Assessing Public Preferences of Landscape and Landscape Attributes: a Case Study of the Proposed Appalachian Geopark Project in West Virginia, USA

Antoniou V, Morley J, Haklay M (2010) Web 2.0 Geotagged photos: assessing the spatial dimension of the phenomenon. Geomatica 64(1):99–110 Antrop M (2000) Geography and landscape science. Belgeo (1–2–3–4):9–36. https://doi.org/10.4000/belgeo.13975 Antrop M (2005) History & Research. Belbin. https://www.belbin.com/about/history/. Accessed 14 June 2022 Arriaza M, Cañas JF, Canas JA, Ruiz P, Gonzalez-Arenas J, Barea F (2005) Landscape assessment via regression analysis. European Association of Agricultural Economists, International Congress, Copenhagen, Denmark Bergen SD, Ulbricht CA, Fridley JL, Ganter MA (1995) The validity of computer-generated graphic images of forest landscape. J Environ Psychol 15(2):135–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-4944(95)90021-7 Brooks RO, Lavigne P (1985) Aesthetic theory and landscape protection: the many meanings of beauty and their implications for the design, control and protection of Vermont’s landscape. UCLA J Environ Law Policy 4(2):1–45. https://doi.org/10.5070/l542018695 Brown G, Weber D (2011) Public participation GIS: a new method for national park planning. Landsc Urban Plan 102(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.03.003 Bubalo M, van Zanten BT, Verburg PH (2019) Crowdsourcing geo-information on landscape perceptions and preferences: a review. Landsc Urban Plann 184(December 2018):101–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.01.001 Callau AÀ, Albert MYP, Rota JJ, Giné DS (2019) Landscape characterization using photographs from crowdsourced platforms: content analysis of social media photographs. Open Geosci 11(1):558–571. https://doi.org/10.1515/geo-2019-0046 Cardwell DH (1975) Geologic history of West Virginia. West Virginia Geol Econ Surv Daniel TC, Boster RS (1976) Measuring landscape esthetics: the scenic beauty estimation method. https://www.fs.usda.gov/rm/pubs_rm/rm_rp167.pdf. Accessed 13 Oct 2022 Daniel TC (2001) Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landsc Urban Plan 54(1–4):267–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00141-4 Daniel TC, Meitner MM (2001) Representational validity of landscape visualizations: the effects of graphical realism on perceived scenic beauty of forest vistas. J Environ Psychol 21(1):61–72. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2000.0182 Dasher GR (2000) The Karst of West Virginia. In G. R. Dasher (Ed.), The caves of East Central West Virginia. The Guidebook of the National Speleological Society’s 2000 Convention (pp. 152–190). West Virginia Speleological Survey (WVASS), Bulletin # 14 Dearden P (1987) Consensus and a theoretical framework for landscape evaluation. Department of Geography, University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. Canada. J Environ Manage 34:267–278 Dmytrowski P, Kicińska A (2022) Protection and monitoring of inanimate nature in the actions of landscape parks — the example of Poland (EU). Geoheritage 14:117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-022-00757-x Dorwart CE, Moore RL, Leung YF (2010) Visitors’ perceptions of a trail environment and effects on experiences: a model for nature-based recreation experiences. Leis Sci 32(1):33–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400903430863 Dowling R (2017) Geoparks- a vehicle for fostering community based, sustainable, regional development in Northern Australia: Briefing to Federal Parliament’s Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia (pp. 1–6). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139567657 Fairclough G, Herlin IS, and Swanwick C (2018) Landscape character approaches in global, disciplinary and policy context. Routledge Handbook Landsc Character Assess 3–20. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315753423-1 Gibson JJ (1979) The “theory of affordances” the ecological approach to visual perception. In The ecological approach to visual perception (pp 127–137). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers. https://monoskop.org/images/c/c6/Gibson_James_J_1977_1979_The_Theory_of_Affordances.pdf. Accessed 2 Oct 2022 Gill N, Dun O, Brennan-Horley C, Eriksen C (2015) Landscape preferences, amenity, and bushfire risk in New South Wales, Australia. Environ Manag 56(3):738–753. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-015-0525-x Goldberg L (2019) Toward conservation of visual resources at the regional scale. Environ Pract 21(4):201–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/14660466.2019.1687231 Griffiths G (2018) Transferring landscape character assessment from the uk to the eastern mediterranean: challenges and perspectives. Land 7(1):1–11. https://doi.org/10.3390/land7010036 Hansen AS (2016) Testing visitor produced pictures as a management strategy to study visitor experience qualities – a Swedish marine case study. J Outdoor Recreat Tour 14:52–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2016.05.001 Herzog TR (1987) A cognitive analysis of preference for natural environments: mountains, canyons, and deserts. Landsc J 6(2):140–152. https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.6.2.140 Herzog TR, Kaplan S, Kaplan R (1982) The prediction of preference for familiar urban places. Popul Environ 5(1):43–59. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.928.7312&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Accessed 23 Sept 2022 Hull RB IV, Stewart W (1992) Validity of photo-based scenic beauty judgments. J Environ Psychol 12(2):101–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80063-5 Jensen LH (2007) Changing conceptualization of landscape in English landscape assessment methods. From Landsc Res Landsc Plan 161–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5363-4_12 Kalivoda O, Vojar J, Skřivanová Z, Zahradník D (2014) Consensus in landscape preference judgments: the effects of landscape visual aesthetic quality and respondents’ characteristics. J Environ Manage 137:36–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.02.009 Kaplan R, Kaplan S (1989) The experience of nature: a psychological perspective. In First Publication. Cambridge University Press. https://ia802204.us.archive.org/32/items/experienceofnatu00kapl/experienceofnatu00kapl.pdf. Accessed 25 Sept 2022 Karjalainen E, Tyrva L (2002) Visualization in forest landscape preference research: a finnish perspective. Landsc Urban Plan | ScienceDirect.com. 59. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204601002444. Accessed 6 May 2022 Kayden J (2000) National land-use planning in America: something whose time has never come. Wash UJL Pol’y 3:445–472. http://heinonlinebackup.com/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/wajlp3&section=21. Accessed 22 Feb 2022 Kaymaz IC (2012) Landscape perception. In Ozyavus DM (ed), Landscape planning. InTech. https://www.intechopen.com/books/landscape-planning/landscape-perception. Accessed 26 Jul 2022 Kellomäki S, Savolainen R (1984) The scenic value of the forest landscape as assessed in the field and the laboratory. Landsc Plan 11(2):97–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3924(84)90033-9 Kvan M (2013) Visual quality assessment methods in landscape architecture studies. Adv Landsc Archit. https://doi.org/10.5772/55769 Langschwager D (2018) The perspective of place and landscape. 1–10. https://research.library.kutztown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=englisheng366. Accessed 23 Aug 2022 Lee J, Lee HS, Jeong D, Shafer CS, Chon J (2019) The relationship between user perception and preference of greenway trail characteristics in urban areas. Sustainability (Switzerland) 11(16):1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11164438 Liu Q, Fu W, van den Bosch CCK, Xiao Y, Zhu Z, You D, Zhu N, Huang Q, Lan S (2018) Do local landscape elements enhance individuals’ place attachment to new environments? A cross-regional comparative study in China. Sustainability (Switzerland) 10(9):1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10093100 Lothian A (2017) The science of scenery: how we view scenic beauty, what it is, why we love it, and how to measure and map it. United States: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform Lothian A (2012) Measuring and mapping landscape quality using the community preferences method. Paper presented at New Zealand Planning Institute Annual Conference, Blenheim, Germany Mahdjoubi L, Wiltshire J (2001) Towards a framework for evaluation of computer visual simulations in environment design. Des Stud 22(2):193–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(00)00027-2 Malik A, Dhir A, Nieminen M (2016) Uses and gratifications of digital photo sharing on Facebook. Telematics Inform 33(1):129–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2015.06.009 Michigan Law Review (1973) Beyond the eye of the beholder: aesthetics and objectivity 71(7). https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4471&context=mlr. Accessed 2 Oct 2022 Muñoz L, Hausner VH, Runge C, Brown G, Daigle R (2020) Using crowdsourced spatial data from Flickr vs. PPGIS for understanding nature’s contribution to people in Southern Norway. People Nat 2(2):437–449. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10083 National Park Service (2012) Connecting the parks with their gateway communities conception plan. https://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkID=259&projectID=11040&documentID=85242 National Park Service (2018) Appalachian plateaus province. National Park Service. https://www.nps.gov/articles/appalachiannplateausprovince.htm Ólafsdóttir R, Tverijonaite E (2018) Geotourism: a systematic literature review. Geosciences (Switzerland) 8(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8070234. Accessed 4 Dec 2022 Palmer JF, Hoffman RE (2001) Rating reliability and representation validity in scenic landscape assessments. Landsc Urban Plan 54(1–4):149–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00133-5 Peng SH, Han KT (2018) Assessment of aesthetic quality on soil and water conservation engineering using the scenic beauty estimation method. Water (Switzerland) 10(4).https://doi.org/10.3390/w10040407 Richards DR, Tunçer B (2018) Using image recognition to automate assessment of cultural ecosystem services from social media photographs. Ecosyst Serv 31:318–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.004 Ros-Candeira A, Moreno-Llorca R, Alcaraz-Segura D, Bonet-García FJ, Vaz AS (2020) Social media photo content for Sierra Nevada: a dataset to support the assessment of cultural ecosystem services in protected areas. Nat Conserv 38:1–12. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.38.38325 Scott MJ, Canter DV (1997) Picture or place? A multiple sorting study of landscape. J Environ Psychol 17:263–281. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1997.0068 Shafer EL Jr, Brush RO (1977) How to measure preferences for photographs of natual landscapes. Landsc Plan 4:237–256 Smardon RC (2016) Visual impact assessment: where have we come from and where are we going? J Environ Prot 07(10):1333–1341. https://doi.org/10.4236/jep.2016.710116 Steiner F (2009) The living landscape: an ecological approach to landscape planning. J Am Plan Assoc 75(4). https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360903169717 Stepchenkova S, Zhan F (2013) Visual destination images of Peru: comparative content analysis of DMO and user-generated photography. Tour Manag 36:590–601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.08.006 Svobodova K, Sklenicka P, Vojar J (2015) How does the representation rate of features in a landscape affect visual preferences? A case study from a post-mining landscape. Int J Min Reclam Environ 29(4):266–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/17480930.2013.873258 Swanwick C, LUC (2002) Landscape character assessment. In The countryside agency, Scottish natural heritage. https://www.nature.scot. Accessed 2 Jul 2021 Tenerelli P, Demšar U, Luque S (2016) Crowdsourcing indicators for cultural ecosystem services: a geographically weighted approach for mountain landscapes. Ecol Indic 64(September 2018):237–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.12.042 Tieskens KF, Van Zanten BT, Schulp CJE, Verburg PH (2018) Aesthetic appreciation of the cultural landscape through social media: an analysis of revealed preference in the Dutch river landscape. Landsc Urban Plan 177:128–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.05.002 Tveit M, Ode Å, Fry G (2006) Key concepts in a framework for analysing visual landscape character. Landsc Res 31(3):229–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426390600783269 U.S. Department of the Interior (n.d.) The Pinelands Scenic Study van der Ploeg MJ, Baartman JEM, Robinson DA (2018) Biophysical landscape interactions: bridging disciplines and scale with connectivity. Land Degrad Dev 29(4):1167–1175. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.2820 van Zanten BT, Verburg PH, Scholte SSK, Tieskens KF (2016) Using choice modeling to map aesthetic values at a landscape scale: lessons from a Dutch case study. Ecol Econ 130:221–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.07.008 Wang Z, Jin Y, Liu Y, Li D, Zhang B (2018) Comparing social media data and survey data in assessing the attractiveness of Beijing Olympic Forest Park. Sustainability (switzerland) 10(2):1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10020382 Wartmann FM, Frick J, Kienast F, Hunziker M (2021) Factors influencing visual landscape quality perceived by the public Results from a national survey. Landsc Urban Plan 208:104024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.104024 Wood SA, Guerry AD, Silver JM, and Lacayo M (2013) Using social media to quantify nature-based tourism and recreation. Sci Rep 3. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep02976 Zube EH, Sell JL, Tylor JG (1982) Landscape perception: research, application and theory. Landsc Plan 9:1–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3924(82)90009-0