Landscape preference study of agricultural landscapes in Germany
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56617/tl.4050Keywords:
Landscape preferences, agricultural vegetation, inferential statistics, landscape and environmental planningAbstract
This paper reports the results of a landscape preference study using photographs of agricultural landscapes from Germany as stimuli. At present, agricultural landscapes are subject to innovations in agricultural management as well as climate change. Hence, large-scale changes of landscapes with regard to their structure, appearance or diversity are likely in the future. A survey was carried out among inhabitants of different parts of Germany, with questions regarding demographic factors (e.g. sex, age, school and professional qualification, importance of nature and environment, frequency of outdoor trips) as well as different scenic qualities such as variety, uniqueness and beauty of landscape. The study explores various factors to account for variability in preference judgements for particular agricultural landscape scenes, including mainly different types of meadows, pastures and arable land. Variance is examined and discussed in relation to the level of preference/ scenic quality, in relation to possible group differences, and in relation to phytosociological typology. Finally, potential topics for further research are discussed.
References
Arriaza, M., Cañas-Ortega, J. F., Cañas-Madueño, J. A., Ruiz-Avilles, P. 2004: Assessing the visual quality of rural landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 69: 115-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2003.10.029
Bahrenberg, G., Giese, E., Nipper, J. 1985: Statistische Methoden in der Geographie. Band 1: Univariate und bivariate Statistik. Second Edition. Teubner Studienbücher Geographie.
Bulut, Z., Yilmaz, H. 2009: Determination of waterscape beauties through visual quality assessment methods. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 154: 459-468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-008-0412-5
Gruehn, D., Roth, M., Kenneweg, H. 2007: Entwicklung eines Ansatzes zur Einschätzung der Bedeutung von Landschaftselementen für das Landschaftserleben als Grundlage für die Beurteilung des Landschaftsbildes auf der Ebene des Landschaftsprogramms in Sachsen. LLP-report 002. Dortmund.
Gruehn, D. 2008: Landscape Preference Study on Forest Landscapes. In: Building together our territories. Abstracts 31st International Geographical Congress, Tunis: 106-107.
Herzog, T.R. 1985: A cognitive analysis of preference for waterscapes. Journal of Environmental Psychology 5: 225-241. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(85)80024-4
Kenneweg, H., Gruehn, D. 2001: Örtliche Landschaftsplanung im Verhältnis zur Agrarfachplanung sowie Anforderungen und Perspektiven zur Weiterentwicklung der örtlichen Landschaftspläne. In: Bundesamt Für Naturschutz [Ed.]: Landschaftsplanung und ihre Wechselwirkungen zu anderen Fachplanungen. Bonn-Bad Godesberg: 15-30.
Krause, C. 2001: Our visual landscape. Managing the landscape under special consideration of visual aspects. Landscape and Urban Planning 54: 239-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00139-6
Lafortezza, R. Corry, R. C., Sanesi, G. Brown, R. D. 2008: Visual preference and ecological assessments for designed alternative brownfield rehabilitations. Journal of Environmental Management 89: 257-269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.01.063
Lewis, J. L. 2008: Perceptions of landscape change in a rural British Columbia community. Landscape and Urban Planning 85: 49-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.09.011
Mertz, P: 2000: Pflanzengesellschaften Mitteleuropas und der Alpen. Ecomed Verlag, Landsberg.
Nohl, W. 2001: Landschaftsplanung. Ästhetische und rekreative Aspekte. Konzepte, Begründungen und Verfahrensweisen auf der Ebene des Landschaftsplans. Patzer Verlag, Berlin.
Oberdorfer, E. 1994: Pflanzensoziologische Exkursionsflora. Seventh Edition. Ulmer Verlag, Stuttgart.
Ode, Å., Fry, G., Tveit, M. S., Messager, P., Miller, D. 2009: Indicators of perceived naturalness as drivers of landscape preference. Journal of Environmental Management 90: 375-383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.10.013
Pott, R. 1995: Die Pflanzengesellschaften Deutschlands. Second Edition. Ulmer Verlag, Stuttgart.
Purcell, A. T, Lamb, R. J., Mainardi Peron, E., Falchero, S. 1994: Preference or preferences for landscape? Journal of Environmental Psychology 14: 195-209. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(94)80056-1
Robinson, W. S. 1950: Ecological correlation and the behaviour of individuals. American Sociological Review 15: 351-357. https://doi.org/10.2307/2087176
Roth, M. 2006: Validating the use of Internet survey techniques in visual landscape assessment - An empirical study from Germany. Landscape and Urban Planning 78: 179-192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.07.005
Roth, M., Gruehn, D. 2005: Scenic Quality Modelling in Real and Virtual Environments. In: Buhmann, E., Paar, P., Bishop, I.D., Lange, E. (Eds.): Trends in Real-time Visualization and Participation. Wichmann Verlag, Heidelberg: 291-302.
Seibert, P. 1982: Ökologische Bewertung von homogenen Landschaftsteilen, Ökosystemen und Pflanzengesellschaften. Berichte der ANL 4: 10-23.
Sevenant, M., Antrop, M. 2009: Cognitive attributes and aesthetic preferences in assessment and differentiation of landscapes. Journal of Environmental Management 90: 2889-2899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.10.016
Tips, W. Savasdisara, T. 1986: The influence of the environmental background of subjects on their landscape preference evaluation. Landscape and Urban Planning 13: 125-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(86)90017-4
Turner, M. A. 2004: Landscape preferences and patterns of residential development. Journal of Urban Economics 57: 19-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2004.08.005
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2010 Dietwald Gruehn, Michael Roth
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
A folyóirat Open Access (Gold). Cikkeire a Creative Commons 4.0 standard licenc alábbi típusa vonatkozik: CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0. Ennek értelmében a mű szabadon másolható, terjeszthető, bemutatható és előadható, azonban nem használható fel kereskedelmi célokra (NC), továbbá nem módosítható és nem készíthető belőle átdolgozás, származékos mű (ND). A licenc alapján a szerző vagy a jogosult által meghatározott módon fel kell tüntetni a szerző nevét és a szerzői mű címét (BY).
