IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i13p10308-d1183062.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of Society’s Perceptions on Cultural Ecosystem Services in a Cultural Landscape in Nanchang, China

Author

Listed:
  • Ning Kang

    (College of Landscape Architecture and Art, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang 330045, China
    College of Fine Arts, Hubei Normal University, Huangshi 435002, China)

  • Guanhong Xie

    (College of Landscape Architecture and Art, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang 330045, China)

  • Chunqing Liu

    (College of Landscape Architecture and Art, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang 330045, China
    Jiangxi Rural Culture Development Research Center, Nanchang 330045, China)

Abstract

Ancient villages are a unique landscape of cultural heritage with both tangible and intangible culture, which provide rich ecosystem services for human beings. Assessment of society’s perceptions on cultural heritage landscapes can improve the integration of cultural heritage values into decision-making processes that affect landscapes, thereby contributing to maximizing the benefits people receive from cultural ecosystem services. Based on this premise, a new sense-based hierarchical assessment framework for a cultural landscape of ancient villages in China from the perspectives of experts and the public was developed in this study. Field research was conducted by the experts to preliminarily extract the evaluation indicators by identifying and refining the characteristics of the landscape perception units based on the classification of village’s landscape resources. The public indicators as supplements were determined by the semantic and social networks generated with ROSTCM tool post-processing, which followed crawling public comments on the tourism platforms with Python. The findings indicated that visual stimulation (57.36%) is the strongest, while touch perception is the weakest (3.56%). The proportion of hearing, smell, and taste was 21.52%, 12.05%, and 5.53%, respectively. Furthermore, people consider variety, historicity, culture, and localism as the core themes of perception in their landscape experiences. The value and usefulness of the sensory experiences for cultural landscape assessment and for decision-making in the context of cultural ecosystem services are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Ning Kang & Guanhong Xie & Chunqing Liu, 2023. "Assessment of Society’s Perceptions on Cultural Ecosystem Services in a Cultural Landscape in Nanchang, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-20, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:13:p:10308-:d:1183062
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/13/10308/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/13/10308/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weiwen Li & Yijiang Zhou & Xingan Dai & Fang Hu, 2022. "Evaluation of Rural Tourism Landscape Resources in Terms of Carbon Neutrality and Rural Revitalization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-22, March.
    2. Rouran Zhang & Jianing Wang & Steve Brown, 2021. "‘The Charm of a Thousand Years’: exploring tourists’ perspectives of the ‘culture-nature value’ of the Humble Administrator’s Garden, Suzhou, China," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(8), pages 1071-1088, November.
    3. Chang, Da-Yong, 1996. "Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 649-655, December.
    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. Xiangnan Fan & Yuning Cheng, 2023. "Assessing a Tourism City from an Ecosystem Services Perspective: The Evaluation of Tourism Service in Liyang, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-22, November.

    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. Benyou Jia & Slobodan P. Simonovic & Pingan Zhong & Zhongbo Yu, 2016. "A Multi-Objective Best Compromise Decision Model for Real-Time Flood Mitigation Operations of Multi-Reservoir System," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(10), pages 3363-3387, August.
    2. Juan Carlos Martín & Veronika Rudchenko & María-Victoria Sánchez-Rebull, 2020. "The Role of Nationality and Hotel Class on Guests’ Satisfaction. A Fuzzy-TOPSIS Approach Applied in Saint Petersburg," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-24, September.
    3. Sajid Ali & Sang-Moon Lee & Choon-Man Jang, 2017. "Determination of the Most Optimal On-Shore Wind Farm Site Location Using a GIS-MCDM Methodology: Evaluating the Case of South Korea," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.
    4. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    5. Lupo, Toni, 2015. "Fuzzy ServPerf model combined with ELECTRE III to comparatively evaluate service quality of international airports in Sicily," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 249-259.
    6. He-Yau Kang & Amy H. I. Lee & Tzu-Ting Huang, 2016. "Project Management for a Wind Turbine Construction by Applying Fuzzy Multiple Objective Linear Programming Models," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-15, December.
    7. Noori, Amir & Bonakdari, Hossein & Salimi, Amir Hossein & Gharabaghi, Bahram, 2021. "A group Multi-Criteria Decision-Making method for water supply choice optimization," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    8. Bojan Srdjevic & Yvonilde Medeiros, 2008. "Fuzzy AHP Assessment of Water Management Plans," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 22(7), pages 877-894, July.
    9. Wang, Ying-Ming & Luo, Ying & Hua, Zhongsheng, 2008. "On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 735-747, April.
    10. Nitidetch Koohathongsumrit & Pongchanun Luangpaiboon, 2022. "An integrated FAHP–ZODP approach for strategic marketing information system project selection," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(6), pages 1792-1809, September.
    11. Deng, Yanfei & Xu, Jiuping & Liu, Ying & Mancl, Karen, 2014. "Biogas as a sustainable energy source in China: Regional development strategy application and decision making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 294-303.
    12. Xin, Li & Xi, Chen & Sagir, Mujgan & Wenbo, Zhang, 2023. "How can infectious medical waste be forecasted and transported during the COVID-19 pandemic? A hybrid two-stage method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    13. Rovick Tarife & Yosuke Nakanishi & Yicheng Zhou & Noel Estoperez & Anacita Tahud, 2023. "Integrated GIS and Fuzzy-AHP Framework for Suitability Analysis of Hybrid Renewable Energy Systems: A Case in Southern Philippines," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-25, January.
    14. Adiprasetyo, Teguh & Suhartoyo, Hery & Firdaus, Arief, 2017. "Developing Strategy for Advancing Organic Agriculture as Sustainable Agricultural Practice," INA-Rxiv wb37h, Center for Open Science.
    15. Aleksandar Aleksić & Danijela Tadić, 2023. "Industrial and Management Applications of Type-2 Multi-Attribute Decision-Making Techniques Extended with Type-2 Fuzzy Sets from 2013 to 2022," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-24, May.
    16. Puppala, Harish & Peddinti, Pranav R.T. & Tamvada, Jagannadha Pawan & Ahuja, Jaya & Kim, Byungmin, 2023. "Barriers to the adoption of new technologies in rural areas: The case of unmanned aerial vehicles for precision agriculture in India," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    17. Hsin-Chieh Wu & Toly Chen & Chin-Hau Huang, 2020. "A Piecewise Linear FGM Approach for Efficient and Accurate FAHP Analysis: Smart Backpack Design as an Example," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-18, August.
    18. Kamoonpuri, Sana Zehra & Sengar, Anita, 2023. "Hi, May AI help you? An analysis of the barriers impeding the implementation and use of artificial intelligence-enabled virtual assistants in retail," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    19. Grošelj, Petra & Hodges, Donald G. & Zadnik Stirn, Lidija, 2016. "Participatory and multi-criteria analysis for forest (ecosystem) management: A case study of Pohorje, Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 80-86.
    20. José Ribas, 2014. "An Assessment of Conflicting Intentions in the Use of Multipurpose Water Reservoirs," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(12), pages 3989-4000, September.

    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:15:y:2023:i:13:p:10308-:d:1183062. 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.