IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i2p422-d1059170.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

While Experiencing a Forest Trail, Variation in Landscape Is Just as Important as Content: A Virtual Reality Experiment of Cross-Country Skiing in Estonia

Author

Listed:
  • Peeter Vassiljev

    (Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 1, 51006 Tartu, Estonia)

  • Simon Bell

    (Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 1, 51006 Tartu, Estonia
    Edinburgh School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh, 74 Lauriston Place, Edinburgh EH3 9DF, UK)

Abstract

It has long been understood that diversity is a key aspect of what makes a landscape attractive but to what degree of diversity and how is it experienced? Many forest landscapes are generally monotonous in character or are broken up by forest management activities such as clear cutting, which may negatively impact their potential for recreation and psychological well-being benefits. We conducted a virtual reality experiment where people were taken on a trip along a simulated cross country skiing track in an Estonian forest. Participants followed a route at simulated speeds typical of cross-country skiing. The route was long enough to experience several minutes passing through one type of forest landscape with a series of small variations in character followed by several minutes passing through a notably different forest landscape. The restorative experience obtained by the visit was measured periodically in each version of the landscape. Univariate general linear modelling analysis was statistically significant ( r 2 = 0.651, F (198, 965) = 9.108, p < 0.001) and showed that while respondents preferred less-dense forest in general ( B = 0.189, p = 0.001)—an expected result—a comparable amount of positive restorative response could also be attributed to prominent changes in forest character, regardless of the type of forest ( B = 0.401, p < 0.001). We hypothesise that respondents were reacting favourably to sudden changes in forest appearance after prolonged exposure to one forest type—that diversity is important in maintaining interest, reducing boredom, and in providing a restorative experience. The implications are, firstly, that a virtual experience can detect restorative effects and, secondly, that recreational trails should be designed to pass through varied landscapes offering continually changing diverse experiences—the impact of which can be tested in the virtual setting because there is control of all variables.

Suggested Citation

  • Peeter Vassiljev & Simon Bell, 2023. "While Experiencing a Forest Trail, Variation in Landscape Is Just as Important as Content: A Virtual Reality Experiment of Cross-Country Skiing in Estonia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:2:p:422-:d:1059170
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/2/422/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/2/422/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agimass, Fitalew & Lundhede, Thomas & Panduro, Toke Emil & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2018. "The choice of forest site for recreation: A revealed preference analysis using spatial data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 445-454.
    2. Peeter Vassiljev & Simon Bell & Jekaterina Balicka & Umme Aymona Ali Amrita, 2020. "Urban Blue Acupuncture: An Experiment on Preferences for Design Options Using Virtual Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-37, December.
    3. Giergiczny, Marek & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Żylicz, Tomasz & Angelstam, Per, 2015. "Choice experiment assessment of public preferences for forest structural attributes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 8-23.
    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. 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).
    2. Sacher, Philipp & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Mayer, Marius, 2022. "Evidence of the association between deadwood and forest recreational site choices," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    3. Han-Shen Chen, 2020. "The Construction and Validation of a Sustainable Tourism Development Evaluation Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-20, October.
    4. Frings, Oliver & Abildtrup, Jens & Montagné-Huck, Claire & Gorel, Salomé & Stenger, Anne, 2023. "Do individual PES buyers care about additionality and free-riding? A choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    5. Sagebiel, Julian & Glenk, Klaus & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2017. "Spatially explicit demand for afforestation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 190-199.
    6. Agimass, Fitalew & Lundhede, Thomas & Panduro, Toke Emil & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2018. "The choice of forest site for recreation: A revealed preference analysis using spatial data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 445-454.
    7. Kim, Do-hun & Sjølie, Hanne K. & Aguilar, Francisco X., 2024. "Psychological distances to climate change and public preferences for biodiversity-augmenting attributes in family-owned production forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    8. 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.
    9. Nannan Kang & Erda Wang & Yang Yu, 2019. "Valuing forest park attributes by giving consideration to the tourist satisfaction," Tourism Economics, , vol. 25(5), pages 711-733, August.
    10. Weller, Priska & Elsasser, Peter, 2018. "Preferences for forest structural attributes in Germany – Evidence from a choice experiment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 1-9.
    11. Martínez-Jauregui, María & White, Piran C.L. & Touza, Julia & Soliño, Mario, 2019. "Untangling perceptions around indicators for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    12. Linjia Wu & Qidi Dong & Shixian Luo & Wenyuan Jiang & Ming Hao & Qibing Chen, 2021. "Effects of Spatial Elements of Urban Landscape Forests on the Restoration Potential and Preference of Adolescents," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    13. Weiyi Yu & Hong Hu & Bindong Sun, 2021. "Elderly Suitability of Park Recreational Space Layout Based on Visual Landscape Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-17, June.
    14. Castillo-Eguskitza, Nekane & Hoyos, David & Onaindia, Miren & Czajkowski, Mikolaj, 2019. "Unraveling local preferences and willingness to pay for different management scenarios: A choice experiment to biosphere reserve management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    15. Héctor Tavárez & Alicia Barriga, 2023. "Economic Viability of Developing Passive Recreational Opportunities in Puerto Rico: Insights for Sustainable Forest Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-17, October.
    16. Mariel, Petr & Artabe, Alaitz, 2020. "Interpreting correlated random parameters in choice experiments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    17. Tavárez, Héctor & Elbakidze, Levan, 2019. "Valuing recreational enhancements in the San Patricio Urban Forest of Puerto Rico: A choice experiment approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    18. Gianluca Grilli & John Curtis & Stephen Hynes, 2020. "Modelling anglers' fish release choices using logbook data," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 206-219, April.
    19. Piotr Czembrowski & Edyta Łaszkiewicz & Jakub Kronenberg & Gustav Engström & Erik Andersson, 2019. "Valuing individual characteristics and the multifunctionality of urban green spaces: The integration of sociotope mapping and hedonic pricing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-16, March.
    20. Heejeong Yun & Dongjin Kang & Youngeun Kang, 2022. "Outdoor recreation planning and management considering FROS and carrying capacities: a case study of forest wetland in Yeongam-gum, South Korea," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 502-526, 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:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:2:p:422-:d:1059170. 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.