SUMMARY

The demand of competition to formulize a set of rules on land administration and ecosystem service is increasing. To tackle the issues on food securities,
renewable energy, etc, there was an increasing pressure on carbon market which create more pressure on the conversion of agricultural land into another
form of land administration, i.e. reforestation and bio-fuels.

This happens in line with the growth of other forms of demand, emerging from agricultural system for urbanization and recreation, mining, production
food, and conservation of biological diversity. To handle the increasing competition between the supervision of this service, and also to handle the interests
of different shareholders, efficient allocations of natural resources is needed.

The planning on land administration can be used by considering the reason to find a balance between competition and contradictive use of land. In short,
the latest evidence shows the design on land administration, and ecosystem-based environmental area by applying a plan as one of many devices that can
strengthen the roles of government related to land, economics opportunity development based on sustainable management and available land resources,
and build the options for a reconciled land administration and able to implement the development goals.

Contribution and land administration, also space allotment to support the management and
administration of a sustainable land
Analysis of the case studies shows that land use and spatial planning can contribute to sustainable land management by:

• Protecting agriculturally significant land from urban and suburban encroachment;

• Protecting natural capital from urban and suburban encroachment;

• Preventing limited exposure to saline and acid sulphate soils;

• Rehabilitating and/or avoiding contaminated sites;

• Adapting to salination and rising groundwater levels;

• Ensuring land use reflects land capacity;

• Protecting the quality and quantity of groundwater supply sources;

• Protecting water quality and minimizing erosion through water-sensitive urban design;

• Minimizing eutrophication and other surface and groundwater pollution;

• Establishing appropriate buffers between development and coastal and coastal waters;

• Managing floodplains;

• Preventing or limiting vegetation clearance;

• Protecting natural habitats from destruction and fragmentation;

• Preserving and enhancing ecological corridors;

• Reducing dependence on cars through managing transport demand;

• Accounting for sea level rise and storm surges, increased coastal development.

In areas of communal land ownership, land use planning accompanies diverse land areas to sustainable management, in i.e. providing solutions to issues
related to competing land uses and land tenure conflicts.

Policy Statement
 Planning on comprehensive land administration as an instrument
 For sustainable land management, government of Rwanda agree to implement state-of-the-art sustainable development: this creates a set of
necessary prior conditions to achieve a type of land use management that is environmentally sustainable, socially viable, and economically sound;
 Land use planning is centered around a participatory definition of future land use management; therefore, as a useful approach where natural
resources and biological diversity are protected and rehabilitated, and unexplored land use potentials are identified and evaluated.
 Planning on land administration and finance can result in the following:
a. Land reconciliation which implements natural principles and potential conflicts amongst some sectoral conflicts along with their potential uses;
b. Improving land ownership security and clarifying customary land ownership above communal land;
 Policy responses to coordinate human activities with environmental conservation – together with appropriate funding, legal, and technical support
– are needed to guide land use planning to support sustainable land management, and to help resolve conflicting land use demands.
 Land use planning should be approached from both a land cover and land function perspective, with a nexus to each other and transversal.
 Integration of cross-sectoral policies (e.g. land use, energy, and waste management) into a single planning instrument at the regional level, based
on an understanding of territorial dynamics, can achieve sustainable land management.
 Planning at the regional scale allows for the cumulative impacts of future development on the natural capital of an area to be assessed, and shares
the responsibility for protection and management across a wider range of stakeholders.
KEY DEFINITION
Best Practices: a procedure that has been shown by research and experience to produce optimal results and can be established or proposed as
a standard worthy of widespread adoption.
Ecosystem Restoration: a process that assists in the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged, or destroyed.
Land Use Planning: a systematic assessment of land and water potential, as well as alternative land and economic and social conditions, in
order to select and adopt the best land use option. It aims to select and put into practice which land use will be the best option to meet the
needs of the population while ensuring the safety of the resource for the future.
Multifunctional Landscape: a landscape that serves different functions and combines various qualities (for example, different material, mental,
and social processes in nature and society that occur simultaneously in any given landscape and interact with each other), ecological,
economic, cultural, historical, and aesthetic functions that already exist in a multifunctional landscape.
Peri-urban Zone: is the area between urban and rural areas that is the surrounding land. The wider peri-urban area may include the villages
and towns within the urban agglomeration. Such areas are often rapidly filling, where complex patterns of land use and landscape
management are fragmented across local or regional boundaries.
Policy: a course or principle of action adopted or proposed by an organization or individual. Strategy provides a means for implementing policy.
Actions describe specific elements within a strategy.
Sustainable land use: the use of components of biological diversity in a way, and at a level, that does not lead to a long-term decline in
biological diversity, but rather maintains its potential to meet the needs and aspirations of present and future generations.
Sustainable land management: the adoption of a land use management system that, through appropriate management practices, enables land
users to maximize the economic and social benefits of their land, while maintaining or enhancing the ecological support functions of its
resources (soil, water, vegetation, and animal resources). PLB combines technologies, policies, and activities that aim to integrate social and
economic principles with environmental concerns, protecting the potential of natural resources and protecting soil, vegetation, and water
degradation, while being economically viable and socially acceptable.
INTRODUCTION
Competition for land will increase as demand for diverse land uses and ecosystem services increases. Issues of food security, renewable
energy, and emerging carbon markets will drive up prices as agricultural land is converted to other uses, such as reforestation and biofuels.
This occurs alongside other growing demands on land systems for urbanization and agriculture, mining, food production and biodiversity
conservation. As land use changes allow for increased competition for the supply of these services, so do the interests of different
stakeholders, requiring land use planning for efficient land allocation that enhances sustainable land use options. And that helps to find a
balance between competing and sometimes conflicting uses.
The background of this paper is aimed to analyze the roles of land administration and space planning instruments, process, and approach in
the improvement of social and economics opportunities by applying a sustainable land resources management (land, water, and biological
diversity).
1.1. Land administration planning–a contribution on a sustainable land administration

Sustainable land management encompasses the ecological, economic, and socio-cultural dimensions of sustainable development; as a process, it
encompasses land use planning, land use design, and land development. The technology adoption, diffusion, adaptation, and implementation of Sustainable
Land Management practices depend on approaches that enable and empower people to the end; land use planning has proven to be such an approach.
Land use planning, spatial planning, territorial, or regional planning, and ultimately, ecosystem-based or environmental land use planning implement
sustainable land use management; this occurs through the recognition of stakeholders; their different objectives, and the need to strike a balance among
the diverse, and often conflicting, interests of the actors. An inspiration of land use planning is to coordinate the present and future needs of society, while
minimizing the arise of some conflicts.

1.2. The correlation between land use planning and changes to the land system
Land development is related to changes in land use patterns. An assessment of the driving forces behind land use patterns and land use changes is
important when analyzing and explaining past patterns, as well as when aiming to predict future patterns. Figure 1 summarizes the driving forces and
pressures on land use change, and underlies the need for planning. Urbanization, agricultural intensification, and land use specialization are processes that
result from the interaction of driving forces related to geographic characteristics, population dynamics, and strategies and policies at different levels.
Land use planning affects a country’s environment; its implementation may have positive as well as negative impacts on the environment. For example, Jia
et. al. (2003) argues that much of China’s environmental degradation is closely linked to the way land is used.

Planning systems and practices are both drivers and responses to it. Practices such as IPNI can enhance environmentally sound land use planning and
management options, resulting in a number of positive consequences, such as addressing land degradation, influencing ecosystem rehabilitation and
restoration, resolving conflicts over land use demands, and ensuring territorial cohesion towards sustainability. Responsive policies related to spatial
planning, transportation, integrated coastal zone management, and integrated water resources management directly influence land use and land use
change. Conversely, changes in land use are indirectly influenced by policy instruments, such as taxation and incentives, climate change adaptation and
mitigation strategies, strategies for sustainable development, and territorial agendas.

1.3.Land administration, land governance, and land ownership: all of them are interdependent factors affecting the planning of land governance

Weak governance is a major limitation when considering planning for sustainable development; it supports land degradation and can exacerbate conflicts
over land use. There are many examples of national governments that have failed to protect valuable ecosystems from clearing, partly due to a failure to
align land use planning and governance efforts.

Box 1: Examples of the impact of governance on the lack of land use planning in diverse areas, leading to land degradation by unevenly distributing
resources from high to low production potential.

Pastoral area in Ethiopia has the following characteristics: varied levels of altitudes, and the raindrops of which is immeasurable in amount, with such a
diverse type of land, the patching of resources can only be measured by the high and low level of production potentials. The absence of spatial planning
framework has directed to the sloppiness and the controversies amongst the bodies of governance, government directed the goals of their planning to
pastoral land administration, the decision has been made in some levels of governance and it occurs without prior multi-sectoral discussion and among
those levels of governance and it must also be considered that the network involves local land administration. This issue has been directed to solve the
conflicts between land users, the pressure is frequently come from local natural resources, and the adjustment in land use has a wide coverage and long-
term negative consequence. Previously, the height and productivity of a wide land coverage shows a higher level of land use fragmentation. The route of
farming, in general, shows the same increasing trend and it was constructed by unplanned group of settlement, closed gate, unclosed gate, and farming
area along the river. Local land planning and administration does not cover among other local government’s development plan.
In 2013, the Ethiopian government initiated the design and implementation of a national land use planning policy. A village level implementation as the
lowest administrative level of government was chosen, but it soon became clear that a different approach was needed to reflect the inherent diversity in
scales and units of planning, ecology, and land use. The government initiated a complementary, community-led land use planning process. This is
implemented at the sub-district level and incorporates the socio-political (communal land tenure, nested governance, economic, and cultural contexts of
pastoralism and their traditional land use, where migration of people and livestock is key to healthy and productive pastoral systems).

• Land use planning that strengthens land governance is a clear process with specific objectives to protect natural resources (specific outcomes) and
emphasizes and focuses on comprehensive natural resource planning;

• Includes spatial tracking and evaluation of each type of land lost to development (e.g. forest, livestock) so as to distinguish between planned and
unplanned loss, both within and outside the urban growth boundary;

• Includes a system for tracking and evaluating the quality of land lost to development, based on soil and other topographic information;

• Uses spatial land use data to examine both the impact of development on forest and livestock availability, and the associated migration that influences
land use planning outcomes;

• Analyzes quality of life factors (e.g. non-economic aspects) that influence land conservation programs.

Good governance structures support responsible land use management through, for example, coordination of sectoral policies and interests. Strengthening
government authority over land can therefore deliver a variety of positive outcomes, including development in the food economy, environmental benefits,
and security and peace. The responsibility to extend to strengthening local-level governance, in places with a wide range of contexts, represents common
elements that can be adapted to different political and cultural contexts.

Box 2: Land tenure issues relevant to land use planning

• Existing private, public, and common land rights, their boundaries and overlaps;

• Existing private, public, and common rights to natural resources, such as water, minerals, and forests;

• Local people’s land or resource rights (e.g., land tenure diversity, specific land tenure, religious land tenure and informal land tenure arrangements);

• Existing secondary rights, such as rights of way, access to water bodies or forests;

• Administrative boundaries;

• Clarification of natural resource management responsibilities between the state and local communities.
2. Planning: definition and evaluation within the context of Sustainable Land Management (Manajemen Tanah Berkelanjutan)

2.1 Definition

Planning is driven by, or fueled by, economic and political pressures, and priorities. The process of land use planning, and its implementation, is a
complexity of those three elements: the stakeholders involved in, or affected by, the land unit being managed; the quality or limitations of each component
of the land unit being planned for; and the consideration of the available land use options that are apparent. From an engineering perspective, planning
factors include: the amount of land available and its tenure system; the quality; the potential productivity and suitability of the land (i.e. the land use
soundness of the land use from its environment); the level of technology used to exploit the land resource; demographic conditions, and the needs and
standards of living affecting the population. Each of these factors interacts with each other.

The land use planning process can provide a view of the previous land use options that can be considered for land evaluation, a useful process for setting
national priorities for development, as well as selecting specific projects for implementation at the local to sub-national levels. Land use planning has
become an integral part of spatial development that aims at social, ecological, and economic sustainability. To meet the challenges, several types of land
use planning exist, as will be explained below.

2.2. Types of Land Administration Planning

Land use planning has evolved from a top-down, expert-led approach, to one of land suitability, in the 1960s and 1970s. From the 1980s onwards, a more
integrated approach involving planning designed by a panel of experts, decision makers, and ordinary citizens replacing previous land planning design;
another approach is then integrated into national institutions, as well as increasing the linkages to financial planning. Furthermore, the traditional concept
has been differentiated over time, to include factors related to sustainability and environmental sustainability, as well as social impacts (e.g. social
acceptability, economic viability, physical suitability, and environmental sustainability), as well as social impacts (e.g. access to land resources, nutritional
status, health status, and education). In this regard, concepts related to land use planning integration, spatial land use planning, participatory land use
planning, participatory village planning, territorial ecological planning, ecosystem-based land use planning emerged from the 1980s onwards. Parallel
transitions changed attitudes over time regarding human relations with land. In the 1700s, land was synonymous with well-being; then it was understood
through the more comprehensive concept of commodity; the regulation is changed again to resource scarcity; from the 1800s onwards, it was generally
seen as a community resource scarcity, indicating both commodity and well-being. The background of this paper considers spatial planning as a part of land
use planning.
Table 1. Land Use Planning and Its Various Types, including Spatial Land Use Planning

Name Definition / Goals Sample of Implementation

Land Administration Planning Systematic assessment of potential land and Extensive application of rural, regional and local
water, as well as alternatives for land use and land use planning in developing and developed
economic and social conditions, in order to select countries.
and adopt the best land use option. The goal is to
select and put in place land use practices that will
meet the needs of the population while
protecting resources for the future.
Spatial Land Use Planning Land Use Planning/Spatial Planning gives CEMAT, the European Conferences consisting of
geographical expression to economic, social, a Board of Ministers who are responsible to their
cultural, and ecological policies towards society. regional affairs: Torremolinos Charter.
At the same time, the disciplines, and
administrative techniques and a policy developed
is a cross-disciplinary and comprehensive
approach directed towards balanced regional
development, and the space of physical
organization, is in accordance with the overall
strategy.
Integrated Land Use Planning The assessment and assignment of resource use, Regional agricultural development of Burgoma
involves different uses, and demands from region, Kenya; rural planning in Laos; land use
different users, including all agricultural, pastoral, and water allocation in river basins in Iran; land
crop and forest sectors as well as industry and use and transportation planning in Jinan, China;
other areas of interest. risk sensitive planning of land use in Nepal, Spain
and Vietnam case studies.
Participatory Land Administration Planning Used for planning communal or common Laos (Luang Prabang Province); Loess Plateau in
property land, important in many countries Northern China; Costa Rica; Rangleands in
where communal land is seriously degraded, and Northern Tanzania; Reunion Island: to integrate
where conflicts over land use rights exist. biological diversity into land use planning; Urban
planning: US-South Florida; Namibia; Oromia
Arrangements that can be regulated through (Ethiopia).
negotiation among stakeholders, and
 communally regarding rules for sustainable land
use management, based on the planning unit.
Social units (such as villages) or geographical
units (such as watersheds) can be adopted.

Village Land Use Planning An approach that involves participation; is the Francophone, West Africa.
membership of groups and communities with
traditionally recognized land areas, adding these
communities to build expertise and develop local
institutions in the implementation of sustainable
management planning. It focuses only on natural
resource management at the village or
community level through:
1. Technical projects, such as those related to soil
conservation;
2. Social and economic factors related to the
organizational structures through which people
organize their livelihood strategies;
3. Legal and administrative systems, which use
rights for enforcement in practice.
Rural Land Use Planning A political and technical administrative process Argentina and some countries in Latin America
aimed at organizing, planning and managing the using Spanish as their medium of
use and control of a territory, possibly in terms of communication.
its bio-physical, cultural, socio-economic, socio-
political and institutional characteristics. This
process should be participatory, interactive and
based on explicit objectives that promote
equitable land use and governance, take
advantage of its opportunities, reduce risks, and
protect resources in the short, medium, and long
term. It should also aim to regionally distribute
the costs and benefits of territorial use among
users.
 Regional Land Use Planning A process by which territorial development is Lithuania, European Union, Canada, Australia
designed to facilitate the elaboration of common
spatial concepts and priorities of use,
determination of environmental conditions and
protection of monuments, regulation of
population involvement, which is prepared on
important territories for the expansion of
activities of private or legal entities.
Comprehensive land use planning as a
consideration of its main constituents. Integral
planning is used to determine policies on spatial
development of a given territory, priorities on
the use of the territory, protection, and basic
principles of management.
Ecological Land Use Planning An instrument on environmental policy to govern Mexico, Argentina, Costa Rica and Chile have
on land administration and productive activity, to developed a set of methodology and framework,
protect environment, improve the quality of land including the rules on ecosystem service and
conservation, and use sustainable natural spatial land planning and administration. A tool
resources, must consider potential land for rural land use planning, combining strategic
administration and land degradation trend. It is environmental assessment, and ecosystem
also important to consider that the most valuation services has been applied in the
appropriate policy making instrument that is compensatory region of southeastern Argentina.
applicable for a short term, medium term, and
long term.

Land administration planning can be improved if the value of spatial relationships among land uses can be calculated with sufficient ease. The spatial aspect
of planning (spatial planning) can be visibly incorporated in the traditional concept of land stewardship planning, until the modern period of planning (e.g.
1970s-1980s) when it can be considered, moving from a product-oriented (master plan) to a process-oriented activity. In terms of issue coverage and scale
of operation, spatial planning is a more integrated concept; equally, it is an activity that may change in terms of different contexts, depending on
institutions and legal frameworks, or variations in planning culture and traditions.
Spatial planning is linked to the economic development of a country. It facilitates infrastructure planning, particularly transportation planning, to determine
land stewardship in managing urban areas; it is a culture and its context is influenced by processes that determine the use of space for sustainable land
management and stewardship. Its adoption facilitated a change in the emphasis on the position of government, and the way in which they thought about
the role of planning. The form of planning is also linked to aspects such as supporting and managing economic growth, improving the quality of life through
a better understanding of the dynamics of development, and a better understanding of when and where a continuous process of national development
occurs.

Depending on the conditions under which it is implemented, land use planning can be more or less complex, ranging from the inclusion of simple planning
aspects to local development planning, to comprehensive spatial planning approaches at several different administrative levels. Regional differences in
planning can be significant as well. The orientation of spatial planning can increase to manifest into an instrument and/or process to solving the problem
retaliated to space demand conflicts; this also means that it is crucial for us to dig deeper into the issues on spatial dimension of strategic policies, with the
aim to integrate and coordinate on all aspects need to be considered for spatial consumption calculation activities, within a single geographical territory.

Whereas considering traditional land administration planning, on the spatial planning variety, the challenge of land administration planning is to ensure the
efficient use of limited resources, and contribute on a more sustainable economic development (at regional, national, and local levels), as well as to
safeguard the balance of resource use (e.g. soil, water, and biological diversity).

2.3 Land Administration Planning Approach: Basic Needs

The approach to Land Stewardship Planning should be flexible and adaptive so that it can fit into varying cycles. In other words, a “blueprint approach” that
defines stages, procedures, and tools does not work, rather on Land Administration Planning itself, which should be structured as a process to design
according to the needs, demands, capacities, regulations and institutional structures of the place in question, following the principles outlined in section 3.

There are two stages to the Land Administration Planning process, namely formulation and implementation, each emphasizing different activities. For
example: Formulation of a land administration plan requires a broad assessment of the current land administration arrangements, as well as a key concept
to identify the constraints and opportunities for a national development. This assessment requires a collection of data and analysis of a substantial amount
of information, including biophysical information, infrastructure, population, land ownership, land tenure, and legal context. tools such as the World Food
Organization's ecological and economic zones, land evaluation, and land suitability analysis, which are commonly applied. It is also at this stage that the
valuation of ecosystem services for inclusion in land administration plans can be applied. By the time the valuation is completed, a study covering in public
opinion and social impact is also needed to be implemented, through a series of participatory process.

Using this information, several land use scenarios can be developed and the best option selected, linked to the criteria of sustainable land administration.
This can be challenging as the most suitable scenario may not always be the most profitable providing a list of alternative land administration options, each
addressing environmental and economic objectives to a different extent in rural areas of Indonesia. In some cases, social dynamics can drastically affect an
activity such as impact pastoralism. The integration of environmental and economic systems using future land administration models can be used to
consider multiple objectives simultaneously, enabling the identification of efficient land administration arrangements (e.g. discovering community
preferences for ecosystem service provision). This was done, recently in Australia, to identify efficient land administration arrangements that anticipate
future demands for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions in the land sector and managing the terms of sale for agriculture, water, and biological diversity.

Once a land administration zoning plan, or spatial plan, is elaborated instruments are identified with which to develop specific programs and initiatives to
achieve the desired outcomes (e.g. payments for ecosystem services; regulated markets). Payment for ecosystem services; land-based markets

After the land use zoning plan, or spatial plan, elaborated instruments are identified with which to develop specific programs and initiatives to achieve the
expected results (e.g. payments for ecosystem services; instrument-based markets, mixed policies, and land zoning). Payment for ecosystem services;
instrument-based markets, mixed policies, and land zoning). These needs will be forwarded in a clearly defined framework, including mechanisms to plan or
monitor implementation, identify and correct mistakes, and develop ongoing processes.
 1. Principles of Best Practice in Land Stewardship Planning for Sustainable Land Stewardship Management

Addressing some aspects of sustainable land administration management (e.g. maximizing economic and social benefits, and maintaining or enhancing
ecological support functions of the resource), requires land administration planning that deals with the maximizing of economic and social benefits, and
maintaining or enhancing ecological support functions of resources), which requires Land Administration Planning that deals with:

1. Have a purpose: a clear formulation of the goal and the problem to be solved (e.g. Land stewardship planning as a demand to guide the process;

2. Recognizes different stakeholders and objectives (e.g. competition over resources and land stewardship);
3. Integrated and participatory, enhancing multi-sectoral coordination and multi-stakeholder linkages, as well as effective stakeholder representation
and participation in negotiations;

4. Consider the legal and socio-political context, including land tenure systems;

5. Develop consistent plans at all levels of decision-making, and link effective institutions from local, sub-national, and national levels;

6. Develop a set of planning procedures that are applicable at multiple scales (land evaluation, participatory techniques, stakeholder objective
analysis, as well as monitoring and evaluation);

7. Improve vertical integration: provide outputs (land administration and management options) that are legitimized at national and local scales;

8. Have an efficient accessibility and knowledge base;

9. Considering the multi-functionality of land and landscape from the basis of planning and management units.

Through the development of cooperation, both in developing regions and in countries whose economies are in transition, international cooperation
through German companies recognizes the best practices of land use and landscape management should be for supporting a more balancing and
sustainable condition that may facilitate social, economics, and environmental needs.

Box 3: Principles that Guide Land Use Planning Practices

Land use planning, will, ideally:

• Be integrated into state institutions, with formal mandate for cross-sectoral planning; be inclusive, based on stakeholder differentiation and gender
equality;

• Integrate bottom-up aspects with top-down aspects (vertical integration);

• Be based on cross-disciplinary cooperation, with sectoral coordination (horizontal integration);

• Increase citizen engagement and transparency;

• Consider and assess local knowledge, and traditional strategies; to solve problems and conflicts;
• Apply methodologies and content (e.g., specificities, forms of participation, and technologies) that are scale-dependent (village, district/city, and
regional);

• Be related to the concepts of space and place (spatial orientation);

• Be linked to financial planning;

• Follow the idea of subsidiary companies;

• Produce a legally binding land use plan;

• Be future-oriented (visionary);

• Be implementation-oriented, realistic, and adaptable to local conditions, and aim at developing stakeholder capacity.

The above principles identify best practices and policies for land use planning, and have been used to identify case studies of land use planning that
enhance sustainable options and land use management.

The significance, of this land use planning, which involves a number of factors, is discussed clearly in the following sub-sections. These factors include: socio-
political and legal context, multi-stakeholder linkages, multi-land use, and landscape-based approaches to the land use planning process.

3.1. Socio-cultural and legal context

An adequate legal framework, with strong political and institutional capacity to integrate Land Use Planning into Rwanda national planning, is crucial to
improve land use policies and achieve good results.

Box 4: Socio-Political and Legal Contexts that Enable Land Use Planning: Evidence from Latin America

Colombia is at the point where the political environment allows for land use planning. In the early 1950s a law has been passed allowing municipalities to
implement urban planning and in 1991, the country incorporated land use planning into its political constitution (article 288: territorial ordenamiento),
which became Territorial Ley Organica, in 2011). By 2007, 96.9% of municipalities had invested in land risk management plans with a land planning
commission to monitor the process, in 2008. Brazil, meanwhile, has implemented land use and spatial planning using ecological-economic zoning and
agricultural-ecological zoning. Starting with the Brazilian legal population living in the Amazon, as a land planning instrument to support economic
development, it is simultaneously responsible for environmental issues. It was later incorporated into the national environmental policy, adopted in 2002.
Furthermore, regional planning tools are also seen, used in a dynamic and ongoing land use planning process, as well as the spatial expression of economic,
social, cultural, and ecological policies as national, regional, and local priorities. Ecological Economic Zone is based on the decentralized integration of the
federal government and this increases the effective participation of states and municipalities in the planning and implementation process (i.e. vertical
integration). This approach has fed into the growing political recognition of the need for the involvement of key stakeholders in the decision-making
process. The Peruvian experience illustrates the political challenges of land use planning. Almost all regions demonstrated the political will to initiate a land
use planning process, but by 2010 only 35% of which had produced Ecological-Economic Zoning. A few municipalities (13.7%) developed Land Use Planning
as an instrument, although the overall process was highly disorganized and not all stages of land use planning had been completed. Recently, the Peruvian
government has decided to re-centralize the land use planning process in order to create a dialogue with the private sector, which contradicts the
Ecological-Economic Zoning, considering it too restrictive for new private investment. This shows that a development is not that profitable since the
decentralized approach appears to have better overall yields. Chile, meanwhile, started with a centralized approach, focusing only on urban areas. Although
this model did not satisfy the government's expectations. Thus, in 2011, 14 of Chile's 15 provinces completed the diagnostic phase of regional land use
planning, albeit with close support from the central government. The experience of Chile's national planning similarly suggests that a decentralized
approach (with sufficient support from the central government) produces better quality results. Chile, moreover, is an example of how a country can re-
direct itself from an initial failed land use planning opportunity. The Mexican experience illustrates the importance of the legal context. Since 1995, the
Mexican provinces have implemented land use planning, through separate reforms. At the national and sub-national levels, Mexico has almost completed
the formulation phase of land use planning (27 of 31 states have established land use plans). However, a lack of sophistication at the local level is reported
because government legislation does not require sub-national governments to implement their plans. Wong Gonzales argues that the strong sectoral
orientation (environment versus urban settlements) of the two territorial development programs (i.e., the General Law of Environmental Balance and
Protection and the General Human Settlements Law) affects multi-sectoral coordination and prevents these planning instruments from supporting a
comprehensive and sustainable regional-territorial development policy. On the one hand, the Secretariat of Social Development plays a role in the country's
land use planning related to the General Human Settlements Law where the National Institute of Ecology and the Secretariat of Environment and Natural
Resources are responsible for the ecological land use plan, which is also called a comprehensive ecological land use plan.

3.2. Multi-sectoral correlation: integration and participation

Diverse stakeholder knowledge and perspectives are key factors needed to include land use planning through practices as the integration of these
elements is often still at the recommendation stage. Case studies analyzing land use planning in Cambodia, Burkina Faso, and Laos have identified
challenges related to effective implementation and integration of agents (e.g. government or international agencies) to learn more about the local context,
as well as increasing community ownership of the outputs. Local government and community ownership of land use plans can lead to stronger
commitment to implementation and further investment.

Box 5: Challenges related to participation in land use planning in developing countries

• Literacy levels: a challenge with community-based landscape planning in developing countries that involve many communities with low literacy;
• Dominance of local elites: the participatory process can help to enforce the influence and interests of local elites over a home and not be heated;

• Lack of implementation capacity: the case of participatory land use planning is characterized by a lack of methodological standards that obscure the
practical implementation of sustainable principles: activities on land are often carried out according to potentially flawed interpretations of the principles
by those responsible for implementation;

• Integration of local and scientific knowledge: combining hard scientific data with local experience can be challenging, as local stakeholders may not
always understand the consequences of their decisions and may be manipulated by those who better understand the issues at stake for land use planners
and/or local leaders.

Participatory land use planning has become a central element of donor-supported programs in developing countries; in many African countries,
participatory land use planning is gradually replacing normative approaches to land use planning. Developed countries such as Denmark, the Netherlands,
the UK, Germany, the US and Australia illustrate good examples by balancing participation throughout the planning process, leading to zoning plans that
promote smart growth, and where participatory options play a complementary role and rarely aspire to usurp the creative attributes of planning.

3.3. Relevance of Multi-Scale and Vertical Integration

The success of Land Administration Planning is linked not only to the achievement in national level, but also, it is supported by the roles of local authorities.
The planning also supports territorial cohesion, enhancing connectivity of individuals and communities, and linking the ecological, landscape, and cultural
values of regional areas. Denmark's spatial planning act (2007) is one example of best practices adopted in land use planning, in terms of vertical integration
principles. It was developed with a set of planning procedures that can be applied at several scales.

Box 6: Spatial planning in Denmark: multi-scale and multi-sectoral coordination

Spatial planning legislation ensures that overall land stewardship planning in Denmark synthesizes between community interests and land use
responsibilities, contributing to the protection of the country's nature and environment, so that the sustainable development of the community developed
in relation with both human living conditions and the conservation of wildlife, and also the security of vegetation availability.

The Minister of the Environment establishes a comprehensive framework for regional spatial development planning and district/municipal planning through
national planning reports, national planning directives, dialogues, and through other instruments. The Minister ensures, by means of a veto, that
district/municipal planning should comply with overall national interest (e.g. vertical articulation). Regional councils prepare regional spatial planning
development which depicts the vision of the region; this strategical plan, then, captures all aspects of the spatial planning within the region, and closely
retaliated it with business development strategies, planned by regional economic growth forum (example: multi-sector coordination). The Board of
Planners of each District/Municipality summarizes their goals long with strategies to establish a plan for the respective District/Municipality, which consists
of a framework mentioning the details of local development framework and process of each individual case, which is solved in accordance with the Law on
Planning and other laws and regulations adopted by other sectors.

3.4. Multi-Sectoral Coordination

Land Administration Planning is an important tool towards better reconciliation of land administration with environmental concerns, and resolving potential
conflicts between diverse sectoral interests and competing behalf of land administrators. Sectoral divisions of institutions (e.g. sectoral ministries, services,
etc.) represent a substantial challenge to territorial development as comprehensive land administrative planning requires the involvement and cooperation
of a whole range of sectoral institutions (at local, regional, or national level). Denmark (box 6) is one of many examples of the case pinpointing the
implementation of a well-structured multi-sectoral coordination.

In terms of strengthening territorial development as a whole to support strategies or policies that improve territorial planning through the integration of
cross-sectoral policies (e.g. land administration, energy, and water management) into a single planning instrument at regional level, based on dynamic
territorial understanding.

Box 7: Coordination of Land Administration and Multi-Sectoral Planning: an Essential Nexus for the Development of a More Integrated Policies

The land administration policy envisaged by the European Union, despite not having spatial planning responsibilities at country level, sets the guiding
framework for land administration planning in the European Union. Institutional arrangements force land administration policy in Europe to be involved in
the goals of European Union dealing with territorial cohesion, directives for the framework of water-ways construction, general policy on farming, Natura
2000, and the improvement of energy importance in 2000.

Territorial cohesion accelerates sectoral policy coordination and can be considered as a spatial representation of sustainability. Furthermore, the gap
between land use conflicts can be negotiated through integrated land use planning and territorial planning, as well as sectoral policies, and targeted policy
instruments, such as protected area networks.

The integration of cross-sectoral policies into a single planning instrument at the regional level can assist regions in their efforts towards sustainable
territorial management, along with an integrated recognition of the specific responsibilities of sectoral policy makers, and highlighting the role sectors play
in promoting stronger territorial and focal points when designing and implementing thematic policies and reducing unwanted externalities. Integrated
coastal zoning management is an example of multi-sectoral land use planning, used for the development of coastal areas in Europe; it refers to conflicts
that may arise when planning offshore wind parks or other ocean technologies, which may hinder some issues, interests of fisheries, cargo traffic, tourism,
or protection of marine biodiversity.
The collaboration fostered within institutions is essential to identify synergies that can accelerate the land use planning process. Mexico, Colombia, and
Singapore are examples of countries that have established independent institutions responsible for land use planning, with strong multi-agency and multi-
sector coordination among public institutions and community organizations. Brazil is another example of a national land use plan that has enhanced multi-
sector coordination, in implementing regional land use planning through the Ecological Economic Zoning, creating an environmental commission. This
commission works under the coordination of the presidential planning secretariat, thus enabling collaboration among other public institutions.

3.5. Multi-Function Land

Land use planning can also be viewed from a land cover perspective, as well as from the so-called functionality perspective, which offers links to other
transversal issues. Most landscapes serve many functions, and various combinations of potential land uses exist. In order to analyze various planning and
management alternatives of a multi-functional landscape, the aspects related to ecosystem functions and demand structures are also considered.

Adopted from multi-functional perspectives towards Land Use Planning, the Planning can be linked to some land use conflicts. In other words, Land Use
Planning reflects a multi-functional value of a land that can increase the level of protection to the biological diversity and increase the multi-functionality of
the landscape of a land use planning process that requires as follows: strengthening of the governance, increasing or adjusting the approach by putting
forward the roles of companies to reinforce the effectivity of the ecosystem of the services provided dealing with any perks related to land planning
process.

3.6. Best planning policies and practices: representative case studies

The case studies below demonstrate different approaches to land use policy at national, regional, and local levels where specific criteria for best land use
practice have been identified. The case studies have been selected based on key principles, and are a combination of geographical location (e.g., at least
one case study per continent), domain (e.g., rural, urban, suburban), and administrative or spatial scale (local, state, national, and regional). A template has
been designed for systematic analysis of the selected case studies, and a method of cross-case analysis has been applied to look for patterns and linkages
between and within them; it also presents the study’s limitations on planning approaches, best practices identified, and lessons learned. A mix of regional,
national, and local scales of land use planning, land use planning policies, spatial planning and ecological planning have been selected and analyzed,
Table 3. Summary table of the case study. Underlined are examples of the best practice criteria identified.
Location/Policy Western Australia / The Law on Planning and Development ( 2005)
Scale / Domain State/territorial comprehensive (rural and urban) land use planning
Focus Providing an effective and efficient land use planning system that promotes sustainable land use and development in
the State of Western Australia
Comment The system is based on a combination of institutional arrangements, governed by strong legislation, centralized regio
nal planning regulations and local planning supervision. The planning system receives funding for metropolitan devel
opment; regulatory authorities exercise planning powers, allocate resources and provide advice, planning cooperatio
n promotes strong multi-sector coordination.
Identified best practice criteria Vertical integration: effective and linked institutions at local, sub-national and national levels; multi-sector coordinati
on (horizontal integration); a set of planning procedures that can be applied at different scales: clear objectives, legal
binding of land use plans, financial planning linkages, objectives on sustainability needs, social, economic, and enviro
nmental balance, stakeholder engagement; realistic local conditions and orientation, relationship between land use
planning and nature conservation law, future orientation
Land Title Ownership State and Private Ownership
Location/Policy State of Oregon, United States / Land Conservation and Development Act (1973)
Scale / Domain State level/comprehensive land use planning (urban, suburban, and rural)
Focus The law requires all cities and towns in the state to prepare comprehensive land use plans consistent with 19 plannin
g objectives. These objectives express state policy on land use and related topics.
Comment Broad scope: state. A land conservation and development commission are overseeing the program. Local comprehen
sive plans must be consistent with broad (state) planning objectives (e.g. they must consider natural resources in lan
d use plans being developed). The law places strong emphasis on coordination, keeping plans and programs consiste
nt with each other, with objectives, and with recognition of local plans. Programs promote citizen involvement and p
articipation, scale appropriate to planning efforts.
Identified best practice criteria Vertical integration: effective and connected institutions at the local, subnational, and national levels; multi-sector co
ordination (horizontal integration); a set of planning procedures that can be applied at multiple scales; use of a light
weight methodology; legally linked land use plans; focus on sustainable, social, economic, and environmental needs;
stakeholder engagement (community).
Land Title Ownership State and Private Ownership
Location/Policy China/Land Administration Law of the People's Republic of China 2004
Scale / Domain National/Territorial level of a Comprehensive Land Use Planning (Rural, Urban)
Focus Regulates land classification and zoning, preservation and protection of environmental resources. The land use
master plan is supported by: protection of communal livestock land; land use efficiency; comprehensive mechanism
 for managing different land uses; sustainable land use development and environmental protection, and also
balancing demand among different types of uses.
Comment It promotes centralized land use planning; the land use master plan is in line with
1) National social and economic development plan;
2) The need for environmental preservation and protection; and
3) Land availability and productivity, and land demand for infrastructure projects.

Implementation of a two-tiers planning system: The Minister of Land and Resources produces land use plans; a
second administrative level related to the sectoral planning system is responsible for developing specific land use
plans. The land use plan system has 3 main categories; master, special topics, and project-oriented plans.
Identified best practice criteria Vertical integration: effective and connected institutions at local, sub-national, and national levels; multi-sector
coordination; a set of planning procedures applicable at different scales; clear objectives; legally binding land use
plans; aiming at sustainability, social balance, economic and environmental needs.
Land Title Ownership States and Communal Regions
Location/Policy European Union/spatial development perspective in Europe in 1999; cohesion of the policy (2014-2010); European
territorial agenda 2020 (2011)
Scale / Domain Regional level/territorial land administration and spatial planning

Effective and connected institutions at local, sub-national, and national levels; multi-sectoral coordination (horizontal
integration); a set of planning procedures that can be applied at different scales; clear objectives; a legally binding
land stewardship plan; aiming at sustainability; and a set of planning procedures that can be applied at different
scales.
Focus A set of spatial planning policies that influence the land use and management of the EU as a region; with best
practice examples of sustainable land management and territorial cohesion, and territorial development.
Comment Patterns and trends in EU land administration and changes to land, influenced by planning systems adopted at
national level; centralization, or decentralization; regional economic planning approach (France, Portugal, Germany);
comprehensive integrated approach (Nordic countries and Austria); land management orientation (UK, Ireland,
Belgium); urban planning focus (Mediterranean countries). Spatial planning cannot fall within the scope of the EU
authorities, but is an initiative such as contributing to its framework. Regarding territorial cohesion, it is the
responsibility of the accelerator to foster a coordination between different spatial policies, and facilitating
cooperation between parties responsible for land stewardship and development planning.
Identified best practice criteria Effective and connected institutions at local, sub-national and national levels; multi-sector coordination (horizontal
integration); a set of planning procedures that can be applied at different scales; clear objectives; legally binding land
 administration plans; aiming at sustainability, balancing social, economic, and environmental needs, multi-
stakeholder ties; territorial cohesion; spatial orientation; future-orientation.
Land Title Ownership States and Private Ownership
Location/Policy Denmark/Law on Planning (2007)
Scale / Domain National level/comprehensive spatial planning (in rural, urban areas)
Focus The law pursues 5 objectives of spatial planning:
1. Rural and urban areas should become visible;
2. Development should benefit all Danish;
3. Spatial planning should be based on respect for identifying towns and cities for nature, environment,
landscape and townscape;
4. Spatial planning and investment in infrastructure should be closely integrated;
5. Spatial planning should be comprehensive.
Comment The system of development planning should follow decentralization principles, controlling the framework and
participation of the public. The Minister of Environment is responsible for upholding the national interest through
national planning. This law establishes regulations related to public participation.
Identified best practice criteria Vertical integration: strong decentralization; effective and connected institutions at local, sub-national, and national
levels; multi-sector coordination (horizontal integration); a set of spatial plans that can be applied at different scales -
substitutes; clear objectives; legally binding land administration plans; internal linkages with spatial planning; aiming
at sustainability, balancing social, economic, and environmental needs; stakeholder engagement; spatial orientation.
Land Title Ownership States and Private Ownership
Location/Policy South Africa / Law on spatial planning and land administration management (2013)
Scale / Domain National level/comprehensive spatial planning (rural, urban, including infrastructure development)

State, private, and communal ownership in national level/comprehensive planning on spatial allotment (rural, urban,
including infrastructure development)
Focus A framework that specifies the relationship between national spatial planning, land administration management
systems, and other types of planning. It describes 5 broad principles: sustainability, equity, efficiency, integration,
and governance.
Comment The law promotes greater consistency and uniformity in its application procedures, and in decision-making by
authorities responsible for land development administration and allocation decisions; it facilitates the existence,
functions, and operations of the same by district/municipal planning boards; it also enables and enforces land
 administration and development measures. Decentralized planning is also improved.
Identified best practice criteria Clear formulation of objectives; legally binding land administration plans; vertical integration; participatory
recognition of stakeholders and their different views; effective and connected institutions [at local, sub-national, and
national levels; multi-sectoral coordination (horizontal integration); spatial orientation; a set of planning procedures
that can be applied at different scales; deep links to spatial planning; aiming at sustainability, balancing social,
economic, and environmental needs.
Land Title Ownership State, private, and communal ownership
Location/Policy Argentina / Laws on General Environment ( 2002)
Scale / Domain National level / regulation on comprehensive land administration (in urban, rural areas)
Focus Environmental land use planning is one of the instruments for environmental policy and management. The
environmental planning process considers political, physical, social, technological, economic, legal, and ecological
aspects; it should ensure environmentally adequate use of natural resources, maximize production and utility in
different ecosystems, while minimizing degradation and misuse of resources, and enhancing social participation in
decisions related to sustainable development.
Comment The Argentinian Constitution includes a right to a healthy environment. The General Environmental Law requires the
implementation of land administration plans throughout the country. The Constitution, the General Environmental
Law, and related provincial laws should be in line with land administration or the existence of a framework of
environmental integration land. The administration plan provides a legal basis to develop comprehensive national
land administration planning laws and regulations, along with its institutions. The land administration planning
process is centralized; an inter-federal agency is tasked with a coordination among provincial environmental
agencies, and with federal environmental authorities.
Identified best practice criteria Vertical integration; effective and connected institutions at local, sub-national, and national levels; multi-sectoral
coordination (Horizontal integration); a set of planning procedures that can be applied at different scales; clear
objectives; legally binding land administration plans; aiming at sustainability, balancing social, economic, and
environmental needs; the principles of subsidy; stakeholders' engagement.
Land Title Ownership States and Private Ownership
Location/Policy Mexico/ Common Law related to Ecological Balance and Environmental Protection along with its Laws
and Regulations on Human General Settlement 1987
Scale / Domain National level/national comprehensive ecological land administration planning (in rural and urban areas)
Focus Land administration planning is framed by social and environmental development policies. Ecological laws
have provisions for environmental planning, ecological organization of territories, and sustainable use of
natural resources. National urban planning is implemented under the General Human Settlements Law
 through a series of urban development plans and programs of countries, states, districts/municipalities,
which include: national urban development programs and zoning programs to integrate urban zones.
Comment The implementation of land administration planning follows a decentralized and sectoral approach, with 2
main coordinating agencies: national, regional and territorial land administration planning, as specialized in
ecological law, and urban land administration planning. The stakeholders involved are determined, and
national, regional and territorial land administration planning is responsible for multi-sector coordination
when preparing the national economic zoning plan. Those issues are developed in district/municipality (or
sub-district) local ecological zoning plans.
Intentional legislative evidence that environmental policy instruments should be used to ensure
environmental protection and social development in urban and rural areas, although financial, legal, and
technical supports of those needs need to coordinated between current human activities and their
environment.
Identified best practice criteria Vertical integration: effective and connected institutions at local, sub-national, and national levels; multi-
sectoral coordination (horizontal integration), a set of planning procedures that can be applied at different
scales; clear objectives; legally binding land administration plans; aiming at sustainability, social balance,
and economic as well as environmental needs, multi-stakeholder bonding (enhancing civic bonding, special
recognition of the role of women and their ingenious community).
Land Title Ownership States, Private, and Communal Ownership
Location/Policy Singapore/Conceptual Plans (2011)
Scale / Domain National level/land administration plan (in urban area and for transportation needs)
Focus The researcher needs a conceptual plan to list a set of land administration strategies, provide a physical
capacity to sustain a high-quality living environment for future generations. It has been set together with
the functionality of land (?) to provide options beyond 2030, so that future generations will have space for
their growth and development. Strategies to maintain a high quality of living environment include:
integrating green open space into the living environment; improving transportation connectivity;
maintaining a vibrant economy with good jobs; and ensuring space for growth and a good living
environment for the future.
Comment Singapore's land scarcity makes planning crucial. Conceptual plans and associated master plans provide a
comprehensive, forward-looking and integrated planning framework for a sustainable development. It
plays an important role in helping to balance competing land use needs, such as for housing, industrial, and
 commercial purposes. Parking and recreation, transportation, and community facilities. In looking at those
conceptual plans, all major land requirements are also considered in collaboration with relevant
government agencies.
Public consultation is a component of the planning process; master plans are reviewed once in every 10
years, with strong multi-agency/multi-sectoral coordination, directing its implementation with
coordination from the Minister of National Development.
Identified best practice criteria Vertical integration: effective institutions and coordinated in local, sub-national, and national levels; multi-
sectoral (horizontal integration) coordination, a planning procedure applicable to different scales, clear
objectives, land administration land bound by laws and regulation, aiming to the sustainability, social
balances, economics, and ecological needs, stakeholders' engagement, realistic conditions and adopt local
situation-oriented perspectives' link between land administration plan and laws on natural conservation;
and, therefore, land administration plan should be directed to futuristic orientation of the people of the
country.
Land Title Ownership States Ownership
Location/Policy Indonesia/Laws on Spatial Planning article 26 of 2007
Scale / Domain National level/comprehensive spatial land administration (in rural, urban areas, and transportation)
Focus Spatial plan is a series of process, beginning from area plan design, implementation, and also area
development control. Laws and regulations on these issues, including the guidance for this process, should
be adopted in national, provincial, and local levels. Laws and Regulation improves the coordination
between multi – sectoral stakeholders, and covers a transportation plan, a plan developed for a green
public spaces and other information related to informal sector, urban spatial plan in particular.
Comment Decentralization process; increase the level of public participation. National spatial plan covers the period
of 20 years and it must be reviewed once in 5 years. National Spatial Plan Coordination Agency (led by the
Coordinating Minister of Economics Affairs) is responsible for the design of the draft of spatial plan.
Director General of Spatial Administration of the Ministry of Public Works handles the implementation of
this process and accommodate it in the agency’s plan.
The implementation of the spatial planning is weak. Most departments of planning of the cities in
Indonesia have few zones of inspectorates. Technical and legal trainings, along with their allotted
operational budget is sufficient for the inspection of spatial planning by an authorized lower level of
governance (i.e Villages/Towns and Sub-Districts) and this kind of coordination is needed to support the
 establishment of this process (?).
Identified best practice criteria Vertical integration; effective and connected institutions at local, sub-national, and national levels; multi-
sectoral coordination (horizontal integration); a set of planning procedures applicable at different scales;
stakeholder engagement; legally binding land use plans; land use plans linked to spatial allocation and
situation of the area; and also the accountability of the same.
Land Title Ownership State, Private, and Communal Ownership.

3.7. Key directions to support sustainable land use management manifested through a set of land use planning policies.

Analysis of best practices of land use planning policies and practices through case studies illustrates that land use policies are able to support sustainable
land use options and/or sustainable land use management and to implement those practices the government must:

 Promote the development of land use management options that reconcile conservation and development objectives, preventing the loss of
ecosystem services;
 Include multi-sectoral coordination among actors with a commentary on land use planning. Agreement on roles and responsibilities for land
management is needed among entities responsible for the coordination and implementation of land use planning, and government agencies, as
well as other relevant sectors. Furthermore, many case studies emphasize the existence of a need for a set of clear guidelines on policy
implementation regarding the measures applicable to solve sustainable land use management issues and they can be addressed through the
following planning system;
 Consider sustainable land use management as the beginning of the land use planning process. Sustainable land use management can be
considered at several different levels of land use planning hierarchy, through strategies and legislation products implemented in the planning
process at the regional, national, state, and/or local levels. For example, case studies have shown that it is difficult to achieve sustainable land use
management through subdivision along with the land development itself, unless such management has been sustainable and adequately addressed
through earlier phases of strategies (e.g. local and regional planning strategy schemes) and planning legislation (e.g. regional and local planning
schemes along with their amendments). Opportunities to achieve sustainable land use management in urban environments (e.g. green
infrastructure in Singapore) are limited and changes from rural to urban land use are often irreversible.
 Ensure that land asset planning and management occurs at a scale that reflects its natural presence. Regional planning requires the most
appropriate scale to consider the natural presence and significance of environmental assets where they cross the boundaries of a number of local
or district governments (Ethiopia). This provides a guidance on the recognition and protection of these assets through land use planning (Australia).
Planning at a regional scale also allows the cumulative impacts on future development of natural capital, as an integrated part of a region, to be
considered, as well as the sharing of responsibilities for protection and management across a wider range of stakeholders;
 Ensure commitment and support across government agencies (vertical and horizontal integration) for the preparation and implementation of
comprehensive planning strategies. This is vital to ensure sustainable land use management and those strategies are adequate to address issues
such as urban growth management, development facilitation that is compatible with the sustainability of the land and also adaptable socio-
economic context to identify significant natural capitals (e.g. significant agricultural land, water resources, biodiversity hotspots) and local
governments (councils, mayors) to identify the priority of natural capital as a key; in other words, recommendations for its protection and
sustainable management can also be designed, thereby, to assist the integration of sustainable land use management into a comprehensible land
use planning.
 Provide technical and practical guidance for local or sub-national land use planning strategies, including capacity building. Both the quality of
local planning strategies, and their extent to which they can address sustainable land use management can often be guided at that level and
coordinated to support state agencies that are available to local governments (e.g. Mexico and Ethiopia). The role of local governments in achieving
sustainable land use management outcomes through local planning is often constrained by low capacity in terms of both resources and expertise
(i.e., in Central America context: inclusive land use planning in protected areas and in the Ethiopian context, i.e., sustainable management and
Indonesian cases). Options for supporting local government capacity to achieve sustainable land use management outcomes include: capacity
building partnerships; more efficient use of local government resources; and provision of financial support and technical assistance from state
agencies (as in the Western Australian case study). Such mechanisms have been identified in case studies of local land use planning.
 Promote the development of land administration options that reconcile conservation and development objectives, preventing the loss of
ecosystem services;
 Include multi-sectoral coordination among actors with opinions in land administration planning. Agreement on the roles and responsibilities of
land management is needed among entities responsible for coordinating and implementing land administration planning, and government agencies
as other relevant sectors. Furthermore, many of the case studies emphasize the existence of a need for clear guidance in the implementation of
policies related to how sustainable land administration management issues should be observed through the planning system;
 Consider sustainable land administration management, and it is the beginning of land administration planning process. Sustainable land
administration management can be considered at different levels of the land administration planning hierarchy, through strategies and legislation
of the planning process at regional, national, state, and/or local levels. For example, the case study analysis shows that it is difficult to achieve
sustainable land administration management through subdivision and land development, unless sustainable land administration management is
sufficiently addressed through earlier strategies (e.g., schematic strategies displaying both local and regional planning) and regulation on the spatial
planning (e.g., green infrastructure in Singapore). It has been limited and altered in functions, from rural into urban design, and we cannot reverse
such pace of development.
 Ensure the planning and management of land assets are implemented to a scale that reflects their natural setting. Regional planning requires the
most appropriate scale to consider the presence of nature and its significance to environmental assets where they cross the boundaries of multiple
local or district governments (Ethiopia). It provides direction for the recognition and protection of assets through land administration planning
 (Australia). Planning at a regional scale also allows the cumulative impact of future development on natural capital as part of a regional
consideration, as well as the sharing of responsibility for protection and management across a wider range of stakeholders;
 Ensure commitment and support across government agencies (vertical and horizontal integration) for the preparation and implementation of a
comprehensive planning strategy. It is vital to ensure that sustainable land administration management is sufficient to address issues such as urban
growth management, facilitating development that is compatible with the sustainability of the land and socio-economic context and to identify
significant natural capital (e.g. significant agricultural land, water resources, biological diversity hotspots) and for local governments (councils,
mayors) to identify priority and set natural capital as a key; in other words, recommendations for the development of sustainable land management
strategies and land use management strategies can be designed. Thus, the assistance on a sustainable integration of a land administration
management can be developed into an integrated land administration plan.
 Prepare both technical and practical guidance for local or sub-national land administration strategy, including capacity development. It was
perceived from both from the quality of local planning strategies and its expansion which is able to respond to the management of sustainable land
administration which frequently can be the guidance in that level and coordinated to support the state agency provided for local government (e.g.,
Mexico and Ethiopia). The role of local government in achieving the output of land administration management is to prepare the planning on local
level and the service is limited by low capacity of the personnels, in terms of the procurement of resources and experts (i.e. Central America dealing
with the planning on an inclusive land administration procurement in a protected area and the range of a sustainable management in Ethiopia and
some cases emerging in Indonesia). The options to support the capacity of local government to achieve certain level of land management output,
including: the cooperation fostered to develop the following capacities; more efficient use of local government resources; and provision of financial
support and technical assistance from state agencies (as in the Western Australian case study). Such mechanisms have been identified in the case
studies of local land use planning that may be among the most sophisticated land use management outcomes including: reservations, zoning,
special area controls; and special provisions relating to special development areas (e.g. China’s administrative law protecting arable land or
Australia’s protection of significant agricultural land).
 Including the guidance on sustainable land use management as a part of a comprehensive land use planning strategy. Several of the case studies are
analyzed (Western Australia, Singapore, Argentina and Denmark) to adopt the structures where national, regional, and sub-national plans, policies, and
strategies are integrated into a central framework to provide the context for land use planning (e.g. Western Australia’s planning and development law
and Argentina’s general environmental law). The framework provides a guidance on a range of sustainable land management issues, including land
degradation, land use conflicts, and water resource management, biodiversity conservation, and coastal management. However, the effectiveness of
policy guidance for sustainable land management varies, and more support for considering the interpretation and application of sustainable land
management at different stages of the planning process is needed (case studies show that good guidance is often poorly applied and/or enforced). Few
national land use planning policies and strategies analyzes short-term experiences, particularly in relation to improving coordination and enforcement.
These difficulties need to be addressed as a sustainable land management and better integrated into a land use planning. This is also related to
conflicts between different sectoral policies relating to sustainable land use management, as well as the limited amount of guidance provided on the
 implementation of sustainable land use management at different stages of the planning process and the issue of previously legally integrated land use
planning.
 Ensure that all governments are involved in land use planning for sustainable land use management. Western Australia is an example of a centralized
land use planning where the challenges associated with integrating sustainable land use management into a land use planning that can be seen, due to
a separate environmental legislation, planning legislation, and non-statutory arrangements for regional natural resource management. Effective
coordination between planning and environmental agencies is required across the planning system. Improved communication and networking
between agencies is, last but not least, ultimately required.

1. Contribution of land use planning to sustainable land use and management

This section discusses the contribution of land use planning to the identification and promotion of sustainable land use and management options. Land
use planning including spatial planning and it promotes a participatory definition of future land use. Keeping land use planning in mind is therefore
useful whenever natural resources and/or biological diversity need to be protected, rehabilitated, and when unexplored potential land uses need to be
identified and evaluated.

Table 1 focuses on the emphasis of land use planning on a systematic assessment of potential land and water uses targeting areas of high partial value
(e.g., biodiversity hotspots, land suitable for agriculture) or low absorption among land uses.
Land use zoning is an output of the land use and spatial planning process; it involves the division of a given territory into zones, with different rules for
land use, management practices, and land cover change. The effectiveness of a particular land zoning unit may be affected by management decisions in
the wider landscape; hence the emphasis on a landscape scale approach to land use planning. Land use zoning plans may encompass national,
regional, or local administrative units (e.g., community, district/city, province, and sub-district), and may accommodate a variety of land uses (e.g.,
mining, agriculture, urban development, and peri-urban development).

1. CONTRIBUTION OF LAND USE PLANNING TO ACHIEVE SUSTAINABLE LAND USE AND MANAGEMENT

This section discusses the contribution of land use planning to the identification and promotion of sustainable land use and management options. Land use
planning (including spatial planning) supports a participatory definition of future land use. Keeping land use planning in mind is therefore useful whenever
natural resources and/or biological diversity need to be protected, rehabilitated, or when unexplored potential land use needs are identified and evaluated.
Table 1 emphasizes the importance of land use planning on systematic assessment of land and water potential to enable environmentally sound decisions
about development impacts, including targeting spatial areas of high value (e.g., biodiversity hotspots, land that is highly suitable for agriculture, or trade-
offs between land uses). Land use zones are an output of the spatial and land use planning process, involving the division of a given territory into zones,
with different rules and regulations for land use, management practices, and land cover change. The effectiveness of a given land use zone unit may be
affected by management decisions in the larger landscape; hence the emphasis on a landscape-scale approach. Land use zones may encompass national,
regional, or local administrative units (e.g., communities, cities, provinces, and districts), and may accommodate a variety of land uses (e.g., mining,
agriculture, urban development, and peri-urban development).

4.1. Land use planning: an instrument for a sustainable land management

The case studies that have been analyzed show that spatial and land use planning can contribute to sustainable land management by way of:

 Protecting agriculturally significant land from urban and peri-urban encroachment;

 Protecting natural capital from urban and peri-urban encroachment;
 Preventing exposure to saline and acid sulphate soils;
 Rehabilitating and/or avoiding contaminated sites;
 Adapting to acidification and rising groundwater levels;
 Ensuring land use reflects land capabilities;
 Improving water quality and minimizing erosion through water-sensitive urban design;
 Minimizing eutrophication and other pollution of surface and groundwater;
 Placing appropriate barriers between development, and coastal estuaries and coastal waters;
 Managing floodplain;
 Preventing excessive vegetation clearing;
 Protecting natural habitats from destruction and fragmentation;
 Preserving and enhancing ecological corridors;
 Reducing dependence on cars through transportation demand management;
 Account for the rise of sea levels and the increase of storm surges, and also the development of coastal areas.

Table 4. Example of a land use plan that identifies and promotes sustainable land use options.

Planning Approach Domain and Scale Goals / Option of Commentary State / Regional
Sustainable Land
Administration
Land Use Zoning / Spatial Regional Village Mapping of important agricult A form of strategic land use Australia, New South
Zone ural lands (e.g. land that is mo policy to protect significant a Wales
st suitable for regional and loc gricultural land and water re
al agricultural industries) sources, and to inform local
 governments in developing l
and use planning, including l
ocal/regional economic and i
ndustrial development strat
egies.
Land use planning / land use Local Village Ecosystem conservation: prot Best practices, promoting co Mexico, Guatemala,
zoning ected areas nservation; this includes dist Nicaragua, Honduras,
rict/municipal master plans, Costa Rica, and Panama.
and land use codes with pres
cribed zones and permitted
uses for or within protected
areas.
Land Use Planning Across border, based on Conservation and sustainable Two regions, regional maste Belize, Guatemala, and
ecosystem; use of tropical forests r plans, regional tourism pla Mexico
ns, and corridor plans are us
ed to guide district/municipa
l plans. Weak governance an
d enforcement capacity, by s
tate or local authorities, can
have indirect negative effect
s on biodiversity, due to encr
oachment of land uses from
adjacent zones. Mexico, Gua
temala, Nicaragua, Hondura
s, Costa Rica, and Panama.
Land Use Planning Urban area Balance sustainable land use Box 8 Belize, Guatemala and Wuhan City, Hengyang
and socio-economic develop Mexico City
ment; identify environmentall
y viable land use options
Land Use Planning Comprehensive, provincial Ecological restoration Land use master plans and st Jilin Province, China
level rategic environmental assess
ments. Supported by geogra
phic information systems. W
 uhan City, Hengyang City
Land Use Planning Rural level, sub-national Rehabilitation of fallow agricu Land use planning and strate Ecuador
level ltural lands, including both de gic environmental assessme
forestation and rehabilitation nts for ecological restoration
pressures, along with a succes based on local environmenta
sion option (e.g. leaving pastu l conditions. Land use planni
res as natural succession area ng provides a detailed analys
s) is of land use, to improve th
e most profitable land use st
ructure and arrangement. Jili
n Province, China
Ecological Land Use Planning Country Biological diversity conservati Ecosystem-based approach t Western Part of Australia
on, sustainable land use, and o land use planning in Ecuad
development or
Land Use Planning Village / sub – regional Production systems with sust Box 9 Western Australia Kiteto Sub-District,
(sub-district level) ainable land ranges on comm Tanzania
unal lands; ensure the mobilit
y of pastoralists and hunter ga
therers is respected in land us
e planning processes. Address
land use conflicts from compe
ting land uses.
Participatory Rural Land Use Local village Reconciliation of conservation Participatory land use planni Minoo Island, Iran
Planning and development objectives, ng is a part of the land use pl
protecting biological diversity, anning law of Tanzania. Land
preventing loss of ecosystem owned by individual villagers
services, clarifying common la is inadequate for sustainable
nd tenure; resolving land use land use production system
conflicts; future land use plan s. State legislation incorpora
ning, accelerating the transiti ting village land use planning
on from subsistence to marke should be introduced where
t-oriented agriculture resources (land, water) are d
istributed among villages. Kit
 eto District, Tanzania
Participatory Land Use Planni Rural and catchment area Land use planning with high p Participative, the association The Delta/Basin of the
ng levels riority on electricity-productio between different Rivers in Birris, Costa Rica
n from river estuaries with co stakeholders, by considering
nflicting interests between ag the aspects as follows:
ricultural production and elec environment, economy, and
tricity generation. social. And the flow of
development begins from
the basin/delta of the river.

 In areas of communal land tenure, land use planning assists in the sustainable management of land parcels, inter alia, generating solutions to issue
the problems related to land use and land use conflicts.
 In this case in Tanzania (Box 8), villages developed cooperative land use plans, entered into resource sharing agreements and protected essential
livestock corridors (stock routes) so as to reduce potential conflicts over relative land use.

Box 8: Village cooperation in land use planning for sustainable management of diverse land uses in Tanzania
 Keys to success:
 Population growth, and declining land productivity, are increasing pressures on land use, with increasing conflicts occurring between different land
uses. These are often linked to a number of related issues, such as: insecure land tenure and use, underdevelopment of land markets; degradation
of land and water resources; deforestation; and increased migration of people and livestock. Competition from existing land uses and this leads to
land conflicts, exacerbated by the increasing number of livestock farms and a breakdown in the ability of traditional and local government regimes
to maintain harmony. This in turn, has led to poor levels of sustainable land use and undermined rural development.
 Conventional land use planning tends to limit the mobility of pastoralists and hunter gatherers. Although, within the range of land, sharing of
resources (e.g. water, land) and movement of livestock across village boundaries is the norm, given that the land held by individual villagers is
usually insufficient to sustain a multi-farm production system.
 Contributions of land use planning:
 Village land laws and land use planning laws have been the framework for land use planning at the village level, in Tanzania. Village land use
planning and management regulates the use of land resources; this allows for, resolution of land conflicts which will lead to improvements in
communal land; development of land tenure security; land use and expansion of livestock size, according to stakeholder priorities and capacities.
 Benefits, outcomes, and impacts: Land use planning ensures security of land tenure, and rights to access pastoral, agricultural pastoral and
resources, and farmers’ crops are negotiated and protected.
  Broad community involvement promotes a more open and transparent process. Pastors and farmers benefit from standard agreements
(transhumant herd’s land use practices; livestock farming has increased in pastoral areas). Carefully negotiated transfers support the local
environment and contribute to national economic growth.
 Participatory land use planning includes strengthening local decision-making through institutional capacity building at sub-district and village levels.
Participatory land use management teams exist and are trained as part of the process for better land management and are aware of land use issues.
 Reflection, lessons learned: Land use planning follows a decentralized framework; The role of local authorities (sub-districts, districts/cities, villages)
in the integration and implementation of land use planning is recognized, with more effective linkage structures between national institutions, sub-
districts, and villages needed (e.g. vertical integration).
 Local level institutional development through capacity building and inadequate financial support are both needed, including conflict reconciliation
processes.
 The capacity of village councils and village land use management committees to administer and manage village lands is still low, resulting in low
enforcement.
 There is a need for better collaboration among stakeholders; government institutions responsible for land use planning, donor agencies, national,
and international non-governmental organizations and financial institutions. It is important to link supporting communities to strengthen their
rights to access land and resources through processes such as village land use planning collaboration. Improved coordination mechanisms are
therefore needed.
 Tools such as participatory land use mapping enable the involvement of large numbers of community members, as well as enhance learning in two
ways, with experts and development agents.

4.2. Land use planning: an instrument to promote sustainable land use and ecosystem restoration

Land use planning, depending on how it is structured and implemented, can either damage or conserve ecosystem services. It is, therefore, important that
land use planners are aware of the existence and potential importance of ecosystem services in order to balance their protective potential with the benefits
gained from alternative uses. Furthermore, awareness of the intrinsic and economic value of attributes to ecosystem services can help inform decision-
making.

Land use planning instruments can significantly influence ecosystem restoration, promote sustainable land use, and aid biodiversity conservation.
Ecosystem restoration means conserving or enhancing biological diversity, as well as the sustainability of living organisms in degraded landscapes, by
restoring or enhancing the flow of services.

Box 9: Land use planning to promote sustainable land use and tropical forest conservation

Key issues
The Selva Maya is a region of tropical forest that covers a large area of Belize, Guatemala, and Mexico. This is addressed in a number of areas, such as forest
fires, illegal encroachment, and exploitation of flora and fauna, and increasing agricultural frontiers. The main challenge is to protect the Selva Maya in the
long term, through sustainable resource management.

Contribution of land use planning

Land use planning, providing environmental protection is considered as one activity within a broader program designed to promote the protection and
sustainable use of this area. Participatory land use planning has been carried out at the community level (Guatemala) and in communal land tenure (Edijos
of Mexico). This approach allows civil society groups to contribute to the development plans. It increases the level of acceptance of the plans and
significantly increases their chances of successful implementation. Land use planning, in this context, leads to the subsequent development of management
plans for sustainable use and forest protection, as well as ecological agriculture projects that develop capacities in sustainable agriculture, product
promotion, and marketing.

Indirect benefits of land use planning include: increased environmental governance, cross-sector collaboration between government and non-government
actors, improved bushfire prevention, cross-border patrols, and alternative sources of income for local communities.

Land use planning achieves conservation outcomes by: identifying and protecting natural areas with significant biological diversity value, guiding the
development of natural areas, and controlling the impacts of land use on natural areas. For example, the Western Australian Planning and Development Act
includes biological diversity as a planning consideration; the Act stating the preservation and conservation measures required to agree to a planning
scheme. Specifically, the planning framework contains provisions for: protecting biodiversity; preventing or limiting vegetation clearance; protecting
habitats from destruction and fragmentation; and preserving or enhancing ecological corridors.

Box 10: Conservation of biological diversity through land use management planning in Western Australia

The planning and development laws of Western Australia include conservation of biological diversity as a valid consideration applicable to regional, state,
and local planning policies and schemes. Planning strategies and associated decision-making schemes are required to:

1. Consider mechanisms to protect areas of high biological diversity and conservation value;

2. Seek to reduce or minimize adverse impacts on areas of high biological diversity and conservation value as a result of changes in land use or
development;

3. Support the establishment of a comprehensive, adequate, and representative system of reservations through the state;
4. Protect and enhance connectivity between terrestrial and aquatic habitats where they have become isolated, including the reestablishment of habitat
corridors;

5. Support the return of areas of high biological diversity and conservation value through mechanisms including planning controls or conservation
agreements;

6. Support the development of management plans to protect areas of high biological diversity and conservation value in the long term.

Limitation:

Limited practice and technical guidance is available for the integration of biological diversity considerations and achieving conservation outcomes through
land use planning at regional and local levels. Local governments across the south west of Western Australia are promoting local biological diversity
strategies to promote conservation of local natural areas through land use planning processes. However, these policies and positions need to be
incorporated into state level planning policies and strategies. Furthermore, the availability of regional information on biological diversity assets and
functions, and the integration of these considerations into a strategic planning at regional levels, is limited, hampering the ability of local governments to
plan effectively for local biological diversity conservation.

Reflection:

Due to the strong legislative and policy basis for biodiversity conservation in land use planning, clearance of locally significant natural areas continues to
occur as a result of land use planning decisions. Local governments, the Department of Primary Industries, the Planning Commission of Western Australia
and the Minister of Planning through the administration of the planning system bear responsibility for addressing biodiversity conservation in the context of
sustainable land use and development. The challenge remains to make the process of preparing biodiversity strategies and integrating sub-areas into land
use planning systems simpler and more streamlined. Integrated spatial planning has demonstrated itself to be a cost-effective way of identifying hotspots
for natural capital restoration and enhancing multi-functionality (through the provision of a range of ecosystem services). Recent Australian experience in
upper part of agricultural areas allocated 53,000 ha for ecological restoration in the most effective hotspots to achieve a range of environmental and
ecological objectives, including prior planning targets for increasing residual vegetation. The project showed that when allocating program funding for
restoration of natural capital and improvement of multifunctional landscapes, using spatial targeting – as opposed to a random approach – can double
water benefits, and increase benefits to species and ecosystems by 25%. The impact, meanwhile, on net economic returns from agriculture is projected to
increase by one-third, as compared to the situation without the strategic approach.
Land use policies that promote ecosystem rehabilitation or restoration can rely on instruments such as land use zones to create protected areas, or to
designate land use restrictions. Land zones are used for specific purposes in high-priority areas. Such as the mapping of critical agricultural land by the state
in New South Wales, Australia, to limit the development of extractive industries. Land use zones have also been used as a policy option in the current
transition from deforestation to net reforestation, in China, India, Vietnam and Bhutan.

Integrated land use planning can contribute to the management needs of national agrarian planning systems. Although programs of ecosystem restoration,
through land use planning and regulatory mechanisms, are used in or near Central American agrarian planning, for example, to reduce threats from
adjacent land uses have shown that agrarian planning needs to be part of a long-term planning strategy in order to prevent being provoked again or
degazetted to make room for more profitable land uses such as mining and agro-industrial agriculture. For sectoral policies related to ecosystem restoration
and/or biodiversity protection to be included in planning systems, they need first to be incorporated into planning policies and strategies. Mechanisms to
integrate biodiversity conservation into local-scale land use planning processes are essential to spur national government efforts in biodiversity protection
and conservation. Collaborative and cross-border land use planning and decision-making are as important for transboundary ecosystem conservation as
they are for the availability of regional information on biodiversity assets and functions.

4.3. Land use planning: a tool for sustainable infrastructure development

Land use and spatial planning play a key role in facilitating and delivering green infrastructure in urban and peri-urban areas. It can shape physical patterns
of mobility based on future generations in tandem with helping to reduce urban sprawl and loss of natural habitats and biodiversity. Furthermore, better
understanding and inclusion of integrated transport and land use planning at urban and regional scales results in higher levels of national economic growth
and development. Green infrastructure offers a promising avenue for integrating biodiversity and ecosystem services into urban planning and governance.
These infrastructures form a network of natural and semi-natural areas, such as green spaces in cities and peri-urban areas; they enhance the health and
resilience of ecosystems, contribute to the conservation of biodiversity in a non-integrated manner, and improve, inter alia, human behaviour. Cities in the
European Union and Singapore are, among other, have begun to implement green infrastructure (e.g. parks and other green spaces, green roofs, and walls,
and also green agriculture and forests) through policies and planning instruments, especially spatial planning. Green infrastructure can enhance and protect
biodiversity in urban areas (e.g. brownfields from former industrial sites). Evidence suggests that green infrastructure has a range of indirect benefits, too,
such as: reducing the risk of natural disasters, including the reduce of surface water runoff, i.e., by reducing flood risk; connecting habitats; and mitigating
the effects of urban heat islands.

4.4. Land use planning is a tool to increase economic opportunities.

The impact of land use planning on regional economic performance. Government intervention in land use can improve regional economic welfare by:

a. Eliminating negative externalities, protecting public goods, and fostering the development of facilities;
 b. Encouraging compact development, associated with higher efficiency in the provision of public services, as well as potential agglomeration benefits
(urban areas);
c. Increasing transportation throughput; and
d. Reducing uncertainty and amount of transactional costs involved in land development.

The economic consequences of land use planning and regulation are context dependent. For example, a 2009 study aimed to identify new opportunities for
development of an industrial range across northern Australia (120 million ha of vast, remote, climate-varying, and extreme land, covering almost a quarter
of the continent) was relied on land resource information for development planning. Land sustainability analysis (part of the land use planning process)
showed that increased agricultural development may be possible in locations where suitable and available soils (and water resources) exist, and where
necessary infrastructure (e.g. irrigation, roads) can be built. The study concluded that land should be developed and installed within its sustainable capacity
limits to prevent a rapid decline in soil conditions; in particular, significant degradation issues related to erosion, soil acidity, carbon sequestration, and
salinity, provided by the facts as follows: low resilience of ancient, vulnerable, and depleted northern Australian soils. Some areas are identified for
potential development. The regions are fertile, it was addressed through the issues of responsible development (e.g., most of the soils are low in nutrients
and may require significant amount of fertilizer). If agricultural efforts are intensified, one of many suggestions are given as an alternative and sustainable
land use management aims to plan and construct a mosaic of well-managed, intensified areas within a larger, relatively undeveloped landscape for the
benefit of a wider ecosystem. Integrated programs of land use planning for regional development and management usually require a number of trade-offs
among sectoral policies which direct economic, social, and environmental processes and dynamics of the following sectors: industry, energy, transportation,
mining, forestry, agriculture, recreation, and environmental protection. Awareness of these trade-offs can support the effectivity of land allocation that
promotes sustainable land management and multifunctional land systems through an efficient provision of diverse ecosystem services. Land use planning
scenarios are increasingly used to model the potential future impacts (social, economic, and environmental) of changes in land use and ecosystem services.
Land use trade-off models can be applied for efficient land allocation, anticipation of the competition arising from the availability of land resources,
resulting from the offering of diverse ecosystem services.

Box 11: Efficient land allocation and spatial targeting: alternative planning for future land use

An integrated assessment of land use efficiency in terms of emissions reductions, agricultural production, water resources, and biodiversity services was
recently undertaken in Australia. The assessment considered four global perspectives from 2013 to 2050 and was conducted in an effort to gauge the
efficiency of carbon markets in Australia’s intensive agricultural lands. Using a land use trade-off model – an integrated, economic-environmental model of
the land system – to project potential land use and ecosystem services under intersecting combinations of global change and domestic policies, the study
found substantial potential for land use transitions from agriculture to carbon generation, environmental generation, and biofuel harvesting. These varied
across scenarios, with impacts on sustainability of economic returns, and ecosystem services, including food/fibre production, emissions reductions, water
resource use, biodiversity services, and energy production. The type, magnitude, timing, and location of land management responses and their impacts
depend heavily on scenario assumptions including: global outlook and emissions reduction efforts, domestic land use policy settings, land use change
adoption behavior, productivity growth, and capacity constraints. With strong global incentives coupled with domestic land use policies that focus on
biodiversity, land use responses can substantially increase and diversify economic returns to land, and provide a variety of ecosystem services, such as
emissions reductions, biodiversity, and energy, without major impacts on agricultural production. The land use trade-off model suggests that better
governance is needed for the management of potentially significant impacts on water resources.

These results have a variety of implications for land use and sustainability policies, as well as for governance at global and domestic scales.

Linking land use planning and regulation to economic development results in land use management that enhances potential positive impacts; and/or
neutralise negative impacts rather than simply reducing government intervention in land development, or attempting to articulate a one-size-fits-all land
use policy.

Box 12: Improving economic and environmental performance through land use planning changes

Planning can anticipate and sustainably manage land use change. This is the case for participatory land use planning in New Zealand, following previously
undefined environmental and economic objectives. The management group captured a stakeholder consensus that sustainable agricultural systems should:

a. Match enterprise and stock class to land capability;

b. Improve erosion control;

c. Reduce sedimentation and nutrient contamination of waterways;

d. Minimize the impacts on human and livestock access to the landscape and water quality;

e. Control disease and pests;

f. Enhance landscape value;

g. Enhance returns of capital; and

h. Maintain management flexibility.

The output of the planning process (which adopted the criteria through a consensus of stakeholders) projected a 6-fold increase in agricultural economic
surplus, a reduction in sediment, nutrient, and other water contamination, and a 40% reduction in soil erosion.

Table 5 Expected Outcomes of The New Land Use Planning of The Catchment Farms
 Aims and Goals Indicator Current Condition New Plan Period
Business feasibility Surplus of agricultural economy; $34,000 $200,000 30 years

Company profit $3,08 / ha $517/ha 2-3 years

Supply performance 8,8 SU / ha 14,7 SU/ha 2-3 years
126 kg meat / ha 367 kg meat/ha
Health ecosystem The prediction that there is a 1.819 kg/ha/year 1.177 kg/ha/year 30 years
solid substance inside the water
Cultivation of the nutrition inside 0,48 kg P/ha/year 0,36 kg P/ha/year 30 years
the water
4,93 kg N/ha/year 3.88 kg N/ha/year
Water temperature Daily maximum Daily maximum temperature of 17 0C 20 years
temperature of 23oC
Water inversion MCI: 102 MCI: 118 15 years
Level of erosion The decrease of 40% 15 years
Source :

 The desired output of the agricultural catchment of the new land use plan is to be analyzed through a number of key performance indicators. The
new plan aims to increase profits by 70%, over a period of 2-3 years, while sustainably reducing erosion.

4.5. Land use planning: a tool to strengthen land governance

 Good leadership is needed for effective coordination between different sectors and policy levels. In other words, the need for multi-level
leadership with horizontal coordination of sectoral administration and policies, vertical coordination of different levels of responsibility, as well as
inclusion of public participation. These are all key factors related to best practices of land use planning. Best practices of land use planning
(including spatial planning) enhance land governance in the following ways:
 4.5.1. Land tenure security improved, and common land tenure of communal land clarified
 In Tanzania, land use planning was adopted at the village level, and between villages, ensuring that land tenure security and resource access are
rights for pastoralists, agricultural workers, and in Rwanda, food crop farmers are negotiated and protected. Broad community involvement in
planning has also promoted more open and transparent processes, strengthening decision-making at the local level, through institutional capacity
building at the sub-district and village levels.
 Box 13: Participatory rural land use planning aims to improve tenure security and resolve land use conflicts
  A land use planning and land allocation program has been implemented in Lao PDR since the early 1990s. Land use planning and land allocation is
seen as a tool to improve land tenure security, which in turn stimulates agricultural intensification, private investment, and development of
commercial agricultural production. Improved land use planning and land allocation contributes to the stabilization of agricultural change and the
preservation of the country’s forests, soils, biodiversity, and water resources.
 Benefits brought by this process:
 Participatory contribution allows (?), considering land use planning, as a key to protected areas and wildlife corridors.
 Participatory contribution allows (?), as a link to clarify common arrangements, to reach agreements, and clarify village boundary or boundaries of
a group of villages.
 Creating a negotiation platform for local community, tied to a participatory land use planning.
 Resolution of conflicts related to communal land use.
 Reflection/lessons learned
 The legitimacy of participatory land use planning outputs needs to be considered at both local and national scales. A successful bridging approach is
needed, so that policies are addressed at the national level, and they are supported by local authorities (vertical articulation);
 Barriers to public participation are as follows: incomplete learning tools for local communities, so they can increase their understanding of land
issues at stake; limited facilitation capacity of land use planners to engage local people in open negotiation processes; limited efforts to assess the
quality of participation; complexity in achieving gender balance. Ensuring greater consideration of local recognition, knowledge, and institutions is
thought to be effective in leading a society into a more balanced and environmentally sound development trajectories.
 The approach of participatory land use planning, perceived from the angle of a sub-district perspective, it is thought to be able to mitigate inter-
village conflicts and support collaborative management of the villages within a cluster.
 Building trust between planners and community members is essential to producing realistic land use plans, which villagers can rediscover and
adopt. By negotiating land use plans and development scenarios, participants reach an agreement on a spatially explicit landscape management
plan, with a high degree of ownership.
 Being realistic is essential to an actual implementation of a plan.

4.5.2. Participation of diverse stakeholders allows for the inclusion of current and future community needs in the decision-making on land use.

It also provides a negotiating platform that has the ability to engage local communities in a more participatory versions of land administration planning, as
evidenced by the evidences from Tanzania, Laos, Ethiopia, and Mexico. Stakeholder participation, the creation and training of citizen bodies and show-
cause commissions, and cross-law enforcement agreements as part of the land administration planning process, all contribute to the improvement of land
tenure.

4.5.3. Transparent land administration planning contributes to the redressing of past time's spatial and regulatory imbalances.
For example, South Africa's spatial planning and land administration law articulates a system of spatial planning and land administration management for
the country, providing a functional working environment to redress past imbalances and improve social and economic inclusion.

4.5.4. Land use planning is a key instrument for reconciling competing land interests, as well as preventing or resolving land use conflicts.

For example, one objective of Mexico's national ecological land administration planning program is to minimize environmental conflicts stemming from
sectoral land administration, with a view to proper and balanced land administration planning, coordinated by state administrative agencies. Also, the
involvement of rural land to implement the plan as an instrument for the adoption of the policy to manage a sustainable communal land in Laos. In
Tanzania, supporting a plan on cooperation land administration and sectoral plan on the management of natural resources needs a formal framework to
distribute the tasks and resources. This type of land administration planning strengthens land leadership by legitimizing the use of shared resources, and in
pairs reduces potential land administration conflicts.

A multi-function perspective can lead to land administration conflicts, with forestry multiple-use planning policies adopted in Northern Bolivia leading to
conflicts over forestry and peanut management in Brazil. In this region, extraction of timber and economically important forest wood products, such as
Brazilian nuts, occurs in all forests, creating opportunities for integration of planning and management decisions.

The absence of well thought-out, integrated land administration planning and policy weakens land leadership. For example, Kenya's experience of the
encroachment of settlements and agricultural areas, squeezing wildlife into smaller and drier areas, and it has been compounded by sectoral legislation of
land administration planning (urban land, agricultural land, wildlife, and forest conservation), resulting in insufficient land leadership. Land administration
planning, and the exercise of property rights for land-owners of wildlife resources, by different holders, requires better coordination, so as to balance the
diverse interests of all stakeholders and ensure sustainable land management.

Such balance can only be achieved through multi-sectoral cooperation comprising of different departments of the country’s government.

Box. 14. Land administration, land tenure, and sustainable wildlife management in Kenya

Kenya's physical planning law, enacted in 1996, makes provision for the preparation and implementation of physical development plans. Such development,
for the goals cited in applicable laws and regulation, is found to include the making of any material change, in the use or due to the density of any available
land. It prepares a physical development plan, in accordance with the requirements of the physical planning committee. Two types of physical development
plans are provided for these purposes: namely, local and regional. Among the objectives of local and regional physical development plans, is to ensure
appropriate regulations are in place when future land uses are involved in the agenda. These regulations and conditions of land development may include
relative requirements for sustainable resource management. The law does not, however, refer to the issues of conservation and sustainable management
of biological diversity, which concerns local authorities based on politics as opposed to ecological balance as units for management. Consequently,
applicable laws and regulations did not reinvent the parameters for zoning the country based on sustainable resource management. It also fell short of
providing for area plans based on the compatibility of land administration.

4.5.5. Land administration planning can help to identify local residents in using and having a right to access the land and prepare formal recognition
(authorization) thereto

This is demonstrated, for example, in the rural land use planning of Laos, Ethiopia, and Tanzania. In the latter countries, certificates of general rights of
tenure for subdivided grassland areas are granted to landowners as a result of the preparation and registration of grassland management plans.

5. CLOSING REMARKS

25 years ago, Agenda 21- a comprehensive plan of action to be adopted globally, nationally, and locally by organizations of the United Nations system,
governments, and other major groups for each area where humankind has an impact on the environment. It calls for the integration of physical land use
planning and management as a practice towards moving land forward more effectively and efficiently. By examining all land uses in an integrated manner, it
is possible to minimize conflicts, to make the most efficient trade-offs and to link economic and social development with environmental protection and
enhancement, thereby helping to achieve the goals of sustainable development. The core of sectoral planning and management activities relates to various
aspects of land and resource use.

1.1. Land use planning opportunities for sustainable land management

The background of this paper presents evidence and lessons from best practice of land use planning for sustainable land use and management. This
includes that land use planning can:

 Reconciling conservation and development objectives;

 Protecting biodiversity, preventing the loss of ecosystem services. Biodiversity conservation can be addressed through multi-scale planning
strategies and legislation, at national, regional, and local levels. It is important that biodiversity conservation is addressed early in the land use
planning process, and carried through each planning stage to land management.
 Clarifying common land ownership in complex landscape fragments.
 Resolving land use conflicts; potential conflicts between sectoral interests and between potential uses.
 Future land use plans, accelerating, among other things, the transition from subsistence to market-oriented agriculture in rural and remote areas.
 Improving land management on communal land areas; for example, by supporting village and sub-district land use plans for the management of
land areas that require high mobility from pastoral to responsibilities.
While participatory approaches are essential to land use planning for sustainable land management, little is forthcoming. In particular, the process can be
highly dependent on the experience of individual project and implementers, turning the planning process far from a well-designed land use master plan,
which includes spatial allocation of land uses within a coherent national development plan within a broad framework, guided by market pressures, and
tailored to manage the current economic scenario. Furthermore, participatory planning processes require more time than conventional top-down planning,
due to the process of consultation and negotiation with the involvement of actors. Recent use of land use planning in pastoral areas in Ethiopia also
highlights the challenges of stakeholder engagement: “participatory approaches require that government work closely with local land users. They require
working within a socio-economic and ecological context with a diverse set of actors, which requires good facilitation and negotiation skills. They also require
problem solving and delineation of what is called a challenge to reach all actors. Although, these approaches accelerate ownership of outputs, they often
leave stakeholders far behind in implementing and sustaining them. Implementation strategies for land use planning may include social programs to
compensate for exclusion from protected areas, or to attract investment in non-agricultural income-generating activities, such as eco-tourism or forest
management. Less common are integrated conservation and development projects that combine rural development with biodiversity conservation
objectives. Non-governmental organizations often provide guidance to design actors and/or national government agencies, as in the case of Central
American countries.

1.2. The challenge of land use planning for sustainable land management is to enforce the necessary mechanisms, not just good legislative
intentions.

Case studies in Argentina, Mexico, and Indonesia, for example, show that the legislation related to comprehensive national land use planning is potentially
far reaching, fully implemented by the central government, state governments, and municipalities. However, enforcement mechanisms, including those
related to capacity building, are essential for the full implementation of planning instruments. The Mexican Constitution and the General Law of Ecological
Balance demonstrate the legislative intention for land use planning instruments to be used in an integrated and coordinated fashion, to give effect to the
constitutional objectives of environmental protection and social development, in both urban and rural areas. However, there is a need for financial, legal,
and technical support to support the coordination of human and environmental activities. Also, in Argentina, the comprehensive land use planning law
(General Environmental Law) has been virtually confined to a chapter of administrative law that regulates development in an urban context, primarily
related to issues of zoning, occupancy density, and the use of permits. Enforcement tends to be lax, in part because land use planning itself is not perceived
as important to policy makers. Better legal and economic instruments for successful implementation of a comprehensive land use system are needed, and
therefore are affected.

Similarities with Indonesia’s spatial planning law specifically provide for sanctions against spatial planning crimes, although the government has been
lenient in imposing penalties against green area conservation in the Jakarta metropolitan area (where only 9% of the city’s land area is used for open space,
compared with the law requiring at least 30%). Technical and legal training, as well as adequate operational budgets for spatial plan inspections are needed
at the sub-district and neighborhood levels to improve the country's law enforcement.
It is often difficult to assess the environmental benefits of land use planning for sustainable land use management as well as rural area management. Case
studies in Argentina and Mexico, for example, suggest that the benefits of land use regulation are less readily apparent in rural areas (e.g., agricultural land).
This is partly because, in rural areas, many land use restrictions imposed are related to the protection of common and scarce goods (e.g., protection of
biological diversity, ecosystem services, or preservation of water quality). The benefits derived from ecosystem services, although widely recognized, do not
easily translate into tangible economic value to landowners that are burdensome to regulatory restrictions. Therefore, rural landowners are often reluctant
to challenge land use restrictions and regulations that impose direct costs on them, such as the los ing of productivity, when other indirect benefits are
associated with better environmental citizenship.

Land use planning should improve multi-sectoral coordination and land use efficiency through sectoral trade-offs.

Policy decisions shaping land use require that trade-offs be included among sectoral interests, including industry. transportation, and also energy, mining,
agriculture, forestry, recreation, as well as environmental protection and conservation. A comprehensive and integrated land use policy approach across
multiple sectors, e.g., social and environmental issues, are often lacking, for example in the European Union. This absence, in turn, creates land use
conflicts. Trade-offs can exist through integrated land use and spatial planning, as well as the targeting of policy instruments such as protected area
networks.

For example, territorial conflicts exist between: hydropower generation, the objectives of the Water Framework Directive, the indirect impacts of land use
on bio-energy production; the influence of wind power generation on the landscape and its impact on bird life, and at a larger scale, the phenomenon of
urban sprawl and the objectives of many centers.

Integrated programs for land use planning, development, and regional management are needed.

Sustainable land management must be sophisticated and adopted through the integration of cross-sectoral policies (e.g. land use, energy, and water
resources management) into a single planning instrument, and at the regional level, based on an understanding and recognition of territorial dynamics.

Enhancing multi-level governance is a key. Land governance should be structured to enhance horizontal coordination of sectoral administrations and
policies, vertical coordination at different administrative levels, and include public participation in multi-sectoral coordination. Lack of horizontal (sectoral)
and vertical (institutional) coordination and integration of policies (in addition to the weakening of land use planning) has been identified as a driver of
urban sprawl in Europe. City boundaries are becoming more diffuse, increasing the complexity of determining which level of government is responsible for
which land (e.g., intermediate metropolitan administrations). Local and regional administrations can be effective in land use planning and management, as
well as in preventing and resolving spatial conflicts. The local level has a strong role to play, i.e., ensuring monitoring of changes and consistency of land use
with spatial planning.

An accessible and efficient knowledge base is needed.

Land use planning is designed based on good soil information and it is essential to achieve sustainable management of land and land resources as one of
the overarching goals of the policy process. Access to soil information is essential for assessing land capability and suitability, and therefore land needs to be
managed within its range of capability and to prevent degradation of its quality. This requires an understanding of inherent properties, and their spatial
distribution at the appropriate scale. Planners rely on easy interpretation of information from land capability maps to suit their needs. A good example of
such mapping is the use of high capability land for agricultural irrigation, which, once identified, can protect against potential subdivision and change in land
use. This can occur in local, regional, and national land use planning.

Better promotion of public and private investment in the existence and management of land use and social planning is needed. Economic and tax incentives
are needed for individuals and public or private organizations to use land for conservatory purposes.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. De Warchien, Daniele. Year of Publication (?). Land Use Planning: a Key to Sustainable Agriculture. Italy: State University of Milan.
2. Widodo, Trisno. 2013. Kajian Ketersediaan Air Tanah terkait Pemanfaatan Lahan di Kabupaten Blitar. Semarang: Biro Penerbit Planolog
i Undip;
3. Trimarwanti, Tessie dan Krisnaningtyas, Endang. 2014. Evaluasi Perubahan Penatagunaan Tanah. Semarang: Biro Penerbit Planologi Un
dip;
4. Kurnianingsih, Nela Agustin, dkk. 2014. Analisis Transformasi Wilayah Peri – Urban pada Aspek Fisik dan Sosial Ekonomi (Kecamatan
Kartasura). Semarang: Biro Penerbit Planologi Undip;
5. Metternicht, G. 2017. Global Land Outlook Working Paper Land Use Planning Disclaimer. Publisher’s Name and Year of Publication (?)
6. Fasika, A., Motuma, T., & Gizaw, T. (2019). Land Use: Land Cover, Change Trend and Its Drivers in Somodo Watershed South Western,
Ethiopia. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 14 (2), 102–117. https://doi.org/10.5897/ajar2018.13672.
7. Tjondronegoro, S. M. P. 2003. Land Policies in Indonesia. Publisher’s Name and Year of Publication (?)
8. Quigley, J. M., Rosenthal, L. A., & Quigley, R. (2005). The Effects of Land Use Regulation on the Price of Housing: What Do We Know?
What Can We Learn? The Effects of Land Use Regulation on the Price of Housing: What Do We Know? What Can We Learn? Cityscap
e 69. In Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research • (Vol. 8, Issue 1).
9. Briassoulis, H. (n.d.) Factors Influencing Land-Use and Land-Cover Change. Publisher’s Name and Year of Publication (?)
10. Author’s Name (?). 2017.The Governance of Land Use. Publisher’s Name and Year of Publication (?)
11. Box, P. 2004. Republic Of Rwanda Ministry of Lands, Environment, Forests, Water, and Mines. Publisher’s Name and Year of Publicati
on (?)
12. Magigi, W., & K Majani, B. B. (n.d.). TS 19-Planning in Informal Settlements Wakuru Magigi and B. B: K. Majani TS19.3 Planning Sta
ndards for Urban Land Use Planning for Effective Land Management in Tanzania: An Analytical Framework for its Adoptability in Infr
astructure Utility and Facility Provisioning in Informal Settlements Planning Standards for Urban Land Use Planning for Effective Land
 Management in Tanzania: An Analytical Framework for Its Adoptability in Infrastructure Provisioning in Informal Settlements . Website’
s Name and Date of Retrieval (?)
13. 03 BAB II. (n.d.).
14. 07 BAB II. (n.d.).
15. 4-7-2-PB. (n.d.).
16. 19_P0303216007(FILEminimizer) ... ok 1-2. (n.d.).
17. Tarru, S. Year of Publication (?). Korespondensi A. Tarru. S. Hut. (n.d.). Penggunaan Lahan Pada Berbagai Kelas Kemampuan Lahan di
Sub DAS Kelara Bagian Hulu pada Desa Jenetallasa Kecamatan Rumbia Kabupaten Jeneponto (Land Use in Various Land of Capability
Class in the Upstream Part of Kelara Sub-Watersheds, Jenetallasa Village, Rumbia Sub-District, Jeneponto District.
18. Kajian Hidrologi pada Satuan Penggunaan Lahan … Sutarno. (n.d.).
19. Kajian Hidrologi pada Satuan Penggunaan Lahan … Sutarno. (n.d.).
20. Kajian Hidrologi pada Satuan Penggunaan Lahan … Sutarno. (n.d.).
21. 4167-10667-1-SM. (n.d.)
22. Benu, Y., Melkianus, D., Program, P., Hutan, S. P., Kehutanan, J., Pertanian, P., Kupang, N., Prof. J. Yohanes, H. (n.d.). 1424 PARTNER ,
TAHUN 25 NOMOR 2.
23. 6516-13924-1-SM. (n.d.).
24. 17822-58145-1-PB. (n.d.).
25. 7784-16930-1-SM. (n.d.).
26. Wahyudi, A. 2019. Evaluasi Kesesuaian Lahan dan Arahan Pengendalian Pemanfaatan Ruang di Kecamatan Mandau. Jurnal Pembangu
nan Wilayah & Kota, 15 (3). https://doi.org/10.14710/pwk.v15i3.21681. Date of Retrieval (?)
27. 8166-17985-1-SM. (n.d.).
28. Widodo, W., & Sunarti, S. 2019. Pola Perkembangan Perumahan di Kota Surakarta. Jurnal Pembangunan Wilayah & Kota, 15 (4), 288.
https://doi.org/10.14710/pwk.v15i4.21984
29. 2.2 Konversi Lahan. (n.d.).
30. Mukhoriyah, M., Arifin, S., Dewi, E. K., & Silvia, S. 2021. Analysis of Development Patterns of Built Land and Spatial Structure in Ban
dung City Using Landsat 8 Image Data. Jurnal Ilmu Lingkungan, 19 (1), 36–42. https://doi.org/10.14710/jil.19.1.36-42
31. Nabal, A. R. J., Panjaitan, N., Septianti, E., Oktapriana, R., Rachmawati, R., Tenricapa, S., (2020). Distribusi Populasi Sebagai Model Pe
ngembangan Kota Berimbang (Population Distribution as a Model of Balanced City Development Open Access. Jurnal Pembangunan W
ilayah dan Kota, 16 (3), 214–226. https://doi.org/10.14710/pwk.v16i3.30068
32. Oleh. (n.d.). Pola dan Faktor Penentu Nilai Lahan Perkotaan di Kota Surakarta: Tugas Akhir. University Name (?)
33. Endarwati, K., Hari, W., Widodo, S., Hamidah Imaduddina, A., Year of Publication (2021). Penataan Sempadan di Perkotaan Bojonegor
o: Kali Kapas. (2021). Artikel terpilih dari Seminar Nasional Daring ASPI (Asosiasi Sekolah Perencanaan Indonesia) 2020 ABSTRAK. 1
7 (1), 108–118. https://doi.org/10.14710/pwk.v17i1.36535
34. 148617859. (n.d.).
35. Arsyad, U., Soma, A. S., Wahyuni, W., & Arief, T. R. (2017). Kesesuaian dan Arahan Penggunaan Lahan Berdasarkan Rencana Pola Ru
ang Wilayah di Hulu Daerah Aliran Sungai Kelara. Jurnal Hutan dan Masyarakat, 9 (2), 75. https://doi.org/10.24259/jhm.v9i2.2872
36. Rezki, A., Juita, E., Zella Putra Ulni Sumber, A., & Oleh, D., 2017. Studi Pendidikan Geografi di PGRI Sumatera Barat (NAGARI CUB
ADAK): Sebuah Studi Kasus. Nomor 2. http://ejournal.stkip-pgri-sumbar.ac.id/index.php/spasial
37. 1291861005-3-BAB II. (n.d.).
38. Name of the Author (?). Year of Publication (?). Teori Alih Lahan. Bab II. Name and City of the Publisher(?)
39. BAB II ANGGA. (n.d.).
40. Multifungsi Pertanian dan Konservasi Sumber Daya Lahan. Bogor, 18 Desember 2003 dan 7 Januari 2004: Prosiding Seminar. (2004).
Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Tanah dan Agroklimat, Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pertanian, Departemen Pertanian.
41. 9 2.1.1 Nilai Lahan, Harga Lahan, dan Faktor Lokasi. (n.d.).
42. Oleh: ASYELLIA TRI OKMALIASARI E 100 170 302 Telah disetujui untuk dipertahankan didepan Dewan Penguji. (n.d.).
43. Sri, O., Soedjoko, A., & Belakang, L. (n.d.). Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Lahan.
44. Mulyani, A., Agus, F., & Subagyo, D. (n.d.). Penggunaan Lahan Pertanian dan Arah Pengembangan ke Depan.
45. PWKL4104-TMK. (n.d.).
46. Optimalisasi Lahan Dengan Pola Agroforestry. (n.d.).
47. Anita Sitawati, I. W. (n.d.). Konsep Dasar Penggunaan Lahan. http://www.raharjo.org/nature/penutupan-dan-penggunaan-lahan.html
48. Mulyani, A., Agus, F., & Subagyo, D. (n.d.). Penggunaan Lahan Pertanian dan Arah Pengembangan ke Depan.
49. UNIKOM_Sarwendami_BAB II. (n.d.).
50. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Multifungsi Pertanian dan Ketahanan Pangan, 12 Oktober dan 24 Desember 2004. (n.d.).
51. PUBLIKASI ILMIAH. (n.d.).
52. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Multifungsi Pertanian dan Ketahanan Pangan, 12 Oktober dan 24 Desember 2004. (n.d.).
53. 7632-16622-1-SM (1). (n.d.).
54. 4996-Full_Text. (n.d.).
55. 7632-16622-1-SM. (n.d.).
56. Kapten, J., & Basri, M. (2023). Book’s/Publication’s Title (?). Universitas Muhammadiyah Sumatera Utara, Fakultas Teknik. Terbitan k
e-3.
57. Rio Firdaus Hasibuan - 1. (n.d.).