The social landscape of planning: Integrating social and perceptual research with spatial planning information

Landscape and Urban Planning

Volumn 100, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 361-363

  Ryan, Robert L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

Integrated landscape models; Landscape perceptions; Social science research

Indexed keywords

PLANNING;

LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENTS; LANDSCAPE MODEL; LANDSCAPE PERCEPTIONS; PUBLIC PERCEPTION; SOCIAL LANDSCAPES; SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH; SPATIAL INFORMATIONS; SPATIAL PLANNING;

URBAN GROWTH;

GIS; INTEGRATED APPROACH; LANDSCAPE PLANNING; LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE; LITERATURE REVIEW; NUMERICAL MODEL; PERCEPTION; RESEARCH WORK; SPATIAL PLANNING; URBAN GROWTH; WATERSHED;

EID: 79953050568     PISSN: 01692046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.01.015     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Alessa L., Kliskey A., Brown G. Social-ecological hotspots mapping: a spatial approach for identifying coupled social-ecological space. Landscape Urban Plann. 2008, 85(1):27-39.
2. Bryan B.A., Raymond C.M., Crossman N.D., Macdonald D.H. Targeting the management of ecosystem services based on social values: where, what, and how?. Landscape Urban Plann. 2010, 97(2):111-122.
3. He H.S., Lewis B.J., Baer A.D., Nigh T.A. Exploring linkages between people and rural landscapes at broad ecological scales. Landscape Urban Plann. 2010, 97:49-57.
4. Jorgensen A., Hitchmough J., Dunnett N. Woodland as a setting for housing-appreciation and fear and the contribution to residential satisfaction and place identity in Warrington New Town, UK. Landscape Urban Plann. 2007, 79:273-287.
5. Junker B., Buchecker M. Aesthetic preferences versus ecological objectives in river restorations. Landscape Urban Plann. 2008, 85(3-4):141-154.
6. Kaplan R. Employees' reactions to nearby nature at their workplace: the wild and the tame. Landscape Urban Plann. 2007, 84(1):17-24.
7. Lange, E., 2011. 99 Landscape Urba Plann, 100, in press.
8. Marans R.W. Understanding environmental quality through quality of life studies: the 2001 DAS and its use of subjective and objective indicators. Landscape Urban Plann. 2003, 65:73-83.
9. Matsuoka R.H., Kaplan R. People needs in the urban landscape: analysis of landscape and urban planning contributions. Landscape Urban Plann. 2008, 84(1):7-19.
10. Palmer J.F. Using spatial metrics to predict scenic perception in a changing landscape: Dennis, Massachusetts. Landscape Urban Plann. 2004, 69:201-218.
11. Ryan R.L. Preserving rural character in New England: local residents' perceptions of alternative residential development. Landscape Urban Plann. 2002, 61:19-35.
12. Snep R., Van Ierland E., Opdam P. Enhancing biodiversity at business sites: what are the options, and which of these do stakeholders prefer?. Landscape Urban Plann. 2009, 91(1):26-35.
13. Walker A.J., Ryan R.L. Place attachment and landscape preservation in rural New England: a Maine case study. Landscape Urban Plann. 2008, 86:141-152.