Section

Physical geography and biogeography, soil geography and landscape geochemistry

Title

TO THE QUESTION ABOUT THE ESTHETIC ASSESSMENT OF RECREATIONAL LANDSCAPES IN URBAN AREAS

Сontributors

Yu. M. Grishaeva, Professor, Department of physical geography, environmental management and methods of teaching of geography, Moscow Region State University (MRSU),

А. А. Medvedkov, Head of the Department of General and Regional Geoecology, Moscow Region State University (MRSU),

Z. N. Tkacheva, Dean of Geography and Ecology Faculty,

A.       V. Volgin, Head of the Department of Economic and Social Geography, Moscow Region State University (MRSU)

Abstract

The article discusses various approaches to the esthetic assessment of recreational landscapes, attractiveness criteria of the landscape are analyzed, concepts associated with landscape esthetics in their relation to urbanized areas are revealed. The important role of esthetic assessment of landscape in a comprehensive geoecologi cal assessment of recreational areas in urbanized areas is stated.

Keywords

recreational landscape, esthetic assessment, geoecological assessment, landscape attractiveness, attractive, urban area.

Очевидно, что качество

References

1.  STST 17.8.1.02—88. Protection of Nature. Landscapes. Classification (app. by the decree of State standard of the USSR from 13.05.1988 N 1329) [Electronic resource]. — URL: http://www.complexdoc.ru/lib/ГОСТ%2017.8.1.02—88] (accessed: 08.09.2017).

2.  Bobylev S. N., Zakharov V. M. Ecosystem services and the economy. — Moscow: “Printing LEVKO”, Institute for sustainable development / Center for Russian environmental policy, 2009. — 72 p.

3.  Bibaeva A. Y. Features of formation of esthetic qualities of coastal landscapes, abstract of Diss. on competition of a scientific degree 25.00.23 — physical geography and biogeography, geography of soils and Geochemistry of landscapes. — Irkutsk, 2015. — 24 p.

4.  Dirin D. A. Assessment of landscape esthetic resources of mountain landscapes in order to optimize the recreational nature management (on example of Ust-Koksa district of the Altai Republic) // abstract of Diss. on competition of a scientific degree 25.00.36 — Geoecology. — Barnaul (Institute for water and environmental problems SB RAS), 2006. — 19 p.

5.  Naveh, Z., & Lieberman, A. S. (1994). Landscape ecology: Theory and application. NewYork: Springer-Verlag.

6.  Rysin S. L., Shapovalova N. V., Chumachenko S. I., Pentelkina O. S. Modeling the dynamics of the recreational potential of forest plantations // Forest Bulletin, 2006. — No. 2. — pp. 13—21.

7.  Daniel E. Orenstein, Tally Katz-Gerro, Jan Dick Environmental tastes as predictors of environmental opinions and behaviors // Landscape and Urban Planning, 2017. — 161. — pp. 59—71.

8.  Grishaeva Yu. M. To the question about the essence of concepts “ecological culture of personality” // Secondary professional education. — 2011. — No. 11. — pp. 48—51.

9.  Grishaeva Yu. M. Ecological culture in the information society: emerging problems of education “Herald of the International Academy of Sciences. Russian section”, 2014. — T. 1. — No. 1 (7). — pp. 36—38.

10. Rodoman B. B. Polarized biosphere: Collection of articles. — Smolensk: Oykumena. — 2002. — 336 p.

11. Dirin D. A., Popov E. S. Assessment of landscape and esthetic appeal of landscapes: methodological review // News of Altai State University, 2010. — No. 3—2. — pp. 120—124.

12. Krasovskaya T. M. Ecological functions of landscapes: methods of assessment and conservation // Geopolitics and ecogeo-dynamics regions. — Simferopol: KFU named of V. I. Vernadsky, 2014. — T. 10. — No. 2 (13). — pp. 51—55.

13. Brush R., Chenoweth R. E., & Barman T. (2000). Group differences in the enjoy ability of driving through rural landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 47 (1—2), 39—45. — [Electronic resource]. — URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0169- 2046(99)00073-0Buijs

14. Dramstad W. E., Tveit M. S., Fjellstad W. J., & Fry G. L. A. (2006). Relationships between visual landscape preferences and map-based indicators of landscape structure. Landscape and Urban Planning, 78 (4), 465—474. — [Electronic resource]. — URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/jMandurbplan.2005.12.006

15. Petrova E. G., Mironova Yu. G. Emotional visual perception of natural landscapes in Russia and Japan: a comparative anal-ysis // Izvestiya RAS. Geographical series, 2013. — No. 1. — pp. 130—140.

16. Frolova M. Yu. Assessment of the esthetic qualities of natural landscapes // Vestnik of Moscow University. Series 5: Geog-raphy. — 1994. — No. 2. — pp. 27—33.