During the last decade, agriculture has lost its importance in many European mountain regions and tourism, which benefits from attractive landscapes, has become a major source of income. Changes in landscape patterns and elements might affect scenic beauty and therefore the socio-economic welfare of a region. Our study aimed at modeling scenic beauty by quantifying the influence of landscape elements and patterns in relationship to distance. Focusing on Alpine landscapes in South and North Tyrol, we used a photographic questionnaire showing different landscape compositions. As mountain landscapes offer long vistas, we related scenic beauty to different distance zones. Our results indicate that the near zone contributes by 64% to the valuation of scenic beauty, the middle zone by 22%, and the far zone by 14%. In contrast to artificial elements, naturalness and diversity increased scenic beauty. Significant differences between different social groups (origin, age, gender, cultural background) occurred only between the local population and tourists regarding great landscape changes. Changes towards more homogenous landscapes were perceived negatively, thus political decision makers should support the conservation of the cultural landscape.
References
[1]
Antrop, M. Landscape change and the urbanization process in Europe. Landscape Urban Plan. 2004, 67, 9–26, doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(03)00026-4.
[2]
Schneeberger, N.; Bürgi, M.; Hersperger, A.M.; Ewald, K.C. Driving forces and rates of landscape change as a promising combination for landscape change research—An application on the northern fringe of the Swiss Alps. Land Use Policy 2007, 24, 349–361, doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2006.04.003.
[3]
Tasser, E.; Ruffini, F.V.; Tappeiner, U. An integrative approach for analysing landscape dynamics in diverse cultivated and natural mountain areas. Landscape Ecol. 2009, 24, 611–628, doi:10.1007/s10980-009-9337-9.
[4]
Hunziker, M. The spontaneous reafforestation in abandoned agricultural lands: Perception and aesthetic assessment by locals and tourists. Landscape Urban Plan. 1995, 31, 399–410, doi:10.1016/0169-2046(95)93251-J.
[5]
Tasser, E.; Walde, J.; Tappeiner, U.; Teutsch, A.; Noggler, W. Land-use changes and natural reforestation in the Eastern Central Alps. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 2007, 118, 115–129, doi:10.1016/j.agee.2006.05.004.
[6]
Costanza, R. Ecosystem Services and Ecological Indicators, In Ecological Indicators for Assessment of Ecosystem Health; J？rgensen S.E.;, Xu, F.; Costanza, R., Eds.; Taylor & Francis: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2010; pp. 189–198.
[7]
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-being; Synthesis, Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005.
[8]
Tveit, M.S. Indicators of visual scale as predictors of landscape preference; a comparison between groups. J. Environ. Manage. 2009, 90, 2882–2888, doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.12.021.
[9]
Lindemann-Matthies, P.; Junge, X.; Matthies, D. The influence of plant diversity on people’s perception and aesthetic appreciation of grassland vegetation. Biol. Conserv. 2010, 143, 195–202, doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2009.10.003.
[10]
Soliva, R.; R？nningen, K.; Bella, I.; Bezak, P.; Cooper, T.; Fl？, B.E.; Marty, P.; Potter, C. Envisioning upland futures: Stakeholder responses to scenarios for Europe's mountain landscapes. J. Rural Stud. 2008, 24, 56–71, doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.04.001.
[11]
Beza, B.B. The aesthetic value of a mountain landscape: A study of the Mt. Everest Trek. Landscape Urban Plan. 2010, 97, 306–317, doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.07.003.
[12]
Grêt-Regamey, A.; Bishop, I.D.; Bebi, P. Predicting the scenic beauty value of mapped landscape changes in a mountainous region through the use of GIS. Environ. Plan. B: Planning and Design 2007, 34, 50–67, doi:10.1068/b32051.
[13]
Augenstein, I. Die ？sthetik der Landschaft: Ein Bewertungsverfahren für die Planerische Umweltvorsorge (in German); Wei？ensee-Verlag: Berlin, Germany, 2002.
[14]
Jessel, B. Elements, characteristics and character—Information functions of landscapes in terms of indicators. Ecol. Indicators 2006, 6, 153–167, doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2005.08.009.
[15]
Lothian, A. Landscape and the philosophy of aesthetics: Is landscape quality inherent in the landscape or in the eye of the beholder? Landscape Urban Plan. 1999, 44, 177–198, doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(99)00019-5.
[16]
Nohl, W. Landschaftsplanung: ？sthetische und rekreative Aspekte; Patzer Verlag: Berlin/Hannover, Germany, 2001.
[17]
Weinstoerffer, J.; Girardin, P. Assessment of the contribution of land use pattern and intensity to landscape quality: use of a landscape indicator. Ecol. Model. 2000, 130, 95–109, doi:10.1016/S0304-3800(00)00209-X.
[18]
Bourassa, S.C. The Aesthetics of Landscape; Belhaven Press: London-New York, UK, 1991.
[19]
Soliva, R.; Hunziker, M. How do biodiversity and conservation values relate to landscape preferences? A case study from the Swiss Alps. Biodivers. Conserv. 2009, 18, 2483–2507, doi:10.1007/s10531-009-9603-9.
[20]
Tveit, M.S.; Ode, ？.; Fry, G. Key Concepts in a Framework for Analysing Visual Landscape Character. Landscape Res. 2006, 31, 229–255, doi:10.1080/01426390600783269.
[21]
Purcell, A.T.; Lamb, R.J. Preference and naturalness: An ecological approach. Landscape Urban Plan. 1998, 42, 57–66, doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(98)00073-5.
[22]
Junge, X.; Jacot, K.A.; Bosshard, A.; Lindemann-Matthies, P. Swiss people's attitudes towards field margins for biodiversity conservation. J. Nature Conserv. 2009, 17, 150–159, doi:10.1016/j.jnc.2008.12.004.
[23]
Rüdisser, J.; Tasser, E.; Tappeiner, U. Distance to nature—A new biodiversity relevant environmental indicator set at the landscape level. Ecol. Indicators 2012, 15, 208–216, doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.09.027.
[24]
Real, E.; Arce, C.; Sabucedo, J.M. Classification of landscapes using quantitative and categorical data and prediction of their scenic beauty in North-Western Spain. J. Environ. Psych. 2000, 20, 355–373, doi:10.1006/jevp.2000.0184.
[25]
Taylor, J.G.; Czarmowski, K.J.; Sexton, N.R.; Flick, S. The importance of water to Rocky Mountain Natural Park Visitors: An adoption of visitor employed photography to natural resources management. J. Applied Recr. Res. 1996, 20, 61–84.
[26]
Kaplan, R.; Kaplan, S. The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1989.
[27]
Gehring, K. Landscape Needs and Notions. Preferences, Expectations, Leisure Motivation, and the Concept of Landscape from a Cross-Cultural Perspective; Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL: Birmensdorf, Switzerland, 2006.
[28]
Dramstad, W.E.; Tveit, M.S.; Fjellstad, W.J.; Fry, G.L.A. Relationships between visual landscape preferences and map-based indicators of landscape structure. Landscape Urban Plan. 2006, 78, 465–474, doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.12.006.
[29]
Tveit, M.S.; Fry, G. Advantages of using different data sources in assessment of landscape change and its effect on visual scale. Ecol. Indicators 2010, 10, 24–31.
Schirpke, U.; Tasser, E.; Tappeiner, U. Predicting scenic beauty of mountain regions. Landscape Urban Plan. 2013, 111, 1–12, doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.11.010.
[32]
Bishop, I.D.; Wherrett, J.R.; Miller, D. Using image depth variables as predictors of visual quality. Environ Plan. 2000, 27, 865–875, doi:10.1068/b26101.
[33]
Ribe, R.G.; Armstrong, E.T.; Gobster, P.H. Scenic Vistas and the Changing Policy Landscape: Visualizing and Testing the Role of Visual Resources in Ecosystem Management. J.Landscape 2002, 21, 42–66, doi:10.3368/lj.21.1.42.
[34]
Patsfall, M.R.; Feimer, N.R.; Buhyoff, G.J.; Wellman, J.D. The prediction of scenic beauty from landscape context and composition. J. Environ. Psych. 1984, 4, 7–26, doi:10.1016/S0272-4944(84)80016-X.
[35]
Bauer, N.; Wallner, A.; Hunziker, M. The change of European landscapes: Human-nature relationships, public attitudes towards rewilding, and the implications for landscape management in Switzerland. J. Environ. Manag. 2009, 90, 2910–2920, doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.01.021.
[36]
Kearney, A.R.; Bradley, G.A.; Petrich, C.H.; Kaplan, R.; Kaplan, S.; Simpson-Colebank, D. Public perception as support for scenic quality regulation in a nationally treasured landscape. Landscape Urban Plan. 2008, 87, 117–128, doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.05.005.
[37]
Ca？as, I.; Ayuga, E.; Ayuga, F. A contribution to the assessment of scenic quality of landscapes based on preferences expressed by the public. Land Use Policy 2009, 26, 1173–1181, doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.02.007.
[38]
Daniel, T.C. Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landscape Urban Plan. 2001, 54, 267–281, doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00141-4.
[39]
Zube, E.; Sell, J.; Taylor, J. Landscape perception; research, application and theory. Landscape Urban Plan. 1982, 9, 1–32, doi:10.1016/0304-3924(82)90009-0.
[40]
Karjalainen, E.; Tyrv？inen, L. Visualization in forest landscape preference research: A Finnish perspective. Landscape Urban Plan. 2002, 59, 13–28, doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00244-4.
[41]
Lindemann-Matthies, P.; Briegel, R.; Schüpbach, B.; Junge, X. Aesthetic preference for a Swiss alpine landscape: The impact of different agricultural land-use with different biodiversity. Landscape Urban Plan. 2010, 98, 99–109, doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.07.015.
[42]
Shafer, J.; Elwood, L.; Brush, R.O. How to measure preferences for photographs of natural landscapes. Landscape Plan. 1977, 4, 237–256, doi:10.1016/0304-3924(77)90027-2.
[43]
Hagerhall, C.M.; Purcell, T.; Taylor, R. Fractal dimension of landscape silhouette outlines as a predictor of landscape preference. J. Environ. Psych. 2004, 24, 247–255, doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2003.12.004.
[44]
Sevenant, M.; Antrop, M. Cognitive attributes and aesthetic preferences in assessment and differentiation of landscapes. J. Environ. Manag. 2009, 90, 2889–2899, doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.10.016.
[45]
Strumse, E. Environmental attributes and the prediction of visual preferences for agrarian landscapes in Western Norway. J. Environ. Psych. 1994, 14, 293–303, doi:10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80220-8.
[46]
Nohl, W. Sustainable landscape use and aesthetic perception-preliminary reflections on future landscape aesthetics. Landscape Urban Plan. 2001, 54, 223–237, doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00138-4.
[47]
Miller, D. A method for estimating changes in the visibility of land cover. Landscape Urban Plan. 2001, 54, 93–106, doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00128-1.
[48]
Tappeiner, U.; Tappeiner, G.; Hilbert, A.; Mattanovich, E. The EU Agricultural Policy and the Environment-Evaluation of the Alpine Region; Blackwell: Berlin-Wien, Germany, 2003.
