[
Blicharska, M. & Mikusiński, G. (2014). Incporating Social and Cultural Significance of Large Old Trees in Conservation Policy. Conservation Biology 28 (6), 1558-1567. doi: 10.1111/cobi.12341 .
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bonaiuto, M., Carrus, G., Martorella H. & Bonnes M. (2002). Local identity processes and environmental attitudes in land use changes: The case of natural protected areas. Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (5): 631-653. doi: 10.1016/S0167-4870(02)00121-6.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Clark W. A. (2011). Clarifying the Spiritual Value of Forests and their Role in Sustainable Forest Management. Journal for the Study of Religion, Nature and Culture 5 (1), 18-38. doi: 10.1558/jsmc.v5il.l8.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Dwyer, J. F., Schroeder, H. W. & Gobster, P. H. (1991). The significance of urban trees and forests: toward a deeper understanding of values. Journal of Arboriculture 17(10), 276-284.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Finger, M. (1994). From Knowledge to Action? Exploring the Relationships Between Environmental Experiences, Learning, and Behavior. Journal of Social Issues 50 (3), 141-160. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1994.tb02424.x.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hunziker, M., Felber, P., Gehring, K., Buchecker, M., Bauer, N. & Kienast, F. (2008). Evaluation of Landscape Change by Different Social Groups: Results of Two Empirical Studies in Switzerland. Mountain Research and Development 28(2), 140-147. doi: 10.2307/25164204.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jones, Ch. D., Patterson, M. E. & Hammitt, W. E. (2000). Evaluating the Construct Validity of Sense of Belonging as a Measure of Landscape Perception. Journal of Leisure Research 32(4), 383-395. doi: 10.1080/00222216.2000.11949922.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kals, E., Schumacher, D. & Montada, L. (1999). Emotional affinity toward nature as a motivational basis to protect nature. Environment and Behavior 31( 2), 178-202. doi: 10.1177/00139169921972056.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kaltenborn, B. P., & Bjerke, T. (2002). Associations between environmental value orientations and landscape preferences. Landscape and Urban Planning 59 (1), 1–11. doi: 10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00243-2.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. Cambridge University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Klvač, P. (Ed.). (2006). Člověk a les [Man and forest]. Masaryk University.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Konijnendijk, C. (2008). The Forest and the City. Springer.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Krajhanzl, J., Chabada, T. & Svobodová, R. (2018). Vztah české veřejnosti k přírodě a životnímu prostředí: Reprezentativní studie veřejného mínění [Relationship of the Czech public with nature and the environment: A representative study of public opinion]. Masaryk University.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kučera, Z. & Kašková, M. (2016). Utváření domova ve změněné krajině pohraničí Česka [Making a home in the changed landscape of the Czech borderlands]. In K. Ledererová Kolajová (Ed.), Domov a krajina [Home and Landscape] (pp 28-42). OSSCU.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kyle, G. T., Mowen, A. J. & Tarrant, M. (2004). Linking place preferences with place meaning: An examination of the relationship between place motivation and place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24 (4), 439-454. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.11.001.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lamp, R.J., & Purcell, A.T. (1990). Perception of naturalness in landscape and its relationships to vegetation structure. Landscape Urban Planning 19(4), 333-352. doi: 10.1016/0169-2046(90)90041-Y.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Librová, H. (1987). Vztah obyvatel ke krajině [Residents’ relationship with the landscape]. Spisy FF 19(1), 527-534.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lindemann-Matthies, P., Junge X. & Diethart, M. (2010). The influence of plant diversity on people’s perception and aesthetic appreciation of grassland vegetation. Biological Conservation 143(1),195-202, doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2009.10.003.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lohr, V. I., Pearson-Mims, C. H., Tarnai, J. & Dillman, J. A. (2004). How urban residents rate and rank the benefits and problems associated with trees in cities. Journal of Arboriculture 30(1), 28-35.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lohr, V. I., & Pearson-Mims, C. H. (2005). Children“s active and passive interactions with plants influence their attitudes and actions toward trees and gardening as adults. Hort Technology, 15 (3): 472-476. doi: 10.21273/HORTTECH.15.3.0472.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mácha, P. (2013). Krajiny: příspěvek k diskusi o konceptualizaci krajiny v (české) geografii [Landscapes: a contribution to the discussion on conceptualisation of landscape in (Czech) geography]. Geografie 118 (1), 1-15.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Míchal, I., (2001). Proti estetickému nihilismu při zásazích do krajiny [Against aesthetic nihilism when intervening in the landscape]. Ed. K. Dejmalová in: Tvář naší země – krajina domova [The face of our country - the landscape of home] (pp. 52-59). Lomnice nad Popelkou: Studio JB.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Misgav, A. (2000). Visual preference of the public for vegetation groups in Israel. Landscape and Urban Planning 48(3-4),143-159. doi: 10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00038-4.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Özgüner, H., & Kendle. A.D. (2006). Public attitudes towards naturalistic versus designed landscapes in the city of Sheffield (UK). Landscape and Urban Planning 74 (2), 139–157. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2004.10.003.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Schama, S. (1995). Landscapes and Memory. A.A. Knopf.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Schroeder, H., Flannigan, J. & Coles, R. (2006). Residents’ Attitudes Toward Street Trees in the UK and U.S. Communities. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 32(5), 236–246. doi: 10.48044/jauf.2006.030.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Scott, K. E., & Benson, J. F. (2002). Public and professional attitudes to landscape—scoping study. Final report. Scottish Natural Heritage.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Scott, A. (2006). Assessing public perception of landscape: past, present and future perspectives. CAB Reviews: Perspectives in Agriculture, Veterinary Science, Nutrition and Natural Resources 1 (041), 1-8. doi: 10.1079/PAVSNNR20061041.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sklenička, P., & Molnárová, K. (2010). Visual Perception of Habitats Adopted for Post-Mining Landscape Rehabilitation. Environmental Management 46(3), 424 - 435. doi: 10.1007/s00267-010-9513-3.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Stachová, J. (2018). Forests in the Czech public discourse. Journal of Landscape Ecology 11(3), 33-44. doi: 10.2478/jlecol-2018-0011.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Stachová, J., Čermák, D., Petřík, P. (2020). Vnímání stromů v krajině 2020 [Perception of trees in the landscape, data setonline]. Ver. 1.0. Praha: Český sociálněvědní datový archiv, 20210. [cited15.2.2023]. DOI 10.14473/V2009b
]Search in Google Scholar
[
STEM. (2020). Češi se obávají změn klimatu a podporují uhlíkovou neutralitu. Mají ale strach z dopadů na českou ekonomiku [Czechs are concerned about climate change and support carbon neutrality. But they are worried about the effects on the Czech economy]. STEM.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Stibral, K. (2005). Proč je příroda krásná? Estetické vnímání přírody v novověku [Why is nature beautiful? Aesthetic perception of nature in the modern age]. Dokořán.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Strumse, E. (1996). Demographic differences in the visual preferences for agrarian landscapes in western Norway. Journal of Environmental Psychology 16(1), 17-31. doi: 10.1006/jevp.1996.0002.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Svobodová K. (2011). Percepce krajiny [Perception of landscape]. The Faculty of Architecture CTU.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Swanwick C. (2009). Society‘s attitudes to and preferences for land and landscape. Land Use Policy 26(1), S62–S75.doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.08.025.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ulrich R. S. (1983). Aesthetic and Affective Response to Natural Environment. In Altman, I. & Wohlwill, J. F. Behavior and the Natural Environment (pp 85-125). Plenum Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
van den Berg, A. E., Vlek, C. A. J. & Coeterier, J. F. (1998). Group differences in the aesthetic evaluation of nature developments plans: A multilevel approach. Journal of Environmental Psychology 18 (2), 141-157. doi: https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1998.0080.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
van den Berg, A. E., & van Winsum-Westra. M. (2010). Manicured, romantic, or wild? The relation between need for structure and preferences for garden styles. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 9(3), 179-186. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2010.01.006.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wells, N. M., & Lekies K. S. (2006). Nature and the Life Course: Pathways from Childhood Nature Experiences to Adult Environmentalism. Children, Youth and Environments 16(1), 41663.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wojnowska-Heciak M., Błaszczyk, M., Suchocka, M. & Kosno-Jończy, J. (2020). Urban– rural differences in perception of trees described by parents bringing up children in Warsaw and Jedlińsk, Poland. PeerJ 8: e8875. doi: 10.7717/peerj.8875.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Zelenka J., Šípek, J, Štyrský, J., Rusková, D., Pásková, M., Drašarová, M., Němec, M., Březina D., Pilařová Z., Pavlík, M., Čadík, J., Hyšková, B., Mrázková, M. & Čermáková, P. (2008). Percepce krajiny a genius loci [Perception of the landscape and genius loci]. Gaudeamus.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Zhao J., Xu, W., & Li, R. (2017). Visual preference of trees: The effects of tree attributes and seasons. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 25, 19–25. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2017.04.015.
]Search in Google Scholar
y 