Variations in cross-cultural perception of riverscapes in relation to in-channel wood

Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 268-287

  Le Lay, Yves François ^a   Piégay, Hervé ^a   Gregory, Ken ^b   Chin, Anne ^c   Dolédec, Sylvain ^d   Elosegi, Arturo ^e   Mutz, Michael ^f   Wyzga, Bartłomiej ^g   Zawiejska, Joanna ^h  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE LYON   (France)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^c TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d CNRS   (France)

^e UNIVERSITY OF THE BASQUE COUNTRY UPV EHU   (Spain)

^f BRANDENBURG UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

^g INSTITUTE OF NATURE CONSERVATION   (Poland)

^h PEDAGOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Poland)

Author keywords

Channel improvement; Cross cultural comparison; In channel wood; Large woody debris; Naturalness; Public perception; Riverscape evaluation

Indexed keywords

CULTURAL INFLUENCE; ESTHETICS; HUMAN ACTIVITY; NATURALNESS; PERCEPTION; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS; PUBLIC ATTITUDE; RIPRAP; RIVER MANAGEMENT; SPATIAL COGNITION; TURBULENT FLOW; WOODY DEBRIS;

ASIA; CENTRAL EUROPE; CHINA; EURASIA; EUROPE; FAR EAST; GERMANY; INDIA; NORTH AMERICA; NORTHERN EUROPE; OREGON; RUSSIAN FEDERATION; SCANDINAVIA; SOUTH ASIA; SWEDEN; UNITED STATES;

EID: 47749104937     PISSN: 00202754     EISSN: 14755661     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-5661.2008.00297.x     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Adams. W M, Perrow. M R and Carpenter. A 2004 Conservatives and champions: River managers and the river restoration discourse in the United Kingdom Environment and Planning A 36 1929-42
2. Adams W M, Perrow M R and Carpenter A 2005 Perceptions of river managers of institutional constraints on floodplain restoration in the UK Journal of Environmental Planning and Management http://www.informaworld.com/ smpp/title~content=t713429786~db=all~tab=issueslist~branches=48-v4848 877-89
3. Arthur L M 1977 Predicting scenic beauty of forest environments: Some empiric tests Forest Science 23 151-9
4. Blankson E J and Green B H 1991 Use of landscape classification as an essential prerequisite to landscape evaluation Landscape and Urban Planning 21 149-62
5. Brown T C and Daniel T C 1991 Landscape aesthetics of riparian environments: Relationship of flow quantity to scenic quality along a wild and scenic river Water Resources Research 27 1787-95
6. Buhyoff G J, Wellman J D, Harvey H and Fraser R A 1978 Landscape architects' interpretations of people's landscape preferences Journal of Environmental Management 6 255-62
7. Buhyoff G J, Wellman J D, Koch N E, Gauthier L and Hultman S 1983 Landscape preference metrics: An international comparison Journal of Environmental Management 16 181-90
8. Burmil S, Daniel T C and Hetherington J D 1999 Human values and perceptions of water in arid landscapes Landscape and Urban Planning 44 99-109
9. Calvin J S, Dearinger J A and Curtin M E 1972 An attempt at assessing preferences for natural landscapes Environment and Behavior 4 447-70
10. Carp F M and Carp A 1982a A role for technical environment assessment in perceptions of environmental quality and well-being Journal of Environmental Psychology 2 171-92
11. Carp F M and Carp A 1982b Perceived environmental quality of neighbourhoods: Development of assessment scales and their relation to age and gender Journal of Environmental Psychology 3 295-312
12. Carter J and Howe J 2006 Stakeholder participation and the water framework directive: The case of the Ribble Pilot Local Environment 11 217-31
13. Dakin S 2003 There's more to landscape than meets the eye: Toward inclusive landscape assessment in resource and environmental management The Canadian Geographer 47 185-200
14. Daniel T C and Boster R S 1976 Measuring landscape aesthetics: The scenic beauty estimation method US Forest Service, Department of Agriculture, Research Paper RM-167, Washington DC
15. Downs P W and Gregory K J 2004 River channel management: Towards sustainable catchment hydrosystems Arnold, London
16. Eden S and Tunstall S 2006 Ecological versus social restoration? How urban river restoration challenges but also fails to challenge the science-policy nexus in the United Kingdom Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 24 661-80
17. Eden S, Tunstall S M and Tapsell S M 2000 Translating nature: River restoration as nature-culture Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 18 257-73
18. Feimer N R 1984 Environmental perception: The effects of media, evaluative context and observer sample Journal of Environmental Management 4 61-80
19. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2003 State of the world's forests FAO, Rome
20. Gift A 1989 Visual analog scales: Measurement of subjective phenomenon Nursing Research 38 286-8
21. Gregory K J and Davis R J 1993 The perception of riverscape aesthetics: an example from two Hampshire rivers Journal of Environmental Management 39 171-85
22. Gregory S V, Boyer K L and Gurnell A M 2003 The ecology and management of wood in world rivers American Fisheries Society, Bethesda MD
23. Haifang L 2004 The Chinese perception of wood in riverscapes. A comparison between the German and Chinese students Master thesis Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus
24. Herzog T R 1985 A cognitive analysis of preference for waterscapes Journal of Environmental Psychology 5 225-41
25. Herzog T R, Black A M, Fountaine K A and Knotts D J 1997 Reflection and attentional recovery as distinctive benefits of restorative environments Journal of Environmental Psychology 17 165-70
26. Hodgson R W and Thayer R L 1980 Implied human influence reduces landscape beauty Landscape Planning 7 171-9
27. House M A 1996 Public participation in water management and the promotion of environmental education Lakes & Reservoirs: Research & Management 2 1-5
28. House M and Sangster E K 1991 Public perception of river corridor management Journal of the Institution of Water and Environmental Management 5 312-17
29. Huang S-C L and Tassinary L 2000 A study of people's perception of waterscapes in built environments Journal of Public Affair Review 1 1-19
30. Hull IV R B and Revell G R B 1989 Cross-cultural comparison of landscape scenic beauty evaluations: A case study in Bali Journal of Environmental Psychology 9 177-91
31. Hull IV R B and Stewart W P 1992 Validity of photo-based scenic beauty judgments Journal of Environmental Psychology 12 101-14
32. Ihaka R and Gentleman R 1996 R: A language for data analysis and graphics Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 5 299-315
33. Kaplan R 1984 Wilderness perception and psychological benefits: An analysis of a continuing program Leisure Sciences 6 271-90
34. Kaplan R and Herbert E J 1987 Cultural and sub-cultural comparisons in preferences for natural settings Landscape and Urban Planning 14 281-93
35. Kaplan S and Kaplan R 1989 The experience of nature: A psychological perspective Cambridge University Press, New York
36. Kellomäki S and Savolainen R 1984 The scenic value of the forest landscape as assessed in the field and the laboratory Landscape Planning 11 97-107
37. Le Lay Y-F 2006 L'évaluation environnementale du bois en rivière par les gestionnaires des cours d'eau français Géocarrefour 84 265-75
38. Le Lay Y-F and Moulin B 2007 Les barrages face àla problématique des bois flottants: Collecte, traitement et valorisation La Houille Blanche. Revue internationale de l'eau 3 96-103
39. Le Lay Y-F and Piégay H 2007 Le bois mort dans les paysages fluviaux français: Éléments pour une gestion renouvelée L'Espace géographique 1 51-64
40. Le Lay Y-F, Piégay H and Cossin M 2005 Les enquêtes de perception paysagère àl' aide de photographies: Choix méthodologiques et exemples en milieu fluvial in Septièmes Rencontres de Théo Quant 26-28 janvier 2005 Besançon (http://thema.univ-fcomte.fr/theoq/pdf/2005/LeLay-theoquant05.pdf) Accessed 15 January 2008
41. Mosley M P 1989 Perceptions of New Zealand river scenery New Zealand Geographer 45 2-13
42. Nasar J L and Li M 2004 Landscape mirror: The attractiveness of reflecting water Landscape and Urban Planning 66 233-8
43. Nasar J L and Lin Y-H 2003 Evaluative responses to five kinds of water features Landscape Research 28 441-50
44. Nassauer J I 1995 Culture and changing landscape structure Landscape Ecology 10 229-37
45. Nunneri C and Hofmann J 2005 A participatory approach for integrated river basin management in the Elbe catchment Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 62 521-37
46. Parsons R, Tassinary L G, Ulrich R S, Hebl M R and Grossman-Alexander M 1998 The view from the road: Implications for stress recovery and immunization Journal of Environmental Psychology 18 113-39
47. Pedersen D M 1978 Relationship between environmental familiarity and environmental preference Perceptual and Motor Skills 47 739-43
48. Petts J 2006 Managing public engagement to optimize learning: reflections from urban river restoration Human Ecology Review 13 172-81
49. Piégay H, Gregory K J, Bondarev V, Chin A, Dalhstrom N, Elosegi A, Gregory S V, Joshi V, Mutz M, Rinaldi M, Wyzga B and Zawiejska J 2005 Public perception as a barrier to introducing wood in rivers for restoration purposes Environmental Management 36 665-74
50. Purcell A T and Lamb R J 1984 Landscape perception: An examination and empirical investigation of two central issues in the area Journal of Environmental Management 19 31-63
51. Real E, Arce C and Sabucedo J M 2000 Classification of landscapes using quantitative and categorical data, and prediction of their scenic beauty in north-western Spain Journal of Environmental Psychology 20 355-73
52. Reich M, Kershner J L and Wildman R C 2003 Restoring streams with large wood: A synthesis in Gregory S V, Boyer K and Gurnell A M eds The ecology and management of wood in world rivers American Fisheries Society, Bethesda MD 355-66
53. Rhoads B L, Wilson D, Urban M and Herricks E E 1999 Interaction between scientists and nonscientists in community-based watershed management: emergence of the concept of stream naturalization Environmental Management 24 297-308
54. Schroeder H W, Buyhoff G J and Cannon W N 1986 Cross-validation of predictive models for aesthetic quality of residential streets Journal of Environmental Management 23 309-26
55. Scott M J and Canter D V 1997 Picture or place? A multiple sorting study of landscape Journal of Environmental Psychology 17 263-81
56. Shafer E L and Brush R O 1977 How to measure preferences for photographs of natural landscapes Landscape Planning 4 237-56
57. Shafer E L and Tooby M 1973 Landscape preferences: An international replication Journal of Leisure Research 5 60-5
58. Shafer E L, Hamilton J F and Schmidt E A 1969 Natural landscape preferences: A predictive model Journal of Leisure Research 1 1-19
59. Shrader C C 1995 Rural greenway planning: The role of streamland perception in landowner acceptance of land management strategies Landscape and Urban Planning 33 375-90
60. Shuttleworth S 1980 The use of photographs as an environment presentation medium in landscape studies Journal of Environmental Management 11 61-76
61. Smith D G, Croker G F and McFarlane K 1995a Human perception of water appearance. 1. Clarity and colour for bathing and aesthetics New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 29 29-43
62. Smith D G, Croker G F and McFarlane K 1995b Human perception of water appearance. 2. Colour judgement, and the influence of perceptual set on perceived water suitability for use New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 29 45-50
63. Stamps III A E 1990 Use of photographs to simulate environments: A meta-analysis Perceptual and Motor Skill 71 907-13
64. Tunstall S M, Tapsell S M and Eden S E 1999 How stable are public responses to changing local environments? A 'before' and 'after' case study of river restoration Journal of Environmental Planning and Management http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713429786~db= all~tab=issueslist~branches=42-v4242 527-45
65. Tunstall S M, Penning-Rowsell E C, Tapsell S M and Eden S E 2000 River restoration: Public attitudes and expectations Journal of the Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management 14 363-70
66. Ulrich R S, Simonds R F, Losito B D, Fiorito E, Miles M A and Zelson M 1991 Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments Journal of Environmental Psychology 11 201-30
67. Vining J and Orland B 1989 The video advantage: A comparison of two environmental representation techniques Journal of Environmental Management 29 275-83
68. Wade R J, Rhoads B L, Newell M D, Wilson D, Garcia M and Herricks E E 2002 Integrating science and technology to support stream naturalization near Chicago, Illinois Journal of American Water Resources Association 38 931-44
69. Wilson M I, Robertson L D, Daly M and Walton S A 1995 Effects of visual cues on assessment of water quality Journal of Environmental Psychology 15 53-63
70. Zube E H 1973 Rating everyday rural landscapes of the northeastern United States Landscape Architecture 63 370-5
71. Zube E H 1984 Themes in landscape assessment theory Landscape Journal 3 104-10
72. Zube E H 1987 Perceived land use patterns and landscape values Landscape Ecology 1 37-45
73. Zube E H and Pitt D G 1981 Cross-cultural perceptions of scenic and heritage landscapes Landscape Planning 8 69-87
74. Zube E H, Sell J L and Taylor J G 1982 Landscape perception: Research, application and theory Landscape Planning 9 1-33
75. Zube E H, Pitt D G and Evans G W 1983 A lifespan development study of landscape assessment Journal of Environmental Psychology 3 115-28
76. Zube E H, Simcox D E and Law C S 1987 Perceptual landscape simulations: history and prospect Landscape Journal 6 62-80