STUDYING A VARIETY OF CRITERIA FOR AESTHETIC EVALUATION OF LANDSCAPES

UDC 504.54

  • Andreeva Victoriya Leonidovna − PhD (Agriculture), Associate Professor, Assistant Professor, the Department of Geography and Methods of Teaching Geography. Belarusian State Pedagogical University named after Maxim Tank (18, Sovetskaya str., 220089, Minsk, Republic of Belarus). E-mail: diversity75@mail.ru

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52065/2519-402X-2021-246-21-170–178

Key words: landscape and aesthetic attractiveness, assessment of the aesthetic attractiveness of landscapes, attractiveness, aesthetic geography, tourist potential.

For citation: Andreeva V. L. Studying a variety of criteria for aesthetic evaluation of landscapes. Proceedings of BSTU, issue 1, Forestry. Nature Management. Processing of Renewable Resources, 2021, no. 2 (246), pp. 170–178 (In Russian). DOI: https://doi.org/10.52065/2519-402X-2021-246-21-170–178.

Abstract

The attractiveness or aesthetic appeal of a landscape is determined by the beauty of the area, its attractiveness to humans and serves to preserve psycho-physical health and good rest for people.

The tourist potential of a territory is determined, among other things, by the presence of natural objects and phenomena, a set of means and conditions for the formation of a tourist product. Consequently, the aesthetic assessment of the attractiveness of landscapes makes it possible to identify the most economic and ecological promising territories for the development of tourism and recreation.Aesthetic assessment of the attractiveness of landscapes allows to select the most economic and ecological promising territories for the development of tourism and recreation. The article discusses the criteria for assessing the attractiveness of landscapes in order to form tourist facilities and services. The history of the study of landscape aesthetics is given, the features of its two directions and modern paradigms are indicated. The concepts of landscape attractiveness and repellency are described. The characteristics of the criteria for assessing aesthetic attractiveness are stated: the degree of diversity and uniqueness of landscapes, components of landscape composition, relief, climate, inland waters, soil and vegetation cover. The leading criterion for the aesthetic appeal of a territory is the degree of its diversity. Lively saturated landscapes have always attracted the attention of respondents in comparison with monotonous monotonous territories. Examples of visual (color (light), tactile, odoric (smell), sound presentation of information) are given.

Download

References

  1. Drozdov A. V. Osnovy ekologicheskogo turizma [Ecological tourism basics]. Moscow, Gardariki Publ., 2005. 271 p.
  2. Krasnikova T. C. The tourist potential of the territory and the need for its development. Obshchestvo: politika, ekonomika, pravo [Society: politics, economics, law], 2015, no. 6, pp. 46–48 (In Russian).
  3. Kuskov A. S., Dzhaladyan Yu. A. Osnovy turizma [Fundamentals of Tourism]. Moscow, KNORUS Publ., 2015. 396 p.
  4. Dedyu I. I. Ekologicheskiy entsiklopedicheskiy slovar’ [Ecological encyclopedic dictionary]. Kishinev, MSE Publ., 1989. 406 p.
  5. Gettner A., Torneus E. A., Baranskiy N. N. The aesthetic value of the landscape. Geografiya [Geography], 2006, no. 6. Available at: https://geo.1sept.ru/article.php?ID=200600612 (accessed 10.03.2021).
  6. Daniel T. C., Arthu L. M., Boster R. S. Scenic assessment: An overview. Landscape Planning, 1977, no. 4, pp. 109–129 (In English).
  7. Penning-Rowsell E. S. Landscape evolution for development plans. Journal of the Royal Town Planing Inst., 1974, no. 60, pp. 930–934 (In English).
  8. Frolova M. Yu. Assessment of the aesthetic merits of natural landscapes. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta [Moscow University Bulletin], 1994, vol. 5, Geography, no. 2, pp. 12–19 (In Russian).
  9. Hrynasiuk A. R., Novosad O. V., Ilyin L. V., Ilyina O. V., Ierko, I. V. Attractiveness of landscapes of Volyn region (Ukraine): theory and practice of evaluation. GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites, 2021, no. 34 (1), pp. 56–62. Available at: https://doi.org/10.30892/gtg.34108-619 (accessed 8.03.2021).
  10. Zube E. H., Sell J. L., Taylor J. G. Landscape perception: research, application and theory. Landscape Planning, 1982, no. 9, pp. 11–33 (In English).
  11. Grodzins’kiy M. D., Savits’ka O. V. Estetika landshaftu [Landscape aesthetics]. Kiev, Kyivs’kiy universitet Publ., 2005. 270 p.
  12. Nosulenko V. N. Psychophysics of natural environment perception: a paradigm shift in experimental research and Epistemology. Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki [Epistemology & Philosophy of Science], 2006,
    vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 89–92 (In Russian).
  13. Urbis A., Povilanskas R., Šimanauskienė R., Taminskas J. Key Aesthetic Appeal Concepts of Coastal Dunes and Forests on the Example of the Curonian Spit (Lithuania). Water, 2019, no. 11. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/w11061193 (accessed 28.02.2021).
  14. Dirin D. A., Popov E. Assessment of the landscape-aesthetic attractiveness of landscapes: a methodological review. Izvestiya Altayskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Bulletin of Altai State University], 2010, no. 3–2, pp. 120–124 (In Russian).
  15. Petrova Е. G., Mironov Y. V., Aoki Y., Matsushima H., Ebine S., Furuya A., Petrova F., Takayama N., Ueda H. Comparison of visual perception and aesthetic assessment of natural landscapes in Russia and Japan: cultural and environmental factors. Progress in Earth and Planetary Science, 2015, no. 6. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40645-015-0033-x (accessed 28.02.2021).
  16. Gorbunov R. V., Tabunshchik V. A., Gorbunova T. Yu. Unresolved theoretical and methodological issues in the aesthetic assessment of landscapes. Geograficheskiy vestnik [Geographical Bulletin], 2020, no. 3 (54), pp. 6–22 (In Russian).
  17. Frank S., Furstb C., Koschkea L., Witta A., Makeschin F. Assessment of landscape aesthetics – Validation of a landscape metrics-based assessment by visual estimation of the scenic beauty. Ecological Indicators, 2013, no. 32, pp. 222–231. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.03.026.
  18. Аtkina L. I. Zhukova M. V. Estetika landshafta [Landscape aesthetics]. Ekaterinburg, UGLTU Publ., 2013. Available at: http://docplayer.ru/34945510-Elektronnyy-arhiv-ugltu-l-i-atkina-m-v-zhukovaestetika-landshafta.html (accessed 4.03.2021).
  19. Safaryan A. A. Turizm v Armenii: distsinatsiya, attraktivnost’, informatsionnyye resursy. Avtoref. dis. … kand. geogr. nauk [Tourism in Armenia: distanation, attractiveness, information resources. Abstract of thesis PhD (Geographic Science)]. Perm’, 2015. 24 p.
  20. Kirillova A. V. Relief as a factor in the aesthetic appeal of the landscape. Vestnik Udmurtskogo universiteta. Ser. Biologiya. Nauki o zemle [Bulletin of the Udmurt University. Ser. Biology. Earth sciences], 2012, no. 2, pp. 104–108 (In Russian).
  21. Nikolayev V. A. Landshaftovedeniye: Estetika i dizayn [Landscape studies: Aesthetics and design]. Moscow, Aspekt Press Publ., 2005. 176 p.
  22. Bibayeva A. Yu., Makarov A. A. Application of GIS to calculate complex indicators aesthetic landscape evaluations. Izvestiya Irkutskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser. Nauki o Zemle [Irkutsk State University Bulletin. Ser. Earth Sciences], 2018, no. 24, pp. 17–33 (In Russian).
  23. Los’ M. A. Natural tourist and recreational potential of the landscape and ecological environment: features of its assessment and rational use. Geograficheskiy vestnik [Geographical Bulletin], 2013, no. 2 (25), pp. 104–109 (In Russian).
  24. Khvorostukhin D. P., Sizova A. D. Development of a methodology for assessing the attractiveness of a survey point using GIS technologies. Sovremennyye problemy territorial’nogo razvitiya [Modern problems of territorial development], 2017, no. 3, pp. 12–19 (In Russian).
  25. Fedortsova T. A. Metodika esteticheskoy otsenki ekskursionnykh resursov (ob”yektov i mestnostey). Avtoref. dis. kand. … geogr. nauk [Methodology for aesthetic assessment of excursion resources (objects and areas). Abstract of thesis PhD (Geographic Science)]. Minsk, 1985. 24 p.
  26. Abramova I. V., Sten’ko S. A. Natural, cultural and historical potential of the Brest region for the development of ecological tourism. Pskovskiy regionologicheskiy zhurnal [Pskov Regional Journal], 2017, no. 1 (29), pp. 76–91 (In Russian).
  27. Kochurov B. I., Buchatskaya N. V. Assessment of the aesthetic potential of landscapes. Yug Rossii: ekologiya, razvitiye [South of Russia: ecology, development], 2007, no. 4, pp. 25–33 (In Russian).
  28. Lopina E. M., Kornilov A. G., Tokhtar’ V. K. Aesthetic assessment of the territory of the botanical garden of the National Research University “BelGU”. Regional’nyye geosistemy [Regional geosystems], 2013, vol. 25, no. 24 (167), pp. 77–82 (In Russian).
  29.  Korf E. D. Criteria for assessing the tourist attraction of geological objects in mountainous terrain. Evraziyskiy soyuz uchenykh [Eurasian Union of Scientists], 2014, no. 7, pp. 149–151 (In Russian).
  30. Perch-Nielsen P. L. Future climate resources for tourism in Europe based on daily Tourism Climatic Index. Climatic Change, 2010, vol. 103, pp. 363–381 (In English).
  31. Rybak O. O., Rybak E. A. Application of climate indices to access regional differences in tourism attraction. Politematicheskiy setevoy elektronnyy nauchnyy zhurnal Kubanskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta [Polythematic network electronic scientific journal of the Kuban State Agrarian University], 2016, no. 121, pp. 425–448 (In Russian).
  32. Motoshina A. A., Vdovyuk L. N. Assessment of the aesthetic properties of landscapes of the Tobolsk district of the Tyumen region for recreational purposes. Geograficheskiy vestnik [Geographic Bulletin], 2012, no. 4 (23), 2012, pp. 10–20 (In Russian).
  33. Cellmer R., Senetra A., Szczepanska A. The Effect of Environmental Factors on Property Value. FIG Working Week 2012 / Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage /Rome, Italy, 6–10 May 2012, pp. 1–13 (In English).
  34. Namazbayeva Z. E., Aktymbayeva A. S., Suleĭmenova N. Zh, Moldagaliyeva. A. E. The index of tourist attraction of natural landscapes of the administrative districts of the East Kazakhstan region. Problemy regional’noy ekologii [Problems of regional ecology], 2019, no. 3, pp. 98–104. DOI: 10.24411/1728-323X2019-13098.
  35. Baczyńska Е., Lorenc M. W., Kaźmierczak U. Procedure for evaluation of the attractiveness of the quarries’ landscape. Acta Geoturistica, 2017, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–10. DOI: 10.1515/agta-2017-0001.
  36. Andreyeva E. D. Sound landscape as a real object and research problem. Ekologiya kul’tury [Ecology of culture], 2000, pp. 76–85 (In Russian).
  37. Žilinskaitė L., Lapėnienė A. Educating the Senses: Walking Through Smells. Geografija ir edukacija [Geography and education], 2017, no. 5, pp. 51–66. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15823/ge.2017.4.
  38. Livinskaya O. A. Assessment of the attractiveness of the cultural and historical heritage as a component of the cultural landscapes of the Pskov region. Pskovskiy regionologicheskiy zhurnal [Pskov Regional Journal], 2013, no. 16, pp. 127–132 (In Russian).
  39. Gres’ R. A. Comparative assessment of the attractiveness of retrospective augmented reality spaces in Moscow and St. Petersburg. Colloquium-journal, 2019, no. 17–1 (41), pp. 6–8. DOI: 10.24411/2520-6990-2019-10551. 
18.03.2021