Visual Assessment of Rural Landscapes Based on Qualitative Indicators Case Study: Villages of Alamut Region of Qazvin

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Ph.d candidate of Architecture, Architecture Department, Faculty of Architecture & Urban Design, Art University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture & Urban Planning Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran

Abstract

Aesthetic values and visual aspects of landscapes is one of the most important and influential determinants of the presence and continuity of living in rural areas and can be considered as a basis for the planning and design of such areas. Therefore, identifying the effective indicators and criteria and how to evaluate them in order to reduce cross-sectional interventions in these areas is of high importance. There are two major theoretical approaches in landscape aesthetics that are based on landscape evaluation methods: The subjective paradigm with a direct approach that compares people's preferences to reach a consensus as well as the objective paradigm with an indirect approach that evaluates the landscape based on having certain characteristics. The main objective of this study is to identify qualitative indicators that have an impact on the evaluation of rural landscapes to improve their visual quality. In order to achieve this objective, indicators of rural landscapes were extracted from the literature. 10 villages in Alamut region of Qazvin were tested and a total of 50 images from the 10 villages were assigned for initial evaluation. The process of image selection was on the basis of having the most diverse features of the landscape. The selected images were categorized and then the operational and proposed framework of research was developed by using a logical reasoning strategy for the qualitative-visual evaluation of rural landscapes. A questionnaire was prepared to survey selected and categorized images of villages. The target participants were landscape architects (students and graduates of this field) and the questionnaire was sent electronically and at the end, 80 completed questionnaires were reviewed. In the next step, a more detailed questionnaire was prepared to measure the visual beauty of the images based on the components and criteria obtained from the operational framework of the research. A total of 120 questionnaires were analyzed for visual evaluation. T-Test was used to examine the score of each of the components and criteria in the visual beauty of each selected image. Then, in order to assess the relationship between the perceptual aesthetics of the selected images and each of the criteria of the operational framework, multivariate regression analysis was used based on the Stepwise method. In this research, the visually selected images from rural landscapes were evaluated using multi-stage image evaluation techniques with questionnaire and T-Test and regression analysis were used to analyze the results of the questionnaires. Findings of this research provide qualitative criteria and indicators affecting the visual evaluation of rural landscapes as well as introducing the indicators with the highest impact in this research which includes "Visual area", "Earth in Landscape", "Lack of Visual Disruption", "Existence of Spectacular, Unique and Symbolic Elements", and "Distribution of Landscape Characteristics". Following the explanation of rural landscape evaluation indicators, the results show that each of the presented indicators has different degrees of effectiveness in evaluating rural landscape images. Therefore, identifying indicators based on the degree of effectiveness can be a useful guide for rural landscape planners and designers.

Keywords

References

-  احمدی میرقائد، فضل‌الله، و محمدزاده، مرجان (1396). بررسی و شناسایی عناصر مهم و مؤثر در ارزیابی کیفیت زیبایی‌شناختی انواع سیمای سرزمین. انسان و محیط‌زیست، 15(3)، 59- 72.
-  تقوایی، سید حسن (1392). منظر روستایی و جلوه‌های پرداخت محیط طبیعی، مسکن و محیط روستا، 143، 15- 38.
-  حیدری، ابوالفضل، معماریان، غلامحسـین، محمد مرادی، اصغر، و حسینعلی‌پور، سید مصطفی (1393). بررســی امکان‌پذیری شیوه‌های بـومی اسـتفاده از بـاد در جهـت بهبـود هویت در معماری مسکن روستایی امروز سیستان. همایش ملی معماری، شهرسازی و توسعه پایدار، مشهد.
-  عنابستانی، علی‌اکبر، و جهانتیغ، حسنعلی (1397). بررسی عوامل مؤثر بر تجلی حس زیباشناختی سکونتگاه‌های روستایی منطقه سیستان. مسکن و محیط روستا، 37(۱۶۳)،  75-90.
-  کوکبی، لیلا (1398). واکاوی ویژگی‌های بنیادین منظر روستایی در راستای پایداری محیطی از طریق کاربست نظریه زمینه‌ای، موردپژوهی: روستای تاریخی فورگ. محیط‌شناسی، 45(4)، 661-675.
-  مهدی‌نژاد، جمال‌الدین، شرقی، علی، و اسدپور، فائزه (۱۳۹۸). مروری بر اندیشه نظریه‌پردازان جهت واکاوی مفهوم زیبایی‌شناسی بصری مؤثر بر کیفیت ادراک مردم از مناظر روستایی. اولین همایش بین‌المللی و پنجمین همایش معماری و شهرسازی پایدار، تهران.
-   Ahas, R., Aasa, A., Silm, S., & Roosaare, J. (2005). Seasonal indicators and seasons of Estonian landscapes. Landscape Research, 30, 173 – 191.
-   Appleton, J. (1975). The Experience of Landscapes .Chichester: Wiley.
-   Arriaza, M., Canas-Ortega, J. F., Canas-Madueno, J. A., & Ruiz-Aviles, P. (2004). Assessing the visual quality of rural landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69, 115 – 125.
-   Asur, F. (2019). An Evaluation of Visual Landscape Quality of Coastal Settltments: A Case Study of Coastal Areas in the Van Lake Basin, Ecology and Environmental Research, 17(2), 1849-1864. DOI: 10.15666/aeer/1702_18491864.
-   Aşur, F., Deniz, S., & Yazici, K. (2020). Visual Preferences Assessment of Landscape Character Types Using Data Mining Methods (Apriori Algorithm): The Case of Altınsaç and Inkoy. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology,22, 247-260.
-   Bell, S. (1999). Landscape: Pattern, Perception and Process. London: Spon.
-   Clay, G. R., & Daniel, T. C. (2000). Scenic landscape assessment: the effects of land management jurisdiction on public perception of scenic beauty. Landscape and Urban Planning, 49(1-2), 1–13.
-   Darlington, J. (2002). Mapping Lancashire’s historic landscape: the Lancashire Historic Landscape Characterisation programme. In G. Fairclough & S. Rippon (Eds.), Europe’s Cultural Landscape: Archaeologists and the Management of Change (97 – 105). Brussels and London: Europae Archaeologiae Consilium and English Heritage.
-   De la Fuente de Val, G.,  Atauri, J. A., & de Lucio, J. V. (2006). Relationship between landscape visual attributes and spatial pattern indices: a test study in Mediterranean-climate landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 77, 393 – 407.
-   Dole, J. C. (2018). Cascade Head Scenery and Change: Cascade Head Law and Our Evolving Understanding of Scenery and Landscape. In Gobster, Paul H.; Smardon, Richard C., (Eds). Visual resource stewardship conference proceedings: landscape and seascape management in a time of change. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-P-183 (176-185). Newtown Square, PA: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station. 
-   Dramstad, W. E., Fjellheim, W. J., Skar, B., Helliksen, W., Sollund, M. L. B., Tveit, M. S., Geelmuyden, A. K. & Framstad, E. (2001) Integrating landscape-based values—Norwegian monitoring of agricultural landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 57, 257 – 268.
-   Fairclough, G., Lambrick, G., & Hopkins, D. (2002). Historic landscape characterisation in England and a Hampshire case study. In G. Fairclough & S. Rippon (Eds.), Europe’s Cultural Landscape: Archaeologists and the Management of Change (69 – 83). Europae Archaeologiae Consilium.
-   Fairclough, G., Lambrick, G., & McNab, A. (1999).Yesterday’s World, Tomorrow Landscape: The English Heritage Historic Landscape Project 1992 – 94. London: English Heritage.
-   Fines, K.D. (1968). Landscape evaluation: A research project in East Sussex. Regional Studies, 2, 41-55.
-   Fitry Rosley. M.S., Lamit, H., & Abdul Rahman, S.R. (2013). Perceiving the Aesthetic Value of the Rural Landscape through Valid Indicators. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 85, 318 – 331.
-   Fry. G., Tveit. M.S., Ode. A., & Velarde, M.D. (2009). The ecology of visual landscapes: Exploring the conceptual common ground of visual and ecological landscape indicators. Ecological Indicators, 9, 933-947.
-   Gulinck, G., Mu´ gica, M., de Lucio, J. V., & Atauri, J. A. (2001). A framework for comparative landscape analysis and evaluation based on land cover data, with an application in the Madrid region (Spain). Landscape and Urban Plannign,55, 257 – 270.
-   Häfner, K., Zasada, I., Van Zanten, B., Ungaro, F., Koetse, M., & Piorr, A. (2017). Assessing landscape preferences: a visual choice experiment in the agricultural region of Märkische Schweiz, Germany. Landscape Research, 43(6), 846-861.
-   Hagerhall, C. M., Purcell, T., & Taylor, R. (2004). Fractal dimension of landscape silhouette outlines as a predictor of landscape preference. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 247 – 255.
-   Hammitt, W. E., Patterson, M. E., & Noe, F. P. (1994). Identifying and predicting visual preference of Southern Appalachian forest recreation vistas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 29, 171 – 183.
-   Hauser, L., Van der Sluis, T., & Giezen, M. (2016).The Role of Farm Management Characteristics in Understanding the Spatial Distribution of Landscape Elements: A Case Study in the Netherlands. Rural Landscapes: Society, Environment, History, 3(1), 1-15.
-   Holm, I. (2006). Ideas and beliefs in architecture and industrial design. Oslo: Oslo School of Architecture and Design.
-   Jessel, B. (2006). Elements, characteristics and character: information functions of landscapes in terms of indicators. Ecological Indicators, 6, 153 – 167.
-   Kaplan, S., & Kaplan, R. (1982). Cognition and Environment: Functioning in an Uncertain World. New York: Praeger.
-   Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The Experience of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-   Kellert, S. R., & Wilson, E. O. (1993). The Biophilia Hypothesis. Washington, DC: Island Press/Shearwater Books.
-   Kuiper, J. (2000). A checklist approach to evaluate the contribution of organic farms to landscape quality. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 77, 143 – 156.
-   Litton, R. B. (1972). Aesthetic dimensions of the landscape, In J.V. Krutilla (Ed.), Natural Environments: Studies in Theoretical and Applied Analysis (262 – 291). Resources for the Future, John Hopkins Press.
-   Lowenthal, D. (1979). Age and artefact, in D. W. Meining (Ed.), the Interpretation of Ordinary Landscapes, Geographical Essays (103 – 128). Oxford University Press.
-   Lowenthal, D. (1985). The Past is a Foreign Country. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-   Lynch, K. (1960). The Image of the City . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press & Harvard University Press.
-   Markova, M. (2013). Latgale upland church everyday landscape in development and growth of region and society. Proceedings of the Latvia University of Agriculture Landscape Architecture and Art, 3(3), 83-89.
-   Misthos, L.M., Nakos, B., Krassanakis, V., & Menegaki, M.  (2019).The effect of topography and elevation on viewsheds in mountain landscapes using geovisualization. International Journal of Cartography, 5(1), 44-66.
-   Morgan, R. (1999). Some factors affecting coastal landscape aesthetic quality assessment. Landscape Research, 24, 167 – 184.
-   Nassauer, J. I. (1995). Messy ecosystems, orderly frames. Landscape Journal, 14, 161 – 170.
-   Ode, A., Tveit, M.S., & Fry, G. (2008). Capturing Landscape Visual Character Using Indicators: Touching Base with Landscape Aesthetic Theory. Landscape Research, 33(1), 89-117.
-   Ojeda, C.G. (2018). Visual scale and Naturalness of Roadside Vegetation Landscape. An exploratory study at Pargua Highway, Puerto Montt – Chile. LO (Landscape Online), 58, 1-12.
-   Palmer, J. F. (2004). Using spatial metrics to predict scenic perception in a changing landscape: Dennis, Massachusetts. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69, 201 – 218.
-   Pérez, J.G. (2002). Ascertaining landscape perceptions and preferences with pair-wise photographs: planning rural tourism in Extremadura, Spain. Landscape Res, 27, 297-308.
-   Pouta, E., Grammatikopoulou, I., Hurme, T., Soini, K. & Uusitalo, M. (2014). Assessing the Quality of Agricultural Landscape Change with Multiple Dimensions. Land, 3, 598-616.
-   Roth, M. (2006).Validating the use of Internet survey techniques in visual landscape assessment- An empirical study from Germany. Landscape and Urban Planning, 78(3), 179-192.
-   Schmidhuber, J. (2007). Simple algorithmic principles of discovery, subjective beauty, selective attention, curiosity and creativity. Discovery Science, 4755, 26-38.
-   Sheppard, S. R. J. (2001). Beyond Visual Resource Management: Emerging Theories of an Ecological Aesthetic and Visible Stewardship. IUFRO Research Series, 6, 149 – 172
-   Shuttleworth, S. (1980). The evaluation of landscape quality. Landscape Research, 5, 14-20.
-   Taylor, P. D. (2002). Fragmentation and cultural landscapes: tightening the relationship between human beings and the environment. Landscape and Urban Planning, 58, 93 – 99
-   Tuan, Y. (1974). Topophilia. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
-   Tveit, M.S. (2009). Indicators of visual scale as predictors of landscape preference; a comparison between groups. Journal of Environmental Management, 90, 2882–2888.
-   Tveit, M., Ode, Å., & Fry, G. (2006). Key concepts in a framework for analysing visual landscape character.Landscape Research, 31(3), 229–255.
-   Ulrich, R. S. (1979). Visual landscapes and psychological well-being. Landscape Research, 4, 14 – 23.
-   Ulrich, R. S. (1984). View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science, 224, 420 – 421.
-   Van Mansvelt, J. D. & Kuiper, J. (1999). Criteria for the humanity realm: psychology and physiognomy and cultural heritage. Checklist for Sustainable Landscape Management, 116 – 134.
-   Vining, J., Daniel, T. C., & Schroeder, H. W. (1984). Predicting scenic values in forested residential landscapes. Journal of Leisure Research, 16, 124 – 135.
-   Vouligny, É., Domon, G., Ruiz, J. (2009). An assessment of ordinary landscapes by an expert and by its residents: Landscape values in areas of intensive agricultural use. Land Use Policy, 26, 890–900.
-   Weinstoerffer, J., & Girardin, P. (2000). Assessment of the contribution of land use pattern and intensity to landscape quality: use of a landscape indicator. Ecological Modelling, 130, 95 – 109.
-   Winchcombe, J., & Revell, G. (2004). Farm forestry and landscape architecture: a feasibility study. Canberra: RIRDC.
-   Xiao, H., Liu, Y., Li, L., Yu, Z., & Zhang, X. (2018). Spatial Variability of Local Rural Landscape Change under Rapid Urbanization in Eastern China. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf, 7, 231, 1-16.
-   Zaleskienė, E., & Grazuleviciute, V.I. (2014). Landscape Aesthetics Theories in Modeling the Image of the Rurban Landscape. Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering, 2(7), 10-21.
-   Zube, E. H., Sell, J. L., & Taylor, J. G. (1982). Landscape perception: Research, application and theory. Landscape Planning, 9, 1-33.
Journal of Architecture and Urban Planning
Volume 13, Issue 30
March 2021
Pages 81-98

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics