Testing the difference between experts\u2019 and lay people\u2019s landscape preferences

The European Landscape Convention, ratified by 40 nations, has placed emphasis on the necessity that the value of the landscape is assessed by the population. However it is standard practice that a few experts decide which areas are of landscape interest and the transformations that are compatible with their conservation. To compare the landscape preferences of experts and lay people a study was done on the Po Delta Natural Park (Italy) using a psychophysical approach. In our case study the average scores of experts and lay people are not very different. However it was also ascertained that the experts evaluate the presence of some elements in a way that differs from lay people. As the responsibility for landscape policies is normally devolved to a few experts it would appear necessary that the preferences and opinions of lay people should always be carefully analysed

Survivable network design of all-optical network.

Kwok-Shing Ho.Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2002.Includes bibliographical references (leaves 69-71).Abstracts in English and Chinese.List of Figures --- p.viList of Tables --- p.viiChapter Chapter 1 --- Introduction --- p.1Chapter 1.1 --- Overview --- p.1Chapter 1.2 --- Thesis Objectives --- p.6Chapter 1.3 --- Outline of Thesis --- p.8Chapter Chapter 2 --- The Spare Capacity Planning Problem --- p.9Chapter 2.1 --- Mathematical Model of the Spare Capacity Planning Problem --- p.12Chapter 2.1.1 --- Variable Definitions --- p.12Chapter 2.1.2 --- Objective Function and Constraints --- p.15Chapter 2.1.3 --- Complexity --- p.17Chapter 2.2 --- Greedy Algorithm - Spare Capacity Allocation and Planning Estimator (SCAPE) --- p.19Chapter 2.2.1 --- Working Principle of SCAPE --- p.20Chapter 2.2.2 --- Implementation of SCAPE --- p.22Chapter 2.2.3 --- Improved SCAPE --- p.23Chapter 2.3 --- Experimental Results and Discussion --- p.27Chapter 2.3.1 --- Experimental Platform --- p.27Chapter 2.3.2 --- Experiment about Accuracy of SCAPE --- p.27Chapter 2.3.3 --- Experiment about Minimization of Network Spare Capacity --- p.30Chapter 2.3.4 --- Experiment about Minimization of Network Spare Cost --- p.35Chapter 2.4 --- Conclusions --- p.38Chapter Chapter 3 --- Survivable All-Optical Network Design Problem --- p.39Chapter 3.1 --- Mathematical Model of the Survivable Network Design Problem --- p.42Chapter 3.2 --- Optimization Algorithms for Survivable Network Design Problem --- p.44Chapter 3.2.1 --- Modified Drop Algorithm (MDA) --- p.45Chapter 3.2.1.1 --- Drop Algorithm Introduction --- p.45Chapter 3.2.1.2 --- Network Design with MDA --- p.45Chapter 3.2.2 --- Genetic Algorithm --- p.47Chapter 3.2.2.1 --- Genetic Algorithm Introduction --- p.47Chapter 3.2.2.2 --- Network Design with GA --- p.48Chapter 3.2.3 --- Complexity of MDA and GA --- p.51Chapter 3.3 --- Experimental Results and Discussion --- p.52Chapter 3.3.1 --- Experimental Platform --- p.52Chapter 3.3.2 --- Experiment about Accuracy of MDA and GA --- p.52Chapter 3.3.3 --- Experiment about Principle of Survivable Network Design --- p.55Chapter 3.3.4 --- Experiment about Performance of MDA and GA --- p.58Chapter 3.4 --- Conclusions --- p.62Chapter Chapter 4 --- Conclusions and Future Work --- p.63Appendix A The Interference Heuristic for the path restoration scheme --- p.66Bibliography --- p.69Publications --- p.7

Методика системно-ориентированного анализа городского ландшафта как инструмент планирования

The article discloses the analysis technique of a concept “townscape” based on universal properties of systems that makes it possible to examine such properties of the townscape as base categories, structural elements, and reference norms. The system-oriented analysis of various types of the townscape is also provided; their characteristic peculiarities and properties have been revealed in the article.Статья раскрывает методику анализа понятия «городской пейзаж» на основе универсальных свойств систем, что делает возможным исследование таких свойств городского пейзажа, как основные категории, структурные элементы и соответствие нормативным требованиям. Выполнен системно-ориентированный анализ различных типов городского ландшафта, его характерных особенностей и свойств

Evaluating the adaptive capacity of cultural landscapes to climate change: Incorporating site-specific knowledge in National Park Service vulnerability assessments

Cultural landscapes are complex systems of natural and cultural resources that are affected by changes in climatic and non-climatic factors. The National Park Service, Pacific West Region, has developed a vulnerability assessment (VA) model for identifying, evaluating, and responding to the effects of climate change to cultural landscapes by utilizing peer-reviewed data and local knowledge to inform management strategies that can reduce the vulnerability of cultural landscapes to deterioration and loss. Key to developing site-specific adaption plans is a VA based on analysis of the significance, exposure, and sensitivity of landscape characteristics and features, and identification of the management capacity to reduce the sensitivity of the cultural landscape to change. The resulting assessment compares the level of projected vulnerability of the landscape as a whole and of each characteristic or feature under evaluation, and the identification of methods for minimizing the sensitivity of the cultural landscape to climate change. This paper provides an overview of the VA model through case studies from the state of Washington, the territory of Guam, and Tinian, commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands

Sustainable Landscape Development with Regional Parks - Overcoming Problems of Landscape Multifunctionality in Urban Agglomerations

Urban agglomerations all over Europe are growing at the expense of the surrounding landscapes. Given the enormous growth of built-up land for settlement and transport use within recent decades in Western and Southern Europe and, more recently, comparable trends within Central and Eastern European EU accession states landscape and open space policy in urban regions is an emerging core issue and action field for targeted sustainable spatial development (Office for Publications of the European Communities 1999). For European urban regions strategies and instruments to secure and improve open spaces play an important role because quality of life, the image of the region as well as international competitive capacity are tightly linked with the existence of valuable open space structures. Although Germany has a comparatively well-developed system of landscape protection (e.g. landscape planning, nature protection) and inclusion of landscape issues in the political instruments of town and regional planning, every day 105 ha of open space is transformed into sealed land. Conflicts between ecological and socio-economic aspects tend to obstruct the implementation of traditional landscape policy instruments, which frequently ignore the multifunctionality of urban landscapes (Apolinarski/Gailing/Röhring 2004). For these reasons in some urban regions protagonists involved in landscape policy have recognized that metropolitan open space depends not only on the top-down approach of public landscape protection, but also on active landscape management and development. They have established Regional parks in order to enhance the value of open spaces by means of project-oriented regional management. Improving living conditions and mobilising urban landscape is to be achieved by the collaborative implementation of local projects and by overcoming problems of institutional interplay (Young 2002) between fields such as local recreation, sustainable agriculture, nature protection, protection of cultural heritage or landscape architecture. In the sense of multifunctional landscape management individual open space interests are integrated and the status of open space is strengthened in a holistic approach. Former “residual space” can thus acquire a lobby in formal planning processes. Case studies of the “Berlin-Brandenburger Regionalparks”, the “Regionalpark RheinMain” and the “Emscher Landschaftspark” demonstrate that Regional parks are an innovative form of regional governance in agglomerations and urban surroundings (Gailing 2004). Despite problems like the underestimation of agricultural land use or the dependence on public finances, Regional parks can be identified as efficient tools to strengthen the status of the landscape in urban and regional policies. By bridging the gap between conception and implementation they are complementary to existing formal planning processes.

The Role of Landscape Connectivity in Planning and Implementing Conservation and Restoration Priorities. Issues in Ecology

Landscape connectivity, the extent to which a landscape facilitates the movements of organisms and their genes, faces critical threats from both fragmentation and habitat loss. Many conservation efforts focus on protecting and enhancing connectivity to offset the impacts of habitat loss and fragmentation on biodiversity conservation, and to increase the resilience of reserve networks to potential threats associated with climate change. Loss of connectivity can reduce the size and quality of available habitat, impede and disrupt movement (including dispersal) to new habitats, and affect seasonal migration patterns. These changes can lead, in turn, to detrimental effects for populations and species, including decreased carrying capacity, population declines, loss of genetic variation, and ultimately species extinction. Measuring and mapping connectivity is facilitated by a growing number of quantitative approaches that can integrate large amounts of information about organisms’ life histories, habitat quality, and other features essential to evaluating connectivity for a given population or species. However, identifying effective approaches for maintaining and restoring connectivity poses several challenges, and our understanding of how connectivity should be designed to mitigate the impacts of climate change is, as yet, in its infancy. Scientists and managers must confront and overcome several challenges inherent in evaluating and planning for connectivity, including: •characterizing the biology of focal species; •understanding the strengths and the limitations of the models used to evaluate connectivity; •considering spatial and temporal extent in connectivity planning; •using caution in extrapolating results outside of observed conditions; •considering non-linear relationships that can complicate assumed or expected ecological responses; •accounting and planning for anthropogenic change in the landscape; •using well-defined goals and objectives to drive the selection of methods used for evaluating and planning for connectivity; •and communicating to the general public in clear and meaningful language the importance of connectivity to improve awareness and strengthen policies for ensuring conservation. Several aspects of connectivity science deserve additional attention in order to improve the effectiveness of design and implementation. Research on species persistence, behavioral ecology, and community structure is needed to reduce the uncertainty associated with connectivity models. Evaluating and testing connectivity responses to climate change will be critical to achieving conservation goals in the face of the rapid changes that will confront many communities and ecosystems. All of these potential areas of advancement will fall short of conservation goals if we do not effectively incorporate human activities into connectivity planning. While this Issue identifies substantial uncertainties in mapping connectivity and evaluating resilience to climate change, it is also clear that integrating human and natural landscape conservation planning to enhance habitat connectivity is essential for biodiversity conservation

The availability of land for perennial energy crops in Great Britain

This paper defines the potentially available land for perennial energy crops across Great Britain as the first component of a broader appraisal undertaken by the ‘Spatial Modelling of Bioenergy in Great Britain to 2050’ project. Combining data on seven primary constraints in a GIS reduced the available area to just over 9 M ha (40% of GB). Adding other restrictions based on land cover naturalness scores to represent landscape considerations resulted in a final area of 8.5 M ha (37% of GB). This distribution was compared with the locations of Miscanthus and SRC willow established under the English Energy Crop Scheme during 2001–2011 and it was found that 83% of the planting fell within the defined available land. Such a correspondence provides confidence that the factors considered in the analysis were broadly consistent with previous planting decisions