Next Article in Journal
Scale-Dependent Diversity Patterns in Subalpine Grasslands: Homogenization vs. Complexity
Previous Article in Journal
Factors Shaping Biodiversity in Urban Voids: A Systematic Literature Review
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Response of Dung Beetle Communities to Land Use Change in the Brazilian Cerrado
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Land
Volume 14
Issue 4
10.3390/land14040822
land-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Agricultural Terraced Areas in the Tuscan Archipelago (Italy): Mapping, Consistency, and Territorial Analysis

by
Leonardo Conti
,
Paolo Armanasco
*,
Caterina Sottili
,
Stefano Camiciottoli
,
Donato Liberto
,
Michele Moretta
,
Alberto Masoni
and
Enrico Palchetti
Department of Agriculture, Food, Environment and Forestry, University of Florence, Piazzale delle Cascine 18, 50144 Florence, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Land 2025, 14(4), 822; https://doi.org/10.3390/land14040822
Submission received: 19 February 2025 / Revised: 26 March 2025 / Accepted: 7 April 2025 / Published: 10 April 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Agroforestry Systems for Biodiversity and Landscape Conservation)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Terraced systems represent a valuable resource, increasing productive areas on steep slopes often unsuitable for cultivation. Over the years, these ecosystems have been recognised as having functions beyond agronomic value, such as hydrogeological, historical-cultural, economic, and biodiversity conservation. This research intends to contribute to mapping the terraced areas of the Tuscan Archipelago to estimate the areas falling within four of the seven islands of the Archipelago. In addition to a quantitative analysis, terraced systems were studied in terms of morphological and anthropic parameters, which may influence their functionality or cultivation abandonment. The analyses were conducted in a GIS environment, using the Tuscany Region Spatial Information Database and georeferenced orthophotos acquired from drone field surveys. Through the spatial analyses, it was possible to identify the distribution of the terraced system concerning parameters such as slope, altitude, aspect, distance from road networks and land fragmentation, providing a key to understanding how these parameters may influence the causes of conservation or abandonment of these fragile landscapes. Analyses of the terraced areas showed that the prevalent slopes are between 10 and 30% and that the altitude is variable depending on the island but predominantly between 0 and 200 m. Exposure was found to be the most heterogeneous parameter, and a strong relationship emerged between the functional abandonment of agricultural terraced areas and the distance from road networks. Furthermore, the land register analysis revealed a high degree of land fragmentation, which complicates the management and conservation of terraced systems.

1. Introduction

The Italian landscape [1,2,3], many continental European regions and the Mediterranean basin [4,5,6,7,8,9], Central and South America [10,11], the Asian continent [12,13,14], and Sub-Saharan East Africa [15], are characterised by the presence of terraced slopes with dry stone walls, which were created over the centuries as a system of transforming steep slopes to extend areas usable for agricultural purposes, but also as a method of controlling erosive or landslide phenomena [16]. Dry stone construction works are the result of many centuries of work and a stone culture that has developed in the various territories in relation to the peculiarities of natural and socio-economic resources [17,18,19], as well as to the changing historical circumstances, maturing, and therefore formal expressions closely linked to the place [20].
The practice of terracing would have developed from the cereal-growing areas of the Near East between 9000 and 5000 years ago [21,22]. Due to the tradition of rice cultivation, the technique then spread first eastwards to northern Indochina, then westwards to the Mediterranean [23], and from there to the Atlantic coasts of the Iberian Peninsula, then to the northwestern portion of the African continent and to the British Isles [24].
The terraces thus represent evidence of agriculture that involved the difficult cultivation of steep slopes, which was the main economic activity for most of the inhabitants of rural areas, such as those of the islands of the Tuscan Archipelago, where the land’s conformation does not provide large flat surfaces or at least easy access. This is a fragile cultural heritage because conservation requires constant maintenance work, which is no longer exercised except in a few rare cases [25,26]. Dry stone walls are also used to delimit properties, protect plant growth and development by creating favourable microclimates, regulate water, and create soil and interstitial water storage structures [27]; the latter are key factors in Mediterranean areas, characterised by water scarcity in the summer months and intense rainfall with often destructive effects [28].
Historical finds discovered on the islands of the Tuscan Archipelago suggest that the ancient inhabitants of these lands did not know how to navigate [29]. This is because, in pre-Neolithic times, these were not yet islands: Elba, Capraia, Gorgona, Montecristo, and Pianosa formed a single elongated peninsula that later separated, giving rise to the present conformation. Starting from Napoleon’s exile (1814), the islands of the Tuscan Archipelago began to be exploited as penal colonies, hosting criminals and political prisoners from all the kingdoms of Europe. In 1856, Pianosa became the first penal colony in Italy, followed in 1973 by Capraia [30]. This particular condition has preserved these islands by isolating them from human activity. It has allowed the conservation of their peculiar ecosystems, increasing their naturalistic and geo-environmental value and interest. Through forced labour, many dry stone walls were built (even of considerable size, such as those on the island of Capraia), which allowed the expansion of the areas belonging to the prisons and the agricultural surfaces to be cultivated, destined for the sustenance of prisoners and staff [31].
Since the 1950s, this situation has undergone a profound change. In fact, due to the low profitability of marginal areas and the agriculture practised there, there was a strong recall of the workforce towards urban centres by industrial and tertiary activities. With the rural exodus, people have abandoned many hillsides and low mountain lands, often carved out precisely on the slopes, most subject to the destabilising action of weather agents [32]. The efforts made to contrast erosion, created over centuries of experience and laboriously maintained, have been abandoned and, without maintenance, have suffered degradation [33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43]. In addition, the agricultural policies carried out in Europe and Italy in recent decades have encouraged the gradual abandonment of traditional farming systems, which are less important from economic and productive points of view but crucial for the landscape [44,45,46].
Fortunately, this approach is slowly changing in recent years. The historical and cultural importance of these structures was definitely recognised in 2018 as the “Art of dry-stone walling, knowledge and techniques” and inscribed in the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage List in the category of cultural landscapes as a transnational element of eight countries: Croatia, Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy, Slovenia, Spain, and Switzerland [47]. At the Italian legislative level, protection regulations paid little attention to their conservation; in many cases, the landscape constraint applied to forests grown on abandoned terraces prevented their restoration; the system of protected areas often favoured abandonment and renaturalisation rather than the recovery of the rural landscape. On the contrary, Legislation No. 34/2018, art. 5, paragraph 2a/b [48] recognises the arboreal and shrub surfaces that originated following processes of abandonment of pre-existing agricultural–forestry–pastoral activities, deserving of protection and recovery actions if identified as rural landscapes of historical interest and included in the National Register of Historic Rural Landscapes [49].
This work aimed to study the mapping, consistency, and territorial analysis of the terraced agricultural areas of the Tuscan Archipelago within the framework of the Integrated Territorial Project (PIT) financed by the PSR of the Region of Tuscany “Clever Land on Elba, Capraia and Giglio Islands (CLEI)”. Specifically, dry stone terraced land distribution was estimated in terms of occupied surfaces, slope, altitude, aspect, distance from the road network, and parcelling. This work intends to complete the study conducted by Agnoletti et al., 2015 [2], conducted in the peninsular part of the Tuscany Region, and to contribute to the systematic mapping of terraced areas in the Italian peninsula [50,51], although still fragmentary and limited to regional and local areas [52,53,54,55,56,57]. Similar studies have also been conducted in other countries: In most cases, research has focused on the spatial distribution of agricultural terraced areas through the use of GIS, as in Portugal [58], Greece [5], Croatia [59], Slovenia [60,61], Malta [62], China [63], and Canary Islands [64]. Some of these studies have analysed the state of agricultural use or abandonment of terraced areas, such as Portugal [58], China [63], and Peru [65]; others have correlated the presence of terraces with environmental and anthropogenic variables, including land use, altimetry, and land slope, identifying the slope as a key factor in the typology and distribution of terraced areas [5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,65].

2. Materials and Methods

Given the complexity of the research, which aims to estimate the consistency of terraced landscapes within the Tuscan Archipelago, an approach combining digital cartographic resources, where present and exhaustive, and in situ aerophotogrammetric surveying with drones was adopted. Surveys conducted directly on-site played a key role in identifying areas that could not be easily identified using digital cartography only. When the data were acquired, they were entered into a dedicated GIS (Geographical Information System) to manage and process the geospatial data and provide a complete information framework for the quantitative analysis of the terraced areas.

2.1. Study Area

The Tuscan Archipelago is located close to the Tuscan coast, between Livorno and the Argentario Promontory (Figure 1a). The major islands of the Archipelago are seven in total, from north to south, in order: Gorgona, Capraia, Elba, Pianosa, Montecristo, Giglio, and Giannutri. To these are added some smaller islets for a total surface area of approximately 300 km2 [66]. All the islands, except Pianosa and Giannutri, have a very lively and usually steep relief. However, they reach modest heights, apart from the exceptional culmination of Monte Capanne in western Elba, which rises to 1018 m. Given the Archipelago’s natural vocation for tourism, the territory’s government’s mission is to conserve the environment; in this regard, on 22 July 1996, the Tuscan Archipelago National Park was established [67]. The park falls within the provinces of Livorno and Grosseto and is the largest marine park in the Mediterranean, with one-fifth of Italy’s protected marine area. It involves the protection of 56,766 ha of sea and 17,887 ha of land. The predominant vegetation in the park consists of the typical Mediterranean scrub species. The most widely distributed vegetation types in the non-cultivated areas are characterised by medium-high scrub consisting of shrubs such as strawberry tree (Arbutus unedo), Phoenician juniper (Juniperus phoenicea), heather (Erica sp.), lentisk (Pistacia lentiscus), and myrtle (Myrtus communis) [68]. The climate is characterised by alternating hot and mostly dry summers, with sometimes considerable humidity due to the close presence of the sea, and fairly mild and windy winters. Rainfall, as typically occurs in Mediterranean climates, is mainly distributed in the intermediate and winter seasons, while it is almost absent in the summer [69]. The study area is represented by four islands of the Tuscan Archipelago, in order of surface area: Elba Island (223.52 km2), Giglio Island (21.21 km2), Capraia Island (about 20 km2), and Gorgona Island (2.23 km2). Pianosa, Montecristo, and Giannutri were excluded from the survey because they do not have agricultural terraced areas.
Figure 1b shows one of the georeferenced orthophotos of a terraced agricultural area on Giglio Island, acquired from drone field surveys and used to identify the distribution of the terraced system.
Figure 1c shows the recovery of an abandoned terraced area on Capraia Island after the cutting of shrub vegetation, while Figure 1d shows a terraced area that has already been recovered and cultivated as a vineyard on Capraia Island.

2.2. Digital Mapping

The quantitative analysis of terraced agricultural systems was conducted in a GIS (Geographic Information System) environment. In order to use this tool, a digital cartography dataset containing specific information on the studied territorial context was used. The digital cartography was downloaded from the Web Map Service (WMS) of the regional geoportal of the Tuscany Region (Geoscopio). The reported data are part of the Spatial Information Database governed by Regional Law 65/2014 [70]. Table 1 shows the digital cartography supports used.
The preliminary boundaries of the areas of interest were drawn using the information layers of the Tuscany Region dataset and the photointerpretation of the OPCs (aerial image plotting). On-site inspections were conducted to verify their correct interpretation to validate their reliability.

2.3. Hardware: Matrice 300 RTK

It was necessary to conduct detailed surveys using a drone to circumscribe the boundaries of the terraced areas, especially those that could not be well interpreted through cartography. Specifically, a Matrice 300 RTK drone (DJI Enterprise) was used, equipped with an FPV (First-Person View) camera, with a resolution of 960 pixels, 145° field of view and 30 fp (frames per second). The missions were planned using a dedicated program (DJI Pilot), which set the main flight parameters (e.g., overside, overlap, image resolution, height, and flight time).

2.4. Software: QGIS e 3DF Zephyr

The open-source Geographic Information System used for acquiring, managing and analysing geospatial data was QGIS (Quantum Geographic Information System), version 3.34.9 (Prizren). 3DF Zephyr (developed by 3Dflow), on the other hand, was the photogrammetry and 3D modelling software that made it possible to create three-dimensional models from images acquired from drones. It is a powerful and flexible tool for processing photogrammetric data and generating georeferenced 3D models, orthophotos and point clouds from a set of aerial or ground photos.

2.5. Analysis Methodology

The methodology of the research activity concerned the identification of terraced agricultural areas through the information provided by the linear element extracted from the vector CTRs and referred to the “dry stone walls” (coded by the code 0504). Other information layers were then superimposed on this information (e.g., Terraced areas dataset, Terracing dataset and Landscape character map) obtained through the WMSs of the Tuscany Region geoportal. Starting from these data, it was possible to identify the areas with the presence of terraced infrastructures preliminarily. Thanks to the surveys conducted in the field using the drone, the polygonisation of the areas was made more accurate. This validated the state previously identified by photo-interpretation and specific datasets. During this phase, uncertainty situations were also verified.
The spatial processing of territorial analysis, performed to characterise the terraced areas, concerned the following morphological characteristics: altitude, slope, and aspect. These parameters were calculated using the QGIS software package starting from the DTM raster obtained from the regional geoportal of Tuscany. This was cut on the terraced polygons of each island. For this purpose, some plugins and processing tools of the software were used until a distribution in hectares of the individual pixels belonging to the different classes of the parameters investigated was developed.
After these elaborations of morphological characterisation of the territory, some analyses were performed concerning the study of the road graph within the polygons. Using this information layer, available in vector format and subsequently rasterised, it was possible to obtain distance values of the terraced areas from the roads within the polygons analysed using the Proximity tool (SAGA). This analysis aimed to understand whether the distance from the road network influences the abandonment or cultivation of terraced areas.
The last information layer considered was the cadastral particles, which were used to study the fragmentation within individual terraced areas. Starting from the raster file available in the Tuscany Region’s geoportal, this information layer was vectorised. It was then overlapped on the terraced polygons and processed in terms of the total number of particles belonging to the identified polygons and their surface extension. Figure 2 shows the flowchart of the overall analysis methodology.

3. Results

By identifying terraced areas within the four analysed islands of the Tuscan Archipelago, it was possible to estimate the extension of terraced areas in relation to the total island surface. This value, estimated at 2.74% of the total area (about 444 ha), implemented the estimate performed by Agnoletti et al. [2] in peninsular Tuscany (4.5% of the total area, about 102,756 ha). From the distribution analysis of terraced areas falling within the four islands, the following ratios between terraced surface and total surface emerged: Gorgona Island (23 ha—10.3%), Giglio Island (127.77 ha—6%), Capraia Island (65.54 ha—3.3%), and Elba Island (227.2 ha—1.2%). These results show that the territory most affected by terraced systems, in percentage terms, corresponds to Gorgona Island, followed by Giglio Island. Even if Elba Island has a significantly lower percentage of terraced areas, its importance is still high, thanks to a larger surface area.

3.1. Morphological Parameter Results

3.1.1. Slope

From the analyses performed, it was possible to obtain the slope distribution over the entire territory of the studied islands and to develop the thematic layouts (Figure 3):
The clipping of the slope raster on the terraced areas allowed the creation of reports of the distribution values of the terraced areas’ surface in different slope classes (Figure 4): the most representative slope classes for the four islands are the second and third (86.66% of terraced areas), with 205.41 ha for slopes between 10 and 20%, and 179 ha for slopes between 20 and 30%, respectively. The terraced areas with slopes lower than 10% were modest (<20 ha for Elba Island and lower than 16 ha for the other three islands). Equally small were the surfaces with slopes between 30 and 40% and between 40 and 60%; these can be attributed to the greater difficulty of building dry stone walls at steep slopes, as well as the cultivation and maintenance operations on the structures themselves. It should be noted that the sixth class (60–80% slope) is entirely absent from the study areas.

3.1.2. Altitude

The altitude profiles were extrapolated from the DTM and, through subsequent reclassification, were divided into altitude classes. From the altitudinal data, the surface area distributions of the terraced areas were elaborated for each island (Figure 5); comparing the data, it can be seen that the situation is quite heterogeneous except for Capraia Island and Giglio Island, where terraced areas are mainly distributed in the hilly areas at 100–200 m and 200–300 m (56.25 ha on Capraia and 87.42 ha on Giglio). On Gorgona and Elba, however, terraced areas are mainly distributed in the lower altitude bands (0–100 m and 100–200 m). Within these two altitude classes fall all the terraced areas surveyed (about 23 ha for Gorgona Island and about 206.52 ha for Elba Island).
The prevailing distribution of terraced areas in peninsular Tuscany [2], appears to be in the hilly area (200–400 m), followed by the lowest altitude area (0–200 m); this shows how the development of terraced systems has been quite similar for two different territorial realities.

3.1.3. Aspect

The last analysis of geomorphological parameters concerned the spatial distribution of terraced areas in relation to the aspect parameter (Figure 6). Unlike the analysed variables until now, this parameter presents the greatest inhomogeneity between the four islands: the results obtained (Figure 7) show similar distributions between Gorgona Island and Capraia Island, with a prevalence of terraced areas with north-east/east/south-east aspect, occupying in the first case 67.56%, while in the second case 73.12% (with a surface area of 15.54 ha and 47.92 ha, respectively). Although not particularly effective in exploiting solar radiation, these locations are confined to the extent of the two islands’ road network.
The situation on Giglio Island and Elba Island, however, is different. On these islands, the terraced areas are mainly situated with a south/southwest/west aspect. Specifically, for Giglio Island, these aspect classes occupy 67.66% of the total surface area (86.45 ha), with a more significant predominance of the western aspect (44.76 ha). These aspects classes are predominant on Elba Island, occupying about 56.24% of the total (127.77 ha), with a marked prevalence of terraced areas with a southern aspect (48.18 ha). These aspects are particularly suitable for crops, as they maximise solar radiation for photosynthetic purposes.

3.2. Anthropic Parameters Results

3.2.1. Road Network Analysis

After the morphological parameters, an anthropogenic parameter, the road network of the Archipelago Islands, was investigated. This parameter could be directly related to the preferential development of some areas over others. The road network was investigated to find a possible connection between terraces’ distance from asphalted roads and their possible state of conservation (cultivated or uncultivated). To conduct this analysis, it was first necessary to understand which terraced areas were cultivated and which were not through the photointerpretation of orthophotos and drone surveys.
In this case, the analysis (Figure 8) was produced by cutting the information layer of the distance of the terraces from the roads on the terraced polygons. Through the reclassification tool, seven distance classes to roads were obtained. By observing the layout, it is possible to see how classes 5 (400–500 m), 6 (500–600 m), and 7 (600–700 m) occur sporadically in the cartographic representation. These data provide an initial key to understanding the importance of the road network in the proximity of the terraced areas; the easy accessibility to these sites is important both during construction and during the cultivation and maintenance of these areas.
Analysing in detail the distribution graphs relating to the road network for each island (Figure 9), it is evident that Gorgona Island, the most extreme distance class (100–150 m), has a very low distribution frequency (0.4 ha). Terraced areas classifiable between 0 and 50 m (16.9 ha) and 50–100 m (3.9 ha) from the road network are most represented, even if not cultivated. For the other three islands, a tendency for terraces to develop within 300 m of roads emerged (86.7% of the total terraced area). These data confirmed how the distance from the roads influenced the construction of dry stone terraces.
Concerning the possible correlation between the cultivated and abandoned terraced areas based on their proximity to roads, it emerged that where terraces are more than 300 m away from roads, these are predominantly abandoned (36 ha against 8.4 ha cultivated), except for Capraia Island. Here, a partial balance exists between cultivated vineyard areas (4.85 ha) and uncultivated areas (3.23 ha). Even below 300 m from the roads, the distribution of cultivated terraced areas is 168 ha against 210 ha of abandoned areas. This highlights an overall negative balance, except for Elba Island (107.9 ha cultivated against 93.26 ha uncultivated).

3.2.2. Particles Analysis

The overlapping of the cadastral particles with the terraced areas polygons revealed a high degree of land fragmentation (Figure 10).
By analysing the data (Table 2), it is possible to observe how the total number of terraced particles and their total extension follow a trend directly proportional to the island’s size.
Starting from what has been described, the average particle extension (ha) of the terraced areas and the average number of particles in each terraced area were calculated for each island. Gorgona Island and Capraia Island, although characterised by very different surface extensions, present similar characteristics of the average particle surface (1.4 to 1.7 ha), with 2–3 particles per terraced area. Elba Island has a particle surface area of less than one hectare and a considerable frequency of particles on each terraced area (about 8). Particularly interesting are the data from Giglio Island, where, despite its size (23.8 km2), similar to Capraia Island (19 km2), the particle division is very pronounced and can be assimilated to land fragmentation. The average particle size is, in fact, around 0.064 ha, which is correlated with a high average number of particles within the terraced areas of 11.74.

4. Discussion

The results showed that terraced systems occupy approximately 2.74% (about 444 ha) of the total surface area of the islands analysed. Subsequent territorial analyses of the morphological and anthropic parameters allowed us to consider the spatial distribution of the surveyed terraced areas.

4.1. Morphological Parameter Discussion

Specifically, from the slope analysis, it emerged that the most present classes are between 10 and 20% between and 20 and 30% (86.66% of the total, equal to 384.41 ha). Terraces on moderate slopes facilitate cultivation practices and make the artefact construction and maintenance phases easier. The spatial distribution results align with what was reported by Agnoletti et al. (2015) [2] on the peninsular territory of the Tuscany Region. Similar slope values (15–30%) have been found in about half of the terraced vineyards in Slovenia [61], in about 70% of the terraced areas on La Gomera Island [65] and also in the terraced systems in Shouf Biosphere Reserve, Lebanon [4]. Terraced areas on slopes of between 15 and 30% predominate in some areas (Bisagno basin) of the Liguria Region [3], as well as those currently active in the Costa Viola area (Calabria), where until the end of the XX century the cultivated surfaces with vineyards and orchards occupied slopes between 30 and 50% [37]. The slope can be considered a key parameter for the functional conservation of terraced systems, especially concerning the increasing risks of soil erosion originating on slopes greater than 25%, often in a state of agricultural abandonment [71].
The distribution of terraced areas in terms of altitude ranges differs between islands: the terraced areas of Capraia Island and Giglio Island are mainly present in hilly areas between 100 and 300 m, with 56.25 ha and 87.42 ha, respectively, while Gorgona Island and Elba Island the terraced areas are mainly distributed at altitudes between 0 and 200 m, with 23.10 ha and 206.52 ha, respectively. These values follow the hilly range distributions of terraced systems found in peninsular Tuscany [2]. Average values between 200 and 700 m have been studied in most coastal [37,56] and piedmont areas near valleys or mountain plains [72]. These altitudes often combine favourable climatic characteristics for cultivation (vineyards, olive groves, and orchards) with good site accessibility.
Among the morphological parameters analysed, the aspect presents the greatest heterogeneity among the various islands: Gorgona Island (15.54 ha) and Capraia Island (47.92 ha) present a prevalence of terraced areas with north-east/east/south-east aspect.
On the contrary, the terraced areas of Giglio Island (86.45) and Elba Island (127.75) are mainly located with a south/south-west/west aspect, exploiting a better energy yield for photosynthetic purposes. The limited diffusion of the road network and residential settlements only in the north-eastern areas of Gorgona Island and Capraia Island could cause terraced systems’ distribution. On the contrary, the prevailing southern aspects maximise sunlight on Giglio Island and Elba Island, as highlighted in other research [2,56].

4.2. Anthropic Parameters Discussion

The road network analysis showed that most of the terraced areas on the islands (86.70%) are no further than 300 m from asphalted roads. On the other hand, it must be emphasised that a strong correlation exists between the functional abandonment of agricultural areas and the distance from road networks greater than 300 metres. These data follow what has already been highlighted by Modica et al. [37] for the Calabrian Costa Viola, while Corrieri et al. [4] report a most significant presence of terraced systems (65%) within 50 m of roads for the Shouf Biosphere Reserve, Lebanon. This aspect can be considered by farmers as a discriminating factor for abandoning or cultivating terraced areas.
The analysis performed on the cadastral register with particles overlapping on the terraced areas has revealed high land fragmentation in the study area; in particular, Giglio Island shows a considerable parcellation per terraced area. It should be noted that the average extension of the particles is significantly less than one hectare for Elba Island and Giglio Island, as highlighted for Costa Viola [37]. Larger areas and less affected by extreme parcelling would be easier to maintain, as a single owner could manage them.

4.3. Which Management Strategies Should Be Adopted for the Conservation of Terraced Landscapes?

The results obtained from the territorial analyses highlight the distribution trend of terraced areas in terms of the analysis of morphological and anthropic parameters. However, the authors suggest management strategies for conserving and enhancing terraced landscapes, not limited to agronomic functions or studying morphological features. For this reason, a complex and systemic definition of terraced slopes is suggested, following an intersectoral and multifunctional approach. Terraced landscapes do not have a merely productive role (although this remains an indispensable function) but are systems for the management and control of quality territories, concretising the sustainability triangle and bringing together economic, environmental, and socio-cultural values [73,74,75]. In order to ensure the conservation of terraced landscapes, integrated land management strategies based on traditional low-energy agricultural practices, hydrogeological defence and territorial planning are needed; this is necessary to promote the socio-economic recovery and tourist enhancement of rural territories and their productions, as well as to contrast the current climate crisis. The recovery and active management of terraces can be a flywheel for the local economy, creating new opportunities for sustainable development with the involvement of institutions, farmers, technicians, and local communities, supported by European and national funds for landscape protection. In this context, Tuscany’s coastal terraces are a tangible example of traditional landscapes to be preserved, capable of increasing and diversifying the tourism offer, connected, for example, to the knowledge of certified local wine productions (CDO Elba, CGDO Aleatico Passito dell’Elba, CDO Ansonica Costa dell’Argentario) obtained on the terraced vineyards of the Archipelago [73]. Implementing similar virtuous paths would represent a concrete strategy to enhance terraced landscapes’ cultural, environmental, and economic potential, contrasting abandonment phenomena.

5. Conclusions

The terraced landscapes of the Tuscan Archipelago are complex hydraulic–agricultural systems that represent the identity and founding characteristics of the places where they are located. Terraced systems are an expression of traditional agricultural knowledge and practices that have characterised communities over the centuries. Therefore, they need to be protected and managed, albeit in accordance with the cultural and temporal changes from which they originate. These landscapes must be considered dynamic realities in constant evolution, following the continuous transformation processes of the rural context.
This study aimed to provide knowledge of the agricultural terraced landscapes of the Tuscan Archipelago, presenting a first quantitative assessment of the areas occupied by these artefacts. The research aimed to map the terraced areas of the Archipelago and then conduct a territorial analysis of the surveyed areas. These data may help fill the gap in the atlas of Italian terraced areas, as studied by other authors for some Alpine, coastal, and peninsular contexts in several regions. The results show that terraced systems occupy approximately 2.74% (about 444 ha) of the total surface area of the islands analysed. Morphological and anthropic parameters analyses allow us to define the spatial distribution of the terraced areas. Specifically, it emerged that the most present slope classes are between 10 and 20% and between 20 and 30%, and the distribution of terraced areas in terms of altitude ranges differs between islands: the terraced areas of Capraia Island and Giglio Island are mainly present in hilly areas between 100 and 300 m, while Gorgona Island and Elba Island the terraced areas are mainly distributed at altitudes between 0 and 200 m. The exposure parameter presents the greatest heterogeneity among the islands, and it is also affected by the presence or absence of viability. The road network analysis showed that most of the terraced areas on the islands (86.70%) are no further than 300 m from asphalted roads. On the other hand, a strong correlation emerges between the functional abandonment of agricultural areas and the distance from road networks. Finally, the analysis performed on the cadastral register has revealed high land fragmentation in the study area: this is one aspect that complicates the running and maintenance of terraced systems.
Combining these results with those obtained in previous research focused on the land use, shape, and size of stone elements and state of conservation [76], it is possible to have a fairly exhaustive picture of the general situation of the Tuscan Archipelago for subsequent analyses. Future developments may involve surveys conducted with drones and lidar sensors in order to survey areas currently under forest cover for a complete mapping. Further elaborations could concern the creation of terraced areas risk maps, which would be developed based on some of the investigated morphological parameters and others (such as soil type, density of the terraced system, and land use). The combination of several attributes characterising terraced areas could identify areas with different levels of fragility, which would help direct potential restoration and safety interventions by governmental bodies to protect the territory from hydrogeological instability and to conserve the biodiversity associated with these structures.
In fact, in addition to the priority issues related to hydrogeological stability, it is important to remember that these dry stone wall systems also play a strategic role in biodiversity conservation (they act as true ecological corridors, hosting a microfauna composed of insects, small reptiles, and amphibians), as well as in the economic and historical–cultural promotion of territories.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, P.A. and E.P.; methodology, L.C., P.A. and E.P.; software, L.C., P.A. and D.L.; validation, L.C., P.A. and D.L.; formal analysis, L.C., P.A. and D.L.; investigation, P.A., S.C., M.M. and A.M.; resources, P.A., S.C., M.M. and A.M.; data curation, L.C., P.A. and D.L.; writing—original draft preparation, L.C., C.S. and D.L.; writing—review and editing, L.C. and C.S.; visualisation, L.C., P.A., C.S. and E.P.; supervision, L.C. and E.P.; project administration, E.P.; funding acquisition, E.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Parco Nazionale Arcipelago Toscano (funding number 973.2021) within the framework of the convention concluded with DAGRI (the Department of Agricultural, Food, Environmental and Forestry Science and Technology of the University of Florence) to conduct a survey entitled “Detailed study of the heritage of dry stone walls in the Tuscan Archipelago”.

Data Availability Statement

The data supporting the reported findings are available on Geoscope Observatory in Tuscany (https://www502.regione.toscana.it/geoscopio/cartoteca.html, accessed on 13 September 2024).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Bonardi, L. Terraced Vineyards in Europe: The Historical Persistence of Highly Specialised Regions. In World Terraced Landscapes: History, Environment, Quality of Life; Varotto, M., Bonardi, L., Tarolli, P., Eds.; Environmental History; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; Volume 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Agnoletti, M.; Conti, L.; Frezza, L.; Santoro, A. Territorial Analysis of the Agricoltural Terraced Landscapes of Tuscany (Italy): Preliminary Result. Sustainability 2015, 7, 4564–4581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Brancucci, G.; Paliaga, G. The Hazard Assessment in a Terraced Landscape: Preliminary Result of the Liguria (Italy) Case Study in the Interreg III Alpter Project; Nadim, F., Pöttler, R., Einstein, H., Klapperich, H., Kramer, S., Eds.; ECI Conference on Geohazards: Lillehammer, Norway, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  4. Corrieri, F.; Piras, F.; Abou Assi, M.; Focacci, M.; Conti, L. Terraced landscapes of the Shouf Biosphere Reserve (Lebanon): Analysis of geomorphological variables. Biodivers. Conserv. 2021, 31, 2421–2433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Bevan, A.; Conolly, J. Terraced fields and Mediterranean landscape structure: An analytical case study from Antikythera, Greece. Ecol. Model. 2011, 222, 1303–1314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ore, G.; Bruins, H.J. Design features of ancient agricultural terrace walls in the Negev desert: Human-made geodiversity. Land Degrad. Dev. 2012, 23, 409–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Petit, C.; Konold, W.; Höchtl, F. Historic terraced vineyards: Impressive witnesses of vernacular architecture. Landsc. Hist. 2012, 33, 5–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Gibson, S. Agricultural terraces and settlement expansion in the highlands of early Iron Age Palestine: Is there any correlation between the two? In Studies in the Archaeology of the Iron Age in Israel and Jordan; A&C Black: London, UK, 2001; pp. 113–146. [Google Scholar]
  9. Cots-Folch, R.; Martínez-Casasnovas, J.A.; Ramos, M.C. Land terracing for new vineyard plantations in the north-eastern Spanish Mediterranean region: Landscape effects of the EU Council Regulation policy for vineyards restructuring. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2006, 115, 88–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Borejsza, A.; Rodríguez López, I.; Frederick, C.H.D.; Bateman, M.D. Agricultural slope management and soil erosion at La Laguna, Tlaxcala, Mexico. J. Archaeol. Sci. 2008, 35, 1854–1866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Posthumus, H.; de Graaff, J. Cost–benefit analysis of bench terraces, a case study in Peru. Land Degrad. Dev. 2005, 16, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Jiang, Y.; Li, S.; Chen, W.; Cai, D.; Liu, Y. The evolution of crop cultivation and paleoenvironment in the Longji Terraces, southern China: Organic geochemical evidence from paleosols. J. Environ. Manag. 2017, 202, 524–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Cao, Y.; Wu, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Tian, J. Landscape pattern and sustainability of a 1300-year-old agricultural landscape in subtropical mountain areas, Southwestern China. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol. 2013, 20, 349–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Gardner, R.; Gerrard, J. Runoff and soil erosion on cultivated rainfed terraces in the Middle Hills of Nepal. Appl. Geogr. 2003, 23, 23–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Amsalu, A.; de Graff, J. Determinants of adoption and continued use of stone terraces for soil and water conservation in an Ethiopian highland watershed. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 61, 249–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Tarolli, P.; Preti, F.; Romano, N. Terraced landscapes: From an old best practice to a potential hazard for soil degradation due to land abandonment. Anthropocene 2014, 6, 10–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Chapagain, T.; Raizada, M.N. Agronomic Challenges and Opportunities for Smallholder Terrace Agriculture in Developing Countries. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Petanidou, T.; Kizos, T.; Soulakellis, N. Socioeconomic dimensions of changes in the agricultural landscape of the Mediterranean basin: A case study of the abandonment of cultivation terraces on Nisyros Island, Greece. Environ. Manag. 2008, 41, 250–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. García-Ruiz, J.M.; Lana-Renault, N. Hydrological and erosive consequences of farmland abandonment in Europe, with special reference to the Mediterranean region—A review. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2011, 140, 317–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Wilkinson, T.J. Archaeological Landscapes of the Near East; University of Arizona Press: Tucson, AZ, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Sandor, J.A. Ancient agricultural terraces and soils. In Footprints in the Soil: People and Ideas in Soil History; Warkentin, P.B., Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2006; pp. 505–553. [Google Scholar]
  22. Price, S.; Nixon, L. Ancient Greek agricultural terraces: Evidence from texts and archaeological survey. Am. J. Arch. 2005, 109, 665–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Galletti, C.S.; Ridder, E.; Falconer, S.E.; Fall, P.L. Maxent modeling of ancient and modern agricultural terraces in the Troodos foothills. Cyprus. Appl. Geogr. 2013, 39, 46–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Spencer, J.E.; Hale, G.A. The nature, origin and distribution of agricoltural terracing. In Pacific Viewpoint; Victoria University of Wellington: Wellington, New Zealand; John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1961; Volume 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Agnoletti, M.; Conti, L.; Frezza, L.; Monti, M.; Santoro, A. Features Analysis of Dry Stone Walls of Tuscany (Italy). Sustainability 2015, 7, 13887–13903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Wei, W.; Chen, D.; Wang, L.; Daryanto, S.; Chen, L.; Yu, Y.; Lu, Y.; Sun, G.; Feng, T. Global synthesis of the classifications, distributions, benefits and issues of terracing. Earth Sci. Rev. 2016, 159, 388–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Arnáez, J.; Lana-Renault, N.; Lasanta, T.; Ruiz-Flaño, P.; Castroviejo, J. Effects of farming terraces on hydrological and geomorphological processes—A review. Catena 2015, 128, 122–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Agnoletti, M.; Errico, A.; Santoro, A.; Dani, A.; Preti, F. Terraced Landscapes and Hydrogeological Risk. Effects of Land Abandonment in Cinque Terre (Italy) during Severe Rainfall Events. Sustainability 2019, 11, 235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Radmilli, A.M. II Popolamento Umano Dell’arcipelago Toscano Prima Dell’età Romana; Tipo-lito Valbonesi: Forlì, Italy, 1975. [Google Scholar]
  30. Gambardella, A. Le Colonie Penali Nell’arcipelago Toscano; Tra l’Ottocento e il Novecento; Ibiskos Ulivieri: Empoli, Italy, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  31. Camilleri, A.; Colombini, I.; Chelazzi, L. Evolution and management of landscapes on Mediterranean minor islands: Case studies from the Tuscan Archipelago (Italy) and Comino (Malta). In Evolution and Management of Landscapes on Mediterranean Minor Islands, 2012th ed.; Cassar, E.C.L., Ed.; Institute of Earth Systems, University of Malta: Msida, Malta, 2012; Chapter 13; pp. 169–204. [Google Scholar]
  32. Toscana, R. Ministero dei beni e delle attività culturali e del turismo. In Piano di Indirizzo Territoriale con Valenza di Piano Paesaggistico—Scheda Ambito di Paesaggio; Colline Metallifere e Elba: Tuscany, Italy, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  33. Sakellariou, M.; Psiloglou, B.E.; Giannakopoulos, C.; Mylona, P.V. Integration of Abandoned Lands in Sustainable Agriculture: The Case of Terraced Landscape Re-Cultivation in Mediterranean Island Conditions. Land 2021, 10, 457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Cicinelli, E.; Caneva, G.; Savo, V. A Review on Management Strategies of the Terraced Agricultural Systems and Conservation Actions to Maintain Cultural Landscapes around the Mediterranean Area. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Moreno-de-las-Heras, M.; Lindenberger, F.; Latron, J.; Lana-Renault, N.; Llorens, P.; Arnáez, J.; Romero-Díaz, A.; Gallart, F. Hydro-geomorphological consequences of the abandonment of agricultural terraces in the Mediterranean region: Key controlling factors and landscape stability patterns. Geomorphology 2019, 333, 73–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Tarolli, P.; Rizzo, D.; Brancucci, G. Terraced landscapes: Land abandonment, soil degradation, and suitable management. In World Terraced Landscapes: History, Environment, Quality of Life; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 195–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Modica, G.; Praticò, S.; Di Fazio, S. Abandonment of traditional terraced landscape: A change detection approach (a case study in Costa Viola, Calabria, Italy). Land. Degrad. Dev. 2017, 28, 2608–2622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Van Der Sluis, T.; Kizos, T.; Pedroli, B. Landscape change in Mediterranean farmlands: Impacts of land abandonment on cultivation terraces in Portofino (Italy) and Lesvos (Greece). J. Landsc. Ecol. Repub. 2014, 7, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Schönbrodt-Stitt, S.; Behrens, T.; Schmidt, K.; Shi, X.; Scholten, T. Degradation of cultivated bench terraces in the Three Gorges Area: Fieldmapping and datamining. Ecol. Indic. 2013, 34, 478–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Chen, S.K.; Liu, C.W.; Chen, Y.R. Assessing soil erosion in a terraced paddy field using experimental measurements and universal soil loss equation. Catena 2012, 95, 131–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ghanem, O.; Jazem, A.; Djili, K. Causes of agricultural terraces degradation in Al-Kimmah watershed (Yemen). Aust. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 2011, 5, 136–144. [Google Scholar]
  42. Lasanta, T.; Vicente-Serrano, S.M.; Cuadrat, J.M. Mountain Mediterranean landscape evolution caused by the abandonment of traditional primary activities: A study of the Spanish Pyrenees. Appl. Geogr. 2005, 25, 47–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. MacDonald, D.; Crabtree, J.R.; Wiesinger, G.; Dax, T.; Stamou, N.; Fleury, P.; Gutiérrez-Lazpita, J.; Gibon, A. Agricultural abandonment in mountain areas of Europe: Environmental consequences and policy response. J. Environ. Manag. 2000, 59, 47–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Asins Velis, S.; Arnau-Rosalen, E.; Romero-Gonzalez, J.; Calvo-Cases, A. Analysis of the consequences of the european union criteria on slope gradient for the delimitation of “areas facing natural constraints” with agricultural terraces. Ann. Annal. Istrian Mediter. Stud. Ser. Hist. Sociol. 2016, 26, 433–448. [Google Scholar]
  45. Lomba, A.; Guerra, C.; Alonso, J.; Pradinho Honrado, J.; Jongman, R.; McCracken, D. Mapping and monitoring High Nature Value farmlands: Challenges in European landscapes. J. Environ. Manag. 2014, 143, 140–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Van Der Ploeg, J.D.; Renting, H.; Brunori, G.; Knickel, K.; Mannion, J.; Marsden, T.; De Roest, K.; Sevilla-Guzmán, E.; Ventura, F. Rural Development: From Practices and Policies towards Theory. Sociol. Rural. 2000, 40, 391–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. UNESCO Intanglible Cultural Heritage List. Available online: https://ich.unesco.org/en/lists (accessed on 13 September 2024).
  48. Decreto Legislativo 3 Aprile 2018, n. 34. Testo Unico in Materia di Foreste e Filiere Forestali. (18G00060) (GU Serie Generale n.92 del 20-04-2018). Available online: https://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2018/04/20/18G00060/s (accessed on 13 September 2024).
  49. Agnoletti, M. Italian Historical Rural Landscapes. In Cultural Values for the Environment and Rural Development; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; pp. 1–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Varotto, M.; Bonardi, L.; Tarolli, P. Introduction. In World Terraced Landscapes: History, Environment, Quality of Life; Varotto, M., Bonardi, L., Tarolli, P., Eds.; Environmental History; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; Volume 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Capolupo, A.; Kooistra, L.; Boccia, L. A novel approach for detecting agricultural terraced landscapes from historical and contemporaneous photogrammetric aerial photos. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 2018, 73, 800–810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Alberti, F.; Lodatti, L. Venetian Terraced Landscapes; Regione del Veneto: Venice, Italy, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  53. Barbera, G.; Cullotta, S. An inventory approach to the assessment of main traditional landscapes in Sicily (Central Mediterranean Basin). Landsc. Res. 2012, 37, 539–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Benetti, G.; Patassini, D. Principles and Laws of Protection, Conservation and Restoration for the Terracing of the Canale di Brenta. In Terraced Landscapes of the Alps. Projects in Progress; Fontanari, E., Patassini, D., Eds.; Marsilio: Venice, Italy, 2008; pp. 104–108. [Google Scholar]
  55. Bonardi, L.; Varotto, M. Paesaggi Terrazzati d’Italia: Eredità Storiche e Nuove Prospettive; Franco Angeli: Milan, Italy, 2016; ISBN 9788891743435. [Google Scholar]
  56. Gravagnuolo, A. Valutazione e mappatura dei servizi culturali nei paesaggi terrazzati. II Caso Studio Della Costiera Amalfitana Territ. Ital. 2016, 1, 107–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Brandolini, P.; Faccini, F.; Pescetto, C. I terrazzamenti della Liguria: Un bene culturale e del paesaggio a rischio. L’Universo 2008, 88, 204–221. [Google Scholar]
  58. Marçal Gonçalves, M.; Prates, G.; Pérez-Cano, M.T.; Rosendahl, S. Territory and Drystone Walls. Comparative of Case Studies in Central and Southern Portugal. In Proceedings of the REHABEND2020 8th Euro-American Congress on Construction Pathology, Rehabilitation Technology and Heritage Management, Granada, Spain, 24–27 March 2020; Universidad de Cantabria: Santander, Spain, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  59. Andlar, G.; Šrajer, F.; Trojanović, A. Classifying the Mediterranean terraced landscape: The case of Adriatic Croatia. Acta Geogr. Slov. 2017, 57, 111–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Ažman Momirski, L. Slovenian Terraced Landscapes. In World Terraced Landscapes: History, Environment, Quality of Life; Varotto, M., Bonardi, L., Tarolli, P., Eds.; Environmental History; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; Volume 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Momirski, L.A.; Bercic, T. Ignored regions: Slovenian terraced landscapes. Ann. Annal. Istrian Mediter. Stud. Ser. Hist. Sociol. 2016, 26, 399–418. [Google Scholar]
  62. Bennett, J. Testing Terraces: Managing and Sustaining the Agrarian Environment in the Maltese Archipelago. Doctoral Dissertation, Apollo-University of Cambridge Repository, Cambridge, UK, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Dong, S.; Xin, L.; Li, S.; Xie, H.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, X.; Li, X.; Song, H.; Lu, Y. Extent and spatial distribution of terrace abandonment in China. J. Geogr. Sci. 2023, 33, 1361–1376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Romero Martín, L.E.; Hernández Cordero, A.I.; Santana Cordero, A.; Vargas Negrín, C.; Palerm Salazar, J.M. Terraced Landscapes in the Canary Islands: La Gomera, “The Terrace Island”. In World Terraced Landscapes: History, Environment, Quality of Life; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 97–118. [Google Scholar]
  65. Camara, L.; de Mesquita, M.B. Terraced landscapes in Peru: Terraces and social water management. In World Terraced Landscapes: History, Environment, Quality of Life; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 119–137. [Google Scholar]
  66. Aringoli, D.; Coltorti, M.; D’Orefice, M.; Dramis, F.; Federici, P.R.; Foresi, L.M.; Tarchiani, U. Carta geomorfologica dell’Arcipelago Toscano. Mem. Descr. Della Carta Geol. D’italia 2009, 86, 7–107. [Google Scholar]
  67. D.P.R. 22 luglio 1996—Istituzione dell’Ente Parco Nazionale dell’Arcipelago Toscano (G.U. 11 dicembre 1996, n. 290). Available online: https://www.mase.gov.it/normative/dpr-22-luglio-1996-istituzione-dellente-parco-nazionale-dellarcipelago-toscano-gu-11 (accessed on 13 September 2024).
  68. Foggi, B.; Pancioli, V. Contributo alla conoscenza della vegetazione dell’Isola del Giglio (Arcipelago Toscano, Toscana meridionale). Webbia 2008, 63, 25–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Viciani, D.; Albanesi, D.; Dell’Olmo, L.; Foggi, B. Contributo alla conoscenza della vegetazione dell’Isola di Gorgona (Arcipelago Toscano). Fitosociologia 2011, 48, 45–64. [Google Scholar]
  70. Legge Regionale 10 Novembre 2014, n. 65. Norme Per Il Gov. Del Territ. (Boll. Uff. n. 53 Parte Prima Del 12.11.2014). 2014. Available online: https://www.regione.toscana.it/il-governo-del-territorio.-legge-regionale-65/2014 (accessed on 13 September 2024).
  71. Koulouri, M.; Giourga, C. Land abandonment and slope gradient as key factors of soil erosion in Mediterranean terraced lands. Catena 2007, 69, 274–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Varotto, M.; Ferrarese, F.; Pappalardo, S.E. Italian Terraced Landscapes: The Shapes and the Trends. In World Terraced Landscapes: History, Environment, Quality of Life; Varotto, M., Bonardi, L., Tarolli, P., Eds.; Environmental History; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; Volume 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Santoro, A.; Venturi, M.; Agnoletti, M. Agricultural Heritage Systems and Landscape Perception among Tourists. The Case of Lamole, Chianti (Italy). Sustainability 2020, 12, 3509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Gowlland, G. Rebuilding Biodiversity One Stone at a Time: Ecology and Intangible Heritage in Dry Stone Walling Practices. Anthropol. J. Eur. Cult. 2024, 33, 72–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Pepe, G.; Mandarino, A.; Raso, E.; Scarpellini, P.; Brandolini, P.; Cevasco, A. Investigation on Farmland Abandonment of Terraced Slopes Using Multitemporal Data Sources Comparison and Its Implication on Hydro-Geomorphological Processes. Water 2019, 11, 1552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Armanasco, P.; Conti, L.; Moretta, M.; Masoni, A.; Camiciottoli, S.; Palchetti, E. Agricultural terraced systems of the Tuscan archipelago: Typological analysis and recovery possibilities of dry stone walls. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Symposium “Monitoring of Mediterranean Coastal Areas: Problems and Measurement Techniques”, Livorno, Italy, 11–13 June 2024; FUP Firenze University Press: Firenze, Italy, 2025; pp. 339–352. [Google Scholar]
Land 14 00822 g001
Figure 1. Geographical position of Tuscan Archipelago Islands (a); orthophoto of a terraced agricultural area on Giglio Island (b); recovery of an abandoned terraced area on Capraia Island (c); recovered terraced area cultivated as a vineyard at Capraia Island (d).
Figure 1. Geographical position of Tuscan Archipelago Islands (a); orthophoto of a terraced agricultural area on Giglio Island (b); recovery of an abandoned terraced area on Capraia Island (c); recovered terraced area cultivated as a vineyard at Capraia Island (d).
Land 14 00822 g001
Land 14 00822 g002
Figure 2. Flowchart of the methodology.
Figure 2. Flowchart of the methodology.
Land 14 00822 g002
Land 14 00822 g003
Figure 3. Slope classification of terraced areas on the four islands: (a) Gorgona Island; (b) Giglio Island; (c) Capraia Island; (d) Elba Island.
Figure 3. Slope classification of terraced areas on the four islands: (a) Gorgona Island; (b) Giglio Island; (c) Capraia Island; (d) Elba Island.
Land 14 00822 g003
Land 14 00822 g004
Figure 4. Distribution of terraced areas according to slope classes: (a) Gorgona Island; (b) Giglio Island; (c) Capraia Island; (d) Elba Island.
Figure 4. Distribution of terraced areas according to slope classes: (a) Gorgona Island; (b) Giglio Island; (c) Capraia Island; (d) Elba Island.
Land 14 00822 g004
Land 14 00822 g005
Figure 5. Distribution of terraced areas according to altitude classes: (a) Gorgona Island; (b) Giglio Island; (c) Capraia Island; (d) Elba Island.
Figure 5. Distribution of terraced areas according to altitude classes: (a) Gorgona Island; (b) Giglio Island; (c) Capraia Island; (d) Elba Island.
Land 14 00822 g005
Land 14 00822 g006
Figure 6. Aspect classification of terraced areas on the four islands: (a) Gorgona Island; (b) Giglio Island; (c) Capraia Island; (d) Elba Island.
Figure 6. Aspect classification of terraced areas on the four islands: (a) Gorgona Island; (b) Giglio Island; (c) Capraia Island; (d) Elba Island.
Land 14 00822 g006
Land 14 00822 g007
Figure 7. Distribution of terraced areas according to aspect classes: (a) Gorgona Island; (b) Giglio Island; (c) Capraia Island; (d) Elba Island.
Figure 7. Distribution of terraced areas according to aspect classes: (a) Gorgona Island; (b) Giglio Island; (c) Capraia Island; (d) Elba Island.
Land 14 00822 g007
Land 14 00822 g008
Figure 8. Distance from road network classification of terraced areas on the four islands: (a) Gorgona Island; (b) Giglio Island; (c) Capraia Island; (d) Elba Island.
Figure 8. Distance from road network classification of terraced areas on the four islands: (a) Gorgona Island; (b) Giglio Island; (c) Capraia Island; (d) Elba Island.
Land 14 00822 g008
Land 14 00822 g009
Figure 9. Distribution of cultivated or uncultivated terraced areas according to distance from roads classes: (a) Gorgona Island; (b) Giglio Island; (c) Capraia Island; (d) Elba Island.
Figure 9. Distribution of cultivated or uncultivated terraced areas according to distance from roads classes: (a) Gorgona Island; (b) Giglio Island; (c) Capraia Island; (d) Elba Island.
Land 14 00822 g009
Land 14 00822 g010
Figure 10. Particles subdivision of terraced areas on the four islands: (a) Gorgona Island; (b) Giglio Island; (c) Capraia Island; (d) Elba Island.
Figure 10. Particles subdivision of terraced areas on the four islands: (a) Gorgona Island; (b) Giglio Island; (c) Capraia Island; (d) Elba Island.
Land 14 00822 g010
Table 1. Digital cartography dataset and their main characteristics.
Table 1. Digital cartography dataset and their main characteristics.
Informative LayerYearTypeScaleSource
Regional Technical Cartography (RTC)2010raster1:10,000Geoscope Observatory in Tuscany
RGB Aerial orthophoto (OPC)2021raster1:5000Geoscope Observatory in Tuscany
Terraced areas dataset2019raster1:2000–1:5000Geoscope Observatory in Tuscany
UCS Terracing dataset2019raster1:10,000Geoscope Observatory in Tuscany
Landscape character map2019raster1:50,000Geoscope Observatory in Tuscany
Digital Terrain Model (DTM)2010raster1:10,000Geoscope Observatory in Tuscany
Cadastral Register2015raster1:5000Geoscope Observatory in Tuscany
Road Network2022vector-Geoscope Observatory in Tuscany
Table 2. Particle-based processing of the islands.
Table 2. Particle-based processing of the islands.
Analysed IslandsTotal Number of
Terraced Parcels		Total Extension of
Terraced Parcels		Mean Extension of Terraced ParcelsMean Number of Particles per Terraced Area
Gorgona1728.42 ha1.671 ha2.428
Giglio 2230144.58 ha0.064 ha11.736
Capraia74103.41 ha1.397 ha2.846
Elba2924345.77 ha0.118 ha7.945
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Conti, L.; Armanasco, P.; Sottili, C.; Camiciottoli, S.; Liberto, D.; Moretta, M.; Masoni, A.; Palchetti, E. Agricultural Terraced Areas in the Tuscan Archipelago (Italy): Mapping, Consistency, and Territorial Analysis. Land 2025, 14, 822. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14040822

AMA Style

Conti L, Armanasco P, Sottili C, Camiciottoli S, Liberto D, Moretta M, Masoni A, Palchetti E. Agricultural Terraced Areas in the Tuscan Archipelago (Italy): Mapping, Consistency, and Territorial Analysis. Land. 2025; 14(4):822. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14040822

Chicago/Turabian Style

Conti, Leonardo, Paolo Armanasco, Caterina Sottili, Stefano Camiciottoli, Donato Liberto, Michele Moretta, Alberto Masoni, and Enrico Palchetti. 2025. "Agricultural Terraced Areas in the Tuscan Archipelago (Italy): Mapping, Consistency, and Territorial Analysis" Land 14, no. 4: 822. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14040822

APA Style

Conti, L., Armanasco, P., Sottili, C., Camiciottoli, S., Liberto, D., Moretta, M., Masoni, A., & Palchetti, E. (2025). Agricultural Terraced Areas in the Tuscan Archipelago (Italy): Mapping, Consistency, and Territorial Analysis. Land, 14(4), 822. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14040822

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop