IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i6p632-d574681.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mapping Landscape Perception: An Assessment with Public Participation Geographic Information Systems and Spatial Analysis Techniques

Author

Listed:
  • Amalia Vaneska Palacio Buendía

    (Department of Geography, Universitat Rovirai Virgili, c/Joanot Martorell, 15, 43480 Vila-seca, Spain)

  • Yolanda Pérez-Albert

    (Department of Geography, Universitat Rovirai Virgili, c/Joanot Martorell, 15, 43480 Vila-seca, Spain)

  • David Serrano Giné

    (Department of Geography, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, av/Rio de Janeiro, 56-58, 08016 Barcelona, Spain)

Abstract

Mapping cognitive landscape perception is hindered by the difficulty of representing opinions that are spatially distributed in a heterogeneous way or not restricted by the locations of physical elements in the landscape. In recent years, the use of tools based on geographic information techniques has gained momentum in landscape assessment. We propose a methodology for generalizing cognitive landscape opinions on a spatial basis. To this end, we used a public participatory geographic information system to collect data, which is a method based on bipolar adjectives to approach users’ opinions, and the inverse distance weighted spatial interpolator and multi-criteria evaluation to undertake the spatial analysis. The study was conducted in the Ebro Delta, which is a protected wetland in northeastern Spain. The assessment was based on 1593 georeferenced opinions and resulted in a continuous geographic map of 330 km 2 depicting positive and negative perceptions about the landscape. The area under study was perceived as productive, interesting, attractive, and, for the most part, quiet and peaceful, although it was seen as dirty in some parts. The method successfully mapped cognitive landscape opinions and establishes a novel procedure in landscape approaches.

Suggested Citation

  • Amalia Vaneska Palacio Buendía & Yolanda Pérez-Albert & David Serrano Giné, 2021. "Mapping Landscape Perception: An Assessment with Public Participation Geographic Information Systems and Spatial Analysis Techniques," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:6:p:632-:d:574681
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/6/632/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/6/632/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. van Zanten, Boris T. & Verburg, Peter H. & Scholte, S.S.K. & Tieskens, K.F., 2016. "Using choice modeling to map aesthetic values at a landscape scale: Lessons from a Dutch case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 221-231.
    2. Brown, Greg & Fagerholm, Nora, 2015. "Empirical PPGIS/PGIS mapping of ecosystem services: A review and evaluation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 119-133.
    3. Antonio Santoro & Martina Venturi & Mauro Agnoletti, 2020. "Agricultural Heritage Systems and Landscape Perception among Tourists. The Case of Lamole, Chianti (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-15, April.
    4. Gregory Brown & Pat Reed, 2012. "Social Landscape Metrics: Measures for Understanding Place Values from Public Participation Geographic Information Systems (PPGIS)," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 73-90.
    5. Sonja Kivinen & Kaarina Vartiainen & Timo Kumpula, 2018. "People and Post-Mining Environments: PPGIS Mapping of Landscape Values, Knowledge Needs, and Future Perspectives in Northern Finland," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-23, December.
    6. Simensen, Trond & Halvorsen, Rune & Erikstad, Lars, 2018. "Methods for landscape characterisation and mapping: A systematic review," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 557-569.
    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. Alicia López-Rodríguez & Ana-Belén Berrocal Menárguez & Rafael Escribano Bombín & Simon Bell, 2021. "Ecology and Esthetics, Esthetic Ecology and the Ecological Esthetic in the Landscape: Contributions to the Apparent TongueTwister," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-11, August.
    2. Jaewon Han & Sugie Lee, 2023. "Verification of Immersive Virtual Reality as a Streetscape Evaluation Method in Urban Residential Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, January.

    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. Loc, Ho Huu & Park, Edward & Thu, Tran Ngoc & Diep, Nguyen Thi Hong & Can, Nguyen Trong, 2021. "An enhanced analytical framework of participatory GIS for ecosystem services assessment applied to a Ramsar wetland site in the Vietnam Mekong Delta," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    2. Antonio Santoro & Martina Venturi & Mauro Agnoletti, 2021. "Landscape Perception and Public Participation for the Conservation and Valorization of Cultural Landscapes: The Case of the Cinque Terre and Porto Venere UNESCO Site," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-24, January.
    3. Burdon, D. & Potts, T. & McKinley, E. & Lew, S. & Shilland, R. & Gormley, K. & Thomson, S. & Forster, R., 2019. "Expanding the role of participatory mapping to assess ecosystem service provision in local coastal environments," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    4. Linjun Yu & Xiaotong Zhang & Feng He & Xiaojun Wang, 2022. "Participatory Historical Village Landscape Analysis Using a Virtual Globe-Based 3D PGIS: Guizhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-16, October.
    5. Martina Slámová & Alexandra Kruse & Ingrid Belčáková & Johannes Dreer, 2021. "Old but Not Old Fashioned: Agricultural Landscapes as European Heritage and Basis for Sustainable Multifunctional Farming to Earn a Living," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-22, April.
    6. Enrica, Garau & Josep, Pueyo-Ros & Amanda, Jiménez-Aceituno & Garry, Peterson & Albert, Norström & Anna, Ribas Palom & Josep, Vila-Subirós, 2023. "Landscape features shape people’s perception of ecosystem service supply areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    7. Van Berkel, Derek B. & Tabrizian, Payam & Dorning, Monica A. & Smart, Lindsey & Newcomb, Doug & Mehaffey, Megan & Neale, Anne & Meentemeyer, Ross K., 2018. "Quantifying the visual-sensory landscape qualities that contribute to cultural ecosystem services using social media and LiDAR," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 326-335.
    8. Czembrowski, Piotr & Kronenberg, Jakub & Czepkiewicz, Michał, 2016. "Integrating non-monetary and monetary valuation methods – SoftGIS and hedonic pricing," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 166-175.
    9. Wai Soe Zin & Aya Suzuki & Kelvin S.-H. Peh & Alexandros Gasparatos, 2019. "Economic Value of Cultural Ecosystem Services from Recreation in Popa Mountain National Park, Myanmar: A Comparison of Two Rapid Valuation Techniques," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-20, December.
    10. Dora Isabel Rodrigues Ferreira & José-Manuel Sánchez-Martín, 2022. "Agricultural Landscapes as a Basis for Promoting Agritourism in Cross-Border Iberian Regions," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-35, May.
    11. Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Rechciński, Marcin & Tusznio, Joanna & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2022. "Divergent or convergent? Prioritization and spatial representation of ecosystem services as perceived by conservation professionals and local leaders," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    12. Nadja Penko Seidl & Mateja Šmid Hribar & Jelka Hudoklin & Tomaž Pipan & Mojca Golobič, 2021. "Defining Landscapes, and Their Importance for National Identity—A Case Study from Slovenia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-18, June.
    13. Ming-Kuang Chung & Dau-Jye Lu & Bor-Wen Tsai & Kuei-Tien Chou, 2019. "Assessing Effectiveness of PPGIS on Protected Areas by Governance Quality: A Case Study of Community-Based Monitoring in Wu-Wei-Kang Wildlife Refuge, Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-20, August.
    14. Maria Anna Bertolino & Federica Corrado, 2021. "Rethinking Terraces and Dry-Stone Walls in the Alps for Sustainable Development: The Case of Mombarone/Alto Eporediese in Piedmont Region (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-18, November.
    15. 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.
    16. Víctor García-Díez & Marina García-Llorente & José A. González, 2020. "Participatory Mapping of Cultural Ecosystem Services in Madrid: Insights for Landscape Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-15, July.
    17. Arki, Vesa & Koskikala, Joni & Fagerholm, Nora & Kisanga, Danielson & Käyhkö, Niina, 2020. "Associations between local land use/land cover and place-based landscape service patterns in rural Tanzania," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    18. Vesna Rajčević & Tanja Mišlicki Tomić & Irena Medar-Tanjga & Mlađen Trifunović & Neda Živak & Aleksandra Petrašević, 2023. "The Role of Landscape in Sustainable Tourism Development—A Study of Identification and Evaluation of Landscape Qualities of the Vrbanja Basin in Bosnia and Herzegovina," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-19, April.
    19. Beichen Ge & Congjin Wang & Yuhong Song, 2023. "Ecosystem Services Research in Rural Areas: A Systematic Review Based on Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    20. Jennifer Hodbod & Emma Tebbs & Kristofer Chan & Shubhechchha Sharma, 2019. "Integrating Participatory Methods and Remote Sensing to Enhance Understanding of Ecosystem Service Dynamics Across Scales," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-30, August.

    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:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:6:p:632-:d:574681. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.