Water as an appreciated feature in the landscape: A comparison of residents' and visitors' preferences in buenos aires

Journal of Cleaner Production

Volumn 60, Issue , 2013, Pages 182-187

  Faggi, A ^a   Breuste, J ^b   Madanes, N ^c   Gropper, C ^b   Perelman, P ^a,c  

^a MUSEO ARGENTINO DE CIENCIAS NATURALES BERNARDINO RIVADAVIA   (Argentina)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SALZBURG   (Austria)

^c UNIVERSIDAD DE BUENOS AIRES   (Argentina)

Author keywords

Familiarity; Gender; Residents; Scarcity; Visitors; Water preferences

Indexed keywords

SURVEYS;

FAMILIARITY; GENDER; RESIDENTS; SCARCITY; VISITORS;

HYDROLOGY;

EID: 84885433348     PISSN: 09596526     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.09.009     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Aguilera-Klink, F., Pérez-Moriana, E., Sánchez- Garcića, J., 2000. The social construction of scarcity. The case of water in Tenerife (Canary Islands). Ecol. Econ. 34, 233-245
2. Appleton, J., 1975. The Experience of Landscape. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
3. Bachelard, G., 1983. Water and Dreams: An Essay on the Imagination of Matter. Pegasus Foundation, Dallas.
4. Barbier, E.B., 1995. Tropical wetland values and environmental functions. In: Perrings, C.A., Mäler, K.-G., Folke, C., Holling, C.S., Jansson, B.-O. (Eds.), Biodiversity Conservation; Problems and Policies. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht-Boston-London, pp. 147-169.
5. Batabyal, A., Kahn, J.R., O'Neill, R.V., 2003. On the scarcity value of ecosystem services. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 46, 334-352. (Pubitemid 37078311)
6. Berlyne, D.E., 1974. Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic appreciation. Hemisphere Pub. Corp., Washington.
7. Burmil, S., Daniel, T.C., Hetherington, J.D., 1999. Human values and perceptions of water in arid landscapes. Landscape Urban Plan. 44, 99-109 (Pubitemid 29272997)
8. Carr, S., Francis, M., Rivlin, L.G., Stone, A.M., 1992. Public Space. Cambridge University Press, New York.
9. Coeterier, J.F., 2002. Lay people's evaluation of historic sites. Landscape Urban Plan. 59 (2), 111-123. (Pubitemid 34416028)
10. Dakin, S., 2003. There's more to landscape than meets the eye: towards inclusive landscape assessment in resource and environmental management. Can. Geographer 47, 185-200. (Pubitemid 38536382)
11. Edwards-Jones, G., Davies, B., Hussain, S., 2000. Ecological Economics - An Introduction. Blackwell Science Ltd., Oxford
12. Faggi, A., Ignatieva, M., 2009. Urban green spaces in Buenos Aires and Christchurch. Municipal Engr 162 (ME4), 241-250.
13. Fairweather, J.R., Swaffield, S.R., 2001. Visitor experiences of Kaikoura, New Zealand: an interpretative study using photographs of landscapes and Q method. Tourism Manage. 22, 219-228 (Pubitemid 32376339)
14. Galindo Galindo, M.P., Corraliza Rodríguez, J.A., 2000. Environmental aesthetics and psychological wellbeing: relationships between preference judgements for urban landscapes and other relevant affective responses. Psychol. Spain 4 (1), 13-27
15. Goede, E., van Leeuwen, E.S., Nijkamp, P., Rodenburg, C.A., 2001. Development of Urban Green Spaces to Improve the Quality of Life in Cities and Urban Regions Economic Criteria. Amsterdam, Netherlands
16. Herzog, T.R., 1985. A cognitive analysis of preference for waterscapes. J. Environ. Psychol. 5, 225-241.
17. Herzog, T.R., Herbert, E.J., Kaplan, R., Crooks, C.L., 2000. Cultural and developmental comparisons of landscape perceptions and preferences. Environ. Behav. 32, 323-346 (Pubitemid 30369382)
18. Hotelling, H., 1931. The economics of exhaustible resources. J. Pol. Econom 39, 137-175
19. Hubbard, H.V., Hubbard, T.K., 1917. An Introduction to the Study of Landscape Design. Macmillan, New York
20. Hull, R.B., Revell, G.R.B., 1989. Issues in sampling landscapes for visual quality assessments. Landscape Urban Plan. 17, 323-330
21. Kaltenborn, B.P., Bjerke, T., 2002. Associations between environmental value orientations and landscape preferences. Landscape Urban Plan. 59, 1-11 (Pubitemid 34215653)
22. Kaplan, R., 1977. Down the riverside: Information factors in waterscape preference. In: Proc. Symp. River Recreation Management and Research, Gen.Tech. Rep. NC-28, Northcentral For. Exp. Stn., USDA, St. Paul, MN, pp. 246-289
23. Kaplan, S., 1992. Environmental Preference in a Knowledge-seeking, Knowledge-Using Organism. Oxford University Press
24. Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R., 1989. The Experience of Nature: a Psychological Perspective. Cambridge University Press, New York
25. Kaur, E., Palang, H., Sooväli, H., 2004. Landscapes in chang-dopposing attitudes in Saaremaa, Estonia. Landscape Urban Plan. 67, 109-120 (Pubitemid 38178854)
26. Lambooy, T., 2011. Corporate social responsibility: sustainable water use. J. Cleaner Production 19, 852-866.
27. Lyons, E., 1983. Demographic correlates of landscape preference. Environ. Behav. 15, 487-511.
28. Madanes, N., Faggi, A., 2008. Espacios Verdes privados y actitud: 2008. Un estudio de caso para Buenos Aires. HOLOGRAMÁTICA - Facultad de Ciencias Sociales - UNLZ - Año V, Núm-ro 8, V1, pp. 77-101, ISSN: 1668-5024. www.hologramatica.com.ar
29. Mehta, L., 2001. The manufacture of popular perceptions of scarcity: dams and water-related narratives in Gujarat, India. World Dev. 29 (12), 2025-2041 (Pubitemid 34034568)
30. Nasar, J.L., 2000. The evaluative image of places. In: Walsh, Bruce, W., Craik, K.H., Price, R.H. (Eds.), Person-Environment Psychology: New Directions and Perspectives. L. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 117-168
31. Nassauer, J.I., 2004. Monitoring the success of metropolitan wetland restorations: cultural sustainability and ecological function. Wetlands 24, 4
32. Noemdoe, S., Jonker, L., Swatuk, L.A., 2006. Perceptions of water scarcity: the case of Genadendal and outstations. Phys. Chem. Earth 31, 771-778 (Pubitemid 44426625)
33. Perman, R., Ma, Y., Mcgilvray, J., Common, M., 1999. Natural Resource and Environmental Economics. Longman, Dorchester
34. Pitt, D.G., 1989. The Attractiveness and Use of Aquatic Environments as Outdoor Recreation Places. In: Altman, I., Zube, E.H. (Eds.), Public Places and Spaces. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 217-254
35. Price, C., 2008. Landscape economics at dawn: an eye-witness account. Landscape Res. 33, 1-18
36. Price, C., 2009. Further thoughts on certification and markets. Scand. For. Econ. 42, 75-85
37. Purcell, T., Peron, E., Berto, R., 2001. Why do preferences differ between scene types? Environ. Behav. 33 (1), 93-106. (Pubitemid 32122925)
38. Roovers, P., Hermy, M., Gulinck, H., 2002. Visitors profile perceptions and expectations in firets from a gradient of increasing urbanisation in central Belgium. Landscape Urban Plan. 59, 129-145 (Pubitemid 34523157)
39. Ruso, B., Atzwanger, K., Buber, R., Gadner, J., Gruber, S. 2004. Age and gender differences in the behavioural response to discrete environmental stimuli. Proceedings of ISHE Conference, Gent 2004
40. Soini, K., Pouta, E., Salmiovirta, M., Uusitalo, M., Kivinen, T., 2011. Land use policy local residents' perceptions of energy landscape: the case of transmission lines. Land Use Pol 28, 294-305
41. Steinwender, A., Gundacker, C., Wittmann, K.J., 2008. Objective versus subjective of standing and running waters in a large city. Landscape Urban Plan. 84, 116-126
42. Turner, R.K., van den Bergh, J.C.J.M., Barendregt, A., Maltby, E., 1998. Ecological- Economic Analysis of Wetlands. Tinbergen Institute. Discussion Paper, TI 98-050/3
43. Unwin, K.I., 1975. The relationship of observer and landscape in landscape evaluation. Trans. Inst. Br. Geographers 66, 130-134
44. Ulrich, R., 1983. Aesthetic and affective responses to natural environment. In: Altman, I., Wohlwill, J.F. (Eds.), Behavior and the Natural Environment. Plenum, New York, pp. 85-125
45. Ulrich, R.S., 1993. Biophilia, biophobia and natural landscapes. In: Kellert, S.R., Wilson, E.O. (Eds.), The Biophilia Hypothesis. Island Press/Sherwater Books, Washington DC, pp. 73-137
46. Van den Berg, A.E., Vlek, C.A.J., Coeterier, J.F., 1998. Group differences in the aesthetic evaluation of nature development plans: a multilevel approach. J. Environ. Psychol. 18, 141-157 (Pubitemid 128343631)
47. Vouligny, E., Domon, G., Ruiz, J., 2009. An assessment of ordinary landscapes by an expert and by its residents: landscape values in areas of intensive agricultural use. Land Use Pol 26, 890-900
48. Wherrett, J.R., 2000. Creating landscape preference models using the internet as a medium for surveys. Landscape Res. 25, 79-96 (Pubitemid 30184280)
49. White, P.S., Yung, L., Cole, D.N., Hobbs, R.J., 2010. Conservation at large scales: Systems of protected areas and protected areas in the matrix. In: Cole, D.N., Yung, L. (Eds.), Beyond Naturalness: Rethinking Park and Wilderness Stewardship in an Era of Rapid Change. Island Press, Washington DC, pp. 197-215
50. Wills, I., 1997. Economics and the Environment; a Signalling and Incentives Approach. Allen & Unwin, St. Leonards.
51. Wright, F.L., 1928. In the cause of architecture. Part 6: the meaning of materials-glass. Architect. Rec. 64, 11-16
52. Xu, J., Fox, J., Melick, D., Fujita, Y., Jinttrawet, A., Jie, Q., Thomas, D.,Weyerhaeuser,W., 2006. Land use transition, livelihoods and environmental services in Montane Mainland Southeast Asia. Mountain Notes Mt Res. Dev. 26, 278-284 (Pubitemid 44696561)
53. Yu, K., 1995. Cultural variations in landscape preference:Comparisons among Chinese sub-groups and western design experts. Landscape Urban Plan. 32, 107-126
54. Zube, E.H., Pitt, D.G., 1981. Cross-cultural perceptions of scenic and heritage landscapes. Landscape Plan. 8, 69-87 (Pubitemid 11135737)
55. Zube, E.H., Sell, J., Taylor, J., 1982. Landscape perception: research, application, theory. Landscape Plan. 9, 1-33