Placing Nature: Culture And Landscape Ecology

Placing Nature: Culture And Landscape Ecology
Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Placing Nature: Culture And Landscape Ecology file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Placing Nature: Culture And Landscape Ecology book. Happy reading Placing Nature: Culture And Landscape Ecology Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Placing Nature: Culture And Landscape Ecology at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Placing Nature: Culture And Landscape Ecology Pocket Guide.

The reconstruction measures e. The situational context e. Tourists are likely to care more about farmland aesthetics, while farmers put a higher value on agricultural productivity. However, both farmland attractiveness enjoyed by tourists and production features valued by farmers are likely to undermine ecological functions. Therefore, it was recommended for policy makers to align aesthetic features to better support ecological health. It was also recommended that the disorderly non-scenic regions which were important to the overall landscape e. In order to make the survey easier, site aesthetic evaluation was kept simple, and only five major landscape types were identified.

It is recommended that the subdivisions of landscapes should be adopted for future research to convey more detailed information. In addition, surveyors from a variety of cultural backgrounds could be involved to incorporate a greater diversity of perspectives into landscape planning. More comprehensive aspects of cultural landscape values e. Subjective aesthetic landscape coefficients can only convey information related to the relative importance of landscape values of the five landscape types.

Culture, Nature, and the Valuation of Ecosystem Services in Northern Namibia

This may limit the use of aesthetic landscape coefficients when comparing with ecological evaluations. Due to the difficulties in integrating different data types, quantitative models and interdisciplinary studies, it was a far-reaching challenge to connect subjective aesthetic and objective ecological aspects in an integrated landscape assessment. Nevertheless, the landscape sustainability requires a careful investigation of the relationship between ecology and aesthetics.

Compared to conventional conceptual frameworks, the metrics i.

Human impacts on ecosystems and landscapes

The results bring aesthetic and ecological goals into a better alignment in landscape planning. The interdisciplinary approach may lead to a revolution in landscape designing and planning, because it balances ecological and aesthetic functions for landscape sustainability. We would like to express our gratitude to the people and institutions in Wuhan who assisted us during the field survey.

We sincerely thank the editor and anonymous reviewers for their useful comments and suggestions on our paper.

We are grateful to Yan Zhu and Jonathan Vause for improving the written quality of the paper. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. PLoS One. Published online Jul Ben Bond-Lamberty, Editor. Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer.

UCLA Store - PLACING NATURE : CULTURE & LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. Received Nov 27; Accepted Jun This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. Abstract Humans receive multiple benefits from various landscapes that foster ecological services and aesthetic attractiveness.

Introduction Various landscapes continually provide human society with multiple benefits, which are derived from ecological services and aesthetic attractiveness [1] — [5].

Open in a separate window. Figure 1. Landscape type map in Houguanhu Region. Field survey The perception-based aesthetic landscape value evaluation method [1] , [33] was employed in this study. Aesthetic landscape value coefficients The landscape type map and the aesthetic landscape value distribution map were overlaid in ArcGIS 9. Ecological landscape value coefficients According to the ecological service valuation framework of Costanza et al. Table 1 Ecosystem service values of Chinese terrestrial ecosystems based on Xie et al.

Integrated evaluation of landscape values The coefficients of ecological and aesthetic landscape value were normalized to evaluate integrated landscape values. Results Landscape value coefficients Functional performances and value contribution of the five landscape types were quantified using a 5-point Likert Scale with 5 being the highest value.

Landscape Ecology

Table 3 Normalized aesthetic and ecological landscape value coefficients. Combination of Landscape values We identified aesthetic, ecological and integrated functional performances of the five landscape types using a two-dimension coordinate system Figure 2.

Introduction

Figure 2. Distribution of landscape values We drew the aesthetic landscape value distribution map after the aesthetic landscape survey Figure 3a , and the ecological landscape value distribution map based on Equation 2 Figure 3b. Figure 3. Figure 4. Discussion Metrics for evaluating landscape values The functional performances and interrelationships between the five landscape types were depicted as the integrated landscape value in a two-dimension coordinate system and displayed in landscape value distribution maps.

Implications for landscape planning The functional performances and distribution of landscape values were identified in present study, which may help optimize landscape planning in terms of developing priorities and intensity. Limitations and future improvements Some limitations and possible improvements of this study included: In order to make the survey easier, site aesthetic evaluation was kept simple, and only five major landscape types were identified. Conclusions Due to the difficulties in integrating different data types, quantitative models and interdisciplinary studies, it was a far-reaching challenge to connect subjective aesthetic and objective ecological aspects in an integrated landscape assessment.

Acknowledgments We would like to express our gratitude to the people and institutions in Wuhan who assisted us during the field survey. References 1. Daniel TC Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landscape Urban Plan 54 : — Landscape Ecol 22 : — Urban Forestry Urban Green 1 : — Klein LR Quantifying relationships between ecology and aesthetics in agricultural landscapes.

Washington State University. Res Environ Sci 23 10 : — in Chinese..

See a Problem?

Wu J Landscape of culture and culture of landscape: does landscape ecology need culture? Landscape Ecol 25 : — Musacchio LR The ecology and culture of landscape sustainability: emerging knowledge and innovation in landscape research and practice. Landscape Ecol 24 : — Landscape Urban Plan 32 : — Landscape Urban Plan 57 : — Naveh Z Landscape ecology and sustainability. Wu J Landscape sustainability science: ecosystem services and human well-being in changing landscapes.

Landscape Ecol 28 : — Porto M, Correia O, Beja P Optimization of landscape services under uncoordinated management by multiple landowners. Ecol Indic 32 : — Lothian A Landscape and the philosophy of aesthetics: is landscape quality inherent in the landscape or in the eye of the beholder? Landsc Urban Plan 44 : — We sincerely thank the editor and anonymous reviewers for their useful comments and suggestions on our paper. We are grateful to Yan Zhu and Jonathan Vause for improving the written quality of the paper.

Conceived and designed the experiments: DY T. Performed the experiments: DY T. Analyzed the data: DY. Luo T. Lin QQ YL. Wrote the paper: DY. Browse Subject Areas? Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field. Abstract Humans receive multiple benefits from various landscapes that foster ecological services and aesthetic attractiveness. Introduction Various landscapes continually provide human society with multiple benefits, which are derived from ecological services and aesthetic attractiveness [1] — [5]. Download: PPT.

Field survey The perception-based aesthetic landscape value evaluation method [1] , [33] was employed in this study. Aesthetic landscape value coefficients The landscape type map and the aesthetic landscape value distribution map were overlaid in ArcGIS 9. Ecological landscape value coefficients According to the ecological service valuation framework of Costanza et al. Table 1. Ecosystem service values of Chinese terrestrial ecosystems based on Xie et al.

  • Une Chance sur un million (Pile ou Face (et autres douceurs) t. 3) (French Edition);
  • Combining Aesthetic with Ecological Values for Landscape Sustainability;
  • Volume 22, Issue 2, Summer 2000.
  • Guide to Postproduction for TV and Film: Managing the Process.

Integrated evaluation of landscape values The coefficients of ecological and aesthetic landscape value were normalized to evaluate integrated landscape values. Results Landscape value coefficients Functional performances and value contribution of the five landscape types were quantified using a 5-point Likert Scale with 5 being the highest value. Table 2. Table 3.