Agricultural areas are subject to multiple functions in addition to agricultural production such as recreation, tourism, environmental practices, etc. For periurban areas, the multifunctionality of agricultural areas is now recognized in the planning procedures. But it is still difficult for the promoters to find managementguidelines to preserve the balance between these uses as well as maintaining a "landscape quality". Periurban agriculture is ultimately considered for its value as a space and an available land in terms of urbanization, but what about the opinion of the farmers and owners of agricultural land? The objective ofthis thesis is to propose but also to analyze a participatory method based on the use of landscape representations to foster dialogue between stakeholders, officials, farmers and owners. This device is designed to help actors build their planning intentions concerning the agriculture. To develop this method,we selected two European French speaking territories, with two different management contexts: the town of Billom in France by the implementation of its Local Urban Planning (2006-2008), and the future Landscape Charter of the Natural Park of Attert in Belgium (2007-2009). We assume that landscape representations can be mobilized as medium for dialogue, through a specific methodological system and through participatory workshops. This methodological system can also help the actors to reveal their planning intentions concerning both social, but also the technical (agricultural and urban), relations and representations and to incorporate them into the urban or landscape planning.From the implementation of the methodological system (surveys and workshops) on the both sites in France and Belgium, we built a Methodological Itinerary of Prospective Vision (IMVP) It is composed of five aims of landscape representations uses which relate to: 1. expertise, 2.identification of the participants’ intentions, 3. characterization of the “cadre de vie” from workshops using the method of the negative vision of the future, 4. sharing the positive vision of the future and operational arguments and intentions to integrate into the planning process, 5. evaluation of the integration of the actors’ intentions into the territorialproject. To formalize and articulate these aims, in terms of methodological steps, we have chosen to complete the reading grid of the local landscape interventions categories (Moquay et al., 2007) and to develop it upstream the landscape charter process and in the middle of the urban planning process. Theresearcher involvement appears at two levels. First is mediation in the aim to bring together stakeholders in the process. The second is the observation and deciphering of the representations and planning intentions on landscape components identified by the actors. The interest of the IMVP is to be included in decision processes. It assists farmers and elected officials by establish agricultural projects in their territories. The IMVP also distinguishes transferable references and tools that urban planning managers can use to analyze actor’s intentions and to develop collaborative approaches. The IMVP could become a methodological guide to complement the growing demand for tools of dialogue and visualization of regional issues to support planning.
