Objectives China’s national parks are largely managed through a binary zoning scheme—core protection areas and general control areas—that is effective at safeguarding ecological baselines but too coarse to steer day-to-day decisions about facility siting, corridor design, lighting, and visitor experience. This study addresses that gap by proposing an eco-scenic co-governance approach that treats “scenery” as a governable object comparable to ecological features. The paper pursues three aims: 1) to clarify the conceptual foundations and public value of scenery in the national park context; 2) to distill transferable practices of eco-scenic coordination from mature international cases; and 3) to identify institutional deficiencies in China’s current system and advance actionable remedies.

Methods We conducted a structured review of national-park laws, plans, technical manuals, and assessment reports across countries, screened by five criteria: maturity of governance tools, diversity of ecological types, administrative distinctiveness, data accessibility, and problem-scenario transferability to China. Three representative cases were retained for deep comparison:Yosemite National Park (USA), South Downs National Park (UK), and Blue Mountains National Park (Australia). Using textual coding and institutional mapping, we extracted common building blocks around 1) resource inventory and grading, 2) collaboration mechanisms among agencies and stakeholders, 3) technical instruments for visibility and landscape-character analysis, and 4) closed-loop monitoring and feedback. These blocks were synthesized as a governance-toolkit framework oriented to Chinese needs. Conceptual advances. We conceptualize scenery as three nested layers: a physical spatial layer (landforms, hydrology, vegetation patterns, habitat integrity), a perceptual imagery layer (what is visually experienced and appraised through composition, scale, color, texture, visibility, and viewer sensitivity), and a spiritual-cognitive layer (place meanings, imageability, traditional ecological knowledge, and cultural services). Western systems have developed operational tools for the first two layers—landscape character assessment, visual impact assessment, visual-resource inventory, and viewshed analysis—whereas Chinese discourse emphasizes the unity of humans and nature and the moral−cosmological value of landscapes. The two traditions are compatible but not identical: Western approaches offer procedural instruments; Chinese traditions provide a value framework that motivates protection and interpretation. Comparative findings. All three cases take ecological integrity as a non-negotiable baseline, yet each emphasizes a different pathway for scenic governance. 1) Yosemite National Park (USA). Scenic management is organized around view corridors and vista restoration, integrated with project approval. GIS-based viewshed modeling, scenic sensitivity classes, and corridor-specific prescriptions guide facility siting, vegetation management, and visitor-use design so that iconic views are protected while ecological functions are maintained. 2) South Downs National Park (UK). The park employs a landscape-led planning regime: Landscape Character Assessment is embedded in the Local Plan and supplemented by a Design Guide and Visual Impact Assessment procedures. Governance balances the physical character (landform, land cover, settlement pattern) and the perceptual qualities (tranquility, dark night skies, experiential attributes), translating them into design codes and development-control conditions. 3) Blue Mountains National Park (Australia). Here, the priority is compatibility of anthropogenic facilities with World Heritage scenic values. Environmental-factor reviews and scenic-landscape assessment constrain the footprint, form, color, reflectance, and lighting of roads and service infrastructure, limiting cumulative visual intrusion on cliff lines, forested valleys, and viewpoints. Across the three cases, remote sensing, digital elevation models, and (cumulative) viewshed analysis are standard instruments to quantify both scenic exposure and ecological risk. Project cycles follow a closed loop—assessment, implementation, monitoring, and adjustment—so that scenic and ecological objectives are jointly tracked through construction and operations.

Result China’s pilot parks have advanced ecological protection but lack a systematic mechanism for scenic governance and for reconciling visitor experience with the ecological baseline. The prevailing core/general binary zoning cannot express differences among viewing corridors, sensitive habitats, and development interfaces. To address this, we propose a two-tier governance model of “control−coordination.” The control tier codifies mandatory thresholds: a national scenic-resource inventory, visibility and corridor safeguards, night-environment parameters, and siting envelopes linked to habitat integrity and connectivity. The coordination tier operationalizes adaptive management: participatory planning, interpretive and landscape-character−based design, seasonal use management, and a monitoring protocol that couples ecological indicators with scenic metrics (visibility, imageability, tranquility/darkness). Technically, we recommend an integrated assessment that generates Scenic Importance (S) and Ecological Importance (E) for a common spatial unit, combined through a coordination index to allocate five second-tier management classes (Z1−Z5) within the existing core/general framework—from absolute ecological protection to low-intensity scenic experience and compatible service areas. Each class is tied to a permit matrix (what/where/how/to what extent) that regulates activity intensity, form and materials, and day- and night-time lighting.

Conclusions Treating scenery as a governable object alongside ecology enables China’s national parks to move beyond “red lines without tools.” The proposed framework connects conceptual clarity with executable methods, turning the three-layer understanding of scenery into spatial rules, approval checklists, and monitoring indicators. By merging international procedural strengths with China’s landscape ethos and by embedding visibility and night-environment management into everyday decisions, the approach provides a timely pathway for high-quality national-park construction. It is technically reproducible, institutionally transferable, and policy-ready, offering immediate relevance to planning, project review, construction management, and long-term stewardship.