Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Associate Professor of Landscape Planning, Faculty of Agriculture, Tabriz University (

2 MSc, Department of Landscape Planning, Faculty of Agriculture, Tabriz University

10.22034/gp.2021.42366.2723

Abstract

Introduction
The growing trend of urbanization in developing countries like as Iran has led to a threefold increase in the urban population, with 54% of the world's population living in cities and projected to reach 66% by 2050. From 1950 to 2014, the world's population increased by 423 percent. The willingness towards machine life is the rapid development of construction in urban areas, causing psychological pressures along with physical pressures on the living environment in urban spaces) and can be said that construction without limitation in cities has a negative impact on urban landscape preferences. Also, rapid population growth in cities has a negative reflection on the environment and urban the pollution of cities, environmental degradation, also the ecological balance of the environment, destruction Cover plants of urban and suburban areas (farmland, gardens) and the conversion of natural ground cover to the impermeable surfaces. It also has an impact on the urban ecosystems. The sequence of that urban dispersal takes place. Extravagant use of suburban lands has led to dramatic changes in the landscape of suburbs and city entrances. Today's entrances, which serve as only an element to determine the city's boundaries, are decorative elements that are located in the middle of the city's entryway and can be said to have no identity. Some of the most important actions carried out in the field of organization of entrance gates in Iranian cities are the construction of the Boulevard and the Blvd and often has been added to the problems of these fields. The lack of proper city management, on the other hand, has led to undesirable uses at the entrance of cities that limit the attractiveness of tourism and the use of natural elements and make visual and environmental disturbances more evident.
The importance of urban landscapes has been revealed to everyone with its many benefits, so planning for urban landscape design is one of the most important issues in ecology and urban landscape. Landscapes are important in human life activities and how they affect the quality of our life. However, strategies for urban landscape management have been developed by experts and the perception of people from the urban landscape is often ignored. The European Landscape Convention (ELC) mentioned that people’s perceptions are the main factor in the assessment and planning of the landscape because general people think in a different way than experienced designers’ do. Studies show that human judgment is instinctive so that prospects for suitable for survival are more preferred. These responses are usually unconscious and immediate. So, in planning and managing public spaces, they need to be considered and understood by users of these.
The need to integrate public perception and expert approaches into landscape management processes can help improve the urban because the use of urban sights is a expect if the reality is not coordinated, it leads to incompatibility between space and citizens. It is obvious that recognizing the desires of people and their preferences is not only an educational challenge, but also vital for policymaking and implementation, and in addition to creating more attractive neighborhoods and promoting environmental services. In this way, urban spaces can be gained better acceptance and satisfaction by people of society. Evidence shows that in Iran, public perception of urban landscapes, especially at city entrances, has not been addressed at all, and therefore, this study attempts to examine the perceptions of people who use the entrances to Saqqez city in order to improve their perceptions. Environmental quality from the perspective of the indigenous peoples of Saqez, travelers, and tourists.
Materials & Methods
study area
The city of Saqqez is located in the northwest of Sanandaj City (center of the province) and approximately 190 kilometers. The city of Saqqez has located between orbit 36 degrees 13 minutes to 36 degrees 16 minutes north latitude and 46 degrees 14 minutes 46 degrees 17 minutes east longitude. The city of Saqqez, with a population equal to 168.258, has also been divided into 22 neighborhoods and 8 districts.The city of Saqqez has 4 entrances; it has one entrance to Sanandaj to the south-east, 1 to Boukan to the north, 1 to Baneh to the west and 1 inlet in the northwest of the city where this entry is a rural entrance, which in this study will examine three main entrances of the city Used.
Questionnaire Structure
The questionnaire is divided into three sections. The first section contains demographic information. Before scoring each landscape scene, the participants had to indicate their personal socio-demographic information; marital status, age, education level, monthly income, and city of residence. Finally, the third section deals with the independent and dependent variables of the research. The questionnaire was designed based on the Likert spectrum and is structurally closed.
Scene Evaluation 
The studies’ photographs were collected during the summers of 2018. All photographs in the studies were taken on sunny to partly sunny days from 10 am to 4 pm to avoid large differences in lighting. They were taken from approximately 5 feet above the ground from streets or sidewalks. A total of 40 images were selected and presented as a booklet. All 12 pictures related to one entrance and 2 photos of the beginning of each section and 2 final pictures were not considered in the analysis. participants were asked to evaluate the images on a 5-Point Likert-type Scale (Very nice + 2, beautiful +1, normal 0, ugly -1 and very ugly -2). The purpose of having two extra scenes at the beginning was to make the participants familiar with the photo rating procedure, whereas the two extra photos at the end of the photo-questionnaire served to prevent the participants from anticipating, which could render them easier. Finally, the images were calculated using the formula below.
 
Survey Population and Sample Size
The most relevant formula and a suitable solution would be the formula proposed by Mitra and Lankford (1999). This formula significantly prevents error by reducing the sampling error and increasing the confidence level, while at the same time reducing the non-sampling error. We assumed the standard deviation to be equal to 2.88, with the sampling size amounting to 300 persons. as a result, the sampling size amounted to 300 persons.
e = √ (P (1-P)/n); P = 50% and e = 2.88% 2.88% = √ (50 %( 1-50%)/n) → n = 300
Sampling Method, Survey Duration and Data analysis
During the spring months 2018, 300 entrance in Saqqez City users, aged 18 to 75, were randomly selected to answer a questionnaire containing 20 questions, using the booklet. The questionnaire was distributed every day at 8 am to 8 pm. These hours constitute the most frequently visited times of urban entrance. The data collected from the questionnaire survey were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS), no. 20.
Discussion of Results
Examine people's preferences
The mean of the dependent variables of the research required to create an appropriate environment and to improve the quality of the environment are "public service, tourist, traffic, law enforcement, and green space. Green space with a mean of 4.40 was the top priority, and tourist destinations with a mean of 4.23 were.
Prioritizing independent variables from people's perspective
Friedman's test was used to prioritize independent variables from the viewpoints of indigenous people, travelers, and tourists in Saqqez City. Prioritizing independent variables is the indicator that it can have a positive impact on different applications within the city's entry range of those users. Green walkways in the range with an average rating of 8.20 as the first proper use of the entrance axis could have the most impact, creating parks or recreational or resorts with an average rating of 8.12 was the second most preferred, but there are repair shops and industrial applications with a mean rating of 2.62 was the lowest preference. The results also showed that the priority of independent variables of people is completely different and not at a level where the mentioned test was significant at the error level of 0.05 (P < 0.05).
People's preferences for independent variables according to demographic characteristic
People's preferences for independent variables were adjusted according to age, education level, marital status and residence in the form of sequential variables. Kruskal-Wallis test for age and level of education was used to compare the independent variables of the study, and the Mann-Whitney test for marital status and residence was used to compare the independent variables of the study. The results show that the choice of some variables (95% and 99% confidence level) was significant, which means that people with age, education, marital status, and different residence have the same priority in relation to variables. Top of form
Mean Description of Preference 
Respondents' preferences at the entrances to Saqqez show That scenes 12, 16, and 34 are the most preferred scenes for the City entrances Saqqez. Sanandaj entrance Scene 12 (M = 3.50, SD= 1.050, pt=269) followed by bukan Entrance scene 16 (M = 4.08, s. d= 0.943, pt=324) and baneh Entrance scene 34 (M =4.06, SD= 0.929 pt=319). The favorable criteria natural landscapes, wide visibility, the presence of green spaces, Plant, elements and urban signs and service use in the desirability of spaces are important factors. But at the entrance to Sanandaj Scene 2 (M = 1.32, SD= 0.173, pt=-503) followed by bukan Entrance scene 15 (M = 1.40, s. d= 0.767, pt=-480) and baneh Entrance scene 32 (M =1.151, SD= 0.832 pt=-448) have the least preferred.The presence of visual turbulence by the waste collection center, range vendors and industrial applications, environmental degradation, lack of green space and lack of identity were the least effective preference. Bottom of Form
Conclusions
According to the results obtained from the present study, suitable land uses have been selected by the people from the perspective of Green walkways as the first priority of land use planning. In this regard, various studies show that green walkways or green trails contribute to the provision of multiple ecosystem services, protection, and conservation of biodiversity in cities. Tourists and travelers in the city of Saqqez have chosen the parks or recreational parks as a second priority in landscaping the entrances. Urban parks have been one of the most important cities. Top of form bottom of Form Urban parks are the main points of the cities. Green spaces, especially urban parks, give the community a wide range of environmental, psychological, social and economic benefits depending on their performance. The third priority of the people to use in landscaping entrances is "health centers". Health is one of the first basic needs of human societies for health and can be said to be an important part of one's social needs. Therefore, equal access to the primary health services for all social and economic groups of security and control with the aim of improving the quality of life and health of citizens is of the most important duties of Governments.
The lowest priority of the people is among the users from the perspective of entrances to "repair shop and industrial applications". Research has shown that the establishment of industrial and repair shops at the entrance axis is unauthorized due to the visual pollution they create, and it is suggested that they are transferred to the second layer. Or that these observations are covered with vegetation. Previous studies have demonstrated that different people could have different perceptions of landscape visual quality. Socio-economic and demographic characteristics significantly affect individuals’ preferences. Landscape preferences show in the entrances of cities, the existence of handmade objects such as houses, buildings in agricultural farms and index changes affect the preference of negative impact, but water, plant cover, shrubs, and trees have a positive impact on the viewpoint and study of verification of this issue.

Keywords

Main Subjects

افندی زاده، شهریار، گلشن خواص، رضا، (1385)، طراحی مدل ایمنی مبادی ورودی شهرها، پژوهشهای حمل‌ونقل، دوره 3، شماره 4، شماره پیاپی، صص 241-233.
بزی، خدا رحم، خمر، غلامعلی، کیانی، اکبر، میرشکاری، محمدعلی و گلچین، پیمان (1392)، ارزیابی ترجیحات گروه‌های متفاوت سنی از مناظر بصری پارک ملت زاهدان، فصلنامه جغرافیا و آمایش شهری- منطقه‌ای، دوره 3، شماره 9، صص 68-49.
پاکزاد، جهانشاه (1391)، راهنمای طراحی فضاهای شهری در ایران، تهران، انتشارات شورای حوزهی معاونت شهرسازی و معماری وزارت مسکن و شهرسازی.
پاکزاد، جهانشاه، (1391)، راهنمای طراحی فضاهای شهری در ایران، تهران، انتشارات شورای حوزهی معاونت شهرسازی و معماری وزارت مسکن و شهرسازی.
پوراحمد، احمد، اکبر‌پور سراسکانرود، محمد و ستوده، سمانه، (1388) ،  مدیریت فضای سبز شهری منطقه 9 شهرداری تهران، مجله پژوهشهای جغرافیای انسانی، دوره 42، شماره 69، صص 50-29.
حامی، احمد، (1397)، ارتباط بین الگوهای کاشت گیاهان و ادراک امنیت در پارک های شهری (مطالعه موردی تبریز، ایران)، نشریه علمی- پژوهشی جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی شهری، سال 22، شماره65، صص 101-116.
خلجانی، فرزاد، (1393)، بررسی و تحلیل خدمات گردشگری در جذب گردشگران با تأکید بر پارکهای مسافر (مطالعه موردی کلان‌شهر تبریز)، پایان نامه گروه جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشگاه تبریز.
رحیمی، اکبر، (1399)، ارزیابی تغییرات فضاهای سبز شهری از سال 1355 تا 1395 با استفاده از تصاویر ماهواره ای و پیش بینی تغییرات شبکه های عصبی مصنوعی، نشریه علمی- پژوهشی جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی شهری، سال 24، شماره71، صص 67-82.
سلطانی فرد، هادی، رعنایی، مجتبی، قدرتی، شفیعه، (1397)، ارزیابی تجربه کیفیت منظر مراکز آموزش عالی از نگاه دانشجویان. نمونه موردی: دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مجله محیط‌شناسی، دوره 44، شماره 3، صص 547-533.
شهابی، هیمن، یاری، ارسطو، یزدانی، محمد و سالاری، ممند، (1395)، ارزیابی روند گسترش افقی شهر در حریم گسل‌های لرزه‌ای و مناطق خطرپذیر طبیعی و پیامدهای آن (مطالعه موردی: شهرستان سقز در استان کردستان)، فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی و بین‌المللی جغرافیای ایران، سال 14، شماره 51، زمستان، صص 283- 304.
ضرابی، اصغر، علی زاده، جابر، رنجبرنیا، بهزاد، کاملی فر، محمدجواد، احمدیان، مهدی، (1394)، ارزیابی سطح رضایت شهروندان از کیفیت محیط شهری (نمونه موردی: مناطق ده گانه کلانشهر تبریز)، نشریه علمی- پژوهشی جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی شهری، سال 19، شماره51، صص 193-219.
قربانی، رسول، پروین، نادر، قیصریان، جمال، (1390)، مکانیابی مراکز تجاری نوین شهری در نواحی شهری با استفاده از مدل تحلیل سلسله مراتبی (AHP) نمونه موردی: نواحی 3 گانه شهرداری سقز، نشریه علمی- پژوهشی جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی شهری، سال هفدهم، شماره45، صص 163-181.
قوام پور، انسیه، (1388)، منظر ورودی: دریچه ادراک شهری، مجله علمی، ترویجی منظر، دورهشماره 3، صص 77-76.
کلانتری خلیل‌آباد، حسین، اخوت، هانیه، (1393). برنامه‌ریزی منظر شهری، جهاد دانشگاهی، تهران.
گلچین، پیمان، ناروئی، بهروز و مثنوی، محمدرضا، (1391)، ارزیابی کیفیت بصری فضاهای آموزشی بر اساس ترجیحات استفاده‌کنندگان (مطالعه موردی: دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان)، محیط‌شناسی، دوره 38، شماره 62، صص 150-135.
گوهری انوشه، ایرانی بهبهانی هما، صالحی اسماعیل، (1395)، روش‌شناختی ادراک منظر شهری در ارتباط با ذهنیات و خاطرات جمعی، مطالعه موردی محله تجریش، مجله محیط‌شناسی، دوره 42، شماره1، صص-210-195.
محمد پوری، سولماز، (1395)، ساماندهی منظر ورودی شهر در جهت ارتقاء حس تعلق شهروندی نمونه موردی: ورودی‌های شهر ارومیه( سلماس- ارومیه، اشنویه- ارومیه)، پایان نامه گروه شهرسازی، دانشگاه هنر ارومیه.
مسچی، مونا، (1392)، پایان نامه طراحی منظر ورودی شهر همدان با رویکرد پساصنعتی، دانشکده شهرسازی، دانشگاه تهران.
ملکشاهی، غلامرضا، وکیلی، صاحبه، (1396)، بررسی توزیع خدمات عمومی براساس عدالت اجتماعی (موردشناسی: شهر سقز)، مجله جغرافیا و آمایش شهری- منطقه‌ای، شماره 25 زمستان، ص 170-147.
میرسیدحسینی، طلایه، (1395)، دستور کار طراحی حوزه‌های ورودی شهری پایدار با تأکید بر اهمیت نقش فضای سبز مطالعه موردی حوزه ورودی فردیس کرج، پایان نامه گروه برنامه‌ریزی و طراحی شهری و منطقه‌ای، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
وحدت، سلمان، سجادزاده، حسین، کریمی مشاور، مهرداد، (1394)، تبیین ابعاد مؤثر بر منظر خیابان در جهت ارتقای خوانش منظر فضاهای شهری، فصلنامه مطالعات شهری، دوره4، شماره 15، صص16-37.
Akpinar, A. (2016). Factors influencing the use of urban greenways: A case study of Aydın, Turkey. Urban forestry & urban greening, 16, 123-131.
Al-Akl, N. M., Karaan, E. N., Al-Zein, M. S., & Assaad, S. (2018). The landscape of urban cemeteries in Beirut: Perceptions and preferences. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 33, 66-74.
Arnberger, A., Schneider, I. E., Ebenberger, M., Eder, R., Venette, R. C., Snyder, S. A., ... & Cottrell, S. (2017). Emerald ash borer impacts on visual preferences for urban forest recreation settings. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 27, 235-245.‏
Bernasconi, C., Strager, M. P., Maskey, V., & Hasenmyer, M. (2009). Assessing public preferences for design and environmental attributes of an urban automated transportation system. Landscape and Urban Planning, 90(3-4), 155-167.
Brown, G., & Brabyn, L. (2012). An analysis of the relationships between multiple values and physical landscapes at a regional scale using public participation GIS and landscape character classification. Landscape and Urban Planning, 107(3), 317–331.
Brown, G., Schebella, M. F., & Weber, D. (2014). Using participatory GIS to measure physical activity and urban park benefits. Landscape and Urban Planning, 121, 34-44.
Chiu, H. Y., Chan, C. S., & Marafa, L. M. (2016). Local perception and preferences in nature tourism in Hong Kong. Tourism Management Perspectives, 20, 87-97.
Chen, B., & Qi, X. (2018). Protest response and contingent valuation of an urban forest park in Fuzhou City, China. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 29, 68-76.‏
Cox, D. T., Hudson, H. L., Shanahan, D. F., Fuller, R. A., & Gaston, K. J. (2017). The rarity of direct experiences of nature in an urban population. Landscape and urban planning, 160, 79-84.
Daniel, T. C. (2001). Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landscape and urban planning, 54(1-4), 267-281.
Dupont, L., Antrop, M., & Van Eetvelde, V. (2015). Does landscape related expertise influence the visual perception of landscape photographs? Implications for participatory landscape planning and management. Landscape and Urban Planning, 141, 68-77.
Filova, L., Vojar, J., Svobodova, K., & Sklenicka, P. (2015). The effect of landscape type and landscape elements on public visual preferences: ways to use knowledge in the context of landscape planning. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 58(11), 2037-2055.‏
Girma, Y., Terefe, H., Pauleit, S., & Kindu, M. (2018). Urban Green Spaces Supply in Rapidly Urbanizing Countries: The Case of Sebeta Town, Ethiopia. Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment.
Hermes, J., Albert, C., & von Haaren, C. (2018). Assessing the aesthetic quality of landscapes in Germany. Ecosystem services, 31, 296-307.
Hilal, M., Joly, D., Roy, D., & Vuidel, G. (2018). Visual structure of landscapes seen from built environment. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 32, 71-80.
Hitchmough, J., Wagner, M., & Ahmad, H. (2017). Extended flowering and high weed resistance within two layer designed perennial “prairie-meadow” vegetation. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 27, 117-126.
Hoyle, H., Hitchmough, J., & Jorgensen, A. (2017). Attractive, climate-adapted and sustainable? Public perception of non-native planting in the designed urban landscape. Landscape and Urban Planning, 164, 49-63.
Howley, P., Donoghue, C. O., & Hynes, S. (2012). Exploring public preferences for traditional farming landscapes. Landscape Urban Planning, 104, 66–74.
Hu, S., Yue, H., & Zhou, Z. (2019). Preferences for urban stream landscapes: Opportunities to promote unmanaged riparian vegetation. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 38, 114-123.
Jiang, Y., & Yuan, T. (2017). Public perceptions and preferences for wildflower meadows in Beijing, China. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 27, 324-331.‏
Joye, Y. (2007). Architectural lessons from environmental psychology: The case of biophilic architecture. Review of general psychology, 11(4), 305-328.‏
Junge, X., Schüpbach, B., Walter, T., Schmid, B., & Lindemann-Matthies, P. (2015). Aesthetic quality of agricultural landscape elements in different seasonal stages in Switzerland. Landscape and Urban Planning, 133, 67-77.‏
Kalivoda, O., Vojar, J., Skřivanová, Z., & Zahradník, D. (2014). Consensus in landscape preference judgments: The effects of landscape visual aesthetic quality and respondents' characteristics. Journal of environmental management, 137, 36-44.
Kaltenborn, B. P., & Bjerke, T. (2002). Associations between Environmental Value Orientations and Landscape Preferences. Landscape and Urban Planning, 59, 1-11.
Keith, S. J., Larson, L. R., Shafer, C. S., Hallo, J. C., & Fernandez, M. (2018). Greenway use and preferences in diverse urban communities: Implications for trail design and management. Landscape and Urban Planning, 172, 47-59.‏
Kim, H. W., Kim, J. H., Li, W., Yang, P., & Cao, Y. (2017). Exploring the impact of green space health on runoff reduction using NDVI. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 28, 81-87.
Kuper, R. (2017). Restorative potential, fascination, and extent for designed digital landscape models. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 28, 118-130.‏
Kowarik, I. (2019). The “Green Belt Berlin”: Establishing a greenway where the Berlin Wall once stood by integrating ecological, social and cultural approaches. Landscape and Urban Planning, 184, 12-22.‏
Lagbas, A. J. (2019). Social valuation of regulating and cultural ecosystem services of Arroceros Forest Park: A man-made forest in the city of Manila, Philippines. Journal of Urban Management, 8(1), 159-177.‏
Lee, K. E., Williams, K. J., Sargent, L. D., Farrell, C., & Williams, N. S. (2014). Living roof preference is influenced by plant characteristics and diversity. Landscape and Urban Planning, 122, 152-159.
Lin, L., Homma, R., & Iki, K. (2018). Preferences for a lake landscape: Effects of building height and lake width. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 70, 22-33.
Liu, X., Zhu, Z., Jin, L., Wang, L., & Huang, C. (2018). Measuring patterns and mechanism of greenway use–A case from Guangzhou, China. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 34, 55-63.‏
Lokocz, E., Ryan, R. L., & Sadler, A. J. (2011). Motivations for land protection and stewardship: Exploring place attachment and rural landscape character in Massachusetts. Landscape and urban planning, 99(2), 65-76.‏
López-Martínez, F. (2017). Visual landscape preferences in Mediterranean areas and their socio-demographic influences. Ecological Engineering, 104, 205-215.
Mitra, A., & Lankford, S. (1999). Research methods in park, recreation, and leisure services. Sagamore Publishing, Champaign: Illinois.
Molnarova, K., Sklenicka, P., Stiborek, J., Svobodova, K., Salek, M., & Brabec, E. (2012). Visual preferences for wind turbines: location, numbers and respondent characteristics. Applied Energy, 92,269–278.
Müderrisoğlu, H., Eroğlu, E., Özkan, Ş., & Ak, K. (2006). Visual perception of tree forms. Building and Environment, 41(6), 796-806.
Muratet, A., Pellegrini, P., Dufour, A. B., Arrif, T., & Chiron, F. (2015). Perception and knowledge of plant diversity among urban park users. Landscape and Urban Planning, 137, 95-106.
Noh, Y. (2019). Does converting abandoned railways to greenways impact neighboring housing prices?. Landscape and Urban Planning, 183, 157-166.‏
Ode, A., Fry, G., Tveit, M. S., Messager, P., & Miller, D. (2009). Indicators of perceived naturalness as drivers of landscape preference. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(1), 375–383.
Qureshi, S., Haase, D., & Coles, R. (2014). The theorized urban gradient (TUG) method—a conceptual framework for socio-ecological sampling in complex urban agglomerations. Ecological indicators, 36, 100-110.
Rahnema, S., Sedaghathoor, S., Allahyari, M. S., Damalas, C. A., & El Bilali, H. (2019). Preferences and emotion perceptions of ornamental plant species for green space designing among urban park users in Iran. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 39, 98-108.‏
Ramzi, A. I., & El-Bedawi, M. A. L. (2019). Towards integration of remote sensing and GIS to manage primary health care centers. Applied Computing and Informatics, 15(2), 109-113.‏
Rossetti, T., Lobel, H., Rocco, V., & Hurtubia, R. (2019). Explaining subjective perceptions of public spaces as a function of the built environment: A massive data approach. Landscape and urban planning, 181, 169-178.
Porteous, J. D. (2013). Environmental aesthetics: Ideas, politics and planning. Routledge.
Schirpke, U., Hölzler, S., Leitinger, G., Bacher, M., Tappeiner, U., & Tasser, E. (2013). Can we model the scenic beauty of an alpine landscape?. Sustainability, 5(3), 1080-1094.
Schirpke, U., Tappeiner, G., Tasser, E., & Tappeiner, U. (2019). Using conjoint analysis to gain deeper insights into aesthetic landscape preferences. Ecological Indicators, 96, 202-212.
Sheppard, S., & Picard, P. (2006). Visual-quality impacts of forest pest activity at the landscape level: a synthesis of published knowledge and research needs. Landscape and Urban Planning, 77(4), 321-342.‏
Suhardi, M. (2006). A perceptual study of wetlands: Implications for wetland restoration in the urban areas in malaysia. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia.
Giergiczny, M., Czajkowski, M., Żylicz, T., & Angelstam, P. (2015). Choice experiment assessment of public preferences for forest structural attributes. Ecological Economics, 119, 8-23.‏
Sowińska-Świerkosz, B., & Soszyński, D. (2019). The index of the Prognosis Rural Landscape Preferences (IPRLP) as a tool of generalizing peoples’ preferences on rural landscape. Journal of environmental management, 248, 109272.
Suppakittpaisarn, P., Jiang, B., Slavenas, M., & Sullivan, W. C. (2019). Does density of green infrastructure predict preference? Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 40, 236-244.‏
Surová, D., & Pinto-Correia, T. (2016). A landscape menu to please them all: Relating users’ preferences to land cover classes in the Mediterranean region of Alentejo, Southern Portugal. Land Use Policy, 54, 355-365.
Turgut, H., Atabeyoğlu, Ö, Yılmaz, H., & Irmak, M. A. (2012). Evaluating different planting design compositions for visual landscape quality in street planting. Artvin Çoruh Üniversitesi Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(1), 49-66.
Wang, R., Zhao, J., & Liu, Z. (2016). Consensus in visual preferences: The effects of aesthetic quality and landscape types. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 20, 210-217.
Van der Wal, R., Miller, D., Irvine, J., Fiorini, S., Amar, A., Yearley, S., Gill, R.,& Dandy,N. (2014). The influence of information provision on people's landscape preferences: A case study on understorey vegetation of deer-browsed woodlands. Landscape and Urban Planning, 142, 129-139.
Van den Berg, A. E., & Koole, S. L. (2006). New wilderness in the Netherlands: An investigation of visual preferences for nature development landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 78(4), 362–372.
Vouligny, É ., Domon, G., & Ruiz, J. (2009). An assessment of ordinary landscapes by an expert and by its residents: Landscape values in areas of intensive agricultural use. Land Use Policy, 26(4), 890-900.
Zhang, D., Huang, Q., He, C., Yin, D., & Liu, Z. (2019). Planning urban landscape to maintain key ecosystem services in a rapidly urbanizing area: A scenario analysis in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei urban agglomeration, China. Ecological Indicators, 96, 559-571.
Zheng, B., Zhang, Y., & Chen, J. (2011). Preference to home landscape: wildness or neatness?. Landscape and Urban Planning, 99(1), 1-8.
Zhou, T., Koomen, E., & van Leeuwen, E. S. (2018). Residents’ preferences for cultural services of the landscape along the urban–rural gradient. Urban forestry & urban greening, 29, 131-141.
Tempesta, T. (2010). The perception of agrarian historical landscapes: A study of the Veneto plain in Italy. Landscape and Urban Planning, 97(4), 258-272.‏