Determination of landscape beauties through visual quality assessment method: A case study for Kemaliye (Erzincan/Turkey)

Environmental Monitoring and Assessment

Volumn 141, Issue 1-3, 2008, Pages 121-129

  Bulut, Zohre ^a   Yilmaz, Hasan ^a  

^a ATATÜRK UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Kemaliye; Turkey; Visual quality assessment; Visual quality of landscape

Indexed keywords

NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT; STRATEGIC PLANNING; STRUCTURAL GEOLOGY; URBAN PLANNING;

LANDSCAPE SPATIAL PATTERN; VISUAL QUALITY ASSESSMENT; VISUAL RICHNESS;

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS;

ASSESSMENT METHOD; LANDSCAPE PLANNING; LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE; NATURAL RESOURCE; RESOURCE USE; SPATIAL ANALYSIS;

ARTICLE; COLOR; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FLORA; GEOLOGY; LANDSCAPE; PHOTOGRAPHY; TOPOGRAPHY; TURKEY (REPUBLIC); URBANIZATION; VEGETATION; VISUAL INFORMATION; WATER SUPPLY;

ADULT; BEAUTY; HUMANS; QUESTIONNAIRES; RECREATION; TRAVEL; TURKEY; VISION;

ERZINCAN [TURKEY]; EURASIA; TURKEY;

EID: 43549099952     PISSN: 01676369     EISSN: 15732959     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10661-007-9882-0     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Acar, C., & Kurdoǧlu, B. Ç. (2005). Visual quality evaluation in Kac7cedil;kar Mointains. Sum on protected natural areas. Isparta, Turkey: Süleyman Demirel University September 8-10, 2005.
2. Aacar,C., Kurdoǧlu, B., Kurdoǧlu, O., & ve Acar, H. (2006). Public preferences for visual quality and management in Kaçkar Mountains National Park (Turkey). The International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 13(6), 499-512.
3. Amir, S., & Gidalizon, E. (1990). Expert-based method fort he evaluation of visual absorption capacity of the landscape. Journal of Environmental Management, 30, 251-263.
4. Angileri, V., & Toccolini, A. (1993). The assessment of visual quality as a tool for the conservation of rural landscape diversity. Landscape and Urban Planning, 24(1-4), 105-112.
5. Anonim. (2005a). Kemaliye I̊lçesi I̊klim Verileri (1984-1990). Ankara: Meteoroloji Genel Müdürlüǧü Araştirma ve Bilgi I̊şlem Daire Başkanliǧ.
6. Anonim. (2005b). 2000 Genel Nüfus Sayimi, Nüfusun Sosyal ve Ekonomik Nitelikleri, 24 Erzincan, T. C. Ankara: Başbakanlik Devlet I̊statistik Enstitüsü.
7. Arriaza, M., Canas-Ortega, J. F., Canas-Madueno, J. A., & Ruiz-Aviles, P. (2004). Assessing the visual quality of rural landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69, 115-125.
8. Bergen, S. D., Ulbricht, C. A., Fridley, J. L., & Ganter, M. A. (1995). The validity of computer generated graphic images of forest landscapes. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15, 135-146.
9. Clay, G. R., & Smidt, R. K. (2004). Assessing the validity and reliability of descriptor variables used in scenic highway analysis. Landscape and Urban Planning, 66(4), 239-255.
10. Daniel, T. C. (2001). Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landscape and Urban Planning, 54(1-4), 267-281.
11. Daniel, T. C., & Vining, J. (1983). Methodological issues in the assessment of landscape quality. In I. Altman, & J. F. Wohwill (Eds.) Behaviour and the Natural Environment (pp. 39-83). New York: Plenum.
12. De Val, G. F., Atauri, J. A., & De Lucio, J. V. (2006). Relationship between landscape visual attributes and spatial pattern indices: A test study in Mediterranean-climate landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 77(4), 393-407.
13. Hammitt, W. E., Patterson, M. E., & Noe, F. P. (1994). Identifying nad predicting visual preference of southern Appalachian forest recreation vistas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 29(2-39), 171-183.
14. Hands, D. E., & Brown, R. D. (2002). Enhancing visual preference of ecological rehabilitation sites. Landscape and Urban Planning, 58(1), 57-70.
15. Hull, R. B., & McCarthy, M. M. (1988). Change in the landscape. Landscape and Urban Planning, 15(3-4), 265-278.
16. Hull, R. B., & Stewart, W. P. (1992). Validity of photo-based scenic beauty judgments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12(2), 101-114.
17. Hunziker, M., & Kienast, F. (1999). Potential impacts of changing agricultural activities on scenic beauty-A prototypical technique for automated rapid assessment. Landscape Ecology, 14(2), 161-176.
18. Kaltenborn, B. P., & Bjerke, T. (2002). Associations between environmental value orientations and landscape preferences. Landscape and Urban Planning, 59, 1-11.
19. Kane, P. S. (1981). Assessing landscape attractiveness: A comparative test of two new method. Applied Geography, 1, 77-96.
20. Kaplan, R., Kaplan, S., & Brown, T. (1989). Environmental preference: A comparison of four domains of predictors. Environment & Behavior, 21(5), 509-530.
21. Karahan, F. (2003). Landscape planning of Erzurum-Rize highway cooridor and its opportunity for usebility as landscape view road (p. 210). Ph.D. Dissertation, Graduate College of Atatürk University, Erzurum.
22. Karahan, F., & Yilmaz, H. (2004a). Evaluation of Erzurum-Rize hihgway cooridor for ecotourism purposes. II. International tourism, environment and culture symposium pp. 225-262. I̊zmir, Turkey: Proceeding Book.
23. Karahan, F., & Yimaz, H. (2004b). (203-205). Visual quality analysis of Erzurum highway cooridor. Landscape Architecture 2. Congress. I̊zmir, Turkey: Proceeding Book.
24. Karjalainen, E., & Komulainen, M. (1999). The visual effect of felling on small and medium-scale landscapes in North-eastern Finland. Journal of Environmental Management, 55, 167-181.
25. Krause, C. L. (2001). Our visual landscape: Managing the landscape under special consideration of visual aspects. Landscape and Urban Planning, 54(1-4), 239-254.
26. Koç, N., & Şahin (1999). Urban Landscape Planning. University of Ankara, Faculty of Agriculture, No: 1509 (p. 210), Ankara.
27. Lambe, R. A. (1986). Commercial highway landscape reclamation: A participatory approach. Landscape and Planning, 24(4), 353-385.
28. Meitner, M. J. (2004). Scenic beauty of river views in the Grand Canyon: Relating perceptual judgments to location. Landscape and Urban Planning, 68, 3-13.
29. Misgav, A. (2000). Visual preference of the public for vegetation groups in Israel. Landscape and Urban Planning, 48, 143-159.
30. Mok, J., Landphair, H. C., & Naderi, J. R. (2005). Landscape improvement impacts on roadside safety in Texas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 78(3), 263-274.
31. Müderrisoǧlu, H., Eroǧlu, E., Özkan, Ş, & ve Ak, K. (2006). Visual perception of tree forms. Building and Environment, 41(6), 796-806.
32. Ribe, R. G. (1994). Scenic beauty perceptions along the ROS. Journal of Environmental Management, 42(3), 199-221.
33. Roth, M. (2006). Validating the use of internet survey techniques in visual landscape assessment-An empirical study from Germany. Landscape and Urban Planning, 78(3), 179-192.
34. Shafer Jr, E. L., & Brush, R. O. (1977). How to measure preference for photographs af natural landscapes. Landscape Planning, 4, 237-256.
35. Sheppard, S., & Picard, P. (2005). Visual-quality impacts of forest pest activity at the landscape level: A synthesis of published knowledge and research needs. Landscape and Urban Planning, 77(4), 321-342.
36. Shuttleworth, S. (1980a). The use of photographs as an environment presantation medium in landscape studies. Journal of Environmental Management, 11(1), 61-76.
37. Shuttleworth, S. (1980b). The evaluation of landscape quality. Landscape Research, 5(1), 14-1518-20.
38. Schroeder, H. W., & Daniel, T. C. (1980). Predicting the scenic quality of forest road corridors. Environment & Behavior, 12(3), 349-366.
39. Sullivan, W. C., & Lovell, S. T. (2006). Improving the visual quality of commercial development at the rural-urban fringe. Landscape and Urban Planning, 77(1-2), 152-166.
40. Tahvanainen, L., Ihalainen, M., Hietala-Koivu, R., Kolehmainen, O., Tyrväinen, L., Nousiainen, O., & Helenius, J. (2002). Measures of the, EU agri-environmental protection scheme (GAEPS) and their impacts on the visual acceptability of Finnish agricultural landscapes. Journal of Environmental Management, 66, 213-227.
41. Tzolova, G. V. (1995). An experiment in greenway analysis and assesment: The Danibe River. Landscape and Urban Planning, 33(1-3), 283-294.
42. Ulrich, R. S. (1986). Human responses to vegetation and landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 13, 29-44.
43. Van den Berg, A. E., & Koole, S. L. (2006). New wilderness in the Netherlands: An investigation of visual preferences for nature development landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 78(4), 362-372.
44. Wherrett, J. R. (2000). Creating landscape preference models using internet survey techniques. Landscape Research, 25(1), 79-96.
45. Yu, K. (1995). Cultural variations in landscape preference: Comparisons among Chinese sub-groups and western design experts. Landscape and Urban Planning, 32(2), 107-126.