Visual aspects in urban woodland management and planning

Urban woodland is an important component of people's everyday environment, both as an attractive environment to visit as well as being an intrinsic part of the surrounding landscape. This thesis focuses on one specific aspect of the urban woodland - the visual. The visual aspect is how most people experience the woodland, both when visiting and as part of their everyday landscape. In order to take visual aspects into account there is a need to have tools and approaches for analysing and describing these. This thesis highlights the importance of management context as well as providing tools for the spatial analysis of visual aspects. The methods used are a combination of predictive modelling, literature reviews and visibility analysis. Based on landscape aesthetic theories, a set of visual concepts were distinguished that were also supported by management guidelines. These visual concepts are: diversity, scale, visual accessibility, stewardship, naturalness and coherence. Visual concepts are presented both in relation to their theoretical basis and to the physical attributes influencing them. Visibility analysis was explored as a way of modelling visual aspects in urban woodland management and planning, with a focus on woodland as an important visual element in the landscape. Visibility models were developed as a way of analysing the contents of the view with regards to woodland. Using a case study area in Aberdeen, Scotland, the contents of the view were analysed both in relation to preferred forest types as well as for the concept of visual diversity. In addition to the focus on visual aspects, this thesis also highlights facets of the management context that influence visual management. These are urban pressure, cultural context and management paradigm. These three factors are important for interpreting and understanding the way management and planning strategies are carried out and hence offer insights into visual resource management. The result of the thesis provides a framework for including visual aspects in urban woodland management and planning as well as being a base for future research within the field.

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

[2]  Bruce T. Milne,et al.  Indices of landscape pattern , 1988, Landscape Ecology.

[3]  T. Daniel,et al.  Good looking: in defense of scenic landscape aesthetics , 2002 .

[4]  Martin Goossen,et al.  Modelling recreational visits to forests and nature areas. , 2002 .

[5]  David Miller,et al.  A method for estimating changes in the visibility of land cover , 2001 .

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

[7]  Ian D. Bishop,et al.  Our visual landscape: analysis, modeling, visualization and protection , 2001 .

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

[9]  L. Tyrväinen,et al.  Forest management and public perceptions — visual versus verbal information , 2001 .

[10]  Ian D. Bishop,et al.  Assessment of path choices on a country walk using a virtual environment , 2001 .

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

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

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

[14]  Terence R. Lee.  Perceptions, Attitudes and Preferences in Forests and Woodlands , 2001 .

[15]  Ian J. Bateman,et al.  Modelling demand for recreation in English woodlands. , 2001 .

[16]  R. Coles,et al.  Urban forest landscapes in the UK — progressing the social agenda , 2000 .

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

[18]  A. Kliskey.  Recreation terrain suitability mapping: a spatially explicit methodology for determining recreation potential for resource use assessment , 2000 .

[19]  Veerle Van Eetvelde,et al.  Holistic aspects of suburban landscapes: visual image interpretation and landscape metrics , 2000 .

[20]  J. Falck,et al.  Urban forestry in Sweden from a silvicultural perspective: a review , 2000 .

[21]  Frederick Steiner,et al.  The living landscape : an ecological approach to landscape planning , 2000 .

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

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

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

[25]  S. Yaffee.  Three Faces of Ecosystem Management , 1999 .

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

[27]  R. Muir.  Approaches to Landscape , 1999 .

[28]  Tomas Germundsson,et al.  Atlas över Skåne , 1999 .

[29]  J. Lankhorst,et al.  Evaluating visible spatial diversity in the landscape , 1998 .

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

[31]  T. Randrup,et al.  RESEARCH NOTE: CO-ORDINATION OF EUROPEAN RESEARCH ON URBAN FORESTS AND TREES , 1998 .

[32]  R. Kaplan,et al.  With people in mind , 1998 .

[33]  Joan Iverson Nassauer,et al.  Placing Nature: Culture And Landscape Ecology , 1997 .

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

[35]  Peter F. Fisher,et al.  Extending the applicability of viewsheds in landscape planning , 1996 .

[36]  P. Jacobs.  Cities and natural processes , 1996 .

[37]  Alan Gilpin,et al.  Dictionary of environment and sustainable development. , 1996 .

[38]  G. Grey.  The Urban Forest: Comprehensive Management , 1995 .

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

[40]  S. Hodge.  Creating and Managing Woodlands Around Towns , 1995 .

[41]  W. Sutherland,et al.  Managing Habitats for Conservation. , 1995 .

[42]  S. Pickett,et al.  Forest-Landscape Structure along an Urban-To-Rural Gradient* , 1995, The Professional Geographer.

[43]  Thomas R. Stanley,et al.  Ecosystem management and the arrogance of humanism , 1995 .

[44]  Gordon A. Bradley,et al.  Urban forest landscapes : integrating multidisciplinary perspectives , 1995 .

[45]  Eckart Lange.  Integration of computerized visual simulation and visual assessment in environmental planning , 1994 .

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

[47]  Michael Hough,et al.  Cities and natural process , 1994 .

[48]  N. Nugent,et al.  European Commission , 1993, European Energy and Environmental Law Review.

[49]  Joseph K. Berry.  Beyond Mapping: Concepts, Algorithms, and Issues in Gis , 1993 .

[50]  Oliver W. R. Lucas,et al.  The Design of Forest Landscapes , 1991 .

[51]  F. Stearns.  Wildlife reserves and corridors in the urban environment: Lowell W. Adams and Louise E. Dove, National Institute for Urban Wildlife, Washington, DC, 1989 (ISBN 0-942015-02-9). 91 pp. $ 7.00 (paperback) , 1990 .

[52]  T. Daniel.  Measuring the quality of the natural environment: A psychophysical approach. , 1990 .

[53]  L. Adams.  National Institute for Urban Wildlife , 1989, Environmental Conservation.

[54]  H. Schroeder,et al.  Environment, Behavior, and Design Research on Urban Forests , 1989 .

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

[56]  Ervin H. Zube,et al.  Advance in Environment, Behavior, and Design , 1989, Advances in Environment, Behavior, and Design.

[57]  Richard Smardon,et al.  Perception and aesthetics of the urban environment: Review of the role of vegetation , 1988 .

[58]  Robert W. Miller.  Urban Forestry: Planning and Managing Urban Greenspaces , 1988 .

[59]  V. Bruce,et al.  Visual Perception: Physiology, Psychology and Ecology , 1985 .

[60]  G. Peterken,et al.  Silviculture of Broadleaved Woodland. , 1984 .

[61]  T. Daniel,et al.  Methodological Issues in the Assessment of Landscape Quality , 1983 .

[62]  I. Altman,et al.  Behavior and the natural environment , 1983 .

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

[64]  M. Denne,et al.  Nature in cities , 1980 .

[65]  Terry C. Daniel,et al.  Scenic beauty estimation model: predicting perceived beauty of forest landscapes , 1979 .

[66]  Allen Carlson,et al.  On the possibility of quantifying scenic beauty , 1977 .

[67]  A. Leopold,et al.  A Sand County Almanac and Sketches Here and There , 2020 .