2002
DOI: 10.1016/s0169-2046(01)00244-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Visualization in forest landscape preference research: a Finnish perspective

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
59
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 91 publications
(62 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
59
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, impacts of growth, management practices, forest (logging) operations, and locations of logging areas may affect the stakeholders' preferences on the management alternatives. It has long been recognized that even technically simple computer visualizations improve understanding of forest stand dynamics and effects of management decisions (Pukkala and Kellomäki 1988;Burkhart 1992) and facilitate eliciting the related preferences (Tahvanainen et al 2001;Karjalainen and Tyrväinen 2002). Visualization techniques and applications are reviewed in the forestry context by Mendoza et al (2006) and Falcão (2008) and techniques for extracting the decision makers' preferences from the visualizations by Kangas et al (2008).…”
Section: Handling Editor: Jean-michel Lebanmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, impacts of growth, management practices, forest (logging) operations, and locations of logging areas may affect the stakeholders' preferences on the management alternatives. It has long been recognized that even technically simple computer visualizations improve understanding of forest stand dynamics and effects of management decisions (Pukkala and Kellomäki 1988;Burkhart 1992) and facilitate eliciting the related preferences (Tahvanainen et al 2001;Karjalainen and Tyrväinen 2002). Visualization techniques and applications are reviewed in the forestry context by Mendoza et al (2006) and Falcão (2008) and techniques for extracting the decision makers' preferences from the visualizations by Kangas et al (2008).…”
Section: Handling Editor: Jean-michel Lebanmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unless tree-wise inventory data are available, the landscapes need to be populated with trees based on less detailed inventory data. A typical approach is to simulate the locations and appearances of the individual trees based on mean diameter, height, and structure information (e.g., Karjalainen and Tyrväinen 2002). Particularly, the use of mean-based attributes and thus the requirement to simulate the trees will result in generalizations and restrictions of reality (Uusitalo and Orland 2001;Wang et al 2006).…”
Section: Handling Editor: Jean-michel Lebanmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On-site visits fulfil most of the criteria for appropriate visualization methods in forest landscape preference research (Karjalainen and Tyrväinen, 2002). Sevenant and Antrop (2009) specify that being on-site implies all senses and not just visual.…”
Section: On-site Surveymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The best expression is by given the respondents' proximity to the landscape. Karjalainen and Tyrväinen (2002) explain, "Movement of the viewer through the landscape is the typical way of experiencing the environment when enjoying recreation in the forest". Herrick and Rudis (1994) add interesting observation, that because respondents were interviewed at recreational areas, it is suspected that respondents may have been describing scenes in and around the interview site.…”
Section: On-site Surveymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Landscape preference studies can be conducted in numerous methods such as the use of photographs (Shafer Jr and Brush 6) ; Aoki 7) ; Dearden 8) ), videos (Schroeder and Orland 9) ), and landscape simulators (Karjalainen and Tyrvainen 10) ). However, there are more limitations in using media as Abstract: Chocolate Hills is a tourist spot in Bohol, Philippines.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%