The fuzziness of Montado landscapes: progress in assessing user preferences through photo-based surveys

Abstract

The European Landscape Convention (2000) states that landscape is an important contributor to the quality of life for people everywhere and that landscape is a complex of natural and cultural factors, as they are seen by the observer. Landscape preference, i.e. the degree to which people like a landscape and variations in the same type of landscape pattern, is an emerging field of knowledge, still under development. Moreover, knowing how preferences of rural landscapes differ among stakeholders can help define and support management responses to the changing demands of modern society. There is a need to understand this demand for new uses and activities, such as hunting, leisure, recreation, life quality support, and aesthetic appreciation. In Mediterranean extensive land use systems, such as the Montado, where agricultural production is under threat, but where the demand for amenity functions is increasing, assessing preferences and thus what the public is looking for, is particularly relevant. This papers demonstrates how photo based surveys can be an suitable tool for assessing landscape preferences in Montado landscapes, and also that, in order to cope with the underlying fuzziness of these landscapes, the images need to be edited (manipulated) so that the variations shown to respondents are adequately controlled in the study. The methodological approach as well as the results, of two different studies on the users preferences for Montado landscapes, applied to case-study areas in the region of Alentejo, Portugal, are presented. The issues concerned with photo manipulation are a particular focus of discussion.

Use of Video and 3D Scenario Visualisation to Rate Vegetation Screens for Integrating Buildings into the Landscape

“…To do this, respondents had to answer the following question after viewing each video: "How would you rate this destination for doing outdoor tourism activities?". To avoid influencing the response, videos were shown to each participant in a random order [8,[36][37][38][39]. All videos were displayed horizontally on separate pages so that they could be viewed in full screen mode.…”

Wood-pastures of Europe: Geographic coverage, social–ecological values, conservation management, and policy implications

“…Different stakeholders may put different weight on the aesthetic value of wood-pastures, based also on other values and benefits. For example, farmers tend to value open wood-pastures managed for livestock highly, while nature tourists and hunters prefer wood-pastures with higher density of shrubs and environmental managers those with higher density of trees (Barroso et al, 2012;Pinto-Correia et al, 2011). These differences are driven by diverse motivations behind landscape preferences (Barroso et al, 2012) which embrace aspects of tradition, knowledge types, cultural identity, or associated recreational activities (Hartel et al, 2014a;García-Llorente et al, 2012).…”

Dealing with landscape fuzziness in user preference studies: Photo-based questionnaires in the Mediterranean context

“…Mixed composition of land cover together with fuzzy borders make it difficult for the participants to respond to differences between images. Manipulation makes it possible for a specific landscape pattern to become more visible (Pinto-Correia, Barroso, Surová, et al, 2010;Ramos, 2010). However, manipulation needs to be sensitive, so that clarification of patterns does not result in over simplification and a landscape in the photo discordant with the real and therefore difficult for people to relate to.…”

“…In order to consider the total area of the municipality and the variations in landscape patterns in between the four landscape areas, a stratified random sampling by landscape area was defined (Bunce et al, 2005(Bunce et al, , 2008Ramos & Teixeira, 2006). It resulted in 14 sample areas of 25 hectares each (Fig.…”

“…And it documents how photo manipulation -and thus simplification of a complex reality -can be a flexible tool and a step forward in preference studies in fuzzy landscapes. This methodological approach builds on the vast conceptual body and toolbox of landscape preference studies (Bell, 2001;de Lucio & Múgica, 1994;Dramstad et al, 2006;Fry, Tveit, Ode, & Velarde, 2009;Kearney et al, 2008;Natori & Chenoweth, 2008;Rogge et al, 2007;Sayadi et al, 2009;Sevenant & Antrop, 2008;Tveit, Ode, & Fry, 2006), as well as on the empirical knowledge developed through different studies developed in Southern Portugal (Pinto-Correia, 1993Pinto-Correia & Vos, 2004;Pinto-Correia, Barroso, Surová, & Menezes, 2010;Ramos & Teixeira, 2006;Ramos, 2010;Surová & Pinto-Correia, 2008;van Doorn & Pinto-Correia, 2007). The content of the paper is based on two subsequent studies, both carried out with the same objective in the same landscape (Municipality of Castelo de Vide, Alentejo, Portugal) and both involving the use of photographs in assessing landscape preference.…”