Progress in indicators to assess agricultural landscape valuation: How and what is measured at different levels of governance

Land Use Policy

Volumn 53, Issue , 2016, Pages 71-85

  Paracchini, M L ^a   Correia, T Pinto ^b   Loupa Ramos, I ^c   Capitani, C ^a,d   Madeira, L ^b  

^a JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ÉVORA   (Portugal)

^c INSTITUTO SUPERIOR TÉCNICO   (Portugal)

^d UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Composite indicator; Policy assessment; Public good; Rural landscape; Societal valuation

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURAL LAND; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; POLICY DEVELOPMENT; PUBLIC GOODS; RURAL LANDSCAPE; VALUATION;

ALENTEJO; PORTUGAL;

EID: 84959906171     PISSN: 02648377     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.05.025     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Antrop M. Background concepts for integrated landscape analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2000, 17-28.
2. Barroso F., Pinto-Correia T., Ramos I., Surova D., Menezes H. Dealing with landscape fuzziness in preference studies: using photo based questionnaires in Mediterranean context/areas. Landsc. Urban Plann. 2012, 104:329-342.
3. Cancela d'Abreu A., Pinto-Correia T., Oliveira R. Contributos para a Identificação e Caracterisação da Paisagem em Portugal Continental 2004, vol. I-V. Colecção Estudos 10, DGOT-DU, Lisboa.
4. Carvalho-Ribeiro S., Loupa-Ramos I., Madeira L., Barroso F., Menezes H., Pinto-Correia T. Is land cover an important asset for addressing the subjective landscape dimensions?. Land Use Policy 2013, 35:50-60.
5. Carvalho-Ribeiro S., Incerti G., Migliozzi A., Pinto-Correia T. Placing land cover pattern preferences on the map: bridging methodological approaches of landscape preference surveys and spatial pattern analysis. Landsc. Urban Plann. 2013, 114:53-68.
6. Coeterier J.F. Dominant attributes in the perception and evaluation of the Dutch landscape. Landsc. Urban Plann. 1996, 34(1):27-44.
7. Commission of the European Communities, 2006a. Development of Agri-environmental Indicators for Monitoring the Integration of Environmental Concerns into the Common Agricultural Policy, COM(2006) 508 Final, Brussels. Available at: (accessed 18.03.14.). http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do%3Furi=COM:2006:0508:FIN:EN:PDF.
8. Commission of the European Communities, 2006b. COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1974/2006 of 15 December 2006 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) - Annex VIII. Official Journal of the European Union L 368/15.
9. Cooper, T., Hart, K., Baldock, D., 2009. The Provision of Public Goods through Agriculture in the European Union, Report Prepared for DG Agriculture and Rural Development, Contract No 30-CE-0233091/00-28, Institute for European Environmental Policy: London. Available at: (accessed 18.03.14.). http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/external/public-goods/report_en.pdf.
10. Council of Europe, 2000. European Landscape Convention. Available at (accessed 18.03.14). http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/176htm.
11. Daniel T.C., Muhar A., Arnberger A., Aznar O., Boyd J.W., Chan K.M.A., Costanza R., Elmqvist T., Flint C.G., Gobster P.H., Grêt-Regamey A., Lave R., Muhar S., Penker M., Ribe R.G., Schauppenlehner T., Sikor T., Soloviy I., Spierenburg M., Taczanowska K., Tam J., von der Dunk A. Cultural ecosystem services: potential contributions to the ecosystems services science and policy agenda. PNAS 2012, 109(23):8812-8819.
12. de Groot R.S., Fisher B., Christie M., Aronson J., Braat L., Haines-Young R., Gowdy J., Maltby E., Neuville A., Polasky S., Portela R., Ring I. Integrating the ecological and economic dimensions in biodiversity and ecosystem service valuation. Chapter 1. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Ecological and Economic Foundation 2010, Earthscan Ltd., London. P. Kumar (Ed.).
13. European Environment Agency, 2004. Corine Land Cover 2000 - Mapping a decade of changes. Brochure No 4/2004. Available at: (accessed 18.03.14.). http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/brochure_2006_0306_103624.
14. European Environment Agency, 2006. Integration of environment into EU agriculture policy-the IRENA indicator-based assessment report. EEA Report, No.2/2006, 60 pp.
15. Eurostat, 2013. Agri-environmental Indicator - Landscape State and Diversity. Available at: (accessed 13.02.15.). http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Agri-environmental_indicator_-_landscape_state_and_diversity.
16. Fjellstad W., Mittenzwei K., Dramstad W., Øvren E. Landscape protection as a tool for managing agricultural landscapes in Norway. Environ. Sci. Policy 2009, 12:1144-1152.
17. Fry G., Tveit M.S., Ode Å., Velarde M.D. The ecology of visual landscapes: Exploring the conceptual common ground of visual and ecological landscape indicators. Ecol. Indic. 2009, 9(5):933-947.
18. Gauttier, M., 2006. Appellations d"Origine Contrôlée et Paysages, INAO, France, pp.75. Available at: (accessed 18.03.2014.). http://agriculture.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/inaoetpaysage_0207pdf.
19. Holmes J. Impulses towards a multifunctional transition in rural Australia: Gaps in the research agenda. J. Rural Stud. 2006, 22:142-160.
20. Jones, P.J., Andersen, E., Capitani, C., Carvalho Ribeiro, S., Griffiths, G.H., Loupa-Ramos, I., Madeira, L., Mortimer, S.R., Paracchini, M.L., Pinto Correia, T., Schmidt, A.M., Simoncini, R., Wascher, D.M., 2015. The EU societal awareness of landscape indicator: a review of its meaning, utility and performance across different scales. Land Use Policy, xx (x): xx-xx.
21. Junge X., Lindemann-Matthies P., Hunziker M., Schüpbach B. Aesthetic preferences of non-farmers and farmers for different land-use types and proportions of ecological compensation areas in the Swiss lowlands. Biol. Conserv. 2011, 144(5):1430-1440.
22. Kienast F., Bolliger J., de Groot R.S., Potschin M., Haines-Young R., Verburg P., Heller I. Assessing landscape functions at the continental scale: a methodological framework. Environ. Manage. 2009, 44:1099-1120.
23. Kienast F., Frick J., Steiger U. Neue Ansätze zur Erfassung der Landschaftsqualität. Zwischenbericht Landschaftsbeobachtung Schweiz (LABES), Umwelt-Wissen Nr. 1325, Bundesamt für Umwelt, Bern und Eidgenössische Forschungsanstalt für Wald 2013, 75S. Schnee und Landschaft, Birmensdorf.
24. Loupa-Ramos, I., 2011. "Landscape Quality Objectives" for remote rural landscapes in Portugal: Addressing experts" and stakeholders" perspectives on future developments. In: Jones, M., Stenseke, M. (Eds.), The European Landscape Convention: Challenges of Participation, Landscape Series, vol. 13, Chapter 10, pp. 199-218.
25. Maes J., Teller A., Erhard M., Liquete C., Braat L., Berry P., Egoh B., Puydarrieux P., Fiorina C., Santos F., Paracchini M.L., Keune H., Wittmer H., Hauck J., Fiala I., Verburg P.H., Condé S., Schägner J.P., San Miguel J., Estreguil C., Ostermann O., Barredo J.I., Pereira H.M., Stott A., Laporte V., Meiner A., Olah B., Royo Gelabert E., Spyropoulou R., Petersen J.E., Maguire C., Zal N., Achilleos E., Rubin A., Ledoux L., Brown C., Raes C., Jacobs S., Vandewalle M., Connor D., Bidoglio G. Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services. An Analytical Framework for Ecosystem Assessments under Action 5 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 2013, 57. Publications office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
26. Mattiacci A., Zampi V. Brunello di montalcino: how a typical wine could revive a poor country-village. Br. Food J. 2004, 106(10/11):767-778.
27. Nijnik M., Zahvoyska L., Nijnik A., Ode A. Public evaluation of landscape content and change: several examples from Europe. Land Use Policy 2009, 26(1):77-86.
28. OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development)-JRC (European Commission Joint Research Centre), 2008. Handbook on constructing composite indicators: methodology and user guide, by Nardo, M., Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S. (EC/JRC), Hoffman, A., Giovannini, E. (OECD), OECD publication Code: 302,008,251E1. Available at: (accessed 18.03.14.). http://www.oecd.org/std/42495745pdf.
29. Paracchini M.L., Capitani C. Implementation of a EU-wide indicator for the rural-agrarian landscape. EUR 25,114 EN 2011, Publications Office of the European Union, 89 p.
30. Paracchini, M.L., Capitani, C., Calvo Iglesias, M.S., 2011. A European wide indicator for the state and diversity of the rural-agrarian landscape, in: Bryn, A., Dramstad, W. & Fjellstad W. (Eds.) Mapping and monitoring of Nordic vegetation and landscapes, Conference proceedings, Norwegian Forest and Landscape Institute. Available at: (accessed 18.03.14.). http://www.skogoglandskap.no/filearchive/viten_01_10_mapping_and_monitoring_of_nordic_vegetation_and_landscapes.pdf.
31. Pinto-Correia T., Barroso F., Menezes H. The changing role of farming in a peripheric South European area: the challenge of the landscape amenities demand. Innovations in European Rural Landscapes 2010, 53-76. Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg. H. Wiggering, H.-P. Ende, A. Knierim, M. Pintar (Eds.).
32. Pinto-Correia T., Barroso F., Menezes H., Surova D. The fuzziness of Montado landscapes: progresses in assessing user preferences through photo based surveys. Agro-For. Syst. 2011, vol. 82(2):209-224. 10.1007/s10457-010-9347-2.
33. Pinto-Correia T., Truchet S., Machado C., Barroso F., Picchi P., Michelin Y., Turpin N., Bousset J.P. How do policy options modify landscape amenities? An assessment approach based on public expressed preferences. Environ. Sci. Policy 2013, 32:37-47.
34. Saltelli A. Composite indicators between analysis and advocacy. Soc. Indic. Res. 2007, 81(1):65-77.
35. Selman P. Planning at the Landscape Scale 2006, Routledge, London, 213 pp.
36. Selman P. Sustainable Landscape Planning 2012, The Reconnection Agenda. Routledge, London, 162 pp.
37. Surova D., Pinto-Correia T. Landscape preferences in the Cork Oak Montado in the region of Alentejo, Southern Portugal: searching for valuable landscape characteristics for different user groups. Landsc. Res. 2008, 33(3):311-330.
38. Surova D., Marusak R., Pinto-Correia T. Visual complexity and the montado do matter: landscape pattern preferences of user groups in Alentejo, Portugal. Ann. For. Sci. 2013, 71:15-24.
39. Swanwick C. Society"s attitudes to and preferences for land and landscape. Land Use Policy 2009, 26:562-575.
40. Tveit M.S. Indicators of visual scale as predictors of landscape preference; a comparison between groups. J. Environ. Manage. 2009, 90(9):2882-2888.
41. Vanslembrouck I., Van Huylenbroeck G. Landscape Amenities. Economic Assessment of Agricultural Landscapes. Landscape Series 2005, Springer, The Netherlands, 202 pp.
42. Wylie J. Landscape 2007, Routledge, London, 246 pp.