Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Methodological Issues in the Assessment of Landscape Quality

  • Chapter
Behavior and the Natural Environment

Part of the book series: Human Behavior and Environment ((HUBE,volume 6))

Abstract

The purpose of this chapter is to provide an overview of contemporary landscape-quality assessment methods. Several reviews of the pertinent literature are available (Arthur, Daniel, & Boster, 1977; Brush, 1976; Fabos, 1971; Feimer, 1983; Palmer, 1981; Redding, 1973; Wohlwill, 1976). However, research and application in landscape assessment is a very active field and new issues and methods appear frequently. Furthermore, the field has matured to a point where several different underlying conceptual models can be identified as a means for organizing and evaluating the growing number of specific methods and techniques.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Anderson, L. M. Land use designations affect perception of scenic beauty in forest landscapes. Forest Science, 1981, 27, 392–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arthur, L. M. Predicting scenic beauty of forest environment: Some empirical tests. Forest Science, 1977, 23, 151–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arthur, L. M., Daniel, T. C., & Boster, R. S. Scenic assessment: An overview. Landscape Planning, 1977, 4, 109–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brush, R. O. Perceived quality of scenic and recreational environments: Some methodological issues. In E. Zube & K. Craik (Eds.), Perceived environmental quality indices. New York: Plenum Press, 1976, pp. 47–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brush, R. O. The attractiveness of woodlands: Perceptions of forest landowners in Massachusetts. Forest Science, 1979, 25, 495–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brush, R. O., & Palmer, J. F. Measuring the impact of urbanization on scenic quality: Land use change in the northeast. In Our national landscape (USDA Forest Service Tech. Rep. PSW-35). Berkeley, Calif.: Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhyoff, G. J., & Leuschner, W. A. Estimating psychological disutility from damaged forest stands. Forest Science, 1978, 24, 424–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhyoff, G. J., & Riesenman, M. F. Experimental manipulation of dimensionality in landscape preference judgments: A quantitative validation. Leisure Sciences, 1979, 2, 221–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buhyoff, G. J., & Wellman, J. D. Landscape architect’s interpretation of people’s landscape preferences, Journal of Environmental Management, 1978, 6, 255–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhyoff, G., & Wellman, J. D. The specification of a non-linear psychophysical function for visual landscape dimensions. Journal of Leisure Research, 1980, 12, 257–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhyoff, G. J., Wellman, J. D., Harvey, H., & Fraser, R. A. Landscape architects’ interpretations of people’s landscape preferences. Journal of Environmental Management, 1978, 6, 255–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhyoff, G. J., Arndt, L. K., & Probst, D. B. Interval scaling of landscape preference by direct and indirect measurement methods. Landscape Planning, 1981, 8, 257–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buhyoff, G. J., Wellman, J. D., & Daniel, T. C. Predicting scenic quality for mountain pine beetle and western spruce budworm damaged vistas. Forest Science, 1982, 28, 827–838.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, I., & Kates, R. W. The perception of natural hazards in resource management. Natural Resources Journal, 1964, 3, 412–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, A. A. On the possibility of quantifying scenic beauty. Landscape Planning, 1977, 4, 131–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craik, K. H. Psychological factors in landscape appraisal. Environment and Behavior, 1972, 1, 255–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craik, K. H., & Feimer, N. R. Setting technical standards for visual impact assessment procedures. In Our national landscape (USDA Forest Service Tech. Rep. PSW-35). Berkeley, Calif.: Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, 1979, pp. 93–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craik, K., & Zube, E. (Eds.). Perceived environmental quality indices. New York: Plenum Press, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, T. C. Criteria for development and application of perceived environmental quality indices. In E. Zube & K. Craik (Eds.), Perceived environmental quality indices. New York: Plenum Press, 1976, pp. 27–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, T. C., & Boster, R. S. Measuring landscape aesthetics: The scenic beauty estimation method (USDA Forest Service Research Paper RM-167). Fort Collins, Colo.: Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, T. C., & Ittelson, W. H. Conditions for environmental perception research: Comment on “The psychological representation of molar physical environments” by Ward and Russell. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1981, 110, 153–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, T. C., & Schroeder, H. W. Scenic beauty estimation model: Predicting perceived beauty of forest landscapes. In Our national landscape (USDA Forest Service Tech. Rep. PSW-35). Berkeley, Calif.: Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, 1979, pp. 514–523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, T. C., & Zube, E. H. Assessment of esthetic resources. In T. C. Daniel, E. H. Zube, & B. L. Driver (Eds.), Assessing amenity resource values (USDA Forest Service Tech. Rep. RM-68). Fort Collins, Colo.: Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, 1979, pp. 2–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, T. C., Wheeler, L., Boster, R. S., & Best, P. Quantitative evaluation of landscapes: An application of signal detection analysis to forest management alterations. Man-Environment Systems, 1973, 3, 330–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, T. C., Anderson, L. M., Schroeder, H. W., & Wheeler, L. W., III. Mapping the scenic beauty of forest landscapes. Leisure Sciences, 1977, 1, 35–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, T. C., Buhyoff, G. J., & Wellman, J. D. Assessment of public perceptions and values regarding mountain pine beetle and western spruce budworm impact in the Colorado Front Range (Final Report, Cooperative Agreement No. 16-930-Gr). Fort Collins, Colo.: Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dearinger, J. A. Measuring preferences for natural landscapes. Journal of the Urban Planning and Development Division, 1979, 105, 63–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabos, J. G. An analysis of enviornmental quality ranking systems in recreation. In USDA Forest Service, Recreation symposium proceedings. Upper Darby, Pa.: Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, 1971, pp. 40–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fechner, G. Elements of psychophysics, 1860. (H. E. Adler, trans.) New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feimer, N. R. Environmental perception and cognition in rural contexts. In A. W. Childs & G. B. Melton (Eds.), Rural psychology. New York: Plenum Press, 1983, pp. 113–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feimer, N. R., Smardon, R. C., & Craik, K. H. Evaluating the effectiveness of observer-based visual resource and impact assessment methods. Landscape Research, 1981, 6, 12–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, D. M., & Swetts, V. A. Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, R. B., & Buhyoff, G. J. On the law of comparative judgment: Scaling with intransitive observers and multidimensional stimuli. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1981, 41, 1083–1089.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, R. H., Hudman, L. E., & England, J. L. Assessment of the environmental impact of high voltage power transmission lines. Journal of Environmental Management, 1978, 6, 153–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. Some methods and strategies in the prediction of preference. In E. H. Zube, R. O. Brush, & J. A. Fabos (Eds.), Landscape assessment: Values, perceptions, and resources. Stroudsburg, Pa.: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, 1975, pp. 118–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, S. An informal model for the prediction of preference. In E. H. Zube, R. O. Brush, & J. A. Fabos (Eds.), Landscape assessment: Values, perceptions, and resources. Stroudsburg, Pa.: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, 1975, pp. 92–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, S., Kaplan, R., & Wendt, J. S. Rated preference and complexity for natural and urban visual material. Perception and Psychophysics, 1972, 12, 354–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latimer, D. A., Daniel, T. C., & Hogo, H. Relationship between air quality and human perception of scenic areas. San Rafael, Calif.: Systems Application, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latimer, D. A., Hogo, H., & Daniel, T. C. The effects of atmospheric optical conditions on perceived scenic beauty. Atmospheric Environment, 1981, 15, 1865–1874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leopold, L. B. Landscape esthetics. Natural History, 1969, 78, 36–45. (a)

    Google Scholar 

  • Leopold, L. B. Quantitative comparison of some aesthetic factors among rivers (U. S. Geological Survey Circular 620). Washington, D.C.: U. S. Department of the Interior, 1969. (b)

    Google Scholar 

  • Leopold, L. B., & Marchand, M. O. On the quantitative inventory of the riverscape. Water Resources Research, 1968, 4, 709–717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Litton, R. B., Jr. Forest landscape description and inventories: A basis for land planning and design (USDA Forest Service Research Paper DSW-49). Berkeley, Calif.: Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowenthal, D. Research in environmental perception and behavior: Perspectives on current problems. Environment and Behavior, 1972, 4, 333–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowenthal, D., & Riel, M. The nature of perceived and imagined environments. Environment and Behavior, 1972, 4, 189–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, K. The image of the city. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1960.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malm, W., Kelley, K., Molenar, J., & Daniel, T. Human perception of visual air quality (uniform haze). Atmospheric Environment, 1981, 15, 1875–1890.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McHarg, I. L. Design with nature. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, J. Approaches for assessing visual quality and visual impacts. In K. Finsterbusch & C. P. Wolf (Eds.), Methodology of social impact assessment. Stroudsburg, Pa.: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, 1981, pp. 284–301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitt, D. G., & Zube, E. H. The Q-sort method: Use in landscape assessment research and landscape planning. In Our national landscape (USDA Forest Service Tech. Rep. PSW-35). Berkeley, Calif.: Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redding, M. J. Aesthetics in environmental planning. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saarinen, T. F. Perception of drought hazard on the Great Plains (Research paper 106). Chicago: University of Chicago, Department of Geography, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saarinen, T. F., & Cooke, R. V. Public perception of environmental quality in Tucson, Arizona. Journal of the Arizona Academy of Science, 1971, 6, 260–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schomaker, J. H. Measurement of preferences for proposed landscape modifications. In T. C. Daniel, E. H. Zube, & B. L. Driver (Eds.), Assessing amenity resource values (USDA Forest Service Tech. Rep. RM-68). Fort Collins, Colo.: Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, 1979, pp. 67–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder, H. W. The effect of perceived conflict on evaluations of natural resource management goals. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1981, 1, 61–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder, H. W., & Daniel, T. C. Predicting the scenic quality of forest road corridors. Environment and Behavior, 1980, 12, 349–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder, H. W., & Daniel, T. C. Progress in predicting the perceived scenic beauty of forest landscapes. Forest Science, 1981, 27, 71–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seamon, D. A geography of the lifeworld. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shafer, E. L., & Brush, R. O. How to measure preferences for photographs of natural landscapes. Landscape Planning, 1977, 4, 237–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shafer, E. L., & Richards, T. A. A comparison of viewer reactions to outdoor scenes and photographs of those scenes (USDA Forest Service Research Paper NE-302). Upper Darby, Pa.: Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shafer, E. L., Hamilton, J. F., & Schmidt, E. A. Natural landscape preferences: A predictive model. Journal of Leisure Research, 1969, 1, 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thurstone, L. L. A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review, 1927, 34, 278–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgerson, W. S. Theory and methods of scaling. New York: Wiley, 1958.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuan, Y. Topophilia: A study of environmental perception, attitudes, and values. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, R. S. Visual landscape preference: A model and application. Man—Environment Systems, 1977, 7, 279–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • USDA Forest Service. National forest landscape management, Volume 2 (Agriculture Handbook No. 462). Washington, D. C: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, L. M., & Russell, J. A. The psychological representation of molar physical environments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1981, 110, 121–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wohlwill, J. F. Environmental aesthetics: The environment as a source of affect. In I. Altaian & J. F. Wohlwill (Eds.), Human behavior and environment (Vol. 1). New York: Plenum Press, 1976, pp. 37–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wohlwill, J. F. What belongs where: Research on fittingness of man-made structures in natural settings. In T. C. Daniel, E. H. Zube, & B. L. Driver (Eds.), Assessing amenity resource values (USDA Forest Service Tech. Rep. RM-68). Fort Collins, Colo,: Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, 1979, pp. 48–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zube, E. H. Rating everyday rural landscapes of the northeastern U.S. Landscape Architecture, 1973, 63, 370–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zube, E. H. Cross-disciplinary and intermode agreement on the description and evaluation of landscape resources. Environment and Behavior, 1974, 6, 69–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zube, E. H., Pitt, D. D., & Anderson, T. W. Perception and measurement of scenic resources in the Southern Connecticut River Valley (Institute of Man and His Environment Publication R-74-1). Amherst: University of Massachusetts, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zube, E. H., Sell, J. L., & Taylor, J. G. Landscape perception: Research, application and theory. Landscape Planning, 1982, 9, 1–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, 85721, USA

    Terry C. Daniel & Joanne Vining

Authors
  1. Terry C. Daniel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joanne Vining
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA

    Irwin Altman

  2. Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA

    Joachim F. Wohlwill

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1983 Plenum Press, New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Daniel, T.C., Vining, J. (1983). Methodological Issues in the Assessment of Landscape Quality. In: Altman, I., Wohlwill, J.F. (eds) Behavior and the Natural Environment. Human Behavior and Environment, vol 6. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-3539-9_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-3539-9_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-3541-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4613-3539-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation