Multiple-case study of landscape visualizations as a tool in transdisciplinary planning workshops

Landscape Journal

Volumn 30, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 53-71

  Schroth, Olaf ^a   Hayek, Ulrike Wissen ^b   Lange, Eckart ^c   Sheppard, Stephen R J ^d   Schmid, Willy A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Interactivity; Landscape planning; Landscape visualization; Participatory planning; Transdisciplinary action research

Indexed keywords

EID: 79251629840     PISSN: 02772426     EISSN: 15532704     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3368/lj.30.1.53     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Al-Kodmany, Kheir. 1999. Using visualization techniques for enhancing public participation in planning and design: Process, implementation, and evaluation. Landscape and Urban Planning 45 (1): 37-45.
2. Appleton, Katy, and Andrew Lovett. 2005. GIS-based visualization of development proposals: Reactions from planning and related professionals. Computers, Environment, and Urban Systems 29 (3): 321-339.
3. Arnstein, Sherry. 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the Royal Town Planning Institute 35 (4): 216-224.
4. Bishop, Ian, and Eckart Lange. 2005. Visualization in Landscape and Environmental Planning: Technology and Applications. New York: Taylor and Francis.
5. Bürki, Rolf. 2000. Klimaänderung und Anpassungsprozesse im Wintertourismus. PhD diss., Geographisches Institut der Universität Zürich, Switzerland.
6. Crewe, Katherine, and Ann Forsyth. 2003. LandSCAPES: A typology of approaches to landscape architecture. Landscape Journal 22 (1): 37-53.
7. Danahy, John. 1997. A set of visualization data needs in urban environmental planning and design for photogrammetric data. In Automatic Extraction of Man-Made Objects from Aerial and Space Images, Monte Verita Series II, ed. Armin Gruen, Emmanuel Baltsavias, and Olof Henricsson, 357-366. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhauser.
8. Danahy, John. 2001. Technology for dynamic viewing and peripheral vision in landscape visualization. Landscape and Urban Planning 54 (1-4): 127-138.
9. Deming, M. Elen, and James Palmer. 2005. Editors' introduction. Landscape Journal 24 (1): iv-vi.
10. DiBiase, David, Alan MacEachren, John Krygier, and Catherine Reeves. 1992. Animation and the role of map design in Scientific visualization. Cartography and Geographic Information Science 19 (4): 201-214.
11. Dockerty, Trudie, Andrew Lovett, Katy Appleton, Alex Bone, and Gilla Sünnenberg. 2006. Developing scenarios and visualisations to illustrate potential policy and climatic influences on future agricultural landscapes. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 114 (1): 103-120.
12. Dransch, Doris. 2000. The use of different media in visualizing spatial data. Computers & Geosciences 26 (1): 5-9.
13. Faludi, Andreas. 2001. The performance of spatial planning. In Towards A New Role For Spatial Planning, 105-132. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
14. Feagin, Joseph, Anthony Orum, and Gideon Sjoberg. 1991. A Case for the Case Study. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
15. Friedmann, John. 1987. Planning in the Public Domain. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16. Fry, Gary. 2001. Multifunctional landscapes-towards transdisciplinary research. Landscape and Urban Planning 57 (3-4): 159-168.
17. Häberling, Christian. 2003. Topographische 3D-Karten: Thesen für kartographische Gestaltungsgrundsätze. PhD diss., Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich.
18. Harrower, Mark, and Sara Fabrikant. 2008. The role of map animation for geographic visualization. In Geographic Visualization: Concepts, Tools and Applications, ed. Martin Dodge, Mary McDerby, and Martin Turner, 49-65. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley and Sons.
19. Healey, Patsy. 1997. Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies. London: Macmillan.
20. Hirsch Hadorn, Gertrude, David Bradley, Christian Pohl, Stephan Rist, and Urs Wiesmann. 2006. Implications of transdisciplinarity for sustainability research. Ecological Economics 60 (1): 119-128.
21. Hurni, Lorenz. 2006. Interaktive Karteninformationssysteme-quo vaditis? Kartographische Nachrichten 56 (3): 136-142.
22. Jantsch, Erich. 1972. Inter-and transdisciplinary university: A systems approach to education and innovation. Higher Education 1 (1): 7-37.
23. Lange, Eckart. 2001. The limits of realism: Perceptions of virtual landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 54 (1-4): 163-182.
24. Lange, Eckart, and Sigrid Hehl-Lange. 2005. Combining a participatory planning approach with a virtual landscape model for the siting of wind turbines. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 48 (6): 833-852.
25. Lewis, John L., and Stephen Sheppard. 2006. Culture and communication: Can landscape visualization improve forest management consultation with indigenous communities? Landscape and Urban Planning, 77 (3): 291-231.3
26. Luz, Frieder. 2000. Participatory landscape ecology-a basis for acceptance and implementation. Landscape and Urban Planning 50: 157-166.
27. Meuser, Michael, and Ulrike Nagel. 1991. ExpertInneninterviews-vielfach erprobt, wenig bedacht. In Qualitativ-Empirische Sozialforschung: Konzepte, Methoden, Analysen, ed. Detlef Garz and Klaus Kraimer, 441-471. Opladen, Germany: Westdeutscher.
28. Orland, Brian, Kanjanee Budthimedhee, and Jori Uusitalo. 2001. Considering virtual worlds as representations of landscape realities and as tools for landscape planning. Landscape and Urban Planning 54 (1-4): 139-148.
29. Parry, Martin L., Osvaldo Canziani, Jean Palutikof, Paul van der Linden, and Clair Hanson, eds. 2007. Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
30. Pohl, Christian, and Getrude Hirsch Hadorn. 2007. Principles for Designing Transdisciplinary Research, trans. Anne Zimmermann. Munich, Germany: Oekom.
31. Rydin, Yvonne. 1998. Urban and Environmental Planning in the UK. London: Macmillan.
32. Salter, Jonathan, Cam Campbell, Murray Journeay, and Stephen R. Sheppard. 2009. The digital workshop: Exploring the use of interactive and immersive visualisation tools in participatory planning. Journal of Environmental Management 90 (6): 2090-2101.
33. Schmid, Annette. 2004. UNESCO Biosphäre Entlebuch: Modell für eine nachhaltige Regionalentwicklung? Konzept Zielerreichungskontrolle. PhD diss., Geographisches Institut der Universität Zürich, Switzerland.
34. Scholz, Roland, and Olaf Tietje. 2002. Embedded Case Study Methods: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Knowledge. London: Sage.
35. Schroth, Olaf. 2010. From Information to Participation. Interactive Landscape Visualization as a Tool for Collaborative Planning. Zurich, Switzerland: vdf Hochschulverlag AG.
36. Schroth, Olaf, and Willy A. Schmid. 2006. How much interactivity does the public want? An assessment of interactive features in virtual landscapes. In Trends in Knowledge-Based Landscape Modeling, ed. Erich Buhmann, Stephen Ervin, Ian Jörgenson, and Josef Strobl, 116-127. Heidelberg, Germany: Wichmann.
37. Selle, Klaus. 2000. Was? Wer? Wie? Warum? Voraussetzungen und Möglichkeiten einer nachhaltigen Kommunikation. Dortmund, Germany: Dortmunder Vertrieb für Bau-und Planungsliteratur.
38. Shaw, Alison, Stephen R. Sheppard, Sarah Burch, David Flanders, Arnim Wiek, Jeff Carmichael, John Robinson, and Stewart Cohen. 2009. Making local futures tangible-synthesizing, downscaling, and visualizing climate change scenarios for participatory capacity building. Global Environmental Change 19 (4): 447-463.
39. Sheppard, Stephen R. 2001. Guidance for crystal ball gazers: Developing a code of ethics for landscape visualization. Landscape and Urban Planning 54 (1): 183-199.
40. Sheppard, Stephen R., and Jonathan Salter. 2004. The role of visualization in forest planning. In Encyclopedia of Forest Sciences, ed. Julian Evans, Jeffery Burley, and John Youngquist, 486-498. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
41. Stokols, Daniel. 2006. Toward a science of transdisciplinary action research. American Journal of Community Psychology 38 (1-2): 63-77.
42. Thering, Sue, and Victoria Chanse. 2011. Towards transdisciplinary action research. Landscape Journal 30 (1): 6-18.
43. Tress, Gunther, Bärbel Tress, and Gary Fry. 2005. Clarifying Integrative Research Concepts in Landscape Ecology. Landscape Ecology 20 (4): 479-493.
44. Von Haaren Christina, and Bartlett Warren-Kretzschmar. 2006. The interactive landscape plan: Use and benefits of new technologies in landscape planning and discussion of the interactive landscape plan in Koenigslutter am Elm, Germany. Landscape Research 31 (1): 83-105.
45. Walter, Alexander, Sebastian Helgenberger, Arnim Wiek, and Roland Scholz. 2007. Measuring societal effects of transdisciplinary research projects: Design and application of an evaluation method. Evaluation and Program Planning 30 (4): 325-338.
46. Whyte, William F. 1993. Street Corner Society: The Social Structure of an Italian Slum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
47. Wiek, Arnim. 2007. Challenges of transdisciplinary research as interactive knowledge generation-experiences from transdisciplinary case study research. GAIA-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society 16 (1): 52-57.
48. Wissen, Ulrike. 2009. Virtuelle Landschaften zur partizipativen Planung. Zurich: vdf Hochschulverlag AG.
49. Yin, Robert K. 2003. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. London: Sage.
50. Zube, Erwin, David. Simcox, and Charles Law. 1987. Perceptual landscape simulations: History and prospects. Landscape Journal 6 (1): 62-80.