Technical Papers
Mar 16, 2016

Assessing the Visual Aesthetic Quality of Vegetation Landscape in Urban Green Space from a Visitor’s Perspective

Publication: Journal of Urban Planning and Development
Volume 142, Issue 3

Abstract

Vegetation landscape is an important visual element of urban green space. This paper presents the results of an attempt to evaluate the visual aesthetic quality (VAQ) of urban vegetation landscape from the perspective of visitors. The research is conducted around the West Lake Scenic Area, Hangzhou, China. By quantitative survey, visual photo stimuli, and statistical analysis, the preference of visitors for different types of urban vegetation landscape in relation to their characteristics is presented, and the interactions between VAQ of urban vegetation landscape and landscape visual attributes are explored. The results demonstrate that education, place of residence, and professional background are especially significant characteristics that influence the preference of visitors for different types of urban vegetation landscape, and both strong color contrast and mixed use of evergreen and deciduous plants can increase the VAQ of urban vegetation landscape. To maintain good VAQ, it is recommended that vegetation structure, plant density, and height ratio should be carefully selected according to the type and function of vegetation landscape. The findings provide good advice for urban political determination and concepts of future vegetation landscape design.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

References

Acar, C., Kurdoglu, B. C., Kurdoglu, O., and Acar, H. (2006). “Public preferences for visual quality and management in the Kackar Mountains National Park (Turkey).” Int. J. Sustainable Dev. World Ecol., 13(6), 499–512.
Adinolfi, C., Suárez-Cáceres, G. P., and Carinanos, P. (2014). “Relation between visitors behaviour and characteristics of green spaces in the city of Granada, south-eastern Spain.” Urban Forest. Urban Green., 13(3), 534–542.
Akbar, K., Hale, W. H., and Headley, A. (2003). “Assessment of scenic beauty of the roadside vegetation in northern England.” Landscape Urban Plann., 63(3), 139–144.
Arriaza, M., Canas-Ortega, J., Canas-Madueno, J., and Ruiz-Aviles, P. (2004). “Assessing the visual quality of rural landscapes.” Landscape Urban Plann., 69(1), 115–125.
Arthur, L. M. (1977). “Predicting scenic beauty of forest environments: Some empirical tests.” Forest Sci., 23(2), 151–160.
Beza, B. B. (2010). “The aesthetic value of a mountain landscape: A study of the Mt. Everest trek.” Landscape Urban Plann., 97(4), 306–317.
Bjerke, T., Østdahl, T., Thrane, C., and Strumse, E. (2006). “Vegetation density of urban parks and perceived appropriateness for recreation.” Urban Forest. Urban Green., 5(1), 35–44.
Blasco, E., González-Olabarria, J. R., Rodriguéz-Veiga, P., Pukkala, T., Kolehmainen, O., and Palah, M. (2009). “Predicting scenic beauty of forest stands in Catalonia (north-east Spain).” J. Forest. Res., 20(1), 73–78.
Buhyoff, G. J., Gauthier, L. J., and Wellman, J. D. (1984). “Predicting scenic quality for urban forests using vegetation measurements.” Forest Sci., 30(1), 71–82.
Bulut, Z., and Yilmaz, H. (2008). “Determination of landscape beauties through visual quality assessment method: A case study for Kemaliye (Erzincan/Turkey).” Environ. Monit. Assess., 141(1–3), 121–129.
Bulut, Z. and Yilmaz, H. (2009). “Determination of waterscape beauties through visual quality assessment method.” Environ. Monit. Assess., 154(1–4), 459–468.
Chen, B., Adimo, O. A., and Bao, Z. (2009). “Assessment of aesthetic quality and multiple functions of urban green space from the user’s perspective: The case of Hangzhou flower garden, China.” Landscape Urban Plann., 93(1), 76–82.
Cook, P. S., and Cable, T. T. (1995). “The scenic beauty of shelterbelts on the great plains.” Landscape Urban Plann., 32(1), 63–69.
Daniel, T. C. (2001). “Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century.” Landscape Urban Plann., 54(1), 267–281.
Daniel, T. C., Boster, R. S., and Forest, R. M. (1976). Measuring landscape esthetics: The scenic beauty estimation method, USDA, Washington, DC.
Daniel, T. C., and Meitner, M. M. (2001). “Representational validity of landscape visualizations: The effects of graphical realism on perceived scenic beauty of forest vistas.” J. Environ. Psychol., 21(1), 61–72.
de Val, G. d. l. F., Atauri, J. A., and de Lucio, J. V. (2006). “Relationship between landscape visual attributes and spatial pattern indices: A test study in Mediterranean-climate landscapes.” Landscape Urban Plann., 77(4), 393–407.
Hagerhall, C. M., Purcell, T., and Taylor, R. (2004). “Fractal dimension of landscape silhouette outlines as a predictor of landscape preference.” J. Environ. Psychol., 24(2), 247–255.
Hendriks, K., Stobbelaar, D., and Van Mansvelt, J. (2000). “The appearance of agriculture: An assessment of the quality of landscape of both organic and conventional horticultural farms in west friesland.” Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 77(1–2), 157–175.
Herzog, T. R., Herbert, E. J., Kaplan, R., and Crooks, C. (2000). “Cultural and developmental comparisons of landscape perceptions and preferences.” Environ. Behav., 32(3), 323–346.
Howley, P. (2011). “Landscape aesthetics: Assessing the general publics’ preferences towards rural landscapes.” Ecol. Econ., 72, 161–169.
Jim, C., and Shan, X. (2013). “Socioeconomic effect on perception of urban green spaces in Guangzhou, China.” Cities, 31, 123–131.
Junge, X., Schüpbach, B., Walter, T., Schmid, B., and Lindemann-Matthies, P. (2015). “Aesthetic quality of agricultural landscape elements in different seasonal stages in Switzerland.” Landscape Urban Plann., 133, 67–77.
Junker, B., and Buchecker, M. (2008). “Aesthetic preferences versus ecological objectives in river restorations.” Landscape Urban Plann., 85(3), 141–154.
Kalivoda, O., Vojar, J., Skřivanová, Z., and Zahradnk, D. (2014). “Consensus in landscape preference judgments: The effects of landscape visual aesthetic quality and respondents’ characteristics.” J. Environ. Manage., 137, 36–44.
Kaplan, R., and Kaplan, S. (1989). “The experience of nature: A psychological perspective.” CUP Archive, Cambridge.
Krüger, E. L. (2015). “Urban heat island and indoor comfort effects in social housing dwellings.” Landscape Urban Plann., 134, 147–156.
Laing, R. A., Davies, A.-M., Miller, D., Conniff, A., Scott, S., and Morrice, J. (2009). “The application of visual environmental economics in the study of public preference and urban greenspace.” Environ. Plann. B, 36(2), 355–375.
Lamb, R. J., and Purcell, A. T. (1990). “Perception of naturalness in landscape and its relationship to vegetation structure.” Landscape Urban Plann., 19(4), 333–352.
Lange, E., Hehl-Lange, S., and Brewer, M. J. (2008). “Scenario-visualization for the assessment of perceived green space qualities at the urban-rural fringe.” J. Environ. Manage., 89(3), 245–256.
Larsen, L., and Harlan, S. L. (2006). “Desert dreamscapes: Residential landscape preference and behavior.” Landscape Urban Plann., 78(1), 85–100.
Lee, L.-H., and Lee, Y.-D. (2015). “The impact of water quality on the visual and olfactory satisfaction of tourists.” Ocean Coast. Manage., 105, 92–99.
Litton, R. B., Jr., et al. (1968). “Forest landscape description and inventories—A basis for landplanning and design.” USDA, Washington, DC.
Lothian, A. (1999). “Landscape and the philosophy of aesthetics: Is landscape quality inherent in the landscape or in the eye of the beholder?” Landscape Urban Plann., 44(4), 177–198.
McPherson, E. G. (1992). “Accounting for benefits and costs of urban greens pace.” Landscape Urban Plann., 22(1), 41–51.
McPherson, E. G., and Simpson, J. R. (1999). “Carbon dioxide reduction through urban forestry.”, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Albany, CA.
Meitner, M. J., and Daniel, T. C. (1997). “Vista scenic beauty estimation modelling: A GIS approach.” Proc., ESRI Int. User Conf, Esri Press, Redlands, CA.
Misgav, A. (2000). “Visual preference of the public for vegetation groups in Israel.” Landscape Urban Plann., 48(3), 143–159.
Nowak, D. J., Civerolo, K. L., Rao, S. T., Sistla, G., Luley, C. J., and Crane, D. E. (2000). “A modeling study of the impact of urban trees on ozone.” Atmos. Environ., 34(10), 1601–1613.
Ode, Å., Fry, G., Tveit, M. S., Messager, P., and Miller, D. (2009). “Indicators of perceived naturalness as drivers of landscape preference.” J. Environ. Manage., 90(1), 375–383.
O’Malley, C., Piroozfarb, P. A., Farr, E. R., and Gates, J. (2014). “An investigation into minimizing urban heat island (UHI) effects: A UK perspective.” Energy Procedia, 62, 72–80.
Pazhouhanfar, M., and Kamal, M. (2014). “Effect of predictors of visual preference as characteristics of urban natural landscapes in increasing perceived restorative potential.” Urban Forest. Urban Green., 13(1), 145–151.
Peterson, M. N., Thurmond, B., Mchale, M., Rodriguez, S., Bondell, H. D., and Cook, M. (2012). “Predicting native plant landscaping preferences in urban areas.” Sustainable Cities Soc., 5, 70–76.
Ribe, R. G. (2006). “Perceptions of forestry alternatives in the US Pacific Northwest: Information effects and acceptability distribution analysis.” J. Environ. Psychol., 26(2), 100–115.
Rogge, E., Nevens, F., and Gulinck, H. (2007). “Perception of rural landscapes in Flanders: Looking beyond aesthetics.” Landscape Urban Plann., 82(4), 159–174.
Roth, M. (2006). “Validating the use of internet survey techniques in visual landscape assessment: An empirical study from Germany.” Landscape Urban Plann., 78(3), 179–192.
Sander, R. (1986). “Urban vegetation impacts on the hydrology of Dayton.” Ohio. Urban Ecol., 9(3–4), 361–376.
Sayadi, S., González-Roa, M. C., and Calatrava-Requena, J. (2009). “Public preferences for landscape features: The case of agricultural landscape in mountainous Mediterranean areas.” Land Use Policy, 26(2), 334–344.
Sevenant, M., and Antrop, M. (2009). “Cognitive attributes and aesthetic preferences in assessment and differentiation of landscapes.” J. Environ. Manage., 90(9), 2889–2899.
Smardon, R. C. (1988). “Perception and aesthetics of the urban environment: Review of the role of vegetation.” Landscape Urban Plann., 15(1), 85–106.
SPSS 13 [Computer software]. IBM, Armonk, NY.
Strumse, E. (1994). “Environmental attributes and the prediction of visual preferences for agrarian landscapes in western Norway.” J. Environ. Psychol., 14(4), 293–303.
Su, X. (1994). Vegetation landscape , Forestry Press of China, Beijing (in Chinese).
Svobodova, K., Sklenicka, P., Molnarova, K., and Salek, M. (2012). “Visual preferences for physical attributes of mining and post-mining landscapes with respect to the sociodemographic characteristics of respondents.” Ecol. Eng., 43, 34–44.
Thayer, R. L., Jr., and Atwood, B. G. (1978). “Plants, complexity, and pleasure in urban and suburban environments.” Environ. Psychol. Nonverbal Behav., 3(2), 67–76.
Tveit, M. S. (2009). “Indicators of visual scale as predictors of landscape preference: A comparison between groups.” J. Environ. Manage., 90(9), 2882–2888.
Ulrich, R. S. (1986). “Human responses to vegetation and landscapes.” Landscape Urban Plann., 13, 29–44.
Van den Berg, A. E., Vlek, C. A., and Coeterier, J. F. (1998). “Group differences in the aesthetic evaluation of nature development plans: A multilevel approach.” J. Environ. Psychol., 18(2), 141–157.
Wong, K.-K., and Domroes, M. (2005). “The visual quality of urban park scenes of Kowloon Park, Hong Kong: Likeability, affective appraisal, and cross-cultural perspectives.” Environ. Plann. B Plann. Des., 32(4), 617–632.
Xiao, Q., McPherson, E. G., Simpson, J. R., and Ustin, S. L. (1998). “Rainfall interception by Sacramento’s urban forest.” J. Arboriculture, 24(4), 235–244.
Yang, J., Zhao, L., Mcbride, J., and Gong, P. (2009). “Can you see green? Assessing the visibility of urban forests in cities.” Landscape Urban Plann., 91(2), 97–104.
Yao, Y., et al. (2012). “Assessing the visual quality of green landscaping in rural residential areas: The case of Changzhou, China.” Environ. Monit. Assess., 184(2), 951–967.
Zhang, H., Chen, B., Sun, Z., and Bao, Z. (2013). “Landscape perception and recreation needs in urban green space in Fuyang, Hangzhou, China.” Urban Forest. Urban Green., 12(1), 44–52.
Zhao, J., Wang, R., Cai, Y., and Luo, P. (2013). “Effects of visual indicators on landscape preferences.” J. Urban Plann. Dev., 70–78.
Zheng, B., Zhang, Y., and Chen, J. (2011). “Preference to home landscape: Wildness or neatness.” Landscape Urban Plann., 99(1), 1–8.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Urban Planning and Development
Journal of Urban Planning and Development
Volume 142Issue 3September 2016

History

Received: Apr 22, 2015
Accepted: Dec 8, 2015
Published online: Mar 16, 2016
Discussion open until: Aug 16, 2016
Published in print: Sep 1, 2016

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

East China Normal Univ., No. 500, Dongchuan Rd., Shanghai 200241, China (corresponding author). E-mail: [email protected]
Hong Jiang
East China Normal Univ., No. 500, Dongchuan Rd., Shanghai 200241, China.
Xuejun Song
East China Normal Univ., No. 500, Dongchuan Rd., Shanghai 200241, China.
Difu Zhan
Tongji Univ., No. 4800, Cao’an Rd., Shanghai 201804, China.
Zhiyi Bao
Professor, Zhejiang A&F Univ., No. 88, Huanchengbei Rd., Lin’an 311300, China.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

Cited by

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share