IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirb/v45y2018i3p567-582.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantifying scenic areas using crowdsourced data

Author

Listed:
  • Chanuki Illushka Seresinhe
  • Helen Susannah Moat
  • Tobias Preis

Abstract

For centuries, philosophers, policy-makers and urban planners have debated whether aesthetically pleasing surroundings can improve our wellbeing. To date, quantifying how scenic an area is has proved challenging, due to the difficulty of gathering large-scale measurements of scenicness. In this study we ask whether images uploaded to the website Flickr , combined with crowdsourced geographic data from OpenStreetMap , can help us estimate how scenic people consider an area to be. We validate our findings using crowdsourced data from Scenic-Or-Not , a website where users rate the scenicness of photos from all around Great Britain. We find that models including crowdsourced data from Flickr and OpenStreetMap can generate more accurate estimates of scenicness than models that consider only basic census measurements such as population density or whether an area is urban or rural. Our results provide evidence that by exploiting the vast quantity of data generated on the Internet, scientists and policy-makers may be able to develop a better understanding of people's subjective experience of the environment in which they live.

Suggested Citation

  • Chanuki Illushka Seresinhe & Helen Susannah Moat & Tobias Preis, 2018. "Quantifying scenic areas using crowdsourced data," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 45(3), pages 567-582, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:45:y:2018:i:3:p:567-582
    DOI: 10.1177/0265813516687302
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0265813516687302
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0265813516687302?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sugiyama, T. & Francis, J. & Middleton, N.J. & Owen, N. & Giles-CortI, B., 2010. "Associations between recreational walking and attractiveness, size, and proximity of neighborhood open spaces," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 100(9), pages 1752-1757.
    2. van den Berg, Agnes E. & Maas, Jolanda & Verheij, Robert A. & Groenewegen, Peter P., 2010. "Green space as a buffer between stressful life events and health," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1203-1210, April.
    3. Julian Besag & Jeremy York & Annie Mollié, 1991. "Bayesian image restoration, with two applications in spatial statistics," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 43(1), pages 1-20, March.
    4. Kaczynski, A.T. & Potwarka, L.R. & Saelens P, B.E., 2008. "Association of park size, distance, and features with physical activity in neighborhood parks," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 98(8), pages 1451-1456.
    5. Martin Zaltz Austwick & Oliver O’Brien & Emanuele Strano & Matheus Viana, 2013. "The Structure of Spatial Networks and Communities in Bicycle Sharing Systems," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(9), pages 1-17, September.
    6. O’Brien, Oliver & Cheshire, James & Batty, Michael, 2014. "Mining bicycle sharing data for generating insights into sustainable transport systems," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 262-273.
    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. Xiaohu Zhang & Scott Melbourne & Chinmoy Sarkar & Alain Chiaradia & Chris Webster, 2020. "Effects of green space on walking: Does size, shape and density matter?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(16), pages 3402-3420, December.
    2. Razieh Zandieh & Javier Martinez & Johannes Flacke, 2019. "Older Adults’ Outdoor Walking and Inequalities in Neighbourhood Green Spaces Characteristics," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-18, November.
    3. 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.
    4. Meryem Hayir-Kanat & Jürgen Breuste, 2020. "Outdoor Recreation Participation in Istanbul, Turkey: An Investigation of Frequency, Length, Travel Time and Activities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-23, January.
    5. Peter Barlow & Sean Lyons & Anne Nolan, 2021. "How Perceived Adequacy of Open Public Space Is Related to Objective Green Space and Individuals’ Opinions of Area-Level Quality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-15, July.
    6. Saberi, Meead & Ghamami, Mehrnaz & Gu, Yi & Shojaei, Mohammad Hossein (Sam) & Fishman, Elliot, 2018. "Understanding the impacts of a public transit disruption on bicycle sharing mobility patterns: A case of Tube strike in London," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 154-166.
    7. Yang Yang & Zhifang Wang & Guangsi Lin, 2021. "Performance Assessment Indicators for Comparing Recreational Services of Urban Parks," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-21, March.
    8. Todd, James & O'Brien, Oliver & Cheshire, James, 2021. "A global comparison of bicycle sharing systems," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    9. Mateo-Babiano, Iderlina & Bean, Richard & Corcoran, Jonathan & Pojani, Dorina, 2016. "How does our natural and built environment affect the use of bicycle sharing?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 295-307.
    10. Médard de Chardon, Cyrille & Caruso, Geoffrey, 2015. "Estimating bike-share trips using station level data," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 260-279.
    11. Zhan Gao & Sheng Wei & Lei Wang & Sijia Fan, 2020. "Exploring the Spatial-Temporal Characteristics of Traditional Public Bicycle Use in Yancheng, China: A Perspective of Time Series Cluster of Stations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-17, August.
    12. Lennon, Mick & Douglas, Owen & Scott, Mark, 2019. "Responsive environments: An outline of a method for determining context sensitive planning interventions to enhance health and wellbeing," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 68-78.
    13. Justine I Blanford & MGIS Geog 586 Students, 2020. "Pedal Power: Explorers and commuters of New York Citi Bikesharing scheme," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-15, June.
    14. Vita Žlender & Stefano Gemin, 2023. "Different Environments and Physical Activity before and during the COVID-19 Lockdown: Data from Slovenia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21, January.
    15. Sarah C. Gadd & Alexis Comber & Mark S. Gilthorpe & Keiran Suchak & Alison J. Heppenstall, 2022. "Simplifying the interpretation of continuous time models for spatio-temporal networks," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 171-198, April.
    16. Claudia Fongar & Geir Aamodt & Thomas B. Randrup & Ingjerd Solfjeld, 2019. "Does Perceived Green Space Quality Matter? Linking Norwegian Adult Perspectives on Perceived Quality to Motivation and Frequency of Visits," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-16, July.
    17. Chaudhury, Habib & Campo, Michael & Michael, Yvonne & Mahmood, Atiya, 2016. "Neighbourhood environment and physical activity in older adults," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 104-113.
    18. Advait Sarkar & Neal Lathia & Cecilia Mascolo, 2015. "Comparing cities’ cycling patterns using online shared bicycle maps," Transportation, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 541-559, July.
    19. Linde Van Hecke & Jelle Van Cauwenberg & Peter Clarys & Delfien Van Dyck & Jenny Veitch & Benedicte Deforche, 2016. "Active Use of Parks in Flanders (Belgium): An Exploratory Observational Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, December.
    20. Zhang, Yongping & Mi, Zhifu, 2018. "Environmental benefits of bike sharing: A big data-based analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 220(C), pages 296-301.

    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:sae:envirb:v:45:y:2018:i:3:p:567-582. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.