IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i7p1414-d1193959.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Land Use and Land Cover Scenarios Support More Integrated Land Use Management?

Author

Listed:
  • Roberta Rigo

    (CNRS UMR 6554 LETG, University de Rennes 2, Place du Recteur Henri le Moal, 35000 Rennes, France
    LTSER Zone Atelier Armorique, 35042 Rennes, France)

  • Thomas Houet

    (CNRS UMR 6554 LETG, University de Rennes 2, Place du Recteur Henri le Moal, 35000 Rennes, France
    LTSER Zone Atelier Armorique, 35042 Rennes, France)

Abstract

In agricultural landscape management, the conventional top-down approaches that primarily focus on market-led responses struggle to preserve the landscape elements essential for environmental sustainability. To address this deficiency, land use and land cover change (LUCC) scenarios promote an integrated understanding of landscape dynamics and highlight the inconsistency between the compartmentalisation of the public sector (“siloisation”) and the necessity for management that reflects the interdependencies of socio-ecological systems. This study investigates the extent to which the creation and dissemination of LUCC scenarios lead to modifications in the values, attitudes, and behaviours of local actors engaged in land management, giving particular emphasis to the role of these scenarios in encouraging integrated management. To accomplish this objective, we interviewed local actors who actively participated in the co-construction of the scenario narratives or learned about the scenarios during dissemination workshops. We then analysed the data via a thematic and lexicometric analysis. The findings highlighted the dual function of these scenarios as a catalyst for pre-existing political will to promote integrated management and as a tool for raising awareness about major environmental challenges. At the group level, the outcomes encompassed aspects such as basing political decisions on the results of scenarios and fostering collaboration between institutions. These outcomes were observed among the actors involved in co-constructing scenarios or those with pre-existing motivations to pursue integrated management initiatives. Additional personal outcomes included an increased awareness of environmental challenges and the consolidation of non-formalised knowledge. We argue that combining co-construction and dissemination enhances the outcomes of scenarios considerably.

Suggested Citation

  • Roberta Rigo & Thomas Houet, 2023. "Do Land Use and Land Cover Scenarios Support More Integrated Land Use Management?," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-19, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:7:p:1414-:d:1193959
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/7/1414/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/7/1414/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Astrid Molenveld & Koen Verhoest & Jan Wynen, 2021. "Correction to: Why public organizations contribute to crosscutting policy programs: the role of structure, culture, and ministerial control," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 239-242, March.
    2. Del Corso, Jean-Pierre & Kephaliacos, Charilaos & Plumecocq, Gaël, 2015. "Legitimizing farmers' new knowledge, learning and practices through communicative action: Application of an agro-environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 86-96.
    3. Xuening Fang & Bingbing Zhou & Xingyue Tu & Qun Ma & Jianguo Wu, 2018. "“What Kind of a Science is Sustainability Science?” An Evidence-Based Reexamination," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-16, May.
    4. Astrid Molenveld & Koen Verhoest & Jan Wynen, 2021. "Why public organizations contribute to crosscutting policy programs: the role of structure, culture, and ministerial control," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 123-154, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ueli Reber & Karin Ingold & Manuel Fischer, 2023. "The role of actors' issue and sector specialization for policy integration in the parliamentary arena: an analysis of Swiss biodiversity policy using text as data," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(1), pages 95-114, March.
    2. Ueli Reber & Manuel Fischer & Karin Ingold & Felix Kienast & Anna M. Hersperger & Rolf Grütter & Robin Benz, 2022. "Integrating biodiversity: a longitudinal and cross-sectoral analysis of Swiss politics," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(2), pages 311-335, June.
    3. Helena Wockelberg & Shirin Ahlbäck Öberg, 2022. "Agency Autonomy and Organizational Interaction," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 1045-1062, December.
    4. Núria Bautista-Puig & Jorge Mañana-Rodríguez & Antonio Eleazar Serrano-López, 2021. "Role taxonomy of green and sustainable science and technology journals: exportation, importation, specialization and interdisciplinarity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 3871-3892, May.
    5. Isabel Miralles & Domenico Dentoni & Stefano Pascucci, 2017. "Understanding the organization of sharing economy in agri-food systems: evidence from alternative food networks in Valencia," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(4), pages 833-854, December.
    6. Alla Mostepaniuk & Turgay Akalin & Mohammad Reza Parish, 2023. "Practices Pursuing the Sustainability of A Healthcare Organization: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, January.
    7. Leah V. Gibbons, 2020. "Regenerative—The New Sustainable?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-18, July.
    8. Longyu Shi & Linwei Han & Fengmei Yang & Lijie Gao, 2019. "The Evolution of Sustainable Development Theory: Types, Goals, and Research Prospects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-16, December.
    9. Tiago Teixeira da Silva Siqueira & Danielle Galliano & Geneviève Nguyen & Ferenc Istvan Bánkuti, 2021. "Organizational Forms and Agri-Environmental Practices: The Case of Brazilian Dairy Farms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-19, March.
    10. Kun Wang & Zhihao Sun & Meng Cai & Lingbo Liu & Hao Wu & Zhenghong Peng, 2022. "Impacts of Urban Blue-Green Space on Residents’ Health: A Bibliometric Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-21, December.
    11. Paweł Dziekański & Piotr Prus, 2020. "Financial Diversity and the Development Process: Case study of Rural Communes of Eastern Poland in 2009–2018," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-25, August.
    12. Kleftodimos, Georgios & Gallai, Nicola & Rozakis, Stelios & Képhaliacos, Charilaos, 2021. "A farm-level ecological-economic approach of the inclusion of pollination services in arable crop farms," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    13. Buchs, Arnaud & Petit, Olivier & Roman, Philippe, 2020. "Can social ecological economics of water reinforce the “big tent”?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    14. Iván González-Márquez & Víctor M. Toledo, 2020. "Sustainability Science: A Paradigm in Crisis?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-18, April.
    15. Michelle J. LeFebvre & Jon M. Erlandson & Scott M. Fitzpatrick, 2022. "Archaeology as Sustainability Science: Perspectives from Ancient Island Societies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-17, August.
    16. Jiaquan Duan & Yue ‘e Cao & Bo Liu & Yinyin Liang & Jinyu Tu & Jiahui Wang & Yeyang Li, 2023. "Construction of an Ecological Security Pattern in Yangtze River Delta Based on Circuit Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-16, August.
    17. Claudio Vitari & Christophe David, 2018. "One-structure-fits-all or how the specific identity of the Permaculture movement fits into the general structure of the networks," Post-Print halshs-01923833, HAL.
    18. Chen, Sha & Chen, Hong & Yang, Runjia & Ye, Yanmei, 2023. "Linking social-ecological management and ecosystem service bundles: Lessons from a peri-urban agriculture landscape," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    19. Zang, Yuzhu & Yang, Yuanyuan & Liu, Yansui, 2021. "Toward serving land consolidation on the table of sustainability: An overview of the research landscape and future directions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    20. Ying Li & Xu Han & Bingbing Zhou & Ligang Lv & Yeting Fan, 2023. "Farmland Dynamics and Its Grain Production Efficiency and Ecological Security in China’s Major Grain-Producing Regions between 2000 and 2020," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-17, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:7:p:1414-:d:1193959. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.