IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/tvecsg/v105y2014i5p591-603.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dossier: Institutions and skilled mobility. Guest Editors: Gery Nijenhuis & Maggi W.H. Leung

Author

Listed:
  • Vincent Vanderheyden
  • Dan Van der Horst
  • Anton Van Rompaey
  • Serge Schmitz

Abstract

Landscape researchers have devoted relatively little attention to ordinary or everyday landscapes. This paper investigates differences in opinion about the attractiveness of these landscapes between groups of people according to their linguistic area and other socio-demographic characteristics. A survey of 1,542 Dutch and French speakers in Belgium using photo-questionnaires depicted the different types of Belgian rural landscape. Significant differences were observed regarding landscapes containing the same features, allowing to posit, to test, and to validate certain hypotheses. Dutch speakers found chessboard agrarian landscapes more attractive. Less educated participants felt more positive towards anthropogenic landscapes. Women were more attracted by farmed fields. Qualitative data added depth to the analysis, permitting to explore different ways in which people related to the landscape pictures. For a theoretical interpretation, we draw on Gibson's affordances theory and we revisit Larrère & Larrère's ways of looking at landscape theory.

Suggested Citation

  • Vincent Vanderheyden & Dan Van der Horst & Anton Van Rompaey & Serge Schmitz, 2014. "Dossier: Institutions and skilled mobility. Guest Editors: Gery Nijenhuis & Maggi W.H. Leung," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 105(5), pages 591-603, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:tvecsg:v:105:y:2014:i:5:p:591-603
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/tesg.12066
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:tvecsg:v:105:y:2014:i:5:p:591-603. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0040-747X .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.