Assessing the visual impacts of surface mining: a systematic review

• Autorzy: Menegaki Maria

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.32933/ActaInnovations.37.2

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This paper provides a systematic review of the methodologies used to evaluate the visual impacts of surface mining. The main objectives are: (a) to analyse the scientific literature and identify the most important issues and the methods and tools used; (b) to conduct an analysis using descriptive of statistical methods and qualitative interpretation; and (c) to evaluate the state of knowledge on this particular topic and identify gaps in the literature, to suggest future research directions. The findings of the analysis suggest that there is no single method capable of integrating all dimensions of the landscape and, thus, future research should put more emphasis on incorporating as many factors contributing to the visual impact of mining as possible towards developing holistic approaches.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

visual impact; landscape changes; mining; quarrying; systematic review

PL

efekt wizualny; zmiany krajobrazu; górnictwo; wydobywanie; analiza systematyczna

• Wydawca: Centrum Badań i Innowacji Pro-Akademia ; Ukrainian Academy of Sciences - Research and Development Centre for Industrial Problems of Development
• Czasopismo: Acta Innovations
• Rocznik: 2020
• Tom: no. 37
• Strony: 21--35
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 75 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Menegaki Maria

• School of Mining and Metallurgy Engineering, National Technical University of Athens 9, Iroon Polytechniou str, 15780 Zografou, Greece

Bibliografia

• [1] Dentoni V, Grosso B, Massacci G. Assessment of visual impact due to surface mining with the Lvi method. Legis. Technol. Pract. Mine L. Reclam. - Proc. Beijing Int. Symp. L. Reclam. Ecol. Restoration, Lr. 2014, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Architecture, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy: 2015, p. 527-34.
• [2] Menegaki ME, Kaliampakos DC. Evaluating mining landscape: A step forward. Ecological Engineering 43 (2012), 26-33.
• [3] Menegaki M, Koutiva I, Kaliampakos D. Assessing the chromatic contrast in open surface excavations: a comparative study between subjective and quantitative approaches. International Journal of Mining, Reclamation and Environment 29 (2015), 112-24.
• [4] USDA. The Visual Management System. National Forest Landscape Management. Agricultur. Washington.: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1973.
• [5] Bureau of Land Management. Visual Resource Management. Manual 840. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, U.S.A. Government Printing Office; 1980.
• [6] Province of British Columbia. Visual Landscape Inventory: Proceedings and Standards Manual. 1997.
• [7] Dentoni V, Massacci G, Radwanek-Bak BD. Visual impact of quarrying in the Polish Carpathians. Geological Quartarly 50 (2006), 383-390.
• [8] Fagiewicz K, Łowicki D. The dynamics of landscape pattern changes in mining areas: The case study of the Adamów-Koźmin Lignite Basin. Quaestiones Geographicae 38 (2019), 151-162.
• [9] Lippiello D, Degan GA, Pinzari M. Landscape changes due to quarrying activities as a project parameter for urban planning. International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning 10 (2015), 843-862.
• [10] Menegaki ME, Kaliampakos DC. Landscape analysis as a tool for surface mining design. Environmental and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science 33 (2006) 185-196.
• [11] Pinto V, Font X, Salgot M, Tapias J, Maná T. Image analysis applied to quantitative evaluation of chromatic impact generated by open-pit quarries and mines. Environmental Geology 41 (2002) 495-503.
• [12] Hutton B, Salanti G, Caldwell DM, Chaimani A, Schmid CH, Cameron C, Ioannidis JPA, Straus S, Thorlund K, Jansen JP, Mulrow C, Catalá-Lopez F, Gotzsche PC, Dickersin K, Boutron I, Altman, DG, Moher D. The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: Checklist and explanations. Annals of Internal Medicine 162 (2015), 777-784.
• [13] Cooper C, Booth A, Varley-Campbell J, Britten N, Garside R. Defining the process to literature searching in systematic reviews: A literature review of guidance and supporting studies. BMC Medical Research Methodology 18 (2018), 85.
• [14] Mengist W, Soromessa T, Legese G. Method for conducting systematic literature review and meta-analysis for environmental science research. MethodsX 7 (2020), 100777.
• [15] Snyder H. Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research 104 (2019), 333-339.
• [16] Tranfield D, Denyer D, Smart P. Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review. British Journal of Managment 14 (2003), 207-222.
• [17] Webster J, Watson RT. Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review. MIS Quartarly 26 (2002), xiii-xxiii.
• [18] Templier M, Paré G. A framework for guiding and evaluating literature reviews. Communications of Association for Information Systems 37 (2015), https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.03706.
• [19] Rousseau DM, Manning J, Denyer D. Evidence in Management and Organizational Science: Assembling the Field's Full Weight of Scientific Knowledge through Syntheses. Academy of Management Annals 2 (2011), 475-515.
• [20] Brandt JS, Buckley RC. A global systematic review of empirical evidence of ecotourism impacts on forests in biodiversity hotspots. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 32 (2018), 112-118.
• [21] Brooks J, Waylen KA, Mulder MB. Assessing community-based conservation projects: A systematic review and multilevel analysis of attitudinal, behavioral, ecological, and economic outcomes. Environmental Evidence 2 (2013), 2.
• [22] Timpane-Padgham BL, Beechie T, Klinger T. A systematic review of ecological attributes that confer resilience to climate change in environmental restoration. PLoS One 12 (2017), e0173812.
• [23] Clucas B, Parker ID, Feldpausch-Parker AM. A systematic review of the relationship between urban agriculture and biodiversity. Urban Ecosystems 21 (2018), 635-643.
• [24] De Araujo Barbosa CC, Atkinson PM, Dearing JA. Remote sensing of ecosystem services: A systematic review. Ecological Indicators 52 (2015), 430-443.
• [25] Harrison PA, Berry PM, Simpson G, Haslett JR, Blicharska M, Bucur M, Dunford R, Egoh B, Garcia-Llorente M, Geamana N, Geertsema W, Lommelen E, Meiresonne L, Turkelboom F, Linkages between biodiversity attributes and ecosystem services: A systematic review. Ecosystem Services 9 (2014), 191-203.
• [26] Himes-Cornell A, Pendleton L, Atiyah P. Valuing ecosystem services from blue forests: A systematic review of the valuation of salt marshes, sea grass beds and mangrove forests. Ecosystem Services 30 (2018), 36-48.
• [27] Lowry E, Rollinson EJ, Laybourn AJ, Scott TE, Aiello-Lammens ME, Gray SM, Mickley J, Gurevitch J. Biological invasions: A field synopsis, systematic review, and database of the literature. Ecology and Evolution 3 (2013), 182-196.
• [28] Mantyka-pringle CS, Martin TG, Rhodes JR. Interactions between climate and habitat loss effects on iodiversity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Glob Change Biology 18 (2012), 1239-1252.
• [29] Savilaakso S, Garcia C, Garcia-Ulloa J, Ghazoul J, Groom M, Guariguata MR, Laumonier Y, Nasi R, Petrokofsky G, Snaddon J, Zrust M. Systematic review of effects on biodiversity from oil palm production. Environmental Evidence 3 (2014), 4.
• [30] Shepard CC, Crain CM, Beck MW. The protective role of coastal marshes: A systematic review and metaanalysis. PLoS One 6 (2011) e27374.
• [31] Englund O, Berndes G, Cederberg C. How to analyse ecosystem services in landscapes—A systematic review. Ecological Indicators 73 (2017), 492-504.
• [32] Kabisch N, Qureshi S, Haase D. Human-environment interactions in urban green spaces - A systematic review of contemporary issues and prospects for future research. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 50 (2015), 25-34.
• [33] Plieninger T, Draux H, Fagerholm N, Bieling C, Bürgi M, Kizos T, Kuemmerle T, Primdahl J, Verburg PH, The driving forces of landscape change in Europe: A systematic review of the evidence. Land Use Policy 57 (2016), 204-214.
• [34] Simensen T, Halvorsen R, Erikstad L. Methods for landscape characterisation and mapping: A systematic review. Land Use Policy 75 (2018), 557-569.
• [35] Davis J, Mengersen K, Bennett S, Mazerolle L. Viewing systematic reviews and meta-analysis in social research through different lenses. Springerplus 3 (2014), 511.
• [36] Higgins JP, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Cochrane Book Series. 2008.
• [37] Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, G0tzsche PC, loannidis JPA, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. The BMJ, 339 (2009), b2700.
• [38] Palmatier RW, Houston MB, Hulland J. Review articles: purpose, process, and structure. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 46 (2018), 1-5.
• [39] Pullin AS, Stewart GB. Guidelines for systematic review in conservation and environmental management. Conservation Biology 20 (2006), 1647-1656.
• [40] Xiao Y, Watson M. Guidance on Conducting a Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Planning Educational Research 39 (2019), 93-112.
• [41] Berrang-Ford L, Pearce T, Ford JD. Systematic review approaches for climate change adaptation research. Regional Environmental Change 15 (2015), 755-769.
• [42] Collaboration for Environmental Evidence. Guidelines and Standards for Evidence Synthesis in Environmental Management Version 5.0. 2018.
• [43] Collaboration for Environmental Evidence. Guidelines for Systematic Review and Evidence Synthesis in Environmental Management. 2013.
• [44] Mongeon P, Paul-Hus A. The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics 106 (2016), 213-228.
• [45] Gutierrez Del Alamo LF, Chacon E. A methodology to evaluate the topographic visual alteration on Surface mining. International Journal of Surface Mining, Reclamation and Environment 12, 1 (1998), 41-45.
• [46] Hendrychová M, Kabrna M. An analysis of 200-year-long changes in a landscape affected by large-scale surface coal mining: History, present and future. Applied Geography 74 (2016), 151-159.
• [47] Lausch A, Herzog F. Applicability of landscape metrics for the monitoring of landscape change: Issues of scale, resolution and interpretability. Ecological Indicators 2, (2002), 3-15.
• [48] Lippiello D, Degan GA, De Agostini M, Pinzari M. Application of a multi stage method to assess the landscape alteration induced by quarrying sites: A comparative analysis. American Journal of Environmental Sciences 12 (2016), 317-327.
• [49] Mouflis GD, Gitas IZ, Iliadou S, Mitri GH. Assessment of the visual impact of marble quarry expansion (1984-2000) on the landscape of Thasos island, NE Greece. Landscape and Urban Planning 86, 1 (2008), 92-102.
• [50] Dentoni V, Massacci G. Assessment of visual impact induced by surface mining with reference to a case study located in Sardinia (Italy). Environmental Earth Sciences 68 (2013), 1485-1493.
• [51] Yang JJ. Detecting landscape changes pre-and post surface coal mining in Indiana, USA. Geographic Information Sciences 14 (2008), 36-43.
• [52] Zhang M, Wang J, Li S, Feng D, Cao E. Dynamic changes in landscape pattern in a large-scale opencast coal mine area from 1986 to 2015: A complex network approach. Catena 194 (2020), 104738.
• [53] Misthos L-M, Messaris G, Damigos D, Menegaki M. Exploring the perceived intrusion of mining into the landscape using the fuzzy cognitive mapping approach. Ecological Engineering 101 (2017), 60-74.
• [54] Misthos L-M, Pavlidis A, Karabassakis E, Menegaki M, Krassanakis V, Nakos B. Exploring the visual impact from open pit mines applying eye movement analyses on mining landscape photographs. International Journal of Mining, Reclamation and Environment 34 (2020), 609-624.
• [55] Upgupta S, Singh PK. Fragmented landscapes of east Bokaro coalfields: A remote sensing based approach highlighting forestland dynamics. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research 15 (2017), 1313-1326.
• [56] Lacina J. Functional differentiation of landscapes in the area of deep coal mining downsizing in the Ostrava region. Moravian Geographical Reports 14 (2006), 3-15.
• [57] Kharuk VL, Ranson KJ, Im ST, Fedotova E V. Impact of gold mining on Middle Siberian taiga landscapes from Landsat 7 data. Mapping Sciences and Remote Sensing 39 (2002), 139-156.
• [58] Quanyuan W, Jiewu P, Shanzhong Q, Yiping L, Congcong H, Tingxiang L, Limei H. Impacts of coal mining subsidence on the surface landscape in Longkou city, Shandong Province of China. Environmental Earth Sciences 59 (2009), 783-791.
• [59] Herzog F, Lausch A, MűIIer E, Thulke H-H, Steinhardt U, Lehmann S. Landscape metrics for assessment of landscape destruction and rehabilitation. Environmental Management 27 (2001), 91-107.
• [60] Fan Q, Ding S. Landscape pattern changes at a county scale: A case study in Fengqiu, Henan Province, China from 1990 to 2013. Catena 137 (2016), 152-160.
• [61] Wang Z, Lechner AM, Yang Y, Baumgartl T, Wu J. Mapping the cumulative impacts of long-term mining disturbance and progressive rehabilitation on ecosystem services. Science of The Total Environment 717 (2020), 137214.
• [62] Popelková R, Mulková M. Multitemporal aerial image analyesis for the monitoring of the processes in the landscape affected by deep coal mining. European Journal of Remote Sensing 49 (2016), 973-1009.
• [63] Csüllög G, Horvâth G, Tamâs L, Szabö M, Munkâcsy B. Quantitative Assessment of Landscape Load Caused by Mining Activity. European Countryside 9 (2017), 230-244.
• [64] Mavrommatis E, Menegaki M. Setting rehabilitation priorities for abandoned mines of similar characteristics according to their visual impact: The case of Milos Island, Greece. Journal of Sustainable Mining 16 (2017), 104-113.
• [65] Wu Z, Lei S, Lu Q, Bian Z, Ge S. Spatial distribution of the impact of surface mining on the landscape ecological health of semi-arid grasslands. Ecological Indicators 111 (2020), 105996.
• [66] Popelkovâ R, Mulkovâ M. The mining landscape of the Ostrava-Karvinâ coalfield: Processes of landscape change from the 1830s to the beginning of the 21st century. Applied Geography 90 (2018), 28-43.
• [67] Prush VB, Lohman RB. Time-varying elevation change at the centralia coal mine in centralia, Washington (USA), constrained with InSAR, ASTER, and optical imagery. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing 8 (2015), 919-925.
• [68] Dentoni V, Massacci G. Visibility of surface mining and impact perception. I International Journal of Mining, Reclamation and Environment 21 (2007), 6-13.
• [69] Dentoni V, Grosso B, Massacci G, Soddu GP. Visual impact evaluation of mines and quarries: the updated Lvi method. Environmental Earth Sciences 79 (2020), 100.
• [70] Alfaro Degan G, Lippiello D, Picciolo L, Pinzari M. Visual impact from quarrying activities: A case study for planning the residential development of surrounding areas. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, 181 (2014), 125-136.
• [71] Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal 26 (2009), 91-108.
• [72] European Commission. Commission Decision 2002/272/EC of 25 March 2002 establishing the ecological criteria for the award of the Community eco-label to hard floor-coverings. Official Journal of European Union 2002:13-27.
• [73] Dentoni V, Massacci G, Asquer C. Visibility of surface mining and impact perception. Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Mine Planning and Equipment Selection, MPES 2005 and the 5th International Conference on Computer Applications in the Minerals Industries, CAMI 2005, Department of Geoengineering and Environmental Technologies, University of Cagliari, Italy: 2005.
• [74] Brabyn L. Classifying landscape character. Landscape Research 34 (2009), 299-321.
• [75] Olwig KR, Dalglish C, Fairclough G, Herring P. Introduction to a special issue: the future of landscape characterisation, and the future character of landscape - between space, time, history, place and nature. Landscape Research 41 (2016), 169-174.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa Nr 461252 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2021).