{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022198731501057084, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.230263157894737, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Coming to Grips with the Concept of Landscape

Over the past seventy-five years, landscape has been variably characterized as “the basis of geography,” the “unit of study” in geography, an approach or framework, and an important geographic concept. How can this important term maintain such tremendous variation in status, meaning, and usage? To many geographers, the plasticity of landscape is advantageous since its meaning can be easily molded to suit their needs. Yet consistent use of such a key term is not only critical to communicating effectively across the boundaries of the discipline, but absolutely essential for establishing and maintaining dialogues within geography. The purpose of this paper is to come to grips with the concept of landscape by tracing the origin of the term, examining current definitions and conflicts, and discussing the significance of the concept to the discipline, and to propose an alternative definition.