All public action is developed on the basis of perceptions of its outcome and the mechanisms required to modify it. Intercommunal landscape policies are thus faced with contrasted representations of the landscape and public action. Underlying theories that support and justify proposed actions are rarely explicit. Nevertheless, the representations and hypotheses shared by those involved determine the direction the action will take together with its operational framework. They must be demonstrated in order to develop a true understanding of the intervention approaches of local stakeholders (Muller, 2005). The action theory of a measure or policy corresponds to the causal supposition applied to the problem to be resolved by policy designers (Trosa, 1992). It covers the hypotheses that underlie policy implementation, hypotheses on the nature and causes of the problem being considered; and hypotheses on the effectiveness and, in particular, the means of production of the actions implemented. This notion thus encapsulates the set of representations and ideas that inspire the designers or participants in the programme as its mechanisms, i.e. the cause and effect relationships between the measures taken and their expected social impact (French scientific Evaluation Committee, 1997). It is based on an often intuitive perception of the economic and social mechanisms (sometimes referred to as action levers) on which it is necessary to act, in the case in point, those influencing changes in the landscape. This work intends to analyse these action theories and to propose a typology on the basis of empirical observations relative to the development process for intercommunal landscape policies.