Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Spatial assessment of aesthetic services in a complex mountain region: combining visual landscape properties with crowdsourced geographic information

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Context

Human and natural systems interact at multiple scales which are context specific in relation to ecosystem service supply. Scenic beauty is recognised as a cultural ecosystem service whose aesthetic value is perceived at a holistic landscape level.

Objectives

In this study we provide methodological advancements for assessing the relationship between landscape visual character and scenic beauty based on crowdsourced geographic information. The final aim is to demonstrate, through a case study application, an empirical method for mapping the scenic beauty of complex mountain landscapes from the perspective of observers which are realistically exposed to the environment being evaluated.

Methods

We propose a viewshed based approach which relies on visual indicators and the location of visitors retrieved by public image storage analysis. A cluster analysis was used to integrate visual characters of the landscape and visiting users’ preferences.

Results

Four different typologies of landscapes were finally characterized by distinct values of visual indicators. The spatial distribution of the landscape typologies presented a clustered pattern, allowing a regionalization of the landscape characters. The analysis of the visiting users’ provenance revealed that visual scale, naturalness and ephemera attract mainly foreign users, while imageability, complexity and historicity attract mostly domestic and local users.

Conclusions

The combination of crowdsourced images with visual indicators allows a systematic analysis of landscape scenic beauty properties. In all, by understanding how specific landscape characters contributes to aesthetic service provision we provide a tool for facilitating the visualization and interpretation of complex landscape characters.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allan JD, Smith SDP, McIntyre PB, Joseph CA, Dickinson CE, Marino AL, Biel RG, Olson JC, Doran PJ, Rutherford ES, Adkins JE (2015) Using cultural ecosystem services to inform restoration priorities in the Laurentian Great Lakes. Front Ecol Environ 13:418–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appleton J (1996) The experience of landscape. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagstad KJ, Villa F, Batker D, Harrison-Cox J, Voigt B, Johnson GW (2014) From theoretical to actual ecosystem services: mapping beneficiaries and spatial flows in ecosystem service assessments. Ecol Soc 19:64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernert JA, Eilers JM, Sullivan TJ, Freemark KE, Ribic C (1997) A quantitative method for delineating regions: an example for the western corn belt plains ecoregion of the USA. Environ Manag 21:405–420

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bishop ID, Hulse DW (1994) Prediction of scenic beauty using mapped data and geographic information systems. Landsc Urban Plan 30:59–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calinski T, Harabasz J (1974) A dendrite method for cluster analysis. Commun Stat Theory Methods 3:1–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cao Y, O’Halloran K (2014) Learning human photo shooting patterns from large-scale community photo collections. Multimed Tools Appl 74(24):1–18

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Casado-Arzuaga I, Onaindia M, Madariaga I, Verburg PH (2014) Mapping recreation and aesthetic value of ecosystems in the Bilbao Metropolitan Greenbelt (northern Spain) to support landscape planning. Landscape Ecol 29:1393–1405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casalegno S, Inger R, DeSilvey C, Gaston KJ (2013) Spatial covariance between aesthetic value & other ecosystem services. PLoS ONE 8:e68437

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Codescu M, Vale DC, Kutz O, Mossakowski T (2012) Ontology-based route planning for OpenStreetMap. In: 5th International Terra Cognita Workshop 2012, Boston, USA, 12 November 2012

  • Costanza R (2008) Ecosystem services: multiple classification systems are needed. Biol Conserv 141:350–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Da Rugna J, Chareyron G, Branchet B (2012) Tourist behavior analysis through geotagged photographies: a method to identify the country of origin. In: Computational Intelligence and Informatics (CINTI), 2012 IEEE 13th International Symposium on. IEEE, pp 347–351

  • Daniel TC (2001) Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landsc Urban Plan 54:267–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniel TC, Muhar A, Arnberger A, Aznarc O, Boydd JW, Chan KM, Costanza R, Elmqvist T, Flint CG, Grêt-Regamey A (2012) Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109:8812–8819

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • De Groot RS, Alkemade R, Braat L, Hein L, Willemen L (2010) Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol Complex 7:260–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Groot RS, Wilson MA, Boumans RM (2002) A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecol Econ 41:393–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de la Fuente de Val G, Atauri JA, de Lucio JV (2006) Relationship between landscape visual attributes and spatial pattern indices: a test study in Mediterranean-climate landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan 77:393–407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorwart CE, Moore RL, Leung Y-F (2007) Visitor employed photography: its potential and use in evaluating visitors’ perceptions of resource impacts in trail and park settings. In: Burns R, Robinson K, comps. 2007. Proceedings of the 2006 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-P-14. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station

  • Dramstad WE, Tveit MS, Fjellstad WJ, Fry GLA (2006) Relationships between visual landscape preferences and map-based indicators of landscape structure. Landsc Urban Plan 78:465–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duque JC, Ramos R, Suriñach J (2007) Supervised regionalization methods: a survey. Int Reg Sci Rev 30:195–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Environment Agency (EEA) (2010) Corine Land Cover 2006 (CLC2006) 100m raster data. Retrieved from http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-andmaps/data/corine-land-cover-2006-raster

  • Fagerholm N, Käyhkö N (2009) Participatory mapping and geographical patterns of the social landscape values of rural communities in Zanzibar, Tanzania. Fenn-Int J Geogr 187:43–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank S, Fürst C, Koschke L, Witta A, Makeschina F (2013) Assessment of landscape aesthetics—validation of a landscape metrics-based assessment by visual estimation of the scenic beauty. Ecol Indic 32:222–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Germino MJ, Reiners WA, Blasko BJ, McLeodc D, Bastian CT (2001) Estimating visual properties of Rocky Mountain landscapes using GIS. Landsc Urban Plan 53:71–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Girardin F, Fiore FD, Ratti C, Blat J (2008) Leveraging explicitly disclosed location information to understand tourist dynamics: a case study. J Locat Based Serv 2:41–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gliozzo G, Pettorelli N, Haklay M (Muki) (2016) Using crowdsourced imagery to detect cultural ecosystem services: a case study in South Wales, UK. Ecol Soc. 21(3):6. Special feature on reconciling art and science for sustainability. doi:10.5751/ES-08436-210306

  • Haines-Young R, Potschin M (2010) The links between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being. Ecosyst Ecol 110–139

  • Haines-Young R, Potschin M (2013) Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES): Consultation on Version 4, August-December 2012. Report to the European Environment Agency. Revised January 2013. Retrieved from http://cices.eu/resources/

  • Haklay M, Weber P (2008) OpenStreetMap: user-generated street maps. IEEE Pervasive Comput 7:12–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammitt WE, Backlund EA, Bixler RD (2004) Experience use history, place bonding and resource substitution of trout anglers during recreation engagements. J Leis Res 36:356–378

    Google Scholar 

  • Hein L, van Koppen K, de Groot RS, van Ierland EC (2006) Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 57:209–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heipke C (2010) Crowdsourcing geospatial data. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens 65:550–557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollenstein L, Purves R (2010) Exploring place through user-generated content: using Flickr to describe city cores. J Spat Inf Sci. doi:10.5311/JOSIS.2010.1.3

    Google Scholar 

  • Host GE, Polzer PL, Mladenoff DJ, White MA, Crow TR (1996) A quantitative approach to developing regional ecosystem classifications. Ecol Appl 6:608

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jain AK (2010) Data clustering: 50 years beyond K-means. Pattern Recognit Lett 31:651–666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joly D, Brossard T, Cavailhès J, Hilal M, Tourneux FP, Tritz C, Wavresky P (2009) A quantitative approach to the visual evaluation of landscape. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 99:292–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan S (1995) The restorative benefits of nature: toward an integrative framework. J Environ Psychol 15:169–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan R, Kaplan S (1989) The experience of nature: a psychological perspective. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellert SR, Wilson EO (1993) The biophilia hypothesis. Island Press (Shearwater Book), Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Ketchen DJ, Shook CL (1996) The application of cluster analysis in strategic management research: an analysis and critique. Strateg Manag J 17:441–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kienast F, Bolliger J, Potschin M, de Groot RS, Verburg PH, Heller I, Wascher D, Haines-Young R (2009) Assessing landscape functions with broad-scale environmental data: insights gained from a prototype development for Europe. Environ Manag 44:1099–1120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kienast F, Degenhardt B, Weilenmann B, Wägerc Y, Bucheckera M (2012) GIS-assisted mapping of landscape suitability for nearby recreation. Landsc Urban Plan 105:385–399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kienast F, Frick J, van Strien MJ, Hunziker M (2015) The swiss landscape monitoring program—a comprehensive indicator set to measure landscape change. Ecol Model 295:136–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kienast F, Wildi O, Ghosh S (2007) A changing world: challenges for landscape research. Springer, Dordrecht

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kisilevich S, Krstajic M, Keim D, Andrienko N, Andrienko G (2010) Event-based analysis of people’s activities and behavior using Flickr and panoramio geotagged photo collections. IEEE, pp 289–296

  • Kruger LE, Hall TE (2010) Understanding concepts of place in recreation research and management. General Technical Report (GTR) PNW-GTR-744, Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Retrieved from http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/29924

  • Li L, Goodchild MF, Xu B (2013) Spatial, temporal, and socioeconomic patterns in the use of Twitter and Flickr. Cartogr Geogr Inf Sci 40:61–77

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lindemann-Matthies P, Briegel R, Schüpbach B, Junge X (2010) Aesthetic preference for a Swiss alpine landscape: the impact of different agricultural land-use with different biodiversity. Landsc Urban Plan 98:99–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luck GW, Daily GC, Ehrlich PR (2003) Population diversity and ecosystem services. Trends Ecol Evol 18:331–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez Pastur G, Peri PL, Lencinas MV, García-Llorente M, Martín-López B (2015) Spatial patterns of cultural ecosystem services provision in Southern Patagonia. Landscape Ecol. doi:10.1007/s10980-015-0254-9

    Google Scholar 

  • Martín-López B, Iniesta-Arandia I, García-Llorente M, Palomo I, Casado- Arzuaga I, García Del Amo D, Gómez-Baggethun E, Oteros-Rozas E, Palacios-Agundez I, Willaarts B, González JA, Santos-Martín F, Onaindia M, López-Santiago C, Montes C (2012) Uncovering ecosystem service bundles through social preferences. PLoS ONE 7(6):1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGarigal K, Cushman SA, Ene E (2015). FRAGSTATS version 4.2 (build 4.2.1.603: spatial pattern analysis program for categorical and continuous maps). Computer software program produced by the authors at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Retrieved from http://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/downloads/fragstats_downloads.html#FRAGSTATS

  • MEA (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: biodiversity synthesis. World Resources Institute, 86 p, Washington, DC

  • Miguel Martínez-Graña A, Luis Goy J, Zazo C (2013) Cartographic-environmental analysis of the landscape in natural protected parks for his management using GIS. Application to the natural parks of the “Las Batuecas-Sierra de Francia” and “Quilamas” (Central System, Spain). J Geogr Inf Syst 05:54–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Musacchio LR (2009) The scientific basis for the design of landscape sustainability: a conceptual framework for translational landscape research and practice of designed landscapes and the six Es of landscape sustainability. Landscape Ecol 24:993–1013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nahuelhual L, Carmona A, Lozada P, Jaramillo A, Aguayo M (2013) Mapping recreation and ecotourism as a cultural ecosystem service: an application at the local level in Southern Chile. Appl Geogr 40:71–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijhuis S, Van Lammeren R, van der Hoeven F (eds) (2011) Exploring the visual landscape: advances in physiognomic landscape research in the Netherlands. IOS Press, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Ode Å, Fry G, Tveit MS, Messager P, Miller D (2009) Indicators of perceived naturalness as drivers of landscape preference. J Environ Manag 90:375–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ode Å, Hagerhall CM, Sang N (2010) Analysing visual landscape complexity: theory and application. Landsc Res 35:111–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ode Å, Tveit MS, Fry G (2008) Capturing landscape visual character using indicators: touching base with landscape aesthetic theory. Landsc Res 33:89–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orsi F, Geneletti D (2013) Using geotagged photographs and GIS analysis to estimate visitor flows in natural areas. J Nat Conserv 21:359–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer JF (2004) Using spatial metrics to predict scenic perception in a changing landscape: Dennis, Massachusetts. Landsc Urban Plan 69:201–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer JF, Lankhorst JR-K (1998) Evaluating visible spatial diversity in the landscape. Landsc Urban Plan 43:65–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearce D, Özdemiroǧlu E, Great Britain, Department for Transport LG and the R (2002) Economic valuation with stated preference techniques: summary guide. Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Potschin MB, Haines-Young RH (2011) Ecosystem services: exploring a geographical perspective. Prog Phys Geogr 35:575–594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Produit T, Tuia D, De Morsier F, Golay F (2014) Do geographic features impact pictures location shared on the Web? Modeling photographic suitability in the Swiss Alps. In: Environmental Multimedia Retrieval. CEUR-WS.org, Glasgow, UK

  • Punj G, Stewart DW (1983) Cluster analysis in marketing research: review and suggestions for application. J Mark Res 20:134–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards DR, Friess DA (2015) A rapid indicator of cultural ecosystem service usage at a fine spatial scale: content analysis of social media photographs. Ecol Indic 53:187–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sang N, Miller D, Ode Å (2008) Landscape metrics and visual topology in the analysis of landscape preference. Environ Plan B Plan Des 35:504–520. doi:10.1068/b33049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schirpke U, Tasser E, Tappeiner U (2013) Predicting scenic beauty of mountain regions. Landsc Urban Plan 111:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seresinhe CI, Preis T, Moat HS (2015) Quantifying the impact of scenic environments on health. Sci Rep 5:16899

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Sun Y, Fan H, Helbich M, Zipf A (2013) Analyzing human activities through volunteered geographic information: using Flickr to analyze spatial and temporal pattern of tourist accommodation. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Tenerelli P, Demšar U, Luque S (2016) Crowdsourcing indicators for cultural ecosystem services: a geographically weighted approach for mountain landscapes. Ecol Indic 64:237–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Termorshuizen JW, Opdam P (2009) Landscape services as a bridge between landscape ecology and sustainable development. Landscape Ecol 24:1037–1052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Termorshuizen JW, Opdam P, van den Brink A (2007) Incorporating ecological sustainability into landscape planning. Landsc Urban Plan 79:374–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tonge J, Moore S, Ryan M, Beckley L (2013) Using photo-elicitation to explore place attachment in a remote setting. Electron J Bus Res Methods 11:41–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Tveit M, Ode Å, Fry G (2006) Key concepts in a framework for analysing visual landscape character. Landsc Res 31:229–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uuemaa E, Antrop M, Roosaare J et al (2009) Landscape metrics and indices: an overview of their use in landscape research. Living Rev Landsc Res 3:1–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood SA, Guerry AD, Silver JM, Lacayo M (2013) Using social media to quantify nature-based tourism and recreation. Sci Rep. doi:10.1038/srep02976

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu J (2013) Landscape sustainability science: ecosystem services and human well-being in changing landscapes. Landscape Ecol 28:999–1023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu C, Sheng S, Chi T, Yang X, An S, Liu M (2014) Developing a quantitative landscape regionalization framework integrating driving factors and response attributes of landscapes. Landsc Ecol Eng 10:295–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was partially supported by the OpenNESS project funded from the European Union’s Seventh Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under Grant Agreement No. 308428. We would like to thank Eric Maldonado for supporting the Flickr API request process. Finally, we would like to tank Schaeffer Yves, Frédéric Bray and Camille Le Moal for their participation to the field work. The authors are solely responsible for the content of this publication. It does not represent the opinion of the European Union, nor is the European Union responsible for any use that might be made of information appearing herein.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UR EMGR Mountain Ecosystems Unit, IRSTEA - National Research Institute of Science and Technology for Environment and Agriculture, 2 rue de la Papeterie, 38402, Saint Martin d’Hères, France

    Patrizia Tenerelli & Sandra Luque

  2. Institute of Geography, Humboldt University, Unter den Linden 6, 10099, Berlin, Germany

    Catharina Püffel

  3. IRSTEA – UMR TETIS Territoires, Environnement, Télédétection et Information Spatiale, 500 rue JF Breton, 34000, Montpellier, France

    Sandra Luque

Authors
  1. Patrizia Tenerelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Catharina Püffel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sandra Luque
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrizia Tenerelli.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tenerelli, P., Püffel, C. & Luque, S. Spatial assessment of aesthetic services in a complex mountain region: combining visual landscape properties with crowdsourced geographic information. Landscape Ecol 32, 1097–1115 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-017-0498-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-017-0498-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation