Perceptions and social valuations of landscape. Objectives and methodology for citizen participation in landscape policies

References

• Besser, D. T., McLain, R., Cerveny, L., Biedenweg, K., & Banis, D. (2014). Mapping landscape values: Issues, challenges and lessons learned from field work on the Olympic Peninsula, Washington. Environmental Practice, 16, 138–150.10.1017/S1466046614000052
   Google Scholar
• Beverly, J. L., Uto, K., Wilkes, J., & Bothwell, P. (2008). Assessing spatial attributes of forest landscape values: An internet-based participatory mapping approach. NRC Research Press, 38, 289–303.
   Google Scholar
• Bianucci, P., & Asenjo, V. (2009). La importancia de la participación pública en el proceso de toma de decisions [The importance of public participation in the decision-making process]. In C. Iglesias Merchan (Ed.), Ecología del paisaje y seguimiento ambiental. Feedback en materia ambiental [Landscape ecology and environmental monitoring. Feedback on environmental issues] (pp. 107–117). Madrid: Ecopás.
   Google Scholar
• Bouwen, R., & Taillieu, T. (2004). Multi-party collaboration as social learning for interdependence: Developing relational knowing for sustainable resource management. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 14, 137–153.10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1298
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buckingham-Hatfield, S., & Percy, S. (2005). Constructing local environmental agendas. People, places, participation. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis e-Library.
   Google Scholar
• Carver, S., Watson, A., Waters, T., Matt, R., Gunderson, K., & Davis, B. (2009). Developing computer-based participatory approaches to mapping landscape values for landscape and resource management. In S. Geertman & J. Stillwell (Eds.), Planning support systems best practice and new methods (pp. 431–448). Rotterdam: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Countryside Agency – Scottish Natural Heritage (2002). Landscape character assessment: Guidance for England and Scotland. Wetherby: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Davenport, A., & Anderson, D. H. (2005). Getting from sense of place to place-based management: An interpretive investigation of place meanings and perceptions of landscape change. Society and Natural Resources, 18, 625–641.10.1080/08941920590959613
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Groot, M., Winnubst, M., Van Shie, N., & Van Ast, J. (2014). Visioning with the Public: Incorporating public values in Landscape Planning. European Planning Studies, 22, 1165–1181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Díaz De Rada, V. (2012). Ventajas e inconvenientes de la encuesta por internet [Advantages and disadvantages of Internet research surveys]. Papers, 97, 193–223.
   Google Scholar
• Elcome, D., & Baines, J. (1999). Steps to success. Working with residents and neighbours to develop and implement plans for protected areas. Gland: Commision on Education and Communication; European Committee for EE.
   Google Scholar
• Fagerholm, N., & Käyhkö, N. (2009). Participatory mapping and geographical patterns of the social landscape values of rural communities in Zanzibar, Tanzania. Fennia, 187, 43–60. Helsinki.
   Google Scholar
• García-Martín, M. (2013). Percepciones y valoraciones sociales del territorio en las aglomeraciones urbanas: paisaje y lugar en el Aljarafe (Sevilla) [Social perception and values of the territory in urban agglomerations: Landscape and place in the Aljarafe region (Seville)] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Dirigida por Leandro del Moral Ituarte y Florencio Zoido, Departamento de Geografía Humana, Universidad de Sevilla.
   Google Scholar
• Gómez Zotano, J., & Riesco Chueca, P. (Eds.). (2010). Marco conceptual y metodológico para los paisajes españoles. Aplicación a tres escalas de análisis [Conceptual and methodological framework for Spanish landscapes. Application to three scales of analysis]. Sevilla: Centro de Estudios Paisaje y Territorio [Andalusian Centre for Landscape and Territorial Studies]. Junta de Andalucía.
   Google Scholar
• Healey, P. (2009). The pragmatic tradition in planning thought. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 28, 277–292.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helling, A. (1998). Collaborative visioning: Proceed with caution! Results from evaluating Atlanta’s vision 2020 project. Journal of the American Planning Association, 64, 335–349.10.1080/01944369808975990
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heras Hernández, F. (2002). Entre tantos. Guía práctica para dinamizar procesos participativos sobre problemas ambientales y sostenibilidad [Among so many. Practical guide to dynamize participatory processes on environmental problems and sustainability]. Valladolid: Gea.
   Google Scholar
• Hurley, P. T., & Walker, P. A. (2004). Whose vision? Conspiracy theory and land-use planning in Nevada County, California Environment and Planning A, 36, 1529–1547.10.1068/a36186
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2003). The impact of collaborative planning on governance capacity. Working paper for Annual Conference of the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning, Baltimore. Institute of Urban and Regional Development University of California, Berkeley. November 21–24, 1–32.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, M. (2006). Landscape, law and justice –concepts and issues. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrijt/Norwegian Journal of Geography, 60(1), 1–14.10.1080/00291950600618726
   Google Scholar
• Jones, M. (2007). The European Landscape Convention and question of public participation. Landscape Research, 32, 613–633.10.1080/01426390701552753
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, M., & Stenseke, M. (Eds.). (2011). The European landscape convention. Challenges of participation. Series: Landscape Series, Vol. 13. London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Larsen, S., & Hutton, C. N. (2012). Community discourse and the emerging amenity landscapes of the American West. GeoJournal, 77, 651–665.10.1007/s10708-011-9410-1
   Google Scholar
• Larsen, S., Sorenson, C., Mcdermott, D., Long, J., & Post, C. (2007). Place perception and social interaction on an exurban landscape in central Colorado. The Professional Geographer, 59, 421–433.10.1111/j.1467-9272.2007.00632.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore-Colyer, R., & De Scott, A. (2005). What kind of landscape do we want? past, present and future perspectives. Landscape Research, 30, 501–523.10.1080/01426390500273254
   Google Scholar
• Muro, M., & Jeffrey, P. (2008). A critical review of the theory and application of social learning in participatory natural resource management processes. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 51, 325–344.10.1080/09640560801977190
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nogue, J., Puigbert, L., Sala, P., & Bretcha, G. (Eds.). (2010). Paisatge i participació ciutadana [Landscape and public participation]. Barcelona: Observatorio del Paisaje de Cataluña [Landscape Observatory of Catalonia].
   Google Scholar
• Prieur, M., & Durousseau, S. (2006). Landscape and public participation. In Landscape and sustainable development. Challenges of the European Landscape Convention, (pp. 165–207). Strasbourg: Council of European Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Rydin, Y., & Pennington, M. (2000). Public participation and local environmental planning: The collective action problem and the potential of social capital. Local Environment, 5, 153–169.10.1080/13549830050009328
   Google Scholar
• Scott, A. J. (1999). Whose futures? A comparative study of local agenda 21 in Mid Wales. Planning Practice and Research, 14, 401–421.10.1080/02697459915535
   Google Scholar
• Selman, P. (2004). Community participation in the planning and management of cultural landscape. Journal of Environnmental Planning and Management, 47, 365–392.
   Google Scholar
• Umemoto, K., & Igarashi, H. (2009). Deliberative planning in a multicultural milieu. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 29, 39–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, P. A., & Hurley, P. T. (2011). Planning paradise: Politics and visioning of land use in Oregon. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wherrett, J. R. (2000). Creating landscape preference models using internet survey techniques. Landscape Research, 25, 79–96.10.1080/014263900113181
   Google Scholar
• Woodhouse, E. J., & Nieusma, D. A. (2001). Democratic expertise: Integrating knowledge, power and participation. In M. Hisschemoller, R. Hoppe, W. N. Dunn, & J. R. Ravetz (Eds.), Knowledge, Power, and Participation in Environmental Policy Analysis. Policy Studies Review Annual (Vol. 12, pp. 73–96). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
   Google Scholar