Key concepts in a framework for analysing visual landscape character

Abstract A transparent and theory-based scheme for analysing visual character is presented. Based on a literature review, nine key visual concepts are identified: stewardship, coherence, disturbance, historicity, visual scale, imageability, complexity, naturalness and ephemera. The nine visual concepts are presented in a framework of four levels of abstraction, described through the concepts' visual dimensions, landscape attributes contributing to the concepts and potential visual indicators suggested for mapping and quantifying the concepts. Each of these concepts focuses on different aspects of the landscape important for visual quality, where visual quality is an holistic experience of them all. The visual concepts presented are used to describe different characteristics of visual landscapes, rather than presenting a normative value for visual quality. It is believed that this framework can be important for landscape assessment and the compilation of landscape character.

[1]  A. Lindhagen,et al.  Forest recreation in 1977 and 1997 in Sweden: changes in public preferences and behaviour , 2000 .

[2]  R. Ulrich.  Aesthetic and Affective Response to Natural Environment , 1983 .

[3]  Gary Fry,et al.  Visual aspects in urban woodland management , 2002 .

[4]  David Lowenthal,et al.  The Past Is a Foreign Country , 1987 .

[5]  Paul H. Gobster,et al.  An Ecological Aesthetic for Forest Landscape Management , 1999, Landscape Journal.

[6]  Bill Slee,et al.  Public preferences for landscape features: A case study of two Scottish environmentally sensitive areas , 1998 .

[7]  Joan Iverson Nassauer,et al.  Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames , 1995, Landscape Journal.

[8]  Graham Fairclough,et al.  Yesterday's world, tomorrow's landscape : the English Heritage Historic Landscape Project 1992-94 , 1999 .

[9]  R. J. Lamb,et al.  Preference and naturalness: An ecological approach , 1998 .

[10]  Brian Orland.  Environmental aesthetics: Aesthetic preference for rural landscapes: some resident and visitor differences , 1988 .

[11]  R. Hull,et al.  Change in the landscape , 1988 .

[12]  J. D. van Mansvelt,et al.  The appearance of agriculture: An assessment of the quality of landscape of both organic and conventional horticultural farms in West Friesland , 2000 .

[13]  Joan Iverson Nassauer.  The appearance of ecological systems as a matter of policy , 2004, Landscape Ecology.

[14]  J. Nassauer.  Cultural Sustainability: Aligning Aesthetics and Ecology , 1997 .

[15]  Francisco Ayuga,et al.  ASSESSMENT OF THE VISUAL IMPACT MADE ON THE LANDSCAPE BY NEW BUILDINGS: A METHODOLOGY FOR SITE SELECTION , 2004 .

[16]  M. Germino,et al.  Estimating visual properties of Rocky Mountain landscapes using GIS , 2001 .

[17]  Robert D. Brown,et al.  Enhancing visual preference of ecological rehabilitation sites , 2002 .

[18]  Constantino Arce,et al.  CLASSIFICATION OF LANDSCAPES USING QUANTITATIVE AND CATEGORICAL DATA, AND PREDICTION OF THEIR SCENIC BEAUTY IN NORTH-WESTERN SPAIN , 2000 .

[19]  Wendy Fjellstad,et al.  Integrating landscape-based values—Norwegian monitoring of agricultural landscapes , 2001 .

[20]  Terry C. Daniel,et al.  Scenic landscape assessment: the effects of land management jurisdiction on public perception of scenic beauty. , 2000 .

[21]  W. H. Ittelson,et al.  Environmental psychology: People and their physical settings , 1976 .

[22]  Simon Bell,et al.  Landscape: Pattern, Perception and Process , 1999 .

[23]  MICHAEL G. WING,et al.  Quantifying Forest Visibility with Spatial Data , 2001, Environmental management.

[24]  Arthur E. Stamps.  A paradigm for distinguishing significant from nonsignificant visual impacts: Theory, implementation, case histories , 1997 .

[25]  Randy Gimblett,et al.  Perceptual values in the cultural landscape: A computer model for assessing and mapping perceived mystery in rural environments , 1992 .

[26]  Thomas George Yahner,et al.  Community by design: contemporary problems—historic resolve , 1997 .

[27]  Finn Arler,et al.  Aspects of landscape or nature quality , 2000, Landscape Ecology.

[28]  V. Angileri,et al.  The assessment of visual quality as a tool for the conservation of rural landscape diversity , 1993 .

[29]  M. B. Nebel,et al.  Assessing the restorative components of environments , 2003 .

[30]  F. E. Kuo,et al.  VIEWS OF NATURE AND SELF-DISCIPLINE: EVIDENCE FROM INNER CITY CHILDREN , 2002 .

[31]  Terry Hartig,et al.  Nature experience in transactional perspective , 1993 .

[32]  F. Kienast,et al.  Potential impacts of changing agricultural activities on scenic beauty – a prototypical technique for automated rapid assessment , 1999, Landscape Ecology.

[33]  Terry Purcell,et al.  Fractal dimension of landscape silhouette outlines as a predictor of landscape preference , 2004 .

[34]  W. H. Ittelson,et al.  Freedom of choice and behavior in a physical setting. , 1972 .

[35]  T. R. Herzog,et al.  A cognitive analysis of preference for waterscapes , 1985 .

[36]  Edward S. Neumann,et al.  Presentation mode and question format artifacts in visual assessment research , 1987 .

[37]  D. Lowenthal,et al.  The Past is a Foreign Country , 1986 .

[38]  J. Nasar,et al.  The emotional quality of scenes and observation points: A look at prospect and refuge , 1983 .

[39]  Kevin Lynch,et al.  The Image of the City , 1960 .

[40]  O. Puschmann,et al.  Agricultural impacts on landscapes : Developing indicators for policy analysis , 2003 .

[41]  Stephen R.J. Sheppard,et al.  Forests and Landscapes: Linking Ecology, Sustainability and Aesthetics , 2000 .

[42]  R. Kaplan,et al.  The Experience of Nature , 2022, Why Conserve Nature?.

[43]  E. Strumse.  Perceptual dimensions in the visual preferences for agrarian landscapes in western norway , 1994 .

[44]  James F. Palmer,et al.  Reliability of Rating Visible Landscape Qualities , 2000, Landscape Journal.

[45]  Kazunori Hanyu,et al.  VISUAL PROPERTIES AND AFFECTIVE APPRAISALS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS IN DAYLIGHT , 2000 .

[46]  Hubert Gulinck,et al.  Approach to landscape character using satellite imagery and spatial analysis tools , 2000 .

[47]  Graham Fairclough,et al.  Europe's Cultural Landscape: archaeologists and the management of change Edited by Graham Fairclough and Stephen Rippon , 2004 .

[48]  E. eng,et al.  Forest landscape design guidelines , 1994 .

[49]  Javier Gómez-Limón,et al.  Changes in use and landscape preferences on the agricultural-livestock landscapes of the central Iberian Peninsula (Madrid, Spain) , 1999 .

[50]  Simon Bell,et al.  Elements of Visual Design in the Landscape , 1993 .

[51]  A. Stamps.  Mystery, complexity, legibility and coherence: A meta-analysis , 2004 .

[52]  Edward Relph,et al.  Classics in human geography revisited , 1994 .

[53]  R. K. Smidt,et al.  Assessing the validity and reliability of descriptor variables used in scenic highway analysis , 2004 .

[54]  E. Strumse.  Environmental attributes and the prediction of visual preferences for agrarian landscapes in Western Norway , 1994 .

[55]  Wayne D. Iverson.  And That's About the Size of It: Visual Magnitude as a Measurement of the Physical Landscape , 1985, Landscape Journal.

[56]  T. Purcell,et al.  Why do Preferences Differ between Scene Types? , 2001 .

[57]  K. Olwig,et al.  The Aesthetics of Landscape , 1991 .

[58]  T. R. Herzog,et al.  A cognitive analysis of preference for urban nature , 1989 .

[59]  Terry C. Daniel,et al.  Predicting Scenic Values in Forested Residential Landscapes , 1984 .

[60]  Mingshen Wang,et al.  An experimental validation for SAGE's value assessment procedures , 1992 .

[61]  C. Holahan.  Cognition and Environment: Functioning in an Uncertain World. , 1984 .

[62]  Caroline Read,et al.  Study into landscape potential for wind turbine development in East and North Highland and Moray , 2004 .

[63]  Stephen R.J. Sheppard,et al.  Beyond visual resource management: emerging theories of an ecological aesthetic and visible stewardship. , 2001 .

[64]  J. B. Jackson,et al.  The Interpretation of Ordinary Landscapes: Geographical Essays , 1979 .

[65]  J. Nasar,et al.  Landscape mirror: the attractiveness of reflecting water , 2004 .

[66]  J. Kuiper.  A checklist approach to evaluate the contribution of organic farms to landscape quality , 2000 .

[67]  Ray Green,et al.  MEANING AND FORM IN COMMUNITY PERCEPTION OF TOWN CHARACTER , 1999 .

[68]  A. Carlson,et al.  Aesthetic preferences for sustainable landscapes: seeing and knowing. , 2001 .

[69]  R. Burton Litton,et al.  Water and Landscape: An Aesthetic Overview of the Role of Water in the Landscape , 1974 .

[70]  J. Kuiper,et al.  Landscape quality based upon diversity, coherence and continuity: Landscape planning at different planning-levels in the River area of The Netherlands , 1998 .

[71]  Anna Jorgensen,et al.  Woodland spaces and edges: their impact on perception of safety and preference , 2002 .

[72]  R. Costanza,et al.  The evolution of preferences Why 'sovereign' preferences may not lead to sustainable policies and what to do about it , 1998 .

[73]  P. Girardin,et al.  Assessment of the contribution of land use pattern and intensity to landscape quality: use of a landscape indicator. , 2000 .

[74]  A. Lothian.  Landscape and the philosophy of aesthetics: is landscape quality inherent in the landscape or in the eye of the beholder? , 1999 .

[75]  D. S. Davis,et al.  Tracking restoration in natural and urban field settings. , 2003 .

[76]  Jay E. Anderson.  A conceptual framework for evaluating and quantifying naturalness , 1991 .

[77]  J. F. Coeterier,et al.  Dominant attributes in the perception and evaluation of the Dutch landscape , 1996 .

[78]  R. Millward,et al.  The Experience of Landscape , 1988 .

[79]  Robert Morgan,et al.  Some factors affecting coastal landscape aesthetic quality assessment , 1999 .

[80]  T. Daniel,et al.  Measuring landscape esthetics: the scenic beauty estimation method , 1976 .

[81]  Ervin H. Zube,et al.  Themes in Landscape Assessment Theory , 1984, Landscape Journal.

[82]  W. Hale,et al.  Assessment of scenic beauty of the roadside vegetation in northern England , 2003 .

[83]  Wendy Fjellstad,et al.  Heterogeneity as a measure of spatial pattern for monitoring agricultural landscapes , 2001 .

[84]  W. Dramstad,et al.  Agricultural impacts on landscapes: Developing indicators for policy analysis - Proceedings from NIJOS/OECD Expert Meeting on Agricultural Landscape Indicators in Oslo, Norway October 7-9, 2002. , 2003 .

[85]  J. Palmer.  Using spatial metrics to predict scenic perception in a changing landscape: Dennis, Massachusetts , 2004 .

[86]  Hannes Palang,et al.  Holistic aspects in landscape development: a scenario approach , 2000 .

[87]  J. Mansvelt,et al.  Criteria for the humanity realm: psychology and physiognomy and cultural heritage , 1999 .

[88]  Gregory J. Buhyoff,et al.  Manipulation of dimensionality in landscape preference judgments: A quantitative validation∗ , 1979 .

[89]  Ervin H. Zube,et al.  Landscape perception: Research, application and theory , 1982 .

[90]  W. T. de Groot,et al.  Visions of nature and landscape type preferences : an exploration in the Netherlands , 2003 .