IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa05p613.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

GIS-based modeling of land use systems - Common Agricultural Policy reform and its impact on agricultural land use and plant species richness

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Ole Schroers
  • Patrick Sheridan
  • Eike Rommelfanger

Abstract

An assessment of agricultural policy measures and their sustainability needs to consider economic, social, and ecological aspects. The current paradigm shift of the European UnionÂ’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) from coupled to decoupled transfer payments calls for such an evaluation. Land users have to reevaluate their production program and its spatial allocation. Consequently, agricultural policy influences regional land use patterns and shares of land use systems, which in turn influence regional plant species richness. Connecting land use and ecological models allows to assess socioeconomic and ecologic effects of policy measures by identifying interactions and estimating potential trade-offs. The paper presents the land use model ProLand and the fuzzy expert system UPAL. ProLand models the regional distribution of land use systems while UPAL predicts plant species richness. The models are connected through a GIS and applied to a study area in Hesse, Germany, in order to simulate the effects of changing conditions on land use, economic and social key indicators, and plant species richness. ProLand is a spatially explicit comparative static model that simulates a regionÂ’s land use pattern based on natural, socioeconomic, political, and technological parameters. The model assumes land rent maximizing behavior of land users. It calculates and assigns the land rent maximizing land use system for every investigated decision unit, generally a field. A land use system is characterized through crop rotation, corresponding outdoor operations, animal husbandry if applicable, and the relevant political and socioeconomic attributes. The fuzzy expert system derives the values of ecologically relevant parameters from several site specific attributes and land use operations. Land use dependent site characteristics that influence plant species richness are derived from predictions generated by ProLand. Detailed information on crop rotation, fertilization and pesticide strategy, and outdoor operations are considered. The expert system then classifies natural and land use dependent site characteristics into aggregate factors. Based on a set of rules it assigns the number of species to the classes and thus to the decision units. Simulation results for the study area show that the CAP reform causes a rise in grassland area. These land use changes mainly occur in areas currently used for arable farming but with natural conditions favoring grassland. Plant species richness is positively influenced by the increase in extensive grassland area.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Ole Schroers & Patrick Sheridan & Eike Rommelfanger, 2005. "GIS-based modeling of land use systems - Common Agricultural Policy reform and its impact on agricultural land use and plant species richness," ERSA conference papers ersa05p613, European Regional Science Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa05p613
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa05/papers/613.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Borresch, René & Schmitz, Kim & Schmitz, P.Michael & Wronka, Tobias C., 2005. "CHOICE – ein integriert ökonomisch-ökologisches Konzept zur Bewertung der Multifunktionalität," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 40, March.
    2. Nancy E. Bockstael, 1996. "Modeling Economics and Ecology: The Importance of a Spatial Perspective," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1168-1180.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Krasnonosova Olena & Mykhailenko Daria, 2018. "The substantiation of the necessary to observe the social justice in the course of reforming the territorial structure of Ukraine," Technology audit and production reserves, 4(42) 2018, Socionet;Technology audit and production reserves, vol. 4(5), pages 24-29.

    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. Kuminoff, Nicolai V. & Sumner, Daniel A., 2001. "What Drives Farmland Conversion: Farm Returns Versus Urban Factors?," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20659, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Lin, Huiyan & Lu, Kang Shou & Espey, Molly & Allen, Jeffery, 2005. "Modeling Urban Sprawl and Land Use Change in a Coastal Area-- A Neural Network Approach," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19364, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Hite, Diane & Sohngen, Brent & Simpson, John W. & Templeton, Josh, 2000. "Competing Risks In The Suburbanization Of Agricultural Land," 2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL 21719, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Pamela Katic, 2015. "Groundwater Spatial Dynamics and Endogenous Well Location," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 29(1), pages 181-196, January.
    5. Carrión-Flores, Carmen E. & Flores-Lagunes, Alfonso & Guci, Ledia, 2018. "An estimator for discrete-choice models with spatial lag dependence using large samples, with an application to land-use conversions," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 77-93.
    6. Fakhruddin, Fahmida & Espey, Molly, 2003. "Living On The Edge: Residential Property Values In The Urban/Rural Fringe?," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22072, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    7. Sanglim Yoo & John E. Wagner, 2016. "A review of the hedonic literatures in environmental amenities from open space: a traditional econometric vs. spatial econometric model," International Journal of Urban Sciences, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 141-166, March.
    8. H. Spencer Banzhaf & James Boyd, 2012. "The Architecture and Measurement of an Ecosystem Services Index," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-32, March.
    9. Kuminoff, Nicolai V. & Sumner, Daniel A., 2001. "Modeling Farmland Conversion with New GIS Data," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 271494, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. Johnston, Robert J. & Bauer, Dana Marie & Swallow, Stephen K., 2000. "The Influence Of Spatial Land Use Patterns On Rural Amenity Values And Willingness To Pay For Growth Management: Evidence From A Contingent Choice Survey," 2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL 21766, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Robert Deacon & Charles Kolstad & Allen Kneese & David Brookshire & David Scrogin & Anthony Fisher & Michael Ward & Kerry Smith & James Wilen, 1998. "Research Trends and Opportunities in Environmental and Natural Resource Economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 383-397, April.
    12. Rauscher, Michael & Barbier, Edward B., 2010. "Biodiversity and geography," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 241-260, April.
    13. Khalid Haniza, 2015. "Spatial heterogeneity and spatial bias analyses in hedonic price models: some practical considerations," Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series, Sciendo, vol. 28(28), pages 113-128, June.
    14. Vermaat, Jan E. & Eppink, Florian & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M. & Barendregt, Aat & van Belle, Jasper, 2005. "Aggregation and the matching of scales in spatial economics and landscape ecology: empirical evidence and prospects for integration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 229-237, January.
    15. Johnston, Robert J. & Ramachandran, Mahesh & Schultz, Eric T. & Segerson, Kathleen & Besedin, Elena Y., 2011. "Characterizing Spatial Pattern in Ecosystem Service Values when Distance Decay Doesn’t Apply: Choice Experiments and Local Indicators of Spatial Association," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103374, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. Li, Sheng & Nadolnyak, Denis & Hartarska, Valentina, 2019. "Agricultural land conversion: Impacts of economic and natural risk factors in a coastal area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 380-390.
    17. Swallow, Brent M. & Wangila, Justine & Mulatu, Woudyalew & Okello, Onyango & McCarthy, Nancy, 2000. "Collective action in space: assessing how collective action varies across an African landscape," CAPRi working papers 5, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    18. Zack Dorner & Dean Hyslop, 2014. "Modelling Changing Rural Land Use in New Zealand 1997 to 2008 Using a Multinomial Logit Approach," Working Papers 14_12, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    19. Skevas, Ioannis, 2020. "Inference in the spatial autoregressive efficiency model with an application to Dutch dairy farms," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 283(1), pages 356-364.
    20. Nelson, Gerald C. & Geoghegan, Jacqueline, 2002. "Deforestation and land use change: sparse data environments," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 201-216, November.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa05p613. 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: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    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.