GIS-assisted mapping of landscape suitability for nearby recreation

Kienast, Félix; Degenhardt, Barbara; Weilenmann, Barbara; Wäger, Yvonne; Buchecker, Matthias

doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.01.015

Cited by 148 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Linear elements can greatly reduce runoff (Borin et al 2010) and in the UK the presence of individual trees and shelterbelts increases the infiltration capacity of grazed pastures (Marshall et al 2009). The effect of land cover depends however on the amount of rainfall and diminishes with increasing soil saturation (Lull Pisani et al (2013), Macfadyen and Muller (2013), Veres et al (2013), Bianchi et al (2013), Martin et al (2013), Rusch et al (2013), Mitchell et al (2014), Morandin et al (2014) f Svensson et al (2000), Kells et al (2001), Potts et al (2003), Kremen et al (2004), Bodin et al (2006), Williams and Kremen (2007), Ricketts et al (2008), Winfree et al (2009), Isaacs andKirk (2010), Kennedy et al (2013), Morandin and Kremen (2013), Rollin et al (2013), Bailey et al (2014), Stanley and Stout (2014) g de la Fuente de Val et al (2006), Dramstad et al (2006), Borin et al (2010), Kienast et al (2012), van Zanten et al (2014 h Castelle et al (1994), Bartley et al (2006), Ludwig et al (2007), Bu et al (2008), Lenka et al (2012), Yang et al (2012), Shi et al (2013) and Reinhart 1972;Calder 2007;Acreman and Holden 2013). In mountainous catchments the riparian z...…”

Section: Review Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies stress the importance of compositional and configurational heterogeneity for recreation (de la Fuente de Val et al 2006;Dramstad et al 2006;Kienast et al 2012). Moreover, a metaanalysis on landscape preferences showed that a mosaic landscape is more appreciated than either an agricultural or natural dominated landscape (van Zanten et al 2014).…”

Section: Review Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of landscape configuration on mapping ecosystem service capacity: a review of evidence and a case study in Scotland

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context Humans structure landscapes for the production of food, fibre and fuel, commonly resulting in declines of non-provisioning ecosystem services (ESs). Heterogeneous landscapes are capable of providing multiple ESs, and landscape configuration-spatial arrangement of land cover in the landscape-is expected to affect ES capacity. However, the majority of ES mapping studies have not accounted for landscape configuration. Objectives Our objective is to assess and quantify the relevance of configuration for mapping ES capacity. A review of empirical evidence for configuration effects on the capacity of ten ESs reveals that for four ESs configuration is relevant but typically ignored in ES quantification. For four ESs we quantify the relevance of configuration for mapping ESs using Scotland as a case study. Methods Each ES was quantified through modelling, respectively ignoring or accounting for configuration. The difference in ES capacity between the two ES models was determined at multiple spatial scales. Results Configuration affected the capacity of all four ESs mapped, particularly at the cell and watershed scale. At the scale of Scotland most local effects averaged out. Flood control and sediment retention responded strongest to configuration. ESs were affected by different aspects of configuration, thus requiring specific methods for mapping each ES. Conclusions Accounting for configuration is important for the assessment of certain ESs at the cell and watershed scale. Incorporating configuration in landscape management provides opportunities for spatial optimization of ES capacity, but the diverging response of ESs to configuration suggests that accounting for configuration involves trade-offs between ESs.

show abstract

Section: Review Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Review Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of landscape configuration on mapping ecosystem service capacity: a review of evidence and a case study in Scotland

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The ecosystem function 'recreational potential' was mapped through a composite indicator based on Paracchini et al [76]. According to findings from surveys and from literature, recreation potential depends on three different components of people´s behavior and preference for outdoor recreation: the first relates to peoples preference for more natural areas and concerns the degree of naturalness [77]; the second refers to protected areas as they are considered indicators of high natural value [78]; the third component refers to the attractiveness of water bodies [79].…”

Section: Outdoor Recreationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regional Patterns of Ecosystem Services in Cultural Landscapes

Früh-Müller

Hotes

Wolters

et al. 2016

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

European agricultural landscapes have been shaped by humans to produce marketable private goods such as food, feed, fiber and timber. Land-use intensification to increase provisioning services in such productive landscapes alters the capacity of ecosystems to supply other services (often public goods and services) that are also vital for human wellbeing. However, the interactions, synergies and trade-offs among ecosystem services are poorly understood. We assessed the spatial distribution of the services carbon storage, sediment regulation, water yield, crop production, timber supply, and outdoor recreation in the counties Wetterau and Vogelsberg (Hesse, Germany). These counties represent a gradient from intensive arable land use to more extensive mixed land use systems with domination of grassland and forests. Spatially explicit models were used to map the location and quantity of service supply. We addressed the following questions: (1) Where are areas of high and low supply of individual and multiple ecosystem services? (2) Where do the strongest trade-offs and synergies between different services occur? Our results show a pronounced spatial aggregation of different ecosystem services, with locations where at least four services are being supplied at high levels occupying only 5% of the landscape. Indicators for water provision, timber supply, carbon storage, erosion control, and outdoor recreation are positively related to each other, but this relationship is influenced by the trade-offs associated with the ecosystem service food production. Optimization of ecosystem services at the landscape scale has to take these patterns into account.

show abstract

“…We considered it necessary to include the Quality of life dimension because the way people use and perceive urban landscapes ought to be an important component of spatial planning [36,37]. The role of planning is to increase the quality of landscapes, including ordinary landscapes, where communities carry out their daily activities [38].…”

Section: Dimensionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Spatial Planning Objectives Reflected in the Evolution of Urban Landscape Patterns? A Framework for the Evaluation of Spatial Planning Outcomes

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The evaluation of spatial planning results, or outcomes, has been rather neglected by scholars and practitioners. The causes of this neglect are linked to the characteristics of the planning systems in use or difficulties in quantifying results. To advance the state of the art of outcome evaluation, this paper focuses on assessing the implementation of national spatial planning objectives in urban landscapes through the use of an evaluation framework, which makes use of spatially explicit information. The framework is built around four dimensions, which reflect the main domains of spatial planning: efficient built-up development, conservation of agricultural land, landscape preservation and human perception. Indicators that are capable of capturing landscape changes in both time and space are used to verify the degree of conformance between adopted objectives and actual development patterns. We make use of spatially explicit data, as well as assess whether and where landscape changes occurred, by integrating the framework into a multi-criteria analysis. In the present study, the framework is tested in two study areas located in Switzerland and Romania, while the results are interpreted from the perspective of spatial planning approaches in the two countries. The efficiency and utility of the framework are demonstrated by the ability to provide valuable information that facilitates improvement in the performance of planning processes, such as identifying where the implementation of objectives is less effective, and the domains of affected spatial planning. Our findings indicate that the distance between objectives and outcomes can be attributed to differences in countries' spatial planning approaches, which should also be placed into the wider economic, institutional and legislative context. Our study provides valuable insights for the integration of time series of spatial data into the evaluation procedure.Keywords: planning evaluation; conformance; urban landscape; spatial multi-criteria analysis; Romania; Switzerland The distance between intentions and outcomes is attributed to the planning strategies, along with the overall planning tradition, economic conditions and the legislative context.

show abstract

GIS-assisted mapping of landscape suitability for nearby recreation

Cited by 148 publications

References 37 publications

Effects of landscape configuration on mapping ecosystem service capacity: a review of evidence and a case study in Scotland

Effects of landscape configuration on mapping ecosystem service capacity: a review of evidence and a case study in Scotland

Regional Patterns of Ecosystem Services in Cultural Landscapes

Are Spatial Planning Objectives Reflected in the Evolution of Urban Landscape Patterns? A Framework for the Evaluation of Spatial Planning Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About