IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i6p1944-d151718.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Do Policies and Actors’ Attitudes, Interests and Interactions Influence Farmland Conversion Outcomes in Land-Use Planning?

Author

Listed:
  • Kristine Lien Skog

    (Department of Landscape Architecture and Spatial Planning, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, P.O. Box 5003, NO-1432 Ås, Norway)

Abstract

Conversion of farmland to built-up land threatens future supply of food and other ecosystem services. However, little research covers how different goods provided by farmland are taken into consideration in planning processes or how different actors influence land-use outcomes. This paper explores this by undertaking a comparative case study in two Norwegian municipalities. One of the main findings is that the national policies’ emphasis on food security is not decisive for local farmland preservation decisions. The land-use plan of the municipality which has the strictest farmland conversion policy is guided by other local values, such as the farmland’s provision of place identity and local food. In both municipalities, informal support networks of developers, other landowners, business interests, and politicians are established. Farmland preservation interests were less visible locally, and politicians found conversion proposals difficult to resist. The municipality which had converted most farmland was in favor of opening more land for development than needed. Then, the possibility space for development interest groups to influence land-use outcome increased. Findings indicate that farmland preservation policies require more emphasis on local public goods and inclusion of farmland preservation interests within the community. Further, farmland preservation strategies could benefit from linking agricultural policies and land-use planning, as well as more restrictive land-use planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristine Lien Skog, 2018. "How Do Policies and Actors’ Attitudes, Interests and Interactions Influence Farmland Conversion Outcomes in Land-Use Planning?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:6:p:1944-:d:151718
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/6/1944/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/6/1944/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Hahn & Malena Heinrup & Regina Lindborg, 2018. "Landscape heterogeneity correlates with recreational values: a case study from Swedish agricultural landscapes and implications for policy," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(5), pages 696-707, July.
    2. Barthel, Stephan & Isendahl, Christian, 2013. "Urban gardens, agriculture, and water management: Sources of resilience for long-term food security in cities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 224-234.
    3. Saarikoski, Heli & Primmer, Eeva & Saarela, Sanna-Riikka & Antunes, Paula & Aszalós, Réka & Baró, Francesc & Berry, Pam & Blanko, Gemma Garcia & Goméz-Baggethun, Erik & Carvalho, Laurence & Dick, Jan , 2018. "Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 579-598.
    4. Swinton, Scott M. & Lupi, Frank & Robertson, G. Philip & Hamilton, Stephen K., 2007. "Ecosystem services and agriculture: Cultivating agricultural ecosystems for diverse benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 245-252, December.
    5. Yongzhong Tan & Ju He & Zhenning Yu & Yonghua Tan, 2018. "Can Arable Land Alone Ensure Food Security? The Concept of Arable Land Equivalent Unit and Its Implications in Zhoushan City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-13, March.
    6. Yiming Wang, 2015. "Negotiating the farmland dilemmas: ‘barefoot planners’ in China’s urban periphery," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 33(5), pages 1108-1124, October.
    7. Eirin Hongslo, 2017. "Background information or future vision? Mapping wild reindeer landscapes in a planning process," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(4), pages 349-360, May.
    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. Heinze, Alan & Bongers, Frans & Ramírez Marcial, Neptalí & García Barrios, Luis E. & Kuyper, Thomas W., 2022. "Farm diversity and fine scales matter in the assessment of ecosystem services and land use scenarios," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    2. Weitzman, Jenny, 2019. "Applying the ecosystem services concept to aquaculture: A review of approaches, definitions, and uses," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 194-206.
    3. Neill, Andrew M. & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Stout, Jane C., 2022. "Conceptual integration of ecosystem services and natural capital within Irish national policy: An analysis over time and between policy sectors," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    4. Vermunt, D.A. & Wojtynia, N. & Hekkert, M.P. & Van Dijk, J. & Verburg, R. & Verweij, P.A. & Wassen, M. & Runhaar, H., 2022. "Five mechanisms blocking the transition towards ‘nature-inclusive’ agriculture: A systemic analysis of Dutch dairy farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    5. Ishak Norziha & Abdullah Rosazlin & Rosli Noor Sharina Mohd & Majid Hazreenbdul & Halim Nur Sa’adah Abdul & Ariffin Fazilah, 2022. "Challenges of Urban Garden Initiatives for Food Security in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 41(4), pages 57-72, December.
    6. Valbuena, Diego & Tui, Sabine Homann-Kee & Erenstein, Olaf & Teufel, Nils & Duncan, Alan & Abdoulaye, Tahirou & Swain, Braja & Mekonnen, Kindu & Germaine, Ibro & Gérard, Bruno, 2015. "Identifying determinants, pressures and trade-offs of crop residue use in mixed smallholder farms in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 107-118.
    7. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    8. Marre, Jean-Baptiste & Billé, Raphaël, 2019. "A demand-driven approach to ecosystem services economic valuation: Lessons from Pacific island countries and territories," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    9. Shah, Syed Mahboob & Liu, Gengyuan & Yang, Qing & Casazza, Marco & Agostinho, Feni & Giannetti, Biagio F., 2021. "Sustainability assessment of agriculture production systems in Pakistan: A provincial-scale energy-based evaluation," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 455(C).
    10. Adams, Clare & Frantzeskaki, Niki & Moglia, Magnus, 2023. "Mainstreaming nature-based solutions in cities: A systematic literature review and a proposal for facilitating urban transitions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    11. Ragnheiður Bogadóttir, 2020. "The Social Metabolism of Quiet Sustainability in the Faroe Islands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-18, January.
    12. Rocío Silva-Pérez & Gema González-Romero, 2022. "GIAHS as an Instrument to Articulate the Landscape and Territorialized Agrifood Systems—The Example of La Axarquía (Malaga Province, Spain)," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-21, February.
    13. González-García, Alberto & Palomo, Ignacio & González, José A. & López, César A. & Montes, Carlos, 2020. "Quantifying spatial supply-demand mismatches in ecosystem services provides insights for land-use planning," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    14. Xiaolu Yan & Xinyuan Li & Chenghao Liu & Jiawei Li & Jingqiu Zhong, 2022. "Scales and Historical Evolution: Methods to Reveal the Relationships between Ecosystem Service Bundles and Socio-Ecological Drivers—A Case Study of Dalian City, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-20, September.
    15. Schäffler, Alexis & Swilling, Mark, 2013. "Valuing green infrastructure in an urban environment under pressure — The Johannesburg case," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 246-257.
    16. Nils Droste & Bartosz Bartkowski, 2018. "Ecosystem Service Valuation for National Accounting: A Reply to Obst, Hein and Edens (2016)," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(1), pages 205-215, September.
    17. Anastasija Novikova & Lucia Rocchi & Bernardas Vaznonis, 2019. "Valuing Agricultural Landscape: Lithuanian Case Study Using a Contingent Valuation Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-13, May.
    18. Laura Calvet-Mir & Hug March & Daniel Corbacho-Monné & Erik Gómez-Baggethun & Victoria Reyes-García, 2016. "Home Garden Ecosystem Services Valuation through a Gender Lens: A Case Study in the Catalan Pyrenees," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-14, July.
    19. Tao, Jieyi & Lu, Yuqi & Ge, Dazhuan & Dong, Ping & Gong, Xiao & Ma, Xiaobin, 2022. "The spatial pattern of agricultural ecosystem services from the production-living-ecology perspective: A case study of the Huaihai Economic Zone, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    20. Dennis, Matthew & James, Philip, 2017. "Ecosystem services of collectively managed urban gardens: Exploring factors affecting synergies and trade-offs at the site level," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 17-26.

    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:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:6:p:1944-:d:151718. 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.