Diseño de criterio, lineamientos y estrategias de protección del paisaje en el Shuyo Riobamba
The landscape is based on reality and perception. This research considers the aesthetics and the ability to perceive the landscape once observed; over time, the landscape has been disappearing in the canton Riobamba, with little concern and mainly the lack of control; the importance of an analysis o...
Uloženo v:
| Hlavní autor: | |
|---|---|
| Médium: | bachelorThesis |
| Jazyk: | spa |
| Vydáno: |
2023
|
| Témata: | |
| On-line přístup: | http://dspace.unach.edu.ec/handle/51000/10310 |
| Tagy: |
Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
|
Přidat tag | Shrnutí: | The landscape is based on reality and perception. This research considers the aesthetics and the ability to perceive the landscape once observed; over time, the landscape has been disappearing in the canton Riobamba, with little concern and mainly the lack of control; the importance of an analysis of the landscape is urgent, for its protection and control of activities, this unfortunately due to the lack of regulations aimed at the landscape in the city of Riobamba - Ecuador. The research was carried out through the methodology of (Muñoz Pedreros Andrés, 2004), where a foundation is sought with real data for the valuation of the landscape, with a mixed methodology that collects data on the current situation of the landscapes through the evaluation of the landscape units obtained from the study site by panelists that allow knowing the conditions in which the landscape is currently found, and obtaining a numerical score for each unit; the previous step to weight each unit and attack them with protection strategies, to propose and address the treatment of the landscape as an integral part of territorial planning and management. Five Landscape Units (LU) were established, with 26 landscape subunits which were quantified and evaluated using the mixed method with the direct valuation of representative subjectivity and subsequent indirect analysis. The overall average was 6.42 VP Landscape Value and SD= 4.05 Standard Deviation, considered distinguished on the Fines scale. The highest-rated LU were Forests, Water, and agricultural land, and the lowest-rated LU were roads and buildings. This evaluation could be compared with future research of a similar nature and thus be able to quantify the losses or gains of the landscape, its agents of destruction, and its mitigating measures so that the authorities take into account the loss of the landscape heritage and avoid it over time |
|---|