Assessing the Visual Intrusion & the Impact on Accessibility

of the Cairngorm Funicular Railway Proposal

 Critical Literature Review - John J. Bark

 

The aim of this literature review is to assess the available work that concerns my dissertation proposal, assessing the visual intrusion and accessibility impact of the Cairngorm Funicular Railway Proposal. It begins my considering the literature available on the proposal in the wider context of Scottish tourism development and tourism’s impact on the environment. Both the concept and application of Visibility analysis in GIS are considered, and finally the accessibility issue is outlined.

There is a wide range of literature available about the Highlands of Scotland, especially books aimed at tourists and outdoor enthusiasts concerned with the outstanding landscapes and filled with glorious colour photographs, such as ‘The Nature of Scotland’. Although not directly relevant to my research they present a good understanding of the high esteem in which the landscape is held. To this end there are many pressure groups concerned with the preservation of the landscape who have published their view on the future of the Highlands.

In 1996 the Scottish Wildlife and Countryside Link published ‘An Agenda for Sustainable Development’ that examines the need for sustainable mountain development in the Highlands. It is a good introduction to the issues facing the region, such as ongoing conflict between the ski developments and nature conservation. They propose an integrated approach to future Highland management and importantly, stresses the need for more effective conservation measures. They are critical of the existing measures, especially the reliance on the ‘voluntary principle’ favoured by government and recognise the role played by conservation groups;

"So ineffective have been the government policies on the conservation and protection of Scotland’s mountain areas, that voluntary conservation bodies have been obliged not only to engage in protracted political campaigns but, from as early as 1935, in an accelerating process of land acquisition in mountainous regions." (Wightman 1996)

The main thrust of their criticism is aimed directly at the government who they believe consider Scotland’s mountains peripheral and simply part of a problem region, although this may politically motivated as there appears to be a distrust of anything that comes from ‘south of the border.’ Similar booklets have been published that are specifically concerned with the Cairngorms, such as Managing the Cairngorms by the Cairngorms Partnership and The Cairngorms – Stepping Forward from the Cairngorms Campaign. Both consider the future of the Mountains and propose strategies for their management based on a sustainable approach, placing the preservation of the landscape as their prime concern:

"An unpolluted environment and unspoiled scenery are an economic asset as well as worthy of being cherished in themselves. Support should be given for the cost of conserving nature. The Cairngorms area should become a model of good environmental management in Europe and the world." (Cairngorms Partnership 1996)

The Cairngorms Campaign also publishes a regular newsletter for members, the Cairngorms Campaigner, which predictably is against the funicular railway proposal. Their reports give a one sided view of the proposal but are a good reference point for consideration of the no campaign. Much of the public literature, available in either paper or electronic format takes the side of the no campaign, although balancing articles exist. Nicoll (1997) wrote about the tension that exists in the Highlands between the landowners and those that work on it, and examines the concerns on both sides. The Scotsman gave Tania Adams of the Cairngorm Chairlift Company a platform to express the company's side of the funicular proposal in their Open Space Column. She is concerned with the hype and misinformation surrounding the proposal spread by the opposition and intends to use the article to "to set the record straight" (Adams 1998). She is very critical of the World Wildlife Fund’s (WWF) ‘no campaign’ and attempts to redress their claims of over exposure and economically viability. Interestingly when summing up the project she places the interests of her company first before stating the environmental protection offered by their proposals.

At present the WWF are involved in legal action to challenge the boundaries of the protected area within the Cairngorms. This action, "if successful, will force a major rethink" (WWF 1998) on the proposal. The WWF is neither against economic development nor skiing but "believe that both should be developed and managed in a way that capitalises upon and supports the natural environment rather than undermines it" (Ibid. 1998). Their Web Site contains a page with the latest information from the court proceeding and expresses their reasoning behind it.

There is a range of texts that examine the impact of tourism on the environment, such as Hunter and Green (1995). They consider the possible negative visual impact of tourist developments:

"Poorly designed, sited and constructed building and other tourist facilities are a well-known consequence of much tourism development, frequently detracting from the visual amenity of the natural environment by, for example blocking views." (Ibid. 1995)

Mathieson and Wall (1982) consider the growth of tourism in mountainous environments and conclude that because of a small carrying capacity, damage to these environments caused by the over exposure could take centuries to disappear.

In 1994 the Government published a national strategy for sustainable development that considers the role played by the leisure and tourism industry. It notes the dependent relationship between the environment and many outdoor leisure activities and their reliance directly on the natural resource conservation. The proposed strategy highlights the most common environmental impacts of the leisure industry, including visual intrusion, the wear and tear caused by high visitor numbers and inappropriate development:

"When out of scale, inappropriately located and insensitively designed, such developments can fundamentally change the character of an area." (Department of the Environment 1994)

Nearly all the main GIS textbooks consider the use of Digital Terrain Models and visibility analysis. Aronoff (1989) provides a concise description of visibility analysis and defines viewshed simply as "the area that can be seen". Burrough and McDonnell (1998) provide a more comprehensive discussion of DTMs and provide another good explanation of the viewshed; "those parts of the landscape that can be seen from a particular point." Both of these authors, and others such as Christoper (1997) explain the need caution when interpreting the results of this analysis. The height value used in the DTM may not take into account the height of features such as woods or buildings and Christopher also considers the impact of the opaqueness of the vegetation and seasonal variability. All conclude that it is possible to take these considerations into account and model their effect on ‘intervisibility’ in the landscape. Another consideration they discuss is the accurately of the DTM used in the analysis.

Work by Fisher (1993, 1995) has studied the effects of error on the calculation of viewsheds, producing maps that consider the levels of uncertainty, taking error considerations into account. He developed the idea of a ‘probable’ viewshed using a Monte Carlo simulation approach to "accommodate the errors which may occur in the process of deriving the viewable area" (Ibid. 1995). He uses the existing Boolean nature of the viewshed analysis results but inserts a sliding scale between 1 and 0. He also looks at the effect of the alternative designs used by different GIS in their viewshed calculation algorithms. Although he found differences in their calculations he does not implicitly criticise any particular GIS as the results are all very similar to the values of his control analysis and none is shown to be grossly wrong.

Although most GIS texts explain visibility analysis and suggest possible user applications that is limited literature available about real world examples. Work by Davidson, Watson and Selman (1993) is particularly relevant to my dissertation but even they use it in a retrospective capacity. Most of the available literature concerning visibility looks at its application in the forestry industry and the design of planting and felling regimes that minimise the impact on the landscape. Davidson, Watson and Selman evaluate "GIS as an aid to the planning of proposed developments in rural areas" and through four case studies they seek to establish whether GIS provided a cost-effective, helpful and accessible tool for policy formulation and decision making:

"One application of considerable importance, prompted by statutory requirements for environmental assessment, has been the visual impact of new development proposals. Hitherto, this has involved laborious manual techniques or protracted and expensive photographic editing. Increased use is now being made of digital terrain models (DTMs) and associated overlays" (Ibid. 1993).

As part of their research they considering the visual impact of the new base station, infrastructure and chairlifts at the Aonach Mor Skiing development. To evaluate this work they form a workshop attended by various planners and environmental professionals. The response to their analysis was very positive and the three dimensional models they created "were judged to be of particular value in providing effective landscape images" (Ibid. 1993). The evaluators felt that such models were more useful than conventional maps, giving them a feel for the area and setting the development in the context of the landscape. The models increased their confidence about the precise location of the development, "a very difficult task to do manually on landscape drawings by artists" (Ibid. 1993). From their analysis they list plenty of the advantages concluded from their experience with visual assessment, but equate this with a number of possible problems. The most important of these is the easy by which people can be seduced by high impact computer graphics. Their research is significant in relation to my dissertation as they have successfully analysed the potential of a GIS role in the planning of rural developments. Other practical examples in the literature assessing the role of GIS to determine visual quality of a location, notably Moreno (1986) and Miller Et al. (1994) who analysed the scenery in the Cairngorms. In their research they raise another important consideration when performing visibility analysis, decreasing size perspective with distance. In their analysis they incorporated into their model a distance-decay function to "calculate visual clarity as the distance between an observer and an object increases" (Miller Et al. 1994).

At present there is little literature concerning accessibility to the landscape, most discusses the access rights of walkers and ramblers to the countryside and the freedom to roam campaigns. Darge & Briggs (1991) in their review of the Scottish environment discusses the concept of wilderness as a recreational resource and the possibility to quantity physical inaccessibility using Naismith’s Rule. Fritz and Carver (1998) have developed a scale of accessibility based upon this rule "in combination with a shortest path algorithm to model walking time in an open landscape." The model takes into consideration an area's topography and its isolation as perceived by a walker and provides the analyst with the time values needed to walk from one source point to all other locations on the surface:

"By using this model, it is possible to allocate those areas that have a specific time distance from the source point and therefore acquire information about areas that are relatively inaccessible" (Ibid. 1998)

The model has been tested in the Peak District and the Cairngorm Mountains and their results seem to indicate that the model works well. In the near future they hope to develop it further to consider more factors affecting walking time. This model will be of considerable use in my analysis, assessing the impact of moving the walker's car park although at present the model is limited to relatively low resolution data sets. It also takes no account of whether walkers are on a marked path or are roaming across open country.

This concise review of the literature available related to my dissertation has given me a better understanding of the funicular proposals in a wider context. Reviewing the work relating to the analysis I will perform has given me an appreciation of some of the data issues that will need to be considered and accessibility has increased my knowledge of the theory underpinning the analysis. This has allowed be to consider the position of my work in a wider context.

  

Return to Top of Document or my GIS Page

Bibliography

 

Booklets

 

Newspaper Articles

 

URL’s

 

Return to Top of Document or my GIS Page

Home


Last Updated 08-03-99