Search

This study investigated whether European, Mediterranean and natural landscapes might trigger identification responses among residents of Mediterranean Europe. The participants (N = 546) were students from three Italian and three Spanish regions who rated their level of place identification by looking at eight pictures of prototypical landscapes, each depicting a unique combination of attributes in a 2×2×2 research design (European/non-European, Mediterranean/non-Mediterranean and natural/built). The results confirmed both European and natural landscapes as stronger carriers of identification than non-European and built landscapes, respectively, whereas no differences emerged between Mediterranean and non-Mediterranean landscapes. The statistical analysis of two-way interactions showed the amplification effect of the combined European–natural landscape, whilst a less clear picture emerged from the other two interactions. These findings suggest that landscape images may be used to foster a more inclusive identity at the supranational level and thus increase the sense of belonging among European citizens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of landscape identity is often referred to in landscape policy and planning. A clear definition of the concept is lacking however. This is problematic because the term 'landscape identity' can have many different meanings and thus easily lead to confusion. We define landscape identity as 'the perceived uniqueness of a place' and endeavour to describe the content of this definition more concisely. Within this context the paper introduces the framework of the Landscape Identity Circle for the various dimensions of landscape identity based on two axes: differentiation between spatial as opposed to existential identity, and differentiation between personal and cultural landscape identity. This framework is valuable in positioning research approaches and disciplines addressing landscape identity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ‘NIMBY’ (Not In My Back Yard) concept is commonly used to explain public opposition to new developments near homes and communities, particularly arising from energy technologies such as wind farms or electricity pylons. Despite its common use, the concept has been extensively critiqued by social scientists as a useful concept for research and practice. Given European policy goals to increase sustainable energy supply by 2020, deepening understanding of local opposition is of both conceptual and practical importance. This paper reviews NIMBY literature and proposes an alternative framework to explain local opposition, drawing upon social and environmental psychological theory on place. Local opposition is conceived as a form of place-protective action, which arises when new developments disrupt pre-existing emotional attachments and threaten place-related identity processes. Adopting a social constructivist perspective and drawing on social representation theory, a framework of place change is proposed encompassing stages of becoming aware, interpreting, evaluating, coping and acting, with each stage conceived at multiple levels of analysis, from intrapersonal to socio-cultural. Directions for future research and potential implications of the place-based approach for public engagement by energy policy-makers and practitioners are discussed. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The importance of place in landscape management and outdoor recreation has been prominent in the literature since the 1970s. As such, calls to incorporate place into the management of parks, forests, and other protected areas exist. However, little work explores how place attachment may complement existing management frameworks. Hence, the purpose of this investigation was to explore levels of visitors' place attachment intensity across the six classes of the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS). Survey data collected in North America and Europe indicated there was more similarity in place attachment intensities among areas classified toward the less developed end of the ROS, while greater variation existed among the more developed sites. Observing place attachment across all six ROS classes allowed for a deeper understanding of the correlation between place and the management framework.