| Reviews of the landscape assessment literature have distinguished among at least three different approaches---expert, experimental and experiential---based on their conceptual and methodological orientations. The fundamental purpose of this research is to explore the 'experiential' approach which has received the least attention. Procedures for collecting visual (self-directed photography), textual (written comments) and oral (interviews) data were integrated into the 'participant-directed landscape imaging' procedure which was then used to explore the experiential landscape knowledge of 18 inhabitants of the Cariboo region of British Columbia.;Qualitative analysis of the resulting landscape images to determine their focus and significance revealed overlapping domains of landscape experience. Participants focussed on landscape elements (environmental features, ephemeral features and dynamic conditions and human activity features), locales and experiences, expressed in both general and location-specific terms. Significance was attributed to landscape elements, locales and experiences based on characteristicness, specialness, contributing to quality of life, emotional feelings, and attachment. These were revealed through participants' instrumental evaluations, affective appraisals and sense of place descriptions.;To facilitate discussion of the experiential approach and the participant-directed method within the context of landscape assessment, a second study was undertaken. The procedures and outcomes of landscape assessment in British Columbia's Ministry of Forests, categorized as an expert approach, were examined. Based on discussions with staff and consultants, and reviews of policy and standards and practices documents, how landscape assessment is carried out, both in policy and in practice, was outlined and discussed. The well-defined, systematic procedures for landscape assessment make it a straight forward technical task for those trained in doing it (experts), but in practice, it involves participation and negotiation by the various actors.;The results from the analysis of the two approaches to landscape assessment reveal strengths and weaknesses for each. For example, the British Columbia method is more participatory in practice than is portrayed in the literature by the expert categorization or in the policy documents. The experiential approach reveals a richness of landscape, a landscape in which people live and to which people are attached in various ways. In this context, the participant-directed method is a 'hybrid' approach, a prototype method in the spirit of the experiential approach, but which is open to other approaches. It does not preclude the identification of 'expert' features, for example, and provides place-specific landscape images essential to an experiential approach.;It is concluded that consideration of the potential offered by an experiential approach requires attention beyond landscape assessment methods, to the broader context of environment and resource management. Such attention is supported by current trends in that realm. In particular, an experiential approach contributes to and takes advantage of calls for increased attention to place and sense of place, to the need for local empowerment rather than reliance on hierarchical power structures, and to the idea of praxis, the integration of theory and research with practical application. |
