The immersive visualization theater: A new tool for ecosystem assessment and landscape planning

Abstract In this study focusing on human–environment interactions, we analyze the use of an immersive visualization theater (IVT) for exploring how humans use and value cultural ecosystem services provided by natural landscapes in Israel's Carmel Forest. Our goal in this inductive, exploratory study is to assess the impact of the IVT on the quality and content of stakeholder discussions held in the theater. We facilitated 10 focus group discussions in the IVT, where a series of high-resolution photographs were projected. Participants were asked (in writing and orally) to choose from among the scenes where they would prefer to spend time, and then asked to explain their answers. Next, they were asked to describe activities in selected scenes in which they were likely to participate. We suggest that the immersion theater, due to screen size, photo resolution, social interaction, and group isolation within the theater, elicited attention to detail and triggered memories and sensory responses to various landscapes. The qualitative data derived from focus group discussions add to our understanding of the diverse meanings and importance that different people attribute to the landscape, contribute to understanding the social processes and conditions through which participants attribute value to cultural ecosystem services, and allow us to generate testable hypotheses for continuing research.

[1]  Richard Chenoweth,et al.  Differences in rural landscape perceptions and preferences between farmers and naturalists , 2008 .

[2]  M. Bloor,et al.  Focus Groups in Social Research , 2000 .

[3]  Millenium Ecosystem Assessment.  Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis , 2005 .

[4]  R. Howarth,et al.  Discourse-based valuation of ecosystem services: establishing fair outcomes through group deliberation , 2002 .

[5]  R. D. Groot,et al.  The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy , 2012 .

[6]  Joe E. Heimlich,et al.  Giant screen film and science learning in museums , 2012 .

[7]  R. Ribe.  The aesthetics of forestry: What has empirical preference research taught us? , 1989 .

[8]  E. Shafer,et al.  How to measure preferences for photographs of natural landscapes , 1977 .

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

[10]  Kwanguk Kim,et al.  Comparison of desktop, head mounted display, and six wall fully immersive systems using a stressful task , 2012, 2012 IEEE Virtual Reality Workshops (VRW).

[11]  Kyu Shik Oh,et al.  A perceptual evaluation of computer-based landscape simulations , 1994 .

[12]  Carl Steinitz,et al.  Toward a sustainable landscape with high visual preference and high ecological integrity: the loop road in Acadia National Park, U.S.A. , 1990 .

[13]  T. Pinto-Correia,et al.  The fuzziness of Montado landscapes: progress in assessing user preferences through photo-based surveys , 2011, Agroforestry Systems.

[14]  Pamela Jordan.  Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques , 1994 .

[15]  Daniel E. Orenstein,et al.  Using the Ecosystem Services Framework in a Long-Term Socio-Ecological Research (LTSER) Platform: Lessons from the Wadi Araba Desert, Israel and Jordan , 2015 .

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

[17]  Yohay Carmel,et al.  The Evolution of the Cultural Mediterranean Landscape in Israel as Affected by Fire, Grazing, and Human Activities , 2004 .

[18]  T. Daniel.  Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century , 2001 .

[19]  Joel Brumm,et al.  Towards Structured Public Involvement in Highway Design: A Comparative Study of Visualization Methods and Preference Modeling using CAVE (Casewise Visual Evaluation) , 2001 .

[20]  Sven Fuhrmann,et al.  Virtual environments for geographic visualization: potential and challenges , 1999, NPIVM '99.

[21]  Greg Brown,et al.  Public Participation GIS: A Method for Identifying Ecosystem Services , 2012 .

[22]  Mark Lindquist,et al.  Sensory Aspects of Simulation and Representation in Landscape and Environmental Planning: A Soundscape Perspective , 2014 .

[23]  M. Arriaza,et al.  Assessing the visual quality of rural landscapes , 2004 .

[24]  Rachelle K. Gould,et al.  Where are Cultural and Social in Ecosystem Services? A Framework for Constructive Engagement , 2012 .

[25]  Eckart Lange,et al.  Visualization in Landscape Architecture and Planning : Where we have been , where we are now and where we might go from here , 2004 .

[26]  Simon Bell,et al.  Landscape pattern, perception and visualisation in the visual management of forests , 2001 .

[27]  Eckart Lange,et al.  The limits of realism: perceptions of virtual landscapes , 2001 .

[28]  B. Burkhard,et al.  Cultural ecosystem services in the context of offshore wind farming: A case study from the west coast of Schleswig-Holstein , 2010 .

[29]  Robert M. Edsall,et al.  The impact of visual information on perceptions of water resource problems and management alternatives , 2010 .

[30]  Frederick P. Brooks.  What's Real About Virtual Reality? , 1999, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[31]  Eckart Lange.  99 volumes later: We can visualise. Now what? , 2011 .

[32]  Patricia Gober,et al.  Credibility, salience, and legitimacy of boundary objects: water managers' assessment of a simulation model in an immersive decision theater , 2010 .

[33]  G. Luck,et al.  Ethical Considerations in On-Ground Applications of the Ecosystem Services Concept , 2012 .

[34]  Olaf Schroth,et al.  Multiple-Case Study of Landscape Visualizations as a Tool in Transdisciplinary Planning Workshops , 2011, Landscape Journal.

[35]  Robert M. Edsall,et al.  Effectiveness of a Semi-Immersive Virtual Environment in Understanding Human–Environment Interactions , 2009 .

[36]  Stephen R.J. Sheppard.  Validity, reliability and ethics in visualization , 2005 .

[37]  Doug A. Bowman,et al.  Virtual Reality: How Much Immersion Is Enough? , 2007, Computer.

[38]  Stephen R. J. Sheppard,et al.  Reviewing the role of visualization in communicating and understanding forest complexity , 2005, Ninth International Conference on Information Visualisation (IV'05).

[39]  Daniel E. Orenstein,et al.  Cross-cultural perceptions of ecosystem services: A social inquiry on both sides of the Israeli–Jordanian border of the Southern Arava Valley Desert , 2013 .

[40]  J. W. Termorshuizen,et al.  Landscape services as a bridge between landscape ecology and sustainable development , 2009, Landscape Ecology.

[41]  E. Zube,et al.  Cross-cultural perceptions of scenic and heritage landscapes , 1981 .

[42]  Greg Brown.  The relationship between social values for ecosystem services and global land cover: An empirical analysis , 2013 .

[43]  R. Costanza,et al.  Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[44]  Philip Paar,et al.  Landscape visualizations: Applications and requirements of 3D visualization software for environmental planning , 2006, Comput. Environ. Urban Syst..

[45]  A. Duraiappah,et al.  The Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services: opportunities for the social sciences , 2011 .

[46]  Stephen R.J. Sheppard,et al.  Culture and communication: Can landscape visualization improve forest management consultation with indigenous communities? , 2006 .

[47]  Kenny Gruchalla,et al.  Immersive well-path editing: investigating the added value of immersion , 2004, IEEE Virtual Reality 2004.

[48]  Daniel E. Orenstein,et al.  In the eye of the stakeholder: Changes in perceptions of ecosystem services across an international border , 2014 .

[49]  Rachelle K. Gould,et al.  A protocol for eliciting nonmaterial values through a cultural ecosystem services frame , 2014, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[50]  T. Clark.  The policy process : a practical guide for natural resource professionals , 2002 .

[51]  C. Tilley,et al.  A Phenomenology of Landscape: Places, Paths and Monuments , 1994 .

[52]  T. Daniel,et al.  REPRESENTATIONAL VALIDITY OF LANDSCAPE VISUALIZATIONS: THE EFFECTS OF GRAPHICAL REALISM ON PERCEIVED SCENIC BEAUTY OF FOREST VISTAS , 2001 .

[53]  Rob Feick,et al.  A Practical Approach for Evaluating Cultural Heritage Landscapes: Lessons From Rural Ontario , 2009 .

[54]  Ian D. Bishop,et al.  Communication, perception and visualization , 2005 .

[55]  Goran Konjevod,et al.  Digital Phoenix Project: A Multidimensional Journey through Time , 2009 .

[56]  John Danahy,et al.  Technology for dynamic viewing and peripheral vision in landscape visualization , 2001 .

[57]  M. Meitner.  Scenic beauty of river views in the Grand Canyon : relating perceptual judgments to locations , 2004 .

[58]  Anselm L. Strauss,et al.  Qualitative Analysis For Social Scientists , 1987 .

[59]  I. Knez,et al.  Cultural ecosystem services provided by landscapes: Assessment of heritage values and identity , 2012 .

[60]  Stephen R.J. Sheppard,et al.  Guidance for crystal ball gazers: developing a code of ethics for landscape visualization , 2001 .

[61]  Alon Tal,et al.  All the Trees of the Forest: Israel's Woodlands from the Bible to the Present , 2013 .

[62]  Robert Shipley,et al.  Making it Count , 2012 .

[63]  Nora Fagerholm,et al.  Community stakeholders’ knowledge in landscape assessments – Mapping indicators for landscape services , 2012 .

[64]  B. Grizzetti,et al.  Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union , 2012 .

[65]  Andreas Muhar,et al.  The role of computer visualization in the communication of urban design—A comparison of viewer responses to visualizations versus on-site visits , 2009 .

[66]  A. H. Zakri,et al.  Ecosystems and human well-being - Synthesis: A Report of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment , 2005 .

[67]  Maurizio Codispoti,et al.  Arousal and attention: picture size and emotional reactions. , 2007, Psychophysiology.

[68]  Byron Reeves,et al.  The effects of screen size and message content on attention and arousal Media Psychology , 1999 .

[69]  J. Spangenberg,et al.  Precisely incorrect? Monetising the value of ecosystem services § , 2010 .