Agriculture as Part of an Integrated Land Use Planning Approach

Transcription

1 Agriculture as Part of an Integrated Land Use Planning Approach Julia Neuwirth, Klaus Wagner Federal Institute of Agricultural Economics Diplom-Ingenieur of Landscape Architecture and Planning Julia Neuwirth MSc of Regional Planning and Development Klaus Wagner Federal Institute of Agricultural Economics Marxergasse Vienna julia.neuwirth@awi.bmlfuw.gv.at klaus.wagner@awi.bmlfuw.gv.at 1. Introduction Since the flood disaster in 2002, when widespread areas of Europe were endangered, risk management and flood prevention are resounded throughout the nations. Solely technical solutions for flood prevention are very expensive, but also do not meet the demands of sustainable development. However, harmonization and coordination of concerned disciplines are indispensable for a sustainable risk and land management of river basins. An interdisciplinary collaboration among affected authorities allows detection and development of common strategies and instruments for sustainable development and reduction of usage conflicts in river basins areas. The INTERREG IIIB project Integrated Land Use Planning and River Basin Management (ILUP) with a duration of 2003 to 2006 picked up this integrated approach. The project s main aim targets at the development and implementation of an integrated river basin management for reducing risks and preventing floods by adapted land use. For this purposes project areas in the Czech Republic (Moravia basin), in Germany (basins of the Danube side tributaries Vils and Rott), in Hungary (Raab basin) and Austria (Ybbs basin) were chosen. The following paper shows the results of the Austrian project region, where an evaluation of the multifunctionality of agricultural areas took place in four reference communities showing a broad range of different natural conditions as well as different levels of production, resource protection, hazard conditions, diversity, recreation concerns and spatial structuring effects. The determination and consideration of these multifarious functions of land is necessary for a controlled and sustainable development in future, which is going to be implemented by agricultural development plans on community levels. The results allow conclusions to the values of benefits of agricultural land beneath physical production. 2. The term integrated land use planning in the context of multifunctionality and sustainability Main purpose of agriculture was the production of food, feed and raw materials (commodity outputs) by the use of the factors work, capital and land. Additional and coeval to that volitional production other products occur, called externalities. Externalities are given when legitimate economic activities of an economic subject cause side effects in an unintended way, which lead directly to utility and production of other economic subjects. Secondly, the absence of compensations is characteristic for externalities (Hofreither 1996). Nowadays an increased awareness can be stated, which ascribes additional production of non-commodity

2 outputs in accordance with nature conservation, tourism, landscape etc. to agriculture. For example, Wytrzens and Pistrich (2000) identified eight non-agricultural forms of land use, such as water management, nature conservation, military, tourism and recreation, danger zones and safety areas, waste management, hunting, and secondary spatial uses. And Wiggering et al. (2005) stated effects of agricultural land use on the topics environment, economy, social issues, culture, and ecosystems. The concept of farming as a multifunctional activity became part of the EU Common Agricultural Policy as base of argumentation for agri-environmental payments (Harte and O Connell 2003). Even though in the same time the term became a diffuse catchphrase, it can be stated as implementation approach of the concept of sustainable development (Wiggering et al. 2003). In general, multifunctionality of agriculture can be seen as the whole sum of the production function and positive externalities. According to the definition of FAO (1993) the term land use planning means the systematic assessment of land and water potential, alternatives for land use and economic and social conditions in order to select and adopt the best land-use options. Its purpose is to select and put into practice those land uses that will best meet the needs of the people while safeguarding resources for the future. This definition shows on the one hand the integration of the multifunctionality approach within land use planning and on the others the strong embedding of land use planning as an implementation instrument of the concept of sustainable development. As it turned out that conventional land-use planning failed in improving land management as well as in satisfying prior objectives of the land users an extension of the term had to be undertaken. Henceforth, the extended term integrated land-use planning also takes into account the different levels of implementation, such as policies, planning, management, monitoring and evaluation, institutions and coordinating mechanisms and bottom-up initiatives (FAO 2007). In the context of ILUP project the meaning of the term integrated focuses on the collaboration of a broad range of experts of different fields of knowledge, which are affected by sustainable land use planning and river basin management. 3. Methods and data of measuring and evaluation multifunctional agricultural areas Four reference communities in the watershed of the river Ybbs have been chosen for a detailed evaluation. The communities Strengberg, Seitenstetten, Waidhofen, and Göstling represent the whole range of different natural conditions and land use potentials in the river basin. To get a clear picture about the different functions of agricultural areas the communities are subdivided into functional areas due to geomorphologic conditions. As far as possible the functional units are homogenous in terms of agricultural land use. A theoretical approach for determination and evaluation of land functions had already been developed in former projects (see Greif et al., 2002) and identified six main functions of agricultural land, which were adapted to the common project scale (~1:25,000), to the thematic focus of risk management and to the specific situation of regional data availability. An evaluation model was developed for each function. The results of each function were transformed into a common scale from 1 (unimportant) to 5 (highly important) to facilitate a comparison of the different functions. The next passage gives an overview about the stated functions and their source of data.

3 Production function derives from the Austrian digital soil map which gives information about the soil quality for arable land and grassland (share of different soil quality classes per ha agricultural area). The resource protection function takes into account risks for wind and water erosion as well as risks for leaking pollutants into the groundwater in connection with the current land use. Data source is the digital soil map and the IACS (Integrated Administration Control System for the CAP) of the Ministry of Agriculture. Data of the hazard protection function come from the Austrian hazard risk maps (share of hazard risk zones per ha agricultural area) and give evidence of the importance of hazard risks in the specific zones. Diversity function includes on the one hand the diversity of the special agricultural land use (number of parcels per ha agricultural area) and on the other the structure of the influenced cultural landscape (size of landscape elements per ha). Sources of data are aerial pictures and IACS. Due to the approach recreational function is expressed in number of inhabitants and overnight stays of tourists but also depends on the diversity of the landscape, because of its use as recreational area. Data used come from statistical census, Statistik Austria, aerial pictures and from IACS. The spatial structuring function involves weighted interference lines in agricultural areas (e.g. streets, railroads, energy lines, border lines to built up zones per ha agricultural area) and provides an insight into the burden or disturbance of the agricultural zones. Information is derived from different maps (such as ÖK50) and from aerial pictures. The project design concludes five main steps: 1. Analyses of the regional economic situation in the catchment area of river Ybbs. 2. Concept of functions of agricultural land, indicators and data sources. 3. Evaluation of functions in reference communities by delineation of functional units as well as calculation and calibration of indicators. 4. Analyses of strengths and weaknesses of functions in connection with land use. 5. Elaboration and evaluation of different scenarios and their effects on functions of agricultural land. 4. Introduction of the project area River Ybbs basin The river Ybbs, situated in Lower Austria, runs from the Austrian limestone alps in northern direction to the river Danube (see graph 1). The whole basin comprises an area of ~275,000 ha from which 140,000 ha are covered by forests, 74,000 ha are grassland and 66,000 ha are arable land. The altitude of the catchment area varies from 1,800m in the alps to 300m at the Danube. Accordingly, precipitation ranges from 1,750 mm to 700 mm per year. Approximately 190,000 people live in the basin, spread over 69 communities. Only two cities in the region have more than 10,000 inhabitants, most of the other communities are small villages. The alpine sub-region is threatened by demographic decline because of migration, forestation and loss of settlement areas. Economic emphasis is situated in the secondary sector. In many small communities 15 to 20% of people are working in the agricultural sector. 55% of the people in the region are working in industries and 34 % in the service sector. Only in a few communities tourism is an economic pillar. The agricultural land use corresponds to the natural resources. Beside small shares of intensively used grassland in the valley grounds and extensively used grassland on the slopes and up in the mountains, forests cover most of the area in the southern alpine region - the

4 reference community of this area is Göstling. The land of the extensive transition zone is used for one third each as wood, grassland and arable land - the communities Waidhofen and Seitenstetten are representatives for this area. In the hilly region near the Danube arable land use dominates with big shares of market crops and corn production especially for pig fattening - Strengberg functions as reference community of this region. Nearly 93% of farm enterprises keep animals. The number of cattle in the mountainous sub-region decreases, while pig and poultry farming in the hilly region are stable (Wagner, 2005). Danube Ybbs Graph 1: Location of the Austrian river Ybbs basin 5. Results of the evaluation of functions of agricultural land The evaluation of the functions of agricultural areas on regional scale took place in four communities of the watershed of river Ybbs: Göstling, Waidhofen an der Ybbs, Seitenstetten and Strengberg represent the different natural conditions of the basin. The results show the different patterns of functions in the specific functional units. Exemplarily four typical patterns are discussed (see graph 2). Strengberg Seitenstetten Waidhofen Göstling Cutline of functions Production Hazard Protection Resource protection Diversity Recreation Spatial Structuring Graph 2: Results of the evaluation of functions of agricultural land in the reference communities Strengberg, Seitenstetten, Waidhofen, and Göstling A typical pattern occurs in the hilly landscape of Strengberg, where production function is an important factor, but all the other functions got only a few points. One threat in this productive zone is the further intensification of agriculture. The consequence would be erosion and groundwater pollution. Thus, a decrease in potentials of diversity and recreation would continue. Result of this possible future development could be diminished chances for developing other pillars in the regional economy. In the broad valley of the Treffling creek in Seitenstetten a high value for the production function can be stated. As grassland prevails in this region and as grassland is the best form of resource protection among the forms of agricultural land use the values in resource protection are on a high level, too. Diversity is at a medium level and could be improved. The functions

5 of recreation and spatial structuring are on a low level, because of the lack of demand, as in this area no bigger settlements are situated. Especially in the surrounding of the city of Waidhofen, located in a narrow valley, the pattern of functions is an extreme one. The function of production is on a very low level but all the other functions show the highest values. This situation indicates the big importance of agricultural areas or at least maintained open areas for the community although agriculture does not really need these areas. The last open spaces in this area are needed for water run off areas in the case of floods, as retention areas, recreation areas and for maintaining biodiversity as well as the spatial structure of the city. If agriculture gives up, these areas have to be kept open by other services or technical solutions are needed. Consequences have to be found for flood protection, and to maintain the attractiveness of the city in terms of diversity. Otherwise the recreation function would suffer. In some parts of the alpine limestone region (community of Göstling) the function of production was evaluated relatively low while hazard and resource protection as well as recreation got higher points in the system. This is a hint to a well adapted agricultural land use. It shows the importance of open space for prevention and protection and the potentials for recreation. The recent development in this area shows the threat of forestation. If forest gains more space the potential of further land use would shorten and could result in further migration of inhabitants as well as in the loss of attractiveness of the landscape for tourists and inhabitants. Long term problems occur when forests arise by afforestation or natural growth, which accord with the definition of the Austrian forest law 1975, as restrictions of use and of clear-cuttings are linked with that term. However, a re-development to agricultural land would be hindered and therefore does not meet the demands of sustainability anymore. The results of this multifunctional approach point out the specific situations the authorities have to deal with in the different subregions of the basin. Production is often not the most important function of agricultural land anymore, but other functions are estimated as very valuable. In this case agricultural areas or at least open space is of high importance for the society. If the agricultural land use disappears, other solutions have to be found to keep the functions required - especially areas for recreation near settlements or open space for unhindered water run-off have to be maintained. The different patterns of these functions in an agricultural view are a starting point for discussions regarding strengths, deficits, threats or priorities of a sustainable and integrated development with other sectors like forestry, water management and spatial planning. 6. Resume The results of the evaluation of river Ybbs basin mirror the different preconditions for a well adapted and risk minimizing land use. The alpine sub-region with its difficult natural conditions allows just a few land use alternatives. Agriculture requires a minimum amount of settlement and infrastructure to maintain the open landscape as an amenity potential for tourism. Moreover, it preserves water run-off areas in the valley grounds. In the transition zone and the hilly landscape at the mountain fringe agriculture is restructuring as a consequence of the Common Agricultural Policy. The results of this multifunctional approach show the specific situation the authorities have to deal within the different subregions of the basin. Production is often not the most important function of agricultural land anymore, but other functions are estimated very valuable. In this case agricultural areas or at least open space is of high importance for the society. If the agricultural land use disappears, other solutions have to be found to keep the functions, especially the one of recreation near settlements or to keep the open space for unhindered

6 water run-off. The different patterns of the functions of agricultural land point out, that a sustainable and integrated development needs close collaboration among affected sectors like agriculture, forestry, water management and spatial planning. The results of the evaluations show that on the one hand agriculture can make valuable contributions to maintain the open landscape as an amenity potential for tourism and recreation, to support of biodiversity and to the preservation of water run-off areas in the valley grounds. On the other hand agriculture can be a source of regional problems regarding soil stabilisation and erosion, loss of biodiversity, nutrient inputs etc. Therefore, the national rural development programmes should meet these regional demands by reducing negative side effects of agriculture and by giving incentives for functions of agricultural land, that fulfil other needs of the society than solely production, at the same time. The applied methodological approach of the ILUP project gives the chance to picture multifunctionality of agricultural land in general and in river basins in special, it points out regional priorities in land use and raises awareness for additional functions of agriculture besides production. And these are the basic requirements for an integrated and sustainable land use planning and for setting measures, which meet specific regional needs. 7. References FAO (1993): Guidelines for Land-use Planning. FAO Development Series 1. Rome. FAO (2007): The Future of Our Land: Facing the Challenge. June Greif, F.; Pfusterschmid, S.; Wagner, K. (2002): Beiträge zur landwirtschaftlichen Raumplanung. Schriftenreihe der Bundesanstalt für Agrarwirtschaft Nr. 93, Wien. Harte, L.; O Connell, J. (2003): How well do Agri-Environmental Payments conform with Multifunctionality? In: EuroChoices, vol. 2, no. 1, p Hofreither, M. (1996): Bewertung von Umweltleistungen der Land- und Forstwirtschaft. In: Der Förderungsdienst, vol. 44, no. 1, p Wagner, K. (2005): Die regionalwirtschaftliche Situation im Einzugsgebiet der Ybbs, in: Ländlicher Raum, Internet Journal of the Austrian Ministry of Agriculture, February 2005 Wiggering, H.; Müller, K.; Werner, A.; Helming, K. (2003): The Concept of Multifunctionality in Sustainable Land Development. In: Helming, K. and Wiggering, H. (Eds.): Sustainable Development of Multifunctional Landscapes. Springer-Verlag; Berlin, Heidelberg, New York. Wiggering, H.; Helming, K.; Hecker, S. (2005): Multifunktionalität und deren Quantifizierung. In: Agrarische Rundschau 6/2005, p Wytrzens, H.K.; Pistrich, K. (2000): Measuring the multifunctionality of mountainous grassland in Austria. Contribution to the International Conference on Multifunctional Landscapes Interdisciplinary Approaches to Landscape Research and Management, Roskilde, Oct , 2000.