IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i14p11458-d1201273.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Positive or Negative Viewpoint Determines the Overall Scenic Beauty of a Scene: A Landscape Perception Evaluation Based on a Panoramic View

Author

Listed:
  • Yue Chen

    (School of Architecture and Art, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Qikang Zhong

    (School of Architecture and Art, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Bo Li

    (School of Architecture and Art, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China)

Abstract

In the contemporary world, the swift advancement of urbanization, the pressing need for environmental conservation, and humanity’s unyielding quest for a better quality of life have jointly underscored the escalating importance of research on landscape aesthetics and perceptual experiences. Researchers have often evaluated the overall scene’s beauty based on photos taken from a single viewpoint. However, it has been observed that different viewpoints of the same scene can lead to varying degrees of beauty perception. Some positive viewpoints highlight landscape features that contribute to beauty preferences, while negative viewpoints emphasize aspects that may evoke discomfort and decrease perceived beauty. Therefore, a crucial question arises: which viewpoint, positive or negative, holds more influence over the overall beauty of the scene? This paper aimed to address this question by utilizing panoramic map technology to establish a landscape perception evaluation model. The model was based on empirical evidence from various spatial scenes along the Yaozijian Ancient Road in Anhua County, encompassing towns and villages. The study analyzed the functional relationship between landscape factors, positive and negative viewpoints, and the degree of scenic beauty. It was found that (1) it is difficult to reflect the overall scenic beauty of a scene (OSBS) of a single viewpoint photo, and both positive and negative viewpoints of scenic beauty have significant effects on the OSBS. In the empirical case study, it was found that the overall effect of a positive viewpoint of scenic beauty (PVSB) on OSBS was greater; (2) PVSB had a major effect on OSBS with a high visual hierarchy and cloud ratio and a low type of vegetation and proportion of man-made objects; (3) a negative viewpoint of scenic beauty (NVSB) had a major effect on OSBS with a low visual hierarchy of the landscape. The results of the study reveal the relationship between landscape factors of different viewpoints and the OSBS, which can be applied to landscape beauty evaluation and landscape planning and design processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Yue Chen & Qikang Zhong & Bo Li, 2023. "Positive or Negative Viewpoint Determines the Overall Scenic Beauty of a Scene: A Landscape Perception Evaluation Based on a Panoramic View," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-23, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:14:p:11458-:d:1201273
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/14/11458/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/14/11458/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xinyi Chen & Yuyang Wang & Tao Huang & Zhengsong Lin, 2022. "Research on Digital Experience and Satisfaction Preference of Plant Community Design in Urban Green Space," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, August.
    2. Hana Vavrouchová & Petra Fukalová & Hana Svobodová & Jan Oulehla & Pavla Pokorná, 2021. "Mapping Landscape Values and Conflicts through the Optics of Different User Groups," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-20, November.
    3. David Jacques, 2021. "Neuroaesthetics and landscape appreciation," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(1), pages 116-127, January.
    4. 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.
    5. Qingsheng Li & Jinliang Huang & Cui Wang & Heshan Lin & Jiwei Zhang & Jinlong Jiang & Bingkun Wang, 2017. "Land Development Suitability Evaluation of Pingtan Island Based on Scenario Analysis and Landscape Ecological Quality Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-15, July.
    6. Federica Buffa, 2015. "Young Tourists and Sustainability. Profiles, Attitudes, and Implications for Destination Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-21, October.
    7. Shengneng Hu & Wei Tong & Kexin Mao, 2023. "Study on Highway Landscape Environment Assessment and Grading Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-17, March.
    8. Rocco Scolozzi & Uta Schirpke & Carlo Detassis & Sabah Abdullah & Alessandro Gretter, 2015. "Mapping Alpine Landscape Values and Related Threats as Perceived by Tourists," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(4), pages 451-465, May.
    9. Jiaying Yan & Shuang Du & Jinbo Zhang & Weiyu Yu, 2023. "Analyzing Transregional Vernacular Cultural Landscape Security Patterns with a Nature–Culture Lens: A Case Study of the Yangtze River Delta Demonstration Area, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-29, March.
    10. Magdalena Gyurkovich & Marta Pieczara, 2021. "Using Composition to Assess and Enhance Visual Values in Landscapes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-31, April.
    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. Xianlun Tian & Guohui Li & Ming Zhu, 2024. "View Selection of Safety Managers Affects Their Ability to Evaluate Safety Level of Workers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-17, October.

    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. Shiwei Shen & Marios Sotiriadis & Qing Zhou, 2020. "Could Smart Tourists Be Sustainable and Responsible as Well? The Contribution of Social Networking Sites to Improving Their Sustainable and Responsible Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-21, February.
    2. Shulong Dong & Jiangming Ma & Yanhua Mo & Hao Yang, 2022. "GIS-Based Watershed Unit Forest Landscape Visual Quality Assessment in Yangshuo Section of Lijiang River Basin, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-28, November.
    3. Alessio Russo & Giuseppe T. Cirella, 2023. "Urban Ecosystem Services: Advancements in Urban Green Development," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-4, February.
    4. Philip R. Walsh & Rachel Dodds & Julianna Priskin & Jonathon Day & Oxana Belozerova, 2021. "The Corporate Responsibility Paradox: A Multi-National Investigation of Business Traveller Attitudes and Their Sustainable Travel Behaviour," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-20, April.
    5. 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).
    6. Ni Sheng & U Wa Tang, 2015. "Spatial Techniques to Visualize Acoustic Comfort along Cultural and Heritage Routes for a World Heritage City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-17, July.
    7. Yeneneh Tamirat Negash & Massoud Moslehpour & Pei-Kuan Lin & Shao-Chun Chiu & Yung-Yen Liu, 2021. "Mapping Generation Y Tourists’ E-Loyalty: A Sustainable Framework through Hierarchical Structure and Fuzzy Set Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-22, April.
    8. Xiaoming Liu & Mei Xu & Huiling Zhou, 2022. "Analyzing the Spatio-Temporal Distribution and Network Structure of Ecotourism Flow in Zhangjiajie," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-19, February.
    9. Dana Badau & Adela Badau, 2018. "The motric, Educational, Recreational and Satisfaction Impact of Adventure Education Activities in the Urban Tourism Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-13, June.
    10. Carine Pachoud & Riccardo Da Re & Maurizio Ramanzin & Stefano Bovolenta & Damiano Gianelle & Enrico Sturaro, 2020. "Tourists and Local Stakeholders’ Perception of Ecosystem Services Provided by Summer Farms in the Eastern Italian Alps," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-16, February.
    11. Mary-Ann Cooper & Raquel Camprubí & Erdogan Koc & Ralf Buckley, 2021. "Digital Destination Matching: Practices, Priorities and Predictions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-11, September.
    12. Gema Pérez-Tapia & Fernando Almeida-García & Pere Mercadé-Melé, 2021. "The “ Four Core Elements ” as a Measuring Instrument: From Simplicity to Complexity in Tourist Destination," Economies, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-16, April.
    13. Josefa García Mestanza & Alfonso Cerezo Medina & Marco Antonio Cruz Morato, 2019. "A Model for Measuring Fair Labour Justice in Hotels: Design for the Spanish Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-20, August.
    14. Xiaocheng Vicky Zhang & Suk Ha Grace Chan, 2021. "Do Knowledge and Experience Value Affect Green Tourism Activity Participation and Buying Decision? A Case Study of Natural Dyeing Experience in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-18, July.
    15. Miroslav D. Vujičić & James Kennell & Alastair Morrison & Viachaslau Filimonau & Ivana Štajner Papuga & Uglješa Stankov & Djordjije A. Vasiljević, 2020. "Fuzzy Modelling of Tourist Motivation: An Age-Related Model for Sustainable, Multi-Attraction, Urban Destinations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-19, October.
    16. Weiwei Zhou & Li-Yu Chen & Rung-Jiun Chou, 2021. "Important Factors Affecting Rural Tourists’ Aesthetic Experience: A Case Study of Zoumatang Village in Ningbo," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-24, July.
    17. Zhiming Li & Zhengxi Fan & Shiguang Shen, 2018. "Urban Green Space Suitability Evaluation Based on the AHP-CV Combined Weight Method: A Case Study of Fuping County, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-15, July.
    18. Hangyu Gao & Shamsul Abu Bakar & Suhardi Maulan & Mohd Johari Mohd Yusof & Riyadh Mundher & Benxue Chen, 2024. "How Highway Landscape Visual Qualities Are Being Studied: A Systematic Literature Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-19, March.
    19. Bastian Bertzky & Colleen Corrigan & Susan Snyman, 2022. "Planning Effective Conservation Landscapes for Nature and People: An Editorial Overview," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-4, July.
    20. Chunhua Li & Jin Wang & Xincen Liu & Kejian Xu, 2024. "Construction of Karst Landscape Ecological Security Pattern Based on Conflict between Human and Nature in Puzhehei," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-22, 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:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:14:p:11458-:d:1201273. 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.