Utilitarian and biocentric stakeholders' visual preferences for floodplain restoration heterogeneity

Abstract Introduction Many stakeholders care more about how a restored landscape looks than about ecological design features, yet visual preferences for restored landscapes have rarely been evaluated. Restoration projects could benefit ecologically from incorporating more heterogeneity at the project's onset, but this impacts visual aesthetics. Objectives We evaluated the visual preferences for different types and levels of habitat heterogeneity of two stakeholder groups. Methods We developed a three‐dimensional interactive survey in Unreal Engine to evaluate participants' visual perception of terrain variability, tree clustering, tree size variability, understory complexity, and large woody debris for riparian forests that were simulated from field and remote sensing data. Participants were grouped into either primarily biocentric (hiker, wildlife viewer, and restoration ecologist) or utilitarian (fisher, hunter, and farmer) land users. Results Both participant groups had similar preferences for an intermediate level of habitat heterogeneity, though results differed for certain features. Biocentric stakeholders preferred landscapes with more variable topography and tree size, greater understory complexity, and more large woody debris than utilitarian participants. Biocentric and utilitarian participants had similar definitions for natural and for cared for landscapes. Utilitarian participants' ideal understory complexity matched their definition of cared for, whereas biocentric participants' ideal matched their definition of naturalness and visual complexity. Conclusions Generally similar perceptions of landscapes by both utilitarian and biocentric participants may result from living in the same region. Nonetheless, their preferences differed slightly because of how each group moves through the landscape.