Multiple-Case Study of Landscape Visualizations as a Tool in Transdisciplinary Planning Workshops

REFERENCES

1. 1. Al-Kodmany Kheir

   . 1999. Using visualization techniques for enhancing public participation in planning and design: Process, implementation, and evaluation. Landscape and Urban Planning 45 (1): 37–45.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
2. 1. Appleton Katy,
   2. Lovett Andrew

   . 2005. GIS-based visualisation of development proposals: Reactions from planning and related professionals. Computers, Environment, and Urban Systems 29 (3): 321–339.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
3. 1. Arnstein Sherry

   . 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the Royal Town Planning Institute 35 (4): 216–224.

   OpenUrl
4. 1. Bishop Ian,
   2. Lange Eckart

   . 2005. Visualization in Landscape and Environmental Planning: Technology and Applications. New York: Taylor and Francis.
5. 1. Bürki Rolf

   . 2000. Klimaänderung und Anpassungsprozesse im Wintertourismus. PhD diss., Geographisches Institut der Universität Zürich, Switzerland.
6. 1. Crewe Katherine,
   2. Forsyth Ann

   . 2003. LandSCAPES: A typology of approaches to landscape architecture. Landscape Journal 22 (1): 37–53.

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
7. 1. Danahy John

   . 1997. A set of visualization data needs in urban environmental planning and design for photogrammetric data. In Automatic Extraction of Man-Made Objects from Aerial and Space Images, Monte Verita Series II, ed. Gruen Armin, Baltsavias Emmanuel, Henricsson Olof, 357–366. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhauser.
8. 1. Danahy John

   . 2001. Technology for dynamic viewing and peripheral vision in landscape visualization. Landscape and Urban Planning 54 (1–4): 127–138.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
9. 1. Deming M. Elen,
   2. Palmer James

   . 2005. Editors’ introduction. Landscape Journal 24 (1): iv–vi.

   OpenUrlFREE Full Text
10. 1. DiBiase David,
    2. MacEachren Alan,
    3. Krygier John,
    4. Reeves Catherine

    . 1992. Animation and the role of map design in scientific visualization. Cartography and Geographic Information Science 19 (4): 201–214.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
11. 1. Dockerty Trudie,
    2. Lovett Andrew,
    3. Appleton Katy,
    4. Bone Alex,
    5. Sünnenberg Gilla

    . 2006. Developing scenarios and visualisations to illustrate potential policy and climatic influences on future agricultural landscapes. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 114 (1): 103–120.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
12. 1. Dransch Doris

    . 2000. The use of different media in visualizing spatial data. Computers & Geosciences 26 (1): 5–9.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
13. 1. Faludi Andreas

    . 2001. The performance of spatial planning. In Towards A New Role For Spatial Planning, 105–132. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
14. 1. Feagin Joseph,
    2. Anthony Orum,
    3. Sjoberg Gideon

    . 1991. A Case for the Case Study. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
15. 1. Friedmann John

    . 1987. Planning in the Public Domain. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16. 1. Fry Gary

    . 2001. Multifunctional landscapes—towards transdisciplinary research. Landscape and Urban Planning 57 (3–4): 159–168.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
17. 1. Häberling Christian

    . 2003. Topographische 3D-Karten: Thesen für kartographische Gestaltungsgrundsätze. PhD diss., Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich.
18. 1. Harrower Mark,
    2. Fabrikant Sara

    . 2008. The role of map animation for geographic visualization. In Geographic Visualization: Concepts, Tools and Applications, ed. Dodge Martin, McDerby Mary, Turner Martin, 49–65. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley and Sons.
19. 1. Healey Patsy

    . 1997. Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies. London: Macmillan.
20. 1. Hirsch Hadorn Gertrude,
    2. Bradley David,
    3. Pohl Christian,
    4. Rist Stephan,
    5. Wiesmann Urs

    . 2006. Implications of transdisciplinarity for sustainability research. Ecological Economics 60 (1): 119–128.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
21. 1. Hurni Lorenz

    . 2006. Interaktive Karteninformationssysteme—quo vaditis? Kartographische Nachrichten 56 (3): 136–142.

    OpenUrl
22. 1. Jantsch Erich

    . 1972. Inter- and transdisciplinary university: A systems approach to education and innovation. Higher Education 1 (1): 7–37.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
23. 1. Lange Eckart

    . 2001. The limits of realism: Perceptions of virtual landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 54 (1–4): 163–182.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
24. 1. Lange Eckart,
    2. Hehl-Lange Sigrid

    . 2005. Combining a participatory planning approach with a virtual landscape model for the siting of wind turbines. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 48 (6): 833–852.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
25. 1. Lewis John L.,
    2. Sheppard Stephen

    . 2006. Culture and communication: Can landscape visualization improve forest management consultation with indigenous communities? Landscape and Urban Planning, 77 (3): 291–31.3

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
26. 1. Luz Frieder

    . 2000. Participatory landscape ecology—a basis for acceptance and implementation. Landscape and Urban Planning 50: 157–166.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
27. 1. Meuser Michael,
    2. Nagel Ulrike

    . 1991. ExpertInneninter-views—vielfach erprobt, wenig bedacht. In Qualitativ-Empirische Sozialforschung: Konzepte, Methoden, Analysen, ed. Garz Detlef, Kraimer Klaus, 441–471. Opladen, Germany: Westdeutscher.
28. 1. Orland Brian,
    2. Budthimedhee Kanjanee,
    3. Uusitalo Jori

    . 2001. Considering virtual worlds as representations of landscape realities and as tools for landscape planning. Landscape and Urban Planning 54 (1–4): 139–148.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
29. 1. Parry Martin L.,
    2. Canziani Osvaldo,
    3. Palutikof Jean,
    4. van der Linden Paul,
    5. Hanson Clair

    , eds. 2007. Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
30. 1. Pohl Christian,
    2. Hadorn Getrude Hirsch

    . 2007. Principles for Designing Transdisciplinary Research, trans. Zimmermann Anne. Munich, Germany: Oekom.
31. 1. Rydin Yvonne

    . 1998. Urban and Environmental Planning in the UK. London: Macmillan.
32. 1. Salter Jonathan,
    2. Campbell Cam,
    3. Journeay Murray,
    4. Sheppard Stephen R.

    2009. The digital workshop: Exploring the use of interactive and immersive visualisation tools in participatory planning. Journal of Environmental Management 90 (6): 2090–2101.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
33. 1. Schmid Annette

    . 2004. UNESCO Biosphäre Entlebuch: Modell für eine nachhaltige Regionalentwicklung? Konzept Zielerreichungskontrolle. PhD diss., Geographisches Institut der Universität Zürich, Switzerland.
34. 1. Scholz Roland,
    2. Tietje Olaf

    . 2002. Embedded Case Study Methods: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Knowledge. London: Sage.
35. 1. Schroth Olaf

    . 2010. From Information to Participation. Interactive Landscape Visualization as a Tool for Collaborative Planning. Zurich, Switzerland: vdf Hochschulverlag AG.
36. 1. Schroth Olaf,
    2. Schmid Willy A.

    2006. How much interactivity does the public want? An assessment of interactive features in virtual landscapes. In Trends in Knowledge-Based Landscape Modeling, ed. Buhmann Erich, Ervin Stephen, Jörgenson Ian, Strobl Josef, 116–127. Heidelberg, Germany: Wichmann.
37. 1. Selle Klaus

    . 2000. Was? Wer? Wie? Warum? Voraussetzungen und Möglichkeiten einer nachhaltigen Kommunikation. Dortmund, Germany: Dortmunder Vertrieb für Bau- und Planungsliteratur.
38. 1. Shaw Alison,
    2. Sheppard Stephen R.,
    3. Burch Sarah,
    4. Flanders David,
    5. Wiek Arnim,
    6. Carmichael Jeff,
    7. Robinson John,
    8. Cohen Stewart

    . 2009. Making local futures tangible—synthesizing, downscaling, and visualizing climate change scenarios for participatory capacity building. Global Environmental Change 19 (4): 447–463.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
39. 1. Sheppard Stephen R.

    2001. Guidance for crystal ball gazers: Developing a code of ethics for landscape visualization. Landscape and Urban Planning 54 (1): 183–199.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
40. 1. Sheppard Stephen R.,
    2. Salter Jonathan

    . 2004. The role of visualization in forest planning. In Encyclopedia of Forest Sciences, ed. Evans Julian, Burley Jeffery, Youngquist John, 486–498. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
41. 1. Stokols Daniel

    . 2006. Toward a science of transdisciplinary action research. American Journal of Community Psychology 38 (1–2): 63–77.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
42. 1. Thering Sue,
    2. Chanse Victoria

    . 2011. Towards transdisciplinary action research. Landscape Journal 30 (1): 6–18.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
43. 1. Tress Gunther,
    2. Tress Bärbel,
    3. Fry Gary

    . 2005. Clarifying Integrative Research Concepts in Landscape Ecology. Landscape Ecology 20 (4): 479–493.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
44. 1. Von Haaren Christina,
    2. Warren-Kretzschmar Bartlett

    . 2006. The interactive landscape plan: Use and benefits of new technologies in landscape planning and discussion of the interactive landscape plan in Koenigslutter am Elm, Germany. Landscape Research 31 (1): 83–105.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
45. 1. Walter Alexander,
    2. Helgenberger Sebastian,
    3. Wiek Arnim,
    4. Scholz Roland

    . 2007. Measuring societal effects of transdisciplinary research projects: Design and application of an evaluation method. Evaluation and Program Planning 30 (4): 325–338.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
46. 1. Whyte William F.

    1993. Street Corner Society: The Social Structure of an Italian Slum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
47. 1. Wiek Arnim

    . 2007. Challenges of transdisciplinary research as interactive knowledge generation—experiences from transdisciplinary case study research. GAIA—Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society 16 (1): 52–57.

    OpenUrl
48. 1. Wissen Ulrike

    . 2009. Virtuelle Landschaften zur partizipativen Planung. Zurich: vdf Hochschulverlag AG.
49. 1. Yin Robert K.

    2003. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. London: Sage.
50. 1. Zube Erwin,
    2. Simcox David.,
    3. Law Charles

    . 1987. Perceptual landscape simulations: History and prospects. Landscape Journal 6 (1): 62–80.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text