Determination of landscape beauties through visual quality assessment method: a case study for Kemaliye (Erzincan/Turkey)
- 559 Downloads
Kemaliye (Erzincan/Turkey) is the member of European Association of Historic Towns and Regions. The aim of this study was to reveal the visual richness of the town; to identify the relationship between landscape spatial pattern and visual quality of the landscape and to offer some suggestions for the future planning in regarding to these visual beauties. The visual quality assessment method was used in this study. The results of the study revealed three landscape types that have the highest visual quality. Among those, the highest one is urban scenery 3 (US3; VQP = 5.9400), the second is geological structure scenery 5 (GSS 5; VQP = 5.9200) and the third natural scenery 3 (NS3; VQP = 5.9133). Visual quality assessment showed that urban pattern, geological structure and natural resources of the region also have visual value. The relationships between landscape spatial pattern and visual quality of landscape indicated that certain characteristics of landscape affected the quality. For instance, as the texture level decreased in natural landscapes and as the green areas increased in geological structure, visual preferences ratio increased. Some suggestions were also made regarding the visual resources use in the region.
KeywordsVisual quality assessment Turkey Visual quality of landscape Kemaliye
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Acar, C., & Kurdoğlu, B. Ç. (2005). Visual quality evaluation in Kaçkar Mointains. Sum on protected natural areas. Isparta, Turkey: Süleyman Demirel University September 8–10, 2005.Google Scholar
- Anonim. (2005a). Kemaliye İlçesi İklim Verileri (1984–1990). Ankara: Meteoroloji Genel Müdürlüğü, Araştırma ve Bilgi İşlem Daire Başkanlığı.Google Scholar
- Anonim. (2005b). 2000 Genel Nüfus Sayımı, Nüfusun Sosyal ve Ekonomik Nitelikleri, 24 Erzincan, T. C. Ankara: Başbakanlık Devlet İstatistik Enstitüsü.Google Scholar
- Daniel, T. C., & Vining, J. (1983). Methodological issues in the assessment of landscape quality. In I. Altman, & J. F. Wohwill (Eds.) Behaviour and the Natural Environment (pp. 39–83). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
- Karahan, F. (2003). Landscape planning of Erzurum-Rize highway cooridor and its opportunity for usebility as landscape view road (p. 210). Ph.D. Dissertation, Graduate College of Atatürk University, Erzurum.Google Scholar
- Karahan, F., & Yılmaz, H. (2004a). Evaluation of Erzurum-Rize hihgway cooridor for ecotourism purposes. II. International tourism, environment and culture symposium pp. 225–262. İzmir, Turkey: Proceeding Book.Google Scholar
- Karahan, F., & Yılmaz, H. (2004b). (203–205). Visual quality analysis of Erzurum highway cooridor. Landscape Architecture 2. Congress. İzmir, Turkey: Proceeding Book.Google Scholar
- Koç, N., & Şahin, Ş. (1999). Urban Landscape Planning. University of Ankara, Faculty of Agriculture, No: 1509 (p. 210), Ankara.Google Scholar
- Shuttleworth, S. (1980a). The use of photographs as an environment presantation medium in landscape studies. Journal of Environmental Management, 11(1), 61–76.Google Scholar
- Shuttleworth, S. (1980b). The evaluation of landscape quality. Landscape Research, 5(1), 14–1518–20.Google Scholar
- Tahvanainen, L., Ihalainen, M., Hietala-Koivu, R., Kolehmainen, O., Tyrväinen, L., Nousiainen, O., & Helenius, J. (2002). Measures of the, EU agri-environmental protection scheme (GAEPS) and their impacts on the visual acceptability of Finnish agricultural landscapes. Journal of Environmental Management, 66, 213–227.Google Scholar