Residents’ preferences for cultural services of the landscape along the urban–rural gradient |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Spatial Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;2. Urban Economics group, Wageningen University, Hollandseweg 1, 6706KN, Wageningen, The Netherlands;1. College of Landscape Architecture, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin, 150040, China;2. Key Lab for Garden Plant Germplasm Development & Landscape Eco-restoration in Cold Regions of Heilongjiang Province, Harbin, 150040, China;3. Landscape Planting Design Research Center, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin, 150040, China;1. Department for International Scientific Cooperation in Southeast Europe – EFISEE, Croatian Forest Research Institute, Cvjetno naselje 41, 10450 Jastrebarsko, Croatia;2. Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Rudower Chaussee 16, 12489 Berlin, Germany;3. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Department of Computational Landscape Ecology, Permoserstraße 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany;1. Institute for Alpine Environment, EURAC Research, Viale Druso 1, 39100 Bolzano, Italy;2. Institute of Social Ecology Vienna, Faculty for Interdisciplinary Studies, Alpen-Adria University Klagenfurt, Wien, Graz, Schottenfeldgasse 29, 1070 Vienna, Austria;3. Institute of Ecology, University of Innsbruck, Sternwartestr. 15, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria;4. Major Research Area ⿿Alpine Space⿿Man and Environment⿿, University of Innsbruck, Universitätsstr. 15, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria;1. Chair of Strategic Landscape Planning and Management, Technische Universität München, Emil-Ramann-Straße 6, 85354 Freising, Germany;2. Chair of Societal Transition and Agriculture, University of Hohenheim, Schloss Hohenheim 1C, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany;3. Chair of Terrestrial Ecology, Department of Ecology and Ecosystem Management, Technische Universität München, Hans-Carl-von-Carlowitz-Platz 2, 85354 Freising, Germany;4. Institute of Geography, Humboldt University Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin, Germany;5. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Department of Computational Landscape Ecology, Permoserstraße 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany;1. Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Edifici Z (ICTA-ICP), Carrer de les Columnes s/n, Campus de la UAB, 08193 Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain;2. Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute (IMIM), Carrer Doctor Aiguader 88, 08003 Barcelona, Spain;3. Department of International Environment and Development Studies (Noragric), Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU), P.O. Box 5003, N-1432 Ås, Norway;4. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Gaustadalléen 21, 0349 Oslo, Norway;5. Department of Geography, Lab for Landscape Ecology, Humboldt University of Berlin, Rudower Chaussee 16, 12489 Berlin, Germany;6. Department of Computational Landscape Ecology, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Permoser Straße 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany |
| |
| Abstract: | Cultural services of the landscape contribute to a higher quality of life. The provision of these services differs along the urban–rural gradient, as does their appreciation by local residents. This paper investigates residents’ preferences for cultural services along the urban–rural gradient through a map-based survey in and around the Dutch city of Maastricht. We focus on the importance of location in explaining these preferences, distinguishing the location of residents (relative to the preferred landscape units) and the location of landscape units (relative to their positions on the urban–rural gradient). The study shows that residents prefer nearby locations for all distinguished cultural services. Locations’ valuation along the urban–rural gradient, however, differs by service type: for cultural heritage locations near the city centre are preferred, while outdoor recreation and sports and passive enjoyment of green landscapes are enjoyed more in rural areas. When considering the spatial distribution of the land-use types that provide these services, we further find that people prefer green areas closer to the city for outdoor recreation and sports and passive enjoyment of green landscapes. The results illustrate the heterogeneity of people’s preferences for cultural services along the urban–rural gradient beyond the distance from their residences. We recommend policy makers to take the urban–rural gradient into account when valuating landscape units, and in particularly the importance of green landscape units close to the city for different cultural services. |
| |
| Keywords: | Cultural services Landscape valuation Maastricht Urban–rural gradient |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
