IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i7p2019-d220098.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Field Method for Landscape Conservation Surveying: The Landscape Assessment Protocol (LAP)

Author

Listed:
  • Vassiliki Vlami

    (Department of Environmental and Natural Resources Management, University of Patras, 30100 Agrinio, Greece)

  • Stamatis Zogaris

    (Hellenic Centre for Marine Research, Institute of Marine Biological Resources and Inland Waters, 19013 Anavissos, Greece)

  • Hakan Djuma

    (Cyprus Institute, Energy-Environment and Water Research Center, Nikosia 1645, Cyprus)

  • Ioannis P. Kokkoris

    (Department of Biology, Laboratory of Botany, University of Patras, 26504 Patras, Greece)

  • George Kehayias

    (Department of Environmental and Natural Resources Management, University of Patras, 30100 Agrinio, Greece)

  • Panayotis Dimopoulos

    (Department of Biology, Laboratory of Botany, University of Patras, 26504 Patras, Greece)

Abstract

We introduce a field survey method to assess the conservation condition of landscapes. Using a popular rapid assessment format, this study defines observable “stressed states” identified through the use of general metrics to gauge landscape degradation. Fifteen metrics within six thematic categories were selected through a literature review and extensive field trials. Field tests on the Greek island of Samothraki show a strong correlation between a single expert’s scores and five assessor’s scores at 35 landscape sites. Only three of the metrics did not maintain a high consistency among assessors; however, this is explained by the difficulty of interpreting certain anthropogenic stressors (such as livestock grazing) in Mediterranean semi-natural landscapes with culturally-modified vegetation patterns. The protocol and proposed index, with five conservation condition classes, identified areas of excellent and good quality, and reliably distinguished the most degraded landscape conditions on the island. Uncertainties and difficulties of the index are investigated, and further research and validation are proposed. The protocol effectively goes beyond a traditional visual aesthetic assessment; it can be used both by experts and non-scientists as a conservation-relevant multi-disciplinary procedure to support a holistic landscape diagnosis. The combination of an on-site experiential survey and its simple integrative format may be useful as a screening-level index, and for promoting local participation, landscape literacy and educational initiatives.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:7:p:2019-:d:220098
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/7/2019/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/7/2019/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ingrid Sarlöv Herlin, 2016. "Exploring the national contexts and cultural ideas that preceded the Landscape Character Assessment method in England," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(2), pages 175-185, February.
    2. Mei Zhang & Jian Kang, 2007. "Towards the Evaluation, Description, and Creation of Soundscapes in Urban Open Spaces," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 34(1), pages 68-86, February.
    3. Mônica Bahia Schlee & Kenneth R. Tamminga & Vera Regina Tangari, 2012. "A Method for Gauging Landscape Change as a Prelude to Urban Watershed Regeneration: The Case of the Carioca River, Rio de Janeiro," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(9), pages 1-45, August.
    4. Panagopoulos, T., 2009. "Linking forestry, sustainability and aesthetics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2485-2489, August.
    5. 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.
    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.
    7. Pere Ariza-Montobbio & Katharine N. Farrell, 2012. "Wind Farm Siting and Protected Areas in Catalonia: Planning Alternatives or Reproducing 'One-Dimensional Thinking'?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(12), pages 1-26, November.
    8. Claudia Bieling & Tobias Plieninger, 2013. "Recording Manifestations of Cultural Ecosystem Services in the Landscape," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(5), pages 649-667, October.
    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. Haifeng Luo & Bor-Shuenn Chiou, 2021. "Framing the Hierarchy of Cultural Tourism Attractiveness of Chinese Historic Districts under the Premise of Landscape Conservation," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-24, February.
    2. Xiangjian Rui & Lei Nie & Yan Xu & Hong Wang, 2019. "Land Degeneration due to Water Infiltration and Sub-Erosion: A Case Study of Soil Slope Failure at the National Geological Park of Qian-an Mud Forest, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-17, August.
    3. Vassiliki Vlami & Carlos Morera Beita & Stamatis Zogaris, 2022. "Landscape Conservation Assessment in the Latin American Tropics: Application and Insights from Costa Rica," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-28, April.
    4. Tinka Delakorda Kawashima, 2021. "The Authenticity of the Hidden Christians’ Villages in Nagasaki: Issues in Evaluation of Cultural Landscapes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-22, April.
    5. Sandra Mayordomo-Maya & Jorge Hermosilla-Pla, 2022. "Evaluation of Landscape Quality in Valencia’s Agricultural Gardens—A Method Adapted to Multifunctional, Territorialized Agrifood Systems (MTAS)," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-31, March.
    6. Vassiliki Vlami & Ioannis P. Kokkoris & Ioannis Charalampopoulos & Thomas Doxiadis & Christos Giannakopoulos & Miltiades Lazoglou, 2023. "A Transect Method for Promoting Landscape Conservation in the Climate Change Context: A Case-Study in Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-29, September.
    7. Vassiliki Vlami & Jan Danek & Stamatis Zogaris & Eirini Gallou & Ioannis P. Kokkoris & George Kehayias & Panayotis Dimopoulos, 2020. "Residents’ Views on Landscape and Ecosystem Services during a Wind Farm Proposal in an Island Protected Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-18, March.
    8. Vassiliki Vlami & Ioannis P. Kokkoris & Stamatis Zogaris & George Kehayias & Panayotis Dimopoulos, 2020. "Cultural Ecosystem Services in the Natura 2000 Network: Introducing Proxy Indicators and Conflict Risk in Greece," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-27, December.

    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. Vassiliki Vlami & Carlos Morera Beita & Stamatis Zogaris, 2022. "Landscape Conservation Assessment in the Latin American Tropics: Application and Insights from Costa Rica," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-28, April.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Vassiliki Vlami & Ioannis P. Kokkoris & Stamatis Zogaris & George Kehayias & Panayotis Dimopoulos, 2020. "Cultural Ecosystem Services in the Natura 2000 Network: Introducing Proxy Indicators and Conflict Risk in Greece," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-27, December.
    6. 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.
    7. Shuang Zhao & Diechuan Yang & Chi Gao, 2023. "Identifying Landscape Character for Large Linear Heritage: A Case Study of the Ming Great Wall in Ji-Town, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, February.
    8. Li-Pei Peng & Wei-Ming Wang, 2020. "Hybrid Decision-Making Evaluation for Future Scenarios of Cultural Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-20, August.
    9. Salvatore Di Fazio & Giuseppe Modica, 2018. "Historic Rural Landscapes: Sustainable Planning Strategies and Action Criteria. The Italian Experience in the Global and European Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-27, October.
    10. 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.
    11. Ata Tara & Gillian Lawson & Wendy Davies & Alan Chenoweth & Georgina Pratten, 2024. "Integrating Landscape Character Assessment with Community Values in a Scenic Evaluation Methodology for Regional Landscape Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-26, January.
    12. 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.
    13. Riechers, Maraja & Barkmann, Jan & Tscharntke, Teja, 2016. "Perceptions of cultural ecosystem services from urban green," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 33-39.
    14. Rędzińska, Katarzyna & Szulczewska, Barbara & Wolski, Przemysław, 2022. "The landscape thresholds analysis as an integrated approach to landscape interpretation for planning purposes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    15. Bieling, Claudia & Plieninger, Tobias & Pirker, Heidemarie & Vogl, Christian R., 2014. "Linkages between landscapes and human well-being: An empirical exploration with short interviews," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 19-30.
    16. Xiangnan Fan & Yuning Cheng & Fangqi Tan & Tianyi Zhao, 2022. "Construction and Optimization of the Ecological Security Pattern in Liyang, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-28, September.
    17. Luís Loures & José Gama & José Rato Nunes & António Lopez-Piñeiro, 2017. "Assessing the Sodium Exchange Capacity in Rainfed and Irrigated Soils in the Mediterranean Basin Using GIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-12, March.
    18. Cooper, Nigel & Brady, Emily & Steen, Helen & Bryce, Rosalind, 2016. "Aesthetic and spiritual values of ecosystems: Recognising the ontological and axiological plurality of cultural ecosystem ‘services’," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 218-229.
    19. Péter Csorba & Krisztina Bánóczki & Zoltán Túri, 2022. "Land Use Changes in Peri-Urban Open Spaces of Small Towns in Eastern Hungary," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-18, August.
    20. Barbara Sowińska-Świerkosz & Malwina Michalik-Śnieżek, 2020. "The Methodology of Landscape Quality (LQ) Indicators Analysis Based on Remote Sensing Data: Polish National Parks Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-18, 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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:7:p:2019-:d:220098. 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.