Complexity as an indicator of aesthetic quality of landscape

• Autorzy: Orzechowska-Szajda I.

Warianty tytułu

PL

Złożoność jako wskaźnik jakości estetycznej krajobrazu

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The purpose of the article is to describe the complexity index as a quantitative parameter and indicate the position in the hierarchy of factors affecting urban riverside landscape on the example of the Odra River in Wroclaw.

PL

Celem niniejszego artykułu jest opisanie wskaźnika złożoność jako parametru ilościowego oraz wskazanie miejsca w hierarchii czynników oddziałujących na wartość krajobrazu nadrzecznego miast na przykładzie Odry we Wrocławiu.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

landscape complexity; aesthetic quality of landscape; landscape indicators; rough sets theory

PL

złożoność krajobrazu; jakość estetyczna krajobrazu; wskaźniki krajobrazu; teoria zbiorów przybliżonych

• Wydawca: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Krakowskiej im. Tadeusza Kościuszki
• Czasopismo: Czasopismo Techniczne. Architektura
• Rocznik: 2014
• Tom: R. 111, z. 10-A
• Strony: 81--93
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 40 poz., tab., wz., il.

Twórcy

autor

Orzechowska-Szajda I.

• Institute of Landscape Architecture, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences

Bibliografia

• [1] Arriaza M., Cañas-Ortega J.F., Cañas-Madueño J.A., Ruiz-Aviles P., Assessing the visual quality of rural landscapes, Landscape and Urban Planning, 69, 2004, 115-125.
• [2] Bishop I., Comparing regression and neural net based approaches to modelling of scenic beauty, Landscape and Urban Planning, 34, 1996, 125-134.
• [3] Bishop I., Hulse D., Prediction of scenic using mapped data and geographic information systems, Landscape and Urban Planning, 1994, 59-70.
• [4] Bondar-Nowakowska E., Dejas D., Reinhard A., Określenie hierarchii czynników wpływających na czas napełniania łyżki maszyny Pelikan przy odmulaniu cieków z zastosowaniem teorii zbiorów przybliżonych, Przegląd Naukowy Wydziału Melioracji i Inżynierii Środowiska, Szkoła Główna Gospodarstwa Wiejskiego w Warszawie, Warszawa 1996.
• [5] Bondar-Nowakowska E., Dejas D., Zarządzanie ryzykiem ekologicznym na przykładzie robót konserwacyjnych na ciekach, Roczniki Akademii Rolniczej w Poznaniu CCCLXV, Melior. Inż. Środ., 26, 2000, 57-62.
• [6] Buhyoff G.J., Riesenmann M.F., Experimental manipulation of dimensionality in landscape preference judgements: a quantitative validation, Leisure Sciences, 2, 1979, 236.
• [7] Crawford D., Using remotely sensed data in landscape visual quality assessment, Landscape and Urban Planning, 30, 1994, 71-81.
• [8] Daniel T., Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century, Landscape and Urban Planning, 56, 2001, 267-281.
• [9] De la Fuente de Val G., Atauri J.A., De Lucio J.V., Relationship between landscape visual attributes and spatial pattern indices: A test study in Mediterranean-climate landscapes, Landscape and Urban Planning, 77, 4, 2006, 393-407.
• [10] DeZonia B., Mladenoff D.J., Computer software program produced by the authors at the Department of Forest Ecology & Management, Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin, IAN 1.0.15, 2004 (http://landscape.forest.wisc.edu/projects/ian/).
• [11] Fjellstad W.J., Dramstad W.E., Strand G.H., Fry G.L.A., Heterogeneity as a measure of spatial pattern for monitoring agricultural landscapes, Norwegian Journal of Geography, 55, 2001, 71-76.
• [12] Francès R., Psychologie de L’art et de L’esthetique, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1968, [za:] G. De la Fuente de Val, J.A. Atauri, J.V. De Lucio, Relationship between landscape visual attributes and spatial pattern indices: A test study in Mediterranean-climate landscapes, Landscape and Urban Planning, 77, 4, 2006, 393-407.
• [13] Fry G., Tveita M.S., Ode A., Velarde M.D., The ecology of visuallandscapes: Exploring the conceptual common ground of visual and ecological landscape indicators, Ecological Indicators, 9, 5, 2009, 933-947.
• [14] Hachoł J., Bondar-Nowakowska E., Reinhard A., Oddziaływanie wybranych elementów koryta cieku na zbiorowiska naczyniowych roślin wodnych, Infrastruktura i Ekologia Terenów Wiejskich, 7/2008, Polska Akademia Nauk, Oddział w Krakowie, 255-266.
• [15] Hammitt W., Patterson M., Noe F., Identifying and predicting visual preference of southern Appalachian forest recreation vistas, Landscape and Urban Planning, 29, 1994, 171-183.
• [16] Hanyu K., Visual properties and affective appraisals in residential areas after dark, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17, 1997, 301-315.
• [17] Herzog F., Shier R., Complexity, age and building preference, Environment and Behavior, 32 (4), 2000, 557-575.
• [18] Kaplan R., Kaplan S., The Experience of Nature. A Psychological Perspective, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1989.
• [19] Litton R.B., Descriptive approaches to landscape analysis, [w:] G.H. Elsner, R.C. Smardon, Proceedings or Our National Landscape: A Conference on Applied Techniques for Analysis and Management of the Visual Resource, Incline Village, Nevada, April 23–25, 1979, 77-87.
• [20] McGarigal K., Cushman S.A., Neel M.C., Ene E., FRAGSTATS: Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for Categorical Maps, Amherst: Computer software program produced by the authors at the University of Massachusetts, 2002 (www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html).
• [21] Ode A., Tveit M., Fry G., Capturing landscapevisual character using indicators: touching base with landscape aesthetic theory, Landscape Research, 33, 2008, 89-118.
• [22] Opdam P., Foppen R., Vos C., Bridging the gap between ecology and spatial planning in landscape ecology, Landscape Ecology, 16, 2002, 767-779.
• [23] Orzechowska-Szajda I., Kształtowanie przestrzeni na styku miasto-rzeka. Model waloryzacji miejskich krajobrazów nadrzecznych, Rozprawa doktorska napisana w Instytucie Architektury Krajobrazu Uniwersytetu Przyrodniczego we Wrocławiu pod opieką dr. hab. T.J. Nowaka, prof. nadzw., Wrocław 2009.
• [24] Palmer J.F., Predicting scenic perceptions in a changing landscape: Dennis, Massachusetts, Landscape and Urban Planning, 2004, 201-218.
• [25] Pawlak Z., Rough sets. Intern. Ministra. of Information and Computer Sciences, Nr 11 (5), 1982.
• [26] Peterson G., Evaluating the quality of the wilderness environment, Environment and Behavior, 6, 1974, 169-193.
• [27] Purcell T., Lamb R., Preference and naturalness: an ecological approach, Landscape and Urban Planning, 42, 1998, 57-66.
• [28] Schutte N., Mallouff J., Preference for complexity in natural landscape scenes Percept, Motor Skills, 1986, 109-110, [za:] G. De la Fuente de Val, J.A. Atauri, J.V. De Lucio, Relationship between landscape visual attributes and spatial pattern indices: A test study in Mediterranean-climate landscapes, Landscape and Urban Planning, 77, 4, 2006, 393-407.
• [29] Silva J.B., Saraiva M.G., Ramos L., Bernardo F., Monteiro F., Identification of parameters to be monitored for aesthetic assessment, Urban River Basin Enhancement Methods, Lisbona 2003.
• [30] Scott A., Assessing public perception of landscape: the LANDMAP experience, Landscape Research, 7 (3), 2002, 271-295.
• [31] Słowiński R., Intelligent decision support. Applications and advances of the rough sets theory, Kluwer Academic Publ., Dordrecht 1992.
• [32] Staats H., Gatersleben B., Hartig T., Change in mood as a function of environmental design: arousal and pleasure on a simulated forest hike, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1997, 283-300.
• [33] Stamps A., A paradigm for distinguishing significant from non-significant visual impacts: theory, implementation, case histories, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 17, 1997, 249-293.
• [34] Todorova A., Asakawa S., Aikoh T., Preferences for and attitudes towards street flowers and trees in Sapporo, Japan, Landscape and Urban Planning, 69, 2004, 403-416.
• [35] Tress B., Tress G., Decamps H., d’Hauteserre A.-M., Bridging human and natural sciences in landscape research, Landscape and Urban Planning, 57, 2001, 137-141.
• [36] Tress G., Tress B., Fry G., Analysis of the barriers to integration in landscape research projects, Land Use Policy, 24, 2007, 374-386.
• [37] Tveit M., Ode, Fry G., Key concepts in a framework for analysing visuallandscape character, Landscape Research, 31, 2006, 229-256.
• [38] Weinstoerffer J, Girardin P., Assessment of the contribution of land use pattern and intensity to landscape quality: use of a landscape indicator, Ecological Modelling, 2000, 95-109.
• [39] Wissen U., Schroth O., Lange E., Schmid W.A., Approaches to integrating indicators into 3D landscape visualisations and their benefits for participative planning situations, Journal of Environmental Management, 89 (3), 2008, 184-196.
• [40] Wohlwill J., Environmental aesthetics: the environment as a source of affect, Human Behavior and Environment, 1, 1976, 37-86.