Advertisement

Journal of Mountain Science

, Volume 15, Issue 7, pp 1471–1480 | Cite as

Land use optimization for sustainable development of mountain regions of western Serbia

  • Tijana Vulević
  • Mirjana Todosijević
  • Nada Dragović
  • Miodrag Zlatić
Article
  • 31 Downloads

Abstract

This study analyses the possibilities for optimal land use structure in mountainous areas of rural Serbia, which is faced with problems such as unfavorable terrain characteristics and inadequate land use patterns causing economic underdevelopment and increasing population migration. In the case of a small privately owned farm in Western Serbia, optimal land use pattern is determined using the linear programming model. The objective function-cost-effectiveness or soil erosion reduction, as well as constraints, are formulated using the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) for a 15-year production period and soil losses data calculated using the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE). The best results are achieved using the scenario with the aim to minimize soil erosion, considering the BCR in the constraints. This scenario is proposed since it was registered that the benefit for landowners would increase by five times, while the losses of land would decline about 80%. The sensitivity analysis of investments is performed to check whether the price variation affects the cost-effectiveness of proposed land use. Results show that market changes (nine cases are considered) do not lead to significant changes in land use allocation. Proposed land use pattern improves the environmental condition, strengthens the rural economy and thus offers the greatest potential for sustainable development of mountainous rural areas.

Keywords

Cost-benefit analysis Linear programming Land use optimization Mountain region Soil erosion 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This paper is a part of the Project No. 43007, subproject No.16 funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia.

References

  1. Bakker MM, Govers G, Kosmas C, et al. (2005) Soil erosion as a driver of land–use change. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 105(3): 467–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2004.07.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bazaraa MS, Jarvis JJ, Sherali HD (2005) Linear Programming and Network Flows. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. p 768.Google Scholar
  3. Benkobi L, Trlica MJ, Smith JL (1994) Evaluation of a refined surface cover subfactor to use in RUSLE. Journal of Range Management 47(1): 74–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beskow S, Mello CR, Norton LD, et al. (2009) Soil erosion prediction in the Grande River Basin, Brazil using distributed modeling. Catena 79(1): 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2009.05.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bogdanov N, Vasiljević Z (2011) Role of agriculture and multifunctional rural development in Serbia. APSTRACT: Applied Studies in Agribusiness and Commerce Agroinform Publishing House 05: 47–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chamheidar H, Nikkami D, Mahdian MH, et al. (2011) Soil loss minimization through Land Use Optimization. World Applied Sciences Journal 12(1): 76–82.Google Scholar
  7. Chuvieco E (1993) Integration of linear programming and GIS for land–use modeling. International Journal of Geographical Information Systems 7(1): 71–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/02693799308901940 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Detomini ER, de Figueiredo MG (2012) Optimising land use and water allocation in intercropping systems. Revista de Política Agrícola XXI (1): 92–102.Google Scholar
  9. Dragicevic S, Filipovic D, Kostadinov S, et al. (2011) Natural Hazard Assessment for Land–use Planning in Serbia. International Journal of Environmental Research 5(2): 371–380. https://doi.org/10.22059/ijer.2011.322 Google Scholar
  10. FAO (2013a) 2000 World Census of Agriculture: Analysis and International Comparison of the Results (1996–2005) Rome, FAOGoogle Scholar
  11. FAO (2013b) Statistical Yearbook 2013: World Food and Agriculture, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.Google Scholar
  12. Harwood J, Heifner R, Coble K, et al. (1999) Market and Trade Economics Division and Resource Economics Division, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Economic Report No. 774.Google Scholar
  13. Hazell P, Poulton C, Wiggins S, et al. (2010) The future of small farms: Trajectories and Policy Priorities. World Development 38(10): 1349–1361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2009.06.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lowder SK, Skoet J, Singh S (2014) What do we really know about the number and distribution of farms and family farms worldwide? Background paper for The State of Food and Agriculture 2014. ESA Working Paper No.14–02, Rome, FAO.Google Scholar
  15. Mandal SK (2003) Impact of land use change on soil and water in the tropical mountain ecosystem: Case study of a watershed in the Indian Himalayas in an ecological economic framework. In: Zlatić M et al. (eds.), Proceedings of natural and socio–economic effects of erosion control in mountainous regions. Belgrade, Serbia, pp 305–314.Google Scholar
  16. Manos B, Chatzinikolaou P, Kiomourtzi F (2013) Sustainable Optimization of Agricultural Production. APCBEE Procedia 5: 410–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcbee.2013.05.071 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Morgan RPC (2005) Soil erosion and conservation, 3rd Edition, Australian: Blackwell Publishing Company, p 122–123.Google Scholar
  18. Nikkami D, Shbani M, Ahmadi H (2009) Land use scenarios and Optimization in a Watershed. Journal of Applied Sciences 9(2): 287–209. https://doi.org/10.3923/jas.2009.287.295 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Qi HM, Altinakar S (2011) A conceptual framework of agricultural land use planning with BMP for integrated watershed management. Journal of Environmental Management 92(1): 149–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.08.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Owji, MR, Nikkami D, Mahdian MH, et al. (2012) Minimizing Surface Runoff by Optimizing Land Use Management 20(1): 170–176.Google Scholar
  21. Sadeghi SHR, Jalili Kh, Nikkami D (2009) Land use optimization in watershed scale. Land Use Policy 26(2): 186–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.02.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shucksmith M, Rønningen K (2011) The Uplands after neoliberalism?–The role of the small farm in rural sustainability. Journal of Rural Studies 27(3): 275–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2011.03.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Todosijević M, Zlatić M, Dragović N, et al. (2014) Sustainable Management of Soil Resources in Mountainous Areas of Western Serbia Using Conservation Measures. In: Zlatic M and Kostadinov S (eds.), Challenges: Sustainable Land Management–Climate Change, Advances in Geoecology 43, Catena Verlag GMBH. pp 136–147.Google Scholar
  24. UNFCCC (2011) Assessing the costs and benefits of adaptation options: An overview of approaches. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).Google Scholar
  25. Wiggins S, Kirsten J, Llambi L (2010) The future of small farms. World Development 38(10): 1341–1348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2009.06.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wischmeier WH, Smith DD (1978) Predicting Rainfall erosion Losses: A Guide to Conservation Planning. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Handbook No. 537. p 62.Google Scholar
  27. Yong X, Qing T (2009) Land use optimization at small watershed scale on the Loess Plateau. Journal of Geographical Sciences 19(5): 577–586.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11442-009-0577-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Zander P, Kächele H (1999) Modelling multiple objectives of land use for sustainable development. Agricultural Systems 59(3): 311–325.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-521X(99)00017-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science Press, Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, CAS and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of BelgradeFaculty of ForestryBelgradeSerbia

Personalised recommendations