Assessing the Economic Aspects of Landscape

  • Marta BotteroEmail author


There are many economic aspects associated with landscape. Firstly, landscape is an “externality”, as the economic activities involving the use and transformation of landscape have different effects and repercussions on the same; secondly, landscape, especially in modern society, is seen more and more as a limited resource, and is therefore perceived as an “economic good”. In consideration of these assumptions, the current chapter will examine the main indicators used in literature to assess the economic aspects of landscape, with an interpretation on the basis of two major approaches to analysis: the “economic value” of landscape and the “economic strength” of landscape. Finally we will propose a set of indicators based on the DPSIR model on two different scales for monitoring macro transformations (regional scale) and the following in-depth study (local scale).


Total Economic Value Externalities Economic analysis Evaluation 


Scientific Literature and Applicative Researches About One Indicator or Category of Indicators

  1. Berentsen PBM et al (2007) Costs and benefits of on-farm nature conservation. Ecol Econ 62:571–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bonnieux F, Le Goffe P (1997) Valuing the benefits of landscape restoration: a case study of the Cotentin in Lower-Normandy, France. J Environ Manag 50:321–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boxall PC et al (2003) Backcountry recreationists valuation of forest and park management features in wildness parks of western Canadian shield. In: Hanley N et al (eds) The new economics of outdoor recreation. Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  4. Bujosa Bestard A, Riera Font A (2009) Environmental diversity in recreational choice modelling. Ecol Econ 68(11): 2743–2750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cho S et al (2009) Amenity values of spatial configurations of forest landscapes over space and time in the southern Appalachian Highlands. Ecol Econ 68:2646–2657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cicia G, Scarpa R (2000) Willingness to pay for rural landscape preservation: a case study in Mediterranean agriculture. Mattei, MilanoGoogle Scholar
  7. Duchateau K (2002) PAIS: proposal on indicators for landscapes, agricultural practices and rural development at the EU level. 8th IWG.AGRI Seminar, Chateau de la Muette, Paris, 21–22 Nov 2002Google Scholar
  8. EEA European Environmental Agency (2003) Environmental indicators; typology and use in reporting. EEA internal working paperGoogle Scholar
  9. EEA European Environmental Agency (2005) Agriculture and environment in EU-15: the IRENA indicator report. Accessed 5 Oct 2009
  10. Eser TW (1999) Economic strength. In: Nordregio, Study Programme on European Spatial Planning. Spatial criteria and their indicatorsGoogle Scholar
  11. European Commission Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development (2006) Handbook on common monitoring and evaluation framework. Draft guidance documentGoogle Scholar
  12. Finco A, Tempesta T (1997) Agricoltura e assetto paesaggistico nella pianura tra Tagliamento e Isonzo. In: Tempesta T (ed) Paesaggio rurale e agro tecnologie. Angeli, MilanGoogle Scholar
  13. Gao X, Asami Y (2007) Effect of urban landscapes on land prices in two Japanese cities. Landsc Urban Plan 81:155–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gómez-Sal A, Belmontes JA, Nicolau JM (2003) Assessing landscape values: a proposal for a multidimensional conceptual model. Ecol Model 168:319–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hanley N et al (1998) Using choice experiments to value the environment. Environ Resour Econ 11(3–4):413–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kong F et al (2007) Using GIS and landscape metrics in the hedonic price modelling of the amenity value of urban green space: a case study in Jinan City, China. Landsc Urban Plan 79:240–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Landsis g.e.i.e. et al (2002) Proposal on Agri-Environmental Indicators PAIS. Project summary. Accessed July 2008
  18. Marangon F, Tempesta T (2008) Proposta di indicatori economici per la valutazione del paesaggio. Estimo Territorio 5:40–55Google Scholar
  19. Marone E (ed) (2007) Il paesaggio agrario tra conservazione e trasformazione: valutazioni economico-estimative, giuridiche ed urbanistiche. Atti del XXXVI incontro di studio Centro di Studi di Estimo e di Economia Territoriale CeSET, Catania, 10–11 Nov 2006. Firenze University Press, FirenzeGoogle Scholar
  20. MCPFE Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forest in Europe (1998) Pan European criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management. Third Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forest in Europe, 2–4 June 1998. Lisbon, PortugalGoogle Scholar
  21. MTT Agrifood Research Finland (2002) Agri-environmental and rural development indicators: a proposal. Jokionen, Finland. Accessed 5 Oct 2009
  22. Nordregio (2000) Criteria for spatial differentiation. In: Study Programme on European Spatial Planning (SPESP). Final reportGoogle Scholar
  23. OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2001a) Multifunctionality—towards an analytical framework. OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  24. OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (2001b) Environmental indicators for agriculture 3. OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  25. Oueslati W et al (2008) Hedonic estimate of agricultural landscape values in suburban areas. 12th Congress of the European Association of Agricultural Economists, Ghent, 26–28 Aug 2008Google Scholar
  26. Piemonte in cifre (2007) Annuario statistico regionale. Accessed 14 Dec 2009
  27. Regione Umbria (2007) Valutazione ex post del Piano di Sviluppo Rurale 2000–2006Google Scholar
  28. Reho M (2007) La costruzione di indicatori per la valutazione del paesaggio. Diversi contesti di domanda. In: Castiglioni B, De Marchi M (eds) Paesaggio, sostenibilità valutazione. Quaderni del Dipartimento di Geografia, Università degli Studi di PadovaGoogle Scholar
  29. Santos JML (1998) The economic valuation of landscape change: theory and policies for land use. Elgar, LondonGoogle Scholar
  30. Sayadi S et al (2009) Public preferences for landscape features: the case of agricultural landscape in mountainous Mediterranean areas. Land Use Policy 26:334–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stellin G, Rosato P (1998) La valutazione economica dei beni ambientali. Città Studi, TorinoGoogle Scholar
  32. Tagliaferro C (2005) La stima del valore economico del paesaggio rurale tramite modelli edonici spaziali. Il caso di Massalubrense. Riv Economia Agraria 3:577–602Google Scholar
  33. Tempesta T (1993) La valutazione del paesaggio nella pianificazione territoriale. In: Franceschetti G, Tempesta T (eds) La pianificazione rurale del Veneto negli anni ottanta. Unipress, PadovaGoogle Scholar
  34. Tempesta T (1994) I servizi ambientali del settore primario. In: Prestamburgo M, Tempesta T (eds) Sistemi produttivi, redditi agricoli e politica ambientale. Risultati di una ricerca del parco regionale dei Colli Euganei. Angeli, MilanoGoogle Scholar
  35. Tempesta T (2006) Percezione e qualità del paesaggio. In: Tempesta T, Thiene M (eds) Percezione e valore del paesaggio. Angeli, MilanoGoogle Scholar
  36. Tempesta T, Visintin F, Rizzi L, Marangon F (2002) Il valore ricreativo dei paesaggi forestali. Riv Economia Agraria 4:637–680Google Scholar
  37. Tyrvainen L (1996) The amenity value of the urban forest: an application of the hedonic price method. Landsc Urban Plan 37:211–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Van Heuckelom M (2004) Framework for assessing sustainability levels in Belgian agricultural systems. SAFE annual report 2003. Scientific report, Brussels. Accessed 5 Oct 2009
  39. Verbič M, Slabe-Erker R (2009) An econometric analysis of willingness-to-pay for sustainable development: a case study of the Volčji Potok landscape area. Ecol Econ 68(5):1316–1328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Waarts Y (2005) Indicators for the quantification of multifunctionality impacts. Series of reports of the FP6 research project MEA-Scope 4. European Centre for Nature Conservation, TilburgGoogle Scholar
  41. Wascher DM (ed) (2000) Agri-environmental indicators for sustainable agriculture in Europe. European Centre for Nature Conservation, TilburgGoogle Scholar
  42. Wright IA et al (1999) A protocol for building the ELPEN livestock policy decision support system. MLURI, ScotlandGoogle Scholar

Web Sources

  1. ECNC European Centre for Nature Conservation.
  2. EEA European Environmental Agency.
  3. European Commission Directorate for Agriculture and Rural Development.
  4. MTT Agrifood Research Finland.
  5. OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. http://
  6. SPESP Study Programme on European Spatial Planning.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipartimento Casa-CittàPolitecnico di TorinoTorinoItaly

Personalised recommendations