IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v97y2020ics0264837719311883.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Values of rural landscape: The case study Chlum u Třeboně (Bohemia)

Author

Listed:
  • Šťastná, Milada
  • Vaishar, Antonín

Abstract

Natural, historical, man-made and spiritual values of the rural landscape were investigated on the example of the rural municipality Chlum u Třeboně in Southern Bohemia (the Czech Republic). It shows that the rural landscape contains a set of values – such as substance, origin, size, and importance – many of which have negative connotations. Some of these values are protected, others are not. The set of values forms genius loci of the place which is an important part of the local identity. The landscape of the area under the study was monitored and analyzed from both macro-structural and micro-structural points of view. As the evaluation of values mainly depends on stakeholders (local residents, tourists, municipalities, entrepreneurs, landscape protection bodies, etc.), in the past, the values of the rural landscape were connected predominantly with its productive function. Based on the results it is possible to say that in relation to the transition towards the post-industrial society, values related to the landscape are gaining new importance such as wetlands or swamps to combat drought. It is necessary to pay higher attention to the dynamic and multi-functional aspects of the landscape values in the near future.

Suggested Citation

  • Šťastná, Milada & Vaishar, Antonín, 2020. "Values of rural landscape: The case study Chlum u Třeboně (Bohemia)," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:97:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719311883
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104699
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719311883
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104699?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. Andrew Butler, 2016. "Dynamics of integrating landscape values in landscape character assessment: the hidden dominance of the objective outsider," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(2), pages 239-252, February.
    2. Christopher Raymond & Gregory Brown, 2006. "A Method for assessing protected area allocations using a typology of landscape values," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(6), pages 797-812.
    3. Dendoncker, Nicolas & Turkelboom, Francis & Boeraeve, Fanny & Boerema, Annelies & Broekx, Steven & Fontaine, Corentin & Demeyer, Rolinde & De Vreese, Rik & Devillet, Guénaël & Keune, Hans & Janssens, , 2018. "Integrating Ecosystem Services values for sustainability? Evidence from the Belgium Ecosystem Services community of practice," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 68-76.
    4. Tagliafierro, C. & Boeri, M. & Longo, A. & Hutchinson, W.G., 2016. "Stated preference methods and landscape ecology indicators: An example of transdisciplinarity in landscape economic valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 11-22.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Hana Vavrouchová & Petra Fukalová & Hana Svobodová & Jan Oulehla & Pavla Pokorná, 2021. "Mapping Landscape Values and Conflicts through the Optics of Different User Groups," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-20, November.
    2. Shuai Jiang & Haoran Ma & Ling Yang & Shixian Luo, 2023. "The Influence of Perceived Physical and Aesthetic Quality of Rural Settlements on Tourists’ Preferences—A Case Study of Zhaoxing Dong Village," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, August.
    3. Weijia Wang & Makoto Watanabe & Donghong Zhou & Kenta Ono, 2023. "Environmental and Community Regeneration: Exploring Design Approach for Inclusive Tourism Based on Visualization Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-22, March.

    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. Liu, Duan & Tang, Runcheng & Xie, Jun & Tian, Jingjing & Shi, Rui & Zhang, Kai, 2020. "Valuation of ecosystem services of rice–fish coculture systems in Ruyuan County, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    2. Rocío Silva-Pérez & Gema González-Romero, 2022. "GIAHS as an Instrument to Articulate the Landscape and Territorialized Agrifood Systems—The Example of La Axarquía (Malaga Province, Spain)," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-21, February.
    3. Andrés Pazmiño & Silvia Serrao-Neumann & Darryl Low Choy, 2018. "Towards Comprehensive Policy Integration for the Sustainability of Small Islands: A Landscape-Scale Planning Approach for the Galápagos Islands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-29, April.
    4. Anastasija Novikova & Lucia Rocchi & Bernardas Vaznonis, 2019. "Valuing Agricultural Landscape: Lithuanian Case Study Using a Contingent Valuation Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-13, May.
    5. Zizhen Hong & Wentao Cao & Ying Chen & Sijia Zhu & Wenjun Zheng, 2024. "Identifying Rural Landscape Heritage Character Types and Areas: A Case Study of the Li River Basin in Guilin, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-24, February.
    6. Bradley S Jorgensen & Richard C Stedman, 2011. "Measuring the Spatial Component of Sense of Place: A Methodology for Research on the Spatial Dynamics of Psychological Experiences of Places," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 38(5), pages 795-813, October.
    7. Raymond, Christopher M. & Kenter, Jasper O. & Plieninger, Tobias & Turner, Nancy J. & Alexander, Karen A., 2014. "Comparing instrumental and deliberative paradigms underpinning the assessment of social values for cultural ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 145-156.
    8. Theano S. Terkenli & Aikaterini Gkoltsiou & Dimitris Kavroudakis, 2021. "The Interplay of Objectivity and Subjectivity in Landscape Character Assessment: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches and Challenges," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, January.
    9. Chunyan Zhu & Rong Li & Jinming Luo & Xi Li & Juan Du & Jun Ma & Chaoping Hou & Weizhen Zeng, 2024. "Research on Evaluating the Characteristics of the Rural Landscape of Zhanqi Village, Chengdu, China, Based on Oblique Aerial Photography by Unmanned Aerial Vehicles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-23, June.
    10. Bartkowski, Bartosz, 2016. "Are diverse ecosystems more valuable? A conceptual framework for economic valuation of biodiversity," UFZ Discussion Papers 9/2016, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    11. Andrew Lothian, 2022. "Visual Resource Stewardship—An International Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-38, March.
    12. Cabana, David & Ryfield, Frances & Crowe, Tasman P. & Brannigan, John, 2020. "Evaluating and communicating cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    13. Timothy L. Hamilton & Erik B. Johnson, 2023. "The amenity value of natural views," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 51(5), pages 1079-1107, September.
    14. Yingxue Wang & Jiaheng Du & Jingxing Kuang & Chunxu Chen & Maobiao Li & Jin Wang, 2023. "Two-Scaled Identification of Landscape Character Types and Areas: A Case Study of the Yunnan–Vietnam Railway (Yunnan Section), China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, April.
    15. Zerrahn, Alexander, 2017. "Wind Power and Externalities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 245-260.
    16. Joanna T. Storie & Enri Uusna & Zane Eglāja & Teele Laur & Mart Külvik & Monika Suškevičs & Simon Bell, 2019. "Place Attachment and Its Consequence for Landscape-Scale Management and Readiness to Participate: Social Network Complexity in the Post-Soviet Rural Context of Latvia and Estonia," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-24, August.
    17. Keenan, Rodney J. & Pozza, Greg & Fitzsimons, James A., 2019. "Ecosystem services in environmental policy: Barriers and opportunities for increased adoption," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    18. Maria Gabriella Trovato & Dana Ali & Jessica Nicolas & Ammar El Halabi & Sarah Meouche, 2017. "Landscape Risk Assessment Model and Decision Support System for the Protection of the Natural and Cultural Heritage in the Eastern Mediterranean Area," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-27, November.
    19. Bingjie Song & Guy M. Robinson & Douglas K. Bardsley, 2020. "Measuring Multifunctional Agricultural Landscapes," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-30, August.
    20. Seweryn Zielinski & Celene B. Milanés & Elena Cambon & Ofelia Perez Montero & Lourdes Rizo & Andres Suarez & Benjamin Cuker & Giorgio Anfuso, 2021. "An Integrated Method for Landscape Assessment: Application to Santiago de Cuba Bay, Cuba," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-30, April.

    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:lauspo:v:97:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719311883. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.