Assessing cumulative visual impacts in coastal areas of the Baltic Sea

Abstract Anthropogenic activity such as offshore wind energy farm development, shipping activity, resource extraction platforms or marine aquaculture can have adverse impacts on the visual quality of coastal landscapes. GIS-based viewshed analysis is the most widely used technique to address visual impacts. However, despite the wide application its spatial extent remains limited to local and regional studies. This study presents a GIS-based model for cumulative visual impact assessment on macro-regional scale based on a case study for the Baltic Sea. The viewshed model was deployed over a visibility zone covering 54% (223.641 km 2 ) of the Baltic Sea space using a database of 63,672 observation points integrated by geospatial data on existing and planned sea uses representing potential visual stressors. Results show that areas of highest potential visual impact are sheltered coastal areas with complex geomorphological features such as barrier islands, peninsulas, straits, archipelagos and lagoons in combination with intensive anthropogenic activity and presence of nature protected areas. The methodology can be applied to any coastal area of the world to classify coastal areas due to their cumulative viewshed characteristics and as early monitoring tool for visual impact assessment on transboundary scale.

[1]  S. Kidd.  Rising to the integration ambitions of Marine Spatial Planning: Reflections from the Irish Sea , 2013 .

[2]  Francisco Andrade,et al.  Quantitative assessment of the differential coastal vulnerability associated to oil spills , 2012, Journal of Coastal Conservation.

[3]  D. Schoeman,et al.  Quantifying cumulative threats to sandy beach ecosystems: A tool to guide ecosystem-based management beyond coastal reserves , 2015 .

[4]  Lindsay G. Ross,et al.  Visual, seascape and landscape analysis to support coastal aquaculture site selection , 2013 .

[5]  Gary W. Johnson,et al.  Spatial dynamics of ecosystem service flows: A comprehensive approach to quantifying actual services , 2013 .

[6]  Maria Laamanen,et al.  Cumulative impacts on seabed habitats: an indicator for assessments of good environmental status. , 2013, Marine pollution bulletin.

[7]  E. Pranzini,et al.  Coastal Erosion and Protection in Europe , 2013 .

[8]  N. Bicho,et al.  Shellmiddens as landmarks: Visibility studies on the Mesolithic of the Muge valley (Central Portugal) , 2014 .

[9]  G. Verutes,et al.  Exploring scenarios of light pollution from coastal development reaching sea turtle nesting beaches near Cabo Pulmo, Mexico , 2014 .

[10]  K. L. Anthonsen,et al.  Screening for CO2 storage sites in Southeast North Sea and Southwest Baltic Sea , 2014 .

[11]  G Weisbrod,et al.  Integrating Tourism And Recreation Travel With Transportation Planning And Project Delivery , 2004 .

[12]  Rainer Froese,et al.  Marine Strategy Framework Directive , 2013 .

[13]  Hans von Storch,et al.  BALTEX ASSESSMENT OF CLIMATE CHANGE for the Baltic Sea basin (BACC) , 2007 .

[14]  Ahmed Mezrhab,et al.  CSP Sites Suitability Analysis in the Eastern Region of Morocco , 2014 .

[15]  Annalisa Minelli,et al.  An open source GIS tool to quantify the visual impact of wind turbines and photovoltaic panels , 2014 .

[16]  S. Caquard,et al.  Mapping cumulative impacts on Hong Kong's pink dolphin population , 2015 .

[17]  Jacob Ladenburg,et al.  Willingness to pay for reduced visual disamenities from offshore wind farms in denmark , 2007 .

[18]  Stuart E. Hamilton,et al.  Integrating lidar, GIS and hedonic price modeling to measure amenity values in urban beach residential property markets , 2010, Comput. Environ. Urban Syst..

[19]  G. Giebel,et al.  Europe's onshore and offshore wind energy potential : An assessment of environmental and economic constraints , 2009 .

[20]  T. Marauhn,et al.  International Environmental Law , 2011 .

[21]  H. Janssen,et al.  A spatial typology for the sea: A contribution from the Baltic , 2013 .

[22]  Agnia Grigas.  The Politics of Energy and Memory between the Baltic States and Russia , 2014 .

[23]  M. Andersson,et al.  Environmental Science : Understanding, protecting and managing the environment in the Baltic Sea Region , 2003 .

[24]  B. Halpern,et al.  Evaluating tradeoffs among ecosystem services to inform marine spatial planning , 2013 .

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

[26]  Å. Danielsson.  Influence of hypoxia on silicate concentrations in the Baltic Proper (Baltic Sea) , 2014 .

[27]  Adam Weintrit,et al.  Safety of Marine Transport : Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation , 2015 .

[28]  H. Janssen,et al.  On the potential benefits of marine spatial planning for herring spawning conditions—An example from the western Baltic Sea , 2015 .

[29]  J. Corbett,et al.  Regional economic and environmental analysis as a decision support for marine spatial planning in Xiamen , 2015 .

[30]  Young-Hoon Kim,et al.  Exploring multiple viewshed analysis using terrain features and optimisation techniques , 2004, Comput. Geosci..

[31]  A. Montis,et al.  Nuraghes and landscape planning: coupling viewshed with complex network analysis. , 2012 .

[32]  Thomas Lang,et al.  Hazardous substances in the Baltic Sea: An integrated thematic assessment of hazardous substances in the Baltic Sea , 2010 .

[33]  Jacob Ladenburg,et al.  Visual impact assessment of offshore wind farms and prior experience , 2009 .

[34]  Benjamin S. Halpern,et al.  Baltic Sea biodiversity status vs. cumulative human pressures , 2015 .

[35]  Jesper H. Andersen,et al.  Human pressures and their potential impact on the Baltic Sea ecosystem , 2012 .

[36]  Carrie V. Kappel,et al.  A Global Map of Human Impact on Marine Ecosystems , 2008, Science.

[37]  G. Schernewski,et al.  Baltic coastal ecosystems : structure, function and coastal zone management , 2002 .

[38]  R. Lifran,et al.  The case for offshore wind farms, artificial reefs and sustainable tourism in the French mediterranean , 2013 .

[39]  D. Jin,et al.  Shoreline change, seawalls, and coastal property values , 2015 .

[40]  Ioannis Z. Gitas,et al.  Assessment of the visual impact of marble quarry expansion (1984-2000) on the landscape of Thasos island, NE Greece. , 2008 .

[41]  Pece V. Gorsevski,et al.  A web-based participatory GIS (PGIS) for offshore wind farm suitability within Lake Erie, Ohio , 2015 .

[42]  S. Polasky,et al.  The value of views and open space: estimates from a hedonic pricing model for Ramsey County, Minnesota, USA. , 2009 .

[43]  Santiago Pardo García,et al.  A geospatial indicator for assessing urban panoramic views , 2015, Comput. Environ. Urban Syst..

[44]  Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas,et al.  Multi-criteria selection of a deep-water port in the Eastern Baltic Sea , 2015, Appl. Soft Comput..

[45]  Benjamin S. Halpern,et al.  Assumptions, challenges, and future directions in cumulative impact analysis , 2013 .

[46]  Michael J. Meitner,et al.  A route-based visibility analysis for landscape management , 2013 .

[47]  Silvia Stiller,et al.  The future of the Baltic Sea region: Potentials and challenges , 2011 .

[48]  T. Żylicz.  Costing Nature in a Transition Economy: Case Studies in Poland , 2000 .

[49]  Fuzzy viewshed, probable viewshed, and their use in the analysis of prehistoric monuments placement in Western Slovakia , 2014 .

[50]  Imrich Jakab,et al.  Development of a Program Tool for the Determination of the Landscape Visual Exposure Potential , 2012 .

[51]  D. Depellegrin,et al.  Aesthetic value characterization of landscapes in coastal zones , 2012, 2012 IEEE/OES Baltic International Symposium (BALTIC).

[52]  Steven M. Manson,et al.  Heights and locations of artificial structures in viewshed calculation : How close is close enough? , 2007 .

[53]  Frank Maes,et al.  The integration of nature conservation into the marine spatial planning process , 2013 .

[54]  Michael J. Harrower,et al.  Landscapes of death: GIS-based analyses of chullpas in the western Lake Titicaca basin , 2012 .

[55]  Carrie V. Kappel,et al.  Evaluating and Ranking the Vulnerability of Global Marine Ecosystems to Anthropogenic Threats , 2007, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[56]  E. Bonsdorff.  Zoobenthic diversity-gradients in the Baltic Sea: Continuous post-glacial succession in a stressed ecosystem , 2006 .

[57]  Claire Haggett,et al.  Understanding public responses to offshore wind power , 2011 .

[58]  Darius J. Semmens,et al.  An application of Social Values for Ecosystem Services (SolVES) to three national forests in Colorado and Wyoming , 2014 .

[59]  Joey R. Bernhardt,et al.  Modeling benefits from nature: using ecosystem services to inform coastal and marine spatial planning , 2012 .

[60]  Ian D. Bishop,et al.  Integrating technologies for visual resource management , 1991 .

[61]  D. Depellegrin,et al.  An integrated visual impact assessment model for offshore windfarm development , 2014 .

[62]  Tobias Börger,et al.  Valuation of ecological and amenity impacts of an offshore windfarm as a factor in marine planning , 2015 .

[63]  Jacek Zaucha,et al.  Sea basin maritime spatial planning: A case study of the Baltic Sea region and Poland , 2014 .

[64]  Lars Brabyn,et al.  Using viewsheds, GIS, and a landscape classification to tag landscape photographs , 2011 .

[65]  S. Hawkins,et al.  Evaluating the relative conservation value of fully and partially protected marine areas , 2015 .

[66]  Marc Antrop,et al.  Settlement models, land use and visibility in rural landscapes: Two case studies in Greece , 2007 .