IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v68y2009i10p2485-2489.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Linking forestry, sustainability and aesthetics

Author

Listed:
  • Panagopoulos, T.

Abstract

In forest planning, little research has been devoted towards examining how visual-impact assessment can improve the public acceptance of forest activities and augment forest sustainability. The objective of the present work is to review the methods of aesthetic assessment of forest landscapes, which will help the implementation of visual-impact assessment in sustainable forestry. From the numerous techniques of landscape evaluation that have been devised in recent years, the expert approach techniques have dominated in environmental management practices and the perception-based approach in research. The non-market economic valuation techniques are essentially trade-off methods and not aesthetic assessments by themselves. Revealed preference methods, such as hedonic-price, use actual market choices of individuals to get their preferences towards non-market attributes, and stated preference methods, such as contingent valuation method, rely on surveys to get directly the individual's willingness to pay for the non-market attributes. Psychophysical preference modelling is a popular quantitative holistic technique of landscape evaluation and if used in combination with indirect aesthetic evaluation methods might create new standards and protocols for techniques of objectively estimating public perception of aesthetic quality and thus to enhance social sustainability in forest space.

Suggested Citation

  • Panagopoulos, T., 2009. "Linking forestry, sustainability and aesthetics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2485-2489, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:68:y:2009:i:10:p:2485-2489
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921-8009(09)00191-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Catarina De Sousa Silva & Inês Viegas & Τhomas Panagopoulos & Simon Bell, 2018. "Environmental Justice in Accessibility to Green Infrastructure in Two European Cities," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-23, November.
    2. Vassiliki Vlami & Stamatis Zogaris & Hakan Djuma & Ioannis P. Kokkoris & George Kehayias & Panayotis Dimopoulos, 2019. "A Field Method for Landscape Conservation Surveying: The Landscape Assessment Protocol (LAP)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-20, April.
    3. Marie Luise Blau & Frieder Luz & Thomas Panagopoulos, 2018. "Urban River Recovery Inspired by Nature-Based Solutions and Biophilic Design in Albufeira, Portugal," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-16, November.
    4. Luis Loures & Thomas Panagopoulos & Jon Bryan Burley, 2016. "Assessing user preferences on post-industrial redevelopment," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 43(5), pages 871-892, September.
    5. Riyadh Mundher & Shamsul Abu Bakar & Suhardi Maulan & Mohd Johari Mohd Yusof & Syuhaily Osman & Ammar Al-Sharaa & Hangyu Gao, 2022. "Exploring Awareness and Public Perception towards the Importance of Visual Aesthetics for Preservation of Permanent Forest Reserve (PFR) in Malaysia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-14, August.
    6. Mariana Vallejo & M. Isabel Ramírez & Alejandro Reyes-González & Jairo G. López-Sánchez & Alejandro Casas, 2019. "Agroforestry Systems of the Tehuacán-Cuicatlán Valley: Land Use for Biocultural Diversity Conservation," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-16, January.
    7. Gonzalez-Duque, Jose Antonio & Panagopoulos, Thomas, 2013. "Evaluation of the Urban Green Infrastructure using Landscape Modules, GIS and a Population Survey: Linking Environmental with Social Aspects in Studying and Managing Urban Forests," Journal of Tourism, Sustainability and Well-being, Cinturs - Research Centre for Tourism, Sustainability and Well-being, University of Algarve, vol. 1(2), pages 82-95.
    8. Marco Criado & Antonio Martínez-Graña & Fernando Santos-Francés & Leticia Merchán, 2020. "Landscape Evaluation as a Complementary Tool in Environmental Assessment. Study Case in Urban Areas: Salamanca (Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-22, August.
    9. Ryan Bullock & Kathryn Jastremski & Maureen G. Reed, 2017. "Canada's Model Forests 20 years on: towards forest and community sustainability?," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 41(3), pages 156-166, August.
    10. Divinski, Itai & Becker, Nir & Bar (Kutiel), Pua, 2018. "Opportunity costs of alternative management options in a protected nature park: The case of Ramat Hanadiv, Israel," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 494-504.
    11. Korobeinikov, A. & Read, P. & Parshotam, A. & Lermit, J., 2010. "Modelling regional markets for co-produced timber and biofuel," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 553-561, January.
    12. Alicia López-Rodríguez & Verónica Hernández-Jiménez, 2022. "Sustainable Forest, Beautiful Forest, Well-Managed Forest: Attitudes towards Land Management and Their Influence on the Perception of a Mediterranean Agroforestry Landscape," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-16, August.
    13. Luís Loures & Ana Loures & José Nunes & Thomas Panagopoulos, 2015. "Landscape Valuation of Environmental Amenities throughout the Application of Direct and Indirect Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-17, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:68:y:2009:i:10:p:2485-2489. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.