IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i5p951-d1131558.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

New Approach to Landscape-Based Spatial Planning Using Meaningful Geolocated Digital Traces

Author

Listed:
  • Clara García-Mayor

    (Urban Design and Regional Planning Unit, Building Sciences and Urbanism Department, University of Alicante, 03690 San Vicente del Raspeig, Spain)

  • Almudena Nolasco-Cirugeda

    (Urban Design and Regional Planning Unit, Building Sciences and Urbanism Department, University of Alicante, 03690 San Vicente del Raspeig, Spain)

Abstract

The integration of landscape-based approaches into regional and town planning policies is one of the main objectives of the European Landscape Convention. In the twenty-first century, the traditional discipline of city spatial-planning has gradually been incorporating two types of tactics linked to a landscape-based approach: nature-based strategies, which focus on sustainable goals; and people-based strategies, which integrate a social dimension into decision-making processes. A backbone of landscape-based spatial planning challenge consists of reshaping consolidated urban areas to improve quality of life, encouraging people’s physical activity, and supporting healthier urban lifestyles. This study assumes that physical activity is further encouraged by itineraries that incorporate both landscape features—i.e., natural assets and sense of place—and functional diversity associated with urban activities—i.e., public facilities. A methodology was elaborated to define a preliminary landscape-based spatial planning approach, centering on the analysis of walking-related activity in urban and peri-urban areas. For this purpose, geolocated digital traces are intertwined: official city routes, urban facility locations, users’ Wikiloc trails, and Google Places API data. Once applied to selected medium-sized European cities in the Mediterranean area, these data sources lead to the identification of intangible values and dynamics in places where landscape-based spatial planning solutions could be enhanced. As a result, the present work shows the suitability of interrelating these geolocated data sources, permitting to identify landscape features as key components of spatial planning, which permit balancing individual goals, the aims of local communities, and administrative functions.

Suggested Citation

  • Clara García-Mayor & Almudena Nolasco-Cirugeda, 2023. "New Approach to Landscape-Based Spatial Planning Using Meaningful Geolocated Digital Traces," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-22, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:5:p:951-:d:1131558
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/5/951/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/5/951/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Depietri, Yaella & Ghermandi, Andrea & Campisi-Pinto, Salvatore & Orenstein, Daniel E., 2021. "Public participation GIS versus geolocated social media data to assess urban cultural ecosystem services: Instances of complementarity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    2. Larson, Lincoln R. & Keith, Samuel J. & Fernandez, Mariela & Hallo, Jeffrey C. & Shafer, C. Scott & Jennings, Viniece, 2016. "Ecosystem services and urban greenways: What's the public's perspective?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 111-116.
    3. Martí, Pablo & García-Mayor, Clara & Nolasco-Cirugeda, Almudena & Serrano-Estrada, Leticia, 2020. "Green infrastructure planning: Unveiling meaningful spaces through Foursquare users’ preferences," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    4. Pablo Martí & Leticia Serrano-Estrada & Almudena Nolasco-Cirugeda & Jesús López Baeza, 2022. "Revisiting the Spatial Definition of Neighborhood Boundaries: Functional Clusters versus Administrative Neighborhoods," Journal of Urban Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(3), pages 73-94, July.
    5. Davies, Clive & Lafortezza, Raffaele, 2017. "Urban green infrastructure in Europe: Is greenspace planning and policy compliant?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 93-101.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Huamei Shao & Gunwoo Kim & Qing Li & Galen Newman, 2021. "Web of Science-Based Green Infrastructure: A Bibliometric Analysis in CiteSpace," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-19, July.
    2. Bolaños-Valencia, Ingrid & Villegas-Palacio, Clara & López-Gómez, Connie Paola & Berrouet, Lina & Ruiz, Aura, 2019. "Social perception of risk in socio-ecological systems. A qualitative and quantitative analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Conway, Tenley M. & Khan, Aliza & Esak, Nasra, 2020. "An analysis of green infrastructure in municipal policy: Divergent meaning and terminology in the Greater Toronto Area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    4. Xiaochang Yang & Sinan Li & Congmou Zhu & Baiyu Dong & Hongwei Xu, 2021. "Simulating Urban Expansion Based on Ecological Security Pattern—A Case Study of Hangzhou, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Clara García-Mayor & Pablo Martí & Manuel Castaño & Álvaro Bernabeu-Bautista, 2020. "The Unexploited Potential of Converting Rail Tracks to Greenways: The Spanish Vías Verdes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-25, January.
    6. Francesco Pinna & Valeria Saiu, 2021. "Greenways as Integrated Systems: A Proposal for Planning and Design Guidelines Based on Case Studies Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.
    7. Irina Iulia Năstase & Ileana Pătru-Stupariu & Felix Kienast, 2019. "Landscape Preferences and Distance Decay Analysis for Mapping the Recreational Potential of an Urban Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-19, July.
    8. Renato Monteiro & José C. Ferreira & Paula Antunes, 2020. "Green Infrastructure Planning Principles: An Integrated Literature Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, December.
    9. Kuo-Wei Hsu & Jen-Chih Chao, 2021. "Study on the Value Model of Urban Green Infrastructure Development—A Case Study of the Central District of Taichung City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, July.
    10. Abramowicz Dawid & Stępniewska Małgorzata, 2020. "Public Investment Policy as a Driver of Changes in the Ecosystem Services Delivery by an Urban Green Infrastructure," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 39(1), pages 5-18, March.
    11. Bin Xu & Qingxia Shi & Yaping Zhang, 2022. "Evaluation of the Health Promotion Capabilities of Greenway Trails: A Case Study in Hangzhou, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-21, April.
    12. Jiquan Chen & Hogeun Park & Peilei Fan & Li Tian & Zutao Ouyang & Raffaele Lafortezza, 2021. "Cultural Landmarks and Urban Landscapes in Three Contrasting Societies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-18, April.
    13. Mahbubur Meenar & Megan Heckert & Deepti Adlakha, 2022. "“Green Enough Ain’t Good Enough:” Public Perceptions and Emotions Related to Green Infrastructure in Environmental Justice Communities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-17, January.
    14. Qinqin Shi & Hai Chen & Di Liu & Tianwei Geng & Hang Zhang, 2022. "Identifying the Spatial Imbalance in the Supply and Demand of Cultural Ecosystem Services," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-20, May.
    15. Weiying Gu & Yiyong Chen & Muye Dai, 2019. "Measuring Community Greening Merging Multi-Source Geo-Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-14, February.
    16. Dickinson, Dawn C. & Hobbs, Richard J., 2017. "Cultural ecosystem services: Characteristics, challenges and lessons for urban green space research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 179-194.
    17. Stępniewska, Małgorzata, 2021. "The capacity of urban parks for providing regulating and cultural ecosystem services versus their social perception," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    18. Hao Chen & Min Wang & Zhen Zhang, 2022. "Research on Rural Landscape Preference Based on TikTok Short Video Content and User Comments," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-13, August.
    19. Fruth, Erik & Kvistad, Michele & Marshall, Joe & Pfeifer, Lena & Rau, Luisa & Sagebiel, Julian & Soto, Daniel & Tarpey, John & Weir, Jessica & Winiarski, Bradyn, 2019. "Economic valuation of street-level urban greening: A case study from an evolving mixed-use area in Berlin," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    20. Elin Slätmo & Kjell Nilsson & Eeva Turunen, 2019. "Implementing Green Infrastructure in Spatial Planning in Europe," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-21, April.

    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:5:p:951-:d:1131558. 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.