ArticleScientific reports2025
An integrated framework for evaluating landscape performance in tourism-oriented rural areas.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Rural tourism has emerged as a key strategy for regional revitalization and sustainable development, yet the lack of a comprehensive and context-sensitive framework to evaluate landscape performance remains a critical gap. In this study, we developed a landscape performance evaluation (LPE) framework tailored to tourism-oriented rural areas by integrating the analytic hierarchy process with multidimensional indicators. Using Jiangxin Island as a case study, the framework was used to assess landscape sustainability across environmental, economic, social, and aesthetic dimensions. The results show that the overall landscape performance score for Jiangxin Island is 3.66, placing it in the Good category. Among the four major dimensions, environmental performance holds the highest weight (0.34) and scores 3.80, reflecting effective ecological protection and water quality management, while also revealing challenges in flood control and biodiversity conservation. Economic performance (weight: 0.24) achieves the highest score of 4.95, driven by increased employment and tourism revenue, though income sources remain concentrated in traditional sectors such as agriculture and hospitality. In contrast, social performance, despite its relatively high weight (0.28), scores the lowest at 2.72, indicating deficiencies in infrastructure, accessibility, and cultural experience. Aesthetic performance, with the lowest weight (0.14) and a score of 3.00, highlights generally acceptable visual conditions while still indicating the need for improved overall landscape coherence. These differentiated results not only validate the robustness of the proposed framework but also provide practical guidance for rural tourism development. Based on the findings, targeted strategies are recommended-such as enhancing infrastructure, improving biodiversity management, diversifying economic activities, and strengthening local cultural identity. This study contributes to the theoretical and practical understanding of landscape performance in tourism-oriented rural areas and offers a replicable framework to inform sustainable agricultural land management and multifunctional landscape planning in broader rural development contexts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.