Landscape Architecture in Israel: A Unique Glocal Professional Institutionalization

Abstract

Given Israel’s unique political, economic, and social conditions—marked by rapid development and the need for landscape preservation—landscape architects played a central role in the nation-building project from the early twentieth century. While most writings focus on built environments and their creators, this article examines the profession’s institutionalization, tracing its evolution from gardening to spatial design. It highlights the efforts of the professional association, founded in 1952, to elevate the field, including its inclusion in the 1958 Engineers and Architects Law, securing employment through government negotiations, and establishing Israel’s first academic program in landscape architecture at the Technion.

Introduction

On Independence Day in 1998, as Israel celebrated its fiftieth anniversary, landscape architects Lippa Yahalom and Dan Zur were awarded the prestigious Israel Prize for Architecture. ¹ This marked the first—and to date, only—occasion on which landscape architects received the prize, which is typically awarded every few years to leading Israeli architects. Beyond recognizing their personal achievements, the award also served as a public expression of appreciation for the profession of landscape architecture. Nearly eighty years after the first landscape architects arrived in Mandatory Palestine, the profession was honored for its role in shaping nationally significant landscapes, a measure of formal legal status, and academic accreditation.

This article examines the emergence of landscape architecture in Israel within the context of the Zionist nation-building project of creating built environments, outdoor recreational spaces, parks, gardens, and a broader culture of living. The development process involved collaboration among planners, architects, and landscape architects (then often referred to as “garden architects”), alongside cultural agents such as poets and writers. Within this dynamic environment of rapid development, landscape architects sought to gain professional status and influence, particularly as development and preservation efforts unfolded in parallel. Their success lay not only in the creation of iconic national landscapes but also in establishing the bureaucratic infrastructure that integrated them into the state apparatus. The founding of the Israeli Association of Landscape Architects (hereinafter, “the Association”) in 1951—and especially the initiatives it led from the 1970s onward—was central to the process of professional consolidation.

While previous scholarship has tended to address landscape architecture from the perspective of the built environment or the oeuvre of individual practitioners, this article foregrounds the institutional and bureaucratic work undertaken by the Association’s leadership. It offers a unique case study of the professionalization of landscape architecture in Israel, a process that occurred decades after similar developments in the Western world.

The study is based on a critical analysis of archival materials from the Association’s archive, personal archives of key community members, and a range of governmental documents. It is further supported by interviews with leading figures in the landscape architecture community and representatives of relevant state authorities. Primary sources include meeting minutes, correspondence, and official documentation.

The article is structured in three parts. The first section explores two interconnected themes. It begins by situating the Israeli case within a global context, discussing the transformation of landscape architecture from an occupation to a profession in the US and England—models that influenced the Israeli practice. It then provides a historical overview of the first fifty years of landscape architecture in Israel. The second part focuses on the period between the 1970s and 2000s. After outlining the political and social context of the time and the practice during this period, the article focuses on the strategies employed by the Association to elevate the profession’s status and protect its boundaries from encroachment by adjacent fields. The final section, the Discussion, highlights the distinctive characteristics of the emergence of landscape architecture in Israel.

Figure 1 presents a timeline of the principal events addressed in this article. Events highlighted in blue indicate major political milestones. The boxes positioned below the timeline mark the successive phases in the emergence of the profession, with interspersed images referencing realized designed landscapes. Pink boxes correspond to legal measures while those that are dark green denote formative events in the professionalization process. Light green boxes mark phases of its subsequent consolidation, as further discussed in the article.

Figure 1.

Timeline of the main events mentioned in the article.

Establishing Landscape Architecture as a Profession: Global and Local Perspectives

This chapter presents the theoretical and historical foundations of the research. First, it discusses the transformation of landscape architecture in general from a mere occupation into a profession. Then, it briefly presents the history of the first fifty years of the practice in Israel, emphasizing the role of landscape architecture in nation building and its transition from the realm of gardening to that of planning and design.

A Historical and Theoretical Framework of Landscape Architecture: From an Occupation to a Profession

Landscape architecture became a profession relatively late in comparison to related professions such as architecture and engineering. According to Wilensky, ² American landscape architecture, like many other disciplines, transformed from an occupation into a profession no earlier than in the late nineteenth century. The process included three phases: the establishment of a national organization—ASLA—in 1899; the development of educational institutions—namely, Harvard in 1900; and finally, the definition of a code of ethics and requirements for state licenses in the 1920s and 1930s. Other important milestones were the establishment of the Council of Landscape Architectural Registration Boards (CLARB) in 1961 and the establishment of the Uniform National Exam (UNE) for landscape architectural licensure in 1970. ³

In England, as argued by Roe, ⁴ the roots of the profession lie in gardening and garden design, which were tightly connected to agriculture and the cultivation of large-scale estates. However, landscape-architecture education was established at the beginning of the twentieth century at the University of Liverpool (1909), and only in 1932 was the first diploma program inaugurated. In 1928, the British Organization of Garden Architects was established, turning into The Institute of Landscape Architects (ILA) in 1933. These phases are summarized in Figure 2. Other European educational programs were also established during the first half of the twentieth century: Norway (1919), Germany (1929), Portugal (1941), and Netherlands (1947). ⁵

Figure 2.

Various milestones in the institutionalization of landscape architecture in the US and England.

These developments in the US, England, and Germany are highly relevant to our discussion as they significantly shaped the evolution of landscape architecture in Israel. In the 1920s, the first landscape architects arrived from Germany to the country, which from then until 1948 was the British Mandate of Palestine. In the late 1960s, graduates of American landscape architecture programs returned to Israel, making substantial contributions to the practice and to the emergence of the professional community.

In their study, Baird and Szczygiel emphasize unique knowledge specific to the profession and public approbation as main factors signaling the transformation of an occupation into a profession. ⁶ They explain the process in Marxist terms, stating that professions naturally arose in response to the modern economy, which advances specialized knowledge. They also note Macdonald’s view that the profession crystallized as middle-class men sought power in response to women’s prominent role in garden-making. ⁷ This has specific relations to landscape architecture as the realm of gardening was often associated with women. How applicable, though, these histories and comparative-theoretical explanations are to the evolution of the profession of landscape architecture in Israel will be discussed in the concluding chapter.

Early Landscape Architecture in Israel—Fifty Years of Nation Building

The emergence of the profession of landscape architecture in Israel was an integral part of the modern Zionist settling project. ⁸ As such, landscape architects went hand in hand with architects and planners in serving both practical and symbolic tool for shaping national identity, territorial control, collective memory, and everyday living environments. Early Zionist planning adopted modernist architecture to express ideals of progress, secularism, and rupture from diasporic traditions, while settlement forms such as kibbutzim and new towns materialized ideological visions. ⁹

Arriving in Mandatory Palestine in the early 1920s, Jewish landscape architects were involved in planting open spaces in kibbutzim, ¹⁰ in the design of urban parks for municipalities, and in planning for construction firms associated with the Zionist settlement institutions. The process gained momentum since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 and in the following years, due to the urgency of housing 1 million immigrants in new towns and rural settlements, building a network of infrastructures, and, at the same time, preserving historic nature and landscape amenities that were to become recreation sites and nature reserves. ¹¹ Consequently, landscape architects joined state and municipal institutions, which played a pivotal role in infrastructure and national projects. Among these institutions were the National Parks Authority, the Ministry of Construction and Housing and the Public Works Department, prominent municipalities, and others. Among the iconic designed landscapes of this early period were the first urban parks of the first Hebrew town—Tel Aviv; the first national parks of Gan HaShlosha (1954), Beit Shearim (1954), and others; numerous kibbutz landscapes such as Yagur; and neighborhoods such as Ramat Aviv (1960), Kiron (1962), as presented in Figure 3. Thus, they fell in line with a common trend among their colleagues abroad—namely, working mainly for the public sector.

Figure 3.

Representative designed landscapes 1920s-1960s; 1. Gan HaShlosha National Park, L.A. Lippa Yahalom and Dan Zur (1954); 2. Kibbutz Yagur, L.A. Shlomo Weinberg-Oren (1930s); 3. Binyamin park, Haifa, L.A. Yehiel Segal (1930s); 4. Ramat Aviv, L.A. Lippa Yahalom and Dan Zur 1960s).

From Garden Design to Landscape Planning and Design

One of the important steps in the evolution of landscape architecture in Israel from an occupation to a profession was the gradual and deliberate transition from the realm of gardening to that of design, mainly in order to gain higher professional status.

The first landscape architects in Mandatory Palestine had been graduates of horticultural vocational schools in Europe, mainly Germany. ¹² Others had been autodidacts or graduates of Mikveh Israel, a local agricultural school established in 1870. ¹³ Consequently, they perceived themselves as gardener-architects as was popular in Germany by the early twentieth century, ¹⁴ and thus Yehiel Segal, the first landscape gardener of the municipality of Tel Aviv, signed his schemes in the 1920s. ¹⁵

The group was first unionized in the early 1940s as an independent section within the Gardeners Organization, which had been established already in 1943, focusing on garden design and planning. ¹⁶ Until the early 1950s (and shortly after the establishment of the state), they found the Gardeners organization a warm home especially for those working for the kibbutzim. They collaborated in advanced training seminars and education tours, and designated the gardeners’ periodical, Garden and Landscape - Gan VaNof, their preferred stage for publication. ¹⁷

The establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 posed great challenges for landscape architects. Some of them were already part of pre-national planning committees and municipalities and their practice went beyond planting design to include recreation planning and the design of the state’s national open spaces. In March 1951, they founded the Association of Garden Architects (see Figure 4). This new body of just nineteen members attracted kibbutz gardeners, individuals from the original section of the Gardeners Organization, as well as managers of gardening departments in local authorities in the newborn State of Israel, educators, and independent garden planners. The establishment of the new association was intended to promote its members’ interests and to enhance its statutory, public, and professional standing, as will be later discussed. It explicitly distanced itself from the Gardeners Organization, joining the International Federation of Landscape Architects (IFLA), in 1954, and hosting IFLA’s 8th world conference in Haifa in 1962. ¹⁸ Two decades later, landscape architect Zvi Miller was appointed president of IFLA (1982–1986).

Figure 4.

(From left to right) Founding members of the Association (1951). Local and mainly foreign participants at the IFLA’s 8th world conference in Haifa (1962).

In general, during its first twenty years (early 1950s–early 1970s), the organization asked to become affiliated with the realm of architecture, which was perceived as a more prestigious occupation, better paid and appreciated. As such, the Association sought connections with the Israeli Association of Engineers and Architects (IAEA), especially after the landmark legislation of the Israeli law of Architects and Engineers (1958) which defined who is eligible to perform architectural jobs. Either as a section within the IAEA, or a distinct chamber, landscape architects aspired to transform their vocation into a registered and licensed profession.

Evolution of the Profession from the 1970s On

Despite objective indicators of the profession’s rising status, reflected in the growing number of impressive projects and increased involvement in planning initiatives across the country, in the early 1970s some landscape architects were disappointed by what they perceived as their limited impact on the local landscape. Landscape architect Lippa Yahalom expressed the community’s frustration upon accepting the Karavan Prize for a Built-Landscape Project in March 1971:

[W]ho does not recognize the importance of gardens, open spaces, and a green landscape[?] . . . [Then], how did it happen that . . . our cities and towns are so ugly, neglected, polluted and so crowded [?] . . .

Our fight is for the right to participate in determining the location of the open green areas . . . for cooperation between all the agents that determine the character of our settlements and for landscape architects to be included in the planning teams and not [just] be called upon to bless what has [already] been finished . . . and to participate from the initial thought until the project’s completion. ¹⁹

From this low point, and within the context of the cultural-political changes throughout Israeli society, as discussed below, the 1970s were a turning point in the development of the profession of landscape architecture in Israel.

Transitions and Shifts in Israeli Society 1970 to 2000

The period from the 1970s on marked the beginning of significant political, ideological, cultural, and economic changes in Israel. ²⁰ Following the Six-Day War (1967), Israel’s territories expanded, and development accelerated on the West Bank, Golan Heights, and Sinai Peninsula. The Yom Kippur War (1973) led to the first Arab Israeli peace process between Israel and Egypt in 1979, to be followed by the Oslo Accords starting 1993, and the Israel-Jordan peace agreement in 1994. These, along with the ending of the Cold War, and other no less important global events brought hope for a better future for Israel and the region. In parallel, in 1977, Israel faced a political upheaval, bringing about an unprecedented switch in leadership from the socialist elite hegemony to a new national neoliberal right. An emergency plan for economic stabilization promoted neoliberalism starting in the mid-1980s, and the utopian economic ideology of the “free market doctrine” marked the transition from social solidarity to individualism and social polarization. ²¹

Following the Six-Day War (1967), debate over the notions of locality and place were at the center of Israel’s cultural arena. The discussion involved artists and architects, among others. ²² Landscape architects witnessed these processes and became deeply involved in the ongoing discourse, making the local landforms and their vegetation prominent elements of design.

Since the 1970s, landscape architects have been involved in several arenas: planning recreation sites along the Sea of Galilee (Figure 5.2) and in the countryside (Figure 5.1); fostering urban renewal projects; developing national parks and sites of national significance, such as the burial site of first Prime minister Ben Gurion (Figure 5.7); building urban parks, such as Wolfson Park in Tel Aviv (Figure 5.4) and Sherover Promenade in Jerusalem; in planning campuses (Figure 5.3); and reclaiming quarries and nature reserves; and in integrating infrastructures in ecologically sensitive areas such as the conveyor belt in the Negev. ²³

Figure 5.

Representative designed landscapes 1970s t0 2000s; 1. Goren Park, L.A. Gideon Sarig (1974); 2. Sea of Galilee shores, L.A. Gideon Sarig (1980s); 3. Haifa University, L.A. Miller & Blum (1970s); 4. Wolfson Park, Tel Aviv, L.A. Tichnun Nof (1976); 5. Charles Clore Park, Tel Aviv, L.A. Hillel Omer, Tichnun Nof and Braudo-Maoz (1970s on); 6. The Community Valley Memorial Site, Jerusalem, L.A. Lippa Yahalom and DAn Zur (1980); 7. Ben Gurion Burial Site, Sde Boker, L.A. Lippa Yahaloom and Dan Zur (1974).

In parallel with the large-scale projects of individuals and firms, the Association has worked toward professional and public recognition in various unique venues. These included the formulation of the Association’s statutes; the incorporation of landscape architecture as a distinct chamber within the Law of Engineers and Architects; the legal phrasing of their deeds of professional conduct in order to distinguish the profession from other professions; the negotiation with the Ministry of Construction and Housing over the Association’s role as the main provider of work; and finally, the process of establishing an academic framework for studying landscape architecture in Israel. These efforts have been aimed not only at securing employment for registered landscape architects but also at maintaining high standards of practice. In the following we discuss these administrative and legal steps.

Formulating the Statutes for Landscape Architects

After its establishment in the early 1950s, formulating a statute was one of the first steps of the newly established Association, reflecting its pursuit of professional recognition among the spatial-planning professions. ²⁴ A discussion of the differences between the 1954, 1968, and 1972 versions of the Association’s statute, ²⁵ brings to light the changes in the goals and activities of the Association, membership eligibility, the duties and the rights of its members, and the Association’s managing institutions.

Changing the official name of the Association reveals the gradual evolution of the association from its early realm of gardening to the designed disciplines and the role its members saw for themselves as an institution. While the Association’s early name (early-1950s) was The Association of Garden-Architects in Israel, in 1968 it was changed into The Association of Gardens and Landscape-Architects in Israel, and in 1972 the Association omitted the word “gardens” from its name, which till today is The Association of Landscape-Architects in Israel.

The statute defined who was eligible to become a member of the Association. While the first version was phrased to include the various educational backgrounds and work experience of the founding members, in 1968 it was changed to specify that only those who held a diploma from a professional high school and had at least one year of experience in planning gardens and overseeing the arrangement of gardens in Israel could be a member of the Association. Later, in the 1972 version, the terms were changed to include an academic diploma in landscape architecture and residency in Israel.

Turning to the issue of the goals of the Association, these also gradually changed, from advancing the profession in general to advancing the standing of its members. The 1954 version set out as the first goal, “to take the actions necessary for a planned creation of the local landscape and construction in the city and in the village.” Later, the goal was rephrased: “to confederate the landscape architects of Israel.” ²⁶

Ethical considerations appeared already in the 1950s statute, which emphasized a code of ethics in the Association’s goals, which read, “to regulate labour matters, and to protect professional matters of the members.” In its second version, the statute expanded its ethical scope and set an additional goal, namely, to act for the common good. Only in the 1980s were ethical aspects phrased separately in the statute. The new section related to environmental ethics, stating that the association’s goal was “to promote and uphold the values of nature and the landscape,” alongside matters of professional ethics, such as maintaining relationships among members of the association, and providing of the highest level of service. ²⁷

Registration, Licensing, and Codes of Professional Conduct

In 1973, landscape architecture was acknowledged by Israeli law as a registered and licensed profession in the Engineers and Architects Registry, and the Association was recognized as one of the ten professional organizations that were entitled to file objections to plans at the National Council for Construction. ²⁸ This was a significant step in the profession’s long journey toward state and public recognition. In practice, it meant that according to Israeli law, only registered and licensed landscape architects could perform certain work reserved, as in other professions such as legal consultancy. ²⁹

The Israeli regulation of landscape architecture was unique not only for its time but also half a century later. In 2020 to 2021, among thirty-three European countries, only half regulated the profession. ³⁰ In the US, the process started relatively late, and in 1995 only California had laws pertaining to landscape architects. ³¹ Discussing the pros and cons of regulating the profession, Walker argued that: “The dominant purpose of licensing statutes is not to protect the professionals, but rather the public . . . to make certain that the profession has satisfactorily established their qualifications to serve the public.” ³² The protection of the public also drove early discussions on the Israel Law of Engineers and Architects, which was first formulated in 1956, ³³ and approved by the Israeli Parliament—the Knesset—in 1958. ³⁴ The law mandates that only professionals with formal training and adherence to a code of ethics are authorized to perform engineering and architectural work. However, in the 1950s, despite the association’s request to gain the law’s protection, ³⁵ the 1958 legislation did not include provisions for landscape architecture. ³⁶ As a result, the Ministry of Labor, responsible for enforcing the law, refused to acknowledge or register landscape architects. Recognizing that legal status was essential for securing employment opportunities for its members, the association actively has pursued various strategies to obtain formal recognition since the 1960s. ³⁷

A decade later, in 1973, due to a legal intervention, ³⁸ the Israel Law of Engineers and Architects was revised and amended to include a chamber for landscape architects. ³⁹ In light of the new legal status, the association petitioned all municipalities, regional councils, local councils and planning committees, for official recognition of its fifty-seven registered landscape architects and firms. ⁴⁰ In addition, landscape architects were nominated as advisers in several district committees tasked with devising landscape-oriented schemes. ⁴¹ However, these achievements only slowly influenced the profession, and in the following years the Association continued complaining about the employment of unregistered landscape architects without credentials. ⁴²

Code of Professional Conduct

Even earlier, throughout the 1960s, the Association began working toward defining a code of professional conduct for landscape architects that was supposed to define their unique fields of practice. ⁴³ Such a code of conduct for architects—but not for landscape architects—had been added to the Israeli Law of Architects and Engineers in 1967. ⁴⁴ Only in 1977, when the law was amended again, did landscape architects gain limited recognition in the code of conduct. ⁴⁵ However, as architects were also eligible to conduct the same activities, the issue has never been fully settled. ⁴⁶

Advocating with State Authorities: The Ministry of Construction and Housing as an Example

The continuous influx of immigrants after the War of Independence (1948), and the ambition to expand development into new territories made Israel one of the fastest developing countries in the West. ⁴⁷ This national project of mass housing was promoted by the Israeli state, rather than by its private sector, and the construction projects were managed by the centralized government first via the Administration at the Ministry of Labor and Construction, and from 1961 onward, by the new Ministry of Construction and Housing. ⁴⁸ Landscape architects took part in these projects as members of planning teams comprised of planners and architects. For example, in the late 1950s landscape architect Lippa Yahalom and Dan Zur collaborated with the architects Robert Bennett and Yizhak Perelstein in the preparation of the general scheme and the detailed design of Ramat Aviv A. ⁴⁹ In the following years they were involved in planning neighborhoods in Beer Sheva, Arad, Kiron and other neighborhoods, all managed by the ministry.

From the 1970s on, the activity of the Ministry of Construction and Housing expanded due to the socio-political transitions mentioned earlier. Yahalom and Zur became involved in the massive construction of schemes around Jerusalem; the firm of Tichnun Nof was involved in the construction of Award-winning neighborhoods in Arad and landscape architect Gideon Sarig was extremely influential in the 1977 National Scheme of Neighborhood and Public Housing Renewal. His firm worked in numerous developing towns, rehabilitating yards and streets. Preparing comprehensive schemes and detailed designs for thousands of dwelling units became prominent in the daily routines of landscape architects. This new branch of labor led to increased demand for landscape architects in both the public and the private sectors.

These unique accomplishments of landscape architects were not achieved without the intensive efforts of the Association in ensuring the delivery of work and fair payment to Association members; expanding the scope of practice of landscape architects within the housing realm; and, to this end, advocating for the appointment of a chief landscape architect at the Ministry of Construction and Housing.

It should be noted that already in the late 1950s, the Association approached the housing and construction authorities, stressing that in order to raise professional standards, planning and landscape development projects must be assigned only to the Association members. ⁵⁰ Consequently, on March 1961, a preliminary agreement was reached. ⁵¹ However, throughout the 1960s, the Association repeatedly reported that central issues remained unresolved. ⁵²

In the following years, several important milestones marked the gradual change in the role of landscape architects within the Ministry of Construction and Housing. The first was the continuous discussion between the Association and the general manager of the ministry in an effort to reach a final agreement that included a general contract for the services of landscape architects rendered at an agreed-upon rate—an agreement that likely never advanced to the signing stage. ⁵³

A second, more important milestone, as already discussed, was the 1973 revised amendments of the Engineers and Architects Law, which included also landscape architects under the protection of the law. ⁵⁴ However, without an agreed-upon code of professional conduct, there was no legal basis for employing solely landscape architects. ⁵⁵

Following this legal change, key figures in the discipline called on the ministry to adopt a new approach to landscape architecture, whose scope went beyond traditional garden design. Dr. Shaul Amir, a landscape architect and faculty member at the Technion, argued in 1975 that the profession of landscape architecture could enhance the ministry’s national activities in program development and project planning. He called for the inclusion of landscape architects in the early planning phases, at national and regional levels, and in decision-making and policy-advising committees. ⁵⁶

Next to the continuous discussion and the revision of the law, a third important milestone was the establishment of the position of chief landscape architect in the Ministry of Construction and Housing and the nomination of landscape architect Ilana Ofir as the first chief landscape architect within the ministry (mid 1980s.). ⁵⁷ Carlos Drinberg, who served as chief architect at the ministry from 1999 to 2013, explains that this appointment reflected the post-Six-Day-War (1967) expansion of cities like the capital Jerusalem, and other large-scale projects. Generally, it expressed the shift in the ministry’s operations following the political upheaval of 1977, and Israel’s transition to a free-market economy. These socio-political changes resulted in a move away from government-led construction toward projects managed by private contractors, requiring collaboration among multidisciplinary teams and elevating the role of landscape architecture. ⁵⁸ Ofir, who was appointed to the position, argued that the Ministry’s new approach made the involvement of landscape architects indispensable. Unlike earlier schemes that relied on standardized building models applied uniformly across the country, the new approach emphasized site-specific design. This shift required landscape architects to play a key role from the very beginning of the planning process. ⁵⁹ Landscape-architecture principles, such as walkability and connectivity, were integrated into comprehensive planning, and as a result, measures such as landscape appendices and mandatory approvals by landscape architects at various stages of the planning process—starting from Phase I of city building schemes—were introduced.

Education

In October 1977, the Technion—Israel Institute of Technology inaugurated the first academic program in the field, awarding its graduates the title of Bachelor of Landscape Architecture. This initiative marked the culmination of an almost two-decade-long process in which the Association had aspired to establish a local educational framework as part of the consolidation of the profession. ⁶⁰ The inauguration date reflected not only the growing demand for landscape architects—estimated at 400 according to a 1975 survey ⁶¹ —but also the return of Israeli landscape architects who had graduated from American universities. These individuals were qualified to teach at the Technion, ready to rise to the challenge, and prepared to fill the professional gap. This section examines the key milestones in the evolution of landscape architecture education, focusing primarily on its establishment as an academic profession. It should be noted, however, that its emergence as a research discipline, which began no earlier than in the 2000s, falls outside the scope of this article.

Early Landscape Architecture Education in Mandatory Palestine/Israel

As already mentioned, the first landscape architects who arrived in Mandatory Palestine during the 1920s were graduates of European vocational institutes or graduates from the local agricultural school of Mikveh Israel. ⁶² From the 1960s onwards, a new generation of Israeli landscape architects mainly studied in the US: either at the University of California at Berkeley or at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.

Despite the increasing demand for professionals and jobs by both state authorities and the private sector, until the 1970s there was no local academic institution for studying landscape architecture. The gap was only partially addressed by a single garden design course at the Technion, which also housed the first architecture program in Mandatory Palestine. In 1955, the course was made mandatory, marking the inclusion of landscape architecture in the design disciplines. ⁶³ Among the teachers of that course were leading members of the Association, landscape architects Haim Latte (1902–1988) and Shlomo Weinberg Oren (1889–1955), who served as adjuncts. In 1968, architect Ruth Enis (1928–2022) who specialized in landscape architecture in the Netherlands joined them as a faculty member. Nevertheless, this group of dedicated practitioners lacked the academic status to advance the establishment of a distinct program of landscape architecture. While in practice, the role of the profession was growing, the Technion held a conservative stance, perceiving architecture as the prominent and sole professional discipline for spatial planning and design.

The constellation started to change thanks to the involvement of the Association, which during the early 1970s, took the lead and formed a professional committee to discuss the essence of the profession, the demand for professional landscape architects in the public and the private sectors, and the potential institutions to host the program, including the Agricultural Faculty of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Bezalel Art Academy. ⁶⁴

At the same time, the Technion started the process of establishing a new landscape planning/architecture program as part of the Faculty of Architecture, which had recently established the Program of City and Regional Planning (1974). The process was headed by Dr. Shaul Amir and architect Ruth Enis. Amir (1939–), a graduate of the Kaduri agricultural high school, with a B.L.A degree from U.C. Berkely and an M.L.A. and Ph.D. from the University of Pennsylvania, returned to Israel in 1972 as a junior faculty member at the newly established City and Regional Planning Program. With a Ph.D., familiarity with the academic milieu, and charisma, he succeeded in persuading the faculty, the Technion, and the Association to establish the first, and for many years, the sole academic program of landscape architecture in Israel. ⁶⁵ As a student of renowned American landscape architects Lawrence Halprin and Ian McHarg, Amir modeled the new program after its American predecessor.

The goal of the program was “to train a planner, who will be able to contribute to the quality of the environment and life, as an independent landscape planner, a member of a planning team or holding a public role.” ⁶⁶ Interestingly, this preliminary goal emphasized the role of the landscape planner over that of landscape architect. The curriculum was modeled after the American curricula, with the support of landscape architect Michael Laurie, a faculty member at U.C. Berkeley and future chair of its program. Laurie wrote, “[t]he curriculum looks excellent and much as we discussed it, it resembles many of the B.L.A. programs in this country.” ⁶⁷ The American influence was evident also in faculty recruitment. The Technion approached American scholars and practitioners such as landscape architect Ron Lovinger from the University of Oregon, landscape architect Richard Mayer from U.C. Davis, California, and later Prof. Kenneth Helphand, also from Oregon, inviting them to teach in Israel. In parallel, Amir approached his fellow graduates, asking them to take positions as part-time teachers. The model, staffed with very few tenured faculty members (Amir and Enis) and mainly adjunct lecturers, was considered efficient and therefore appealed to the Technion’s authorities.

During the early 1970s, Amir negotiated with Prof. Halevi from the Faculty of Agriculture at the Hebrew University to establish a joint program whose graduates would receive a degree in landscape architecture. They both approached their deans and their institutions with a detailed program. ⁶⁸ However, the initiative failed due to bureaucratic considerations, and the Technion continued the process independently.

In 1975, the Technion approved the program, not without reservations regarding the ability of such a small group of landscape architects to influence the contemporary state of the Israeli landscape. Faculty members were critical as well. They claimed that all architects needed to be knowledgeable in the field and to possess a “sense” of the landscape, and were also concerned about the educational gap between architects, who were required to study for five years, and landscape architects, who were supposed to study only four years. ⁶⁹ In general, the architects among the faculty members viewed the new program with suspicion, perceiving it as a threat to their academic hegemony and job security. After the Technion’s approval, a committee of the State Council of Higher Education, as the regulator, reflected on the position of the discipline both as a profession and as an academic field of study. ⁷⁰ In general, it emphasized the importance of expanding the local community of landscape architects due to the urgent needs of development and conservation in Israel, pointing to the potential to export this knowledge to developing countries. However, it criticized the dependence on the American model, rather than on European ones, asking to strengthen studies on local geography and history. It also criticized the limited means for establishing the program in terms of faculty and budget. ⁷¹

In the fall of 1977, the first students were admitted to the first year of the Landscape Architecture Program, and the first cohort of six graduated in 1981. The program was co-headed by Prof. Shaul Amir together with architect Ruth Enis. Two visiting professors from the US joined the faculty, and members of the local professional community served as adjuncts.

By 2000, 227 students had graduated from the program. 72 percent of them were women, and 28 percent were men. ⁷² Currently, the number of graduates has tripled, with women comprising a clear majority.

Despite its constant growth, the program has faced various difficulties since its inauguration. Richard Mayer, a landscape architect and one of the American scholars teaching at the Technion, submitted a report to the faculty dean in 1984. While he praised the students’ achievements, he argued that the program was understaffed, with no tenured faculty and with more than 80 percent of courses taught by part-time, non-tenure-track adjuncts. In addition, he found that the level of the students was not high enough and that, in general, both the faculty and the Technion were not dedicated to the future of the program. ⁷³

In conclusion, Mayer recommended turning the program into a professional graduate program of 3 + 2 years. Three years later, Mayer complained to the newly elected dean that nothing had happened since his previous report. ⁷⁴ His observations and recommendations were still relevant later on, but they are beyond the scope of this article.

Summary and Discussion

In 1998 landscape architects Lippa Yahalom and Dan Zur were awarded the prestigious Israel Prize for their designed oeuvre. The prize established the status of not only the awardees but also the growing professional community engaged, by that point, in projects throughout the country. By this stage, its members had gained legal status and access to state and municipal projects. From nineteen members in 1951, the community had grown to several hundred. More than two hundred students graduated the Technion, and a dozen of them accomplished their master’s degrees abroad. Relative to the emergence of landscape architecture in Europe and the US, the Israeli profession was exceptional in its achievements and in its process of consolidation. The following discussion emphasizes the uniqueness of the local practice, stressing the bureaucratic aspects of that success.

Similarities and Differences Between Landscape Architecture in Israel and Overseas

As Baird and Szczygiel argued, the professionalization of landscape architecture in the West was part of the broader modernization process of the early twentieth century and of the implementation of distinct professional knowledge.

By the early twentieth century, Palestine was only starting its modernization process, and it lacked an established local cultural tradition of landscape planning and design, as was already common abroad. However, between the Ottoman regime, the British Mandate, and the Zionist settling projects, the area went under extremely intensive and simultaneous processes of development and preservation. Consequently, the first landscape architects who arrived in the country in the 1920s and their followers found a bare land to experiment with and to express their great talents and ambitions, which were based on European concepts. The profession was free from a certain “path dependency” that characterized contemporary Western societies; it was thus able to break disciplinary boundaries and to achieve what sister disciplines abroad could only aspire to at that point of time. The aspiration of these pioneers to take part in the process of nation building spurred them to leave the realm of gardening in favor of the design disciplines. The latter played a more prominent role, were better paid, and from the mid-1950s onward gained legal protection for their occupation and, consequently, greater prestige. These motivations of the landscape architects were reflected in the shift of the title of the Association and that of the practitioners from gardener-architects to landscape-architects. However, unlike Baird’s and Szczygiel’s explanation, in Mandatory Palestine gardening was not so much connected with women, and gender issues played a limited role in the development of the profession.

As such, the local practice followed the American model, which already in 1899 had named the new association the American Association of Landscape Architects, while in Germany, the word “garden” within the title of the professional association remained in place until the 1970s. ⁷⁵ The discourse around the name reflects different perceptions regarding concepts of gardens and landscapes on both sides of the ocean; the term “landscape architecture” came to replace the term “garden architecture,” signifying not just practical considerations (licensing and registration) but also a turn in relation to professional identity. In the global discourse on the scope of the profession, the American perception of the profession as one dealing with large-scale projects of uncultivated landscapes marked a shift away from the German garden-oriented practice. In general, the cultural-political shift from German to American models also characterized other fields of operation in Israeli history during the mid- twentieth century, such as architecture, regional planning, and legal culture. ⁷⁶

The aspiration of landscape architects to be included within the architectural realm was met with resistance by Israeli architects and their professional organization. In a relatively small country with limited resources, architects sought to safeguard the interests of their own guild. This was reflected in their opposition to the inclusion of landscape architects within the legal framework, their refusal to recognize them as a professional chamber within their organization, and even their objection to the establishment of an academic program in landscape architecture. Today, this dominance is evident in the professional code of conduct of architects, which also encompasses the expertise of landscape architects. However, this complex and multifaceted issue lies beyond the scope of this paper and invites a dedicated study of its own.

In general, the consolidation of landscape architecture in Israel happened decades after other parallel processes in the West. It reflected the socio-political situation of the era after the Six-Day War (1967) and the emergence of the neoliberal economy. Since the 1970s, the profession took advantage of the local situation and gradually gained public approbation, state acknowledgment, and legal status. As the article argues, the role of the Israeli Association of Landscape Architects was crucial in defining, formalizing, and elevating the status of the profession.

The following highlights two key aspects in the activity of the professional organization which contributed to the consolidation of the profession: the dynamic interplay between global trends and local conditions, and the role of individuals and organizations as two dominant forces in shaping Israeli society.

Between the Global and the Local

Since its inception, the Association aspired to assume a position in the global arena of landscape architecture, despite the relatively remote location of Israel on the periphery of the Western hemisphere. Only three years after its establishment, Israel became a member of the International Federation of Landscape Architects (IFLA, established 1948), sending representatives to its international conferences and even hosting its prestigious annual conference (1962). Later, landscape architect Zvi Miller was elected president of the organization (1986–1992). Overseas studies, the modeling of the Technion’s curriculum after American curricula, and the invitation of scholars from the US to teach in Israel were all expressions of the will to establish a profession of international esteem. Even the emergence of the concept of locality during the 1970s reflected both the international discourse on critical regionalism, land art, and regionalism in landscape architecture.

Between Individuals and the Group: A Leading, Professional Elite

All these changes could not have happened without the power of a relatively small group of fierce and devoted individuals combined with the motivations of the Association. Early Israeli landscape architects were devoted personas who were exceptional not just in creating unique landscapes but also in their ability to influence state institutions. Many of the leading figures and experts in the field were successfully appointed to positions of significant authority and influenced the ways in which the local landscape was designed and shaped. Such advocates included Lippa Yahalom who was a member of the body managing national parks and nature reserves, Yehiel Segal who was the landscape gardener of the Tel Aviv municipality, and Zvi Miller who held international prestige. Landscape architects have served state authorities, holding positions tailored by the Association to serve the interests of the public, the profession, and the professionals. Thus, for instance, and as described earlier, Ilana Ofir was nominated as Chief Landscape Architect in the Ministry of Housing, and Avinoam Avnun established a new position within the Department of Public Works, responsible for the design of Israeli roads and roadsides. All such positions had—as they still have today—a significant influence on the ways in which the land is designed and modified in accordance with social, planning, and political-governmental considerations and pressures.

In the early period of state-building, public-sector workers were held in high esteem, following the ethos of public service and social commitment to the public good. ⁷⁷ In a similar vein, a small group of decisive and enthusiastic members served in the Association’s secretariat. Mainly volunteers, they prioritized, above their personal interests, the interests of the landscape, the profession, and members of the Association, as indicated by the Association’s goals. For many of them, like landscape architect Ariel Barnet, who served as the secretary of the association for decades, it was their life-long mission to elevate the status of the profession, giving up the glory of the built projects in favor of bureaucratic work. As such the combined oeuvre of individual landscape architects and the Association contributed to the success and the esteem of the profession.

The process was not easy, and the advocacy work encountered various obstacles and objections from competing bodies, such as the Gardeners’ Association and later the Israeli Association of Engineers and Architects. All were afraid of losing their income, professional expertise in the public eye and by the law, and priority. Even the Technion, which in theory was supposed to support the establishment of the new educational program, preferred to represent the interests of the architects, rather than those of the public.

By the turn of the millennium, landscape architecture in Israel arrived at its mature phase. The 2002 publication of the book Dreaming Gardens by landscape architect Kenneth Helphand, a Visiting Professor at the Technion, marked the anniversary of the Association and almost eighty years of successful practice. Today, the Association consists of several hundred members, most of them working at private firms that serve state or municipal authorities. In Israel, unlike other countries, landscape architecture is an integral and mandatory part of public projects, and the demand for registered and licensed practitioners exceeds supply. Yet, their deeds of professional conduct have not yet been resolved and remain at the center of legal controversy and competition with architects.