2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2009.11.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

“It’s a gestalt experience”: Landscape values and development pressure in Hawke’s Bay, New Zealand

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

5
14
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
5
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Feedback from focus groups indicated that the geovisualization was helpful for considering how certain fencing materials might align or conflict with the surrounding environment. Such aesthetic considerations are important when thinking about fostering positive visitor experience and sense of place (e.g., Collins and Kearns, 2010). The findings from this study thus align with previous research that found visualizations to be useful for showing how constructed elements can affect the "character" of a place (Salter et al, 2009).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Feedback from focus groups indicated that the geovisualization was helpful for considering how certain fencing materials might align or conflict with the surrounding environment. Such aesthetic considerations are important when thinking about fostering positive visitor experience and sense of place (e.g., Collins and Kearns, 2010). The findings from this study thus align with previous research that found visualizations to be useful for showing how constructed elements can affect the "character" of a place (Salter et al, 2009).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…Dog management scenarios differed from fencing and mooring buoy scenarios in that they primarily involved modeling of place and involved little spatial modeling. Places can have fuzzy boundaries that are not always easily defined spatially (Collins and Kearns, 2010;McLain et al, 2013), and such was true for the dog scenarios where even though models were assigned locations (i.e., dogs, owners, and Parks Canada staff), it was generally understood that they would not be bound to these locations in the realworld. In contrast, fencing and mooring buoys were highly spatial in nature, and most agreed that some form of visual media would be useful for these scenarios (i.e., maps, if not the geovisualization).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the subject of regulation is usually either people or property, a third subject, that of capital, is tied with the other two. The regulation of the second home is often the same as any other form of housing but, depending on the jurisdiction, second home properties can have additional layers of regulatory requirements because of their impacts on amenity landscapes and the housing stock available to permanent residents (Collins & Kearns, 2010;Hidle, Ellingsen, & Cruickshank, 2010). In addition, in the case of international second homes there are issues of rights and citizenship (Stapa, Musaev, Hieda, & Amzah, 2013), as well as potential concerns over foreign land ownership (Pitkänen & Vepsäläinen, 2008).…”
Section: Governing Second Homesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, planning maps issued by the local authority – the Whangarei District Council (WDC) – labelled the sandspit a heritage area and ‘possible regional park.’ The latter descriptor lacked any official status but was a symbolic nod to long‐standing local aspirations for public ownership of the site. Second, and more formally, the bulk of the sandspit was classified as an ‘outstanding landscape area’ by the WDC – the highest level of landscape protection that local government in New Zealand can offer (Collins & Kearns ). Third, it was also officially recognised as containing sites of significance to Māori, as a coastal hazard zone, and as a flood‐susceptible area.…”
Section: Study Contextmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The latter were frequently to the fore during the real estate boom of 2002–2007 (Peart ). Widespread coastal development at this time was often portrayed as to the detriment of affordability, accessibility and heritage and landscape values (Cheyne & Freeman ; Collins & Kearns , ; Collins ; Peart ). For Collins and Kearns (, p. 2914) widespread concern about coastal development at that time spoke to ‘a perception that coastal landscapes imagined as public, democratic, and relatively unspoiled are being transformed into elite and privatized spaces with a heavy human imprint.’…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%