Tahvanainen Liisa, Ihalainen Marjut, Hietala-Koivu Reija, Kolehmainen Osmo, Tyrväinen Liisa, Nousiainen Ismo, Helenius Juha
University of Joensuu, P.O. Box 111, FIN-80101, Joensuu, Finland.
J Environ Manage. 2002 Nov;66(3):213-27.
As a member of the European Union, Finland has committed itself to creating an environmental policy for agriculture. The aims of this study were to evaluate visual impacts of the General Agri-Environmental Protection Scheme (GAEPS) and Supplementary Protection Scheme (SPS) and general attitudes towards some activities in those policies and furthermore to examine the suitability of the method of Alho et al. (2001) for the scenic beauty assessment. The study areas consisted of three original, untreated, and 15 modified rural landscapes representing a variety of different activities. The scenic beauty of the landscapes was evaluated through pairwise comparisons of the responses of 68 people. Furthermore, attitudes towards environmental values, water protection, buffer strips and subsidies to agriculture were obtained. The respondents found the maintained buffer strips more pleasing than unmaintained strips and considered that the quality of watercourses was increased by buffer strips along them. A suitable width for the buffer strip along main ditches, brooks and waterways was regarded, on average, to be wider than the current recommendations. Although the opinions of farmers were basically in line with the existing recommendations, farmers' opininons on the second and third most important effects of buffer strips, an increase in weeds and a decrease in cultivated land, clearly differed from those of the other respondents. Afforestation, lack of building maintenance and abandoned fields were considered to be the most important factors impacting rural landscapes. This study indicates that the Finnish Agri-Environmental Protection Schemes have had positive impacts on the visual quality of landscapes. Attitudes towards other impacts are contradictory. This study also showed the improvement of the Alho et al. (2001) method in these kinds of studies relative to other methods of pairwise comparisons.
作为欧盟成员国，芬兰致力于制定农业环境政策。本研究的目的是评估一般农业环境保护计划（GAEPS）和补充保护计划（SPS）的视觉影响，以及对这些政策中某些活动的总体态度，并进一步检验阿尔霍等人（2001年）的方法对风景优美度评估的适用性。研究区域包括三个原始的、未处理的以及15个经过改造的乡村景观，代表了各种不同的活动。通过对68人的回答进行成对比较来评估景观的风景优美度。此外，还获取了对环境价值、水资源保护、缓冲带和农业补贴的态度。受访者发现维护好的缓冲带比未维护的缓冲带更令人愉悦，并认为沿着水道设置缓冲带可提高水道质量。人们认为，沿着主要沟渠、小溪和水道设置缓冲带的合适宽度平均而言要比当前建议的更宽。尽管农民的意见基本与现有建议一致，但农民对缓冲带的第二和第三重要影响（杂草增加和耕地减少）的看法与其他受访者明显不同。植树造林、建筑物缺乏维护和农田荒废被认为是影响乡村景观的最重要因素。本研究表明，芬兰的农业环境保护计划对景观的视觉质量产生了积极影响。对其他影响的态度则相互矛盾。本研究还表明，相对于其他成对比较方法，阿尔霍等人（2001年）的方法在这类研究中有所改进。
