Historic gardens are conceptualized within various cultural and legal frameworks. This research aims to unravel the complexities of the historic garden identity through the lens of international regulations, national laws, and scientific literature to reveal differences in the perception of their botanical elements. We employed a combined analytical approach, using recommendations from related international institutions (i.e. UNESCO, ICCROM, and ICOMOS), national legislation, and a review of scientific literature. The analysis identified 25 documents related to the keywords: nature, landscape, site, and garden; however, only six mentioned gardens, and just one (The Florence Charter., 1982) explicitly addressed historic gardens. Only 7 % of UNESCO member countries (197) have specific provisions for historic gardens. Within them, a diverse range of definitions and standards has resulted in discrepancies in how historic gardens are recognized and conserved across different jurisdictions. Some countries have well-defined categories for garden heritage, while others offer limited or broad categorizations that may obscure garden identities. The findings underscore the necessity for more coherent international regulations that adequately reflect historic gardens' cultural and botanical significance. The study also highlighted the overlooked role of botanical elements, since only four countries included botanical value as an explicit criterion in their legal designations, suggesting that the botanical aspect is often considered within a larger ecological and geographical context. The imperative to preserve these living legacies within the broader context of cultural heritage also became apparent.

中文翻译：

---

历史花园的身份：国际文献的观点和对植物元素作用的委托


历史园林在各种文化和法律框架中被概念化。本研究旨在通过国际法规、国家法律和科学文献的视角来揭示历史花园身份的复杂性，以揭示对其植物元素的看法差异。我们采用了一种综合分析方法，使用相关国际机构（即 UNESCO、ICCROM 和 ICOMOS）的建议、国家立法和科学文献综述。分析确定了 25 个与关键词相关的文件：自然、景观、遗址和花园;然而，只有 6 个提到了花园，只有一个（佛罗伦萨宪章，1982 年）明确提到了历史花园。只有 7% 的联合国教科文组织成员国 （197） 对历史园林有具体规定。其中，不同的定义和标准导致不同司法管辖区对历史园林的识别和保护方式存在差异。一些国家/地区对花园遗产有明确定义的类别，而另一些国家/地区则提供有限或宽泛的分类，这可能会掩盖花园的身份。研究结果强调了制定更连贯的国际法规的必要性，以充分反映历史花园的文化和植物意义。该研究还强调了植物学元素被忽视的作用，因为只有四个国家在其法律名称中将植物学价值作为明确的标准，这表明植物学方面通常在更大的生态和地理背景下考虑。在更广泛的文化遗产背景下保护这些活的遗产的必要性也变得显而易见。