Home › Landscape Institute LI UK professional body

Landscape Institute LI UK professional body


The Landscape Institute (LI) is the successor to the Institute of Landscape Architects (ILA). It is Britain’s professional body for the landscape profession, which includes includes landscape architects, urban designers, landscape planners, landscape scientists and landscape managers. When formed in 1929-30 the ILA was purely a membership organisation, run by the members and for the members and with a written constitution. A change of name, to Landscape Institute took place in the 1970s. In 1997 the body was granted a royal charter and became a charity registered with the Charities Commission. The Royal Charter was obtained to raise the status of the profession in the eyes of the public and the government. Charitable status was also seen as an advantage because it would no longer have to pay VAT. The aims and objectives of the landscape profession’s official body also changed:

  • The Objects of the Institute of  Landscape Architects ILA were set out in Clause 2 of its first Constitution (drafted by Gilbert Henry Jenkins): ‘The Institute shall be formed to promote the study and general advancement of the Art of Landscape Architecture in all its branches, and to serve as a medium of friendly intercourse between the members and others practising or interested in the Art’. In Clause 3, ten Methods of Achievement were set out: Establish suitable headquarters; Arrange lectures; Prepare sets of lantern slides; Promote the publication of a Journal; Arrange periodical exhibitions; Found a Library; Educate the public in the Art of Landscape Architecture; Secure the establishment of one or more Training Centres; Organise visits to good examples of Landscape Architecture; Hold Conferences with other Societies who can assist in promoting the Art of Landscape Architecture.
  • The Objects of the Landscape Institute  LI  are specified as follows in Clause 5. (1) as : ‘The objects and purposes for which the Institute is hereby constituted are to protect, conserve and enhance the natural and built environment for the benefit of the public by promoting the arts and sciences of Landscape Architecture (as such expression is hereinafter defined) and its several applications and for that purpose to foster and encourage the dissemination of knowledge relating to Landscape Architecture and the promotion of research and education therein, and in particular to establish, uphold and advance the standards of education, qualification, competence and conduct of those who practice Landscape Architecture as a profession, and to determine standards and criteria for education, training and experience.’

These differences have proved significant:

  • The emphasis of the ILA was on serving the needs and wishes of its members, particularly with regard to promotion of the profession and development of the art of landscape architecture. This objective led to a emphasis on the preparation and promulgation of landscape policies (for the landscape treatment of new towns, housing, roads, forestry etc)
  • The emphasis of LI is on charitable objectives, particularly relating to general environmental objectives including conservation of the natural and built environment and it is stated that this is ‘for the benefit of the public‘ more than for the benefit of the profession. This objective led to an emphasis on diversity, inclusiveness, equality and climate change (all of which apply to all the environmental professions as much as they do to the landscape profession.

Another difference, apparently resulting from the adoption of the Royal Charter, is that the nature of the Institute has changed. In ILA days, all the work was done elected members with the support of one or two secretaries. The LI, in contrast, has a Chief Executive (instead of a Secretary), a large staff and much less involvement of the membership.  ILA members used to have a Members Handbook with the names and addresses of fellow members. The LI does not let members consult the database of fellow members and this is a hindrance to ‘friendly intercourse between the members and others practising or interested in the Art’.  The Data Protection Act imposes some restrictions but other professional bodies have an opt-in/opt-out system so that members can control whether or not their contact details are available to other members.