Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 104511 |
| Journal | Landscape and urban planning |
| Volume | 226 |
| Early online date | 10 Jul 2022 |
| Publication status | Published - Oct 2022 |
Abstract
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Environmental Science(all)
- Ecology
- Social Sciences(all)
- Urban Studies
- Environmental Science(all)
- Nature and Landscape Conservation
- Environmental Science(all)
- Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: Landscape and urban planning, Vol. 226, 104511, 10.2022.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparing landscape value patterns between participatory mapping and geolocated social media content across Europe
AU - Stahl Olafsson, Anton
AU - Purves, Ross S.
AU - Wartmann, Flurina M.
AU - Garcia-Martin, Maria
AU - Fagerholm, Nora
AU - Torralba, Mario
AU - Albert, Christian
AU - Verbrugge, Laura N.H.
AU - Heikinheimo, Vuokko
AU - Plieninger, Tobias
AU - Bieling, Claudia
AU - Kaaronen, Roope
AU - Hartmann, Maximilian
AU - Raymond, Christopher M.
N1 - Funding Information: The authors met at a social-ecological systems club workshop hosted by the Helsinki Institute of Sustainability science in Finland between 30.9.2019-2.10.2019. The PPGIS-based data collection has received funding from the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme under Grant Agreements No. 613520 (Project AGFORWARD) and No. 603447 (Project HERCULES). RSP and MH acknowledge support from the Swiss National Science Foundation (Project EVA-VGI 2 No. 186389). NF acknowledges support from the Academy of Finland (Grant 321555). Funding Information: The authors met at a social-ecological systems club workshop hosted by the Helsinki Institute of Sustainability science in Finland between 30.9.2019-2.10.2019. The PPGIS-based data collection has received funding from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under Grant Agreements No. 613520 (Project AGFORWARD) and No. 603447 (Project HERCULES). RSP and MH acknowledge support from the Swiss National Science Foundation (Project EVA-VGI 2 No. 186389). NF acknowledges support from the Academy of Finland (Grant 321555).
PY - 2022/10
Y1 - 2022/10
N2 - In this study, we bring together participatory mapping and analysis of geolocated social media content from the Flickr platform in an assessment of similarities and differences in their utility for landscape value elicitation. We do so in a Pan-European context comparing types of landscape values and their spatial patterns across 19 case sites in 11 European countries. Across these sites, we find great variety in volume, types and spatial patterns of landscape values elicited from participatory mapping by local people and opportunistic use of tags and image locations crowdsourced from Flickr. Most agreement in spatial patterns across the two data sets are found in densely populated landscapes; however, comparison of types of perceived landscape values is challenged by the differing assumptions of each value elicitation technique. We argue for the complementary potential of both approaches and highlight the strengths and weaknesses of using the two together in landscape research, planning and management. An integrated approach is likely to increase the inclusiveness of landscape value assessments.
AB - In this study, we bring together participatory mapping and analysis of geolocated social media content from the Flickr platform in an assessment of similarities and differences in their utility for landscape value elicitation. We do so in a Pan-European context comparing types of landscape values and their spatial patterns across 19 case sites in 11 European countries. Across these sites, we find great variety in volume, types and spatial patterns of landscape values elicited from participatory mapping by local people and opportunistic use of tags and image locations crowdsourced from Flickr. Most agreement in spatial patterns across the two data sets are found in densely populated landscapes; however, comparison of types of perceived landscape values is challenged by the differing assumptions of each value elicitation technique. We argue for the complementary potential of both approaches and highlight the strengths and weaknesses of using the two together in landscape research, planning and management. An integrated approach is likely to increase the inclusiveness of landscape value assessments.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85133909626&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2022.104511
DO - 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2022.104511
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85133909626
VL - 226
JO - Landscape and urban planning
JF - Landscape and urban planning
SN - 0169-2046
M1 - 104511
ER -