The impacts of knowledge of the past on preferences for future landscape change

Journal of Environmental Management

Volumn 90, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 1404-1412

  Hanley, Nick ^a   Ready, Richard ^b   Colombo, Sergio ^c   Watson, Fiona ^d   Stewart, Mairi ^e   Bergmann, E Ariel ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c IFAPA CENTRO EL TORUÑO   (Spain)

^d UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE   (United Kingdom)

^e UNIVERSITY OF THE HIGHLANDS AND ISLANDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Environmental history; Landscape change; Landscape preferences; National parks; Woodland management

Indexed keywords

'CURRENT; CASE-STUDIES; ENVIRONMENTAL HISTORY; INFORMATION SET; LANDSCAPE CHANGES; LANDSCAPE PREFERENCES; NATIONAL PARKS; PROSPECTIVES; STATUS QUO; WOODLAND MANAGEMENT;

ECOLOGY;

ENVIRONMENTAL HISTORY; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; KNOWLEDGE; LANDSCAPE CHANGE; NATIONAL PARK; WOODLAND;

CUMBRIA; ENGLAND; EURASIA; EUROPE; LAKE DISTRICT; UNITED KINGDOM; WESTERN EUROPE;

EID: 58049140731     PISSN: 03014797     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.08.008     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Bateman I., Carson R., Day B., Hanemann M., Hanley N., Hett T., Jones-Lee M., Loomes G., Mourato S., Ozdemiroglu E., Pearce D., Sugden R., and Swanson J. Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques, A Manual (2002), Edward Elgar, Cheltenhan, UK/Northampton, MA, USA
2. Bullen J. Assessing public perception of landscape in Wales: a LANDMAP approach. In: Usher M.B. (Ed). Landscape Character: Perspectives on Management and Change (1999), The Stationary Office, Edinburgh
3. Cheng A.C., Kruger L., and Daniels S. Place as an integrating concept in natural resource politics. Society and Natural Resources 16 (2003) 87-104
4. Council of Europe. The European Landscape Convention - Firenze, 20.X.2000 (ETS No. 176) (2000), Council of Europe, Strasbourg
5. Daniel T.C. Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landscape and Urban Planning 54 1-4 (2001) 267-281
6. Dramstad W.E., Fry G., Fjellstad W.J., Skar B., Helliksen W., Sollund M.L.B., Tveit M.S., Geelmuyden A.K., and Framstad E. Integrating landscape-based values - Norwegian monitoring of agricultural landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 57 3-4 (2001) 257-268
7. Fischer, A., 2003. Decision Behaviour and Information Processing in Contingent Valuation Surveys. PhD thesis, Gottingen University, Berlin, www.dissertation.de.
8. Garrod G.D., and Willis K.G. Valuing the benefits of South Downs environmentally sensitive area. Journal of Agricultural Economics 46 2 (1995) 160-173
9. Gomez-Limon J., and Fernandez J.V.D. Changes in use and landscape preferences on the agricultural-livestock landscapes of the central Iberian Peninsula (Madrid, Spain). Landscape and Urban Planning 44 (1999) 165-175
10. González M., and León C.J. Consumption, process and multiple valuation of landscape attributes. Ecological Economics 45 (2003) 159-169
11. Greene W. Econometric Analysis. second ed. (1993), MacMillan Publishing, New York
12. Greider T., and Garkovitch L. Landscapes: the social construction of nature and the environment. Rural Sociology 59 1 (1994) 1-24
13. Habron D. Visual perception of wild land in Scotland. Landscape and Urban Planning 42 1 (1998) 45-56
14. Hanley N., Wright R.E., and Adamowicz W. Using choice experiments to value the environment: design issues, current experience and future prospects. Environmental and Resource Economics 11 3-4 (1998) 413-428
15. Hynes S., Hanley N., and Scarpa R. Effects on welfare measures of alternative means of accounting for preference heterogeneity. American Journal of Agricultural Economics (2008) 10.1111/j.1467-8276.2008.01148.x
16. Jones C.D., Patterson M.E., and Hammitt W.E. Evaluating the construct validity of sense of belonging as a measure of landscape perception. Journal of Leisure Research 32 4 (2000) 383-395
17. Kaltenborn B.P., and Bjerke T. Associations between environmental value orientations and landscape preferences. Landscape and Urban Planning 59 (2002) 1-11
18. Kristrom B. Spike models in contingent valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79 (1997) 1013-1023
19. Lake District National Park Authority (LDNPA). Habitats of the Lake District (1995). http://www.lake-district.gov.uk/lake_district_docs95/factsheets_habitat.pdf (accessed 29.04.08)
20. Lake District National Park Authority (LDNPA). The Lake District National Park in Figures (2003). http://www.lake-district.gov.uk/lake (accessed 01.05.05)
21. Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park Authority (LLTNPA). State of the Park Report (2005). http://www.lochlomond-trossachs.org/park/deault.asp?p=109 (accessed 01.05.05)
22. Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park Authority (LLTNPA). An evaluation of the special qualities of Loch Lomond and the Trossachs. Appenidix Submitted to Scottish Ministers, 2006 (2006). http://www.lochlomond-trossachs.org/upload/file/parkplan2/Ch7_SQ_low.pdf (accessed 28.04.08)
23. MacMillan D., Hanley N., and Lienhoop N. Contingent valuation: environmental polling or preference engine?. Ecological Economics 60 1 (2006) 299-307
24. Múgica M., and de Lucio J.V. The role of on-site experience on landscape preferences. A case study at Doñana National Park, Spain. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 47 (1996) 229-239
25. Munro A., and Hanley N. Information, uncertainty and contingent valuation. In: Bateman I., and Willis K. (Eds). Valuing Environmental Preferences (1999), Oxford University Press, Oxford
26. Ready R., Navrud S., and Dubourg W.R. How do respondents with uncertain Willingness to Pay answer contingent valuation questions?. Land Economics 77 3 (2001) 315-326
27. Ribe R.G. Is scenic beauty a proxy for acceptable management? The influence of environmental attitudes on landscape perceptions. Environment and Behavior 34 (2002) 757-780
28. Sheail J. Nature in Trust. The History of Nature Conservation in Britain (1976), Blackie, Glasgow
29. Stedman R. Is it really just a social construction? The contribution of physical environment to Sense of Place. Society and Natural Resources 16 (2003) 671-685
30. Van den Berg A.E., Vlek C., and Coeterier J. Group differences in the aesthetic valuation of nature development plans: a multi-level approach. Journal of Environmental Psychology 18 (1998) 141-157
31. Whyte I. Whose Lake District? Contested landscapes and changing sense of place. North West Geography 2 2 (2002) 1-11
32. Zube E.H., Pitt D.G., and Evans G.W. A life-span developmental study of landscape assessment. Journal of Environmental Psychology 3 (1983) 115-128