Landscape Characterization Using Spatial Typology and Metrics: An Approach for Identifying Natural and Agricultural Setting

Year 2026, Volume: 32 Issue: 2, 247 - 266, 24.03.2026

Şükran Şahin , Bulent Cengiz , Canan Cengiz , Mükerrem Bahar Başkır , Eren Dağra Sökmen

https://doi.org/10.15832/ankutbd.1752287

https://izlik.org/JA55UY39DK

Abstract

This study focuses on the spatially identified structural character of the landscape in the case of Bartın province in the Western Black Sea Region of Türkiye. In the first stage, Landscape Character Types (LCTs), which are the integrated expression of reclassified climate, geology, geomorphography and landscape pattern components, were created at two levels as L1-Regional and L2-Subregional (L1: 157 types, 4018 units; L2: 449 types, 7757 units, respectively). In the second stage, the raster data for the L1-LCTs in the study area were transformed into {1(present), 0(absent)} values and PCA scores. Clustering algorithms, including twostep and k-means methods, were applied to L1-LCTs data, and clustering structures were compared across different cluster numbers. The optimal number of clusters was identified based on Silhouette index values, and the optimal cluster-based performance metrics were calculated accordingly. In this context, the analysis proceeded with 13 clusters, which achieved the highest average Silhouette index (0.231), and the resulting clustering structure demonstrated an accuracy rate of 82.8% and an overall (average) F1-score of 81.5%, supporting the validity of the classification. In the third stage, landscape diversity, landscape density, naturalness ratio, cluster ratio, relative landscape richness, average nearest neighbor distance and Shannon diversity metrics were calculated using FRAGSTATS based on the L2-LCTs included in the 13 clusters. When the clusters are examined, clusters 6 and 9, which constitute 24.67% and 17.35% of the study area respectively, have high normalized landscape naturalness rate (0.99 and 1.00 respectively) and normalized landscape diversity values (0.67 and 0.65). This study provides a robust framework for identifying spatially distinct natural and agricultural systems through structural landscape analysis. By integrating spatial typology with quantitative metrics, the method enables a consistent and diagnostic understanding of landscape variation, which can guide planning, management, and protection decisions. 

Keywords

Landscape metrics , Hierarchical clustering , Multi-level analysis , Landscape typology , Handscape heterogeneity

Ethical Statement

No need for Ethics Committee Approval The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest to disclose.

Supporting Institution

TÜBİTAK 1001

Project Number

120O537

Thanks

This study was conducted as part of the project titled “A Research on the Development of a Smart Tourism and Recreation Application Model for the Province of Bartın within the Scope of Integrated Coastal Zone Planning and Management,” supported by the TÜBİTAK 1001 Program (Project No: 120O537) and coordinated by Prof. Dr. Bülent Cengiz, faculty member at Bartın University.

References

• Akın A & Erdoğan M A (2020). Analysing temporal and spatial urban sprawl change of Bursa city using landscape metrics and remote sensing. Model Earth Syst Environ 6: 1331-1343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-020-00766-1
• Alparslan C, Mirici M E, Sarıçam S & Çabuk A (2019). Landscape inventory and character analysis: A case study from Urla, Cesme, Karaburun district, Turkey. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin 28(4A): 3281-3294
• Antrop M (2000). Background concepts for integrated landscape analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 77(1-2): 17-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(99)00089-4
• Atabeyoğlu Ö & Bulut Y (2013). Ordu kenti kentsel peyzaj karakter analizi. Akademik Ziraat Dergisi 2(1): 1-12. https://doi.org/10.29278/azd.132760
• Bartlett D, Gomez-Martin E, Milliken S & Parmar D (2017). Introducing landscape character assessment and the ecosystem service approach to India: A case study. Landscape and Urban Planning 167: 257-266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.06.013
• Bastian O (2000). Landscape classification in Saxony (Germany): A tool for holistic regional planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 50 (1-3): 145-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00086-4
• Bharath S, Aithal B H, Durgappa S & Ramachandra T V (2012). Landscape dynamics through spatial metrics. Proceedings of the 14th Annual International Conference and Exhibition on Geospatial Information Technology and Applications (India Geospatial Forum), February 7 9, Gurgaon, India.
• Brown G & Brabyn L (2012). An analysis of the relationships between multiple values and physical landscapes at a regional scale using public participation GIS and landscape character classification. Landscape and urban planning 107(3): 317-331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.06.007
• Butler A & Berglund U (2014). Landscape character assessment as an approach to understanding public interests within the European Landscape Convention. Landscape Research, 39(3), 219-236. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2012.716404
• Capra F (1996). The web of life: A new scientific understanding of living systems. Anchor Books. Çiçek İ & Yılmaz E (2016). Thornthwaite climate classification of Türkiye. Journal of Human Sciences 13(3): 3973-3994. https://doi.org/10.14687/jhs.v13i3.3994
• Çorbacı Ö L & Dönmez Y (2019). Peyzajın yapısının (peyzaj karakter tiplerinin) tanımlanması ve haritalanması: Bartın ili Amasra ilçesi örneği. In L. G. Kaya (Ed.), Mimarlık, planlama ve tasarım alanında yeni ufuklar (pp. 329-366). Gece Kitaplığı. https://www.gecekitapligi.com/Webkontrol/uploads/Fck/mimarlik_9.pdf
• Das S & Angadi D P (2021). Assessment of urban sprawl using landscape metrics and Shannon’s entropy model approach in town level of Barrackpore sub-divisional region, India. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 7, 1071-1095. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-020-00990-9
• Dewan A M, Yamaguchi Y & Rahman M Z (2012). Dynamics of land use/cover changes and the analysis of landscape fragmentation in Dhaka Metropolitan, Bangladesh. GeoJournal, 77(3), 315-330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-010-9399-x
• Dramstad W E, Fry G, Fjellstad W J, Skar B, Helliksen W, Sollund, M-L B, Tveit MS, Geelmuyden A K & Framstad E (2001). Integrating landscape-based values: Norwegian monitoring of agricultural landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 57(3-4): 257-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00208-0
• Dunn C P, Sharpe D M, Guntenspergen G R, Stearns F, & Yang Z (1991). Methods for analyzing temporal changes in landscape patterns. In M. G. Turner & R. H. Gardner (Eds.), Quantitative methods in landscape ecology: The analysis and interpretation of landscape heterogeneity (pp. 173-198). Springer.
• Elkie P C, Rempel R S & Carr A P (1999). Patch Analyst User’s Manual: A tool for quantifying landscape structure (NWST Technical Manual TM-002). Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Northwest Science & Technology. ISBN 0-7778-8295-7.
• European Environment Agency (EEA) (2018). Corine Land Cover 2018. Copernicus Land Monitoring Service. https://land.copernicus.eu/pan european/corine-land-cover/clc201 Council of Europe (2000). European Landscape Convention (European Treaty Series No. 176). Council of Europe. https://www.coe.int/en/web/landscape
• Forman R T T & Godron M (1986). Landscape ecology. Cambridge University Press. Frohn R C, McGwire K C, Dale V H & Estes J E (1996). Using satellite remote sensing analysis to evaluate a socio-economic and ecological model of deforestation in Rondônia, Brazil. Int J Remote Sens, 17(16): 3233-3255. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431169608949141
• Gardner R, O’Neill, R & Turner M (1993). Ecological implications of landscape fragmentation. In S. Pickett & M. McDonnell (Eds.), Humans as components of ecosystems (pp. 208-226). Springer.
• Gkoltsiou A (2025). Landscape character assessment for sustainable rural development in border insular areas: A case study of Ano Mirabello, Crete. Agriculture, 15(10): 1020. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15101020
• Görmüş S, Oğuz D, Eşbah Tunçay H & Cengiz S (2021). The use of landscape character analysis to reveal differences between protected and non-protected landscapes in Kapısuyu Basin. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 27(4): 414-425. https://doi.org/10.15832/ankutbd.640159
• Griffiths G (2018). Transferring landscape character assessment from the UK to the Eastern Mediterranean: Challenges and perspectives. Land, 7(1): 36. https://doi.org/10.3390/land7010036
• Haines-Young R & Chopping M (1996). Quantifying landscape structure: A review of landscape indices and their application to forested landscapes. Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment 20(4): 418-445. https://doi.org/10.1177/030913339602000403
• Han J W, Kamber M & Pei J (2012). Data mining: concepts and techniques (3rd ed.). Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. Herold M, Scepan J & Clarke K C (2002). The use of remote sensing and landscape metrics to describe structures and changes in urban land uses. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 34(8): 1443-1458. https://doi.org/10.1068/a3496 Hijmans R J, Cameron S E, Parra J L, Jones P G & Jarvis A (2005). Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. International Journal of Climatology, 25(15): 1965-1978. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.1276 Hussein M K, Yunos M Y M, Zhuang Q D & Mohd Ariffin N F M (2022). Landscape character: A knowledge mapping analysis using CiteSpace. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology 19(12): 12183-12210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-022 04279-5
• Jones K B, Riitters K H, Wickham J D, Tankersley R D Jr, O’Neill R V, Chaloud D J, Smith E R & Neale A C (1997). An ecological assessment of the United States Mid-Atlantic region: A landscape atlas (EPA/600/R-97/130). United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development.
• Kim K-H & Pauleit S (2007). Landscape character, biodiversity and land use planning: The case of Kwangju City Region, South Korea. Land Use Policy, 24(2): 264-274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2005.12.001 Kap Yücel S D (2024). Determination of landscape character area by cluster analysis: Erdek Kapıdağ Peninsula. GRID Architecture, Planning and Design Journal 7(2): 545-570. https://doi.org/10.37246/grid.1303509
• Koç A & Yılmaz S (2020). Landscape character analysis and assessment at the lower basin-scale. Applied Geography, 125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2020.102359
• Li, X, Lu L, Cheng G & Xiao H (2001). Quantifying landscape structure of the Heihe River Basin, north-west China using FRAGSTATS. Journal of Arid Environments, 48(4): 521-535. https://doi.org/10.1006/jare.2000.0715
• MacQueen J B (1967). Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In L. M. Le Cam & J. Neyman (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability (Vol. 1, pp. 281-297). University of California Press.
• Malinowska E & Szumacher I (2013). Application of landscape metrics in the evaluation of geodiversity. Miscellanea Geographica - Regional Studies on Development 17(4): 28-33. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10288-012-0045-y
• Martín B, Ortega E, Martino P & Otero I (2018). Inferring landscape change from differences in landscape character between the current and a reference situation. Ecological Indicators 90: 584-593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.03.065
• McGarigal K & Marks B J (1995). FRAGSTATS: Spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure (Gen. Tech. Rep. PNWGTR-351). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. https://doi.org/10.2737/PNW-GTR-351
• Mücher C A, Bunce R G H, Jongman R H G, Klijn J A, Koomen A J M, Metzger M J & Wascher D M (2003). Identification and characterisation of environments and landscapes in Europe (Alterra Report No. 832). Alterra, Wageningen UR. https://content.alterra.wur.nl/internet/webdocs/internet/geoinformatie/projects/LANMAP2/publications/Alterrarep832. user-oriented
• Mücher C A, Klijn J A, Wascher D M & Schaminée J H J (2010). A new European landscape classification (LANMAP): A transparent, flexible and methodology https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.03.018 to distinguish landscapes. Ecological Indicators, 10(1): 87-103.
• Maden Tetkik ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü (MTA) (2019). 1/100.000 ölçekli jeoloji haritaları [1/100,000 geology maps]. Maden Tetkik ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü Türkiye. NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) (2015). NASA Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) global 1 arc second elevation data set [Data set]. NASA EOSDIS Land Processes DAAC. https://srtm.csi.cgiar.org/ Norusis M J (2007). SPSS 15.0 advanced statistical procedures companion. Prentice Hall.
• O’Neill R V, Riitters K H, Wickham J D & Jones K B (1999). Landscape pattern metrics and regional assessment. Ecosystem Health, 5(4), 225-233. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-0992.1999.09942.x
• OpenStreetMap Contributors (2021). Planet dump. OpenStreetMap Foundation [PostgreSQL via API]. https://www.openstreetmap.org Palmer J F & Smardon R C (2018). Approaches related to landscape character assessment. In G. Fairclough, I. Sarlöv Herlin, & C. Swanwick (Eds.), Routledge handbook of landscape character assessment: Current approaches to characterization and assessment (pp. 131-143). Routledge
• Pan Y, Wu Y, Xu X, Zhang B & Li W (2022). Identifying terrestrial landscape character types in China. Land, 11(7): 1014. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11071014
• Otero I, Mancebo S, Ortega E & Casermeiro M A (2007). Mapa de calidad del paisaje de España. M+A. Revista Electrónic@ de Medioambiente, 4: 18-34
• Posada M I (2012). Using landscape pattern metrics to characterize ecoregions [Master’s Thesis, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, School of Natural Resources]. Dissertations & Theses in Natural Resources. Ramachandra T V, Aithal B H & Sanna D D (2012). Insight to urban dynamics through landscape spatial pattern analysis. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 18: 329-343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2012.03.005
• Ramachandra T V, Aithal B H & Sowmyashree M V (2014). Urban structure in Kolkata: Metrics and modeling through geo-informatics. Applied Geomatics 6: 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12518-014-0135-y
• Rousseuw P J (1987). Silhouettes: A graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 20, 53-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-0427(87)90125-7
• Rundle-Thiele S, Kubacki K, Tkaczynski & Parkinson J (2015). Using two-step cluster analysis to identify homogeneous physical activity groups. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 33(4): 522-537. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-03-2014-0050 Seguin J F (2008). Peyzaj atlasları [Landscape atlases]. Avrupa Peyzaj Sözleşmesi Uygulanması Yolunda Türkiye: Uluslararası Katılımlı Toplantı Bildiriler Kitabı (pp. 87-102). Mülga T.C. Çevre ve Orman Bakanlığı & TMMOB Peyzaj Mimarları Odası. (TMMOB Peyzaj Mimarları Odası Yayın No. 2008/3).
• Simensen T, Halvorsen R & Erikstad L (2018). Methods for landscape characterisation and mapping: A systematic review. Land Use Policy, 75, 557-569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.04.022
• Swanwick C (2002). Landscape character assessment: Guidance for England and Scotland. Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage.
• Şahin Ş, Bilgili B C & Müftüoğlu V (2008). Peyzaj envanteri. Avrupa Peyzaj Sözleşmesi Uygulanması Yolunda Türkiye: Uluslararası Katılımlı Toplantı Bildiriler Kitabı (pp. 139-148). Mülga T.C. Çevre ve Orman Bakanlığı & TMMOB Peyzaj Mimarları Odası. (TMMOB Peyzaj Mimarları Odası Yayın No. 2008/3).
• Şahin Ş, Perçin H, Kurum E, Uzun O, Bilgili B C, Tezcan L, Çiçek İ, Müftüoğlu V, Çorbacı Ö L, Sütünç S, Doğan D, Koç Ö, Ateş E, Tarım B & Kurdoğlu G (2013). PEYZAJ-44: İl ölçeğinde peyzaj karakter analizi ve turizm/rekreasyon açısından değerlendirilmesi (Landscape character analysis and its assessment for tourism/recreation - PEYZAJ-44) [Project report, TÜBİTAK KAMAG 1007 Program, Project No. 109G074]. TÜBİTAK.
• Şahin Ş, Perçin H, Kurum E, Uzun O & Bilgili B C (2014). National technical guideline for landscape character analysis and assessment at the regional and sub-regional (provincial) levels. Ankara: Republic of Turkey Ministry of Interior, Ministry of Environment and Urbanization, and Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs; Ankara University (Coordinating Institution). TÜBİTAK KAMAG 1007 Program, PEYZAJ-44 Project No. 109G074. ISBN 978-605-136-201-4.
• Şchiopu D (2010). Applying TwoStep cluster analysis for identifying bank customers’ profile. Buletinul Universităţii Petrol–Gaze din Ploieşti, Economic Sciences Series, 62(3), 66-75.
• Terkenli T S, Gkoltsiou A & Kavroudakis D (2021). The interplay of objectivity and subjectivity in landscape character assessment: qualitative and quantitative approaches and challenges. Land, 10(1), 53. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10010053
• Tırnakçı A & Özer S (2018). Determining landscape character areas and types in district scale: The sample of Artvin-Şavşat, Turkey. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi 49(1): 53-66
• Tkaczynski A (2017). Segmentation using two-step cluster analysis. In D. Dietrich, S. Rundle-Thiele, & K. Kubacki (Eds.), Segmentation in social marketing (pp. 109–125). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1835-0_8
• Turgut H & Tırnakçı A (2020). Korunan alanlarda peyzaj karakter analizi: Hatila Vadisi Milli Parkı örneği. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi 51(1): 8–20. https://doi.org/10.17097/ataunizfd.565108 Turner M G O’Neill R V Gardner R H & Milne B T (1989). Effects of changing spatial scale on the analysis of landscape pattern. Landscape Ecology, 3(3-4), 153-162. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00131534
• Turoğlu H & Özdemir H (2005). Bartın’da sel ve taşkınlar: Sebepler, etkiler, önleme ve zarar azaltma önerileri. Çantay Yayınevi.
• Uzun O, İlke E F, Çetinkaya G, Erduran F & Açıksöz S (2012). Konya ili Bozkır-Seydişehir-Ahırlı-Yalıhüyük ilçeleri ve Suğla Gölü yöresi peyzaj planlaması: peyzajın korunması, yönetimi ve planlanması projesi. T.C. Orman ve Su İşleri Bakanlığı, Doğa Koruma ve Milli Parklar Genel Müdürlüğü, Türkiye.
• Uzun O, Gündüz S, Müderrisoğlu H, Kaya L G Demir Z & Gültekin P (2015). Yeşilırmak Havzası peyzaj atlası. T.C. Orman ve Su İşleri Bakanlığı, Doğa Koruma ve Milli Parklar Genel Müdürlüğü, Türkiye.
• Van Eetvelde V & Antrop M (2009a). A stepwise multi-scaled landscape typology and characterisation for trans-regional integration, applied on the federal state of Belgium. Landscapand Urban Planning, 91(3), 160-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.12.008
• Van Eetvelde V & Antrop M (2009b). Indicators for assessing changing landscape character of cultural landscapes in Flanders (Belgium). Land Use Policy, 26(4): 901-910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.11.001
• Vogiatzakis I N (2011). Mediterranean experience and practice in landscape character assessment. Ecologia Mediterranea, 37, 17-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.11.001
• Warnock S, Enotiades P & Griffiths G (2018). Developing a landscape character map of Cyprus. In G. Fairclough, I. Sarlöv Herlin, & C. Swanwick (Eds.), Routledge handbook of landscape character assessment (pp. 80–89). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315753423
• Wascher D M (2005). European landscape character areas: Typologies, cartography and indicators for the assessment of sustainable landscapes. Landscape Europe in collaboration with ELCAI project partners.
• Yang D, Gao C, Li L, Zhang Y & Wang Z (2020). Multi-scaled identification of landscape character types and areas in Lushan National Park and its fringes, China. Landscape and Urban Planning, 201, 103844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103844
• Zhang Y, Bian Z, Guo X & Wang C (2025). Multiscale agrobiodiversity conservation: Modeling epigaeic arthropod diversity with landscape heterogeneity and ecosystem services. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.126003 Journal of Environmental Management, 388, 126003.