Article: Cultural ecosystem services of mountain regions: Modelling the aesthetic value

Mountain regions meet an increasing demand for pleasant landscapes, offering many cultural ecosystem services to both their residents and tourists. As a result of global change, land managers and policy makers are faced with changes to this landscape and need efficient evaluation techniques to assess cultural ecosystem services. This study provides a spatially explicit modelling approach to estimating aesthetic landscape values by relating spatial landscape patterns to human perceptions via a photo-based survey. The respondents attributed higher aesthetic values to the Alpine landscape in respect to areas with settlements, infrastructure or intensive agricultural use. The aesthetic value of two study areas in the Central Alps (Stubai Valley, Austria and Vinschgau, Italy) was modelled for 10,215 viewpoints along hiking trails according to current land cover and a scenario considering the spontaneous reforestation of abandoned land. Viewpoints with high aesthetic values were mainly located at high altitude, allowing long vistas, and included views of lakes or glaciers, and the lowest values were for viewpoints close to streets and in narrow valleys with little view. The aesthetic values of the reforestation scenario decreased mainly at higher altitudes, but the whole area was affected, reducing aesthetic value by almost 10% in Stubai Valley and 15% in Vinschgau. Our proposed modelling approach allows the estimation of aesthetic values in spatial and qualitative terms for most viewpoints in the European Alps. The resulting maps can be used as information and the basis for discussion by stakeholders, to support the decision-making process and landscape planning. This paper also discusses the role of mountain farming in preserving an attractive landscape and related cultural values.

Citing Articles

Public perception of cultural ecosystem services in historic districts based on biterm topic model.

Pan Y, Nik Hashim N, Goh H Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):11717.

PMID: 38778095 PMC: 11111457. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-62770-0.

Foraging behavior of Highland cattle in silvopastoral systems in the Alps.

Nota G, Svensk M, Barberis D, Frund D, Pagani R, Pittarello M Agrofor Syst. 2024; 98(2):491-505.

PMID: 38314106 PMC: 10830757. DOI: 10.1007/s10457-023-00926-z.

Modeling the Visual Landscape: A Review on Approaches, Methods and Techniques.

Misthos L, Krassanakis V, Merlemis N, Kesidis A Sensors (Basel). 2023; 23(19).

PMID: 37836966 PMC: 10574952. DOI: 10.3390/s23198135.

Assessing landscape aesthetic values: Do clouds in photographs influence people's preferences?.

Tasser E, Lavdas A, Schirpke U PLoS One. 2023; 18(7):e0288424.

PMID: 37506121 PMC: 10381034. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288424.

Linking plant and vertebrate species to Nature's Contributions to People in the Swiss Alps.

Rey P, Vittoz P, Petitpierre B, Adde A, Guisan A Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):7312.

PMID: 37147401 PMC: 10163046. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-34236-2.

References

1.

Lamarque P, Lavorel S, Mouchet M, Quetier F . Plant trait-based models identify direct and indirect effects of climate change on bundles of grassland ecosystem services. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014; 111(38):13751-6. PMC: 4183316. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1216051111. View

2.

Bauer N, Wallner A, Hunziker M . The change of European landscapes: human-nature relationships, public attitudes towards rewilding, and the implications for landscape management in Switzerland. J Environ Manage. 2008; 90(9):2910-20. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.01.021. View

3.

Gret-Regamey A, Bebi P, Bishop I, Schmid W . Linking GIS-based models to value ecosystem services in an Alpine region. J Environ Manage. 2007; 89(3):197-208. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.05.019. View

4.

Swetnam R, Fisher B, Mbilinyi B, Munishi P, Willcock S, Ricketts T . Mapping socio-economic scenarios of land cover change: a GIS method to enable ecosystem service modelling. J Environ Manage. 2010; 92(3):563-74. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.09.007. View

5.

Daniel T, Muhar A, Arnberger A, Aznar O, Boyd J, Chan K . Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012; 109(23):8812-9. PMC: 3384142. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1114773109. View

6.

Guo Z, Zhang L, Li Y . Increased dependence of humans on ecosystem services and biodiversity. PLoS One. 2010; 5(10). PMC: 2948508. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013113. View

7.

Tveit M . Indicators of visual scale as predictors of landscape preference; a comparison between groups. J Environ Manage. 2008; 90(9):2882-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.12.021. View

8.

Gret-Regamey A, Weibel B, Bagstad K, Ferrari M, Geneletti D, Klug H . On the effects of scale for ecosystem services mapping. PLoS One. 2014; 9(12):e112601. PMC: 4280228. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0112601. View

9.

Schirpke U, Leitinger G, Tasser E, Schermer M, Steinbacher M, Tappeiner U . Multiple ecosystem services of a changing Alpine landscape: past, present and future. Int J Biodivers Sci Ecosyst Serv Manag. 2019; 9(2):123-135. PMC: 6694010. DOI: 10.1080/21513732.2012.751936. View

10.

Briner S, Elkin C, Huber R . Evaluating the relative impact of climate and economic changes on forest and agricultural ecosystem services in mountain regions. J Environ Manage. 2013; 129:414-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.07.018. View

11.

Ode A, Fry G, Tveit M, Messager P, Miller D . Indicators of perceived naturalness as drivers of landscape preference. J Environ Manage. 2008; 90(1):375-83. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.10.013. View

Cultural Ecosystem Services of Mountain Regions: Modelling the Aesthetic Value