Table of Contents
Economics Research International
Volume 2014 (2014), Article ID 259471, 12 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/259471
Research Article

Econometric Analysis of Landscape Preferences in Canterbury, New Zealand

1Landcare Research, Lincoln 7608, New Zealand
2Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment, Auckland 1143, New Zealand

Received 28 April 2014; Accepted 8 July 2014; Published 17 August 2014

Academic Editor: Magda E. Kandil

Copyright © 2014 P. Brown and C. Mortimer. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. NZIER, “Dairy's Role in Sustaining New Zealand,” Report, 2010, https://nzier.org.nz/publications/dairys-role-in-sustaining-new-zealand.
  2. Ministry of Primary Industries, “Situation and outlook for primary industries,” 2013, http://www.mpi.govt.nz/news-resources/news/situation-amp-outlook-for-primary-industries.
  3. “OECD/Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations,” OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook, OECD Publishing, Paris, France, 2013.
  4. Statistics New Zealand, “New Zealand is Home to 3 Million People and 60 Million Sheep,” 2012, http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/population/mythbusters/3million-people-60million-sheep.aspx.
  5. S. Kerr and J. Hendy, “Drivers of rural land use in New Zealand: estimates from national data,” Working Paper MEL 0368, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research, 2004. View at Google Scholar
  6. Statistics New Zealand, “Agricultural Census 2012,” http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/industry_sectors/agriculture-horticulture-forestry/2012-agricultural-census-tables.aspx.
  7. Statistics New Zealand, “New Zealand Official Yearbook 2012,” 2013, http://www.stats.govt.nz/yearbook2012.
  8. Statistics New Zealand, “Population estimates,” 2013, http://www.stats.govt.nz/~/media/Statistics/browse-categories/people-and-communities/geographic-areas/urban-rural-profile-update/population-estimates.xls.
  9. P. J. Rawlinson, The influence of the black and white tide: dairy farming, landscape and community change [Ph.D. thesis], Lincoln University, Lincoln, UK, 2011.
  10. A. C. Nelessen, Visions for a New American Dream: Process, Principles, and an Ordinance to Plan and Design Small Communities, APA Planners Press, Chicago, Ill, USA, 1994.
  11. E. E. Malizia and S. Exline, Consumer Preferences for Residential Development Alternatives, Center for Urban and Regional Studies, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA, 2000.
  12. R. Kaplan, M. E. Austin, and S. Kaplan, “Open space communities: resident perceptions, nature benefits, and problems with terminology,” Journal of the American Planning Association, vol. 70, no. 3, pp. 300–312, 2004. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. J. I. Nassauer, Z. Wang, and E. Dayrell, “What will the neighbors think? Cultural norms and ecological design,” Landscape and Urban Planning, vol. 92, no. 3-4, pp. 282–292, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. Envision Utah, Envision Utah process: greater wastach area, 2000, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/processes/tools/toolbox/utah/index.cfm.
  15. Seattle Department of Transportation, “5th Avenue NE streetscape design project: visual preference survey results,” 2001, http://www.cityofseattle.net/transportation/pdf/VisualPreferenceSurveyResults.pdf.
  16. G. G. Schultz and J. E. Searle, Understanding the Economics of Transportation Projects, Economics Research International, 2012.
  17. T. R. Herzog, S. Kaplan, and R. Kaplan, “The prediction of preference for unfamiliar urban places,” Population and Environment, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 43–59, 1982. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. S. Lenzholzer and N. Y. van der Wulp, “Thermal experience and perception of the built environment in Dutch urban squares,” Journal of Urban Design, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 375–401, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. R. Ewing, T. Schmid, R. Killingsworth, A. Zlot, and S. Raudenbush, “Relationship between urban sprawl and physical activity, obesity, and morbidity,” The American Journal of Health Promotion, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 47–57, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. M. C. Dunn, “Landscape with photographs: testing the preference approach to landscape evaluation,” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 4, pp. 15–26, 1976. View at Google Scholar
  21. L. M. Arthur, “Predicting scenic beauty of forest environments: some empirical tests,” Forest Science, vol. 23, pp. 151–160, 1977. View at Google Scholar
  22. R. Kaplan and S. Kaplan, The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 1989.
  23. J. L. Nasar, The Evaluative Image of the City, Sage, Thousand Oaks, Calif, USA, 1998.
  24. H. Sanoff, Visual Research Methods in Design, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY, USA, 1991.
  25. A. E. Stamps III and J. L. Nasar, “Design review and public preferences: effects of geographical location, public consensus, sensation seeking, and architectural styles,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 11–32, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. A. E. Stamps, Psychology and the Aesthetics of the Built Environment, Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2000.
  27. A. E. Stamps III, “On shape and spaciousness,” Environment and Behavior, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 526–548, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. T. Tempesta, “The perception of agrarian historical landscapes: a study of the Veneto plain in Italy,” Landscape and Urban Planning, vol. 97, no. 4, pp. 258–272, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  29. M. Gjerde, “Visual evaluation of urban streetscapes: how do public preferences reconcile with those held by experts,” Urban Design International, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 153–161, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. H. W. Schroeder, “Environmental perception rating scales: a case for simple methods of analysis,” Environment and Behavior, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 573–598, 1984. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  31. T. R. Herzog, “A cognitive analysis of preference for urban nature,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 27–43, 1989. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. P. J. Lindal and T. Hartig, “Architectural variation, building height, and the restorative quality of urban residential streetscapes,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 33, pp. 26–36, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. E. H. Zube, D. G. Pitt, and T. W. Anderson, “Perception and prediction of scenic resources values of the Northeast,” in Landscape Assessment: Values, Perceptions, and Resources, E. H. Zube, R. O. Brush, and J. G. Fabos, Eds., pp. 151–167, Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Stroudsberg, Pa, USA, 1976. View at Google Scholar
  34. S. Shuttleworth, “The use of photographs as an environment presentation medium in landscape studies,” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 61–76, 1980. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. T. C. Daniel and M. M. Meitner, “Representational validity of landscape visualizations: the effects of graphical realism on perceived scenic beauty of forest vistas,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 61–72, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. S. B. Im, “Visual preferences in enclosed urban spaces: an exploration of a scientific approach to environmental design,” Environment and Behavior, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 235–262, 1984. View at Google Scholar
  37. A. E. Stamps, “Meta-analysis in environmental research,” in Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Environmental Design Research Association Edmond, Space Design and Management for Place Making, M. S. Amiel and J. C. Vischer, Eds., pp. 114–124, Environmental Design Research Association, Edmond, Okla, USA, 1997.
  38. E. H. Zube, J. Vining, C. S. Law, and R. B. Bechtel, “Perceived urban residential quality: a cross-cultural bimodal study,” Environment and Behavior, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 327–350, 1985. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  39. J. N. Lien and G. J. Buhyoff, “Extension of visual quality models for urban forests,” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 245–254, 1986. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. T. R. Herzog and O. L. Leverich, “Searching for legibility,” Environment and Behavior, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 459–477, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. M. Arriaza, J. F. Cañas-Ortega, J. A. Cañas-Madueño, and P. Ruiz-Aviles, “Assessing the visual quality of rural landscapes,” Landscape and Urban Planning, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 115–125, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. R. Ewing, M. R. King, S. W. Raudenbush, and O. J. Clemente, “Turning highways into main streets: two innovations in planning methodology,” Journal of the American Planning Association, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 269–282, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. S. W. Raudenbush and A. S. Bryk, Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods, Sage, Beverly Hills, Calif, USA, 2nd edition, 2002.
  44. R. Ewing, S. Handy, R. C. Brownson, O. Clemente, and E. Winston, “Identifying and measuring urban design qualities related to walkability,” Journal of Physical Activity and Health, vol. 3, supplement 1, pp. S223–S240, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  45. D. H. Gustafson, R. K. Shukla, A. Delbecq, and G. W. Walster, “A comparative study of differences in subjective likelihood estimates made by individuals, interacting groups, Delphi groups, and nominal groups,” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 280–291, 1973. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. H. A. Linstone and M. Turoff, Eds., The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications, Addison-Wesley, New York, NY, USA, 1975.
  47. G. Cuddeback, E. Wilson, J. G. Orme, and T. Combs-Orme, “Detecting and statistically correcting sample selection bias,” Journal of Social Service Research, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 19–33, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. P. Marsden and J. Wright, Handbook of Survey Research, Emerald Group, London, UK, 2010.
  49. Statistics New Zealand, “2006 Census,” 2006, http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2006CensusHomePage.aspx.
  50. P. Lafferty, “International migration to/from Christchurch after the earthquakes,” Presentation at Statistics New Zealand, 2011, http://www.population.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/3b3_peter-lafferty.pdf.
  51. P. Tait and R. Cullen, Some External Costs of Dairy Farming in Canterbury, Lincoln University [Publication for Malvern Hills Protection Society Inc], 2006, http://purl.umn.edu/109595.
  52. A. E. Stamps III, “Demographic effects in environmental aesthetics: a meta-analysis,” Journal of Planning Literature, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 155–175, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. C. L. Regan and S. A. Horn, “To nature or not to nature: associations between environmental preferences, mood states and demographic factors,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 57–66, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus