Landscapes and Natural Environments

Introduction

As commonly used in behavioural research, ‘natural environment’ refers to a large outdoor area with little or no apparent evidence of human presence or intervention (Pitt & Zube, 1987). In contrast, ‘landscape’ refers to a view over or into an area of land, or the area and landforms encompassed by a view (Daniel, 2001). Although research and practical efforts may focus on a landscape as the visual aspect of a natural environment, definitions of landscape often eschew the human exclusion criterion typically used in defining a natural environment. Landscape designations such as ‘cultural’, ‘pastoral’, and ‘natural’ imply varying degrees of human involvement.

In line with these definitions, most landscape assessment work treats the person as a viewer, whereas assessments concerning natural environments commonly treat people as visitors seeking an appropriate setting for outdoor recreation activities, including but not limited to viewing scenery. Work in both areas serves descriptive and evaluative purposes (Craik & Feimer, 1987). Whether relying on experts, technical devices, and/or perceptual capabilities of an appropriate panel of human observers, descriptive assessments characterize landscapes and natural/recreational settings in terms of physical or other attributes that are grounded in some conception of environmental quality, such as scenic beauty. Evaluative assessments document observer responses to landscapes or natural/recreational settings using criterion variables that reflect on an underlying conception of environmental quality, such as ratings of scenic beauty or the importance of escape from stressors. Together, descriptive and evaluative assessments can provide a basis for predicting public responses to changes in the environment.

Pressing concerns about human impacts on the possibilities for realizing valued outcomes drive much of the assessment work on landscape and natural environments. Human activities can add to scenic and other amenity values, or they can diminish or destroy them. Recent decades have seen demand for buildable land, natural resources, and infrastructure increase alongside demand for outdoor recreation. Environmental policies in many countries now direct environmental managers to weigh the demands of competing uses and users. To fulfil this responsibility, managers need information on how users experience and evaluate not only environments as they now exist, but also environmental changes associated with different management alternatives.

Approaches and Theories

Daniel and Vining (1983; see also Daniel, 2001) overview several landscape assessment [Page 530]approaches. Ecological and formal aesthetic approaches rely on biologists and other experts to classify landscapes using ecological or formal attributes as a basis for scenic quality judgements. For example, a landscape architect applying the Visual Management System (USDA, 1974) would render an area's features (e.g. rock outcroppings, lakes, streams, vegetation) in terms of form, line, colour and texture. He or she would then assign the area to one of three scenic quality categories according to the diversity of its formal attributes. When joined with other information, such as the number and type of users, the classification would support decisions about the suitability of activities that would alter the formal attributes of the landscape, such as timber cutting. Problems with expert approaches include the uncertain validity of chosen attributes as indicators of visual quality; potential disagreement by experts on landscape classifications; lack of sensitivity to variations in visual quality given broad quality categories; and lack of public input despite differences between expert and public aesthetic preferences.

...