Environmental monitoring

Nowadays, there is increasing recognition for monitoring the health of the forest as well as the services it provides to those dependent of them. Forest ecosystems—and environment in general—are complex and therefore monitoring the processes is challenging without

technological aid. The introduction of wireless networks, high-powered sensors, visualization technologies, and cloud-based storage can feed real-time data on the ecosystem; thereby providing forest managers a way to track and assess any negative changes (Nitoslawski, Galle, Konijnendijk Van Den Bosch, Steenberg, 2019). These tools can also be used to identify understudied ecosystem processes/dynamics and distribute better the benefits of the ecosystem services (Aik, Tway, 2004; Deussen et al., 1998; Fabrika, Valent, Merganičová, 2019; La Salandra, Frajberg, Fraternali, 2019). Through these improvements, more refined modelling and predictive possibilities of the ecosystem can also be done (Nitoslawski, Galle, Konijnendijk Van Den Bosch, Steenberg, 2019). Müller, Jaeger, Hanewinkel (2019) acknowledge that while examination on ecosystems and their services through advanced technologies have been done, the few that have been tested lacked complexity as the observed ecosystems were mostly plantations or even-aged stands. In addition, certain VR forest simulations have omitted

important environmental factors central to understanding the ecosystem processes which, in turn,

delegitimizes the realism of the virtual world (Kohek, Strnad, Zalik, Kolmanic, 2018). More research will be needed in order to visually comprehend better how ecosystems function and just how human activities impact the system.

15.6. Landscape visualization assessment

Over the past few decades, the incorporation of public input throughout the planning phase within forest management has been progressively become more important. Public participation can aid forest managers avoid potentially causing outrage or serious backlash due to the initial management plan going against the values and concerns of the community. The inclusion of public participation also allows forest managers to properly communicate more effectively their vision by having immediate questioning and feedback from the attending members (Lewis, Sheppard, Sutherland, 2004; Mcgaughey, 1998; Pettit, Raymond, Bryan, Lewis, 2011). By clarifying the planning process and the expected result, the legitimacy of the work can be

realized by the general public and therefore provide more support. One method of showcasing to the public of the expected design and implementation of the work is through the use of visual aids.

Apart from digitally edited images, virtual landscape simulators offer the most sophisticated means of visualization for a forest landscape (Karjalainen, Tyrväinen, 2002). Landscape simulators are less labor-intensive than image editing and offer flexible movements between different viewpoints (Karjalainen, Tyrväinen, 2002). Visualizations are helpful as images can be easily consumed and understood (Karjalainen, Tyrväinen, 2002). Lewis, Sheppard, Sutherland (2004) define visualizations as “pictures” of objects, conditions, processes, or places that help the viewer understand and interpret the subject matter by revealing its appearance or visually

displaying certain significant characteristics. Visualizing complex scientific data and models in 2D can be challenging as the material can be hard to interpret and understand for a general audience (Huang, Lucash, Scheller, Klippel, 2019; Pettit, Raymond, Bryan, Lewis, 2011).

Expressing the model accuracy can even be hard for experts to properly evaluate. Visualizations enables the creator to change 2D information into structured, 3D graphic form which allows the

viewers to perceive information that may have otherwise been unknown or hard to visualize with words/text alone (Pettit, Raymond, Bryan, Lewis, 2011; Väisänen, 2017). Visualizations are increasingly becoming important in assessing and depicting forest operations as generally that is the main form of communicating information to the public whom may be unaware of how the system works (Li, Zhang, 2019; Mcgaughey, 1998; Pettit, Raymond, Bryan, Lewis, 2011). In the past, visual representations have been used mainly to communicate the impact of environmental changes, evaluate the visual effects of forest harvest practices, depict various characteristics and variations existing in the forest or judge the visual quality of the landscape (Uusitalo, Orland, 2001). Gradually, visualization through virtual reality has been successfully utilized in the analysis of complex data and their interpretation in the form of visual perception of users (Aghamirkarimi, Lemire, 2017; Fabrika, Valent, 2015). VR forest visualizations enables the observer to perceive changes in the forest without chronological limitations (Karjalainen, Tyrväinen, 2002; Uusitalo, Orland, 2001). The easy accessibility of spatial information and navigation through a virtual landscape is considered as one of the major strengths of VR as it makes environmental planning more available to the general public (Pettit, Raymond, Bryan, Lewis, 2011). With virtual imagery via VR, visual changes of the landscape can be shown very remarkably which can allow for an intuitive assessment of the visual landscape quality (Griffon et al., 2011).

Landscape visualizations through simulators in VR offer the means for assessment of the quality of the landscape and forest landscape preference research. Pettit, Raymond, Bryan, Lewis (2011) consider landscape visualization as a “subset of the broader field of geographical visualization which is used to communicate existing conditions and alternative landscape scenarios, past and present, for both educative and consultative purposes”. Landscape visualization has become a central part of forest landscape perception and preference research (Karjalainen, Tyrväinen, 2002). Despite the growing need for such research, human perceptions on visualizations and the knowledge on the suitability of these visualizations to landscape preference has been noted to be limited within the literature (Karjalainen, Tyrväinen, 2002; Pettit, Raymond, Bryan, Lewis, 2011). Understanding the preference and end-user evaluation can aid in effectively planning land use changes as the public may react negatively to the management plants once put into place.

Pettit, Raymond, Bryan, Lewis (2011) have put forth a criteria for evaluating landscape visualizations under the following categories: 1) Accuracy, 2) Representativeness, 3) Visual clarity, 4) Interest, 5) Legitimacy, 6) Access to visual information, and lastly 6) framing and presentation. As mentioned before, accuracy in the visualization is important as respondents are generally not experts in evaluating images and therefore need to be able to make the connection between the illustration to the real world (Karjalainen, Tyrväinen, 2002). By making the

visualization accurate, the realism aspect is improved upon; to the point where the reactions and feedback of the users are genuine. When studying people’s reactions to the changes in the landscape, it is crucial in knowing the exact quantity of the change (Karjalainen, Tyrväinen, 2002). How representative a visualization is depending on the data used to realize the

environment as well as how real the landscape looks. Framing and presentation operate on the same principle. Another important criterion for assessing the suitability of visualization systems for forest landscape preference research is the capability of simulating different kinds of

movement within the landscape (Karjalainen, Tyrväinen, 2002; Pettit, Raymond, Bryan, Lewis, 2011). Generally, people look from different directions in a certain area and one’s impressions of a setting vary due to the location and the viewing point of that location. Such perceptions of end users in VR simulate different ways of moving in the virtual landscape. Through movement, users are able to identify different levels of preference in the landscape which can help forest mangers pinpoint areas that need further improvements in visual qualities or address problems that were once hidden in the public’s eye.

Some examples within the literature of VR applications for landscape assessment can be found, although a rarity. Huang, Lucash, Scheller, Klippel (2019) created a workflow that translates data of an ecological model (LANDIS-II) into a 3D model in VR. The experience allows users to experience a forest under two climate scenarios. Within those two different climate scenarios, users can explore the impacts of climate change on different tree species and retrieve information from a 3D tree database (Huang, Lucash, Scheller, Klippel, 2019). Nam et al. (2019) took a similar approach in comparing visualizations by designing a 3D user interface and visualization technique (called Worlds-in-Wedges) that divides the virtual space surrounding the user into

volumetric wedges. Typically, virtual reality environments are designed for a single user which can be an issue especially for applications that require visual comparisons. But with Nam et al.

(2019) approach, the virtual space surrounding the viewer is cut into pie-slice shaped volumetric wedges and each wedge is filled with a different virtual world alongside with its associated spatial data, where the user may look around to compare the multiple worlds. Integrating illustrations with spatial data not only increases the sense of realism, but also illustrates the relationships between preference and landscape elements (Aghamirkarimi, Lemire, 2017;

Karjalainen, Tyrväinen, 2002). Pettit, Raymond, Bryan, Lewis (2011) conducted an experiment with end user evaluation of landscape visualizations. Participants were able to compare and contrast different scenarios and policy options by clicking individual attributes within the layers on and off through to the development of printing and viewing functions. Feedback afterwards indicated that participants appreciated the planning and investment prioritization potential of the landscape visualization products as it provided a justification for spending money on different management actions and how future landscapes may look (Pettit, Raymond, Bryan, Lewis, 2011). Accessibility, planning and investment, and learning concepts were the strengths of the landscape visualization products most frequently mentioned by interviewees (Pettit, Raymond, Bryan, Lewis, 2011).

Before presenting the visualization of the landscape, it is vital to ensure that the visual representation is as accurate and representative to the real-world counterpart to avoid miscommunication and false advertisement of the management plan. Such selection or

highlighting of particular aspects in order to influence the public on particular issues can lead to strong bias (Griffon et al., 2011). Measures to avoid such pitfalls consist of inspecting the accuracy of the data used in making the 3D models and landscape while also stating the purpose of the simulation models. Especially, the visual representation should be transparent to the audiences—from the process of making the visualizations to the assumptions behind the modeling—and clearly describe the expected level of accuracy and uncertainties from the visualization (Chou et al., 2010; Karjalainen, Tyrväinen, 2002; Pettit, Raymond, Bryan, Lewis, 2011).

In conclusion, improving the quality of the landscape visualization products and process of engaging multiple stakeholders in visualization product development will continue to further push the progress of landscape assessment (Pettit, Raymond, Bryan, Lewis, 2011).

15.6.A. Visual aesthetics

Visual aesthetics also is considered when evaluating the landscape as they have an influence on how the land can be managed. Integration of scenic beauty into the decision-making process requires a relationship between the visual aesthetic and other physical forest features. In the past, photographs or altered images would provide the comparisons or highlight the accentuated scenic locations so that viewers could make appropriate decisions. However, still

photographs/images can be limited by subjective perception and visual perspective (Blasco et al., 2009). VR can lessen these limitations through the inclusion of visualizations that include

seemingly high vegetation cover from the large number of 3D tree models in a degree of realism sufficient for visual landscape assessment (Griffon et al., 2011; Karjalainen, Tyrväinen, 2002;

Schroth et al., 2011).

15.7. Tourism

Concerning the potential for tourism, virtual reality can provide a real opportunity to those whom are unable to travel and experience forested landscapes (Mattila et al., 2020; Wallgrün et al., n.d.;

Yu, Lee, Luo, 2018). VR can be especially helpful for those living in urban areas that lack any access to green areas—due to a number of factors such as income disparity, disproportionally neglected demographics, poorly situated location, absence of public green spaces, etc.—or those who are physically disabled and are unable to go visit the site. Since the virtual world within VR is not limited by time or location, the environment can be visited at any time and/or anywhere (Yu, Lee, Luo, 2018). Virtual reality can also help with the promotion or advertisement of a location through virtual tours. Such virtual tours can allow interested tourists to visit the location before the visitation and for companies to host large events that may have previously been impossible due to certain circumstances (Wallgrün et al., n.d.). Allowing groups of people to

visit a virtual place together has been known to enhance learning opportunities as well (Meini, Di Felice, Petrella, 2018; Wallgrün et al., n.d.). An example of such a VR application can be found in the work of Meini, Di Felice, Petrella (2018). The team of researchers recreated ancient cultural landscapes through 3D virtual reconstructions that users are free to roam in VR. The landscape layer is equipped with transitional layers depicting the changes over the

centuries/decades/years (Meini, Di Felice, Petrella, 2018). The VR application not only provides the visitors with recreation opportunities but also increase the possibility of an in-person

visitation (Meini, Di Felice, Petrella, 2018).

15.8. Summarization of forest management planning in VR

All in all, virtual reality in the context of forest management can be summarized as the following: 1) Visualization of forest management data, 2) Assessment of various forest management options before conducting related activities, 3) Prediction of long-term effects of forest growth and disturbances (both natural and anthropogenic), and 4) Presentation and assessment of landscape changes. While there are many challenges facing adoption of virtual reality in managing forests, the future opportunities positively outweigh them. Current examples of virtual reality usage in forest management such as the Virtual Forest—one from Rossman, Schluse, Krahwinkler (2007) and the other, by the same name, Boissonneault, Lamontagne, Thomas (2018)—illustrate how the technology can be successful in integrating the physical forested world into the virtual world. The technology truly has the capacity to completely alter how the industry functions and the nature of forestry may be changed forever.

16. VR Restoration therapy

Within the past two decades, VR research has transitioned heavily towards a more clinical-based focus; mainly emphasizing on rehabilitation, conducting risky invasive surgery training, and a new phase of therapies (Cipresso, Giglioli, Raya, Riva, 2018). Part of this new wave clinical-based studies are those dealing with restoration therapy. Restoration therapy refers to the recovery process from both psychological and physiological stress caused by attentional fatigue

(Mattila et al., 2020). Restoration is manifested through states of relaxation, calmness, and focus (Mattila et al.,2020). Modern living conditions—from stress at work to a noisy urban

environment—has put a strain on our overall health: both on ourselves and as a society (Yu, Lee, Luo, 2018). Unless the harmful effects from stress are mitigated, they are likely to be a

continuous hindrance (Mattila et al., 2020).

The WHO suggested that increased exposure to vegetation in an urban area is associated with reduced general mortality, improved mental health, increased physical activity, and better birth outcomes (White et al., 2018). Studies regarding nature surroundings and human health have even shown that “forest bathing [shinrin-yoku]” has a great impact on health promotion and disease prevention (White et al., 2018; Yu, Lee, Luo, 2018). Therefore, the restoration potential can be elevated with the introduction of a simulated natural environment such as a park, forest, or a green urban area. Multiple studies have found that benefits of natural environments not only provide restorative experiences that improve psychological and physiological health, but also increase recovery from fatigue and positive emotional states (Kobayashi, Ueoka, Hirose, 2009;

Mattila et al., 2020; Moeller et al., 2018; Tabrizian, Baran, Smith, Meentemeyer, 2018; White et al., 2018; Yu, Lee, Luo, 2018).

The application of VR as a method of restorative therapy has been wildly regarded as an

alternative in introducing restoration to stressed patients (Mattila et al., 2020; White et al., 2018) Virtual reality technology can offer highly realistic, immersive natural environments thus

enhancing restorative potential (Mattila et al., 2020; Patil, Yao, Lok, 2019). Additionally, VR can provide simulated natural environments to those whom sadly lack easy access to physical forests or other types of natural environments (e.g. the disabled, elderly, urbanites, etc.) (Mattila et al., 2020; White et al., 2018; Yu, Lee, Luo, 2018). However, only a few studies have examined the health benefits of the virtual environments with this piece of technology. So, the effects of the simulated natural environments created by use of VR on psychological and physiological responses are limited (Moeller et al., 2018; Yu, Lee, Luo, 2018).

So far, literature on VR restoration therapy showcase that patients in simulated forests (in VR) had decreased levels of negative emotions and an increase in energy (Mattila et al., 2020; Yu, Lee, Luo, 2018). However, Mattila et al. (2020) found that VR forest environments were perceived more restorative than both urban and semi-urban forest environments while Yu, Lee, Luo (2018) did not find any differences between either environment. Yu, Lee, Luo (2018) state that this may have been due to an insufficient amount of simulations as other studies have been consistent with Mattila et al. (2020). White et al. (2018) saw an increase in positive emotions when patients were exposed to “greenness” in simulated urban environments. The authors suggest that this increase in emotion may be connected to the idea that blue and green

environments have relaxing effects, allowing people to recover from stressful situations (White et al., 2018). An example of a VR forest simulation that provides restoration benefits is the Virtual Forest experience from Harvard University. The Virtual World provides a year-round, live VR feed of 360-degree still images from a northeastern U.S. forest. Seasonal and time-lapse changes can be seen through this VR (Unknown Author, n.d.).

While the current results of VR restoration therapy via forest simulations is promising, there are a few cautions worth mentioning before widespread usage can occur. Firstly, more research is required to study the effects of frequent visits to the simulated green environments as the length of the stay and frequency of visiting are positively related to restorative experiences (Mattila et al., 2020; Yu, Lee, Luo, 2018). Once these personal reasons are discovered, perhaps the

simulation can be tailored to meet the true needs of the patient; thus, increasing the realism of the VR world and in turn, restorative potential. While Mattila et al. (2020) did not find differences in perceived restoration through VR by age or gender, other socio-economic factors may influence personal reasons. Secondly, the simulated forests are not designed to replaced real forests as these cannot (yet) stimulate the sense of touch or smell (Mattila et al., 2020; Yu, Lee, Luo, 2018). The addition of sounds and smells of nature with VR have been found to decrease stress;

thereby increasing the patients to fully obtain the potential of restorative therapy (Mattila et al., 2020; Sacchelli, Favaro, 2019; Yu, Lee, Luo, 2018). Finally, building the restorative

environment requires high technical skillsets along with forestry-based knowledge; both of which are rare to find together (Mattila et al., 2020). Presence of natural features such as trees,

water, plants, grass, and high levels of biodiversity have been known to have higher restorative potential, so it is important to incorporate each and every little detail in the virtual environment (Tabrizian, Baran, Smith, Meentemeyer, 2018). Finally, the VR forested environment must be created to be user-friendly as issues such as visual stress (Tabrizian, Baran, Smith, Meentemeyer, 2018) and simulation sickness may hinder restoration trainings (Zahabi, Razak, 2020).

Conclusion

The work presented here provides a comprehensive look at the current literature for virtual reality with a focus on forestry applications. Although still in the developmental phase in forestry, VR has serious potential and may be the catalyst to push the industry into the I.40 revolution. While are still uncertain factors and unexplored areas concerning VR, the

opportunities highlighted in this thesis showcases the multiple, exciting possibilities that this piece of technology can offer to the forestry sector. Yet, the literature warns potential future users that the technology faces certain challenges that may hinder complete adoption in the forestry sector (Müller, Jaeger, Hanewinkel, 2019). For example, White et al. (2018) state that current commercial VR systems such as the Oculus Rift are still relatively expensive and require a high level of computer proficiency. The forestry industry presently lacks the skilled workforce that is proficient enough to handle the high computational requirements to build and maintain a VR visualization system. In addition, the industry is usually hesitant to invest in a product that

opportunities highlighted in this thesis showcases the multiple, exciting possibilities that this piece of technology can offer to the forestry sector. Yet, the literature warns potential future users that the technology faces certain challenges that may hinder complete adoption in the forestry sector (Müller, Jaeger, Hanewinkel, 2019). For example, White et al. (2018) state that current commercial VR systems such as the Oculus Rift are still relatively expensive and require a high level of computer proficiency. The forestry industry presently lacks the skilled workforce that is proficient enough to handle the high computational requirements to build and maintain a VR visualization system. In addition, the industry is usually hesitant to invest in a product that