«RUSSIAN ACADEMy Of SCIENCES fAR EASTERN bRANCH PACIfIC INSTITUTE Of GEOGRAPHy IGU/LUCC North East Asia Conference 2009 LAND COVER AND LAND USE CHANGE IN NORTH EAST ASIA: ...»
INTERNATIONAL GEOGRAPHICAL UNION
COMMISSION ON LAND USE/COVER CHANGES
LAND COVER AND LAND USE CHANGE IN NORTH EAST ASIA:PRObLEMS Of SUSTAINAbLE NATURE MANAGEMENT
RUSSIAN ACADEMy Of SCIENCESfAR EASTERN bRANCH
PACIfIC INSTITUTE Of GEOGRAPHyIGU/LUCC North East Asia Conference
LAND COVER AND LAND USE CHANGE
IN NORTH EAST ASIA:
PRObLEMS Of SUSTAINAbLE NATURE
MANAGEMENTProceedings of the international conference sePtember 6 – 12, Land cover and land use changes in North East Asia: problems of sustainable nature management
INTERNATIONAL GEOGRAPHICAL UNION
COMMISSION ON LAND USE/COVER CHANGES
RUSSIAN ACADEMy Of SCIENCESfAR EASTERN bRANCH
PACIfIC INSTITUTE Of GEOGRAPHyIGU/LUCC North East Asia Conference
LAND COVER AND LAND USE CHANGE
IN NORTH EAST ASIA:
PRObLEMS Of SUSTAINAbLE NATURE MANAGEMENTProceedings of the international conference sePtember 6 – 12, Владивосток – Vladivostok Дальнаука – Dalnauka Land cover and land use changes in North East Asia: problems of sustainable nature management УДК :91:502: Land cover and land use changes in North East Asia: problems of sustainable nature management. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference, September 6 -12, 2009, Vladivostok, Russia. Vladivostok: Dalnauka, 2009. p. ISBN 978-5-8044-1053- The Proceedings include the papers prepared for the International Scientific Conference “Land cover and land use changes in North East Asia: problems of sustainable nature management”, held on September 6-12, 2009 at Vladivostok, Russian Federation. A broad range of issues on land use/land cover changes of the East Asia has been examined during the conference: theoretical and methodological problems of land use in the context of sustainable development, problems of land use in the globalizing and changing World, natural resources and sustainable land use, sustainable land use and food security in North East Asia, and regional developing of North East Asia. The Conference was organized in the frame of activities of IGU Commission “Land use/cover change (LUCC)”, and its results will be interesting for scientists, decision makers, students who deal with the problems of sustainable land use, regional development, and sustainable nature management.
Papers were published as submitted by the authors.
Editors: P.ya. baklanov, S.S. Ganzey Динамика землепользования и изменение ландшафтов в Северо-восточной Азии: проблемы устойчивого природопользования. Материалы международного совещания, 6-12 сентября 2009 г., г. Владивосток: Дальнаука, 2009. 192 с. ISBN 978-5-8044-1053- В сборнике представлены материалы международного совещания «Динамика землепользования и изменение ландшафтов в Северо-восточной Азии: проблемы устойчивого природопользования», которое состоялось 6сентября 2009 года в г. Владивостоке. На совещании рассматривался широкий круг вопросов по проблемам использования земель и изменения ландшафтов в Восточной Азии: теоретические и методологические проблемы использования земель в контексте устойчивого развития, проблемы использования земель в процессе глобализации и изменяющегося Мира, проблемы использования земель и обеспечения продовольственной безопасности, землепользование и проблемы использования природных ресурсов, проблемы устойчивого развития Северовосточной Азии. Конференция была организована в рамках деятельности Комиссии по использованию земель и изменению ландшафтов (IGU LUCC) Международного союза географов и ее результаты будут интересны различным ученым, лицам, принимающих решения, студентам, интересующимся проблемами устойчивого использования земель, регионального развития и устойчивого природопользования.
Статьи опубликованы в авторской редакции.
Редакторы: П.Я.Бакланов, С.С.Ганзей Утверждено к печати Ученым советом Тихоокеанского института географии ДВО РАН ISBN 978-5-8044-1053-8 © Pacific Institute of Geography FEB RAS,
CONTENTSAlexeev b.A., Alyautdinov A.R., Ushakova L.A.
Investigation of Forestry Changes Using GIS Techologies……………………………………………………………….. baklanov P.ya. Problems of the sustainable nature management in the North-East Asia……………………………… Bik I., Jeleek L. Land use and landscape changes in Czechia in transformational period 1990 – 2005: their historical roots and societal driving forces……………………………………………………………………………..................…….... Doi H., Kubo K., Itai M. Development of Housing Estate and Urbanization in Oita City, Japan ………………....… Dong S., Li yu., Wang L., you f., Wang Ch., Zhang X. The Environmental Impacts and Sustainable urbanization Strategy in the arid areas of Northwestern China ……
Ermoshin V. V. Mapping of habitats on the mountain forest-covered territories based on remote sensing data ………. Gusev M.N., Pomigaev M. N. Consequences of regulation of the drain in the downstream section from the Zeya hydroelectric power station: morphodinamics aspect …………………………………………………… Haruyama Sh. Murooka M. land cover change of the Middle reaches of the Amur River and the relationship with geomorphologic land form series
Himiyama yu. Towards sustainable land use in Asia ……………………………
Kagatsume M. Food & Resource Trade and Environmental Issues under the East Asia Community Concept ………………………………………………………
Karakin V.P. History of mastering and formation of the land-use and nature management systems in RFE ………………………………………………………
Kawahigashi M., Nagao S., yoh M., Onishi T., Chi G., Chen Xin, ShamovV., Levshina S., Prokushkin A., Sumida H. Influence of land-use and land cover change on iron oxides in boreal soils
Kimoto K., Das A. Conflicts over land in counter urbanized area in India…………
Kiwa Z. Introduction of Corporate Farming and Farmland Accumulation by Chinese Food Exporting Companies …………………………………………………………
Krasnoyarova b. Agrarian nature management and land tenure: relation of levels and approaches …………….......… Lankin A.S. Wood cutting load on forest stands in the Russian Far East and Northeastern China………………………………………………………………….......…. Li Z., Dong S. Model Modification and Application on Carrying Capacity of Relative Resources ………….....……… Lyashevskaya M., Kiselyova A., Rodnikova I. Biodiversity dynamics of vascular plants and lichents under anthropogenic and natural factors (Small Islands located in Peter the Great Bay, Sea of Japan)
Mares P., Gabrovec M. Czechia and Slovenia – land use development heading towards regional specialization ………………………………………………………
Milanova E. Land use in context of sustainable development and people well-being (Baikal region case study) ………………………………………………................…………… Land cover and land use changes in North East Asia: problems of sustainable nature management Mishina N., Ganzey S. Spatial distribution of Land use/land cover types in the transboundary geosystems of the South of the Russian Far East and North-East China……………………………………………………….......… Miyasaka T., Okuro T., Zhao X, Zhao H., Takeuchi K. Agent-based framework of emperical land use/cover change model for simulating relationships between land degradation, household behavior and policy implementation in Northeast China
Murota T., Litvinenko T. Recent trend of population and natural resources use and five settlement patterns in Chukotka Autonomous Okrug, Russia ………………
Nagao S., Suzuki T., Kawahigashi M., Kodama H., Onishi T., yoh M., Shiraiwa T., Shesterkin V.P., Kim V.I., Levshina S.I., Makhinov A.N., yan b., Zhang b. Characteristics of fluorescent dissolved organic matter in the Middle and Lower Amur River
Okumura M., Okubo K., fonseca C. N. Qualitative zone classification based on transportation activities …………………………………………………
Onishi T., yoh M., Shibata H., Nagao S., Kawahigashi M., Shamov V.V.
Numerical experiment of land cover conversion effect on dissolved iron productivity of the Amur River Basin …………………………………………………………
Oyungerel b. Land use in Mongolia………………………………………………
Ryzhova N. P. Social and economic development of borderline Russian and Chinese regions ……………….....…… Sendikait Ju., Pakalnis R., Aviien D., Jaraius L., Ptaekien V. Coordination of environmental and economic interests in Klaipeda seaport (Lithuania)
Sharabarina S. Strategic management of land resources in Altai resort-recreational zone ………….......…………… Shiraiwa T. And the Amur-Okhotsk Project members. The Amur-Okhotsk system or the “Giant” fish-breading forest connected by dissolved iron ………………………
Skirina I., Rodnikova I. Modern condition of the lichen flora from Prykhankayskaya valley as indicator of anthropogenic transformation of the landscapes …………
Song K., Wang Z., Zhang b., Liu Q., Liu D., Ren Ch. Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) characterization with MODIS time series NDVI data in the Amur River Basin……
Sorokin P.S. Principles of Coastal Zone Atlas mapping for Vladivostok City ………
Sorokina O.A. Distribution and sources of rare Earth elements in bottom sediments and flood plain soils in the fragment of the valley in the midstream of the Amur river…………………….......……… Stepanko A.A. Territorial structures of the agricultural use of the Russian Far East lands
Sukhomlinov N. The experience of territory zoning in connecting with fire impact …
Vinokurov yu.I., Krasnoyarova b.A., Surazakova S.P. Problems of land tenure in Altai transboundary regions. ……………………………………………………
Vyrkin V., Kobylkin D., Ryzhov yu. Land use and exogenous processes in the South of East Siberia …….......….… Wang Z., Song K., Zhang B., Zhang S., Liu D., Wang J. Impacts of land use/land cover changes on net primary productivity in the Sanjiang plain, China……………
yan b., Zhang X., Liu X. Impact of land use change on soil erosion in Northeast China…………………………………………………………………………………
Zhu L. A research into the conditions for developing the eco-industry in the west sandy region of Jilin Province (Take Tongyu as an example)………………………
INVESTIGATION Of fORESTRy CHANGES USING GIS TECHOLOGIESmoscow state University by m.V.lomonosov, faculty of geography, moscow, russia.
email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; 3 email@example.com South America – one of the most wooded regions of the world, which area makes the quarter areas of forests of all Earth. The main specific feature of South America forestry is so called “tropical rain forests” (TRF), growing at the area more then 834 millions hectares. Total forestry of South America is more then percents of total area of South America. Such countries as Argentina, Bolivia, Brasilia, Columbia, Venezuela, Peru, and Mexico consist more then 56 percents of South America forestry which contains more then milliards cube meters of wood, what is the third part of world supply. That is why South America is so called “lung of the world”.
Process of reduction of the wood areas in the world is observed for a long period, but in last decades the tendency to reduction of natural forestry amplifies, this phenomenon is typical for South America. Deforestation rate of the region is one of highest in the world – 0.48 percent annually. At the period from 1990 to 2005 forest area decreased at about 49.0 millions hectares, that is the second place in the world after Africa.
Investigation of forestry changes of South America is a very important task not only from the point of view ecology, human assessment or sustainable development of this certain region. This problem is wider.
Investigation of forestry area changes in the world and especially in South America in many respects promotes the duly analysis of tendencies and character of these changes, revealing of the reasons of reduction or increase of the forest area in different regions, and also in many respects helps to understand mechanisms of change of a climate on the Earth.
Consequently, for the submitted work has been formulated the next task - with the help of modern GIS technologies to analyze the changes in distribution of forest vegetation types in South America from 1995 to 2005. The work was carried out in several stages:
• Collection of statistical and cartographic data of various organizations using literature and Internet sources.
• Processing and analysis of selected statistic data and maps;
• Creating a database of spatial and attribute data in the software environment of ArcGIS;
• Developing a unified legend and thematic content for a series of different maps;
• Selecting the representation type to examine changes of forest vegetation in South America;
• Creating a series of different maps of forest vegetation in South America;
• Analysis of trends in forestry changes of South America.
As general-base map and basis for spatial referencing and data modeling of the nature of changes in forest area in South America it was used digital World Map scale 1:3 000 000 (ArcWorldTM 1:3 M Database) , created by ESRI in vector format. The database of the digital map consists of 16 different thematic layers, including spatial information, attribute and textual data which can be visualized and modified in the environment of ArcGIS, ArcView v.3.x, ArcInfo and other software company ESRI. All the thematic layers are represented in latitude - longitude on the ellipsoid WGS - 84.
In the first phase of work it was carried out selecting and generalization of elements of general-base map, rely on the task and the appointment of resulting maps to scale 1: 12 000 000, with the circuit and remove unwanted objects, carried out the selection and generalization of hydrographic network and road network, selecting map projection for output maps.
General-base maps is presenting by next layers, which will be presented at all output maps:
• Coastline of South America and adjacent islands;
• Hydrographic network (rivers and lakes);
Of the wide range of projections proposed in the ArcGIS software environment to mainland South Land cover and land use changes in North East Asia: problems of sustainable nature management America, it was chosen South America Albers Equal Area Conic projection with the following parameters:
• Longitude of Central meridian:
-60. • Latitude of first Standard parallel:
-5. • Latitude of second Standard parallel:
-42. • Source point of the coordinate:
-32. • East shift: 0. • North shift: 0. • Units of measure: meters The choice of this projection is due to set objectives - evaluation of changes in forest cover. Although neither form nor a linear scale in the conical projection is not truly accurate, distortion of these properties are minimized in the region between the two standard parallels. All square in proportion to the areas on the Earth’s surface.
At the next stage processing and analysis of thematic maps and statistical data sources was carried out.
For creation of output different timescale maps of South America forestry it were used cartographic materials presented in raster form, - Land Use / Land Cover (LULC), compiled based on surveys 1995, 2000 and 2005.
«Institute for Environment and Sustainability biorazvitiya» (Institute for Environment and Sustainability) Joint European Research Center (Joint Research Centre of the European Commission) (Belgium - Luxembourg) [2;
6]. On these maps, a pixel size is of 30x30 seconds, i.e. approximately 900x900 meters on the Earth surface.
Using the appropriate tools of ArcGIS, were allocated only to those sites (pixels) that belong to the forest vegetation. Then, using module ArcToolbox tools, the raster-grid maps were exported to the vector shape files, which is the standard format of software packages ArcGIS, ArcView, ArcInfo. Translation of the original thematic information in the vector type of reporting is due to the fact that for the solution of the problem is more convenient to store and work with data in vector format, as well as the fact that the tools used ArcGIS software environment for working with vector data, presented significantly more than for working with raster data.
Then received vector thematic maps were linked to revised general-base map of scale 1: 000. Due to this it was performed a spatial and thematic coordination of thematic maps with general-base map. In the ArcGIS software environment the transformation of objects in the correct coordinate space is performed using tools panel “Vector Transformation” (Spatial Adjustment) . For algorithms that are used in the transformation vector, it is necessary to establish links offsets, which determine the source and target coordinates to transformation. Communication offsets can be added manually or loaded from a file links. In our case, they were added manually to the 90-ty reference points that accurately identified on the general-base map and thematic maps of the characteristic curve of coastline and river network of the mainland South America.
Most of the natural objects were as a reference points, that is why we can say that in such a way thematic alignment was also conducted. The results were subjected to the harmonization of spatial analysis in terms of thematic content. Among the five implemented methods of transformation the “rubber sheet” (Rubbersheet) has been chosen. In applying this method, the surface a little bit stretched, the objects are moving in the direction of displacement relations. For a complete harmonization of spatial segments representing the linear objects were taken from the general-base map, and then transformed areas were redefined again in polygonal objects using special tools ArcGIS.
As a result of the operation we have received three different time-scale maps of South America forestry distribution at the following time periods - 1995, 2000 and 2005 in a single projection and a single scale (1:12 000000). Comparison of the maps allowed examining only the general character of changes in forestry distribution, showing negative changes of the areas occupied by forest vegetation.
The next important step is the analysis of changes in forest area by forest types. This is necessary in order to identify what types of vegetation exposed to the process of deforestation and the need to preserve, or, conversely, increasing their share of the total area of forest vegetation. For these purposes, it was developed a unified legend of types of forest vegetation. The source material was the restored site (natural) vegetation of the electronic atlas «Our Planet» («ArcAtlas: Our Earth») . It has been allocated the following types of forest vegetation. Analyses of these data presented in table 1.
Type of forest vegetation Amazon evergreen wet and evergreen periodically wet forests 453000,0 442600,0 439620,0 -10400,0 -0,98 -4980,0 -0,99 28,6% (“hylea”) Amazon paludal evergreen wet equatorial forests Mountain evergreen wet equatorial forests (“tierra caliente”) Mountain seasonally wet forest and savanna East Brazil Atlantic periodically wet evergreen tropical forests Brazil tropical savanna (“campos limpos”) Semi evergreen and deciduous forest in combination with vysokotravnymi savanna ( «Llanos») Mountain vegetation of monsoon rain forest Tropical forests (“restinga”) and (“kaatinga”) Paraguayan-Argentine dry tropical forests and woodlands («Cha- 45430,0 43970,0 43794,2 -1460,0 -0,97 -175,8 -1,00 2,9 % co forest») with the marsh forest Tucuman-Bolivian mountain tropical forests and woodlands Tucuman-kordobskie mountain forests and woodlands Xerophytes tropical forests and woodlands A gallery and floodplain evergreen rain forest Gallery evergreen forests with meadow and marsh Andy mountain evergreen forests (“gemihylea”) Land cover and land use changes in North East Asia: problems of sustainable nature management To achieve more information about the status of forest vegetation on the continent of based on different statistical data also it have been created forest cover map and availability of forest resources map for the same periods.
Forest cover - a relative measure, which is defined as the ratio of forest area to the area of the country multiplied by 100. Classification of forest cover ratio was carried out in the software environment ArcGIS. Due to the fact that the original values have a large range and uneven distribution, as a method of classification of the six methods implemented in ArcGIS, was chosen «the method of natural boundaries», which allows you to analyze and display data are unevenly distributed. Once the automated classification was carried out manual adjustments to the allocation of the five intervals.
The maps are clearly identified, Argentina and Uruguay as the country with the lowest value of forest land (20%) The largest group consists of countries which covers more than 50% of Brazil, Venezuela, Peru, Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Chile and Paraguay. The highest rate of forest cover in countries such as - Guyana, Suriname and French Guiana (60%) (Fig. 1).
The availability of forest resources is calculating the ratio of area of forest resources to the country’s population (ha/person). With the mapping of forest resources is also the method of classification described above. At the wrap-up of different maps in a single scale shows the five gradations of this. There are countries such as Argentina, Uruguay and Ecuador, where the availability of forest resources of less than 1 hectare per person. The highest rates (over 30 ha\cel) from countries such as Guyana, Suriname and French Guiana This may be due to the fact that forests are placed unevenly on the territory of individual countries, and most of them remains in the undeveloped, inaccessible places. So forests are located in Argentina, on the outskirts of the country’s poorly developed areas. In Brazil, the bulk of forest is concentrated in the Amazon basin. Also it is difficult of access the forests of Guyana and Suriname. Most of the forests of Peru are located in the undeveloped parts of the Peruvian Amazon. It is extremely difficult of access and forests of Ecuador, while the forests on the Brazilian plateau is largely reduced due to its relative affordability [8; 1].
Mapping and analysis of statistics show that in all countries of the continent continues the downward trend in forest cover. Revealed that from 2000 to 2005. an overall decline in the rate of deforestation, but also on global trends in the intensity of attention in South America remains extremely high. The highest rate of deforestation continues to be characterized primarily humid equatorial forests and subequatorial (hylea). At least this man-made forests sub boreal process affects the southern tip of South America.
The main factors influencing the change of forest area are:
• Reduction (logging) forests for export (80%) and for internal needs.
• Expansion of agricultural land and pastures.
• Reducing the area of forest vegetation as a result of forest fires in South America.
• Degradation (disappearance) of forests as a result of desertification and soil erosion.
• Inundation forests grow near the big rivers.
• Destruction of forests as a result of industrial waste cluttering around large mega-cities and settlements.
Despite a significant reduction in forest areas in recent years, South America as a whole still has a large forested area of approximately 710 million hectares, half of which goes to the territory of Brazil .
Such a wealth of forest resources is due, above all, a number of natural and geographical factors. South America, except the southern tip of the mainland, is located within the hot zone, a feature of the atmospheric circulation provides the necessary quantity of moisture, most of the continent.
A variety of landforms and seasonality of lithogenic basis wetting determine the diversity of forest species and their distribution. Forest area the size of South America, took first place in the world, however, it is necessary to note several points.
First, some countries have still not established clear criteria for determining the forest area, which significantly affects the determination of its true size.
Secondly, often referring to the area covered by forest, do not take account of factors that they are burnt, dead plants and etc.
Most belong to the wooded areas of land with shrubs. Not surprisingly, the assessment of forest area in Latin America range from 0.7 billion to 1.1 billion hectares.
Currently, all of these results exist in mapping environment ArcGIS, which allows for multi-layer mapping analysis. They are open for editing and conversion to the new maps, as well as for operational update attributive databases.
References1. Alexeev B.“Reserves of the world”, Мoscow.: Encyclopedia world, Avanta Plus, 2. Anderson, J. R., Hardy, E. E., Roach, J. T. and Witmer, R. E., 1976, “A Land Use and Land Cover Classification System for Use with Remote Sensor Data,” U.S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper 964, p 28, Reston, VA.
3. ArcAtlas: Our Earth. Redlands USA, Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI), 4. ArcWorldTM 1:3M Database. ESRI, 5. http://bioval.jrc.ec.europa.eu/products/glc2000/glc2000.php 6. Land Cover map of South America, Global Change Biology (2004) 10, 731–744, doi: 10.1111/j.1529-8817.2003.00774.x 7. Minami M. ArcMap. User manual. Part II. Redlands USA, Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI), 2000, 220 с.
8. Romanova E., Alexeev B, Golubev G. Geoecological condition of landscapes /Modern condition of landscapes. М., 2004, с.
Land cover and land use changes in North East Asia: problems of sustainable nature management
PRObLEMS Of THE SUSTAINAbLE NATURE MANAGEMENTPacific Institute of Geography FEB of RAS, Russia, firstname.lastname@example.org In the modern world’s geopolitical structure, the North-East Asia (NEA) is considered as the most important region including the developed and developing countries and regions: Japan, both Korean republics as well as North-East China and Russian Far East. Its unique feature is a broad approach to the Arctic and Pacific Oceans with forming of the contact geographical structures of “land-sea” . The NEA is a great, highly differentiated geographical, economic and cultural region with increasing integration processes. Here, about 300 million people reside and practically all branches of extractive and processing industries, multisectoral agriculture, poly-structural marine-sector and transport complexes are developed.
In whole, the NEA is characterized by high and diverse natural-resource potential: oil and gas resources, coal, timber, ferrous and non-ferrous metal ores, chemical raw materials, building materials as well as considerable quantities of aquatic and land resources, marine bioresources, diverse tourist-recreation resources . Many of these resources are intensely used. In perspective, the rates of development can increase although some mineral deposits are close to exhaustion.
A large part of the region (territory and offshore zone) is subjected to considerable anthropogenic impacts. In a number of areas of the southern Far East of Russia and North-East China, the ecological problems are quite pronounced, for example, the problems of forest exploitation expressed in an exceeding of felling volume over the increase in forests; problems of land use being evident in the reduction in the land potential and productive capacity and problems of water consumption related to the surface water pollution.
In the NEA, the transboundary ecological problems related to the transfer of water and aerial technogenic contaminations from one country to the other arise also. Such problems become aggravated for periods of technogenic emergency situations.
Therefore, the problems of organizing the efficient sustainable nature management for this region are very urgent.
The nature management in the great region should be considered, to wide extent, as the whole system of the human-engineering-nature relations covering the extraction and application of natural resources as well as anthropogenic influences on the environment. The complete system of the regional nature management can be presented in the form of interaction between three subsystems: 1) region’s population and economy; 2) different combinations of natural resources including marine ones; 3) region’s natural systems, and reflected in the matrix model of the regional nature management .
Based on the above, the sustainable nature management is considered to mean such system of the regional nature management the spatial-temporal structures of which provide the sustainable development of the region and allow maintaining in the region the sufficient natural-resource potential and high qualities of the environment over a long period of time. The system of the sustainable regional nature management should provide the maintenance in the region of high economic, social and ecological characteristics of the regional development.
In the NEF, there are many favorable prerequisites for achievement of the sustainable nature management goals.
- By and large it is large and diverse natural-resource potential including the marine natural resources:
oil and gas, biological and mineral.
- A considerable share of the renewable natural resources: forest, land, aquatic, hydropower, marine bioresources, recreation etc. According to our generalized estimates, a share of renewable natural resources in the NEA reaches 50-60%/ - Opportunities of complementarity and interconnecting of natural resources of the land and sea.
- Opportunities of complementarity in the natural resources of separate countries and regions of the NEA. For example, here the regions with great and diverse natural resources potential (Russian Far East and North-East China) and countries with the lesser natural resources potential (Japan, Republic of Korea) are neighbors. Many kinds of the absent in these countries natural resources potential can be filled as a result of supplies from the neighboring countries and regions of the NEA.
- Widespread adoption of new, ecologically pure and resource-saving technologies in the NEA countries and regions in recent years.
- Intensification of relation and cooperation between the NEA countries and regions in the economic, scientific and technical and ecological spheres, for example, in an effort to improve the nature management in the basins of Khanka Lake, Amur river, Japan and Okhotsk seas/ In consideration for studies carried out in the Pacific Institute of Geography, FEB of RAS, the following measures should be taken to reach the sustainable nature management in the NEA:
1. To perform the complex evaluation of the natural-resources potential of the NEA countries and regions based on the natural-resources zoning and identification of integral territorial and aqua-territorial naturalresources systems.
2. To make the prognostic calculations of the natural-resources potential dynamics for such separate systems according to different scenarios of development.
3. To estimate the intervals and variants of the complementarity of the natural-resources potentials of the NEA countries and regions.
4. To identify and evaluate the variants of the spatial-temporal structures of nature management for the NEA as a whole and for separate countries and regions.
5. To calculate variants of the possible reduction in a share of nonrenewable natural resources and growth in a share of renewable ones in the proper spatial-temporal structures of the nature management.
6. To develop for separate countries and regions of the NEA the complete matrix models of nature management.
7. To develop the special international programs of nature management and coordination for transboundary regions, territories and water areas .
8. To organize the international complex monitoring of the nature management in the NEA including also the ecological one.
References1. Baklanov P.Ya. Contact geographical structures and their functions in the North-East Asia. Proceedings of the Russian Academy of Sciences, ser. Geogr. 2000, No. 1, p. 31-39.
2. Baklanov P.Ya. Nature management in the strategy of the Far-Eastern Region of Russia development. – in book: Resources, environmental protection and sustainable development. Moscow: Nauka, 2007, p. 197-205.
3. Baklanov P.Ya., Ganzei S.S. Transboundary territories: problems of the sustainable nature management. Vladivostok: Dalnauka, 4. Nature management of the Russian Far East and North-East Asia: potential of integration and sustainable development (Edited by A.S. Sheingauz), Vladivostok-Khabarovsk: FEB of RAS, 2005, 528 pp.
Land cover and land use changes in North East Asia: problems of sustainable nature management
LAND USE AND LANDSCAPE CHANGES IN CZECHIA INTRANSfORMATIONAL PERIOD 990 – 200: THEIR HISTORICAL
ROOTS AND SOCIETAL DRIVING fORCEScharles University in Prague, czech republic, email@example.com
. IntroductionCzechia (it is from 1993 official geographical – shorter name of the official Czech Republic) due to its turbulent past forms a unique model-area for the study of land use (LU) changes as affected by societal driving forces (also abbr. SDF). There are four specific issues or events which together constitute this uniqueness:
1) Czechia experienced three profoundly different economic and social systems: a) traditional” liberal capitalism in the variety of types between 1848 and 1948; b) “communist regime” or “planned economy” 1948c) contemporary period of “global” capitalism.
2) The Transfer of the German population from Czechoslovakia to Germany and so-called “socialist industrialization”: after the Second World War, the Potsdam Conference in 1945 determined that Czechoslovak Germans would have to leave Czechoslovakia. This process caused massive depopulation mainly in the border regions of Czechia – in some parts of NW and N Bohemia or in Ostrava region originally, regional core industrial areas.
3) Since the Industrial Revolution in Czechia starting in the first half of the 19th century several key political events changed the geopolitical and geo-economical position of the state and thus affected land use patterns remarkably: 1867 (dualism, i.e. monarchy new establishment– Austria-Hungary), 1918 (foundation of the independent Czechoslovakia), 1938 (abolition of Czechoslovakia), 1948 (onset of the communist regime) a 1989 (reintroduction of democracy and capitalism; opening of the national economy to foreign markets, 2004 (EU membership, adaptation to its agricultural policies) 4) Availability of archival and statistical data sources (cadastre) covering more than 170 years of the land use development in Czechia down to the level of cadastral units.
In this article we would detect, characterized, describe and explain the fundamental LU changes during the past two centuries as result of the Societal Driving Forces influence on landscapes, of which structure and “historical weight” have changed in the course of history. We also take into consideration the impact of natural conditions (Natural Driving Forces) and the interactions of SDF and NDF representing major factors for the land use changes.
The concept of societal driving forces and its contribution to LU and landscape changes research (compare, e.g.
[12; 5; 6; 20; 26]). They were characterized by Bьrgi, Hersperger and Schneeberger [13, p. 857]: “landscape is the prime sphere, where the combined effects of society and nature become visible. as societies and nature are dynamic, change is an inherent characteristic of landscapes.” Holistically grasped, the LU changes in their dialectical feedback represent „...the forces that cause observed landscape changes.They are influential processes in the evolutionary trajectory of the landscape” [13, p. 858). Lambin and Geist  analyzed the following main factors influencing land use changes: natural variability, economic and technological, demographic, institutional, cultural and globalization.
The authors categorize the causes of the land use change into two groups: proximate (direct or local) and underlying (indirect or root). The proximate causes explain how and why local land use and ecosystem processes are modified directly by humans. The underlying causes explain broader context and fundamental forces underpinning these local actions. Lambin and Geist (24, p. 7) argue in general that, “...proximate causes operate at the local level (individual farms, households, or communities) and underlying causes originate from regional (districts, provinces, or country) or even global levels, though complex interplays between these levels of organization are common”.
To sum up, SDF are the major influential factors in the past two centuries in respect of land use and land cover change. The growing intensity of agricultural land use (soils) in lowlands became an economically more effective way to increase the level (volume??) of production. Therefore, the extensive agricultural production in hilly and mountainous regions in Czechia decreased greatly and has been re-structuralized in many places or territories.
The collapse of the communist regime in 1989 ended the era of the “socialist” economy. The peaceful split of Czechoslovakia into two independent states, Czechia and Slovakia, followed in 1992. Since 1990s, there has been a substantial economic change, generally characterized as “transformation”. Changes have had great impacts on agriculture, the countryside, and land use in Czechia.
Transformation in Czechia has been a new and unknown process of moving society and the economy from a centrally and rigidly planned economy to a market-oriented one (for more details, see [18; 33]). The transformation of the state is an extraordinarily complex process for several reasons. Above all, there are substantial changes in the organization of the economic life, and these changes affect every member of the formerly totalitarian society. From an economic point of view, transformation can be perceived as a dynamic process of modernizing the economy and society. In Western Europe and other developed countries, this modernization process has been going on continuously in response to global pressures (the globalization, oil crisis, the Gulf War, internationalization, etc.). In totalitarian countries, however, these international and global pressures were limited because of the closed nature of the economy and society on the state level, respectively by the operation of the former COMECON (Council of Mutual Economic Aid) directed by USSR. For this reason, the ongoing process of transforming economies and societies is also a process of internationalization, and it has a more pronounced influence on the state, its economy, and society. This article focuses mainly on the effects of this transformation on landscape and land use changes in the Czech Republic (for more details, see [4; 7; etc.]).
The first cadastre providing detailed and exact maps of the cadastral units or cadastral territories was developed and it can be used up to now. It was the so-called Stabile (also Franciscan) Cadastre founded in the first half of the 19th century, when the exact frontiers of cadastral units (also abbr. CU) were measured and drawn on maps. Then their structure (i.e. frontiers of land plots, parcels, including their numbering, property data, fertility of soils, etc.) was elaborated. The methodology of the cadastral mapping initially distinguished 45 categories of land use. Currently the files of the Czech Office for Surveying, Mapping and Cadastre (COSMC) provide data regarding only 12 categories .
The LU database was developed by LUCC research team from archival data containing some 13,000 cadastral units covering the entire territory of Czechia. The cadastral data of 1845 and 1948 were received from the Central Land Survey and Cadastre Archive files. More recent land use data (1990, 2000) came from the computerized database of the COSMC in Prague. Each settlement, i.e. village, township, city is composed from one (village, township) or more (villages, townships, cities) cadastral units. The cadastral unit does not have any administrative function – it is only a basic territorial unit, according to which the cadastral data including statistics and maps set up. Currently, the territory of Czechia composed approximately of 13,027 cadastral units. Their average area covers 609 ha.
About 25 % of the cadastral units have changed their area, and in the course of time (1945–2000) new cadastral units were created (by dividing of the old ones) or have changed more or less their territory. For the sake of comparison, our research team developed some 8,910 comparable so-called basic territorial units (BTU) by joining of those CU whose areas changed over the period examined. The average area of one BTU is 886 ha. Approximately 70 % of the BTUs consist of one cadastral unit only; the rest is composed of two or more, so that the BTU areas do not differ more than by 1 % in the four compared years 1845, 1948, 1990 and 2000. Here we would like to emphasize that we use only basic territorial units (BTU) as a tool of measuring and comparing.
We use a bit of a simplified structure of land categories which is applied to cadastral surveying: Arable land = abbr.
AL; Permanent cultures = PC; Meadows = Me; Pastures = Pa; (Me+Pa = Permanent grasslands = PGL); (AL+PC+PGL = Agricultural land = AgL; Forest areas = FA; Water areas = WA, Built-up Areas = BuA, Remaining Areas = RA (WA+BuA+RA = Other Areas – abbr. OA). The major part of “Remaining areas” is composed of transportation (roads, railroads, and highways), stores, courtyards in factories, open mines etc. areas.
We also explore the changes of content (definitions) in some land use categories during the time of cadastral mapping. At first, agricultural land was carved out temporarily of farming located in mining areas especially. This category of land was changed back to agricultural use after the realization of big investments – i.e. by reclamations.
There were hundreds of hectares of such land category. Today, in Czechia, about 250,000 ha of arable land are covered by grass, weeds and many often by dispersed bush and trees. There are also changes of content in some categories over history. Good examples represent gardens. At the beginning of the observed period they were used mainly as an area for vegetables, fruits growing, and breeding. On the contrary, today, gardens rather fulfill a special recreational and representative function and thus their production function became much weaker.
Land cover and land use changes in North East Asia: problems of sustainable nature management Recently, the analysis of land use changes receives a very distinct motivation and is being developed further.
We witness it primarily in important international projects focusing on the interactions of nature and society in the long-term time development at the macro-regional or even in global perspectives. Very inspiring for the study of long-term land use changes is the publications of Turner II, Meyer  and Robinson, Douglas, Huggett , Worster . Both publications demonstrate the entire range of disciplines, examining global changes of the environment and the influence of human society on these changes.
At a more general level it is necessary to recall the idea of Hampl , who differentiated three basic phases of nature – society interactions, dominated by either the determination or the competition or the cooperation. They correspond to different stages in the evolution of human society where there is underway a gradual release of the society from its external determinations due to the natural conditions and evolution of new sorts of internal (social) or external (socially geographical) organizations.
Long term land use development is studied as a social metabolism especially by Austrian geoecologists and other scientists using similar historical data from archives [16; 23 and others].
. Major political and economic factors ranked according to the power of their impact) Before the evaluation of land use changes and problems in the transformational period in Czechia we explain the major economic and political driving forces influencing LU changes within the past two centuries. Only this way we could understand the varied consequences of LU changes in the post-totalitarian – transformational period (after 1990).
I. The revolution in /9 opened “space” to a boom of the capitalist mode of production. Serfdom abolishing freeing large amount of labor forces that moved to the cities where they worked in the industry and services; as a result, land became like the labor force an important market commodity. These processes called for extensive economic development and use of resources during the third quarter of the 19th century, i.e. the agricultural land fund of Czechia.
II. 0s – The completion of Industrial Revolution brought more rapid industrialization, urbanization, railway networks, construction, etc. It resulted in the increase of food demand due to fast growing numbers of nonagricultural (urban) population. The completion of Agricultural Revolution (1850s –1870s) meant improvement and increase of agricultural production by revolutionary changes in its technique, technology and equipment for farming. Such revolution was in case of Czechia’s territory characterized above all by transition from the triennial (farming under fallow) system to the alternate systems of farming, by growing of fodder plants, and especially of root plants (potatoes and sugar beets) which caused great greed for new plots of arable land), due to the improvement in drilling and sowing procedures, the onset and increasingly use of natural fertilizers, deep tillage to at least restore or increase its fertility, breeding of cattle in stables (more manure to use), application of science [19; 21].
The processes had a great impact of the differential land rent I (abbr. DR I) on land use and agriculture changes. This rent represents an extra profit which arises because of all plots of land differ from each other in terms of their natural fertility and location of land (farms) to the market of agricultural products (e.g. mainly cities). It means farming of more fertile land; or on the ones that are located near the market or transport lines, get an extra large profit than those farms with poorer quality of land or with worse location to the market (see [15, Vol. II, pp.
557-560, Jeleek’s entry Land rent]. DR I, therefore, relates to the extensive growth of agriculture based on the extension of cultivated, especially arable land. Though loosing its basic impact and importance that it gained in the late 19th century, historically, advancing industrialization and urbanization created new location conditions, including growing demand for food. Transport of agricultural products from middle or long distances influenced regional differentiation of agriculture and land use development.
III: Agricultural Revolution Completing 0s–0s induced the beginning of differential rent II (abbr.
DR II) impact growth. This form of rent represents an extra profit, which is created by unequal capital investments into plots of land with the same degrees of natural fertility [15, Vol. II, pp. 557-560]. Due to investment of larger amount of capital in form, e.g., of more manure, then mainly artificial fertilizers, deep plowing, mechanization of harvesting (tractors, seed drills, combine harvesters), meliorations, irrigations, recently genetic engineering raised “economic fertility of land”. Only investments in the more (in comparison with plots, or farms, of lower fertility) fertile land (soils) are more effective and bring larger DR II. Thus, DR II relates to the intensification of land use, has been enabled by factors of technological-scientific revolution in agriculture (see bellow) and fundamentally changed regional organization of agriculture, including also land abandonment in regions with low prospects for intensification and income from farming such as at higher located or more remote locations (especially in border regions). In both cases, differential rent is determined by the difference in costs between any productive plot of land, and the so-called marginal plot [15, ibid; 9; 8].
IV. the 1st stage of technological-scientific revolution (tSR) in agriculture onset in 1880s –1910s. It has been typical by introduction of free crop rotation systems, mechanization which get started by onset of use of combustion engine and the electricity as a new means of energy, the rapid introduction of increasingly sophisticated agricultural machines and tools, use of artificial fertilizers produced in industry, land reclamations, use of tractor as „universal machine in agriculture“ (similar importance to the role being played by steam engine in industry and transport), acceleration of land improvements (including re-joining of fields patterns), application of scientific breeding methods in plant and animal production.
The 2nd phase of TSR in agriculture was characterized by the quantitative and qualitative boom of all features of the first one, and by their increasing penetration into small farming. The major innovations were the more intensive applications of chemicals and progress in mechanization of agriculture. This started together with deep plowing after WW I and played decisive role in reviving and increasing of the natural fertility of land and in protection of plants against insects and diseases. The introduction of internal combustion engine and electricity played a major role in the change, which brought the fundamental change in the energy balance: from solar energy to fossil fuels energy used for the purposes or drive drilling, sewing, grain threshing and cleaning machines, in animal production for preparing of feed. The electricity use as safe lighting enabled night works in peak seasons and indoor breeding of farm animals. All these processes made a large amount of human labor forces available for the industry, the number of horses could be reduced and the permanent grassland producing fodder for them could be used for production of other plants as grain etc. The TSR in agriculture needed much bigger amount of capital, because of had focused the agriculture to intensive use of more fertile soils with better location to the market. The leading role then had the influence of differential rent II.
There was a drawn-out agrarian crisis in the 1880s and 1890s that brought on also by the competition with American grain imports, which was relatively cheap and rapidly transported by steamboats to Europe. These consequences have induced fast development of food and agricultural machinery industries. Regarding land use they started following permanent decrease of agricultural and arable land and growth of other areas. (Mainly builtup, transport, and mining areas – see [9; 19; 20; 21; 15]).
V. Czech agriculture underwent a series of fundamental political and economic changes in the 20th century.
First, the break-up of Austria-Hungary in 1918 and the birth of independent Czechoslovakia narrowed the economic space to a smaller state. Then LU changes were influenced mostly by land reforms in 99–92.
According to Act No. 215 Sb. of April 16, 1919 the size of great farms could be only by 250 ha of all land and by ha of agricultural land. The area of all land above “determined” sizes of farm was, therefore, requested by the state.
This land represented about 2.2 mil ha from area of Czechia (mostly owned by nobility, then by the Catholic Church, but all property owned by the Habsburg family was confiscated). That land price had to be reimbursed to its owners.
Due to the lack of money (capital) the state’s larger part of requested land had to be given back to former owners (who got right to farm it free for 30 years). About 0.8 mln ha of land were distributed among small farmers. Their use of land increased size of arable land caused (that 1920s were only one period of area of arable land increased after 1900 until nowadays).
VI. The Czech borderlands settled more or less by Czech Germans in accordance with the decision of Munich conference of Germany, Italy, UK and France were incorporated to the territory of fascist Germany. The rest of Czechia was occupied by Germany on March 15, 1939. These events, together with the outcome of World War II, led formerly to the post-war exodus, but from August 1945 according to the decision of Potsdam conference of USA, USSR and UK to the organized transfer of Czechoslovak Germans to Germany and Austria until 1947.
This transfer was one of the key factors in the radical changes not only in land use changes (but also depopulation, settlements abandoning) that the country underwent in the border regions. These were further influenced by the setting up of the Iron Curtain at the beginning of the 1950s [11; 29]. Later this process has been strengthening by “run” of population of all frontier (but located previously in higher altitude) regions i.e. including the region at the border to Slovakia, where any Czech Germans had lived before WW II [6; 20].
VII. The socialisation of the country meant forced creation of so-called Unified Agricultural Cooperatives and state farms (especially in the beginning), and the minimization of the small family farms, that comprised less Land cover and land use changes in North East Asia: problems of sustainable nature management than 3 percent of total land resources in 1989 . These events led to the radical changes in the rural landscape and agriculture. Deep changes influenced also social climate, and ways of traditional villages life, environmental situation (including the plowing away of balks and disperse trees and bushes, the big tracts of land, decrease of biodiversity, soil erosion, the construction of large buildings, etc.) and also the centralization of settlement patterns, the depopulation and aging of villages, concentration of livestock breeding to the big stables located outside of intravilan of villages and simplification of landscape structure [19; 6].
VII. The years after 99 marked a passage from socialist to market-oriented agriculture. Although these elements might seem to be a re-establishment of the situation prior to 1948, much could not be restored and in many cases it was impossible to return to previous conditions (changed structure of fields or rural landscape et all, the liquidation of many buildings, their transformation into second residences, the level of nature protection, etc.). The last of the key transformations in the political-economic sphere that had an impact on the rural landscape occurred after 1990, and will be discussed in more detail in the following part of this paper [4; 7; 8; 9; 25].
Main factors affecting land use in Czechia in the 20th century:
1) Results of WW II, transfer of German population from the frontier region of Czechia, creation of the “Iron curtain” after 2) Takeover of political power by the Communists in 1948 and forty years of communist regime, nationalization of industry, agriculture and majority of land, impact of centrally directed planned economy 3) birth of independent czechoslovakia and land reform in 1920s 4) Political revolution in 1989 and comeback of democracy, freedom and capitalist/free market economy later followed by the process of eU accession 5) Cyclic development of the economy and the changes geopolitical and geo-economic position of Czechia (1918, 1938, 1945, 1948, 1989) 6) impact of World War i .
These factors influenced land use changes with different intensities in Czechia as shown in the following chart.
Source: Database LUCC Czechia 2001, Charles University in Prague “Index of change” (abbr. IC) calculation is based upon comparison of the differences in the areas of the eight land categories (we use in our research) in two time levels (cross-sections) – compare table and example.
n = 8 – number of land categories A(1i) – the area extent of the land use category in the first year A(2i) – the area extent of the land use category in the last year E – total area extent of examined territory Tables 1 a and b: Example of calculating of the index of change in Bavoryn in three different periods.
Table 1a: Land use structure in the BTU Bavoryn in 1845, 1948, 1990 and 2000 yrs (in ha) Source: Database LUCC Czechia 2001, Charles University in Prague.
Individual classes are strictly defined. Summarized classes are in bold letters.
This example regards data for only one Basic Territorial Unit (it can be calculated for larger territories, including the whole country (see diagram above). Land use change have different directions (as opposite, of course) and therefore index of change in district or higher regional levels is in the same period lower in comparison with many (100–200 BTUs) in district. Logically, at the country level (see chart No. 1) the IC is smaller in comparison with IC at districts or BTU levels.
The index of change takes the values between 0 and 100. Lower values indicate more landscape stability of particular territorial unit and minor changes in the size of particular categories occurred between two time horizons. This index acquires a high value above all categories in those regions, where substantial suburbanization, wide-area interventions in the landscape (construction of the dams, open quarry mining of the coal and suchlike) occurred in the regions de-populated where arable land was abandoned and where the intensity of farming decreased or agriculturally exploited land reduced. The IC accordingly makes it possible Land cover and land use changes in North East Asia: problems of sustainable nature management to decode the intensity of conversion of the landscape (through the changes of distribution of particular areas) and this represents a signal on the basis of which additional, more detailed research of the changes of landscape rather by geo-ecological methods is needed. The demonstration of the results of IC calculation, which confirms described tendencies, brings the figure above.
Chart 2: Transformational processes in rural landscape in Czechia after 1990 (see separate picture) . Political and economic transformation in Czechia after 9 Most important in this period have been permanent changes in laws, volume and structure of production, prices and wages, change of many years kept stabilization. From the point of view of land use and landscape, changes were important factor of the reorganization of rural landscape. Transformation of agriculture led to deep structural changes due to the new laws and the rules for privatization and massive large-scale restitution of land property (nowadays 3,5 millions of owners less than 1% of them began again to farm). Reorganization of socialist cooperatives (using in socialist period some 65% of agricultural land (AgL) could start into coops of owners when all requests of restitutents were realized. It is interesting that all of these demands had to be approved by the meeting with all of a coop’s members (some of them were totally without any land or immobility property) as owners (or their ancestors, i.e. children/grandchildren etc.) who owned land, stables, machines, cattle etc. before creating socialist cooperatives. The second most important producer in socialist agriculture – the state farms (they used some 35 % of AgL, majority located in border regions) were privatized on the base of the privatization project. These projects were mostly prepared by the managers of state farms for competition directed by ministry of agriculture. Managers had the best information about big state farms and it was one of the main reasons of their highest successes in economic competition. But it was also the way how to support traditional structure created during the communist regime period. It was one (but not the most important) reason why restituted farmers faced much worse conditions at the beginning of their new farming.
These quick processes influenced also the decrease in the number of employees (from some 600 thousands into 200 thousand in 2006) in the agriculture, forestry and fish industries and division of socialist type of farms (especially constructional, industrial and assembling workshops without any agricultural functions). These newly created parts (enterprises, facilities) were privatized and new reconstructed farms for that reason lost a good chance for earning extra profit out of agriculture. Changes in domestic consumption (introducing of real market prices) and the almost real impossibility of exporting agro-production influenced a fast and deep decrease in the intensity of agricultural production. An indicator of this change was the big decrease of the purchase of artificial fertilizers which amount is expressed by of NPK units (sum of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium).
In this period the NPK consumption decreased from former amount of some 240 kg/ha 40 kg/ha only .
The government pursued great changes in the agricultural policy. In this period, all traditional production supports in agriculture were terminated. These changes influenced the decrease of Czech agriculture intensity, which seems to be an exception in all Europe at the time. The first period of transformation brought some special problems to solve. New managers emerged by the process of privatization had different starting positions; the best ones had stayed with informed people and were joined with old communist “personal structures”. Big privatized properties directed by special ministerial officers presented opportunities for corruption, but only some have been proven . Society overall developed a very similar and relatively good standard of living.
The Czech rural population had never in the past enjoyed so similar standard of living to urban population.
The transformation of rural society produced again differences in property, in standard of living and new social structuring. In many cases, extended families living together with no property before 1948 and after 1992 and we find families facing the opposite. Differences in richness brought new kind of behavior and also in some cases envy.
The beginning of this period is connected to the completion of restitutions (perhaps even 90%) and also privatization of the majority of state farms. Therefore, a new structure of property in rural landscape has appeared. At the beginning of this period private persons owned most of the agricultural land (and some 20 % is up to now in state hands) but using AgL led to different structures in comparison to the former one within the communist regime (chart 1). The Czech Office for Surveying, Mapping and Cadastre put a great effort to dispatch many of the mistakes done during the communist regime period and creating written records. The cadastre records monitored only changes of plots (land) users, but not changes of land properties. The completion of the Cadastre (including legal relations to real estate property) has yet to occur. Right in the middle of this period started a process of creation of a new „Complex land parcels regulation” by application of remote sensing, extended field mapping and hard work with owners in haggling about new use and dealing of their parcels etc. This process of regulating new plots of land is up to be now realized only on some 5 % of Czechia, it is extremely demanding as regards state budget, and it is planned to take two decades and will require the budgeting of billions of crowns.
Any production subsidies have been applied within this period, but farmers could get some support for projects of special programs (from ministries of agriculture, environment, or of local development) focused on grassland cutting, repairing ponds and streams, field roads, etc.
The decrease of size in both arable and in all agricultural land continued during this period. Some plots of both categories were abandoned. The loss of subsidies provided by “socialist” state especially in naturally less favored areas and impact of differential rent I operation in returned market economy influenced regional deeper decrease of AL and AgL inmountainous and sub-mountainous regions. In both is visible growth as grassland as forest areas. Also relatively deep changes in structure of agricultural production occurred: the share of plant production rose from 44 % to 49 %, share of some plants grown on AL is now much higher (rape, corn, sunflower), big decrease of dairy cows (about 40% of the 1990 amount) and milk and milk products, a large decrease in cattle breeding caused smaller amount of muck in arable land etc.). The amount of applied artificial fertilizers went up step by step (average amount of NPK applied in 2004 represents some 120 kg/ha).
New agro-complexes started to be formed. Many big food industry plants collapsed in the first years of transformation. An illustrative example is the collapse of the big modern slaughterhouse which was finished in the middle of 1990s in the southern suburb of Prague. In its place today there is the largest Vietnamese wholesale and retail (“shopping center”) in Czechia. Similar fates met many other big food plants, newly built at the end of totalitarian regime. But at the same time many smaller plants were built up and renovated mainly in the agricultural regions with surpluses (potatoes, milk, meat, vegetables, fruits and wine productions).
Rural space obtained and strengthened non-production functions in which many farms participated.
Environment and nature protection became more important. Some areas around big cities were transformed into suburbs; there are also special functions for different forest areas, including water protection areas, recreation function, cutting timber forests etc.
Abandoned agricultural land began to be changed into forests. New functions of villages in rural regions were strengthened (second-housing, recreation, energetic sources, environmental maintenance etc.). All these changes in rural areas brought new functions and influenced land use changes accordingly. In this period there is a typical regional and local differentiation of developmental directions of land use classes and categories. It is really influenced as by too big number of lands owners, weaker control of the parcels move among quality classes and categories of land use etc. Nevertheless, it is very surprising, that approximately in one third of 8903 basic territorial units there was a significant increase of permanent grassland in the period after 1990. It happened firstly within such a long period 1845–2000 and continues also nowadays The increase of meadows and pastures area in the detriment mainly of arable land was connected to the technological changes in cattle breeding during the 1990–2000 period. About 95 % of cattle was gradually concentrated to big new cowsheds and fed by industrially prepared feed. A decrease of beef, milk, and cheese domestic consumption after 1990 and visible decrease of agricultural intensity contributed to the process of grassing (of permanent grasslands area increase) especially in hilly and mountainous regions where the now 7–8 months open air cattle fattening is dominant. This change is present in differential rent II function’s impact on regional re-organization of agriculture. In the conditions of market economy it is not possible to grow e.g. cereals in such regions, or to invest big capital in the farming there. To make an investments of the same amount of capital into farming in fertile lowlands is much more effective and brings sufficient income.
Big LU changes in the transformational period were also influenced by the “socialist” subsidies abolishing, which before supported intensive farming in less favored areas (i.e. mainly in hilly and the highlands). The farms (cooperative, state, private, in other words – agriculture) farming in fertile regions which got satisfactory income had to pay special agricultural tax which has been used for subsidizing of farming in LFA. This support caused higher share of AL and enabled extensive grain production, typical by small yields, in less fertile Land cover and land use changes in North East Asia: problems of sustainable nature management regions. Ironically, the communist regime agricultural policy ignored forming and influence of differential rent, whose theory elaborated C. Marx. Dissolving of this agricultural policy after 1990 contributed to the return of prevailing permanent grassland and pasturage. Therefore we could note that from the point of view of LU changes, the process of big differences in regions functions forming within transformational period has been result also by strong impact of land rent II.
Source: . Note: Agricultural cooperatives in 1990 are of socialist type only, in 1995 and 2000 coopґs of owners only.
When Czechia joined EU, the state still owned almost 20% of AgL. Only a few hundred unsatisfied restitution applicants remained, who requested around 1 % of agricultural land. About 20 % of the total agricultural land was in 2005 still in the hands of the state. The majority of that land is located in those border regions in which were mostly owned by the Czech Germans who after WW II were transferred to Germany.
The land plots cannot be sold to foreigners until 2012, but the Czech government has begun a discussion about shortening this period. Some foreigners on the base of cooperation with some Czech willing partners started farming in Czechia. This was enabled by the method, by which the Czech partners registered their ownership in cadastral evidence as official owners of the farm. The system of subsidies is developed, but subsidies can be used only for non-production function. Extent of abandoned AL reached almost 10 % of its total registered area in Czechia. It also significant to mention that there were some “waiting” owners for joining the EU. After joining the EU these subsidies again became smaller in comparison to the subsidies of farmers in old EU member states. Stratification of users and owners structures of agricultural land rose up.
Transformed cooperatives (728 coops in 2001 had average size some 1,464 ha – for comparison, an average area of farm, e.g., in Iowa is about 100 ha) cultivated 28 % of AGL area in Czechia. Some of them were changed into the stock companies; because of its easier managing. Biggest share of AGL (44 %) was used by 2 095 farms using different forms of ownership (joint-stock companies, limited liability company, public business company etc.), their average size reached ca 890 ha. Most of the farmed land in both main form of use was rented. The price for lease or selling of land was at this time at the level ca 5 % of the average the EU representing average of the old 15 members. It seems that this fact was the main reason why Czech farmers could obtain only 25 % of subsidies amount obtaining by EU farmers in 2005 year. In this period the delimitation of LFA in Czechia ended (chart 3). The first plan of the LFA area prepared for discussion with the EU officers supposed some 63 % of the AGL in Czechia. The accepted area is now ca 54 % [8; LUCC Czechia Database].
One of the largest changes in the rural landscape in this period has been stronger process of suburbanization, especially in neighborhoods of big agglomerations. Due to this process, the agriculture is losing the best or good fertile soils in lowlands, which are turning into built up areas, roads, and recreational gardens (allotments) and light industry. There are also areas for family housing, and areas for services or stores. Rural areas are changed by these processes into areas with new functions and AL or the AgL is lost forever. In peripheral and semi-peripheral regions we can observe some agro-brownfields. These are buildings and areas earlier used by big coops and state farms for cattle and pigs breeding in big cowsheds, stores, barns, garages for agro-machines, tools and industrial workshops. Many of these investments from the totalitarian period are now in many cases empty and threatened by the plunge. Some of them are used for planned purposes; some of them are rented for non-agricultural use. All processes mentioned here influenced the formation of a new agrocomplex, which deeply differs from the one from the totalitarian era. As far as land use changes are considered there are typical processes of increase in the forest and grassland area as well as continuation of “built up” and “remaining areas” permanent increase. Another serious impact on LU is going on in the surroundings of big cities like first of all are the capital city Praha, Brno, Ostrava Plze, Liberec etc. has the process of suburbanization when inhabitants of cities move to the townships and villages to live in new family houses These are often built-up arable land, in a better eventuality on grasslands.
The situation in agriculture and also rural landscape of Czechia within last 15 years has been influenced by some specific external factors. These have been especially affected by globalization processes and processes connected to the preparation of accession of Czechia into the EU. Agriculture was influenced by a huge amount of imported wine, fruits and vegetables, trade with commodities and changing amounts of subsidies (pork, beef, grains etc.). But there were also special processes earlier controlled by state and developed after its disintegration (1989): restitutions of land and other property gave chance to 3,5 millions of “new” land owners to realize some individual aims (but 98% are renting this land), renting of big share of land but without possibilities to change LU structure and function, selling of land in suburbs and immense process of suburbanization, restructuralisation of transport network, construction of main highways and railway corridors and construction of tens border crossing points.
Source: Database LUCC Czechia 2001, Charles University in Prague Land cover and land use changes in North East Asia: problems of sustainable nature management Table 3: Typology of the changes of the structure in agricultural land resources of Czechia (1st sign = Arable land, 2nd sign = Permanent cultures, 3rd sign = Meadows, 4th sign = Pastures) Types –++– 1867 20.95 21.16 1935 21.72 1358516.5 17.23 1349 15.14 1271864.4 16. –+++ 119 1.34 86479.7 1.10 820 9.20 632854.2 8.02 1824 20.47 1519748.4 19. Source: Database LUCC Czechia 2001, Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Science.
1) Symbol „+“represents an increase or stagnation of given category in reviewed period. Symbol „–„ represents decrease of given category in reviewed period. Category „+++“ and „– – – –-„ accepting error size extent up to one percent of total area of BTU quite 39, alternatively 2 and 528.Bigger number of category “+++” in last period is influenced by the very strong process of restitution (3,5 millions of restituents) realized in Czechia during the period of transformation (1990–000).
It is possible roughly divide territory of Czechia into three different types:
1) Regions with relatively good natural conditions, with stabile higher share of arable land especially in lowlands (in some cases shortened by sub- urbanization),changes of LU will take place especially in AL and other categories of AgL (with limited exemption of permanent grassland) into built-up and remaining areas;
2) Regions with middle and higher changes in the structure of AgL (changes from arable- into grasslands) and weak afforestation are situated in hilly regions of altitude above ca 550 m and higher a.s.l. There are many regions where it is possible to successfully apply rural policy of 21st century– to multifunctional rural landscape.
3) Regions with a very steep decrease of arable land as well as grassland and strong afforestation, where share of agricultural land has been slowly shortened from the end of 19th century and accelerated after WWII.
There are almost only rarely used pastures and going on strong afforestation (above 600 m of s.l.). These processes have been in progress until the joining the EU. But increase in subsidies coming from the EU and also participation in world trade due to the high demand for grains (and different forms of bio-energy or biofuels) can influence land use changes in Czechia.
ReferencesAtkins, P., Simmons Ian, and B.Roberts, People, land and time. an historical introduction to the relations between landscape, culture and environment. Arnold, USA, 1998.
Auer, Matthew, R., ed, Restoring Cursed Land: Appraising Environmental Policy Reforms in Eastern Europe and Russia.
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, INC., Lanham, Boulder, New York, Toronto, Oxford, ( 3. Bik, Ivan, “Dynamic land use in the Czech Republic: Data sources, research methods and compatibility,” In: Land Use Changes in Comparative Perspective, eds: Y. Himiyama, M. Hwang, and T. Ichinose, New Delhi: Oxford & IBH Publishing, 2002, 21Bik, Ivan and Antonнn Gцtz, „Czech Republic“. In: Turnock D.: Privatization in Rural Eastern Europe. The Process of Restitution and Restructuring,“ London: Edw. Elgar Publishing, Studies of Communism in Transition, 1998, 93-120.
Bik, Ivan, Pavel Chrom, Vt Jank, and Helena Jan, eds, Land Use /Land Cover Changes in the Period of Globalization.
Proceedings of the IGU-LUCC International Conference Prague 2001. Prague: Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Science, Dept. of Social Geography and Regional Development, 2002.
6. Bik, Ivan, Pavel Chrom, Vt Jank, Leo Jeleek, Lucie Kupkov, Vt tpnek, and Jana Winklerov, “Land use/Land Cover Changes in Czechia over the past 150 Years – An Overwiev,” In: Y. Himiyama, A. Mather, I. Bik, E. V. Milanova, eds, Land Use/Cover Change in Selected Regions in the World. Asahikawa: Institute of Geography, Hokkaido Univ. of education, 2001, Vol. I, Part IV, 29-39.
7. Bik, Ivan and Vt Jank, “The Transformation of the Czech Agriculture after 1990,” In: Drbohlav, D., Kalvoda, J., Voћenнlek, V., eds, Czech Geography at the Dawn of the Millenium. Olomouc: Palackэ University in Olomouc, 2004, 271-291.
8. Bik, Ivan and Leo Jeleek, “Political Events Factoring into Land-Use Changes in Czechia in the 20th century,” In: E. Milanova, Y. Himiyama, I. Bik, eds, Understanding Land-Use and Land-Cover Change in Global and Regional Context. Enfield (NH), USA, Plymouth, UK: Science Publishers, Inc., 2004, 165-186.
9. Bik, Ivan, Leo Jeleek, and Vt tpnek, “Land-Use Changes and their Social Driving Forces in Czechia in the 19th and 20th Centuries,” land Use Policy, 18, 1:65-73, 2001.
10. Bik Ivan and Lucie Kupkov, “Long-term and Transformational Land Use Changes in Czechia,” In: Land Use/Cover Change in Selected Regions in the World. Ed. by Y. Himiyama, A. Mather, I. Bik, E. V. Milanova. Vol. II, Issued by IGU SG LUCC.
Asahikawa: Institute of Geography, Hokkaido Univ. of Education, 2002, 29-39.
11. Bik, Ivan and Vt tpnek, “Post War Changes of the Land Use Structure in Bohemia and Moravia. Case Study Sudetenland,” geoJournal, 32, 3:253-259, 1994.
12. Brandt, J., Primdahl, J., Reenberg, A., “Rural land-use and dynamic forces – analysis of driving forces in space and time,” In:
Krцnert, R. et al., eds: Land-use changes and their environmental impact in rural areas in Europe. Paris: UNESCO, 1999, 81-102.
13. Bьrgi, Mathias, A. M. Hersperger, and N. Scheeberger, “Driving Forces of Landscape Change – Current and New Directions.
landscape ecology, 19, 857-868, 2004.
14. Database LUCC Czechia, Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Science, 2001.
Geist, Helmut, ed, Our Earth’s Changing Land: An Encyclopedia of Land-Use and Cover Change. Vol. 1: A–K, Vol. 2: L–Z.
Westport, CT, Greenwood Press, 2006.
Haberl, Helmut, Batterbury, Simon, and Emilio Moran, “Using and shaping the land: a long-term perspective,” land Use Policy, 16.
18, 1:1-8, 2001.
Hampl, Martin, “Ecological problems, development of the society and geography,” aUc–geographica, 1:7-10, Prague, 1992.
Hampl, Martin et al. geography of societal transformation in the czech republic. Prague, Faculty of Science, Charles University 18.
in Prague, 1999.
19. Jeleek, Leoљ, “Changes in the Production and Techniques in the Agriculture of Bohemia 1870–1945,” In: Havinden, M.A., Collins, E.J.T., eds, Agriculture in the Industrial State. Chapter 6. Reading, UK: Rural History Centre, University of Reading, 126-145, 1995.
20. Jeleek, Leo, “Historical Development of Society and LUCC in Czechia 1800–2000: Major Societal Driving Forces of Land Use Changes,” In: I. Bik et al., eds, Land Use/Land Cover Changes in the Period of Globalization. Proceedings of the IGULUCC International Conference Prague 2001, Prague, 44-57, 2002.
21. Jeleek, Leoљ, “Agricultural Revolution, Cadastre, East Central Europe, Industrial Revolution, Land reforms, Land rent, Southeast Europe, Technological Scientific Revolution (in agriculture),” In: Geist, H., ed.: The Earth’s Changing Land: An Encyclopedia of Land-Use and Land-Cover Change. Vol. I., s. 25–27; 81–84; 188–193; 302–303; Vol. II, s. 352–355; 356–357;
557–560; 588–590. Westport, CT., USA: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2006a.
Land cover and land use changes in North East Asia: problems of sustainable nature management 22. Jeleek, Leoљ, “Development of Modern Cadastre and Cadastral Mapping: Cadastre as Major Information Source of LUCC Research in Czechia. acta geographica Universitatis comenianae, Bratislava, No. 49, 37–51, 2006b.
23. Krausmann, Fridolin, Haberl, Helmut, Niels Schulz, Erb, Karlheinz, Darge, Ekkehard, Gaube, Veronika, „Land-use change and socio-economic metabolism in Austria – Part I: Driving forces of land-use change: 1950–1995,“ land Use Policy, 20, 1:1–20, 24. Lambin, Eric, Geist, Helmut, “Causes of land-use and land-cover change. The Encyclopedia of Earth: Content, Credibility, Community,” 2007. In: http://www.eoearth.org/article/Causes_of_land-use_and_land-cover_change. Retrieved: Aug 18, 2007.
25. Lipskэ, Zdenk, “Present land use changes in the Czech cultural landscape: driving forces and environmental consequences,” moravian geographical reports, 9, 2: 2-14, 2001.
26. Mareљ, Petr, Љtych, Pemysl, “Historical Changes in Czech Landscape in 1845–2000 and their Natural and Social Driving Forces Studied at Different Spatial Levels,” In: Milanova, E., Himiyama, Y., Bik, I., eds, Understanding Land-Use and LandCover Change in Global and Regional Context. Science Publishers, chapter 8, 2005,107–134.
Milanova, Elena, Himiyama, Yukio, and Ivan Bik, eds, Understanding Land-Use and Land-Cover Change in Global 27.
and regional context. Enfield (NH), USA, Plymouth, UK: Science Publishers, Inc., 2004.
28. Robinson, Douglas, Huggett (eds. 1997, 2002): Companion encyclopedia of geography: The environment and humankind.
Routledge, New York, 1021 s.
tpnek, Vt, “The Iron Curtain and Its Impact on the Environment in the Czech Republic,” AUC-Geographica, 27, 1:59–63, 29.
Turner II, Bill L., et al., eds, The Earth as Transformed by Human Action: Global and Regional Changes in the Biosphere over 30.
the Past 300 Years. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge Univ. Press with Clark University, 1990.
Turner II, Bill L. et al., Land-Use and Land-Cover Change: Science /Research Plan. IGBP Report No. 35 / HDP Report No. 7, 31.
Stockholm and Geneva, 1995.
Turner II, Bill L. and Meyer, William B., Changes in Land Use and Land Cover: A Global Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge 32.
University Press, 1994.
Turnock, David, agricultural transformation of land Use in central and eastern europe. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001.
Worster, Donald, “Transformation of the Earth: Toward an Agroecological Perspective in History,” the Journal of american 34.
history, 76, 4:1087-1116, 1990.
This study has been supported by Grant Agency of the Czech Republic research project reg. no. 205/05/ „Driving forces of land use differentiation in Czechia and in neighboring countries: Prospects of development after joining the EU”, and by Grant Agency of the Academy of Science of the Czech Republic research project reg. no KJB301110705 “Land use of model regions in the context of social metabolism of Czechoslovakia”.
DEVELOPMENT Of HOUSING ESTATEYakushin Co., Ltd., 1-1-17 Nishiomichi, Oita City, 870-0820, Japan
I. PrefaceJapan has achieved population growth and rapid economic growth after World War II, and a large quantity of farmland and forest have changed to urban land use. Popularization of privately-owned cars supported spatial expansion of urban area. However, the birth rate of Japan has fallen rapidly as a result of the economic growth, and now Japan entered into the depopulation society. A population decrease has already begun in the cities of medium and small size in the non-metropolitan area, and population decrease will begin in the near future in the local central cities such as a prefectural office.
Purposes of the report are to understand a regional characteristic of the history of the housing estate development of Oita City and to understand social and economic environment surrounding housing estate development connection with regional development policy. Another important purpose of the report is to understand a role of public and private sectors in the housing estate development.
The data about the housing estate development used in this report is “Housing Estate Development Status in Oita City” edited by Oita City in 2002, it includes 370 housing estates more than 3,000 m2 of development area from 1962 to 2002 .