| Abstract: | ABSTRACT Many of the resources generating aesthetic and visual benefits are publically owned and their optimum use and development depends upon public investment. Traditionally, public investment decisions have been couched in economic terms requiring quantitative measurement of benefits and costs. Since many of the benefits these resources provide are not consumed when they are enjoyed, the total contribution of the resource is imperfectly measured in the usual market sense. Thus, if the provision of these public goods is left to the conventional market mechanism, less than socially optimal investment may occur. This study was designed to investigate whether aesthetic preferences related to water projects could be determined, and whether they differ among different groups of people. A Q sort of 44 photographs of a wide variety of water development projects was conducted with two groups, i.e., photographers (aesthetic man) and town assessors (economic man). The resultant analysis identified two significant factors. Factor 1 provided insight into a hypothesis of nature dominant or man dominant scenes. Factor 2 indicated that the respondents had a negative preference for projects which were in varying stages of completion or appeared to be polluted. Preferences were consistent between the two groups tested. The test revealed that people do not necessarily equate only naturalness with aesthetic appeal, but will accept development as aesthetic, provided that it is designed to complement the natural landscape. |
