%0 Journal Article %1 tudor2014similarities %A Tudor, C.A. %A Iojă, I.C. %A Rozylowicz, L. %A Pătru-Stupariu, I. %A Hersperger, A.M. %D 2014 %J Land Use Policy %K Adjacency,Land-use association,Neighborhood,Nuisance,Residential myown %P 341--351 %R 10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.07.001 %T Similarities and differences in the assessment of land-use associations by local people and experts %V 49 %X © 2015. The continuous and unforeseeable mutations in relation to the use of land have led to different types of adjacencies between land uses. These often cause considerable nuisance which influences how people think about their environment. The aim of our study is to explore the similarities and differences in the assessment of land-use associations by local people and experts. We investigated the problems or nuisance (noise, insecurity, odor, waste disposal, unwanted animals, health risk, visual discomfort and unorganized trade) caused by the adjacency of residential to a range of six non-residential land uses (industry, commercial, transport infrastructure, landfill, medical and recreational). Face-to face written surveys were conducted with local people from 33 settlements in Romania (52\% urban areas) and an online survey was distributed to experts of different professional activities. A multiple correspondence analysis was carried out to explore similarities and differences in the assessment of land-use associations by the two groups of actors. The results showed (i) differences, where local people positively assessed some land-use associations (industry vs. residential, commercial vs. residential and transport infrastructure vs. residential), while experts assessed them negatively; (ii) similarities, where both local people and experts had similar negative assessments on the same land-use association (landfill-residential), as well as (iii) similarities, where both groups had similar positive assessments on the same land-use associations (medical-residential and recreational-residential). Therefore, understanding the patterns in local people's and experts' assessment towards different adjacent land uses potentially causing nuisance could provide additional support for the complicated planning processes which are often overriding the public participation. This means that motivated and informed citizens along with experts' evaluation should be part of the planning process in order to achieve effective land-use policies.

@article{tudor2014similarities, abstract = {{\textcopyright} 2015. The continuous and unforeseeable mutations in relation to the use of land have led to different types of adjacencies between land uses. These often cause considerable nuisance which influences how people think about their environment. The aim of our study is to explore the similarities and differences in the assessment of land-use associations by local people and experts. We investigated the problems or nuisance (noise, insecurity, odor, waste disposal, unwanted animals, health risk, visual discomfort and unorganized trade) caused by the adjacency of residential to a range of six non-residential land uses (industry, commercial, transport infrastructure, landfill, medical and recreational). Face-to face written surveys were conducted with local people from 33 settlements in Romania (52{\%} urban areas) and an online survey was distributed to experts of different professional activities. A multiple correspondence analysis was carried out to explore similarities and differences in the assessment of land-use associations by the two groups of actors. The results showed (i) differences, where local people positively assessed some land-use associations (industry vs. residential, commercial vs. residential and transport infrastructure vs. residential), while experts assessed them negatively; (ii) similarities, where both local people and experts had similar negative assessments on the same land-use association (landfill-residential), as well as (iii) similarities, where both groups had similar positive assessments on the same land-use associations (medical-residential and recreational-residential). Therefore, understanding the patterns in local people's and experts' assessment towards different adjacent land uses potentially causing nuisance could provide additional support for the complicated planning processes which are often overriding the public participation. This means that motivated and informed citizens along with experts' evaluation should be part of the planning process in order to achieve effective land-use policies.}, added-at = {2016-09-18T08:10:03.000+0200}, author = {Tudor, C.A. and Iojă, I.C. and Rozylowicz, L. and Pătru-Stupariu, I. and Hersperger, A.M.}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2adb0e99180975990b8241c0f905a5799/rlaurentiu1}, doi = {10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.07.001}, interhash = {9e691f0f302ec4a8c95129ad4a10031f}, intrahash = {adb0e99180975990b8241c0f905a5799}, issn = {02648377}, journal = {Land Use Policy}, keywords = {Adjacency,Land-use association,Neighborhood,Nuisance,Residential myown}, pages = {341--351}, timestamp = {2016-09-18T08:16:20.000+0200}, title = {{Similarities and differences in the assessment of land-use associations by local people and experts}}, volume = 49, year = 2014 }