15 1 . 1 I N T R O D U C T I O N The European Landscape Convention (ELC) defi nes landscape as “an area, as perceived by people, which character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors” (Council of Europe, 2000). Thus, the ELC clearly emphasises the sensory relationship between the observer and the landscape. The major question here is how do we know and un- derstand the landscape through perception? Although ‘perceived by people’ refers to a holistic experience with all senses, very often it is re- duced to the visual aspects. This has clearly to do with the ‘range’ of our senses. Already Granö (1929) 1 made the distinction between the ‘Nahsichtmade the distinction between the ‘Nahsichtmade the distinction between the ‘ ’ and ‘Fernsicht’. The Nahsicht or proximity Nahsicht or proximity Nahsicht is the environment we can experience with all our senses, the Fernsicht he called also landscape Fernsicht he called also landscape Fernsicht and is the part of our environment we mainly experience by vision. As Harris and Fairchild Ruggles (2007) put it: “For most human beings, the primary way of knowing the material world is through vision; the simple act of opening ones eyes and looking at an object, a scene, a horizon. The physiological processes engaged when the lid retracts from the eye are, when not impeded by pathologies, universal among humans. Because vision is an embodied experience, it is altered by the infi nite range of the possibilities presented by corporeal performance. The body moves in space – quickly or slowly, the head still or moving side to side, up or down – the eyes view a scene, and a cognitive process begins in which particles of light are assembled by S T E F F E N N I J H U I S , R O N V A N L A M M E R E N , M A R C A N T R O P EXPLORING THE VISUAL LANDSCAPE INTRODUCTION 16 Exploring the visual landscape. Introduction the brain to create an ordered image”. This quote exemplifi es that the identifying character of rural and urban environments is, to a large extent, built upon visual perception, which is a key factor in behaviour and preference, and thus important for landscape protection, monitoring, planning and management and design. But how can we comprehend the ‘face of the landscape’ and its perception? And how can we make this applicable to landscape planning, design and management? Although these ques- tions are not new 2, we believe that the long tradition and current advances in the fi eld of visual landscape research in the Netherlands offer interesting clues for further development in theory, methodology and application. 1.1.1 Visual landscape research Visual landscape research is the central theme, and throughout the book you will fi nd also terms like landscape physiognomy and physiognomic landscape research. In this book we con- sider rural, urban and infrastructural landscapes as types of landscape. According to the Oxford dictionary (2011a) landscape physiognomy refers to the appearance of the landscape and is derived from the Greek physiognomonía meaning ‘judging of man’s nature (by his features)’ based on gnomon ‘a judge, interpreter’. Initially, it refers to the human face as in the French ‘visage’, and its meaning has extended to the appearance of features such as land- scape (French ‘paysagescape (French ‘paysagescape (French ‘ ’). In the late 1970s scholars like De Veer and Burrough (1978) adopted this term and introduced the comparable Dutch terms landschapsfysiognomie (physiognomic landscape), visueel landschap (visual landscape) and landschapsbeeld (landscape scenery) to refer to the visual landscape consisting of the visible properties of all the landscape phenomena and their structure (De Veer and Burrough, 1978). We use the initial term landscape physio- gnomy (or physiognomic landscape) and the more actual term visual landscape as synonyms. Physiognomic landscape research refers to visual landscape research that is concerned with mapping the visual landscape. Physiognomic landscape mapping or visual landscape mapping (landschapsbeeldkartering) comprises of a wide range of theories, methods and techniques for analysis and visualisation, and which refl ect different approaches to landscape as described for example by Sevenant (2010). 17 1.1.2 Landscape planning, perception and Geographic Information Science Visual landscape research is an interdisciplinary approach important for landscape planning. It involves disciplines such as (landscape) architecture and urban planning and design, psy- chology and sociology, environmental ethics, and (humanistic) geography, all of which use data and tools offered by Geographic Information Science (GISc) such as computer mapping, spatial analysis, geomatics and (virtual) visualisation. The contributions in this book express this interdisciplinarity and refl ect different perspectives on visual landscape research by their theoretical elaborations, research approaches and practical applications. However, the core of this book is the integration of (1) landscape planning, design and management concepts, (2) landscape perception approaches, and (3) GISc-based methods and techniques in order to map the visual landscape (see fi gure 1). 1 . 2 V I S U A L R E S E A R C H I N L A N D S C A P E P L A N N I N G , D E S I G N A N D M A N A G E M E N T In the Netherlands there is a long tradition of visual landscape research starting in the 1960s, which has had an important infl uence on Flemish work as we ll. Its origins are to be found on one hand in the widely acknowledged Dutch system of spatial planning, and on the other, in the academic interest in landscape perception infl uenced by parallel developments in the Unit- Landscape planning, design and management concepts Visual landscape mapping Landscape perception approaches GISc-based methods and techniques Figure 1 Visual landscape research is characterised by visual landscape mapping and determined by the integration of landscape planning, design and management, landscape perception and GISc-based methods and techniques 18 Exploring the visual landscape. Introduction ed States. Nowadays, this rich tradition of visual landscape research continues to develop and fi nd its way in landscape perception research, planning and design oriented landscape research and its implementation in landscape policy. The contributions in this book showcase the latest developments in the fi eld. 1.2.1 Visual research as policy-demand The publication of a map called The landscape of the Netherlands and bordering regions (Het landschap van Nederland met aangrenzende gebieden) in the Second National Memorandum on Spatial Planning (Tweede Nota over de ruimtelijke ordening van Nederland) (RijksPlanologische Dienst, 1966) 3 represents an important step in visual research. This map presented the ‘open’ Dutch rural landscape as different ‘complexes of open spaces’ (fi gure 2) and addressed the visual landscape as an important issue for landscape planning and policy in the Netherlands for the fi rst time. Inspired by this more detailed interest in the Dutch landscape, several scholars, Figure 2 The landscape of the Netherlands and bordering regions showing complexes of open spaces (source: RijksPlanologische Dienst, 1966) 19 from different Dutch universities and related research institutes, took the opportunity to devel- op visual landscape concepts for the purpose of landscape planning, design and management, exemplifi ed by the work of Van der Ham et al. (1970, 1971), Nicolai (1971), Koster and De Veer (1972), Kerkstra et al. (1974), and De Veer (1977) (see fi gures 3 and 4). The fi rst overview of developed methods for visual landscape mapping and its applications appeared in De Veer et al. (1977), followed by an academic article by De Veer and Burrough (1978). This article remained until now the only English-language overview of the Dutch visual landscape research (includ- ing the Flemish studies). From the 1980s onwards we see applications of computational methods and techniques in visual landscape mapping appear, exemplifi ed by the work of Burrough et al. (1982), Van den Berg et al. (1985), and Dijkstra (1985). From the late 1980s, early 1990s a vast amount of vis- ual landscape studies appear, boosted by policy demands and stimulated by Dutch perception Figure 3 Landscape typology based on visual attributes (source: Van der Ham and Iding, 1971) 20 Exploring the visual landscape. Introduction studies of e.g. De Boer (1979), Boerwinkel (1986), Coeterier (1987, 1994, 1996), Van den Berg (1999), infl uenced by the work of Berlyne (1971), Appleton (1975), Ulrich (1981) and Kaplan and Kaplan (1989). Simultaneously advances in GISc in landscape research appeared too, as by Buitenhuis et al. (1986), Piket et al. (1987), Alphen et al. (1994), Palmer (1996), Palmer and Roos-Klein Lankhorst (1998) and Dijkstra and Van Lith-Kranendonk (2000). Most of these studies cover the rural types of landscape. 1.2.2 Visual research as academic interest Parallel to this there was a growing interest for visual research in Dutch universities and re- search institutes involving disciplines such as architecture in urban and landscape domains. These developments are characterised by visual perception research in the urban realm. The studies of Wentholt (1968), Steffen and Van der Voordt (1978) and Korthals Altes and Steffen (1988) are important examples with respect to urbanism and are highly infl uenced by the work of Lynch (1960) cum suis (see fi gure 5). The use of the enthescoop (camera with periscopic Figure 4 Visual complexity (source: Kerkstra et al., 1974) 21 Figure 5 Collective image of the city Antwerp (source: Steffen and Van der Voordt, 1978) Figure 6 Computational visualisation of the Floriade by M. den Ruijter, 1984 (source: personal archive Den Ruijter) 22 Exploring the visual landscape. Introduction lens) for means of urban analysis by Bouwman (1979) was also infl uential. For architecture the work of Prak (1979), Steffen (1981) and Hoogstad (1990) are good examples, and with regard to landscape architecture the infl uential works of Bijhouwer (1954), Warnau (1979, 1990), Steenbergen (1985, 1990) and Reh (1995). However, it is striking to notice that computational methods and techniques hardly found their way in this type of research. Early exceptions are to be found in the pioneering work of Den Ruijter (1978, 1984) and Roos-Klein Lankhorst (1987, 1989) (see fi gure 6). The increasing amount of (inter)national publications, inclusion in aca- demic research programmes and educational curricula of the last decade exemplify the ongo- ing academic interest in visual research. 1 . 3 R E S E A R C H O N V I S U A L L A N D S C A P E A N D P E R C E P T I O N According to Bell (1996), perception refers to “the activity carried out by the brain by which we interpret what the senses receive. It is not merely a factual reporting, but tends to be ref- erenced to associations and expectations already in the mind of the beholder” and is derived from the Latin perceptio, from the verb percipere ‘seize, understand’ (Oxford dictionary, 2011b). Although we use all our senses to analyse the surroundings, mainly vision stands out, because it covers 87% of the sensory perception. So, vision provides the most information, and it is the sense in which we ‘imagine’ and ‘think’ (Bell, 1999; Snowden et al., 2006). As all senses work together, they add different dimensions to visual perception and can reinforce or confi rm the information. The term visual, derived from the Latin visualis and visus ‘sight’, from videre ‘to see’, is used as adjective relating to perception by seeing or sight: visual perception (Oxford dic- tionary, 2011c). 1.3.1 Physiology of perception vs. psychology of perception In (visual) perception studies there is a crucial difference between the physiology of percep- tion (the ‘senses’) and the psychology of perception (the ‘brain’) (Jacobs, 2006; Bell, 1999). Physiology of visual perception refers to the processes of sensation and the mechanisms of sight, the structure of the eye, how it receives light, and its limitations. All aspects of physi- ological perception can be measured in an objective way (Sevenant, 2010; Jacobs, 2006; Bell, 1999). Although it is not the scope of this introductory chapter to elaborate on this, it is use- ful to mention the fi eld of vision, which is an important aspect as it determines the visibility of the elements and their visual properties. Humans have an almost 120 degrees forward-facing horizontal, binocular fi eld of vision, allowing depth perception (see fi gure 7). Also, the ability to perceive shape (pattern recognition), motion and colour varies across the fi eld of vision. Pat- 23 tern recognition concentrates in the centre of the fi eld of vision and covers about 20-60 degrees of the binocular view (Panero and Zelnik, 1979; Snowden et al., 2006) (for applications see chapter 5). There are also some physiological restrictions to the range of vision, which is the distance from the observer to an object, depth plan, or skyline. The range of vision depends on the position of the observer (altitude, proximity and angular size of the objects), viewing direction and atmospheric conditions (e.g. contrast threshold) (Duntley, 1948; Nicolai, 1971; Antrop, 2007). 1200-1400 metres is a critical distance, further away it is not possible to distin- guish optical depth; individual (common) objects are hardly recognizable and merge with their background (Nicolai, 1971; Antrop, 2007). Also, for the recognition of characteristic elements of the landscape, the limiting distance of 500 metres is used (Van der Ham and Iding, 1971) and is a common step in the changing structural density (Antrop, 2007) (for applications see chapters 12 and 13). The psychology of perception refers to two different processes: (1) the basically unconscious processing sensory information, and (2) the more or less conscious experience of analysing and interpreting this information (Jacobs, 2006). These two processes are complex and include pat- tern recognition (shape, size, spatial arrangement) and colour discrimination, and are the basis for the identifi cation of objects and their relationships. It also comprises of assigning meaning, defi ning relations, classifying information and memorization. These processes integrate new Left Right 100 80 60 40 20 Figure 7 The fi eld of vision for a person looking straight ahead. The irregular boundaries of the left and right fi elds are caused by facial features such as the nose. The darker area shows the region of binocular overlap (source: Ware, 2004) 24 Exploring the visual landscape. Introduction information with existing knowledge and experience, combining it with personal symbolic and cultural elements. This whole psychological process is individual and thus essentially subjective and determines the experience of the landscape (Jacobs, 2006; Bell, 1999; Coeterier, 1987). Finally, this will affect our behaviour and actions (Sevenant and Antrop, 2010)(see chapter 2 and 3 for elaborations on this topic). 1.3.2 Paradigms in landscape perception research In the fi eld of landscape perception research there is a vast amount of theories, methods and applications available. Valuable overviews are given by Daniel and Vining (1983), Zube et al. (1982) and Arthur et al. (1977) as well as the more recent overviews of Sevenant (2010), Scott and Benson (2002), Lothian (1999) and Dijkstra (1991). As found in these studies the existing approaches to landscape perception can be divided in four paradigms and two types of models: (i) Expert models • Expert-approach: evaluation of the visual landscape by experts and trained observers (e.g. landscape architects, geographers), characterised by heuristic methods and the use of sys- tematic descriptive inventories, visual management systems, etc. Most of the early Dutch studies on the visual landscape can be labelled as expert-approaches (see section 1.2). For recent examples see section 1.4. However, the works of Boogert and Schalk (1995), Was- sink (1999) and Hendriks and Stobbelaar (2003) are worthwhile mentioning here. Inter- national references include the classic works of Lynch (1960), Cullen (1961), Appleyard et al. (1964), Ashihara (1983), Smardon et al. (1986) and Higuchi (1988). Furthermore, the works of e.g. Bell (1996), Thiel (1997), Dee (2001) and The Landscape Institute (2003) are good examples of this type of approach; (ii) Public preference models • Psychophysical-approach: testing general public or selected populations’ evaluations of land- scape aesthetics/properties by, for example, environmental psychologists, landscape archi- tects, characterised by the use of photo questionnaires. In these studies the behavioural ap- proach is the dominant methodology. Exemplary Dutch studies are Van de Wardt and Staats (1988) and Staats and Van de Wardt (1990). International references include Appleton (1975) and Daniel (2001); • Psychological-approach: search for human meaning associated with landscape or landscape properties by environmental psychologists, characterised by mapping landscape experi- ence. As in the psychophysical-approach, the behavioural approach is dominant 4. Korthals Altes and Steffen (1988) and Coeterier (1987) are Dutch examples. Important international references include Kaplan and Kaplan (1989), Bell et al. (2001) and Nasar (2008); 25 • Phenomenological-approach: research on subjective experience of the landscape (e.g. phe- nomenologists, psychologists, humanistic geographers), characterised by the interpretation of paintings, poetry, etc. These studies show a humanistic approach. The work of Lemaire (1970) is a good Dutch example. International examples include: Tuan (1974), Boyer (1994) and Olwig (2002). Throughout the book these different approaches are present, although most chapters refl ect typical expert-approaches. The literature guide after the last chapter gives further readings on the different approaches. 1 . 4 V I S U A L L A N D S C A P E R E S E A R C H A N D G E O G R A P H I C I N F O R M A T I O N S C I E N C E The term Geographic Information Science was introduced by Goodchild (1992) and is defi ned as: “an information science focussing on the collection, modelling, management, display, and interpretation of geographic data. It is an integrative fi eld, combining concepts, theories, and techniques from a wide range of disciplines, allowing new insights and innovative synergies for an increased understanding of our world. By incorporating spatial location as an essential characteristic of what we seek to understand in the natural and built environment, Geographic Information Science (GISc) and Systems (GIS) provide the conceptual foundation and syner- getic tools to [explore visual landscapes]” (Kemp, 2008). For the full breadth of GISc and the background to it see e.g. Goodchild (1992) and Wilson and Fotheringham (2008). Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are computer systems for capturing, storing, querying, analysing, and displaying geodata. GIS developed from the integration of four different com- puter applications: image processing (raster-based), image processing (raster-based), image processing computer aided design (CAD) (vector-based), mapping/cartography and mapping/cartography and mapping/cartography database management (Kraak and Ormeling, 2010). Introductory database management (Kraak and Ormeling, 2010). Introductory database management works to GIS include Longley and Batty (2003), Chang (2010) and Longley et al. (2011). Useful accounts on geo-visualisation are Dodge et al. (2008) and Kraak and Ormeling (2010). The terms geomatics or geomatic engineering or geospatial technology all refer to techniques for geospatial technology all refer to techniques for geospatial technology the acquisition, storage and processing of spatially referenced information of any kind. It com- bines tools used in geodesy, photogrammetry, cartography, land surveying, geography, remote sensing, GIS and GPS. Thus geomatics refers to a scientifi c approach focussed on the funda- mental aspects of geo-information and is elaborated in chapter 4 (Longley et al., 2011). An essential aspect of geomatics for visual landscape research is the elaboration of Digital El- evation Models (DEM, the generic term), Digital Terrain Models (DTM) and Digital Landscape 26 Exploring the visual landscape. Introduction Models (DLM) describing the earth’s topographical surface. Basically two types of DEMs can be recognised: • DTM: Digital Terrain Models only representing the bare ground surface; • DLM: Digital Landscape Models also referred to as ‘envelope models’ representing the earth’s surface including all objects on it (‘obstacles’ such as buildings, infrastructures and land uses). DEMs can be acquired by different means such as interpolation from elevation points, digitising contour lines or direct measurements using stereo-photogrammetry or LiDAR (Light Detection And Ranging). They exist in different formats, as raster or vector (TIN: Triangular Irregular Network) data. A TIN dataset is also referred to as a primary or measured DEM, whereas a ras- ter DEM is referred to as a secondary or computed DEM. All these factors defi ne the accuracy, precision and uncertainty (fuzziness) of the DEM dataset, which are important conditions for the analyses and the quality of the results. 1.4.1 Trends in GISc During the last forty years visual landscape research has been constrained by computer tech- nology and availability of digital data. The fi rst decennia in using geo-information technology was characterised by problems to acquire useful digital data in appropriate formats and the development of system specifi c software standards. Today, the power of PCs allow complex GIS-applications, there is a multitude of geodata available from many providers and there is a lot of user’s friendly ‘of the shelf GIS-software’ widely available, offering ‘common’ functions and tools for mapping the visual landscape. This will be exemplifi ed by a brief bibliometric sur- vey on the use of GISc in visual landscape research (see fi gure 8). Infl uenced by national (NCG, 2010; VROM, 2008) and international initiatives supporting GISc and its applications in interdisciplinary approaches, GISc is likely to continue developing. The following trends can be recognised (Craglia et al., 2008): • from practice to theory; • from geo-information application to geo-information infrastructure; • from spatial data structuring to meaningful spatial data integration; • from mapping to dynamic real-time spatial data collection and visualisation; • from technological to socio-technical; • from a few application areas to many disciplines in society. This list represents a rich research agenda and includes applications in space and place, de- scription and classifi cation and temporality. Alternative models of space and time (dynamics, 27 movement) will be explored and corresponding specifi c visualisation tools, and languages are being created (Fisher and Unwin, 2005). Especially with regards to visual landscape research the development of a body-centred geography in GISc offers interesting clues for addressing the perceptual space (Batty et al., 2005). The trends mentioned before are also found in (academic) education, as can be seen in many recent BSc and MSc programmes, where learning goals aim to link academic knowledge and skills in information technology. For example, the List of relevant European teaching subjects in the studies of landscape architecture (EU-Teach, 2011) proposed by the European Council of Landscape Architecture Schools (ECLAS), the European Federation of Landscape Architecture (EFLA) and others, promote learning outcomes in information technology, including GIS and three-dimensional visualisation, besides basic learning outcomes of theory and methodology in landscape architecture and participation. 1.4.2 Specific methods and techniques based on GIScience De Veer and Burrough (1978) suggested that the core of visual landscape mapping is about distinguishing between space and mass (see fi gure 9). A space is defi ned as an area of the earth’s 0 5 10 15 20 25 publication year re co rd c ou nt 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Figure 8 The diagram is based on a brief Web of Science literature research (1994-2010) using the key terms ‘visual landscape’ and ‘GIS’. 145 references published in this period were found (source: Web of Science, 2011, 7th of July) 28 Exploring the visual landscape. Introduction surface, bordered by linear or mass/volume elements higher than the eye level of a standing observer, within which all points are mutually visible. Mass or volumes are space-defi ning ele- ments and can consist of vegetation (forest) or buildings or infrastructure (De Veer and Bur- rough, 1978). Later the concepts of screens and transparency were added (Buitenhuis et al., 1979; De Veer, 1981; Piessens, 1985). Based on these defi nitions, De Veer and Burrough (1978) defi ned three approaches to map the visible landscape: the compartment, the fi eld of view and the grid cell approach (see fi gure 10). These differ mainly by the way they defi ne space and mass and how these can be determined using topographic maps or aerial photographs. The compartment approach considers the vis- ible landscape as a set of concave compartments that can be characterised by size or shape, the type of border and their content. The fi eld of view approach is based on measurements of fi elds of view and mapping sightlines from the observer’s position in the landscape. The grid cell ap- proach samples the landscape by a tessellation of (mostly square) grid cells, for which one or more variables are measured and used to classify the cell density and complexity or to assign a type to it (De Veer and Burrough, 1978; Palmer and Roos-Klein Lankhorst, 1998). Methods for operationalising these approaches using geodata are given in studies like Bur- rough et al. (1982) and Buitenhuis et al. (1986). The last decennia, the number of processing methods and techniques to map the visual landscape increased, new algorithms were devel- oped allowing the determination of new indicators for the visual landscape. Important are stereometric three-dimensional (3D) analyses that complement the planimetric two-dimen- Figure 9 Space and mass. Original map (l) and derived space (white) – mass (black) map 29 sional (2D) ones. Referring to the Dutch academic context, the following groups of methods and techniques can be recognised: • Grid cell analysis: the landscape is subdivided into spatial features that are represented by raster cells or grid-shaped polygons. Each feature is described by one of more variables and can be integrated in each cell as integrated indicators, such density or complexity. The ori- gins and background of this ‘raster analysis’ go back to the work of Tomlinson et al. (1976) and Tomlin (1983, 1991). The Map Analysis Package (MAP) by Tomlin was the fi rst raster based GIS and a milestone in the GIS development (see e.g. Blom et al., 1985; Van den Berg et al., 1985; Van Lammeren, 1985) (see fi gure 11). Regarding visual landscape assess- ment using this approach, recent examples are given by Dijkstra and Van Lith-Kranendonk (2000), Palmer and Roos-Klein Lankhorst (1998) and Roos-Klein Lankhorst et al. (2002). In the international context these studies are comparable with the ones of Bishop and Hulse (1994) and Dramstadt et al. (2006). Raster analysis is also used for landscape characteri- sation at different scale levels (see e.g. Van Eetvelde and Antrop, 2009). The research of Bishop et al. (2000) showcases an application in the vertical plane; • Landscape metrics: were originally developed for spatial analysis of land use patches in landscape ecology. Landscapes are modelled into patches, corridors, matrix and mosaics. Landscape metrics are also used to describe the composition and spatial confi guration of these elements (Turner and Gardner, 1991; Li and Wu, 2007). The software FRAGSTATS (McGarigal and Marks, 1995) had a important impact on the broad introduction of land- scape metrics in landscape research. For Dutch applications in visual landscape studies see Antrop and Van Eetvelde (2000) and Van Lammeren and Kamps (2001). Palmer (2004) and Uuema et al. (2009) gave examples of visual landscape studies that use landscape met- rics. Li and Wu (2004) point at the misuse of the landscape metrics because of conceptual fl aws regarding spatial pattern concepts. Landscape metrics are two-dimensional and can be applied both on raster and vector data; Figure 10 Three important approaches in landscape mapping: compartment (l); fi eld of view (m); grid cell (r) 1 5 4 2 8 7 9 10 18 16 22 27 26 19 20 15 21 14 12 30 Exploring the visual landscape. Introduction • Viewsheds: areas that can be seen from a given position. Viewshed-analysis is basically a three-dimensional visibility calculation based on raster data (surface analysis). Tandy (1967) introduced the term viewshed by analogy to the watershed. The computer program VIEWIT (Amidon and Elsner, 1968) was an important stimulant in viewshed-analysis, in particular as promulgated by the US Forest Service in the 1970s and used by many natural resource planners, landscape architects and engineers (Ervin and Steinitz, 2003). See De Floriani and Magillo (2003), Fisher (1991, 1992, 1993, 1995 and 1995) and Riggs and Dean (2007) for technical backgrounds. Interesting Dutch applications in visual landscape as- sessment are Sevenant and Antrop (2006), Kerkstra et al. (2007), Piek et al. (2007) and Nijhuis (2010) (see fi gure 12). International references are Wheatley (1995), Llobera (1996, 2003), Germino et al. (2001), Bishop (2003), Rød and Van der Meer (2009); • Isovists: sight fi eld polygons or limit-of-vision plottings are the vector-based counterpart of viewsheds and address only the horizontal plane. Tandy (1967) suggested the application of isovists to “convey the spatial composition from an observers point of view”. Later, Ben- edikt connected Gibson’s (1979) concept of the ambient optic array to isovists and isovist fi elds for means of architectonic research (Benedikt, 1979, 1981). Computational genera- tion of isovists are found in Depthmap (Turner, 2001) and Isovist Analyst Extension (Rana, 2002). For technical backgrounds and interesting parameters see Batty (2001) and Turner et al. (2001). In the Netherlands this topic can be found in Van Bilsen and Stolk (2007), Nijhuis (2009) and Weitkamp (2010). Recently the so-called 3D-isovists became of inter- est e.g. Fisher-Gewirtzman et al. (2003, 2005), Morello and Ratti (2009) and Van Bilsen (2008). “A ‘3D-isovist’ defi nes the three-dimensional fi eld of view, which can be seen from a vantage point with a circular rotation of 360 degrees and from the ground to the sky. In comparison to the defi nition of a 2D-isovist, which considers a plan parallel to the ground, this new defi nition refers to the real perceived volumes in a stereometric reference. Adding the vertical dimension helps to better simulate the physical environment observed from the vantage point” (Morello and Ratti, 2009); • Virtual 3D-landscapes: current GIS are generally limited to the horizontal two dimensions but utilise three-dimensional visualisation and analysis. GIS support 3D-display of ter- rain models (DEMs), interactive navigation, 3D-symbols/geometries (including: custom 3D modelling, importing GIS data, importing 3D-data, 3D laser scanning), surface analysis (i.e. viewsheds and isovists) and viewpoint and path creation (i.e. fl y-through animations) (Kemp, 2008; Raper, 1989, 2000). However, the embedding of 3D topology and, conse- quently, 3D analysis tools to be become true 3D-GIS is still under development. See e.g. Batty (2008, 2000) and Abdul-Rahman et al. (2006) on this matter. Three-dimensional visualisation (GIS-based) offers a wide range of possibilities for means of visual landscape research. For an elaboration see Ervin (2001), Ervin and Hasbrouck (2001) and Bishop and Lange (2005). Degree of reality is an important topic that has to be addressed (Lange, 2001). Dutch examples of virtual 3D landscapes in visual landscape research include 31 Alkhoven (1993) and Van Lammeren et al. (2003). International examples are Ribe et al. (2002), Hudson-Smith and Evans, (2003), Paar (2003), Rekitte and Paar (2006) and Hud- son-Smith (2008). Throughout the book the reader will fi nd theoretical and practical applications of these meth- ods and techniques, in particular in part two and three. More backgrounds on GISc in relation to visual landscape research can be found in chapter 4. 1 . 5 T H R E E P A R T S , T W E LV E C H A P T E R S This book is built up of twelve chapters, plus this introduction. The chapters are organised around three themes: (1) theory, (2) landscape research and design, and (3) landscape policy. This practical grouping in parts is derived from the content of the chapters and refl ects the scope and direction of visual landscape research in the Dutch academic context. The chapters offer important clues for theory, methodology and application in research and development of landscapes all over the world, exemplifi ed by their particular perspectives on the topic. Figure 11 Visibility analysis using MAP2, an early GIS developed by Dutch scholars and based on Tomlin’s MAP software (source: Van den Berg et al., 1985) 32 Exploring the visual landscape. Introduction 1.5.1 Part one: theory This part comprises of theoretical elaborations on the psychology and phenomenology of the visual landscape and showcases recent developments in the fi eld of environmental psychol- ogy. Furthermore it elaborates a perspective on GISc with regard to physiognomic landscape research from a typical geomatics point of view. Psychology of the visual landscape (chapter 2) by Jacobs introduces the key concepts of psycho- logical perception of the landscape. The chapter introduces biological, cultural and individual factors that determine the mental processes involved in landscape perception. It presents a comprehensive overview of disciplinary approaches to the study of psychological responses to the visual landscape and links it to GIS. The phenomenological experience of the visual landscape (chapter 3) by Moya Pellitero explores how phenomenological approaches can inform land- scape planning, design and policy. This chapter elaborates how the qualitative and intangible nature of landscape can be incorporated into the analyses and monitoring typically performed Figure 12 Analysis of landscape openness relative to the observer by means of viewsheds (by S. Nijhuis) Openness relative to observer < 1 1 - 2.5 2.5 - 5 5 - 7.5 7.5 - 10 10 - 15 15 - 20 20 - 25 25 - 30 30 - 40 > 40% 33 through GIS. It proposes a participative methodology to elaborate new ways of mapping the so- cial phenomenological experience of landscape. Geomatics in physiognomic landscape research (chapter 4) by Van Lammeren introduces the key concepts of geomatics in relation to visual landscape research. It addresses the constituent elements of geomatics: geodata, geodata pro- cessing and geodata visualisation. Furthermore, the chapter refl ects experiences in the Nether- lands in the use of GISc in visual landscape research and embeds it in an international context. 1.5.2 Part two: landscape research and design This part presents visual landscape research methods and techniques for landscape planning, design and management and comprises of examples in the urban and rural realm. It showcases recent examples of multi-disciplinary approaches in landscape architecture, environmental psychology, urban design, information science and landscape heritage management. Visual research in landscape architecture (chapter 5) by Nijhuis explores visual landscape re- search for means of landscape architectonic design. It is about analysis of the visible form of a landscape architectonic composition as it is encountered by an individual within it, moving through it, making use of GIS-based isovists and viewsheds. It addresses the basic concepts of visual perception, the role of movement and showcases how GIS can reveal the particularities of the perceived landscape architectonic space by computational analysis and its representa- tion. Mapping landscape attractiveness (chapter 6) by Roos-Klein Lankhorst et al. introduces a validated model that predicts the attractiveness of the landscape: the GIS-based Landscape Appreciation Model (GLAM). The authors elaborate on the theoretical background to GLAM, the attributes in the current version of the model, the fi nal steps in calibrating the model, as well as its validation. The chapter concludes with a discussion on the usefulness of GLAM for spatial policy. The one- and two-dimensional isovists analyses in Space Syntax (chapter 7) by Van Nes elaborates on axial lines and isovists as constituent elements of the Space Syntax method for means of visibility analyses. It showcases how spatial properties derived from these analy- ses indicate degrees of street life, safety and economic attractiveness in urban areas. Virtual historical landscapes (chapter 8) by De Boer et al. is about realistic 3D virtual reconstructions of historical landscapes using GIS-technology. These virtual historical landscapes let users experi- ence the historical landscape from different viewpoints by browsing and navigating through 3D virtual environments. These virtual environments provide a global, visual context for a de- tailed presentation of historical and archaeological research data for management of landscape heritage and edutainment projects. Mapping landscape openness with isovists (chapter 9) by Weitkamp describes a procedure to get a grip on landscape openness using GIS-based isovists. It is about the concept of landscape openness as an important aspect of the visual landscape, it describes a method to model landscape openness and a procedure to use this model for policy 34 Exploring the visual landscape. Introduction making purposes. Furthermore, it discusses the evaluation of the results of the procedure with policy makers. 1.5.3 Part three: landscape policy Landscape character assessment is a key element in landscape management, planning and monitoring and serves as an important basis for landscape policy. This part consists of applica- tions of visual landscape research in the context of policymaking in the urban and rural realm. Important themes are landscape openness, the visual infl uence of high-rise buildings and pano- ramic views along motorways. Landscape policy and visual landscape assessment (chapter 10) by Nijhuis and Reitsma elaborates a landscape planning and design-oriented approach to visual landscape indicators, involving GISc-based methods. It focuses on landscape character assessment addressing visual attributes such as spaciousness, degree of openness and visibility. The Province of Noord-Holland (the Netherlands) serves as a case study of how regional authorities can include visual landscape character assessment in landscape policy. Preserving panoramic views along motorways through policy (chapter 11) by Piek et al. introduces a practical approach towards motorway panora-policy (chapter 11) by Piek et al. introduces a practical approach towards motorway panora-policy mas, it provides a defi nition and elaborates a GIS-based method to get a grip on views along motorways. The described approach fi tted in well with policy discussions of the Dutch govern- ment about preventing spatial clutter across the landscape and preserving landscape openness. The research, to some degree, was used to formulate policy on motorway environments. Hi Rise, I can see you! (chapter 12) by Van der Hoeven and Nijhuis presents a framework for ana- lysing high building development and the visual impact of high buildings on the surrounding landscape, with the city of Rotterdam as a Western European showcase. Architectural height, year of completion, location and functional use, as well as atmospheric circumstances and ver- tical size are constituent elements of the analysis comparing existing buildings with the urban policies that are in place. Visions of Belle van Zuylen (chapter 13) by Lörzing demonstrates that visual landscape assessment can have some tangible impact on a political decision-making process. As pointed out in the case of the proposed (and controversial) Belle van Zuylen sky- scraper, a study into the tower’s visual effects played an important role in the decision process of policy makers such as the Chief Government Architect, providing a solid basis for discussion on this issue of national importance. 35 N O T E S [1] Recently republished and translated in English: see Granö and Paasi (1997). [2] The quest of apprehension, representation and realisation of the perceived space started already in Ancient Greece and took a big step in development in Renaissance Italy by the invention, description and application of linear perspective. [3] For backgrounds to this see Maas and Reh (1968). [4] The differences between the psychophysical and psychological approaches are gradual and hard to distinguish. R E F E R E N C E S Abdul-Rahman, A., Zlatanova, S., and Cours, V. (2006) Inno- vations in 3D geo-information systems. Berlin, Springer. Alkhoven, P. (1993) The changing image of the city: a study of the transformation of the townscape using computer-aided architectural design and visualization techniques: a case study: Heusden. Utrecht, Utrecht University. Alphen, B.J. van, Dijkstra, H., and Roos Klein-Lankhorst, J. (1994) De ontwikkeling van een methode voor monitoring van de ‘Maat van de Ruimte’. Wageningen, DLO-Staring Centrum (report 334) Amidon, E., and Elsner, G. (1968) Delineating landscape view areas. A computer approach. Pacifi c Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Berkeley, CA, USDA Forest Service (report RN PSW-180) Antrop, M. (2007) Perspectieven op het landschap. Achter- gronden om landschappen te lezen en te begrijpen. Gent, Academia Press. Antrop, M., and Van Eetvelde, V. (2000) Holistic aspects of sub- urban landscapes: visual image interpretation and land- scape metrics. Landscape and Urban Planning 50; 43-58Landscape and Urban Planning 50; 43-58Landscape and Urban Planning Appleton, J. (1975) The experience of landscape. London, Wiley. Appleyard, D., Lynch, K., and Myer, J. R. (1964) The View from the Road. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Massachu- setts Institute of Technology. Arthur, L.M., Daniel, T.C. and Boster, R.S. (1977) Scenic assess- ment: An overview. Landscape Planning 1977(4): 109-129Landscape Planning 1977(4): 109-129Landscape Planning Ashihara, Y. (1983) The Aesthetic Townscape. Cambrigde, Mas- sachusetts, The MIT Press. Batty, M. (2001) Exploring isovist fi elds. Space and shape in architectural and urban morphology. Environment and planning B: Planning and Design 28; 123-150 Batty, M. (2000) The new geography of the third dimension. Environment and Planning B 27; 483-484 Batty, M. (2008) Virtual Reality in Geographic Information Systems. In: Wilson, J.P., and Fotheringham, A.S. (eds.) The Handbook of Geographic Information Science. Oxford, Blackwell Publishing, pp 317-334 Batty, M., Galton, A., and Llobera, M. (2005) Not Just Space. An introduction. In: Fisher, P., and Unwin, D. (eds.) Re-pre- senting GIS. London etc., John Wiley & Sons, pp 127-133 Bell, S. (1996) Elements of Visual Design in the Landscape. London, E&FN Spon. Bell, S. (1999) Landscape. Pattern, Perception and Process. London, E&FN Spon. Bell, P.A., Greene, T.C., Fisher, J.D., and Baum, A. (2001) Environmental Psychology. London, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Benedikt, M.L. (1979) To take hold of space: isovists and isovist fi elds. Environment and Planning B 6; 47-65 Benedikt, M.L. & C.A. Burnham, (1981) Perceiving architectur- al space: from optic arrays to isovists. In: Warren, W.H., Shaw, R.E., and Hillsdale, N. J. (eds.) Persistence and Change. Connecticut, Lawrence Erlbaum, pp 103-114 Berlyne, D. E. (1971) Aesthetics and psychology. New York, Appleton Century Crofts. Bijhouwer, J.T.P. (1954) Waarnemen en ontwerpen in tuin en landschap. Amsterdam, Uitgeverij Argus. Bishop, I.D. (2003) Assessment of visual qualities, impacts, and behaviours in the landscape by using measures of visibility. Environment and Planning B: planning and design 30; 677-688 Bishop, I., and Hulse, D.W. (1994) Prediction of scenic beauty using mapped data and geographic information systems. Landscape and Urban Planning 30; 59-70 Bishop, I., and Lange, E., eds. (2005) Visualization in land- scape and environmental planning. Technology and appli- cations. London/New York, Taylor & Francis. Bishop, I., Wherrett, J.R., and Miller, D. (2000) Using image depth variables as predictors of visual quality. Environ- ment and Planning B: Planning and Design 27; 865-875 Blom, R., Rip, F., Toes, H., and Voskens, M. (1985) CALP 4, proefproject Haaglanden, Rapport Tuin- en Landschaps- architectuur, Landbouwhogeschool Wageningen. Boerwinkel, H.J.W. (1986) Cultuur, psychologie, omgevings- vormgeving en zelfoverstijging. Wageningen, Landbouw- hogeschool. Bouwman, M.J.A. (1979) De waarde van het gebruik van de entheskoop in relatie tot andere presentatie-technieken voor de gebouwde omgeving. Wageningen, Landbouwho- geschool Wageningen. Boyer, M.C. (1994) The city of collective memory: its historical imagery and architectural entertainments. Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press. Buitenhuis, A., Burrough, P.A., and Veer, A.A. de (1979) De door- zichtigheid van landschapselementen. Groen 7; 279-286 36 Exploring the visual landscape. Introduction Buitenhuis, A., Kerkhof, C.E.M. van de, Randen, Y. van, and De Veer, A.A. (1986) Schaal van het landschap. Opbouw en gebruik van een geografi sch informatie-systeem van schaalkenmerken van het landschap van Nederland, met landelijke kaarten 1:400.000. Boogert, D.A., and Schalk, J. (1995) Inrichting in vorm. De vormgeving van de maatregelen in landinrichting. Utrecht, LBL (report 205) Burrough, P.A., Buitenhuis, A., and De Veer, A.A. (1982) Het Informatiesysteem Landschapsbeeld, Reeks Landschaps- studies. Wageningen, Pudoc. Chang, K.T. (2010) Introduction to Geographic Information Systems. New York, etc., McGraw-Hill. Council of Europe (2000) The European Landscape Conven- tion. Florence, s.n. Coeterier, J.F. (1987) De waarneming en waardering van land- schappen. Resultaten van omgevingspsychologisch onder- zoek. Wageningen, Landbouwuniversiteit Wageningen Coeterier, J.F. (1994) Cues for the perception of the size of spaces in landscapes. Journal of Environmental Manage- ment 42; 333-347ment 42; 333-347ment Coeterier, J.F. (1996) Dominant attributes in the perception and evaluation of the Dutch landscape. Landscape and Urban Planning 34; 27-44 Craglia, M, Goodchild, M.F., Annoni, A. et al. (2008) Next- Generation Digital Earth. A position paper from the Vespucci Initiative for the Advancement of Geographic Information Science. International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research 3; 146-167 Cullen, G. (1961) Townscape. London, The Architectural Press. Daniel, T.C. (2001) Wither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landscape and urban planning 54; 267-281 Daniel, T.C., and Vining, J. (1983) Methodological issues in the assessment of landscape quality. In: Altman, I., and Wohlwill, J. (eds.), Behavior and the Natural Environ- ment: Advances in Theory and Research. New York, Ple- num Press, pp 5-45 De Boer, H. (1979) Landschapswaardering: rapport ten behoe- ve van het landschapsbeeldkarteringsonderzoek. Wageningen, De Dorschkamp (report 209) De Floriani, L. and, Magillo, P. (2003) Algorithms for visibil- ity computation on terrains: a survey. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 30; 709-728 De Veer, A.A. (1981) De doorzichtigheid van landschaps- elementen. Groen 7; 279-287 De Veer, A.A. (1977) De ruimtelijke classifi catie van het Nederlandse landschap. KNAG Geografi sch Tijdschrift (XI) 2; 98-109 De Veer, A.A. (1978) Visuele verstedelijking. KNAG Geo- grafi sch Tijdschrift (XII) 3; 281-282grafi sch Tijdschrift (XII) 3; 281-282grafi sch Tijdschrift De Veer, A.A., and Burrough, P.A. (1978) Physiognomic land- scape mapping in the Netherlands. Landscape Planning 5; 45-62 De Veer, A.A., Buitenhuis, A., and Van het Loo, H. (1977) Vergelijking van Nederlandse methoden van landschaps- beeldkartering en hun toepassingsmogelijkheden. Wageningen, Stiboka & Pudoc. Dee, C. (2001) Form and fabric in landscape architecture. London, Routledge. Den Ruijter, M. (1984) Perspektief in computergraphics. Groen 40(9); 338-341 Den Ruijter, M. (1978) Perspectiefreeksen construeren met computerhulp en projecteren. Bouw 20; 55-58 Dijkstra, H. et al. (1985) Visuele en ecologische effecten van nieuwbouw in Burgers Zoo. Wageningen, De Dorschkamp. Dijkstra, H. (1991) Het visuele landschap. Onderzoek naar de visuele kwaliteit van landschappen. Landschap 8 (3); 157-175 Dijkstra, H., and Van Lith-Kranendonk, J. (2000) Schaal- kenmerken van het landschap in Nederland. Monitoring Kwaliteit Groene Ruimte (MKGR). Wageningen, Alterra (report nr. 40) Dodge, M., McDerby, M., and Turner, M., eds. (2008) Geo- graphic Visualization. Concepts, Tools and Applications. London, John Wiley & Sons. Dramstad, W.E., Tveit, M., Fjellstad, W.J., and Fry ,G.L.A. (2006) Relationships between visual landscape prefer- ences and map-based indicators of landscape structure. Landscape and Urban Planning 78; 465–474 Duntley, S.Q. (1948) The Visibility of Distant Objects. Journal of the Optical Society of America 38(3); 237-249 Ervin, S.M. (2001) Digital landscape modelling and visualiza- tion: a research agenda. Landscape and Urban Planning 54 (1-4); 49-62 Ervin, S.M., and Hasbrouck, H.H. (2001) Landscape Model- ling: Digital Techniques for Landscape Visualization. New York, McGraw-Hill. Ervin, S., and Steinitz, C., (2003) Landscape visibility com- putation: necessary, but not suffi cient. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 30; 757-766 EU-Teach (2011) List of relevant European teaching contents in the studies of landscape architecture. ECLAS, EFLA, etc., ERASMUS-Life Long Learning programme of the European Union / Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency. Fisher, P.F. (1991) First experiments in viewshed uncertainty: the accuracy of the viewshed area. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 57; 1321-327 Fisher, P.F. (1992) First Experiments in Viewshed Uncer- tainty: Simulating Fuzzy Viewsheds. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 58 (3); 345-352 Fisher, P. F. (1993) Algorithm and implementation uncer- tainty in viewshed analysis. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 7 (4); 331-347 Fischer, P.F. (1995) An Exploration of probable viewsheds in landscape planning. Environment and Planning B: Plan- ning and design 22; 527-546 37 Fisher, P.F. (1996) Extending the applicability of viewsheds in landscape planning. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 62 (11); 1297-1302 Fisher-Gewirtzman, D., Dalit Shach, P., Wagner, I.A., and Burt, M. (2005) View-oriented three-dimensional visual analysis models for the urban environment. Urban De- sign International 10; 23–37 Fisher-Gewirtzman, D., and Wagner, I. A. (2003) Spatial openness as a practical metric for evaluating build up en- vironments. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 30(1); 37-49 Fisher, P., and Unwin, D., eds. (2005) Re-presenting GIS. London etc., John Wiley & Sons. Germino, M.J., Reiners, W.A., Blasko, B.J., McLeod, D., and Bastian, C.T. (2001) Estimating visual properties of Rocky Mountain landscape using GIS. Landscape and Urban Planning 53; 71-84 Gibson, J.J. (1979) The Ecological Approach to Visual Percep- tion. London, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Goodchild, M.F. (1992) Geographical Information Science. International Journal of Geographical Information Sys- tems 6; 31-45 Granö, J.G. (1929) Reine Geographie. Eine methodologische Studie beleuchtet mit Beispielen aus Finnland und Est- land. Acta Geographica 2 (2); 202 Granö, O., and Paasi, A., eds. (1997) Pure Geography. Balti- more and London, The John Hopkins University Press. Harris, D., and Ruggles, D.F. (2007) Sites Unseen. Landscape and Vision. Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh Press. Hendriks, K., and Stobbelaar, D.J. (2003) Landbouw in een leesbaar landschap. Hoe gangbare en biologische landbouw bedrijven bijdragen aan landschapskwaliteit. Wageningen, Blauwdruk. Higuchi, T. (1975) The Visual and Spatial Structure of Land- scapes. Cambridge, The MIT Press. Hoogstad, J. (1990) Ruimte-tijd-beweging. Prolegomena voor de architectuur. Den Haag, SDU Uitgevers. Hudson-Smith, A. (2008) The Visual City. In: Dodge, M., McDerby, M., and Turner, M. (eds.) Geographic Visuali- zation. Concepts, Tools and Applications. London, John Wiley & Sons, pp 183-197 Hudson-Smith, A., and Evans, S. (2003) Virtual cities: from CAD to 3D-GIS. In: Longley, P.A., and Batty, M. (eds.) Ad- vanced Spatial Analysis. The CASA book of GIS. Redlands: Environmental Systems Research Institute, pp 41-60 Jacobs, M. H. (2006) The production of mindscapes. Wageningen, Wageningen University. Kaplan, R., and Kaplan, S. (1989) The Experience of Nature. A Psychological Perspective. Cambridge, Cambridge Uni- versity Press. Kemp, K., ed. (2008) Encyclopedia of geo-information science. London etc., Sage publications. Kerkstra, K., et al. (1974) De visuele aspecten. In: Werkgroep Helmond, Landschapsonderzoek Helmond. Afdeling Land- schapsarchitectuur Landbouwhogeschool, Wageningen Kerkstra, K., Vrijlandt, P., De Jonge, H.C., and Houwen, J. (2007) Landschapsvisie Zuid Limburg. Wageningen, Wageningen University. Korthals Altes, H.J., and Steffen, C. (1988) Beleving en routekeuze in de binnenstad van Delft. Delft, Delft Uni- versity Press. Koster, E.A., and De Veer, A.A. (1972) Een analyse van het landschap ten noorden van Amsterdam aan de hand van de topografi sche kaart. Stedebouw en Volkshuisvesting 53; 331-355 Kraak, M.J., and Ormeling, F. (2010) Cartography. Visualiza- tion of Spatial Data. London, Prentice Hall. Lange, E., (2001) The limits of realism: perceptions of virtual landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 54; 163–182 Lemaire, T. (1970) Filosofi e van het landschap. Amsterdam, Ambo. Li, H., and Wu, J. (2004) Use and misuse of landscape met- rics. Landscape Ecology 19; 389-399Landscape Ecology 19; 389-399Landscape Ecology Li, H. and Wu, J. (2007) Landscape pattern analysis: key issues and challenges. In: Wu, J., and Hobbs, R.J. (eds.) Key Topics in Landscape Ecology. Cambridge University Press, Studies in Landscape Ecology. pp 39-61. Llobera, M. (1996) Exploring the topography of mind. GIS, land- scape archeology and social theory. Antiquity 70; 612-622Antiquity 70; 612-622Antiquity Llobera, M. (2003) Extending GIS-based visual analysis. The concepts of visualscapes. International Journal for Geo- graphical Information Science 17 (1); 25-48 Longley, P.A., and Batty, M., eds. (2003) Advanced Spatial Analysis. The CASA book of GIS. Redlands, Environmen- tal Systems Research Institute. Longley, P., Goodchild, M.F., Maguire, D.J., and Rhind, D.W. (2011) Geographic information systems & science. Lon- don, John Wiley & Sons. Lothian, A. (1999) Landscape and the philosophy of aesthet- ics: is landscape quality inherent in the landscape or in the eye of the beholder? Landscape and Urban Planning 44; 177-198 Lynch, K. (1960) The Image of the City. Cambridge, MIT Press. Maas, F.M. and Reh, W. (1968) The appearance and develop- ment of the landscape in the Netherlands up to approxi- mately the year 2000. Forum XXI(1); 14-34 McGarigal, K., and Marks, B.J. (1995) FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape struc- ture. Pacifi c Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, USDA Forest Service (Gen. Tech. Report PNW-GTR-351). Morello, E., and Ratti, C. (2009) A digital image of the city: 3D isovists in Lynch’s urban analysis. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 36; 837–853 Nasar, J.L. ed. (2008) Environmental aesthetics. Theory, research and applications. Cambridge, Cambridge Uni- versity Press. NCG (Nederlandse Commissie Geodesie) (2010) Nederland 2020 – Virtuele Delta: Agenda en aanpak kennis, innovatie en educatie – GIDEON Strategie 7. Delft, Bureau van de Nederlandse commissie voor Geodesie. 38 Exploring the visual landscape. Introduction Nicolai, J. (1971) De visuele invloed van woonplaatsen op open ruimten. Met enkele toepassingen op het midden van west- Nederland. Delft, Delft University of Technology. Nijhuis, S. (2009) Mapping architectonic structures with GIS. In: Calabrese, L.M., et al. (eds.) Architecture Annual 2007-2008. Delft and Rotterdam, University of Technol- ogy / 010 publishers. Nijhuis, S. (2010) Quickscan visuele effecten Landschapsplan Binnenduingebied Bergen. Haarlem, Provincie Noord- Holland Olwig, K.R. (2002) Landscape, nature and the body politic: from Britain’s Reinassance to America’s New World. Madi- son, University of Wisconsin Press. Oxford dictionary (2011a) Physiognomy. Retrieved from: http://oxforddictionaries.com/defi nition/physiognomy [accessed 12 July 2011] Oxford dictionary (2011b) Perception. Retrieved from: http:// oxforddictionaries.com/defi nition/perception [accessed 12 July 2011] Oxford dictionary (2011c) Visual. Retrieved from: http:// oxforddictionaries.com/defi nition/visual [accessed 12 July 2011] Paar, P. (2003) Lenné3D-the making of a new landscape visualisation system. From requirements analysis and feasibility survey towards prototyping. In: Buhnmann, E., and Ervin, S. (eds.) Trends in landscape modelling. Heidelberg, Wichmann. pp 78-84 Palmer, J. (1996) Modelling spaciousness in the Dutch Land- scape. Wageningen, DLO-Staring Centrum (report 119) Palmer, J. (2004) Using spatial metrics to predict scenic per- ception in a changing landscape. Landscape and Urban Planning 69 (2004) 201–218 Palmer, J.F., and Roos-Klein Lankhorst, J. (1998) Evaluating visible spatial diversity in the landscape. Landscape and Urban Planning 43; 65-78 Panero, J. and Zelnik, M. (1979) Human Dimension & Interior Space. New York, Whitney Library of Design. Piek, M., Middelkoop, M. van, Breedijk, M., Hornis, W., Sorel, N., and Verhoef, N. (2007) Snelwegpanorama’s in Ned- erland. The Hague/Rotterdam, Ruimtelijk Planbureau/ NAi Uitgevers. Piessens, C. (1985) Studie van de landschapstransparantie in het Land van Waas. De Aardrijkskunde 9 (2); 155-163 Piket, J.C., Kalkhoven, J.T.R., De Veer, A.A., and Vos, W. (1987) Landschap. Edited by Stichting wetenschappeli- jke atlas van Nederland. Vol. 16, Atlas van Nederland in 20 delen. ‘s-Gravehage, Staatsuitgeverij. Prak, N.L. (1979) De visuele waarneming van de gebouwde omgeving. Delft, Delft University Press. Rana, S. (2002) Isovist Analyst Extension. Version 1.1. Com- puter software program produced by the author at the Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis, University College London. Raper, J. (1989) Three-dimensional applications in Geographi- cal Information Systems. London, Taylor & Francis. Raper, J. (2000) Multidimensional Geographic Information Science. London, Taylor & Francis. Rekitte, J., and Paar, P. (2006) Digital Botany. Journal of Landscape Architecture (Autumn); 28-35 Reh, W. (1995) Arcadia en metropolis. Het landschapsexperi- ment van de verlichting. Delft University of Technology. Ribe, R.G., Armstrong, E.T., and Gobster, P.H. (2002) Scenic vistas and the changing policy landscape. Visualizing and testing the role of visual resources in ecosystem management. Landscape Journal 21(1); 42-66 RijksPlanologische Dienst (1966) Tweede Nota over de ruimtelijke ordening van Nederland. The Hague. Riggs, P. D., and Dean, D. J. (2007) An Investigation into the Causes of Errors and Inconsistencies in Predicted Views- heds. Transactions in GIS 11; 175–196 Rød, J. K., and Van der Meer, D. (2009) Visibility and domi- nance analysis: assessing a high-rise building project in Trondheim. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 36(4); 698 – 710 Roos-Klein Lankhorst, J. (1987) Visualisation tool for (land- scape) architects. Computer Aided-Design 19 (4); 188-194 Roos-Klein Lankhorst, J. (1989) Visualisering van verande- ringen in het landschap. Een computer-ondersteund ontwerp instrument voor de (landschaps)architect. Wageningen, Landbouwhogeschool Wageningen. Roos-Klein Lankhorst, J., Buijs, A.E., Van den Berg, A.E., Bloemmen, M., Vries, S. de, Schuiling, C., and Griffi oen, A.J. (2002) BelevingsGIS, versie februari 2002 (hoofd- tekst). Wageningen, Alterra (werkdocument 2002/08). Scott, K. and Benson, F. (2002) Public and professional atti- tudes to landscape: scoping study. Newcastle, University of Newcastle. Sevenant, M. (2010) Variation in landscape perception ad pref- erence. Expieriences from case studies in rural and urban landscapes observed by different groups of respondents. Ghent University, Department of Geography. Sevenant, M., and Antrop, M. (2006) Settlement models, land use and visibility in rural landscapes: Two case studies in Greece. Landscape and Urban Planning 80; 362–374 Sevenant, M., and Antrop, M. (2010) The use of latent classes to identify individual differences in the importance of landscape dimensions for aesthetic preference. Land Use Policy 27; 827-842Policy 27; 827-842Policy Smardon, R.C., Palmer, J.F., and Felleman, J.P. (1986) Foun- dations for visual project analysis. New York etc., Wiley. Snowden, R., Thompson, P. and Troscianko, T. (2006) Basic Vision. An introduction to visual perception. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Staats, H., and Van de Wardt, J.W. (1990) Changing a small- scale landscape: Environmental psychology applied to the problems of the countryside. Netherlands Journal of Housing and Environmental Research 5; 65-86 Steffen, C. (1981) Psychologie van de waarneming. Delft, Technische Hogeschool Delft. Steffen, C., and Van der Voordt, D. (1978) Belevingsonderzoek 39 in Antwerpen. Delft, Technische Hogeschool Delft. Steenbergen, C.M., ed. (1985) Architectuur en landschap. Rationele, formele en picturale enscenering en het situatief ontwerpen. Delft, Delft University Press. Steenbergen, C.M. (1990), De stap over de horizon. Een ontleding van het formele ontwerp in de landschaps- architectuur. Faculteit Bouwkunde, Delft University of Technology. Tandy, C.R. (1967), The Isovist Method of Landscape Survey, in: C.R. Murray (ed.) Methods of Landscape Analysis. London: Landscape Research Group, pp 9-10 The Landscape Institute (2003) Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment. Second Edition. London and New York, Spon Press. Thiel, P. (1997) People, Paths, and Purposes: Notations for a Participatory Envirotecture. Seattle and London, Univer- sity of Washington Press. Tomlin, C.D. (1983) Digital Cartographic modelling. Tech- niques in environmental planning. Unpublished PhD thesis. Harvard University. Tomlin, C.D. (1991) Cartograpic Modelling. In: Maguire D.J., Goodchild, M.F., and Rhind, D.W. (eds.) Geographical Information systems: principles and applications. London, Longman. Tomlinson, R.F. Calkins, H.W., and Marble, D.F. (1976) Computer handling of geographical data. Paris, UNESCO Natural Resources Research XIII. Tuan, Y.F. (1974) Topophili: a study of environmental percep- tion, attitudes, and values. New York, Columbia Univer- sity Press. Turner, M.G., and Gardner, R.H. eds. (1991) Quantitative methods in landscape ecology. New York, Springer-Verlag. Turner, A.(2001) Depthmap. A program to perform visibility graph analysis. Proceedings Space Syntax symposium. Turner, A., Doxa, M., O’Sullivan D., and Penn, A. (2001) From Isovists to visibility graphs: a methodology for the analy- sis of architectural space. Environment and Planning B: Planning and design 28; 103-121 Uuema, E., Antrop, M., Roosaare, J., Marja, R., and Mander, U. (2009) Landscape Metrics and indices: An overview of Their Use in Landscape Research. Living Review in Landscape Research. Ulrich, R.S. (1981) Natural versus urban scenes: some psy- chophysiological effect. Environment and Behavior 13; 523-556 Van Bilsen, A. (2008) Mathematical Explorations in Urban and Regional Design. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology. Van Bilsen, A., and Stolk, E. (2007) The potential of isovist- based visibility analysis. In: H. C. Bekering, J. Klatte, and D. Hauptmann (eds.) The architectural annual 2005- 2006. Rotterdam, 010 Publishers, pp 68–73 Van de Wardt, J.W., and Staats, H. (1988) Veranderingen in een kleinschalig landschap. Omgevingspsychologisch onderzoek. Leiden, Rijksuniversiteit Van den Berg, A.E. (1999) Individual differences in the aesthet- ic evaluation of natural landscapes. Thesis. Groningen, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Van den Berg, A., Van Lith, J., and Roos, J. (1985) Toepassing van het computerprogramma MAP2 in het landschaps- bouwkundig onderzoek. Landschap 2(4); 278-293 Van der Ham, R., G.F.A. Schut and J. Iding (1970) Een voor- stel voor een nieuwe landschapstypologie naar visuele kenmerken. Stedebouw en Volkshuisvesting 11: 421-438 Van der Ham, R. and J. Idding (1971) De landschapstypologie naar visuele kenmerken. Methoden en gebruik. Afdeling Land- schapsarchitectuur Landbouwhogeschool, Wageningen. Van Eetvelde, V., and Antrop, M. (2009) A stepwise multi- scaled landscape typology and characterisation for trans-regional integration, applied on the federal state of Belgium. Landscape and Urban Planning 91(3); 160-170 Van Lammeren, R.J.A. (1985) MAP en de Wageningse Uiter- waarden. Wageningen, Landbouwhogeschool Wagenin- gen, Planologie (two volumes). Van Lammeren, R.J.A. (2003) SALIX-2, Simulatie Agenten voor Landschapsarchitectonisch Design in Virtual Reality (X). Wageningen, Alterra. Van Lammeren, R.J.A., and Kamps, S. (2001) Quantitative landscape description. In: Conference Proceedings of ECLAS, Velp, pp 64-75 VROM, Ministery of (2008) GIDEON Basisvoorziening geo- informatie Nederland: Visie en implementatiestrategie (2008-2011). The Hague. Ware, C. (2004) Information Visualization. Perception for design. Burlington, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. Warnau, H. (1979) Rapport over de parken Sonsbeek, Zijpendaal en Gulden Bodem in Arnhem. Beschrijving, waardering, mogelijke veranderingen. Wageningen, Vakgroep Land- schapsarchitectuur, Landbouwhogeschool Wageningen Warnau, H. (1990) Ontwerpdoelstellingen in de landschaps- architectuur. Plan 21(5/6); 12-21 Wassink, W.T. (1999) Beekdallandschappen. Een morfologisch onderzoek in de zandgebieden van Nederland. Wagenin- gen University Weitkamp, G. (2010) Capturing the View. A GIS based proce- dure to assess perceived landscape openness. Wageningen, Wageningen University. Wentholt, R. (1968) De binnenstadbeleving en Rotterdam. Wheatley, D. (1995) Cumulative viewshed analysis: a GIS- based method for investigating intervisibility, and its archaeological application. In: Lock, G., and Stancic, Z. (eds.) Archaeology and Geographical Information Systems: A European Perspective. London, Taylor and Francis, pp 171-185 Wilson, J.P., and Fotheringham, A.S. (eds.) The Handbook of Geographic Information Science. Oxford, Blackwell Publishing. Zube, E.H., Sell, J.L., and Taylor, J.G. (1982) Landscape perception: research, application and theory. Landscape Planning 9 (1): 1-33