Assessment of Rural Landscape Aesthetics on the Basis of the Values of the Natural Environment (Case Study: Selected Villages in North Khorasan Province)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Mojgan Ghorbanzadeh ¹

Seyed Hassan Taghvaei ²

Saeid Norouzian-Maleki ²

Åsa Ode Sang ³

¹ University of Bojnord, Bojnord, Iran.

² Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran

³ Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Lomma, Sweden

10.22067/jrrp.v15i1.2511-1151

Abstract

Purpose- This study aims to evaluate the natural rural landscapes of North Khorasan Province by examining their environmental, ecological, and socio-cultural characteristics. Rural natural landscapes and cultural heritage are increasingly and inevitably influenced by global environmental changes such as climate change, depletion of natural resources, and biodiversity loss. These transformations diminish aesthetic, ecological, and symbolic values, gradually weakening residents’ emotional attachment, identity, and sense of place within rural communities.
Design/methodology/approach- A mixed-method approach was employed, integrating questionnaires, structured and semi-structured interviews, and qualitative field observations to investigate villagers’ perceptions, attitudes, and experiences concerning their surrounding natural environments and everyday landscapes. The selected rural landscapes were analyzed based on three key indicators: landscape diversity, perceived naturalness, and sense of place, which together reflect both the ecological integrity and perceptual dimensions of the rural setting.
Finding- The findings reveal that conserving natural elements—such as vegetation, water resources, landforms, and traditional architectural patterns—significantly enhances people’s sense of belonging, identity, and overall quality of life. Conversely, landscape degradation contributes to social alienation, cultural erosion, and reduced environmental satisfaction. The chosen villages were selected according to settlement characteristics (density, size, and spatial distribution), ecological and landscape diversity (climate, land use, and accessibility), and socio-economic and cultural indicators representing population scale, livelihood structure, and heritage context.
Practical implications- Identifying priority areas for conservation not only supports sustainable rural development but also provides a scientific foundation for long-term landscape management. Through the active participation of local communities in planning and decision-making, this approach establishes a practical and adaptable framework for preserving natural and cultural heritage while enhancing the well-being of rural societies across North Khorasan Province.

Keywords

Rural landscape assessment

Landscape diversity

Perceived naturalness

Sense of place

North Khorasan Province

Subjects

• Rural Studies

---

References

1. Abbaszadegan, M. (2017). Landscape of Iranian Villages. Road, Housing and Urban Development Research Center.
2. Alparslan, C., Mirici, M. E., Saricam, S., & Cabuk, A. (2019). Landscape inventory and character analysis: A case study from Urla, Cesme, Karaburun District Turkey. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 28(4A), 3281–3294. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337495305
3. Altman, I., & Low, S. M. (Eds.). (2012). Place attachment (Vol. 12). Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-8753-4
4. Anabestani, A., Soleymani, Z., & Ataei, P. (2022). Challenges of physical planning in Iranian villages with emphasis on rural guidance [Hadi] plans. Journal of Research and Rural Planning, 11(1), 103–119. https://doi.org/10.22067/JRRP.V11I1.2203.1041
5. Badiani, B., Barontini, S., Bettoni, B., Bonati, S., Peli, M., Pietta, A., Scala, B., Tononi, M., & Vitale, N. (2017). Lake Garda lemon houses (Italy): Opportunities of a sensitive, marginal area in urban planning. Change and Adaptation in Socio-Ecological Systems, 3(1), 111–118. https://doi.org/10.1515/CASS-2017-0010
6. Balestrieri, M. (2015). Theories and methods of rural landscape classification in Europe: The Italian approach. International Journal of Rural Management, 11(2), 156–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973005215604932
7. Bastian, O. (2008). Landscape classification—Between fact and fiction. Problemy Ekologii Krajobrazu, 20, 39–48. https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/86001.pdf
8. Bernard, H. R. (2017). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Bloomsbury Publishing PLC.
9. Brown, G., & Brabyn, L. (2012). An analysis of the relationships between multiple values and physical landscapes at a regional scale using public participation GIS and landscape character classification. Landscape and Urban Planning, 107(3), 317–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.06.007
10. Brown, G., & Raymond, C. (2007). The relationship between place attachment and landscape values: Toward mapping place attachment. Applied Geography, 27(2), 89–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2006.11.002
11. Brown, G., & Weber, D. (2012). Measuring change in place values using public participation GIS (PPGIS). Applied Geography, 34, 316–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.12.007
12. Brown, J., Mitchell, N. J., & Beresford, M. (Eds.). (2005). The protected landscape approach: Linking nature, culture and community. IUCN.
13. Budruk, M. (2010). Cross-language measurement equivalence of the place attachment scale: A multigroup confirmatory factor analysis approach. Journal of Leisure Research, 42(1), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2010.11950193
14. Buijs, A. E., Elands, B. H., & Langers, F. (2009). No wilderness for immigrants: Cultural differences in images of nature and landscape preferences. Landscape and Urban Planning, 91(3), 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.12.003
15. Center for Development and Foresight Studies. (2023). Comprehensive rural development bill: Proposal for establishing a rural development organization under the Ministry of Agriculture Jihad. Tehran: Group of Land Use Planning, Development and Regional Balance. [In Persian]
16. Cooper, N., Brady, E., Bryce, R., & Steen, H. (2016). Aesthetic and spiritual values of ecosystems: Recognising the ontological and axiological plurality of cultural ecosystem ‘services. Ecosystem Services, 21, 218–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.07.014
17. Daniel, T. C. (2001). Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landscape and Urban Planning, 54(1–4), 267–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00141-4
18. De Groot, R. S., Alkemade, R., Braat, L., Hein, L., & Willemen, L. (2010). Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecological Complexity, 7(3), 260–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2009.10.006
19. Department of Environment of Iran. (2020). National strategy and policy framework for biodiversity conservation in Iran. Tehran: Department of Environment. [In Persian]
20. Diaz-Christiansen, S., López-Guzmán, T., Pérez Gálvez, J. C., & Muñoz Fernández, G. A. (2016). Wetland tourism in natural protected areas: Santay Island (Ecuador). Tourism Management Perspectives, 20, 47–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2016.07.005
21. Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method. Indianapolis, Indiana, 17. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781394260645
22. Dutton, D. (2003). Aesthetics and evolutionary psychology. In J. Levinson (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of aesthetics (pp. 693–705). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199279456.003.0041
23. Einali, J., Mohammadi Yeganeh, B., & Ghasemlou, H. (2019). The role of creative tourism in sustainable development of rural areas (Case study: Historic-cultural villages in North-West of Iran). Journal of Research and Rural Planning, 8(2), 19–39. https://doi.org/10.22067/jrrp.v5i4.67441
24. Elsadek, M., Sun, M., Sugiyama, R., & Fujii, E. (2019). Cross-cultural comparison of physiological and psychological responses to different garden styles. Urban forestry & urban greening, 38, 74-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2018.11.007
25. Erikstad, L. (1997). Geological heritage and environmental impact assessment: Can quality and quantity be merged? In P. G. Marinos, G. C. Koukis, G. C. Tsiambaos, & G. C. Stournaras (Eds.), Engineering Geology and the Environment, 2927–2931.
26. Erikstad, L., Lindblom, I., Jerpåsen, G., Hanssen, M. A., Bekkby, T., Stabbetorp, O., & Bakkestuen, V. (2008). Environmental value assessment in a multidisciplinary EIA setting. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 28(2–3), 131–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2007.03.005
27. Erikstad, L., Uttakleiv, L. A., & Halvorsen, R. (2015). Characterisation and mapping of landscape types, a case study from Norway. Belgeo. Revue belge de géographie, (3). https://doi.org/10.4000/belgeo.17412
28. Europe, C. O. (2000, October). European landscape convention. In Report and convention.
29. Faezi, S. F., Elyasi, M. R., & Rafiean Bahabadi, M. (2018). The impact of rural housing rehabilitation on rural landscape (Case study: Ahmadabad Village of Bahabad County). Journal of Research and Rural Planning, 7(1), 57–79. https://doi.org/10.22067/jrrp.v5i4.63564 
30. Fagerholm, N., Käyhkö, N., Ndumbaro, F., & Khamis, M. (2012). Community stakeholders’ knowledge in landscape assessments–Mapping indicators for landscape services. Ecological Indicators, 18, 421-433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.12.004
31. Falahat, M. S. (2006). The concept of sense of place and its forming factors. Journal of Fine Arts, -(26), 57-66.
32. Frank, S., Fürst, C., Koschke, L., & Makeschin, F. (2012). A contribution towards a transfer of the ecosystem service concept to landscape planning using landscape metrics. Ecological indicators, 21, 30-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.04.027
33. Frank, S., Fürst, C., Koschke, L., Witt, A., Makeschin, F., (2013). Assessment of landscape aesthetics - validation of a landscape metrics-based assessment by visual estimation of the scenic beauty. Indicat. 32, 222–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.03.026
34. Fritz, S., See, L., Carlson, T., Haklay, M., Oliver, J. L., Fraisl, D., ... & West, S. (2019). Citizen science and the United Nations sustainable development goals. Nature sustainability, 2(10), 922-930. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0390-3
35. Fry, G., Tveit, M. S., Ode, Å., & Velarde, M. D. (2009). The ecology of visual landscapes: Exploring the conceptual common ground of visual and ecological landscape indicators. Ecological Indicators, 9(5), 933–947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2008.11.008
36. Ghorbanzadeh, M., & Niloufar, P. (2019). Categorization of North Khorasan villages in terms of indicators of entrepreneurial ecotourism developments (Case study: Bojnord–Golestan Road). Journal of Research and Rural Planning, 8(3), 119–132. https://doi.org/10.22067/jrrp.v8i3.78831 
37. Ghorbanzadeh, M., Taghvaei, S. H., & Norouzian-Maleki, S. (2023). Rural landscape: A systematic review of thematic contexts. Journal of Architecture and Urban Planning, 15(38), 23-42. https://www.magiran.com/paper/2556801/ [In Persian]
38. Ghorbanzadeh, M., Taghvaei, S. H., Norouzian-Maleki, S., & Ode Sang, Å. (2025). Cross-Cultural Differences in Rural Landscape Assessment: Iran and Sweden. Journal of Research and Rural Planning, 14(1), 87-106. https://doi.org/22067/jrrp.v14i1.2505-1138
39. Gottero, E., & Cassatella, C. (2017). Landscape indicators for rural development policies: Application of a core set in the case study of Piedmont Region. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 65, 75–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2017.04.002
40. Green, D. G., Klomp, N., Rimmington, G., & Sadedin, S. (2006). Complexity in landscape ecology (Vol. 217). Dordrecht: Springer.
41. Hägerhäll, C. M., Ode Sang, Å., Englund, J. E., Ahlner, F., Rybka, K., Huber, J., & Burenhult, N. (2018). Do humans really prefer semi-open natural landscapes? A cross-cultural reappraisal. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 822. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00822
42. Herbst, H., Förster, M., & Kleinschmit, B. (2009). Contribution of landscape metrics to the assessment of scenic quality–the example of the landscape structure plan Havelland/Germany. Landscape Online, 10(1).
43. Hermes, J., Van Berkel, D., Burkhard, B., Plieninger, T., Fagerholm, N., von Haaren, C., & Albert, C. (2018). Assessment and valuation of recreational ecosystem services of landscapes. Ecosystem Services, 31(Part C), 289–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.04.011
44. Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational research methods, 1(1), 104-121. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442819800100106
45. Hosieni, A., Tavakoli, M., Purtaheri, M., & Rokoddin Eftekhari, A. (2019). Explaining the landscape identity components in the tourist villages with valuable texture in Iran. Journal of Research and Rural Planning, 8(4), 107–125. https://doi.org/10.22067/jrrp.v5i4.78964 
46. Huai, S., & Van de Voorde, T. (2022). Which environmental features contribute to positive and negative perceptions of urban parks? A cross-cultural comparison using online reviews and Natural Language Processing methods. Landscape and Urban Planning, 218, 104307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104307
47. ICOMOS. (2017). ICOMOS–IFLA principles concerning rural landscapes as heritage. International Council on Monuments and Sites.
48. Israel, A., & Wynberg, R. (2018). Multifunctional landscapes in a rural, developing country context: Conflicts and synergies in Tshidzivhe, South Africa. Landscape Research, 44(4), 404–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2018.1441388
49. Jafari, T., Maqami, G., & Azimian, M. (2012). North Khorasan Province Studies. Tehran: Iran Textbook Publishing and Printing Company. [In Persian]
50. Jahangirpour, D., & Bakhshoodeh, M. (2019). The impact of climate change on rural migration in Iran: Application of panel VAR approach. Environmental Research, 11(21), 133-142. https://www.iraneiap.ir/article_125476_en.html [In Persian]
51. Jones, M., Howard, P., Olwig, K. R., Primdahl, J. R., & Sarlöv Herlin, I. (2007). Multiple interfaces of the European landscape convention. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift-Norwegian, Journal of Geography, 61(4), 207-216. https://doi.org/10.1080/00291950701709176
52. Jorgensen, B. S., & Stedman, R. C. (2001). Sense of place as an attitude: Lakeshore owners attitudes toward their properties. Journal of environmental psychology, 21(3), 233-248. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2001.0226
53. Kalinauskas, M., Mikša, K., Inácio, M., Gomes, E., & Pereira, P. (2021). Mapping and assessment of landscape aesthetic quality in Lithuania. Journal of Environmental Management, 286, 112239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112239
54. Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112239
55. Kellert, S. R., & Wilson, E. O. (1993). The biophilia hypothesis. Washington, DC: Island, 73-137.
56. Keong, C. Y., & Onuma, A. (2021). Transboundary ecological conservation, environmental value, and environmental sustainability: Lessons from the Heart of Borneo. Sustainability, 13(17), 9727. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13179727
57. Kudryavtsev, A., Stedman, R. C., & Krasny, M. E. (2012). Sense of place in environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 18(2), 229-250. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2011.609615
58. Kyle, G. T., & Johnson, C. Y. (2008). Understanding cultural variation in place meaning. 109–134.
59. Law, E. A., Macchi, L., Baumann, M., Decarre, J., Gavier-Pizarro, G., Levers, C., ... & Kuemmerle, T. (2021). Fading opportunities for mitigating agriculture-environment trade-offs in a South American deforestation hotspot. Biological Conservation, 262, 109310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109310
60. Lothian, A. (1999). Landscape and the philosophy of aesthetics. Is landscape quality inherent in the landscape or in the eye of the beholder? Landscape and Urban Planning, 44(4), 177–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(99)00019-5
61. Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing research, 35(6), 382-386. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3640358/
62. Madureira, H., Nunes, F., Oliveira, J. V., Cormier, L., & Madureira, T. (2015). Urban residents’ beliefs concerning greenspace benefits in four cities in France and Portugal. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 14(1), 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2014.11.008
63. Mahmoodi, S., Rokneddin Efekhari, A., & Ghaffari, G. (2016). Localization of indicators of social capital in rural areas of Iran. Rural Research, 7(4), 618-643. https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.20087373.1395.7.4.3.0 [In Persian]
64. Malinić, V., Sedlak, M., Krstić, F., Joksimović, M., Golić, R., Gajić, M., ... & Šabić, D. (2025). Land Cover Changes in the Rural Border Region of Serbia Affected by Demographic Dynamics. Land, 14(8), 1663. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14081663
65. Milcu, A., Hanspach, J., Abson, D., Fischer, J. (2013). Cultural ecosystem services: a literature review and prospects for future research. Ecology and Society, 18(44). http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-05790-180344 
66. Mohammad-Moradi, A., Yazdanfar, S. A., Faizi, M., & Norouzian-Maleki, S. (2022). Measuring sense of place and identifying the effective components in the historical fabric of Tehran (Case study: The historical neighborhood of Imamzadeh Yahya). Journal of Iranian Architecture Studies, 8(15), 173-191. https://doi.org/22052/1.15.173
67. Montazerolhodjah, M., & Sharifnejad, M. (2023). Factors affecting the promotion of sense of place in new urban developments of Yazd City. Iran University of Science and Technology, 33(3), 83–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.22068/ijaup.640
68. Mücher, C. A., Klijn, J. A., Wascher, D. M., & Schaminée, J. H. (2010). A new European landscape classification (LANMAP): A transparent, flexible, and user-oriented methodology to distinguish landscapes. Ecological Indicators, 10(1), 87-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.03.018
69. Naseri, C. (2021). Investigating Kerman's Vernacular Landscape with an Emphasis on Rural Landscapes as an Endangered Heritage. Cultural Tourism, 1(3), 37–42. https://doi.org/10.22034/toc.2020.249628.1023
70. Ode, Å., Fry, G., Tveit, M. S., Messager, P., & Miller, D. (2009). Indicators of perceived naturalness as drivers of landscape preference. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(1), 375-383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.10.013
71. Ode, Å., Tveit, M. S., & Fry, G. (2008). Capturing landscape visual character using indicators: Touching base with landscape aesthetic theory. Landscape Research, 33(1), 89-117. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426390701773854
72. Ólafsdóttir, R., & Sæþórsdóttir, A. D. (2020). Public perception of wilderness in Iceland. Land, 9(4), 99.  https://doi.org/10.3390/land9040099
73. O'Neill, J., Holland, A., & Light, A. (2008). Environmental values. Abingdon, UK: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203495452
74. Otieno, T. A., Otieno, L. A., Rotich, B., Löhr, K., & Kipkulei, H. K. (2025). Modeling climate change impacts and predicting future vulnerability in the Mount Kenya forest ecosystem using remote sensing and machine learning. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 197(6), 631. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10661-025-14089-0
75. Özgüner, H. (2011). Cultural differences in attitudes towards urban parks and green spaces. Landscape Research, 36(5), 599–620. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2011.560474
76. Palmer, J. F. (2004). Using spatial metrics to predict scenic perception in a changing landscape: Dennis, Massachusetts. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69(2-3), 201-218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2003.08.010
77. Paracchini, M. L., Zulian, G., Kopperoinen, L., Maes, J., Schägner, J. P., Termansen, M., ... & Bidoglio, G. (2014). Mapping cultural ecosystem services: A framework to assess the potential for outdoor recreation across the EU. Ecological Indicators, 45, 371-385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.04.018
78. Pentz, M., & Albert, N. (2023). Cultural landscapes as potential tools for the conservation of rural landscape heritage values. Modern Geografía, 18(2), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.15170/MG.2023.18.02.01 
79. Pinto-Correia, T., Guiomar, N., Guerra, C. A., & Carvalho-Ribeiro, S. (2016). Assessing the ability of rural areas to fulfill multiple societal demands. Land Use Policy, 53, 86-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.01.031
80. Plieninger, T., Draux, H., Fagerholm, N., Bieling, C., Bürgi, M., Kizos, T., Kuemmerle, T., Primdahl, J., & Verburg, P. H. (2016). The driving forces of landscape change in Europe: A systematic review of the evidence. Land Use Policy, 57, 204–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.04.040
81. Porteous, J. D. (2013). Environmental aesthetics: Ideas, politics and planning. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203437322
82. Purcell, A. T. & Lamb, R. J. (1998) Preference and naturalness: an ecological approach, Landscape and Urban Planning, 42, pp. 57 – 66. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(98)00073-5
83. Ramezani, H. (2019). An assessment of landscape diversity using large-scale field-based forest inventory. Caspian Journal of Environmental Sciences, 17(2), 121–130. https://doi.org/22124/cjes.2019.3406
84. Reser, J. P., & Bentrupperbäumer, J. M. (2005). What and where are environmental values? Assessing the impacts of current diversity of use of ‘environmental’ and ‘World Heritage’ values. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(2), 125–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.03.002
85. Rezaei, Z. (2024). Protection of the natural landscape of a village, and protection of the place-making index in the development process. Cultural Tourism, 16(5), 52–55. https://doi.org/10.22034/toc.2024.444045.1149
86. Ridding, L. E., Redhead, J. W., Oliver, T. H., Schmucki, R., McGinlay, J., Graves, A. R., ... & Bullock, J. M. (2018). The importance of landscape characteristics for the delivery of cultural ecosystem services. Journal of Environmental Management, 206, 1145-1154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.11.066
87. Rüdisser, J., Tasser, E., & Tappeiner, U. (2012). Distance to nature—a new biodiversity relevant environmental indicator set at the landscape level. Ecological Indicators, 15(1), 208–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.09.027
88. Ruegaard Petersen, L. (2024). Democratising local values and priorities in regional landscape planning: A Danish strategy-making case. Landscape Research, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2024.2352459
89. Salvati, L., & Zitti, M. (2012). Monitoring vegetation and land use quality along the rural–urban gradient in a Mediterranean region. Applied Geography, 32(2), 896–903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.09.002
90. Samadpour Shahrak A, Etesam I & Einifar A. (2019). Determining the Motivating Factors of Place Sense in Rural Society Using Structural Equation Modeling (Case Study: Rural Zone of East Azerbaijan Province). JHRE. 38(165), 65-80. https://doi.org/10.22034/38.165.65
91. Sayer, J., Sunderland, T., Ghazoul, J., Pfund, J. L., Sheil, D., Meijaard, E., ... & Buck, L. E. (2013). Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(21), 8349–8356. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1210595110
92. Sedighkia, M., & Datta, B. (2023). Detecting land use changes using hybrid machine learning methods in the Australian tropical regions. GeoJournal, 88(Suppl 1), 241-253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-022-10678-5
93. Simensen, T., Halvorsen, R., & Erikstad, L. (2018). Methods for landscape characterisation and mapping: A systematic review. Land Use Policy, 75, 557–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.04.022
94. Šťastná, M., & Vaishar, A. (2020). Values of rural landscape: The case study Chlum u Třeboně (Bohemia). Land Use Policy, 97, 104699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104699
95. Statuto, D., Cillis, G., & Picuno, P. (2018). GIS-based analysis of temporal evolution of rural landscape: A case study in Southern Italy. Natural Resources Research, 28, 61–75. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11053-018-9402-7
96. Supreme Council for Urban Planning and Architecture of Iran. (2020). National spatial planning document of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Tehran: Ministry of Roads and Urban Development. [In Persian]
97. Swaffield, S. R., & McWilliam, W. J. (2013). Landscape aesthetic experience and ecosystem services. School of Landscape Architecture, Lincoln University, 2.6, 349–362. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273441039
98. Swanwick, C. (2002). Landscape Character Assessment: Guidance for England and Scotland; Prepared on Behalf of the Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage. Countryside Agency. https://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/2671754?category=60007
99. Swapan, M. S. H., Iftekhar, M. S., & Li, X. (2017). Contextual variations in perceived social values of ecosystem services of urban parks: A comparative study of China and Australia. Cities, 61, 17–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2016.11.003
100. Swetnam, R. D., Harrison-Curran, S. K., & Smith, G. R. (2017). Quantifying visual landscape quality in rural Wales: A GIS-enabled method for extensive monitoring of a valued cultural ecosystem service. Ecosystem Services, 26, 451–464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.11.004
101. Tadaki, M., Sinner, J., & Chan, K. M. (2017). Making sense of environmental values: A typology of concepts. Ecology and Society, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08999-220107 
102. Taghvaei, S. H., Norouzian-Maleki, S., & Alidoost, S. (2017). The role of “everyday landscape” in the quality of urban spaces, case study: Girls’ dormitory route in Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran. Soffeh, 27(76), 55–76. https://soffeh.sbu.ac.ir/article_100400.html [In Persian]
103. Teh, M. Z., Abdullah, M., Pugi, N. A., & Rahman, N. A. (2018). Visual landscape assessment: A method for analysing and planning for landscape structure. Asian Journal of Quality of Life, 3(14), 33–40. https://doi.org/10.21834/AJQOL.V3I14.181
104. Tenerelli, P., Püffel, C., & Luque, S. (2017). Spatial assessment of aesthetic services in a complex mountain region: Combining visual landscape properties with crowdsourced geographic information. Landscape Ecology, 32(5), 1097–1115. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10980-017-0498-7
105. Trentelman, C. K. (2009). Place attachment and community attachment: A primer grounded in the lived experience of a community sociologist. Society and Natural Resources, 22(3), 191–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920802191712
106. Tudor, C. (2014). An approach to landscape character assessment. Natural England, 65, 101716.

• Tveit, M., Ode, Å., & Fry, G. (2006). Key concepts in a framework for analyzing visual landscape character. Landscape Research, 31(3), 229–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426390600783269

108. Ul Din, S., & Mak, H. W. L. (2021). Retrieval of land-use/land cover change (LUCC) maps and urban expansion dynamics of Hyderabad, Pakistan via Landsat datasets and support vector machine framework. Remote Sensing, 13(16), 3337. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13163337
109. Ulrich, R. S. (1993). Biophilia, biophobia, and natural landscapes. In S. R. Kellert & E. O. Wilson (Eds.), The biophilia hypothesis 73–137. Island Press.
110. van Zanten, B. T., Zasada, I., Koetse, M. J., Ungaro, F., Häfner, K., & Verburg, P. H. (2016). A comparative approach to assess the contribution of landscape features to aesthetic and recreational values in agricultural landscapes. Ecosystem Services, 17, 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.11.011
111. Walz, U., & Stein, C. (2014). Indicators of hemeroby for the monitoring of landscapes in Germany. Journal for Nature Conservation, 22(3), 279–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2014.01.007
112. Wascher, D. M. (2005). European landscape character areas: Typologies, cartography and indicators for the assessment of sustainable landscapes (No. 1254). Landscape Europe.
113. Williams, D. R., & Vaske, J. J. (2003). The measurement of place attachment: Validity and generalizability of a psychometric approach. Forest Science, 49(6), 830–840. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestscience/49.6.830

• Wynveen, C. J., Schneider, I. E., & Arnberger, A. (2018). The context of place: Issues measuring place attachment across urban forest contexts. Journal of Forestry, 116(4), 367–373. https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvy001

115. Xie, H., Zhu, Z., He, Y., Zeng, X., & Wen, Y. (2022). Integrated framework of rural landscape research: Based on the global perspective. Landscape Ecology, 37(4), 1161–1184. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10980-022-01401-3
116. Zhuang, Q., Hussein, M. K., Mohd Ariffin, N. F., Mohd. Yunos, M. Y., & Chen, S. (2022). Rural landscape characterization from the perspective of the tourist using online reviews: A case study of Yayou Gou Village in Shandong, China. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10, 915110. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.915110