The role of land use planning in sustainable rural

systems

Prof. Md. Zakir Hossain, URPD

 Land-use planning
‘Land-use planning is the systematic assessment of land and water
potential, alternatives for land-use and economic and social conditions
in order to select and adapt the best land-use options (F.A.O., 1993).

This definition embraces the systematic approach of possibilities for

different land-uses in the future, and also the (felt) need for changes and
the willingness to execute the plan.

All present land-use planning is caught up between two seemingly

contradictory dimensions: ecological conservation and economic
existence. Both dimensions are, in someway or another, related to
sustainability.
 Land-use planning
The first dimension refers, at present, strongly to conservation: to
conserve the natural resources: clear water, air and soils; to preserve
plants and animals (biodiversity; gene sources); etc. In many cases it
even goes further than just conservation: it seeks a re-creation of lost
values.
Examples are the creation of nature areas out of farmland or
reforestation of pieces of land.
Other examples are: restoration of high water tables in formerly drained
lands, in order to create low intensive use of meadows and thus creating
meadow bird-areas, etc.
Sustainability in terms of conservation is either halting certain
autonomous developments, retracting on past developments, or a
combination of both. It can become in conflict with the other meaning of
sustainability, but does not necessarily do so.
 Land-use planning
The second meaning, that of a durable socio–economic existence, is often
argued as a very important goal to achieve in order to create a sustainable
rural system.
In many places across the world local economies are under strong
pressure, notably so in farming. Surplus productions, low qualities,
worsening production conditions (lack of water or other important means,
rising production costs, etc.) make it even more difficult for many people
to survive at a reasonable standard of living. This results in such things as
outmigration and several other effects. This dimension of rural
sustainability is often felt when activities concerning land-use planning
and management are at stake.
A very important task for land-use planners was always, and still is, to
improve the socio–economic situation of the rural population. One of the
means was to create more farmland, improve farmland, increase
production, relocate farm buildings, create villages etc.
 Land-use planning
Would it be possible to achieve both ecological and socio–economic
sustainability all at one time? And if so, what strategies would be needed
for that? Can land-use planning play a role in this?
In land-use planning, sustainability as a goal is often criticized as being
vague and a paradox. The conflicting problem of economic development
and ecological conservation is often mentioned: ‘‘we cannot save the
environment without development, and that we cannot continue to develop
anywhere unless we save the environment’’ (Science Council of Canada,
1989), but there is also a belief in the possibility of bringing conservation
and development together: ‘‘unless development conforms to conservation
principles, it is not sustainable and human welfare is not served. At the
same time, unless there is adequate development—which must be
ecologically sound—conservation will be undermined by the subsistence
requirements of the increasing populations needing development
assistance’’ (Talbot,1984).
 Land-use planning

This last point is often expressed:

1.‘‘the economy and its participants exist within the environment,
not outside it: we cannot expect to maintain economic prosperity
unless we protect the environment and our resource base, the
building blocks of development’’ (National Task Force on
Environment and Economy, 1987), or by saying:
2.‘‘just as long-term economic growth depends on a healthy
environment, so the maintenance of a healthy environment
requires continued economic development’’ (Aitken, 1988).
 Land-use planning

It is the Brundtland Commission itself, finally, that addresses the

sustainability-concept as a task for everybody (so also for land-use
planners) by stressing: ‘‘ . . . environmental protection and
sustainability development must be an integral part of the
mandates of all agencies . . .
These must be made responsible and accountable for ensuring that
their policies, programmes, and budgets encourage and support
activities that are economically and ecologically sustainable both
in the short and longer terms’’ (Brundtland Commission, 1987).
 Land-use planning
Land-use planning has been described in many ways. A simple and short
description is that it consists of activities that:
1. determine future land-uses; 2. improve the area properties and 3.
organise the management of the new situation
 Land-use planning
‘Physical planning’ is related to studies and policies aimed at deciding what
type of land-use activity should take place and where. In this sense it
distributes the often scarce space between several potential users, with the
optimization of the land-uses as a main objective.
Many developed and developing countries have policies and projects
resulting in this type of land-use planning. It is often called physical planning
or land-use planning. In such policies or plans the future land-uses are
grouped together and restricted to a certain area (or areas) for each of the
land-use types.
Often also other restrictions are included such as the scale or intensity of the
particular type of land-use (e.g., in farming) or the sizes and types of
buildings and other developments (e.g., new towns or subdivisions, industrial
areas or infrastructure).
 Land-use planning
‘Land redevelopment’ refers to the actual changing of the land-uses and
the improvement of the physical conditions for the planned land-uses. In
most cases, this type of land-use planning follows physical planning. It is
responsible to carry through the planned land-uses as determined in
physical planning and often to improve the physical conditions for the
planned land-uses.
Clear examples of such land-use planning are the land reconstruction
projects, common across Europe and some parts in Asia. These projects not
only set the final determination of the different land-uses in the different
locations, but also prepare plans and carry through field work in order to
improve the physical conditions for the defined land-uses. These types of
projects are found especially in older cultures where intensive land-use has
been practised. They are mainly found in Western Europe and in Asia,
although in a sense the former communist (central planned) Economies also
applied the programmes to drastically change the rural countryside.
 Land-use planning
The land reallocation projects started in the past primarily as farm
improvement plans in which the improvement of the water
management system and of the soils were the most important
goals. Later on such topics as farm enlargement, trading of land
between farmers to reunite scattered land defragmentation, and
the improvement of forms and sizes of fields were also included.
In more recent times other objectives, apart from farming-
improvements, became important. The protection of landscape
and of nature (ecosystems) became new targets.
Also the planning of the land to be used for outdoor recreation
and tourism became part of land reallocation plans. The terms
‘multi-functional’ and ‘integrated land-uses’ were born.
 Land-use planning

‘Land management’ refers to new methods of how to manage

lands by mankind. For the rural countryside it mainly focuses on
farm practices, forest management and nature management.
The intensity of the use, especially in farming and to a certain
degree also in forestry, has a tremendous long-term effect on the
abiotic (soil, water, air), as well as on the biotic factors. It is for
this reason that the way in which land is managed, given a
certain type of use, require new planning and policies (such as
management-agreements e.g.).
 Land-use planning
In theory, a wide spectrum of land-use planning goals can be
defined

The conservation attitude strives to restore and conserve. In its

most extreme sense: fencing everything that is beautiful and/or
can be made beautiful, to protect it from human beings.

The development attitude strives to create and ‘improve’ land

for more and higher production. In its most extreme sense, the
countryside is only seen as a food-producing machine
 Land-use planning

In a study for the European Union it was investigated what the

potentials are for agriculture if it is performed in its best technical
modern way and the production volume is restricted to the
expected consumption level.

The study was based upon four scenarios: free market and free
trade; regional development; nature and landscape; and
environmental protection. The study made clear that the total
amount of land in agricultural production could decline at least by
40% and at most by 80%; labour could decline by 50 to 75%.
 Land-use planning

A drastic reduction in nitrogen and pesticide application could also be

technically feasible.

Changes in farming methods are probably what best explains the

drastic changes of the countryside. Farming developed along such
lines as enlargement of scale, intensification, specialisation and
mechanisation.

Many and different factors contributed to this line of developments,

not in the least socio–economic and technical ones. No wonder that
these developments have led to severe problems in the countryside,
such as misuses, overuses, damages and losses of our natural system.
 Land-use planning
The resulting problems are known:
Abiotic factors:
Desertification; soil erosion; wind and water erosion; soil degradation
and soil compaction; water pollution; air pollution

Biotic factors:
losses of nature: plants and animals; in fact whole ecosystems
Anthropogenic factors:
in fact the loss of the social countryside life and the recreational values

Concern: ‘how can land-use planners be of any help in bringing about

a change in these developments towards the notion of a more
sustainable rural system?
 Land-use planning: Spatial concepts

'Sustainable Rural Systems' needs interpreting for land-use planning. Firstly, the
term 'sustainability’ is based upon the protection of our natural resources, because
of its productive and reproductive qualities at present and in the future, if properly
managed or used. Bryden (1994), however, distinguishes at least three further
meanings, with land-use planning aimed primarily at the second meaning because
of its spatial dimensions:

Sustainability in the meaning of husbandry: in this sense it is related to such

terms as continuity, durability and exploitation of natural resources over long
periods of time. It also refers to certain methods in which mankind manages the
land - for example, crop rotation systems and the application of fallowing - to
create possibilities for the restoration of soil and water systems in terms
of, for instance, good and sufficient water, and healthy soil structures. This
meaning actually refers strongly to physical and economic sustainability in the
long-run.
 Land-use planning: Spatial concepts

Sustainability in terms of interdependence:

Bryden ( 1994) describes this meaning as strongly related to the spatial

dimension of sustainability. It refers to such aspects as fragmentation
(which has contradictory meanings for farming, nature and outdoor
recreation and is therefore an important land-use planning aspect), and
relations between different land-uses (e.g. cropped areas and semi-
natural vegetation).

This meaning of sustainability gets a great deal of attention in land-use

planning studies. Since there is still a great lack of knowledge, there are
many uncertainties and there is often a lack of clear policies on this
objective.
 Land-use planning: Spatial concepts

Sustainability in terms of ethical obligations to future generations:

This refers to the many observed losses and depletions of natural

resources in combination with the expected increase in population.
Particularly salient are fossil fuels, forests, soils, water, air, nature areas
and old landscapes. It is clear that, both in the field of better management
and restoration, much needs to be done for our future human populations.
 Land-use planning: Spatial concepts
Secondly, looking at the concept of 'system', planning by definition implies
interference with a land-use system. Systems analysis can, therefore, play a more
important role in land-use planning than it does at the moment.

Adapting systems analysis in land-use planning means an integrated, or holistic,

approach to problems. It opens the possibility, among others, of predicting effects
over the long-run and over many dimensions.

Systems analysis itself has been defined as: "a general framework of thoughts
that creates the possibility to project specific problems as seen from a general
background”(Hanken 1973). Such a description is rather general but it does show
that systems analysis is applicable in many disciplines, and also that an
interdisciplinary approach is possible. Often a distinction is made between
concrete and abstract systems. In the case of rural areas, concrete systems are more
important.
 Land-use planning: Spatial concepts

Hanken and Reuver (1973) observe that: "a concrete system is a limited
and coherent part of the real world" (e.g. a technical instrument, a farm,
a local community or a land-use planning area). Such a system is by
definition limited. The type of system determines whether it is a so-called
'open’ or 'closed' system.

An open system has an interaction with its surroundings; a closed system

has no such interaction. Rural areas are (predominantly) open systems: they
have an input (i.e. influence of their surroundings upon themselves) and an
output (i.e. influence of themselves upon their surroundings).
 Land-use planning: Spatial concepts
There are at least three reasons for applying systems analysis in land-use
planning:

the need to work holistically: science is no longer challenged to work

only from a (strong) reductionist viewpoint

to learn more about the most important aspect of a system and to focus
further research upon those aspects

to learn about the interaction between elements comprising a system and,

where applicable, to promote further research on these interactions.
The objective of a systems analysis approach in land-use
planning is to learn about the meaning of planning in the
functioning of rural areas, so that priorities can be
provided for research, as well as clarification sought on the
interaction between different studies. A systems analysis in
land-use planning should lead to: knowledge
about interactions (e.g. between the different land-use types);
knowledge about the most striking problems in the system; a
determination of shortcomings in knowledge; the
setting of priorities; and the promotion of new research.
 Land-use planning: Spatial concepts

In order to address problems of conservation and or vs..

development, as related to sustainability, the birth of spatial
concepts can be noted in land-use planning. The following
three are briefly mentioned and explained:

a. the integration vs. segregation concept;

b. the framework concept

and c. the ecological network concept.

 Land-use planning: Spatial concepts
The integration vs. segregation concept tries to restore
the many relationships between the several land-uses
in the countryside. Integration seeks to correct upon
the segregation which was a dominant change during
the last centuries.

The integration concept puts restrictions on the

development of each land-use type because of a
desired or chosen development of another. The
concept is actually the basis of the landscape ecology:
land-use types such as farming, outdoor recreation;
infrastructure; traffic; etc.. have to be planned and
developed in such a way that the basic ecology of the
rural area is kept to function.
 Land-use planning: Spatial concepts

The framework-concept is fundamentally based upon a distinction into a low

dynamic part of the rural system (nature, ecosystem) and a highly dynamic one
(farming, housing, recreation and transport). Extensive research (see Kerkstra and
Vrijlandt, 1990; van Buuren, 1991; van Buuren and Kerkstra, 1993) on the
changes in Dutch rural systems showed e.g. that:

the natural variation in moisture content (wet or dry) and in nutrition levels
(eutrophic/oligotrophic) of soils diminished;

this disappearance of variation in area properties resulted in a sharp decrease in

number and species of natural vegetation and wildlife; and

the visual character of the landscape became more uniform: contrasts between
largely open areas and small enclosed areas (with small scale farmlands)
disappeared.
 Land-use planning: Spatial concepts
The framework concept seeks a correction through a spatial
segregation of intensively-used lands, requiring a flexible lay-out
and use on one hand; and extensive used lands, requiring stability
on the other.

This involves the planning of a durable and stable framework: an

interconnected pattern of zones in which nature management,
forestry, outdoor recreation and water management is
concentrated. Such a framework envelops large open areas in
which optimal farming is possible.
 Land-use planning: Spatial concepts
The ecological network-concept is more or less based upon the
island theory of Mac Arthur and Wilson (1967) and the application
of this theory to mainland situations. The fragmentation of nature
in rural systems created ‘Nature islands’.

The increasing isolation of these islands determined whether

certain populations of plants and animals could survive over time.
The concept of an ecological network is a reaction to this
fragmentation and isolation. An ecological network is a
constellation of landscape elements that is functional for the
dispersion of a species in a landscape