Método de valoración de paisajes forestales basado en el uso de atributos estéticos como variables explicativas de las preferencias

  1. Sergio Zubelzu
  2. Ana Hernández
Revista:
Madera y bosques

ISSN: 2448-7597,  1405-0471

Año de publicación: 2015

Volumen: 21

Número: 1

Páginas: 45-62

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.21829/MYB.2015.211432 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: Madera y bosques

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

This paper presents an assessment method for forest landscapes based on a mixed approach using aesthetics attributes. A set of variables have been deduced in order to objectively quantify in photographs its lines, colors, shapes, texture, scale and spatial composition. Referred variables have been measured in a forest landscape and preferences for that landscape have been collected. Using this information, regression functions have been tested to deduce a predictive method for preferences. The deduced optimum method adopts a linear structure and is able to explain 60,1% of the variance of population preferences.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Altamirano, A., Miranda, A., Jimenez, C.. (2012). Incertidumbre de los índices de paisaje en el análisis de la estructura espacial. Revista Bosque (Valdivia). 33. 171-181
  • Ambrosio, L.. (2000). Econometría. Servicio de Publicaciones Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Agrónomos. Universidad Politécnica de Madrid. Madrid. 211
  • Arbogast, F., Knepper, D.H., Langer, W.H.. (2000). The Human factor in Mining reclamation. US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey. Denver. 28
  • Arriaza, M., Cañas-Ortega, J.F., Cañas-Madueño, J.A., Ruiz-Avilés, P.. (2004). Assessing the visual quality of rural landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning. 69. 115-125
  • Bartels, A., Zeki, S.. (2006). The temporal order of binding visual attributes. Vision Research. 46. 2280-2286
  • Berleant, A.. (2010). Reconsidering Scenic Beauty. Environmental Values. 19. 335-350
  • (1980). Visual Resource Management. Manual 8400. Bureau of Land Management. Washington. 15
  • (1980). Visual Resource Inventory. Manual H-8410-1. Bureau of Land Management. Washington. 28
  • (1980). Visual Resource Contrast Rating. Manual 8431. Bureau of Land Management. Washington. 32
  • Borst, G., Kosslyn, S.M.. (2008). Visual mental imagery and visual perception: Structural equivalence revealed by scanning processes. Memory & Cognition. 36. 849-862
  • Cañas, I., Ayuga, E., Ayuga, F.. (2009). A contribution to the assessment of scenic quality of landscapes based on preferences expressed by the public. Land Use Policy. 26. 1173-1181
  • Chapa-Bezanilla, D., Sosa-Ramírez, J., de Alba-Ávila, A.. (2008). Estudio multitemporal de fragmentación de los bosques en la sierra Fría, Aguascalientes, México. Madera y Bosques. 14. 37-51
  • Daniel, T.C.. (2001). Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landscape and Urban Planning. 25. 267-281
  • Daniel, T.C., Boster, R.S.. (1976). Measuring landscape aesthetics: the scenic beauty estimation method. USDA Forest Service. Washington. 66
  • Daniel, T.C., Vining, J.. (1983). Behaviour and the natural environment. Plenum Press. Nueva York. 39-83
  • Deng, S.Q., Yan, J.F., Guan, Q.W., Katoh, M.. (2013). Short-term effects of thinning intensity on scenic beauty values of different stands. Journal of Forest Research. 18. 209-219
  • Franco, D., Franco, D., Mannino, I., Zanetto, G.. (2003). The impact of agroforestry networks on scenic beauty estimation - The role of a landscape ecological network on a socio-cultural process. Landscape and Urban Planning. 62. 119-138
  • García Moruno, L.. (1998). Criterios de diseño para la integración de las construcciones rurales en el paisaje. Informes de la construcción. 50. 71-73
  • Gobster, P.H., Chenoweth, R.E.. (1989). The dimensions of aesthetic preference: a quantitative analysis. Journal of Environmental Management. 29. 47-72
  • González, R.. (2000). La fotografía como elemento para el análisis y la simulación del paisaje forestal. 719
  • Hofmann, M., Westermann, J.R, Kowarik, I., Van der Meer, E.. (2012). Perceptions of parks and urban derelict land by landscape planners and residents. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening. 11. 303-312
  • Howley, P., Donoghue, C.O., Hynes, S.. (2012). Exploring public preferences for traditional farming landscapes. Landscape and urban planning. 104. 66-74
  • Junge, X., Lindemann-Matthies, P., Hunziker, M., Schupbach, B.. (2011). Aesthetic preferences of non-farmers and farmers for different land-use types and proportions of ecological compensation areas in the Swiss lowlands. Biological Conservation. 144. 1430-1440
  • Kaltenborn, B., Bjerke, T.. (2002). Visualization on forest landscape preference research: a finish perspective. Landscape and urban planning. 59. 1-11
  • Krause, C.L.. (2001). Our visual landscape-Managing the landscape under special consideration of visual aspects. Landscape Urban Planning. 54. 239-254
  • Lewis, K.J.S., Borst, G., Kosslyn, S.M.. (2011). Integrating visual mental images and visual percepts: new evidence for depictive representations. Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung. 75. 259-271
  • Lothian, A.. (1999). Landscape and the philosophy of aesthetics: Is landscape quality inherent in the landscape or in the eye of the beholder?. Landscape and Urban Planning. 44. 177-198
  • Luckmann, K., Lagemann, V., Menzel, S.. (2013). Landscape assessment and evaluation of young people: Comparing nature-orientated habitat and engineered habitat preferences. Environmental and Behavior. 41. 86-112
  • Milani, R.. (2009). Esthétiques du paysage. Art et contemplation. Arles. 239
  • Mühlhauser, S.H., de la Fuente, G., Atauri, J.A., de Lucio, J.V.. (2004). Influencia de la heterogeneidad del paisaje en la calidad escénica: el caso precordillerano andino de la cuenca de Santiago. Revista de Geografía Norte Grande. 32. 129-138
  • Muñoz-Pedreros, A.. (2004). La evaluación del paisaje: una herramienta de gestión ambiental. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural. 77. 139-156
  • Nielsen, A.B., Heyman, E., Richnau, G.. (2012). Liked, disliked and unseen forest attributes: Relation to modes of viewing and cognitive constructs. Journal of Environmental Management. 113. 456-466
  • Otero, L.. (2009). Arquitectura y diseño del paisaje forestal: impacto de las plantaciones en el sur de Chile. XIII Congreso Forestal Mundial. Buenos Aires.
  • Rubio, P., Muñoz, J.. (2008). Gestión del Paisaje en áreas de interés natural. Cuadernos Geográficos. 43. 271-288
  • Ryan, R.L.. (2012). The influence of landscape preference and environmental education on public attitudes toward wildfire management in the Northeast pine barrens (USA). Landscape and Urban Planning. 107. 55-68
  • Schirpke, U., Tasser, E., Tappeiner, U.. (2013). Predicting scenic beauty of mountain regions. Landscape and Urban Planning. 111. 1-12
  • Sheppard, S.R.J.. Elsevier Encyclopedia of Forest Sciences, Landscape and Planning Section. Oxford. 440-450
  • Smardon, R.C., Appleyard, D., Sheppard, S.R.J., Newman, S.. (1979). Prototype Visual Impact Assessment Manual. Syracusa State University. Nueva York. 113
  • Smith, E.L., Bishop, I.D., Williams, K.J.H., Ford, R.M.. (2012). Scenario Chooser: An interactive approach to eliciting public landscape preferences. Landscape and Urban Planning. 106. 230-243
  • Sevenant, M., Antrop, M.. (2011). Landscape representation validity: a comparison between on-site observations and photographs with different angles of view. Landscape Research. 36. 363-385
  • Stamps, A.E.. (1996). People and places: Variance components of environmental preferences. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 82. 323-334
  • Svobodova, K., Sklenicka, P., Molnarova, K.. (2012). Visual preferences for physical attributes of mining and post-mining landscapes with respect to the sociodemographic characteristics of respondents. Ecological engineering. 43. 34-44
  • Van den Berg, A.E, Koole, S.L.. (2006). New wilderness in the Netherlands: An investigation of visual preferences for nature development landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning. 78. 362-372
  • Velázquez, J., Zubelzu, S., Díaz, P.M., Hernández, A.. (2012). Adecuación de la gestión paisajística española al convenio europeo del paisaje. Análisis de las adaptaciones normativas autonómicas y sus implicaciones prácticas sobre los paisajes ordinarios. Actas XI Congreso Nacional de Medioambiente. Madrid.
  • Wang, B.Z, He, P., An, S.Q., Shen, S.Y.. (2012). Modeling scenic quality of wetland landscape resources in South Dongting Lake, China. Chinese Geographical Science. 22. 578-589
  • Young, C., Wesner, M.. (2003). Valores estéticos de los bosques: medición del impacto visual de las operaciones forestales. Revista internacional de silvicultura e industrias forestales. Unisylvia. 54. 23-37
  • Zeki, S.. (2001). Localization and globalization in conscious vision. Annual Review of Neuroscience. 24. 57-86
  • Zhao, J.W., Wang, R.H., Cai, Y.L., Luo, P.J.. (2013). Effects of visual indicators on landscape preferences. Journal of Urban Planning and Development-ASCE. 139. 70-78
  • Zubelzu, S.. (2014). Estadística. Teoría y problemas. García Maroto Editores, S.L.. Madrid. 520
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet