Literature DB >> 23895913

Does human perception of wetland aesthetics and healthiness relate to ecological functioning?

Marylise Cottet1, Hervé Piégay, Gudrun Bornette.   

Abstract

Wetland management usually aims at preserving or restoring desirable ecological characteristics or functions. It is now well-recognized that some social criteria should also be included. Involving lay-people in wetland preservation or restoration projects may mean broadening project objectives to fit various and potentially competing requirements that relate to ecology, aesthetics, recreation, etc. In addition, perceived value depends both upon expertise and objectives, both of which vary from one stakeholder population to another. Perceived value and ecological functioning have to be reconciled in order to make a project successful. Understanding the perceptions of lay-people as well as their opinions about ecological value is a critical part of the development of sustainable management plans. Characterizing the environment in a way that adequately describes ecological function while also being consistent with lay perception may help reach such objectives. This goal has been addressed in a case study relating to wetlands of the Ain River (France). A photo-questionnaire presenting a sample of photographs of riverine wetlands distributed along the Ain River was submitted to 403 lay-people and self-identified experts. Two objectives were defined: (1) to identify the different parameters, whether visual or ecological, influencing the perception regarding the value of these ecosystems; (2) to compare the perceptions of self-identified experts and lay-people. Four criteria appear to strongly influence peoples' perceptions of ecological and aesthetical values: water transparency and colour, the presence and appearance of aquatic vegetation, the presence of sediments, and finally, trophic status. In our study, we observed only a few differences in perception. The differences primarily related to the value assigned to oligotrophic wetlands but even here, the differences between lay and expert populations were minimal. These results support the idea that it is possible to implement an integrated and participative management program for ecosystems. Our approach can provide a shared view of environmental value facilitating the work of managers in defining comprehensive goals for wetland preservation or restoration projects.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aesthetics; Ain River; Healthiness; Perception; Photoquestionnaire; Riverine wetland; Trophic status; Value

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23895913     DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.06.056

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Environ Manage        ISSN: 0301-4797            Impact factor:   6.789


  8 in total

1.  Landscape perceptions and social representations of Fallopia spp. in France.

Authors:  S Rouifed; M Cottet; M de Battista; Y-F Le Lay; F Piola; P Rateau; A Rivière-Honegger
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2018-11-22

2.  The social dimensions of a river's environmental quality assessment.

Authors:  Anne-Lise Boyer; Emeline Comby; Silvia Flaminio; Yves-François Le Lay; Marylise Cottet
Journal:  Ambio       Date:  2018-08-25       Impact factor: 5.129

3.  Diverse Approaches to Implement and Monitor River Restoration: A Comparative Perspective in France and Germany.

Authors:  Bertrand Morandi; Jochem Kail; Anne Toedter; Christian Wolter; Hervé Piégay
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2017-08-21       Impact factor: 3.266

Review 4.  Community experiences of landscape-based stormwater management practices: A review.

Authors:  Yuanqiu Feng; Joan Nassauer
Journal:  Ambio       Date:  2022-04-20       Impact factor: 6.943

Review 5.  Building bridges between natural and social science disciplines: a standardized methodology to combine data on ecosystem quality trends.

Authors:  I Richter; B R Roberts; S F Sailley; E Sullivan; V V Cheung; J Eales; M Fortnam; J B Jontila; C Maharja; T Ha Nguyen; S Pahl; R A Praptiwi; J Sugardjito; J D C Sumeldan; W M Syazwan; A Y Then; M C Austen
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2022-05-16       Impact factor: 6.671

Review 6.  Beneficial Use Impairments, Degradation of Aesthetics, and Human Health: A Review.

Authors:  Erik D Slawsky; Joel C Hoffman; Kristen N Cowan; Kristen M Rappazzo
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 4.614

Review 7.  Factors influencing perceptions of aquatic ecosystems.

Authors:  Joseph Flotemersch; Kelsey Aho
Journal:  Ambio       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 5.129

8.  Ecological aesthetic assessment of a rebuilt wetland restored from farmland and management implications for National Wetland Parks.

Authors:  Mingyang Sun; Xue Tian; Yuanchun Zou; Ming Jiang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-10-10       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.