Has anyone read the article in Hort Week last week - Landscapers band together to stand up for the industry? It talks about proposals that encourage all groups to work more closely together.
On the face of it it all sounds very agreeable. Not many people with argue that a more integrated approach is needed if the landscape industry was to become more serious about promoting itself to the widest possible audience.
However, these (new?) proposals come from small groups working for the benefit of small groups. I haven't seen any invitation that asks the entire landscape industry practitioners to share their views on the future of their industry. Until there is an all-encompassing mentality, nothing tangible can be achieved.
Estimates vary but there are 10-15,000 businesses in the landscape industry but yet a few assume the role of industry police.
The elitists must come to realise - whether they like it or not - that the diversity of the landscape industry means we can never create any kind of working policy that incorporates everyone for the benefit of everyone.
It all sounds very business-like to want to create a landscape industry-wide code of conduct and I don't think many would not welcome some guidelines but there is a real danger that those who seek to write the rules will do so, so that they best serv themselves and not others they might view as peripheral.
Whether someone calls themselves a landscape architect or a garden designer is largely irrelevant. It is that person's audit trail and portfolio that's important and what a potential client will (or should) use to make a decision on employing/engaging that person.
I would say that if an incumbent landscape association has a problem with its members using professional titles that don't correctly reflect their industry role, then there's an inherent cultural problem and it's best fixed in-house before even trying to develop a rational that fits all.
Comments