Polazište za istraživanje ovoga rada je u širokom spektru metoda kojima se mogu vrednovati krajobrazne kvalitete. Svrha rada je utvrđivanje prednosti i nedostataka često korištenih pristupa za vrednovanje krajobraza. Na odabranom području istraživanja, otoku Rabu, radom je identificirano petnaest krajobraznih područja te su određena tri pristupa za vrednovanje kvaliteta krajobraza: 1. jedan temeljen isključivo na vrednovanju ranjivosti kvaliteta krajobraza, a dva na procjeni osjetljivosti krajobraza; 2. preklapanjem krajobraznih područja sa združenim modelom ranjivosti kvaliteta krajobraza i 3. izravnim vrednovanjem krajobraznih područja s prirodnog, kulturno-povijesnog i vizualno-doživljajnog aspekta. Navedeni pristupi međusobno su uspoređeni radi utvrđivanja sličnosti i razlika među njima, kao i ukazivanja na prednosti i nedostatke svakog od njih. Rezultati su pokazali da adekvatnost pristupa ovisi o odabiru homogene prostorne jedinice. Ispravni pristup odabiru kriterija vrednovanja može utjecati na objektivnost metode. Najviše kvalitete krajobraza utvrđene su na jednakim područjima neovisno o pristupu utvrđivanja navedenih kvaliteta.The incentive for this research has come from a wide range of methods for landscape quality evaluation. The purpose was to determine the advantages and disadvantages of the commonly used approaches to landscape evaluation. In the selected research area, the Island of Rab, 15 landscape character areas were identified and three approaches for evaluation of landscape qualities were determined; (1) one based exclusively on the evaluation of vulnerability of landscape qualities, and two based on landscape sensitivity assessment: (2) the overlap of landscape character areas with the combined landscape quality vulnerability model and (3) the direct evaluation of landscape character areas from the natural, cultural-historical, and visual-experiential perspective. The aforementioned approaches were compared with one another in order to identify similarities and differences between the individual approaches, as well as to highlight their advantages and disadvantages. The results have shown that the adequacy of an approach depends on the selection of a homogeneous spatial unit; the appropriate approach for the evaluation criteria selection may affect the objectivity of the method; and the highest landscape qualities were determined in the same areas regardless of the approach used. ; The incentive for this research has come from a wide range of methods for landscape quality evaluation. The purpose was to determine the advantages and disadvantages of the commonly used approaches to landscape evaluation. In the selected research area, the Island of Rab, 15 landscape character areas were identified and three approaches for evaluation of landscape qualities were determined; (1) one based exclusively on the evaluation of vulnerability of landscape qualities, and two based on landscape sensitivity assessment: (2) the overlap of landscape character areas with the combined landscape quality vulnerability model and (3) the direct evaluation of landscape character areas from the natural, cultural-historical, and visual-experiential perspective. The aforementioned approaches were compared with one another in order to identify similarities and differences between the individual approaches, as well as to highlight their advantages and disadvantages. The results have shown that the adequacy of an approach depends on the selection of a homogeneous spatial unit; the appropriate approach for the evaluation criteria selection may affect the objectivity of the method; and the highest landscape qualities were determined in the same areas regardless of the approach used.