IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v31y2018ipcp318-325.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using image recognition to automate assessment of cultural ecosystem services from social media photographs

Author

Listed:
  • Richards, Daniel R.
  • Tunçer, Bige

Abstract

Quantifying and mapping cultural ecosystem services is complex because of their intangibility. Data from social media, such as geo-tagged photographs, have been proposed for mapping cultural use or appreciation of ecosystems. However, manual content analysis and classification of large numbers of photographs is time consuming. This study develops a novel method for automating content analysis of social media photographs for ecosystem services assessment. The approach applies an online machine learning algorithm – Google Cloud Vision – to analyse over 20,000 photographs from Singapore, and uses hierarchical clustering to group these photographs. The accuracy of the classification was assessed by comparison with manual classification. Over 20% of photographs were taken of nature, being of animals or plants. The distribution of nature photographs was concentrated around particular natural attractions, and nature photographs were more likely to occur in parks and areas of high vegetation cover. The approach developed for clustering photographs was accurate and saved approximately 170h of manual work. The method provides an indicator of cultural ecosystem services that can be applied rapidly over large areas. Automated assessment and mapping of cultural ecosystem services could be used to inform urban planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Richards, Daniel R. & Tunçer, Bige, 2018. "Using image recognition to automate assessment of cultural ecosystem services from social media photographs," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 318-325.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:31:y:2018:i:pc:p:318-325
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041617301559
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pleasant, Mary M. & Gray, Steven A. & Lepczyk, Christopher & Fernandes, Anthea & Hunter, Nathan & Ford, Derek, 2014. "Managing cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 141-147.
    2. Richards, Daniel R. & Warren, Philip H. & Moggridge, Helen L. & Maltby, Lorraine, 2015. "Spatial variation in the impact of dragonflies and debris on recreational ecosystem services in a floodplain wetland," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 113-121.
    3. Keeler, Bonnie L. & Wood, Spencer A. & Polasky, Stephen & Kling, Catherine L. & Filstrup, Christopher T. & Downing, John A., 2015. "Recreational demand for clean water: evidence from geotagged photographs by visitors to lakes," ISU General Staff Papers 201501290800001557, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Han-Shen Chen & Chu-Wei Chen, 2019. "Economic Valuation of Green Island, Taiwan: A Choice Experiment Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-17, January.
    2. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chris, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    3. Martí, Pablo & García-Mayor, Clara & Nolasco-Cirugeda, Almudena & Serrano-Estrada, Leticia, 2020. "Green infrastructure planning: Unveiling meaningful spaces through Foursquare users’ preferences," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    4. Sinclair, Michael & Ghermandi, Andrea & Signorello, Giovanni & Giuffrida, Laura & De Salvo, Maria, 2022. "Valuing Recreation in Italy's Protected Areas Using Spatial Big Data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    5. Zapata-Caldas, Emmanuel & Calcagni, Fulvia & Baró, Francesc & Langemeyer, Johannes, 2022. "Using crowdsourced imagery to assess cultural ecosystem services in data-scarce urban contexts: The case of the metropolitan area of Cali, Colombia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    6. Rosa, Josianne Claudia Sales & Geneletti, Davide & Morrison-Saunders, Angus & Sánchez, Luis Enrique & Hughes, Michael, 2020. "To what extent can mine rehabilitation restore recreational use of forest land? Learning from 50 years of practice in southwest Australia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    7. Ciesielski, Mariusz & Stereńczak, Krzysztof, 2021. "Using Flickr data and selected environmental characteristics to analyse the temporal and spatial distribution of activities in forest areas," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    8. Havinga, Ilan & Bogaart, Patrick W. & Hein, Lars & Tuia, Devis, 2020. "Defining and spatially modelling cultural ecosystem services using crowdsourced data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    9. E. Seda Arslan & Ömer K. Örücü, 2021. "MaxEnt modelling of the potential distribution areas of cultural ecosystem services using social media data and GIS," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 2655-2667, February.
    10. Lingua, Federico & Coops, Nicholas C. & Griess, Verena C., 2022. "Valuing cultural ecosystem services combining deep learning and benefit transfer approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    11. Sinclair, Michael & Mayer, Marius & Woltering, Manuel & Ghermandi, Andrea, 2020. "Valuing nature-based recreation using a crowdsourced travel cost method: A comparison to onsite survey data and value transfer," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    12. Thiele, Julia & Albert, Christian & Hermes, Johannes & von Haaren, Christina, 2020. "Assessing and quantifying offered cultural ecosystem services of German river landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    13. Kolstoe, Sonja & Naald, Brian Vander & Cohan, Alison, 2022. "A tale of two samples: Understanding WTP differences in the age of social media," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    14. Sterner, Robert W. & Keeler, Bonnie & Polasky, Stephen & Poudel, Rajendra & Rhude, Kirsten & Rogers, Maggie, 2020. "Ecosystem services of Earth’s largest freshwater lakes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    15. Claudia Canedoli & Craig Bullock & Marcus J. Collier & Deirdre Joyce & Emilio Padoa-Schioppa, 2017. "Public Participatory Mapping of Cultural Ecosystem Services: Citizen Perception and Park Management in the Parco Nord of Milan (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-27, May.
    16. Daria Sikorska & Piotr Sikorski & Piotr Archiciński & Jarosław Chormański & Richard J. Hopkins, 2019. "You Can’t See the Woods for the Trees: Invasive Acer negundo L. in Urban Riparian Forests Harms Biodiversity and Limits Recreation Activity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-16, October.
    17. Gugulica, Madalina & Burghardt, Dirk, 2023. "Mapping indicators of cultural ecosystem services use in urban green spaces based on text classification of geosocial media data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    18. Xiaoling Zhu & Hio-Jung Shin, 2021. "Financial Analysis for Improving River Water Quality through Introduction of Organic Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-15, March.
    19. Katie K. Arkema & David M. Fisher & Katherine Wyatt & Spencer A. Wood & Hanna J. Payne, 2021. "Advancing Sustainable Development and Protected Area Management with Social Media-Based Tourism Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-18, February.
    20. Daria Sikorska & Piotr Sikorski & Richard James Hopkins, 2017. "High Biodiversity of Green Infrastructure Does Not Contribute to Recreational Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-13, February.

    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:ecoser:v:31:y:2018:i:pc:p:318-325. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    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.