Developing Computer-Based Participatory Approaches to Mapping Landscape Values for Landscape and Resource Management

Carver, Steve; Watson, Alan E.; Waters, Tim; Matt, Roian; Gunderson, Kari; Davis, Brett

doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-8952-7_21

Cited by 29 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…An online survey was designed using participatory GIS. This technique normally involves marking points or shapes on a map (Brown & Fagerholm, 2015); however, many people struggle to communicate the value of landscapes using such constrained spatial techniques (Carver et al, 2009;Huck, Whyatt, & Coulton, 2014). We therefore used the participatory GIS spraycan tool Map-Me (Huck et al, 2014), which has been designed to overcome this.…”

Section: Survey Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying cultural ecosystem services: Disentangling the effects of management from landscape features

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cultural ecosystem services are undeniably important, yet are typically neglected in land management decisions due to a suite of intractable challenges: they are highly complex, localised, and inextricably associated with landscape features. However, to incorporate the ecosystem services framework into land management, decision‐makers need the tools to disentangle the effects of land use from other factors. This is a major challenge for ecosystem services research. Forestry is a widespread land use that has considerable potential to deliver a broad range of ecosystem services, although this requires careful management planning. Additionally, modern production forestry is undergoing a period of rapid change in the face of a plethora of challenges, such as climate change and disease. To increase cultural ecosystem services delivery from forests, managers need tools to understand the implications of different management options. In this paper, we directly test how land use affects cultural ecosystem services. We use a new approach that recognises the underlying complexity of cultural ecosystem services but produces easily interpretable results that are locally relevant and directly applicable to land management. By combining participatory geographic information systems (GIS) and a novel site matching technique, we relate cultural values explicitly to land management, while accounting for the influence of landscape features. Applying this new method to a major UK forest site, we conducted a large survey to gather participatory GIS data points. We showed that land management significantly affected cultural ecosystem service values and were able to make a series of practical forest management recommendations. Notably, a greater diversity of tree species would improve cultural value, and open space is important within the forest landscape. This approach is highly flexible and can be applied to any type of landscape. It allows cultural ecosystem services to be fully integrated into land management decisions to formulate the best management strategy to maximise ecosystem service delivery. A plain language summary is available for this article.

show abstract

Section: Survey Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying cultural ecosystem services: Disentangling the effects of management from landscape features

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other words, a people-oriented development plan should reflect the sufficient concern and views from the public sector. As a result, some researchers have tried to include a collaborative way and integrate participatory techniques into the planning support tools to enhance the public engagement in urban (land use) planning and also develop more effective participation methods for this profession [49][50][51][52]. Undoubtedly, PSS provide an environment in which land use models can be utilized to support the planning.…”

Section: For Land Use Planning (Or Urban Planning)mentioning

confidence: 96%

A Review of Planning Support Systems for Urban Land Use Planning

Wang

Shen

Tang

2013

Proceedings of the 17th International Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews the research work on a relatively particular areaplanning support systems (PSS) for urban land use planning (ULUP) from their emergence to the present. To aid readers' clear understanding of PSS, its definition is discussed in the beginning. The review summarizes the development of PSS from two perspectives: system components and system application. In terms of system components, namely, the major theories and technologies serving for building the PSS such as related planning theories, GIS and decision support systems (DSS) technologies are reviewed respectively. With respect to system application, the paper discusses in detail their application to urban (land use) planning and other specialized planning separately. Based on this systematic overview, the characteristics in different times, especially current advantages and shortcomings of the PSS are indicated. Moreover, several new research trends in the PSS area are also highlighted for guiding researchers in future studies. Keywords Planning support systems • Land use planning • Urban planning • Spatial decision support systems • GIS IntroductionLand is the foundation of human activities. Without enough land, cities cannot be formed, let alone developed further. With the development of human civilization, natural land has been occupied by human beings increasingly. Because of the rapid growth of the world population, more and more developed land is needed to satisfy the demands of humans. However, only 29 % of the earth's surface is land, and

show abstract

“…Such mapping assumes a connection between spatially situated values and meanings, and views on management actions, suggesting that relationships with special places may influence or even drive management preferences. Place-mapping methods include interviews that involve identifying special places by drawing on a paper map (see Gunderson and Watson 2007), sticker dot surveys that enable respondents to locate landscape values and development preferences (see Brown 2006), and computer-based programs that allow participants to paint locations with a spray-can tool and describe their importance (see Carver et al 2009). …”

Section: Place Mapping and Spatial Scalementioning

confidence: 99%

“…He suggests that ''One respondent could be referencing a spatial area as small as a picnic site, while another might be referencing a spatial area as large as the entire study region'' (15). The fuzzy mapping employed by Carver et al (2009) addresses this issue through a tool that allows participants to vary the size and thus scale of the place they are mapping. However, while some scalar questions have been identified and, in some cases, addressed, the implications of asking participants to spatially locate their views and values and what is captured and conveyed by the scales selected by either researchers or research participants have not been addressed in depth.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Place Mapping and the Role of Spatial Scale in Understanding Landowner Views of Fire and Fuels Management

Cacciapaglia

Yung

Patterson

2012

Society & Natural Resources

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developing Computer-Based Participatory Approaches to Mapping Landscape Values for Landscape and Resource Management

Cited by 29 publications

References 11 publications

Quantifying cultural ecosystem services: Disentangling the effects of management from landscape features

Quantifying cultural ecosystem services: Disentangling the effects of management from landscape features

A Review of Planning Support Systems for Urban Land Use Planning

Place Mapping and the Role of Spatial Scale in Understanding Landowner Views of Fire and Fuels Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About