IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i16p6395-d396353.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Landscape Evaluation as a Complementary Tool in Environmental Assessment. Study Case in Urban Areas: Salamanca (Spain)

Author

Listed:
  • Marco Criado

    (Department of Soil Sciences, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, University of Salamanca, 37007 Salamanca, Spain)

  • Antonio Martínez-Graña

    (Department of Geology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Salamanca, 37008 Salamanca, Spain)

  • Fernando Santos-Francés

    (Department of Soil Sciences, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, University of Salamanca, 37007 Salamanca, Spain)

  • Leticia Merchán

    (Department of Soil Sciences, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, University of Salamanca, 37007 Salamanca, Spain)

Abstract

In recent years, the landscape has become another environmental resource, so it is important to incorporate it into planning actions. However, its broad sense of study has made it difficult to develop methodologies that precisely diagnose the state of the landscape and its management requirements, especially in dynamic spaces like urban areas. In order to develop a method capable of providing information that can be incorporated into environmental assessment and territorial planning tasks so that the needs of the landscape are taken into account in the decision-making stages, an objective methodology is presented based on the study of different parameters (biotic, abiotic and socioeconomic) analyzed in the field and subsequently geoprocessed through Geographic Information Systems according to their influence on the landscape. Through the proposed methodology it is possible to determine the quality, fragility and need of protection of the landscape, as well as to identify the diverse landscape units that form the landscape of a territory. Based on these results, a landscape diagnosis can be drawn up to quantify its overall and partial state, carry out monitoring analyses and make comparisons between different landscape units, so that management measures can be adopted according to the obtained scenarios.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:16:p:6395-:d:396353
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/16/6395/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/16/6395/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marco Criado & Antonio Martínez-Graña & Fernando Santos-Francés & Sergio Veleda & Caridad Zazo, 2017. "Multi-Criteria Analyses of Urban Planning for City Expansion: A Case Study of Zamora, Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-18, October.
    2. Pedro Molina Holgado & Lara Jendrzyczkowski Rieth & Ana-Belén Berrocal Menárguez & Fernando Allende Álvarez, 2020. "The Analysis of Urban Fluvial Landscapes in the Centre of Spain, Their Characterization, Values and Interventions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-30, June.
    3. Panagopoulos, T., 2009. "Linking forestry, sustainability and aesthetics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2485-2489, August.
    4. Jiaying Shi & Tsuyoshi Honjo & Kaixuan Zhang & Katsunori Furuya, 2020. "Using Virtual Reality to Assess Landscape: A Comparative Study Between On-Site Survey and Virtual Reality of Aesthetic Preference and Landscape Cognition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-16, April.
    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. Tengberg, Anna & Fredholm, Susanne & Eliasson, Ingegard & Knez, Igor & Saltzman, Katarina & Wetterberg, Ola, 2012. "Cultural ecosystem services provided by landscapes: Assessment of heritage values and identity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 2(C), pages 14-26.
    7. Inés Santé & Alfredo Fernández-Ríos & José María Tubío & Francisco García-Fernández & Eliska Farkova & David Miranda, 2019. "The Landscape Inventory of Galicia (NW Spain): GIS-web and public participation for landscape planning," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(2), pages 212-240, February.
    8. Willemen, Louise & Hein, Lars & Verburg, Peter H., 2010. "Evaluating the impact of regional development policies on future landscape services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2244-2254, September.
    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Swetnam, R.D. & Harrison-Curran, S.K. & Smith, G.R., 2017. "Quantifying visual landscape quality in rural Wales: A GIS-enabled method for extensive monitoring of a valued cultural ecosystem service," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 451-464.
    4. Radenka Mitova & Bilyana Borisova & Boian Koulov, 2021. "Digital Marketing of Bulgarian Natural Heritage for Tourism and Recreation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, November.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Integrating deliberative monetary valuation, systems modelling and participatory mapping to assess shared values of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 291-307.
    8. Suling Guo & Wei Sun & Wen Chen & Jianxin Zhang & Peixue Liu, 2021. "Impact of Artificial Elements on Mountain Landscape Perception: An Eye-Tracking Study," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-18, October.
    9. Moses Fayiah & ShiKui Dong & Sphiwe Wezzie Khomera & Syed Aziz Ur Rehman & Mingyue Yang & Jiannan Xiao, 2020. "Status and Challenges of Qinghai–Tibet Plateau’s Grasslands: An Analysis of Causes, Mitigation Measures, and Way Forward," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-21, February.
    10. 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.
    11. Bryce, Rosalind & Irvine, Katherine N. & Church, Andrew & Fish, Robert & Ranger, Sue & Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Subjective well-being indicators for large-scale assessment of cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 258-269.
    12. Elwell, Tammy L. & López-Carr, David & Gelcich, Stefan & Gaines, Steven D., 2020. "The importance of cultural ecosystem services in natural resource-dependent communities: Implications for management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    13. Ruiz-Frau, A. & Krause, T. & Marbà, N., 2018. "The use of sociocultural valuation in sustainable environmental management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 158-167.
    14. Katayama, Naoki & Baba, Yuki G., 2020. "Measuring artistic inspiration drawn from ecosystems and biodiversity: A case study of old children’s songs in Japan," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    15. Isabelle King & John Martin, 2021. "Exploring Public Recognition and Perceived Cultural Value of the Special Qualities within English Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-24, November.
    16. Ángel Raúl Ruiz Pulpón & María del Carmen Cañizares Ruiz, 2022. "Intangible Heritage and Territorial Identity in the Multifunctional Agrarian Systems of Vineyards in Castilla-La Mancha (Spain)," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-23, February.
    17. Fanny Boeraeve & Marc Dufrêne & Nicolas Dendoncker & Amandine Dupire & Grégory Mahy, 2020. "How Are Landscapes under Agroecological Transition Perceived and Appreciated? A Belgian Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-16, March.
    18. Ryan Bullock & Kathryn Jastremski & Maureen G. Reed, 2017. "Canada's Model Forests 20 years on: towards forest and community sustainability?," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 41(3), pages 156-166, August.
    19. Yiannis Kountouris & Kyriaki Remoundou, 2016. "Cultural Influence on Preferences and Attitudes for Environmental Quality," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(2), pages 369-397, May.
    20. Shivaraj Thapa & Subina Shrestha & Ram Kumar Adhikari & Suman Bhattarai & Deepa Paudel & Deepak Gautam & Anil Koirala, 2022. "Residents’ willingness-to-pay for watershed conservation program facilitating ecosystem services in Begnas watershed, Nepal," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(6), pages 7811-7832, June.

    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:12:y:2020:i:16:p:6395-:d:396353. 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.