IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i10p1674-d1498323.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multidimensional Assessment of the Aesthetic Quality of Natural Landscapes in Mount Wuyi National Park, China

Author

Listed:
  • Xin Zheng

    (Key Laboratory of Regional Sustainable Development Modeling, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Zhaoping Yang

    (Key Laboratory of Regional Sustainable Development Modeling, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
    State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China)

  • Yayan Lu

    (School of Tourism, Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, China)

Abstract

Natural landscapes are scenic complexes accessible to the public within national parks. Exploring their aesthetic quality can promote an emotional connection between the public and the landscape, which has a positive significance in enhancing human well-being. In this study, Mount Wuyi National Park in China was considered as the study area, and key dimensions tailored to individual and combined natural landscapes for aesthetic quality evaluation were proposed. Seventeen landscape metrics were selected to comprehensively measure the aesthetic quality level of the natural landscapes within the study area. The results indicated that (1) the spatial distribution of 341 individual natural landscapes exhibited a pattern of denser concentration in the south and east, with a relatively sparse distribution in the north and west. (2) Based on the elements of land cover, vegetation, topography, and landforms, 41 types of combined natural landscapes were identified in Mount Wuyi National Park. (3) Southeastern natural landscapes possess significant advantages in aesthetic service provision, uniqueness, diversity, combination, and coordination, and are concentrated in natural landscapes of high aesthetic quality. Natural landscapes of moderate aesthetic quality were distributed across the northern, southwestern, and some parts of the southeastern areas within the study region. The findings provide a reference for aesthetic quality assessment in natural landscapes at the micro-scale and serve as a basis for the scientific management of natural landscapes in national parks.

Suggested Citation

  • Xin Zheng & Zhaoping Yang & Yayan Lu, 2024. "Multidimensional Assessment of the Aesthetic Quality of Natural Landscapes in Mount Wuyi National Park, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-16, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:10:p:1674-:d:1498323
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/10/1674/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/10/1674/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simensen, Trond & Halvorsen, Rune & Erikstad, Lars, 2018. "Methods for landscape characterisation and mapping: A systematic review," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 557-569.
    2. Hermes, Johannes & Albert, Christian & von Haaren, Christina, 2018. "Assessing the aesthetic quality of landscapes in Germany," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 296-307.
    3. Xin Cheng, 2023. "A Review of Empirical Studies of Cultural Ecosystem Services in National Parks: Current Status and Future Research," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-19, October.
    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. Xingyuan Li & Wenqing Pang & Lizhi Han & Yufan Yan & Xianjie Pan & Diechuan Yang, 2025. "Relationship Between Landscape Character and Public Preferences in Urban Landscapes: A Case Study from the East–West Mountain Region in Wuhan, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-26, June.
    2. Barbara Sowińska-Świerkosz & Malwina Michalik-Śnieżek, 2020. "The Methodology of Landscape Quality (LQ) Indicators Analysis Based on Remote Sensing Data: Polish National Parks Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-18, April.
    3. Nadja Penko Seidl & Mateja Šmid Hribar & Jelka Hudoklin & Tomaž Pipan & Mojca Golobič, 2021. "Defining Landscapes, and Their Importance for National Identity—A Case Study from Slovenia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-18, June.
    4. Zizhen Hong & Wentao Cao & Ying Chen & Sijia Zhu & Wenjun Zheng, 2024. "Identifying Rural Landscape Heritage Character Types and Areas: A Case Study of the Li River Basin in Guilin, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-24, February.
    5. Amalia Vaneska Palacio Buendía & Yolanda Pérez-Albert & David Serrano Giné, 2021. "Mapping Landscape Perception: An Assessment with Public Participation Geographic Information Systems and Spatial Analysis Techniques," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, June.
    6. Antonio Santoro & Martina Venturi & Mauro Agnoletti, 2021. "Landscape Perception and Public Participation for the Conservation and Valorization of Cultural Landscapes: The Case of the Cinque Terre and Porto Venere UNESCO Site," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-24, January.
    7. Fabio A. Madau & Brunella Arru & Roberto Furesi & Paola Sau & Pietro Pulina, 2022. "Public perception of ecosystem and social services produced by Sardinia extensive dairy sheep farming systems," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 10(1), pages 1-42, December.
    8. Lehmann, Paul & Tafarte, Philip, 2024. "Exclusion zones for renewable energy deployment: One man’s blessing, another man’s curse," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    9. Tafarte, Philip & Lehmann, Paul, 2023. "Quantifying trade-offs for the spatial allocation of onshore wind generation capacity – A case study for Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    10. Tafarte, Philip & Lehmann, Paul, 2021. "Quantifying trade-offs for the spatial allocation of onshore wind generation capacity: A case study for Germany," UFZ Discussion Papers 2/2021, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    11. Vassiliki Vlami & Stamatis Zogaris & Hakan Djuma & Ioannis P. Kokkoris & George Kehayias & Panayotis Dimopoulos, 2019. "A Field Method for Landscape Conservation Surveying: The Landscape Assessment Protocol (LAP)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-20, April.
    12. Riyadh Mundher & Shamsul Abu Bakar & Suhardi Maulan & Mohd Johari Mohd Yusof & Syuhaily Osman & Ammar Al-Sharaa & Hangyu Gao, 2022. "Exploring Awareness and Public Perception towards the Importance of Visual Aesthetics for Preservation of Permanent Forest Reserve (PFR) in Malaysia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-14, August.
    13. Yingxue Wang & Jiaheng Du & Jingxing Kuang & Chunxu Chen & Maobiao Li & Jin Wang, 2023. "Two-Scaled Identification of Landscape Character Types and Areas: A Case Study of the Yunnan–Vietnam Railway (Yunnan Section), China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, April.
    14. Joaquin Romano & Emilio Pérez-Chinarro & Byron V. Coral, 2020. "Network of Landscapes in the Sustainable Management of Transboundary Biosphere Reserves," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-24, September.
    15. Brunella Arru & Roberto Furesi & Pietro Pulina & Antonietta Bardi & Fabio A. Madau, 2025. "Perception of Ecosystem Services Provided by the Primary Sector in Floodplains: A Study of Sardinia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-25, January.
    16. Seweryn Zielinski & Celene B. Milanés & Elena Cambon & Ofelia Perez Montero & Lourdes Rizo & Andres Suarez & Benjamin Cuker & Giorgio Anfuso, 2021. "An Integrated Method for Landscape Assessment: Application to Santiago de Cuba Bay, Cuba," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-30, April.
    17. Maria Ignatieva & Fahimeh Mofrad, 2023. "Understanding Urban Green Spaces Typology’s Contribution to Comprehensive Green Infrastructure Planning: A Study of Canberra, the National Capital of Australia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-27, April.
    18. Yiyuan Sun & Beiming Zhang & Kexin Lei & Yunong Wu & Daimou Wei & Bin Zhang, 2025. "Assessing rural landscape diversity for management and conservation: a case study in Lichuan, China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(6), pages 14523-14551, June.
    19. Fiona Nevzati & Mart Külvik & Joanna Storie & Liisa-Maria Tiidu & Simon Bell, 2023. "Assessment of Cultural Ecosystem Services and Well-Being: Testing a Method for Evaluating Natural Environment and Contact Types in the Harku Municipality, Estonia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-24, June.
    20. Ilić, Milica & Srđević, Zorica & Srđević, Bojan & Stammel, Barbara & Borgs, Tim & Benka, Pavel & Grabić, Jasna & Ždero, Senka, 2024. "The nexus between pressures and ecosystem services in floodplains: New methods to integrate stakeholders’ knowledge for water quality management in Serbia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:10:p:1674-:d:1498323. 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.