IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i9p2687-d230227.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of Viewshed and Spatial Aesthetic Analyses to Forest Practices for Mountain Scenery Improvement in the Republic of Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Kwang Youn Lee

    (Research Institute for Gangwon, 5 Jungang-ro, Chuncheon-si, Gangwon-do 24265, Korea
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Jung Il Seo

    (Department of Forest Resources, College of Industrial Sciences, Kongju National University, 54 Daehak-ro, Yesan-gun, Chungcheongnam-do 32439, Korea
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Kyoung-Nam Kim

    (Research Institute for Gangwon, 5 Jungang-ro, Chuncheon-si, Gangwon-do 24265, Korea)

  • Yohan Lee

    (Department of Forest Resources and Landscape Architecture, College of Life and Applied Sciences, Yeungnam University, 280 Daehak-ro, Gyeongsan-si, Gyeongsangbuk-do 38541, Korea)

  • Hyeongkeun Kweon

    (School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, 3715 West Stevens Way Northeast, Seattle, WA 98195, USA)

  • Jinki Kim

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, College of Industrial Sciences, Kongju National University, 54 Daehak-ro, Yesan-gun, Chungcheongnam-do 32439, Korea)

Abstract

Forest practices for mountainous areas can enhance the scenery value and function of forests. However, forest scenery management is rarely implemented except for conservation areas and public forests. In this study, we first used the viewshed analysis to extract visible and invisible zones from the surface areas of ordinary mountains in Korea, and then we used spatial aesthetic analysis to interpret the human-recognized characteristics on the visible zones of mountain scenery. Finally, based on the results of both analyses, reasonable guidelines for forest practice planning were proposed to improve the scenery of ordinary mountains. The result shows that the viewshed analysis made it possible to extract visible and invisible areas from the surface areas of ordinary mountains, and to determine the scale of zoning for forest practices to improve mountain scenery. In addition, using spatial aesthetic analysis, it was possible to explain the characteristics of mountain scenery according to distance and elevational differences between viewpoint and target, and to suggest a treatment target and direction for forest practices to improve the mountain scenery. This study is meaningful in that the viewshed and spatial aesthetic analyses were applied to evaluate the current scenery of ordinary mountains and to present guidelines for forest practice planning to promote their own scenery values.

Suggested Citation

  • Kwang Youn Lee & Jung Il Seo & Kyoung-Nam Kim & Yohan Lee & Hyeongkeun Kweon & Jinki Kim, 2019. "Application of Viewshed and Spatial Aesthetic Analyses to Forest Practices for Mountain Scenery Improvement in the Republic of Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-16, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:9:p:2687-:d:230227
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/9/2687/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/9/2687/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. P F Fisher, 1995. "An Exploration of Probable Viewsheds in Landscape Planning," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 22(5), pages 527-546, October.
    2. Mi Sun Park & Hyowon Lee, 2014. "Forest Policy and Law for Sustainability within the Korean Peninsula," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(8), pages 1-25, August.
    3. Iván Franch-Pardo & Brian M. Napoletano & Gerardo Bocco & Sara Barrasa & Luis Cancer-Pomar, 2017. "The Role of Geographical Landscape Studies for Sustainable Territorial Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-23, November.
    4. Maria Cerreta & Giuliano Poli, 2017. "Landscape Services Assessment: A Hybrid Multi-Criteria Spatial Decision Support System (MC-SDSS)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-18, July.
    5. Gerd Weitkamp & Arnold Bregt & Ron Van Lammeren, 2011. "Measuring Visible Space to Assess Landscape Openness," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(2), pages 127-150, April.
    6. Alasdair Turner & Maria Doxa & David O'Sullivan & Alan Penn, 2001. "From Isovists to Visibility Graphs: A Methodology for the Analysis of Architectural Space," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 28(1), pages 103-121, February.
    7. Perry Pei-Ju Yang & Simon Yunuar Putra & Wenjing Li, 2007. "Viewsphere: A GIS-Based 3D Visibility Analysis for Urban Design Evaluation," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 34(6), pages 971-992, December.
    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. Janjira Sukwai & Nobuo Mishima & Nattasit Srinurak, 2022. "Balancing Cultural Heritage Conservation: Visual Integrity Assessment to Support Change Management in the Buffer Zone of Chiang Mai Historic City Using GIS and Computer-Generated 3D Modeling," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-27, April.
    2. Szymon Chmielewski, 2020. "Chaos in Motion: Measuring Visual Pollution with Tangential View Landscape Metrics," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-21, 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. Park, Mi Sun & Lee, Hyowon, 2019. "Accountability and reciprocal interests of bilateral forest cooperation under the global forest regime," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 32-44.
    2. Alessio D’Auria & Pasquale De Toro & Nicola Fierro & Elisa Montone, 2018. "Integration between GIS and Multi-Criteria Analysis for Ecosystem Services Assessment: A Methodological Proposal for the National Park of Cilento, Vallo di Diano and Alburni (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-25, September.
    3. Cloe X. Pérez-Valladares & Ana I. Moreno-Calles & Alejandro Casas & Selene Rangel-Landa & José Blancas & Javier Caballero & Alejandro Velazquez, 2020. "Ecological, Cultural, and Geographical Implications of Brahea dulcis (Kunth) Mart. Insights for Sustainable Management in Mexico," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, January.
    4. Deqiang Cheng & Chunliu Gao, 2022. "Regionalization Research of Mountain-Hazards Developing Environments for the Eurasian Continent," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-19, September.
    5. Park, Mi Sun & Shin, Seongmin & Lee, Haeun, 2021. "Media frames on urban greening in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    6. Caprioli, Caterina & Bottero, Marta, 2021. "Addressing complex challenges in transformations and planning: A fuzzy spatial multicriteria analysis for identifying suitable locations for urban infrastructures," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    7. Maria Cerreta & Eleonora Giovene di Girasole, 2020. "Towards Heritage Community Assessment: Indicators Proposal for the Self-Evaluation in Faro Convention Network Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-22, November.
    8. Youngsu Park & Yujun Sun, 2018. "Sustainable Forest Management in North-East Asia: A Comparative Assessment between China and Republic of Korea," International Journal of Sciences, Office ijSciences, vol. 7(04), pages 102-114, April.
    9. Shirley Thompson & Stewart Hill & Annette Salles & Tanzim Ahmed & Ajarat Adegun & Uche Nwankwo, 2023. "The Northern Corridor, Food Insecurity and the Resource Curse for Indigenous Communities in Canada," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 16(20), June.
    10. Yuanjie Deng & Wencong Cai & Mengyang Hou & Xiaolong Zhang & Shiyuan Xu & Nan Yao & Yajun Guo & Hua Li & Shunbo Yao, 2022. "How Eco-Efficiency Is the Forestry Ecological Restoration Program? The Case of the Sloping Land Conversion Program in the Loess Plateau, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-20, May.
    11. Maria Cerreta & Eleonora Giovene di Girasole & Giuliano Poli & Stefania Regalbuto, 2020. "Operationalizing the Circular City Model for Naples’ City-Port: A Hybrid Development Strategy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-26, April.
    12. Brian M. Napoletano & Brett Clark & John Bellamy Foster & Pedro S. Urquijo, 2020. "Sustainability and Metabolic Revolution in the Works of Henri Lefebvre," World, MDPI, vol. 1(3), pages 1-18, December.
    13. Park, Mi Sun & Youn, Yeo-Chang, 2017. "Reforestation policy integration by the multiple sectors toward forest transition in the Republic of Korea," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 45-55.
    14. Janjira Sukwai & Nobuo Mishima & Nattasit Srinurak, 2022. "Balancing Cultural Heritage Conservation: Visual Integrity Assessment to Support Change Management in the Buffer Zone of Chiang Mai Historic City Using GIS and Computer-Generated 3D Modeling," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-27, April.
    15. Hao Liu & Lin Ma, 2020. "Spatial Pattern and Effects of Urban Coordinated Development in China’s Urbanization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-16, March.
    16. Pasquale De Toro & Enrico Formato & Nicola Fierro, 2023. "Sustainability Assessments of Peri-Urban Areas: An Evaluation Model for the Territorialization of the Sustainable Development Goals," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-32, July.
    17. Sirnik, Igor & Oudes, Dirk & Stremke, Sven, 2024. "Agrivoltaics and landscape change: First evidence from built cases in the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    18. Mi Sun Park & Hyowon Lee, 2016. "Legal Opportunities for Public Participation in Forest Management in the Republic of Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-13, April.
    19. Mi Sun Park, 2015. "Inter-Korean Forest Cooperation 1998–2012: A Policy Arrangement Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-19, April.
    20. Magdalena Gyurkovich & Marta Pieczara, 2021. "Using Composition to Assess and Enhance Visual Values in Landscapes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-31, 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:9:p:2687-:d:230227. 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.