IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i8p4295-d534855.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cultural Landmarks and Urban Landscapes in Three Contrasting Societies

Author

Listed:
  • Jiquan Chen

    (Department of Geography, Environment, and Spatial Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48823, USA)

  • Hogeun Park

    (The World Bank, Washington, DC 20433, USA)

  • Peilei Fan

    (School of Planning, Design, and Construction and Center for Global Change and Earth Observations, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48823, USA)

  • Li Tian

    (Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100864, China)

  • Zutao Ouyang

    (Earth System Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA)

  • Raffaele Lafortezza

    (Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Bari Aldo Moro, 70126 Bari, Italy
    Department of Geography, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China)

Abstract

Cultural heritage sites and landscapes are intuitively connected in urban systems. Based on available databases of cultural landmarks, we selected three pairs of cities that are currently dominated by three contrasting religions (Catholic, Buddhist and emerging culture) to compare the long-term changes in cultural landmarks, to quantify their spatial distribution in the current landscape, and to examine the potential influences these landmarks have on landscapes. The landmark database and landscapes were constructed from archived maps, satellite imagery and the UNESCO heritage sites for Barcelona, Bari, Beijing, Vientiane, Shenzhen, and Ulaanbaatar. Roads in Asian cities are mostly constructed in alignment with the four cardinal directions, forming a checkerboard-type landscape, whereas Bari and Barcelona in Europe have examples of roads radiating from major cultural landmarks. We found clear differences in the number of landmarks and surrounding landscape in these cities, supporting our hypothesis that current urban landscapes have been influenced similarly by cultural landmarks, although substantial differences exist among cities. Negative relationships between the number of cultural landmarks and major cover types were found, except with agricultural lands. Clearly, cultural landmarks need to be treated as “natural features” and considered as reference points in urban planning. Major efforts are needed to construct a global database before an overarching conclusion can be made for global cities.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:8:p:4295-:d:534855
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/8/4295/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/8/4295/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Douglas Noonan & Douglas Krupka, 2010. "Determinants of historic and cultural landmark designation: why we preserve what we preserve," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 34(1), pages 1-26, February.
    2. 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.
    3. Hui Wen & Jiquan Chen & Zhifang Wang, 2020. "Disproportioned Performances of Protected Areas in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-15, August.
    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. Shujing Dong & Danjie Shen, 2023. "A Study of Historical Urban Landscape Layering in Luoyang Based on Historical Map Translation," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-22, 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. 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).
    2. Ruben Loon & Tom Gosens & Jan Rouwendal, 2014. "Cultural heritage and the attractiveness of cities: evidence from recreation trips," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 38(3), pages 253-285, August.
    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. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Xueting Pan & Jialing Zhao, 2025. "Coupling Coordination Analysis and Spatiotemporal Heterogeneity Between Green Space Quality and Economic Development: A Case Study of the Yangtze River Delta in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-24, February.
    8. Kean Siang Ch’Ng & Suet Leng Khoo, 2015. "Market Mechanisms To Allocate Heritage Conservation Fund: An Experimental Study," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 60(05), pages 1-19, December.
    9. Gabriel Ahlfeldt & Kristoffer Möller & Sevrin Waights & Nicolai Wendland, 2012. "On prisoner's dilemmas and gilded cages: The economics of heritage preservation," ERSA conference papers ersa12p783, European Regional Science Association.
    10. Elin Slätmo & Kjell Nilsson & Eeva Turunen, 2019. "Implementing Green Infrastructure in Spatial Planning in Europe," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-21, April.
    11. Liberalesso, Tiago & Oliveira Cruz, Carlos & Matos Silva, Cristina & Manso, Maria, 2020. "Green infrastructure and public policies: An international review of green roofs and green walls incentives," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    12. Ilde Rizzo, 2011. "Regulation," Chapters, in: Ruth Towse (ed.), A Handbook of Cultural Economics, Second Edition, chapter 54, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Fan Zhang & Xiuyan Liu & Songlin Li, 2023. "Rebuilding or refurbishing: Heterogeneity effects of urban renewal strategy," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 37(1), pages 51-81, March.
    14. Rocío Losada-Iglesias & Emilio R. Díaz-Varela & Wim Timmermans & David Miranda, 2025. "Analysis of Strategic Green Infrastructure Planning Guided by Actors’ Perceptions: Insights at the Regional Level in the Netherlands and Spain," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-26, April.
    15. Monica Pantaloni & Giovanni Marinelli & Rodolfo Santilocchi & Alberto Minelli & Davide Neri, 2022. "Sustainable Management Practices for Urban Green Spaces to Support Green Infrastructure: An Italian Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-20, April.
    16. Borja Ruiz-Apilánez & Francesco Pilla, 2025. "The CUGA Method: A Reliable Framework for Identifying Public Urban Green Spaces in Metropolitan Regions," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-31, August.
    17. Lu, Jiaxuan, 2023. "The economics of China’s between-city height competition: A regression discontinuity approach," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    18. Outi Tahvonen, 2018. "Scalable Green Infrastructure—The Case of Domestic Private Gardens in Vuores, Finland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    19. Tetsuharu Oba & Douglas Simpson Noonan, 2020. "The Price of Preserving Neighborhoods: The Unequal Impacts of Historic District Designation," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 34(4), pages 343-355, November.
    20. Eda Ustaoglu & Brendan Williams, 2022. "Institutional Settings and Effects on Agricultural Land Conversion: A Global and Spatial Analysis of European Regions," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-35, December.

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:8:p:4295-:d:534855. 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.