    Gabino Carballo

    Ok, I can see what you are saying, but I guess that there is a misunderstanding.

    Technically, in European English legal speak”regulation” of a profession is simply the set of rules and laws that govern attaining a certain qualification, acquiring some experience in a structured environment and then being able to practice with legal guarantees ie: having a form of professional insurance that may cover yourself or clients if something goes wrong.

    I guess that the three letters after your name imply that you are a “Registered Landscape Architect”, possibly from Australia.

    When I was in Britain I acquired the CMLI letters, which is a regulated title and can only be used by those that the Landscape Institute says that may use the title.

    This is what we mean by regulation.

    In this context, “Regulation” does not mean exclusivity to practice. It means ability to carry out the work we can do without obstacles.

    You say “The answer to your question “How can Landscape Architecture contribute to a new professional free market?” is to be responsive to it. It is that simple”

    The problem is that European professional markets do not work like that. You cannot enter into a contract for quite a few projects if you do not hold a regulated professional title, and you cannot obtain insurance to cover your professional activity.

    This is what we are seeking to reverse.

    You could say “Well, then ask for deregulation” but the problem is that the list of regulated professions is huge, vast and means asking 300 million people to give up their current legal system.

    So we are asking to be regulated, so 10.000 people or so, can lend professional services freely, without having to use architects and engineers as middle men.

    I hope this is clear now.

    Andrew Garulay, RLA

    It is and was clear. I’m suggesting that if you are trying to put forth standards to meet for a new professional license, those standards should be things that are valued by those whom are in the best position to need landscape architecture type services. In other words, don’t set standards that are more idealistic and appealing to public image and not so appealing to a developer who may have a choice of hiring an engineer or architect instead.


    Here in the US, our professional society has put more into portraying the glamour of landscape architecture in many instances, instead of the nuts and bolts of what we can do as team players for developers. The same holds true at the universities who recruit new students. Developers are portrayed as adversaries in some circumstances.


    We have a saying in some circles “don’t crap where you eat” or something similar. Others use the phrase “don’t bite the hand that feeds you”.


    All I’m saying is that if you are active in shaping the standards, do so with the intent of becoming appealing to those who may use your services rather than to glamourize the profession.


    I hope this is also clear.

    Gabino Carballo

    It is pretty clear.

    I think that we are coming from the same angle because we can see that the people not very happy about this move, about getting a professional license, are the people who show up in magazines and nice pictures with expensive projects that only look good on websites.

    I’ll here our latest post, which I think depicts the situation in Europe pretty well.

    Andrew Garulay, RLA

    Maybe we are in a habit of looking at the profession from the inside out and from the government down? Too many other professions and academia seem to have something to lose by making it a recognised profession.


    Well, if the profession has value, which I believe it does, it makes more sense to go to those who value it or who will value it in order to identify exactly the key knowledge, skills, and abilities that those people would value enough to embrace this profession.


    Who are those people? Our would be clients.They are the only ones who really matter if the profession is to be viable. Build the power of the profession from the engine that supplies the need for such work. Don’t concentrate on what we wish the profession should be, but meeting the needs are that already exist. Put the catch basin where the water is running to instead of trying to make the water go up hill.


    Instead, we spend our time trying to impress the general public, government, educators, architects, and engineers … why? They are not going to hire you or me.


    Gabino Carballo

    Hi all,

    As in Spain, it looks like Brazilian Landscape Architects are working tirelessly to achieve full recognition for Landscape Architecture as a profession in Brazil.

    Landscape Architects have already access to a number of graduate and postgraduate studies in Brazil, and there are new ones emerging. Sadly, they  lack full professional regulation and the ability to obtain licensure. It has been known for a while that Brazilian Landscape Architects Brazil need enabling laws to apply for licensure.

    Such a law is being pushed though the Brazilian house of representatives, the Draft Bill 2043/2011. This move enjoys CLARB’s support, alongside Stephanie Landregan’s ASLA President Elect.

    This salutary process is being strongly resisted by Architect’s professional body ABAP. They claim Architects and Town Planners have sole right to practice Landscape Architecture in Brazil.

    ABAP has even used New York’s Highline as an argument AGAINST Landscape Architects, as you can see in this video in the minute 14:49. This is a cynical assault on Landscape Architects, paid for with our own money!

    You can read more here:


    Hi Gabino;

    If I’m not mistaken….there are some very large elite LA firms here in the U.S.A… AECOM, Belt Collins, EDSA…..many, many more who have branch offices all over the World…including in Europe.  I guess, I’m just native….didn’t realize there were “issues” with our profession in Europe.

    I will say this….growing up, I knew I wanted to be a designer (like my Dad).  But, I didn’t know which of the various design fields I really would be most interested in.  At first, I thought being an Architect was the way to go.  But, 18 mos. out of high school, I enlisted in the U.S. Navy and was assigned to a U.S. aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean Sea……for 4 yrs.  Our ship anchored a couple miles off the coast at cities like Barcelona, Cannes, Naples, Athens, Palma de Mallorca, Venice, Rhodes…..many other cities in Southern Europe.  I didn’t realize it at the time, but I was exposed to “Landscape Architectural History”… was all around me.  A few months after I was Honorably Discharged….I decided to study Landscape Architecture at Texas A&M University.  My decision to study Landscape Architecture was a direct effect from my 4 years of my experiences in seeing much of Southern Europe.

    Sounds like (for whatever reason/s)….politics are getting in the way of Landscape Architecture in Europe.  Doesn’t make sense to me…..Europe is where so much of our profession has its’ beginnings.



Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 33 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Lost Password