Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Human-Environment Interactions pp 295–318Cite as

Land-Use Institutions and Natural Resources in Fast-Growing Communities at the Urban-Rural Fringe

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Human-Environment Interactions ((HUEN,volume 1))

Abstract

In the last several decades, urban decentralization and the conversion of formerly natural or agricultural areas have become the norm in much of the United States. Effective policies to constrain or mediate such growth and its effect on rural landscapes are a major priority at local and regional levels. Past research on land-use policies’ ability to protect natural resources has not paid sufficient attention to the effects of the land market; rising land values, particularly when spatially differentiated, complicate policy efforts to stave off development in environmentally valuable areas. In this chapter, we review key lessons from the literature and provide examples from empirical work in Ohio, Indiana, and Arizona. Better understanding of spatial impacts of land-use institutions across a wide range of contexts will enable planners and policy makers to craft more effective policies balancing costs and benefits of development.

The Indiana work was supported by the Biocomplexity Project at the Center for the Study of Institutions, Population, and Environmental Change, Indiana University, through National Science Foundation grant SES0083511. The Arizona work was supported by the National Science Foundation under grant number DEB-0423704, Central Arizona-Phoenix Long-Term Ecological Research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abbott, J. K., & Klaiber, H. A. (2010). Is all space created equal? Uncovering the relationship between competing land uses in subdivisions. Ecological Economics, 70(2), 296–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altshuler, A. A., Gomez-Ibanez, J. A., & Howitt, A. M. (1993). Regulation for revenue: The political economy of land use exactions. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. E. (2005). Taxes and fees as forms of land use regulation. Journal of Real Estate, Finance and Economics, 31(4), 413–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babcock, R. F. (1966). The zoning game. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Babcock, R. F., & Siemon, C. L. (1985). The zoning game revisited. Boston: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Been, V. (2005). Impact fees and housing affordability. Cityscape, 8(1), 139–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bengston, D. N., Fletcher, J. O., & Nelson, K. C. (2004). Public policies for managing urban growth and protecting open space: Policy instruments and lessons learned in the United States. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69(2–3), 271–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, B. J. L. (1980). Urbanization and counterurbanization in the United States. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 451(1), 13–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berube, A., Singer, A., Wilson, J. H., & Frey, W. H. (2006). Finding exurbia: America’s fast-growing communities at the metropolitan fringe. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bluffstone, R., Braman, M., Fernandez, L., Scott, T., & Lee, P. Y. (2008). Housing, sprawl, and the use of development impact fees: The case of the Inland Empire. Contemporary Economic Policy, 26(3), 433–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brabec, E., & Smith, C. (2002). Agricultural land fragmentation: The spatial effects of three land protection strategies in the eastern United States. Landscape and Urban Planning, 58, 255–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brueckner, J. K. (1997). Infrastructure financing and urban development: The economics of impact fees. Journal of Public Economics, 66(3), 383–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brueckner, J. K. (2000). Urban sprawl: Diagnosis and remedies. International Regional Science Review, 23(2), 160–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunce, M. F. (1985). Agricultural land as a real estate commodity: Implications for farmland preservation in the North American urban fringe. Landscape Planning, 12(2), 177–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burchell, R. W., & Downs, A. (2005). Sprawl costs: Economic impacts of unchecked development. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burchfield, M., Overman, H. G., Puga, D., & Turner, M. A. (2006). Causes of sprawl: A portrait from space. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(2), 587–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burge, G., & Ihlanfeldt, K. (2009). Development impact fees and employment. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 39(1), 54–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capozza, D. R., & Helsley, R. W. (1989). The fundamentals of land prices and urban growth. Journal of Urban Economics, 26(3), 295–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capozza, D. R., & Li, Y. (1994). The intensity and timing of investment: The case of land. American Economic Review, 84(4), 889–904.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carruthers, J. L. (2003). Growth at the fringe: The influence of political fragmentation in United States metropolitan areas. Papers in Regional Science, 82(4), 475–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, J. I. (2008). State and local fiscal sustainability: The challenges. Public Administration Review, 68, 115–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, J. K., Sharp, J. S., Irwin, E., & Libby, L. (2003). Growth and change at the rural-urban interface: An overview of Ohio’s changing population and land use. Columbus: Exurban Change Project, Department of Agricultural, Environmental, and Development Economics, The Ohio State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, J. K., McChesney, R., Munroe, D. K., & Irwin, E. G. (2009). Spatial characteristics of exurban settlement pattern in the United States. Landscape and Urban Planning, 90(3–4), 178–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, J. N., & Angersbach, K. (2001). The federal four: Change and continuity in the Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, Forest Service, and National Park Service, 1970–2000. In C. Davis (Ed.), Western public lands and environmental politics (pp. 35–41). Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Culp, P. W., Laurenzi, A., & Tuell, C. C. (2006). State trust lands in the West: Fiduciary duty in a changing landscape (Policy Focus Report). Cambridge, MA: The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, H. L., & Noonan, P. F. (1996). Land use in America. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dow, K. (2000). Social dimensions of gradients in urban ecosystems. Urban Ecosystems, 4(4), 255–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downs, A. (1999). Some realities about sprawl and urban decline. Housing Policy Debate, 10(4), 955–974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downs, A. (2005). Smart growth: Why we discuss it more than we do it. Journal of the American Planning Association, 71(4), 367–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncombe, W., Robbins, M., & Wolf, D. A. (2003). Place characteristics and residential location choice among the retirement-age population. Journal of Gerontology B Psychological Social Science, 58, S244–S252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, E. C., Goldewijk, K. K., Siebert, S., Lightman, D., & Ramankutty, N. (2010). Anthropogenic transformation of the biomes, 1700 to 2000. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 19(5), 589–606.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, D. L. (1995). Rural land use and land cover change: Implications for local planning in the River Raisin watershed. Land Use Policy, 12(3), 223–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esparza, A. X., & Carruthers, J. I. (2000). Land use planning and exurbanization in the rural mountain West. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 20(1), 23–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans-Cowley, J. S., & Lawhon, L. L. (2003). The effects of impact fees on the price of housing and land: A literature review. Journal of Planning Literature, 17(3), 351–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans-Crowley, J. S., Forgey, F. A., & Rutherford, R. C. (2005). The effect of development impact fees on land values. Growth and Change, 36(1), 100–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewing, R. H. (1994). Characteristics, causes, and effects of sprawl: A literature review. Environmental and Urban Issues, 21(2), 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischel, W. A. (1985). The economics of zoning laws: A property rights approach to American land use controls. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischel, W. A. (2001). The homevoter hypothesis: How home values influence local government taxation, school finance, and land-use policies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frey, W. H. (2003). Boomers and seniors in the suburbs: Aging patterns in census 2000 (The Living City Census Series). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gammage, G., Jr. (1999). Phoenix in perspective: Reflections on developing the desert. Tempe: Herberger Center for Design Excellence, College of Architecture and Environmental Design, Arizona State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gober, P. (2006). Metropolitan Phoenix: Place making and community building in the desert. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gober, P., & Burns, E. K. (2002). The shape and size of Phoenix’s urban fringe. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 21, 379–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, B. W. (1978). Zoning and the exercise of monopoly power. Journal of Urban Economics, 5(1), 116–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardie, I. W., & Parks, P. J. (1997). Land use with heterogeneous land quality: An application of an area base model. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 79, 299–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harlan, S., Budruk, M., Gustafson, A., Larson, K., Ruddell, D., Smith, V., et al. (2007). Highlights of the 2006 Phoenix area social survey: Community and environment in a desert metropolis. Contribution No. 4, Central Arizona – Long-Term Ecological Research Project. Tempe: Global Institute of Sustainability, Arizona State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasse, J. E., & Lathrop, R. G. (2003). Land resource impact indicators of urban sprawl. Applied Geography, 23(2–3), 159–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, M. A., & Vandoren, P. M. (1990). Social policy through land reform: New Jersey’s Mount Laurel controversy. Political Science Quarterly, 105(1), 97–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iacono, M. J., & Levinson, D. M. (2009). Predicting land use change: How much does transportation matter? Transportation Research Record, 2119, 130–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ihlanfeldt, K. R., & Shaughnessy, T. M. (2004). An empirical investigation of the effects of impact fees on housing and land markets. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 34(6), 639–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irwin, E. G., & Bockstael, N. E. (2002). Interacting agents, spatial externalities and the evolution of residential land-use patterns. Journal of Economic Geography, 2(1), 31–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irwin, E. G., & Bockstael, N. E. (2007). The evolution of urban sprawl: Evidence of spatial heterogeneity and increasing land fragmentation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(52), 20672–20677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, M. G., & Feiock, R. C. (2006). Impact fees, growth management, and development: A contractual approach to local policy and governance. Urban Affairs Review, 41(6), 749–768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, E. A., & Klemens, M. W. (2005). Nature in fragments: The legacy of sprawl. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambin, E. F., & Geist, H. J. (Eds.). (2006). Land use and land cover change: Local processes, global impacts. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Logan, M. F. (1994). Fighting sprawl and city hall: Resistance to the urban growth in the Southwest. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, C. J., & Somerville, C. T. (2000). Land use regulation and new construction. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 30(6), 639–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCullagh, P. (1980). Regression models for ordinal data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B, 42(2), 109–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohai, P. (1997). Gender differences in the perception of most important environmental problems. Race, Gender and Class, 5(1), 153–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueser, P., & Graves, P. (1995). Examining the role of economic opportunity and amenities in explaining population redistribution. Journal Urban Economics, 37, 176–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munroe, D. K. (2010). Pattern-based evaluation of peri-urban development in Delaware County, Ohio, USA: Roads, zoning and spatial externalities. In A. Páez, J. Gallo, R. N. Buliung, & S. Dall'erba (Eds.), Progress in spatial analysis (pp. 149–169). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Munroe, D. K., & York, A. M. (2003). Jobs, houses, and trees: Changing regional structure, local land-use patterns, and forest cover in southern Indiana. Growth & Change, 34(3), 299–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munroe, D. K., Croissant, C., & York, A. M. (2005). Land use policy and landscape fragmentation in an urbanizing region: Assessing the impact of zoning. Applied Geography, 25(2), 121–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nash, G. D. (1994). New Mexico since 1940: An overview. In R. W. Etulain (Ed.), Contemporary New Mexico (pp. 1940–1990). Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. H. (1980). Zoning and property rights: An analysis of the American system of land use regulation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newburn, D. A., Berck, P., & Merenlender, A. M. (2006). Habitat and open space at risk of land-use conversion: Targeting strategies for land conservation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 88(1), 28–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, V., Tiebout, C. M., & Warren, R. (1999). The organization of government in metropolitan areas: A theoretical inquiry. In M. D. McGinnis (Ed.), Polycentricity and local public economies: Readings from the workshop in political theory and policy analysis (pp. 31–51). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, D. C., & Meretsky, V. (2004). Measuring pattern outcomes in an agent-based model of edge-effect externalities using spatial metrics. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 101(2–3), 233–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, M. J., & Mackun, P. J. (2001). Population change and distribution: 1990 to 2000 (2000 Census Brief C2KBR/01-2). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, P. E. (1981). City limits. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Planning Research, Inc. (2002). Development impact fees. Best Practices Paper: Growing Smarter Implementation Project. Phoenix: Maricopa Association of Governments.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudel, T. K. (1989). Situations and strategies in American land-use planning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slifkin, R. T., Randolph, R., & Ricketts, T. C. (2006). The changing metropolitan designation process and rural America. The Journal of Rural Health, 20(1), 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Souder, J. A., & Fairfax, S. K. (1996). State trust lands: History, management, and sustainable use. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talen, E., & Knaap, G. (2001). Legalizing smart growth: An empirical study of land use regulation in Illinois. Champaign: Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Published in Journal of Planning and Education Research, 22, 345–359 in 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiebout, C. (1956). A pure theory of public expenditures. Journal of Political Economy, 64, 416–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tong, S. T. Y., & Chen, W. (2002). Modeling the relationship between land use and surface water quality. Journal of Environmental Management, 66(4), 377–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Travis, W. R. (2007). New geographies of the American West: Land use and the changing patterns of place. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turnbull, G. K. (2004). Urban growth controls: Transitional dynamics of development fees and growth boundaries. Journal of Urban Economics, 55(2), 215–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitousek, P. M., Mooney, H. A., Lubchenco, J., & Melillo, J. M. (1997). Human domination of earth’s ecosystems. Science, 277(5325), 494–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, P., & Fortmann, L. (2003). Whose landscape? A political ecology of the ‘exurban’ Sierra. Cultural Geographies, 10(4), 469–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wassmer, R. W. (2000). Fiscal equalization for state and local government finance. Economics of Education Review, 19(4), 451–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, Q. S., Li, X., & Shi, X. (2008). Cellular automata for simulating land use changes based on support vector machines. Computers & Geosciences, 34(6), 592–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yinger, J. (1998). The incidence of development fees and special assessments. National Tax Journal, 51(1), 23–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • York, A. M. (2005). Land use institutions in an urbanizing environment. Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.

    Google Scholar 

  • York, A. M., & Munroe, D. K. (2010). Urban encroachment, forest regrowth and land-use institutions: Does zoning matter? Land Use Policy, 27(2), 471–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • York, A. M., Zhang, S., Boone, C. G., & Shrestha, M. (2009). Landscape fragmentation under rapid urbanization. UGEC Viewpoints, 20, 20–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • York, A. M., Shrestha, M., Boone, C. G., Zhang, S., Harrington, J. A., Jr., Prebyl, T., et al. (2011). Land fragmentation under rapid urbanization: A cross-site analysis of southwestern cities. Urban Ecosystems, 14(3), 429–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State University, 872402, Tempe, AZ, 85287, USA

    Abigail M. York

  2. Department of Geography, Ohio State University, 1036 Derby Hall, 154 N. Oval Mall, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA

    Darla K. Munroe

Authors
  1. Abigail M. York
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Darla K. Munroe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abigail M. York .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Department of Anthropology, Indiana University, E. Kirkwood Avenue, Student Building 130 701, Bloomington, IN, 47405-7100, USA

    Eduardo S. Brondízio

  2. Dept. Anthropology, Indiana University, Bloomington, E. Kirkwood Avenue 701, Bloomington, 47405-7100, Indiana, USA

    Emilio F. Moran

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

York, A.M., Munroe, D.K. (2013). Land-Use Institutions and Natural Resources in Fast-Growing Communities at the Urban-Rural Fringe. In: Brondízio, E., Moran, E. (eds) Human-Environment Interactions. Human-Environment Interactions, vol 1. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4780-7_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation