IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i10p1825-d1246894.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of Landscape Character Assessment and Cultural Ecosystem Services Evaluation Frameworks for Peri-Urban Landscape Planning: A Case Study of Harku Municipality, Estonia

Author

Listed:
  • Fiona Nevzati

    (Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, 51014 Tartu, Estonia)

  • Martti Veldi

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, Estonian University of Life Sciences, 51006 Tartu, Estonia)

  • Mart Külvik

    (Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, 51014 Tartu, Estonia)

  • Simon Bell

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, Estonian University of Life Sciences, 51006 Tartu, Estonia
    OPENspace Research Centre, Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH3 9DF, UK)

Abstract

This study combined landscape character assessment (LCA) and cultural ecosystem services (CES) frameworks to evaluate human well-being in the peri-urban area of Harku Municipality, Estonia. Using geospatial data combined with expert opinions, the study investigated the interplay between landscape character types and environmental/contact types through the LCA method. In total, 21 distinct landscape types comprising 47 separate areas were identified, with CES values determined for each. Restorative, social, and cognitive values were associated with each landscape character type. The findings demonstrated the higher restorative potential of blue and green elements (water bodies, forests) with low settlement density and minimal agriculture. High-density settlements with good road access demonstrated significant social values, while mixed forests and wetlands tended to be associated with higher cognitive values. Coastal zones with semi-dense settlements and mixed forests earned favourable ratings, whereas industrial/agricultural landscapes were rated lowest for all values. These findings offer valuable insights into the complex dynamics of urban–rural interactions, resilience, and the impact of urbanisation on CES. They may inform future landscape management strategies, urban planning decisions, and policy considerations. Additionally, this study highlights the need for further research to explore the long-term trends and potential changes in CES in evolving peri-urban environments.

Suggested Citation

  • Fiona Nevzati & Martti Veldi & Mart Külvik & Simon Bell, 2023. "Analysis of Landscape Character Assessment and Cultural Ecosystem Services Evaluation Frameworks for Peri-Urban Landscape Planning: A Case Study of Harku Municipality, Estonia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-19, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:10:p:1825-:d:1246894
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/10/1825/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/10/1825/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Norimasa Takayama & Takeshi Morikawa & Ernest Bielinis, 2019. "Relation between Psychological Restorativeness and Lifestyle, Quality of Life, Resilience, and Stress-Coping in Forest Settings," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-21, April.
    2. Magdaléna Pichlerová & Dilek Önkal & Anthony Bartlett & Jozef Výbošťok & Viliam Pichler, 2021. "Variability in Forest Visit Numbers in Different Regions and Population Segments before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-9, March.
    3. Norimasa Takayama & Akio Fujiwara & Haruo Saito & Masahiro Horiuchi, 2017. "Management Effectiveness of a Secondary Coniferous Forest for Landscape Appreciation and Psychological Restoration," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-22, July.
    4. Jenni Simkin & Ann Ojala & Liisa Tyrväinen, 2021. "The Perceived Restorativeness of Differently Managed Forests and Its Association with Forest Qualities and Individual Variables: A Field Experiment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-26, January.
    5. Schirpke, Uta & Scolozzi, Rocco & Dean, Graeme & Haller, Andreas & Jäger, Hieronymus & Kister, Jutta & Kovács, Barbara & Sarmiento, Fausto O. & Sattler, Birgit & Schleyer, Christian, 2020. "Cultural ecosystem services in mountain regions: Conceptualising conflicts among users and limitations of use," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kristina Veidemane & Agnese Reke & Anda Ruskule & Ivo Vinogradovs, 2024. "Assessment of Coastal Cultural Ecosystem Services and Well-Being for Integrating Stakeholder Values into Coastal Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-34, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ernest Bielinis & Jenni Simkin & Pasi Puttonen & Liisa Tyrväinen, 2020. "Effect of Viewing Video Representation of the Urban Environment and Forest Environment on Mood and Level of Procrastination," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-23, July.
    2. Giacomo Staffolani & Deborah Bentivoglio & Adele Finco, 2022. "Consumers’ Purchasing Determinants Towards Mountain Food Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-15, July.
    3. Ernest Bielinis & Jianzhong Xu & Aneta Anna Omelan, 2020. "A Novel Anti-Environmental Forest Experience Scale to Predict Preferred Pleasantness Associated with Forest Environments," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-18, September.
    4. Don-Gak Lee & Jin-Gun Kim & Bum-Jin Park & Won Sop Shin, 2022. "Effect of Forest Users’ Stress on Perceived Restorativeness, Forest Recreation Motivation, and Mental Well-Being during COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-19, May.
    5. Song Song & Ruoxiang Tu & Yao Lu & Shi Yin & Hankun Lin & Yiqiang Xiao, 2022. "Restorative Effects from Green Exposure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Control Trials," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-22, November.
    6. Marta Teston & Matteo Orsi & Giovanni Bittante & Alessio Cecchinato & Luigi Gallo & Paola Gatto & Lucio Flavio Macedo Mota & Maurizio Ramanzin & Salvatore Raniolo & Antonella Tormen & Enrico Sturaro, 2022. "Added Value of Local Sheep Breeds in Alpine Agroecosystems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-18, April.
    7. Sujin Park & Eunsoo Kim & Geonwoo Kim & Soojin Kim & Yeji Choi & Domyung Paek, 2022. "What Activities in Forests Are Beneficial for Human Health? A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-29, February.
    8. de Pater, Catharina & Verschuuren, Bas & Elands, Birgit & van Hal, Iris & Turnhout, Esther, 2023. "Spiritual values in forest management plans in British Columbia and the Netherlands," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    9. Vilém Jarský & Petra Palátová & Marcel Riedl & Daniel Zahradník & Radek Rinn & Miroslava Hochmalová, 2022. "Forest Attendance in the Times of COVID-19—A Case Study on the Example of the Czech Republic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-15, February.
    10. Magdaléna Pichlerová & Dilek Önkal & Anthony Bartlett & Jozef Výbošťok & Viliam Pichler, 2021. "Variability in Forest Visit Numbers in Different Regions and Population Segments before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-9, March.
    11. Fontana, Veronika & Ebner, Manuel & Schirpke, Uta & Ohndorf, Markus & Pritsch, Hanna & Tappeiner, Ulrike & Kurmayer, Rainer, 2023. "An integrative approach to evaluate ecosystem services of mountain lakes using multi-criteria decision analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    12. Altaf Engineer & Aletheia Ida & Esther M. Sternberg, 2020. "Healing Spaces: Designing Physical Environments to Optimize Health, Wellbeing, and Performance," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-4, February.
    13. Uta Schirpke & Manuel Ebner & Hanna Pritsch & Veronika Fontana & Rainer Kurmayer, 2021. "Quantifying Ecosystem Services of High Mountain Lakes across Different Socio-Ecological Contexts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-22, May.
    14. Nowak-Olejnik, Agnieszka & Schirpke, Uta & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2022. "A systematic review on subjective well-being benefits associated with cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    15. Ebner, Manuel & Fontana, Veronika & Schirpke, Uta & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2022. "Stakeholder perspectives on ecosystem services of mountain lakes in the European Alps," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    16. Anna Széchy & Zsuzsanna Szerényi, 2023. "Valuing the Recreational Services Provided by Hungary’s Forest Ecosystems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-16, February.
    17. Mónica de Castro-Pardo & João C. Azevedo, 2021. "A Goal Programming Model to Guide Decision-Making Processes towards Conservation Consensuses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-25, February.
    18. Schirpke, Uta & Tasser, Erich & Ebner, Manuel & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2021. "What can geotagged photographs tell us about cultural ecosystem services of lakes?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    19. Kaili Chen & Tianzheng Zhang & Fangyuan Liu & Yingjie Zhang & Yan Song, 2021. "How Does Urban Green Space Impact Residents’ Mental Health: A Literature Review of Mediators," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-27, November.
    20. Schirpke, Uta & Wang, Genxu & Padoa-Schioppa, Emilio, 2021. "Editorial: Mountain landscapes: Protected areas, ecosystem services, and future challenges," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).

    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:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:10:p:1825-:d:1246894. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.