Part 1 - Basic Concepts & Procedures of Land Evaluation

1/3/2015
Part1:BasicConcepts&ProceduresofLandEvaluation
|Home|LandEvaluation|ResourcesonInternet|Contacts|Examples|
|LectureNotes(Index)|Introduction|Part2|Part3|Part4|Part5|Part6|Part7|
Part1:Basicconcepts&proceduresofland
evaluation
(PleasereadtheDisclaimer)
ContentsforPart1:"Basicconcepts&proceduresofland
evaluation"
1. Outlineofalandevaluationexercise
1. Client,evaluator,experts,andstakeholders
2. Thelandevaluationprocess
3. 'Rapidprototyping'appliedtolandevaluation
2. PrinciplesoftheFAOMethodologyforlandevaluation
1. Background
2. Threelevelsofdetail:Framework,Guidelines,Evaluations
3. BasicprinciplesoftheFAOmethod
4. Keypoints
5. Levelsofsuitability
3. Whatisthespatialentitybeingevaluated?
1. FAOdefinitionof'land'
2. MapunitsofNaturalResourceInventories(NRI)
3. DelineationsofNRI
4. Managementunits
5. Economicunits
6. Planningareas
7. Gridcells
8. Scaleandprecision
4. KeyDefinitionsoftheFAOFramework
1. FAOdefinitionof'MajorKindofLandUse'
2. FAOdefinitionof'LandUtilizationType'(LUT)
3. FAOdefinitionof'LandUseRequirements'(LUR)
4. FAOdefinitionof'LandQualities'(LQ)
5. FAOdefinitionof'LandCharacteristics'(LC)
5. DefiningaLandUtilizationType
1. WhatisincludedinthedefinitionofaLUT?
2. ChecklistfordefiningaLUT
3. DisaggregatedorhierarchicaldefinitionofLUTs
6. SelectingLandUseRequirements
1. CriteriafortheselectionofLandUseRequirements
2. Effectsoflandqualities
3. DefiningSeverityLevelsofLandQualities
http://www.geo.upm.es/postgrado/CarlosLopez/materiales/cursos/www.css.cornell.edu/landeval/le_notes/s494ch1p.htm
1/39
1/3/2015
4. WorksheetforselectingLandUseRequirements
7. EvaluatingLandQualitiesfromDiagnosticLandCharacteristics
1. Matchingtables
2. Decisiontrees
3. Landindicesfromclassifiedlandcharacteristics
4. Landindicesfromcontinuousvaluedlandcharacteristics
5. Empiricalstatisticalmethods
6. Dynamicsimulationoflandqualities
8. EvaluatingoverallsuitabilityfromLandQualities
1. Theconceptofsuitabilityclasses
2. Methodsofevaluatingoverallphysicalsuitability
3. Methodsofevaluatingoveralleconomicsuitability
9. Glossary
10. References
Thisunitintroduceslandevaluationconceptsandterminology,usingtheFAO"FrameworkforLand
Evaluation"andsubsequentguidelinesasthereferencesystem.Inthisunitwelearnwhatresultswewant
fromalandevaluationandtheprocedurestofollow,i.e.,thestructureofalandevaluationexercise.In
laterunitswewillstudytheanalyticaltechniquesnecessarytoactuallycarryoutthelandevaluation.
1Outlineofalandevaluationexercise
Thissectionpresentstheoverallstructureoftheevaluationexercise.Mostofthestepswillbeexplained
inmoredetailinlaterlectures.
Beforepresentingthesteps,wemustdefinetheactorsinthisdrama.
1.1Client,evaluator,experts,andstakeholders
Thesearethefivetypesof'actors'inthelandevaluationprocess
(1)Client:Apersonororganizationthatrequeststheworkandwillactonthebasisofitsresults.Also
calledtheuserofthelandevaluationresults.
(2)Evaluator:Apersonwhocarriesoutthelandevaluation(thismeansyou!).Theevaluatormust
understandtheconceptsandmethodologyofandevaluation,andbeabletouseappropriateanalytic
techniquesandcomputerizedtoolsasnecessary.Theevaluatoractsastheintermediarybetweenthe
clientandtheexperts.Alandevaluatormusthaveagoodknowledgeofnaturalresourcesandlanduses,
beabletothinklogicallyandsystematically,beabletousecomputerswithsomefacility,and,mostof
all,beabletocommunicatewithclients,landuseexperts,andlandresourceexpertsusingtheirspecialist
language.Landevaluationisanintegrativeanditerativeprocess,sotheevaluatormusthaveanopen
mind.
(3)Landuseexpert:apersonwhohasinformationaboutalanduseorlandquality,inrelationtothe
2/39
1/3/2015
land,forexample,soilscientists,agronomists,economists,,ruralagentsandfarmerswithgoodpowers
ofobservation.Theexpertmustbecommittedtoundergoingaseriesofinterviewsbythelandevaluator,
andlaterreviewingtheresultsofthepreliminaryevaluation.Thisisnotatrivialtimecommitment.Land
useexpertsusuallyviewtheirareaofexpertiseinspecialistterms,andmustworkwiththelandevaluator
toexpresstheirknowledgewithinthelandevaluationframework.
(4)Landresourceexpert:apersonwhohasinformationonthelandresource,forexample,soil
surveyors,climatologists,censustakers,ruralagentsandfarmerswithgoodpowersofobservation.The
expertmustbepreparedtoexplaintheirdatatotheinformedoutsider,inparticular,itsprovenance,
meaning,andreliability,andmustbeabletoconstructmapunitsanddatabasesasrequiredbytheland
evaluationcomputersystem.Thelandresourceexpertmustinterpretthedataastheycollectitinthe
termsrequiredbythelandevaluator.
Farmersorothercountrypeopleareaspecialcategoryofexperts:oftenintimatelyfamiliarwithlanduse
andlandqualitiesinarestrictedarea,butusuallywithapoorunderstandingofthescientific(predictive)
relationsunderlyingtheobservedphenomena.Theirobservationscanprovideanexcellentstartingpoint
forfurtherinvestigation.
(5)Stakeholders:allpartieswhowillbeaffectedbytheresultsoftheplanningdecisionstakenonthe
basisofthelandevaluation.Thisisusuallythewholeruralpopulationoftheplanningarea,butmay
includeworkersinrelatedindustriessuchastransportorfoodprocessing.
1.2Thelandevaluationprocess
Alandevaluationexercisecanbedividedintotwelvesteps,asshowninthefigure.Thesestepscertainly
cancontainfeedback,i.e.,theresultsofastepmaysuggestmodificationsthatshouldbemadetoprevious
steps.Themostimportantfeedbacksareshowninthefigure,buttheremaybeothers.Forexample,it
maybecomeclearduringtheidentificationofdatasources,thatthereisnotenoughdatatoevaluatea
certainlanduse.
Andofcourseonceyou'vefinishedthewholeprocess,it'stimetostartover,withalltheexperienceyou
gainedthefirsttime,sothereshouldbeanarrowfromthebottomtothetopoftheentirediagram.
Wenowdiscusseachstepinthefigureinsomedetail.
1.2.1(1)Identifythedecisionmakers,theirobjectives,andtheirmeansof
implementation.
Thekeypointisthatlandevaluationcannottakeplaceasanisolatedactivity.Itmustservetheneedsof
landuseplanning,insomesense.Thisimpliesthatthereisarecognizedneedtoplan,anddecision
makerswhoarepreparedtoplan,sothattheresultsofthelandevaluationwillbeusedbythesedecision
makerstoinformtheirplan.Therefore,thefirststepinthelandevaluationexerciseistodetermine
exactlywhowantstoplan,theirobjectives,andthescopeoftheirdecisionmakingpowertoimplementa
plan.
Tocarryoutthisstep,theevaluatorconductsaseriesofinterviewswiththedecisionmakersandother
affectedparties,andreviewsrelevantdocuments,toanswerthefollowingquestions:
Decisionmakers
3/39
1/3/2015
Whoaretheactorsinrurallanduseandwhataretheirroles?Theprimarydecisionmakerisoftenthe
partywhocommissionedthestudy,i.e.,theclient.Insomecases,thestudyiscommissionedbyoneparty
tobenefitanother(e.g.FAOtobenefitanationalplanningboard),inwhichcasethelatteristhedecision
maker.
Objectives
Whatproblemsdothedecisionmakerswanttosolve?(1)Generalobjectives,e.g.,'reduceruralpoverty',
'promotesustainablelanduse',(2)Specificobjectives,e.g.,decidewheretoimproveruralroadsand
locateruralassistancecenters.Theseobjectivesdeterminetheselectionoflandutilizationtypesand
evaluationunits.Obviously,themorespecifictheobjective,theeasieritistodeterminelandutilization
typestomeetthatobjective.
Resources,Methodsofimplementationandenforcement
Bywhatmeanscanthedecisionmakersaffectthelanduse?Whatdotheyactuallyhavethepowertodo,
andwhatdotheyintendtodowiththeresultsofthestudy?Willtheyusedirectlyprescriptive,indirectly
prescriptive,orproscriptivemethods(previoussection)?
Thepointhereistoavoidunrealistic(politicallyunfeasible)landutilizationtypes.Agoodexampleis
agrarianreform:doestheclienthavesufficientresourcestopurchaselargeestatesfordistributionto
landlessfarmers?Doestheclienthavethepoliticalpowertoexpropriatetheseestates?Ifthereisno
practicalwaytoacquiretheland,thereisnopointinincludingsettledestatesintheevaluationexercise
(otherthantoshowhowmuchbetteroffthelandlessfarmerswouldbeiftherewereawaytoexpropriate
theestates).
Otheraffectedparties
Whatotherparties(notthedecisionmakers)willbeaffectedbytheevaluation?Howcantheybe
includedinthedecisionmakingprocess?Thesearegenerallythestakeholdersmentionedaboveasoneof
thetypesofactorsintheprocess.Withouttheiractiveparticipationintheformulationofobjectivesand
implementationplans,itisunlikelythattheresultsofthelandevaluationwillbeuseful.
Itisgenerallyimpracticaltoincludeallstakeholdersinthelandevaluationandplanningprocessinstead
theirrepresentativesareincluded.Thisismucheasierifthereareexistingorganizationsthatwell
representthestakeholders,forexample,peasantcooperatives,unions,andprofessionalassociations.Of
course,ifthesearenotdemocratic,theremaybestakeholdersnotorpoorlyrepresentedbytheir
supposed'leaders',inwhichcasesomemethodmustbefoundfordirectlyinvolvingthesestakeholders.
Outputofthisphase
Adocumentdetailingtheabovepoints.Please,tothepoint!Statementssuchas'countyXisbynaturean
agriculturalandpeasantnation'or'theproblemsofruralpovertyandlanddegradationareeverydaymore
acute'arenothelpfulunlesstheyleaddirectlytoaspecificpolicyonthepartofthedecisionmaker.This
documentshouldbeapprovedbyallthestakeholders.
1.2.2(2)Definethespatialentitiestobeevaluated(evaluationunits)
basedontheplanningneedsofthedecisionmakers(separatesection).Includesscaleofthefinalmap(s)
andtypeofmapunit.Maybeinfluencedbydatasources(below).
4/39
1/3/2015
Outputofthisphase
Thelistoftheevaluationunits,howtheyweredefined,theminimumdecisionarea,thetotalprojectarea,
themapscaleorresolutionforevaluationresults.
1.2.3(3)DefinetheLandUtilizationTypes(LUT)
tobeevaluated,bothactualandpotential.(separatesection).Thesearethelanduseoptions,andare
specifiedinenoughdetailtosupportthelaterphasesoftheevaluation.
Outputofthisphase
ThelistoftheLandUtilizationTypesandtheirdetaileddescription,probablyaccordingtoastandardized
formpreparedbytheevaluator.
1..2.4(4)DefinetheLUTsintermsoftheirLandUseRequirements(LUR)
DefinetheLUTbyasetofmoreorlessindependentrequirements,whicharethegeneralconditionsof
thelandnecessaryforsuccessfuluseaccordingtothesystemspecifiedbytheLUT.
Thisisthecomputabledefinitionofthelanduse.Thelanduseexpertsparticipateinthisphase.(separate
section)
Outputofthisphase
ForeachLandUtilizationTypes,itslistofLandUseRequirements,thenumberofseveritylevelsofthe
correspondingLandQuality,andtheireffectonsuitability,includingdecreasedyields,increasedcosts,
andphysicallimitationsasapplicable.TheevaluatorshouldfillinoneworksheetforeachLUT.
1.2.5(5)DefinetheLURsintermsoftheirdiagnosticLandCharacteristics(LC)
Identifythemeasurablediagnosticlandcharacteristicsthatwillbeusedtodeterminetowhatdegreethe
LandUseRequirementsaresatisfied.
Thelandresourceandlanduseexpertsparticipateinthisphase.(separatelectures)
Outputofthisphase
ForeachLandUseRequirementofeachLandUtilizationTypes,alistoftheLandCharacteristicsthat
willbeusedtoevaluateit,andageneraldescriptionofhowtheLCswillbecombined.
1.2.6(6)Identifydatasources(&surveyifpossible/necessary)
...accordingtohowtheLandUseRequirementsaretobeevaluation(separatelectures).Mayinfluence
choiceofevaluationunits(above).
Outputofthisphase
Alistofthedatasources,alongwiththediagnosticLCsthatwillbesuppliedbyeachone.
5/39
1/3/2015
1.2.7(7)EntertabulardataandmapsfortheLCs
intothecomputer,readyforthemodel.Ideally,thedatawouldalreadybeindigitalform(trueintheUS
forbasemaps,digitalelevationmodels,manythematicmapssuchassoils,climaterecords)andasimple
formatconversionwouldbethemostthatwouldberequired.Ingeneral,datavalidation,entryand
transformationwillbenecessary.
Outputofthisphase
Computerizeddatabaseanddigitalmaps,possiblyincludingremotelysensedimages.
1.2.8(8)Build(computer)modelsforlandevaluation
(alltheseinseparatesections)
1. InferLQsfromthediagnosticLCs.
2. InfersuitabilityforLUTsfromtheLQs.
3. ModeltheeconomicsoftheLUT.
4. Geographicanalysis(partof1,2,or3)
5. Optimizationunderconstraints
Outputofthisphase
Thecomputermodelitself.
1.2.9(9)Computetheevaluation
1. ApplythemodeltoeachLUT/evaluationunitcombination.
2. Exportresultsforoptimizationand/orgeographicanalysis
3. Performtheoptimizationand/orgeographicanalysis
Ineachstep,estimatetheuncertaintyoftheresult.
Outputofthisphase
Theresultsofthecomputation,intheformoftablesandmaps,preferablydigital.
1.2.10(10)Calibratetheresults
Presentthepreliminaryresultstotheexperts,verifyifpossiblewithexperience(foractualLUTsonly).
ForpotentialLUTs,verifytheinternalconsistencyoftheresults,e.g.,yieldsandpredictedcostsand
returnsshouldbereasonableandconsistent.Adjustthemodelaccordinglyandrecalculate.
Noticethatwedon'ttalkaboutvalidationoflandevaluations,becausethatwouldimplythateachland
usewouldbetestedoneachlandareaforanextendedtimeperiod!Obviouslyimpossible,sowe
calibrateagainstexpertjudgmentandrelatedexperience.
6/39
1/3/2015
Outputofthisphase
Sameas(9)and(10),butcalibratedandextendedtoallLUT/landunitcombinations.
1.2.11(11)Presenttheresultstotheusers
Withouteffectivedisseminationoftheresultsofalandevaluation,itremainsanacademicexercisewith
nopracticalvaluenoreffectonlanduse.
Outputsofthisphase
1. Thereportandaccompanyingmapsarethetraditionalproductsofalandevaluationexerciseand
aredeliveredtotheclientwhocommissionedthelandevaluation.However,thesearestaticand
maybemisinterpreted.So,theidealsituationisthatthelandevaluatorkeepaformalrelationwith
theclient,to(1)explainanythingthatisnotclear,(2)makeminoradjustmentstheevaluation
duringtheimplementationphase,(3)extendtheevaluationbasedontheexperiencesgainedduring
implementation.Inotherwords,alongtermrelationbetweenevaluatoranduserwouldbe
profitableforboth.Attheveryleast,theevaluationprojectshouldincludeafollowupstage.
2. Theautomatedsystemitself,withthedataandmodelsconstructedfortheevaluation,canbe
deliveredtotheclient.Mostclientshavesufficientcomputerresourcestoreceivethese,possibly
withoutsomeofthemorespecializedperipherals(e.g.,digitizers,plotters,highresolutioncolor
displays)thatmighthavebeenusedbytheevaluator.Theclientcanreceiveinstructiontobein
conditiontochangeparametersandrerunthemodel,andtoproduceadhocreports(thisdepends
ontheirlevelofsophistication).
3. Technicalworkshopscanbepresentedtotheclientandotherstakeholders,explainingindetailthe
proceduresthatwereusedintheevaluation.Bymakingthedecisionmakingprocesstransparent,
theclientcangainpublicsupportfortheplan'simplementation.
4. Executiveworkshopscanbepresentedtothedecisionmakersandtheinterestedbutnontechnical
public,toprovideanoverviewoftheprojectanditsresults.
Inalldisseminationmethods,thelandevaluatormusttrytocommunicatethereliability,orconversely
theuncertainty,oftheresults.
1.2.12(12)Assistwithprojectimplementation
Duringthecourseoftheexercise,thelandevaluatorshouldhavebecomeintimatelyacquaintedwiththe
projectareaanditsproblems.Thispracticalexperienceshouldnotbelost,sothattheevaluatorshould
haveanadvisoryroleintheimplementationoftheevaluationrecommendations,perhapsbyservingon
theappropriateplanningboardasatechnicaladvisor.
1.3'Rapidprototyping'appliedtolandevaluation
Inanyengineeringactivity,itisunwisetoinvesttoomuchintheearlystagesoftheproject,without
beingsurethatthemethodstobeemployedwillwork.Oneapproachtothisproblemiscalled'rapid
prototyping',i.e.,theideaistoproduceaworkingprototypetoillustratetheessentialfeaturesofthe
proposedengineeringsolutionasquicklyaspossible,sothattheclientcanreacttotheideasmadevisible
intheprototype.Thisapproachhasbeenadvocatedespeciallyinsoftwareengineering.
7/39
1/3/2015
Appliedtolandevaluation,thisimpliesthatitisoftenmorecosteffectivetobuildsimplifiedmodels
incorporatingthemostcriticalfactorsforaselectedsetofthemostimportantorbestunderstoodland
uses,identifyandenterdataforasetofthemostimportantormostrepresentativeevaluationunits,and
assurethatthisevaluationgivesreasonableandusefulresults.
Then,themodelcanbemademorecomplex,awidersetoflandusescanbemodeled,anddatacanbe
enteredforallevaluationunits.Thiswillleadtoafinalevaluation.Thisiterativeapproachtoland
evaluationworksbestwhentheevaluatorisacceptedasamoreorlesspermanentpartoftheplanning
team,notasaconsultanthiredtoproduceasingledocument.
2PrinciplesoftheFAOMethodologyforlandevaluation
FAO=FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations
References:Theoriginalstatementisin(FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,
1976)butbetterreferencesarethesubsequentguidelines(FoodandAgricultureOrganizationofthe
UnitedNations,1983,1984,1985,1991).VanDiepen(1991)providesacriticalreview(p.153172and
theconclusion).
2.1Background
Intheearly1970s,therewasgrowingdissatisfactionwiththenexistinglandclassificationsystems
insofarastheirabilitytosupportrationallanduseplanning,inthreemainrespects:
(1)Existinglandclassificationsystemsweremostlyorcompletelybasedonphysicalfactorsandignored
socioeconomicaspectsoflanduse
(2)Theydidnotspecifylandusesinsufficientdetailforrealisticevaluation,i.e.,asingleclassification
wasbeingappliedtolanduseswithdistinctlydifferentrequirements
(3)Theywerebeinguncriticallyappliedoutsideoftheirareaofcalibration(notreallyafaultofthe
system,exceptinsofaras,beingreadymadeandapparently'scientific',theywereeasytoapply,without
theobviousmodificationsforlocalconditions,byillinformedorlazylandevaluators).
ThemainpromotersofthedevelopmentoftheFAOsystemwereEuropeansoilscientistsworkingin
developmentprojects,especiallyBeek(1978),workinginBrazil.CornellUniversityparticipatedinthe
personofProf.GeraldOlson,whospentasabbaticalatFAOin1972.
TheFAO'sLandandWaterDevelopmentdivision(AGL),inapproximately1973,sponsoredworking
groups,leadingtopublicationoftheFrameworkin1976(FoodandAgricultureOrganizationofthe
UnitedNations,1976).Subsequently,theFAOorganizedworkshopsleadingtopublicationofguidelines
forlandevaluationin:
drylandagriculture(FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1983)
irrigatedagriculture(FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1985)
forestry(FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1984,Laban,1981)
8/39
1/3/2015
extensivegrazing(FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1991)and
steeplands(Siderius,1986).
PresentlytheFAOFrameworkisusedinFAOandUNDPprojects,andbymanynationalagencies,with
modificationsandsimplificationsmadelocally.ItispracticallyunknownandnoninfluentialintheUSA,
foravarietyofreasons.Amongthepositivereasonsare(1)thefactthatdomesticmethodshaveworked
wellfortheirintendedpurposesand(2)modelingapproachesaremorepopularanddatafortheseare
available.Amongthenegativereasonsare(1)a'notinventedhere'mentalityand(2)thelackof
internationalexperience/orientationofsoilsurveyors.
TheFAOFrameworkusessomenewtechnicalterms,andsomeredefinitionsofcommonterms,that
wereagreedonafterintensenegotiations.
JudgmentofvanDiepen(1991)p.196197:atitsconception,theFAOFrameworkrepresentedthestate
oftheart,borrowingthebestfromthenexistinglandclassificationmethodsmanyweaknessesapparent
oncloseexaminationandattemptstoimplement"itisbecomingoutdatedfromanoperationalpointof
view,butwithafunctionasbackgroundphilosophy".
JudgmentofRossiteronvanDiepen:theFrameworkiscapableofmodificationandinterpretation,the
problemshavebeenwithunimaginativeapplications.TheFrameworkcanbeextendedwithnew
analyticaltechniques.
FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1976).
Guidelines(directives):whatfactors(landqualities)toconsiderwhenevaluatingforcertaingeneral
kindsoflanduses(e.g.forestry),howtoevaluatethesequalities.Thesehavebeenpublishedas
Guidelines(FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1983,1984,1985,1991,Siderius,
1986).
Evaluations:specificevaluationexercises.Thesearedesignedseparatelyforeachproblemandarea,by
thelocallandevaluator.Forexample,thePapuaNewGuineaLandEvaluationSystem(Venema&
Daink,1992).
2.3BasicprinciplesoftheFAOmethod
(vanDiepenetal.,1991)p.153154
Thesearemostlyinreactiontoearlier(pre1973)methods.
1. Landsuitabilityisassessedandclassifiedwithrespecttospecifiedkindsofuses(asopposedtoa
singlescaleof'goodness'ofland)
2. Thesuitabilityclassesaredefinedbyeconomiccriteria(asopposedtopurelyphysicalcriteriain
practicethishasrarelybeenfollowed)
3. multidisciplinaryapproachisrequired(inpractice,notjustsoilsurveyors)
4. Evaluationsshouldtakeintoaccountthephysical,economic,socialandpoliticalcontextofthe
areaconcerned(i.e.,don'tevaluateforimpossibleuses)
9/39
1/3/2015
5. Suitabilityreferstolanduseonasustainedbasis(i.e.,can'tdepletetheresourcebase,inpractice
thisisrarely
6. 'Evaluation'involvescomparisonoftwoormorealternativekindsofusethisseemsredundantto
point1.
2.4Keypoints
ThefollowingthreekeypointsdistinguishtheFAOFrameworkfrompreviouslandclassification
systems:
Evaluateseparatelyforeachspecificuse,thencompare
Thereisnotonescaleof'goodness'oflandfrom'excellent'to'poor'insteadonemustspeakofvery
suitablethroughunsuitablelandforaspecificuse.
'Therearenobadlandareas,onlyinappropriatelanduses.'(Paraphrase:'therearenodifficultlands,only
incompetentlandusers'.)
Manyexamplesofperfectlysuitedlandareasforoneusewhichareextremelyunsuitedforanother.E.g.
intensivesemimechanizedirrigatedricevs.areasforurbanexpansion.ExampleofCaribbeanpine
nurseriesinoldPleistoceneterracesofthelowerOrinoco(easternVenezuela).
Abroaddefinitionof'land'
(nextsection).Notjust'soil'oreven'physicalresourcebase'.
Abroaddefinitionof'landuse'
TheLandUtilizationTypeisadetaileddescription,atanappropriatelevelofdetail,ofthelanduse(later
section).Itincludesallthecharacteristicsoftheproductionsystemandsocialcontextwhichinfluence
suitability,including:(1)products(maybethebroadsense),(2)inputs(offandonfarm),(3)production
calendar,(4)marketsandotherexternalinfluences.
Landshouldbeevaluatedinbothphysicalandeconomicterms
Ideally,bothaphysicalandaneconomiclandevaluationareundertaken.
AphysicallandevaluationisbasedonlyonphysicalfactorsthatdeterminewhetheraLUTcanbe
implementedonalandarea,andthenatureandseverityofphysicallimitationsorhazards.
Aneconomiclandevaluationisbasedonsomeeconomicmeasureofnetbenefits,shouldagivenLUTbe
implementedonagivenlandarea.
Thephysicalevaluationrevealsthenatureoflimitationsandhazards,whichisusefulinformationtothe
landmanagerhowever,theeconomicevaluationrevealstheexpectedeconomicbenefits,whichin
generaldrivethedecisionmakingprocess,oratleastareasinaquanonforsuccessfullanduse.
2.5Levelsofsuitability
LandSuitabilitymaybedefinedas"thefitnessofagiventypeoflandforaspecifiedkindoflanduse"(
10/39
1/3/2015
FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1985).
Dependingontheobjectivesoftheevaluation,thesuitabilityofanevaluationunitforalandusecanbe
describedinfourlevelsofdetail.See(EUROCONSULT,1989)p.140142.Frommostgeneraltomost
specific,theseare:
(1)Suitabilityorders
Alllandisdividedintotwosuitabilityorders,accordingtowhetherthelandissuitableornotforagiven
LUT.
'S'=suitable,'N'=notsuitable,forthelanduse.
(2)Suitabilityclasses
Thesearedivisionsofsuitabilityordersthatindicatethedegreeofsuitability,notsimplysuitablevs.not
suitable.
'S1'=suitable,'S2'=moderatelysuitable,'S3'=marginallysuitable,'N1'unsuitableforeconomic
reasonsbutotherwisemarginallysuitable,'N2'=unsuitableforphysicalreasons.Thelinguisticterms
'moderately'and'marginal'aregivenspecificmeaningsinthecourseoftheevaluation.
N2implieslimitationsthatarenotcorrectableatanycostwithinthecontextofthelandutilizationtype.
Inphysicalevaluations,S3&N1arecombinedinto'S3/N1'becausethedistinctionbetweentheseis
purelyeconomic(cost/benefitofovercomingthelimitation).ThelimitsbetweenS1andS2,S2and
S3/N1arearbitraryorbasedonsinglefactoryieldreductions.
Ineconomicevaluations,thelimitsbetweenS1andS2,S2andS3,andS3andN1aremadeonthebasis
ofpredictedeconomicvalue(variousmeasures,wewilldiscusstheseindetail).
Note:the4(physical)or5(economic)classsystemisarbitrary,exceptthedivisionoforder'N'into
classes'N1'(physicallysuitablebuteconomicallyunsuitable)and'N2'(physicallyunsuitable).The
numberofintermediategradesof'suitable'couldbereducedfromthreetotwoorexpanded.
(3)Suitabilitysubclasses
Thesearedivisionsofsuitabilityclasseswhichindicatenotonlythedegreeofsuitability(asinthe
suitabilityclass)butalsothenatureofthelimitationsthatmakethelandlessthancompletelysuitable.
(So,suitabilityclassS1hasnosubclasses.)
Thesubclasscodeconsistsofthesuitabilityclasscode,augmentedwithasuffixwhichindicatesthe
natureofthelimitations.Thereisasuggestedlistofsuffixesinsomeoftheguidelines.E.g.'S3e':
marginallysuitable('S3')becauseoferosionhazard('e'),'S3w':marginallysuitable('S3')becauseof
wetness('w').
(4)Suitabilityunits
Thesearedivisionsofsuitabilitysubclasses,designatedbynumberswithinsubclasses,e.g.'S3e3',which
aremeanttobemanagedsimilarly.Thesehavedifferentmanagementrequirements,butthesamedegree
oflimitationandthesamegeneralkindoflimitation(becausetheyaredivisionsofsubclasses).E.g.
'moderate'fertilitylimitations,butonemanagementunitmayrequireextraKandanotherextraP.
11/39
1/3/2015
Summarizing,wecanseethehierarchicalnatureofthesuitabilityclassificationandthecorresponding
code:
Suitabilityclassificationandcodesimage
Actualvs.potentialsuitability
Sometimeswewanttoindicatetotheplannerthesuitabilityofthelandareaasitisnowand/orunder
currentassumptions(actualsuitability)andasitwouldbewerethelandmodified(potential),usuallyby
amajorlandimprovementorinfrastructuredevelopment(drainage,irrigation,clearing,constructionof
accessroads).
Inthiscase,thesuitabilityisgivenintwoparts,separatedbyaslash,withthetypeofimprovement
impliedorindicated.Thiscanbeatanylevelofdetail.E.g.,atthesuitabilitysubclasslevel:'S3w/dS1':
currentlymarginallysuitablebecauseofwetness('w'),butafterdrainage('d')wouldbehighlysuitable.
3Whatisthespatialentitybeingevaluated?
Beforewecanevaluate'land',wemustdefinewhatwemeanbythisterm.Sincelandoccursoverdefinite
areas,wemustdecidewhatcontiguousareastoevaluate:thesearetheevaluationunits.Alsobeforewe
canevaluate,wemustdecideontheappropriatemapscaleoftheevaluation.
3.1FAOdefinitionof'land'
Alongbutinformativedefinition:Landisdefinedas'anareaoftheearth'ssurface...
...thecharacteristicsofwhichembraceallreasonablystable,orpredictablycyclic,attributesofthe
biosphereverticallyaboveandbelowthisarea...
...includingthoseoftheatmosphere,thesoilandunderlyinggeology,thehydrology,theplantandanimal
populations,...
...andtheresultsofpastandpresenthumanactivity,totheextentthattheseattributesexertasignificant
influenceonpresentandfutureusesofthelandbyhumans.'
(FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1985)p.212.
Notethatinthisdefinition,'land'ismuchmorethan'soil','topography','climate','politicaldivision',etc.
12/39
1/3/2015
andinfactisanintegratedgeographicconcept(bothphysicalandhuman).Itincludeshumanoccupation
totheextentthatthisinfluenceslanduse.
Grayarea:doesthisdefinitionoflandincludenoncyclicattributesthatcanberepresentedbytimeseries,
inparticular,the(nonaverage)weather?Inpractice,yes.
Thisdefinitionbegsthequestion:Whatarethe'areas'ofthisdefinition?Wenowreviewsixpossible
definitions:(1)mapunitsofNaturalResourceInventories(NRI)(2)delineationsofNRI(3)
managementunits(4)economicunits(5)planningareasand(6)gridcells.
3.2MapunitsofNaturalResourceInventories(NRI)
Whentheevaluationstartswithdatafromanaturalresourcesdatabase(e.g.,asoilsurveyorclimate
map),themapunitasshownontheresourcemapasasinglelegendclass,orasderivedfroman
intersectionofseveralmaps(e.g.,soiltypeoverlaidwithclimatetype),isconsideredsufficiently
homogeneouswithrespecttothelandcharacteristicsimpliedbythelegend,andformstheunitof
analysis.ThemapunitoftheNRIisalsocalledalegendclassorcategory.
Thishasbeentheusualapproachforphysicallandevaluationsbasedonsoilsurveyinterpretationsor
agroecologicalzones.Thesimplestanalysisconsidersalldelineationsofthemapunittobethesame,no
matterwherelocated.Thisviewpointissufficientforevaluationsoflimitationstousethatarebasedon
insitunaturalresources(e.g.,limitationstotillageorcropadaptation)andeconomicanalysesthatdonot
dependongeographicallocationbutonlyontheinsitucharacteristicsofthemapunit(e.g.,soilfertility).
Economicresultsarenormalizedtoaperhectareorotherunitlandareabasis.
3.3DelineationsofNRI
Itmaybedesirabletoevaluateseparatelyeachdelineationofthenaturalresourceinventorymapunit.
TheseareindividualconnectedareasoftheNRImapunit,andareoftenrelativelysmallandcompact.In
thistypeofevaluation,theanalystcanconsiderthegeographyofthedelineation,forexampleitslocation
withrespecttoculturalfeaturessuchasroadsandcities,aswellasitssizeandshape,tobeland
characteristicsthatcanbeusedintheevaluation.
Thiskindofevaluationunitisappropriatewhensuitabilitydependsonproximity(e.g.,iftransportcosts
areimportant),orifthespatialfeaturesofthedelineationareimportant(e.g.,aminimumsizeis
necessary).Intheeconomicevaluation,eachdelineationisanalyzedseparately.Theresultscanbe
expressedonaperunitarea(normalized)oraperdelineationbasis.
Theproblemwithevaluatingalldelineationsseparatelyisthenumberofdelineationsinatypicalmap
(ontheorderof1,000sto10,000s),comparedwiththenumberofmapunits(ontheorderof10sto100s),
andconsequentlythehighdatastorageandprocessingcosts.Thesearebecomingeverlessimportant
withadvancesintechnology.
3.4Managementunits
Amanagementunit,sometimestermedadecisionarea,isanareaoflandthatthemanager(farmeror
planner)willtreatorallocatedifferently.Thesemaybequitelarge,e.g.,inlargescalemechanized
monocultures,orverysmall,e.g.,insubsistenceagriculture.
13/39
1/3/2015
Iftheobjectiveoftheevaluationistodeterminethelanduseoptionsforexistingmanagementunits,it
makessensetousethesedirectlyastheevaluationunits.Eachmanagementunitisuniquelylocated,so
geographicconsiderationscanbeincludedintheanalysis.
Note:Iftheunitsaretakenfromthecurrentlandusepattern(e.g.fieldsorparcels),theyarealmost
alwayslesshomogeneouswithrespecttonaturalresourcesthan'natural'mapunits,becausethelimitsof
naturalresourcesrarelycorrespondexactlywiththelimitsofmanagementunits.Therearetwowaysto
addressthisproblem:(1)thedominantormostprevalentvalueofeachlandcharacteristiccanbeusedas
therepresentativevalueforthemanagementunit,withalossofprecisionintheanalysis,or(2)theunit
canbedefinedascompound,withtwoormorehomogeneousconstituentspresentinadefined
proportion.Inthelattercase,dataisenteredforeachconstituentseparately,eachisevaluatedseparately
foreachproposedlanduse,andtheresultsarecombinedinweightedlinearproportionaccordingtothe
definedproportionsoftheconstituents,toarriveattheperarearesultforthemanagementunitasa
whole.Thisprocedureassumesthatthelandmanagerwillimplementornotthelandutilizationtypeon
theentiremanagementunit,nomatterwhatthesuitabilitiesofitshomogeneousconstituents.Whether
thisassumptionisvaliddependsonthesizeofthemanagementunitandthelanduse.Forexample,an
improvedpastureorforestplantationwillusuallybeimplementedoveranentireparcelevenifsome
areaswithintheparcelarelimiting,whereasinmechanizedcerealproduction,itisnotfeasibletoplantin
wetspots,whichwillbeavoidedduringfieldoperations.
Theresultsoftheeconomicevaluationareusuallyexpressedonapermanagementunitbasis,i.e.the
normalizedorperunitarearesultismultipliedbytheareaofthemanagementunittoobtainaperfield
result.Theseresultscanbeaggregatedtoaperfarmbasis.
3.5Economicunits
Aneconomicunitisthecollectionofmanagementunits(seeabove)controlledbyonelandmanager
(directprescriptiveplanning).Althoughdecisionswillbemadeseparatelyforeachmanagementunit,the
landmanager(orzoningagency)maywellrequireamixofactivitiesspreadoutovertheentireeconomic
unitorplanningarea,becausetheoverallbenefitoftheeconomicunitiswhatisimportanttothe
manager,notthebenefitfromeachmanagementunit.
Inaddition,theeconomicunitusuallyhasonlyonesourceofresources(machinery,labor,cash,capital)
whichisusuallyinsufficientforsomepossiblecombinationsofactivities.
Therefore,theentireeconomicunitmustbeconsideredasawhole,to(1)ensurethecorrectmixof
activitiesand(2)optimizetheuseofscarceresources.
Example:Dairyfarmsneedamixofgrain,pasture,silageandhayinafairlydefiniteproportion.
Example:onlyfamilylaborisavailable,thisquantityisobviouslylimited.
Theusualprocedureistoevaluateeachmanagementunitseparately(previoussection),detailingtheir
inputsandoutputs,thenusetheseresultstooptimizeoverthewholeeconomicunit,nowtakinginto
accounttheconstraintsandgoals.
3.6Planningareas
Aplanningareaisthecollectionofmanagementunitsinfluencedbyaplanningagency(proscriptiveor
indirectprescriptiveplanning).Althoughdecisionswillbemadeseparatelyforeachmanagementunit,
14/39
1/3/2015
thezoningagencyusuallyhasamixofobjectivesthatmustbesatisfiedbytheplanningarea,aswellas
geographicconstraintsonsimultaneouslandallocation.
Therefore,theentireplanningareamustbeconsideredasaunit,inordertoarriveatcorrectland
allocationdecisions.
Productionconstraint:minimumormaximumamountoflandorproductrequired.Example:atleast10
hafordevelopedcampsites,atleast1000haforconservationreserve.
Geographicconstraints:(non)adjacency,proximity.Example:can'thaveadevelopedcampsiteadjacent
toaconservationreserveor,campsitesmustbeatleast50mfromadesignatedwetlandhabitat.
Theusualprocedureistoevaluateeachmanagementunitseparately,detailingtheirinputsandoutputs,
thenusetheseresultstoallocatelanditeratively,respectingthegeographicconstraints.
3.7Gridcells
Gridcellsarerelativelysmall,regular,'homogeneous'divisionsofthelandarea,thatbetweenthemcover
theareatobeevaluated.Theycorrespondtothesocalled'pixels'ofaremotelysensedimage.
Essentially,theyaretiedtothetechnologyofthegridbasedGeographicInformationSystem.
Theevaluationisperformedforeachcell,andresultsareexpressedpercell.Theresultscanbetranslated
toaperunitlandareabasissimplybydividingbythecellarea.Resultscanbeaggregatedintoanygroup
ofcellsthatcanbedelineated(e.g.,managementunits),simplybysummingoverthegroupofcells.
3.8Scaleandprecision
Acrucialdecisioninthelandevaluationexerciseisthemapscaleoftheevaluationresults.
Eveniftheevaluationwillnotproducemaps(notagoodidea!)thereremainstheconceptofminimum
decisionarea,i.e.,thesizeoftheindividuallandareasforwhichdecisionsaretobemade,andthe
projectextent,i.e.thesizeofthetotalprojectarea.
Thebasicrelationbetweenmapscaleanddelineationsizeis(Forbes,Rossiter&VanWambeke,1982):
theminimumdecisionarea(MDA)correspondstotheoptimumlegibledelineation(OLD)ofamap,
convertedtogroundscale.TheOLDisconventionallytakentobe4timestheminimumlegible
delineation(MLD)of0.4cm,i.e.1.6cmonthemap.
______
|__|__|_0.63cm1.26cm
|__|__|_0.63cm_
Figure:thesmallcellsare1MLD(0.4cm),thegroupof4cellsare1OLD(1.6cm).
Note:SomeauthorssuchasVink(1975)use0.25cmfortheMLDandso1cmfortheOLD,theseseem
quitesmall,althoughforthepurposesofconvertingapaperorvectormaptogridrepresentation,using
thesesmallersizeswillresultinamorepleasinggridmap.SeethelecturesonGIS.
FormulatodeterminetheMDAinhectares(=10.000m100ha=1km):
15/39
1/3/2015
Forexample,amapat1:100.000(scalefactor10E+5)hasaMDAof1.6x10ha(160ha).
HerearesometypicalMDAs:
Mapscale
MLD
1:5000
OLD~MDA
0.1ha(1,000m)
0.4ha(4,000m)
1:10000
0.4ha(4,000m)
1.6ha
1:20000
1.6ha
6.4ha
1:25000
2.5ha
10ha
1:50000
10ha
40ha
1:100000
40ha
160ha(1.6km)
1:200000
160ha
640ha
1:250000
250ha(2.5km)
1000ha(10km)
1:500000
1000ha(10km)
4000ha(40km)
1:1000000
4000ha(40km)
16000ha(160km)
1:2000000
16000ha(160km)
64000ha(640km)
1:5000000
100000ha(1000km)
400000ha(4000km)
WecanreversethisrelationtofindthenecessaryscaleforagivenMDA:
Forexample,toplanforaMDAof100haweneedamapatascaleof1:79.057orlarger.(Notethatthe
largerthescaleofamap,thelargeramapsheetthatisneededtoshowagivenlandarea,sothata'large
scale'mapiscapableofshowinggroundfeatureswithmoreprecision.Thescaleislargeralsoina
mathematicalsense,sinceasthescalefactordecreases,thefractionitselfbecomeslarger,i.e.,further
awayfromzero.)
4KeyDefinitionsoftheFAOFramework
ThissectionpresentssomekeydefinitionsoftermsusedbytheFAOFramework.Inlaterlectureswe
willseehowtospecifyLandUtilizationTypes,howtoselecttheirLandUseRequirements,andhowto
selectandusediagnosticLandCharacteristicstoevaluatethecorrespondingLandQualities.
16/39
1/3/2015
References:(Beek,1978,FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1983,1984,1985,
1991,Vink,1975)
4.1FAOdefinitionof'MajorKindofLandUse'
"Amajorsubdivisionofrurallanduse,suchasrainfedagriculture,irrigatedagriculture,grassland,
forestry,recreation"(FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1976)
Theguidelinesadd'annualcrops,perennialcrops,swampricecultivation,forestplantation,natural
forests'whichseemstobemorespecific.Therewasnoattempttocreateahierarchicalclassificationof
landuses.Themajorkindsoflanduseeacharecovered,atleastintheory,bytheirownGuidelines.
4.2FAOdefinitionof'LandUtilizationType'(LUT)
"Akindoflandusedescribedordefinedinadegreeofdetailgreaterthanthatofamajorkindoflanduse
(q.v.)"(FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1976)
"Inthecontextofirrigatedagriculture,alandutilizationtypereferstoacrop,cropcombinationor
croppingsystemwithspecifiedirrigationandmanagementmethodsinadefinedtechnicalandsocio
economicsetting."(FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1985)
"Inthecontextofrainfedagriculture,alandutilizationtypereferstoacrop,cropcombinationor
croppingsystemwithaspecifiedtechnicalandsocioeconomicsetting."(FoodandAgriculture
OrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1983)
"Alandutilizationtype[inforestry]consistsofatechnicalspecificationsinagivenphysical,economic
andsocialsetting"(FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1984)
Keypoints:(1)thecontextmustbeexplicit,bothsocioeconomicandtechnical(2):acomplete
technicalspecificationisrequired:whatcrops,inwhatsequence,withwhatinputs,etc.Bothoftheseare
animportantadvanceoverpreviouslandevaluationmethods.
ThenextsectionexplainsinmoredetailhowtodefineandspecifyaLandUtilizationType.
4.3FAOdefinitionof'LandUseRequirements'(LUR)
ALandUseRequirement(LUR)isaconditionofthelandnecessaryforsuccessfulandsustained
implementationofaspecificLandUtilizationType.EachLUTisdefinedbyasetofLURs.Theyarethe
'demand'sideofthelandlanduseequation:whattheuserequiresoftheland.
YoucanthinkoftheLUTas'requiring'certaingeneralpropertiesoflandthesearetheLURs.Theyare
atthesamelevelofgeneralityasLandQualities(below).
Forexample,plantsrequirewaterinordertogrow,thismightbecalledthe'moisturerequirement'.The
soilmustbemaintainedwithoutchemicaldegradation,thismightbecalledthe'avoidanceofsalinization'
requirement.
LURscanbeassembledintounderstandablegroups,e.g.'croprequirements','managementrequirements',
'conservation/environmentalrequirements',aswewillseeintheworksheetinthenextsection.
17/39
1/3/2015
4.4FAOdefinitionof'LandQualities'(LQ)
ALandQuality(LQ)is"[a]complexattributeoflandwhichactsinamannerdistinctfromtheactionsof
otherlandqualitiesinitsinfluenceonthesuitabilityoflandforaspecifiedkindofuse"(Foodand
AgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1983)
"Alandqualityistheabilityofthelandtofulfillspecificrequirements"fortheLUT(vanDiepenetal.,
1991)p.159,i.e.,foreachLURthereisacorrespondingLQ.
Landqualitiesarethe'supply'sideofthelandlanduseequation:whatthelandcanoffertotheuse.In
somesense,thisisjustasemanticdifference,oradifferentpointofview,fromtheLandUse
Requirements.
Forexample,thelandcansupplyacertainamountofwatertothecrop,thismightbecalledthe'moisture
availability'LandQuality.Ontheotherhand,thecrophasarequirementforwaterthis'moisture
requirement'LandUseRequirementcorrespondstothe'moistureavailability'LandQuality.
LandQualitiesareusuallycomplexattributesoftheland,i.e.,theycan'tbedirectlymeasuredor
estimatedinroutinesurvey.ThisisasopposedtoLandCharacteristics(seenext)whicharedirectly
measuredorestimated.Therefore,LQsmustbeinferredfromasetofdiagnosticLandCharacteristics
(latersection),withavarietyofanalyticmethods.
LandQualitiesactmoreorlessindependentlytoaffectsuitability.ThisistoavoidaproliferationofLQs
intheevaluation.Inpractice,LQsmayinteract(e.g.,moistureavailabilityandsoilfertility)butmuchof
thecomplexityisavoidedbyabstractingfromLandCharacteristicstoLQs.
Severitylevels
Ingeneral,LQsaremeasuredaslandqualityclasses,alsocalled(inALES)severitylevels,singlefactor
ratingsordegreesoflimitation.TheseareclassificationsoftheLQ,indicatingthedegreeoflimitationor
hazardassociatedwiththeLQonaparticularlandarea,fromLevel1=nolimitation,upwardstosome
maximum.ForeachLQ,alinguisticscaleisestablished,suchas'high','moderate','low',and'verylow'
moistureavailability,andproceduresaredevelopedforclassifyingeachlandareaaccordingtothisscale.
Note:Thereisalotofargumentabouttheterm'landquality',see(vanDiepenetal.,1991)p.158162,
butthesupply/demandviewofqualities/requirementsseemstometobeadequateandpractical.
ThenextsectiondiscusseshowLandUseRequirementsareselected,andthecorrespondingLand
Qualitiesevaluated.
4.5FAOdefinitionof'LandCharacteristics'(LC)
LandCharacteristics(LC)aresimpleattributesofthelandthatcanbedirectlymeasuredorestimatedin
routinesurveyinanyoperationalsense,includingbyremotesensingandcensusaswellasbynatural
resourceinventory.Examples:surfacesoiltextureandorganicmatter,currentlandcover,distancetothe
nearestroad.
Ingeneral,theeffectsofaLConsuitabilityarenotdirect,butthroughtheireffectonlandqualities(see
previous).ThisisbecauseasingleLCmayaffectseveralqualitiesoftenincontradictoryways,e.g.,
sandysoilsmayhavelowfertilityandwaterholdingcapacity,butmaybeeasytotillandthereareno
18/39
1/3/2015
problemswithaerationoftheroots.HerethesoiltextureistheLC,theothersareLQ.
TheFAOFrameworkdoesallowtheuseofLCsdirectlytoassesssuitability,butitisgenerallyclearerto
useLQasanintermediatelevelofevaluation,bothbecausethetotalcomplexityoftheproblemisbroken
downintomoremanageableunits,andbecauseLQsinthemselvesprovideusefulinformationtotheland
evaluator.
5DefiningaLandUtilizationType
RecallfromtheprevioussectionthataLandUtilizationType(LUT)maybedefinedas"akindofland
usedescribedordefinedinadegreeofdetailgreaterthanthatofamajorkindoflanduse"(Foodand
AgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1976)thekeypointsarethatthesocioeconomic
contextinwhichtheLUTistobeimplemented,andthetechnicaldetailsofthelandusesystem,must
bothbespecifiedforthedefinitionoftheLUTtobecomplete.
5.1WhatisincludedinthedefinitionofaLUT?
ThedefinitionofaLandUtilizationType(LUT)isnotacompletedescriptionofthefarmingorother
landusesystem,althoughifsuchadescriptionexists,itcanformthebasisofaLUTdefinition.TheLUT
includesonlythosecharacteristicsthat(1)servetodifferentiatelandareasfromthepointofviewofland
evaluation,i.e.,thatcanbeexpressedasLandUseRequirementswithcriticalvaluesinthestudyarea,or
(2)servetolimitthelanduseoptions.
Insomecontexts,itmaynotevenbenecessarytomentioncertaincharacteristicsoftheLUT,sincethey
areuniformanduniversallyunderstoodinthatcontext.E.g.,thevastmajorityofagriculturalproduction
intheUSAandW.Europeisformarket(notselfsufficiency),itisawasteofpapertomentionthis.
5.2ChecklistfordefiningaLUT
The'AgriculturalCompendium'(EUROCONSULT,1989)2.10.8(p.1612)distinguishesbetween
majorandminordeterminantsofLUTs.
Theirmajordeterminants:
1. Government
2. Location
3. Technology
4. Produce
5. Labor
6. Capital
7. Management
8. Socioeconomicaspectsofland
Foreachmajordeterminant,theylistseveralminordeterminants,notallofwhichareapplicableinevery
situation.Forexample,undermajordeterminant'Labor'theylist:
19/39
1/3/2015
"availability(totalperoperationalunit,e.g.family,statefarm,cooperative)kind(male,
female,child,parttime,fulltime,onfarm,offfarm)limitstoscaleofoperationdueto
labouravailabilityanddistributioneducationallevelspecialisation(e.g.experiencewith
specifictechniquesorcrops)labourdensitytrendsincrease,outflowrateseasonal
distributionofavailablelabourseasonlabourabsorptionlabourincomelabour
productivitypertimeuniteffectivelyworkedlabourproductivityperhectarelabour
productivitypercapitalunitinvested...preferencesoflabourforspecifickindsofwork
(e.g.,resistancetoanimaltraction)labourorganisationsstrengthandbehaviourvalueof
leisureascomparedtolabourmobilityoflabouravailabilityofofffarmopportunities
percentageofincomederivedfromofffarmactivities(ruralandnonrural)effectiveanimal
labourinputsperhectareandseasonaldistributioneffectivemechanicallabourinputsper
hectareandseasonaldistribution."(p.162).
So,theminordeterminantsarespecificindicatorsrelatedtothemajordeterminant.Obviously,onlysome
ofthesewillbeapplicableinagivensituation.Theaimisnottodescribepersebut(1)toidentifyland
userequirements(seebelow)and(2)tosettheeconomiccontext,inparticular,theoperationaldefinition
ofeconomicsuitability.
ThevariousFAOguidelinesgivemoredetailedlists,e.g.(FoodandAgricultureOrganizationof
theUnitedNations,1985)Table10:
1. Croppingsystem
2. Markets
3. Watersupply
4. Irrigationmethod
5. Capitalintensity
6. Laborintensity
7. Technicalskillsandattitudes
8. Powersource
9. Mechanizationoffarmoperations
10. Sizeandshapeoffarms
11. Landtenure
12. Waterrights
13. Infrastructure
14. Irrigationinfrastructure
15. Materialinputs
16. Cultivationpractices
17. Livestock
18. Associatedrainfedagriculture,forestry,orgrazing
19. Yieldsandproduction
20. Environmentalimpact
21. Economicinformation
Similarlistscanbedevisedforothermajorkindsoflanduses.Thesecouldbegroupedunderthemajor
determinantsoftheAgriculturalCompendium,manyunder'Technology'.
TheevaluatorshouldcreatealistlikethisspecificallydesignedforthesetofLandUtilizationTypesto
beconsideredintheirevaluationexercise,withchoicesforeachitem,andthencompletethelistforeach
LUT.Forexample,under'Livestock',thechoicesmightbe'none','milkandmeatforhouseholduse
only','milkformarket',and'meatformarket'.Noticethatthechoicesdependentirelyonthecontextof
thelandevaluationexercise.
20/39
1/3/2015
5.3DisaggregatedorhierarchicaldefinitionofLUTs
AlmostalwayswewanttoevaluateseveralsimilarLUTs.Wecansaveworkandbringouttherelation
betweenLUTsbyorganizingtheminaconvenienthierarchyor,morecommonly,amatrixbasedon
someadhocclassification.
Example(adaptedfrom(FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1983)):
Traditionalsmallholdercultivationatlowinputlevels
withconservationmeasures
selfsufficiencycropmix
marketorientedcropmix
withoutconservationmeasures
selfsufficiencycropmix
marketorientedcropmix
Semimechanizedsmallholdercultivationatmoderateinputlevels
withconservationmeasures
exportorientedcropmix
localmarketorientedcropmix
withoutconservationmeasures
exportorientedcropmix
localmarketorientedcropmix
Anotherexamplefromthesamesource:amultivariate(nonhierarchical)classification:
MaincropGeneralproductionsystemcultivationfactorpowersource
E.g.'maize,cooperatives,singlecrop,oxen'
Note:ALESallowstheevaluatortocopyaLUTdefinition,thenmodifyit.Sotheevaluatorcancreatea
hierarchyofLUTsbycreatingthebasetype,thencopyingtothederivedtypesatthenextlevelinthe
hierarchy,modifyingthese,andsoon.
6.SelectingLandUseRequirements
OfthemanyLURsthatcanbeincludedinthedefinitionofaLUTandhenceintheevaluation,itis
usuallysufficienttoselectasmallsubset.Morethan10LQsaregenerallyunworkable,anditusuallyis
21/39
1/3/2015
thecasethatthemostimportant5LQscanbeusedtocorrectlyclassifyalmostallland.
Seetheworksheet'SelectionofLandUseRequirements'attheendofthissection,whichprovidesa
checklistofLURsandallowstheevaluatortojudgetheirimportancetotheevaluation.Eachofthe
GuidelinescontainsalistofpossibleLURs,e.g.theRainfedAgricultureguidelineslist25.Thisisnotan
exhaustivelist:newLURscanbeaddedandlistedonescanbesplitintomorespecificLURs,orseveral
listedLURscanbecombined,allaccordingtotheanalysis.
6.1CriteriafortheselectionofLandUseRequirements
TherearefourcriteriabywhichwecanselectLURs:(1)importancefortheuse(2)existenceofcritical
valuesinthestudyzone(3)availabilityofdatawithwhichtoevaluatethecorrespondingLQand(4)
availabilityofknowledgewithwhichtoevaluatethecorrespondingLQ.Wenowdiscusseachofthesein
detail.
(1)Importancefortheuse
TheRequirementmustbeimportantfortheuse,oritisomittedfromtheanalysis.Hereiswhereacareful
definitionoftheLUTwillrepaytheeffort.
Importancecanberated'veryimportant','important',or'notimportant'.
Forexample,harvestrequirementsareirrelevanttopasturelands,mechanizationrequirementsare
irrelevanttoLUTswithonlyhumanoranimaltraction.
(2)Existenceofcriticalvaluesinthezone
TheremustbedifferencesinthelevelsofthecorrespondingLQinthezone,ortheLURbecomesa
constant,i.e.,partofthecontextoftheLUT,notavariable,i.e.,adeterminantofsuitability.
Existenceofcriticalvaluescanberated'frequent','infrequent',or'none'.
Forexample,althoughmechanizationrequirementsareimportantformechanizedagriculture,inagiven
zonetheremaybeonlylevel,easilytrafficable,mediumtextured,stonefreesoils,presentingno
limitationstomechanization.Inthiscase,mechanizationrequirementswouldnotbeincludedinthe
evaluation.
Importantnote:ifthegeographicscopeofthemodelisincreased,theevaluatorshouldgobackthrough
thechecklistofLURs,tomakesurethatthoseLURsthatareimportantbutwhichdon'thavecritical
valuesinthesmallerscopenowdon'thavecriticalvaluesinthewiderscope.Iftheydo,theseLURsmust
beaddedtotheevaluation.
(3)AvailabilityofdatawithwhichtoevaluatethecorrespondingLQ
EvenanimportantLURwithdifferencesinthecorrespondingLQcannotbeincludedintheevaluationif
thereisnotsufficientlanddataonthediagnosticLCswhichwouldbeusedtoevaluatetheLQ.
Examples:TheLQ'moistureavailability',intheabsenceofreliablelongtermclimaterecordsand
moisturereleasecharacteristicsofrepresentativesoilprofilestheLQ'erosionhazard'without
measurementsofrainfallintensity,withoutaslopemap,orwithoutinformationontopsoilparticlesize
distributionandsurfacesealingcharacteristics.
22/39
1/3/2015
Dataavailabilitycanberated'available','notavailablebutobtainablewithsurvey',or'notobtainable'.If
'obtainablewithsurvey',anestimateofthecost/benefitofsurveyingmustbeincluded.Newsurveysmay
beimpracticalwithinthetimeorbudgetoftheevaluation.
ItmaybepossibletouseasurrogatesetofLCs,ifthedesiredLCisnotavailable.Intheexampleabove,
perhapsnaturalvegetationtypemightindicatemoistureavailability.Butatacertainpointthereisnot
enoughprecision,andthedataavailabilityisrated'notobtainable'.
Thefinalevaluationmustincludeacautionarynotethatanimportantfactorwasnotconsidered,sothat
theresultsareprovisional,andsuggestionsforhowthenecessarydatamightbecollected.
Notethatananalyticalmodelcanbebuiltwhichrequiresunavailabledatathemodelisstillvalidbutit
won'tbeusablewithoutfurthersurvey.
(4)AvailabilityofknowledgewithwhichtoevaluatethecorrespondingLQ
ALURcannotbeincludedifthereisnotsufficientknowledgeontherelationofdiagnosticLCstothe
correspondingLQ.Thismotivatesappliedagricultural(etc.)research.
Knowledgeavailabilitycanberated'available','notavailablebutobtainablewithresearch',or'not
obtainable'.If'obtainablewithresearch',anestimateofthecost/benefitoftheappliedresearchmustbe
included.Thisisalmostalwaysimpracticalwithinthetimeorbudgetoftheevaluation.
Forexample,theLQ'riskofcompaction'(duetomechanization)isaveryimportantLQinthewestern
plainsofVenezuelahoweverthereisnoagreementonwhatmeasurableLCscanbeusedtopredictthis
risk,soithastobeomittedfromlandevaluations.
Thefinalevaluationmustincludeacautionarynotethatanimportantfactorwasnotconsidered,sothat
theresultsareprovisional,andsuggestionsforwhatresearchisneeded.
6.2Effectsoflandqualities
TheeffectsofeachLandQualityonthelandusemustbespecified,or,lookingatthe'demand'sideofthe
equation,thereasoneachLURisincludedintheevaluationmustbespecified.Thisinformation
determinesthenumberofseveritylevels(or,singlefactorratings)thatarerelevantforeachLQ.
LQscan(1)affectphysicalsuitability,(2)reduceyields,(3)increasecosts,oranycombination.
(1)LQswhichaffectphysicalsuitability
ThiskindofLURistypicallya'hazard',andinfluencesthelanduseinanegativemanner.Examples:
erosionhazard,floodhazard,droughthazard.Theideahereisthatexcessiveseveritylevelsofthe
correspondinglandqualitiesmakesthelandunfitforthelanduse,andthatincreasingseveritylevels
increasethemanagementrequirement,i.e.,thelandsmustbemorecarefullymanaged.So,theseLURs
canbeusedtoclassifylandintomanagementgroups.
(2)LQswhichreduceyields
TheseLURstypicallyhavetodowithintrinsicfactorsofplantgrowth,suchaswater,light,temperature,
andnutrients.Somelimitationstoculturecanalsobeincludedhere:e.g.plantingconditionsor
harvestingconditions.Themodelbuildermustdeterminewhichlandqualitiescanreduceyield,andhow
23/39
1/3/2015
manyyieldlevelscanbedistinguished.
(3)LQswhichincreasecosts
Limitationscanresultinreducedyieldshowever,inthecontextofalandutilizationtypewemaychoose
tocorrectorcompensatefor(completelyorpartially)alimitationbyincreasinginputs.Ifcertainseverity
levelsofalandqualityincreasecosts,themodelbuilderexpressesthisbylistingtheadditionalinputs,
whichcanbeeitherannual(recurring)oronetime,atoneormorespecificyearswithintheplan.Each
severitylevelmayhaveadifferentamountoftheinputneededtocorrectthelimitation.
Importantnote:Althoughtheapplicationofaninputtocorrectalimitationmaybeattractivetothe
extensionist,itmaynotbesotothelanduser,whomayprefertoacceptayieldreduction,evenifthe
extrainputappearscosteffectiveintheeconomicanalysis.Thismaybeduetotheopportunitycostfor
thesameinput(orthemoneyneededtopurchaseit)inthelanduser'stotalsystem,ortotheeffective
nonavailabilityoftheinput(e.g.morefamilylaboratlaborintensiveseasons),ortotheuncertaintyof
theinput'seffectinrelationtotheriskaversionofthefarmer.Theassumptionthattheextrainputwillbe
appliedthusmustbeverifiedandformspartoftheLUTdefinition,undertheheadingsof'levelofinputs',
'accesstoworkingcapital',andeven'socialattitudes'.
Arelatedproblemisthatthelandusermustbemadeawarethataparticularlandunitrequiresthe
additionalinput.Forexample,ifalandunithaslowsoilfertilitywhichcanbecorrectedbyextra
fertilizer,thesoiltestresultsmustbemadeavailable(andpossiblyexplained)totheuser.Again,this
assumptionformspartoftheLUTdefinition,undertheheadingof'technicalassistance'or'social
infrastructure'.
Givenanunlimitedamountofresources,anylimitationcouldbeovercome.Thisisfairlyobviousfor
limitationsofnutrientsorwater.Evenlimitationsduetodaylengthcouldbecorrectedbyputting
supplementallightinginthefield!So,strictlyspeaking,therearenocompletelylimitinglanduse
requirements.Inpracticalterms,however,therecertainlyare.Themodelbuilderdeterminestheconcept
ofimpracticalityinthecontextofthelandutilizationtype.
Combining'decreasesyield'and'increasescosts'
Thelandusermayelecttoonlycorrectsomeofthelimitation,forexample,toapplyacertainamountof
fertilizer,butnotenoughtoreachmaximumattainableyield.Thisisusuallyaneconomicdecision,and
mayalsobebasedonriskaversion.Ananalysisoftheproductionfunctionandtherelativecostsofthe
inputandtheproduct(s)isnecessarytodeterminetheoptimuminputlevelforeachseveritylevelofthe
landquality.Thisanalysisispriortotheactuallandevaluation,andservestodefinetheLUTintermsof
thelanduser'sstrategyinthefaceofeachlimitationlevel.
Seeforexample(Tisdale,Nelson&Beaton,1985)Chapter15foratypicalanalysisoftheeconomicsof
fertilizeruseasimilaranalysiscanbemadeforanyvariableinput.Theidealcurveisshowninthe
figure.
6.3DefiningSeverityLevelsofLandQualities
ForeachLandUseRequirementselected,theevaluatormustdecidehowmanyseveritylevels(also
calledsinglefactorratings,degreesoflimitationorlandqualityclasses)aretobedistinguishedforthe
correspondingLandQuality.TheseveritylevelsarethenumberofclassesintowhichtheLQwillbe
classified.
24/39
1/3/2015
IntheoriginalFAOFrameworktherearefourorfiveseveritylevels,correspondingdirectlytothe
physicalsuitabilityclassesS1,S2,S3/N1(theseareseparateforeconomicevaluation)andN2,possibly
withsomelevelsomittedbecausetheLQisnevertoolimitingorbecausetheLQcan'tbedetermined
withtheprecisionimpliedbythatnumberofseveritylevels.
Note:ALESallowsfrom2to9severitylevels,withthecorrespondencewithoverallsuitabilitybeinga
laterstepintheevaluation,ratherthannecessarilybeingcommensuratewiththeoverallsuitability
classes.ThisallowsgreaterflexibilityandvariableprecisionamongthedifferentLQs.However,the
simplestwaytouseALESistodivideeachLQintothesamenumberofseveritylevels,andforthis
numbertobethesameasthenumberofphysicalsuitabilityclasses.ThisallowstheuseoftheMaximum
Limitationmethodofdeterminingoverallphysicalsuitability.
Therearethreewaystodeterminehowmanyseveritylevelstodefine,dependingontheeffectsoftheLQ
(previous).Inaddition,thenumberofseveritylevelsshouldnotexceedtherequiredprecisionofthe
evaluation,whichisdeterminedbytheobjectives.
Forexample,toidentifypromisingareasforanewcrop,wemayonlyneedtoproduceapreliminary
suitabilitymap'promising','possible'and'improbable',sothatmorethanthreelevelsofanyoftheLQs
wouldbewastedeffort.
(1)Definedbyphysicalsuitability(managementdifferencesorrisks)
First,theproposeddifferencesinphysicalsuitabilitymustbedistinguishableinthefield.Second,there
mustbeenoughdatatodifferentiatethematthisdegreeofresolution.
Thenumberofseveritylevelsmaybeobviouslyinclasses,inwhichcasethe'natural'numberofclasses
shouldbeevident.Forexample,thenumberofseveritylevelsofan'easeofmechanization'LandQuality
(correspondingtoa'mechanization'LandUseRequirement)wouldcorrespondtothedifferent
managementoptions.E.g.,'nolimitation','mustworkoncontour','mustworkoncontourandapplya
counterbalancetotractor','notfeasible,tractorwouldrollover'.
Inothercases,theLQmaybeconceptuallycontinuous,forexample,erosionhazard:soillossperyear
canvaryfrom0Tha1upward.Ifwelookatthefrequencydistributionoftheareabytheamountofsoil
loss(continuousdensityfunctionorhistogram),wemightseeoneofthefollowingcases:
Inthefirstcasethereisnoobviousbreakpointbetweenclasses,whereasinthesecondweseebunched
valuesleadingtothreeclassesandclearbreaksnear4and7.Ifthereareobviousbreakpoints,itmakes
sensetousethem.Otherwise,anarbitrarydivisionmustbeused.
(2)Definedbydecreasingyields
IftheLQaffectsyield,thenumberofseveritylevelsshouldcorrespondtoobservableorpredictedyield
levels.Again,thisdependsonthequalityofthedata.IngeneralFAOpractice,the'best'class
correspondsto80100%ofoptimumyield,the'moderate'classto4080%,andthe'marginal'to2040%.
(3)Definedbyincreasingcosts
IflimitingvaluesoftheLQwillbeovercomebyincreasinginputs,thenumberofdifferentlevelsofthe
inputdefinethenumberofseveritylevels.
(4)Limitedbytheprecisionofthenaturalresourcesdata
25/39
1/3/2015
ThenumberofseveritylevelsoftheLQcannotexceedtheprecisionofthediagnosticLCsthatwillbe
usedtoevaluateit.Forexample,ifslopeisonlymeasuredinthreeclassesinthenaturalresources
inventory,anderosionhazardisdeterminedbythesingleLC'slope',itwouldbeimpossibletorate
'erosionhazard'inmorethanthreeclasses.
6.4WorksheetforselectingLandUseRequirements
TohelpintheprocessofselectingtheLURs,aworksheetinEXCELformatwasdesigned.
Clickhereifyouwanttodownloadtheworksheetfile(30k).
7EvaluatingLandQualitiesfrom
DiagnosticLandCharacteristics
SinceLandQualities,bydefinition,can'tbedirectlymeasuredinroutinesurvey,theirseveritylevelsor
singlefactorratingsforeachevaluationunitmustbeinferredfromoneormorediagnosticland
characteristics.
DiagnosticlandcharacteristicsaretheLCsthatwillbeusedtoevaluatetheLQ.Theymustbe
measurableattheappropriatescale,andwellrelatedtothelandquality(whichiswhytheyarecalled
'diagnostic').TheremaybeachoiceofLCs,inwhichcasethesimplestorcheapesttodetermineshould
beused.
Forexample,toevaluatetheLQ'erosionhazard',wemaychooseasdiagnosticLCs'slope','rainfall
intensity','topsoilparticlesizedistribution',and'topsoilmineralogy'.
Therestillremainsthemainquestion:HowdoweinferfromthesetofdiagnosticLCstotheseverity
levelsoftheLandQuality?Inotherwords,givendatavaluesforeachdiagnosticLandCharacteristics,
howdoweassignanevaluationunittoitscorrectseverityleveloftheLQ?Thisisthemostdifficult
analyticalprobleminlandevaluation,andrequiresgreatskillandjudgment.Wecandistinguishfive
mainmethods:(1)matchingtables(2)decisiontreesorrules(3)parametricindices(4)empirical
statisticalmethods(5)dynamicsimulation.Thefirsttwomethodsworkexclusivelywithclassified
(categorical)data,thelasttwowithcontinuousdataexclusively,andmethod(3)witheither.
7.1Matchingtables
Thesearealsocalled'maximumlimitation'tables.Theyareintheformofamatrix,withtherowsbeing
thedifferentdiagnosticLCs,thecolumnsbeingthe(classified)LQratings,andthecellsbeingthevalue
ofthediagnosticLC(row)thatmustbemetorexceededinorderfortheLQtoberatedintheseverity
levelindicatedbythecolumn.Thus,matchingtableslimitthelandqualityratingtothemostlimiting
valueofthesetofdiagnosticlandcharacteristics.
Advantage:simplicity,easytounderstandgraphicalpresentation.
Disadvantage:can'taccountforinteractionsbetweendiagnosticLCs(thisisaseriousdisadvantage).
26/39
1/3/2015
Tousethetable,startattheupperleftandfindthecolumncorrespondingtotheLCvalueforthe
evaluationunit.TheLQratingisprovisionallythiscolumn'sheading.Now,movedownonerowandfind
thecolumncorrespondingtotheLCvaluefortheevaluationunit.Ifthecolumnisthesameas,ortothe
leftof(lesslimitingthan)theprovisionalrating,keepthesameprovisionalrating.Ifthecolumnistothe
right,movetothatcolumn,whichnowbecomestheprovisionalrating.Dothesameforeachrowatthe
endoftheprocess,theprovisionalratingbecomesthefinalrating,sincealldiagnosticfactorshavebeen
included.
AnotherwaytousethetableissimplytofindthecolumncorrespondingtotheLCvalueforeachrow,
andthenusetherightmostcolumnasthefinalrating.
MatchingtablesevolvedfromsimilartablesusedinUSBRandUSDAlandclassificationsystems.Their
drawbackispreciselythatofthemaximumlimitationmethod:theydonottakeintoaccountany
interactionsbetweendiagnosticLCs.Forexample,evaluationunitAmayhaveonlyonediagnosticLC
rated'moderatelylimiting',evaluationunitBmayhaveallitsdiagnosticLCswiththisrating,yetboth
unitsendupwiththesameLQrating.
Hereisanexampleofamatchingtablemodifiedfrom(Sys,1985):
SeverityLeveloftheLandQuality
Land
Characteristic
S1
S2
S3/N1
N2
coarsefragments,
volume%
C60s,SiCS,Co,SiCL,CL,Si,Sil,
SC,L,SCL,SL
C+60v,C+60s,C
60v,LfS,LS
Cm,SiCm,
LcS,fS,S
cS
coarsefragments,
volume%
<15
<35
<55
>55
soildepth,cm
>50
>20
>10
<10
CaCO3,%
<25
<35
<50
>50
Ca2SO4,%
<6
<10
<20
>20
Tousethistable,asitemustbecharacterizedbyvaluesofthefivelandcharacteristics'texture/
structure','coarsefragments',etc.(Sysusesadistinctivetexture/structurenotation,e.g.'C+60v'isvery
fineclaywithvertisolstructure.)Considerahypotheticalmapunitwiththefollowingdata:
texture/structure,class
LfS
coarsefragments,volume% 20
soildepth,cm
100
CaCO3,%
45
Ca2SO4,%
Thismapunitisratedasfollows.Datavaluesareboldandtheclassismarkedwith*.
SeverityLeveloftheLandQuality
Land
27/39
1/3/2015
Characteristic
S1
S2
S3/N1
N2
coarsefragments,
volume%
C60s,SiCS,Co,SiCL,CL,Si,Sil,
SC,L,SCL,SL
C+60v,C+60s,C
60v,LfS,LS
*
Cm,SiCm,
LcS,fS,S
cS
<15
20<35
*
<55
>55
100>50
*
>20
>10
<10
CaCO3,%
<25
<35
45<50
*
>50
Ca2SO4,%
5<6
*
<10
<20
>20
coarsefragments,
volume%
soildepth,cm
Therightmostcolumnmarkedwith*isS3/N1,sothemapunitisratedS3/N1,becauseoftheCaCO3
content.
7.2Decisiontrees
Thesearehierarchicalmultiwaykeys,inwhichvaluesofthediagnosticLCsarethediagnosticcriteria
andtheresultistheseveritylevelofthe(classified)LQtobeevaluated.
Hierarchical:onedecisionmayleadtoothers,untilallfactorsaretakenintoaccount
Multiway:mayhavemorethantwochoicesforadecision
Keys:answeringthequestionsaskedbythetreeleadstoadecision,inthiscase,aseverityratingofa
LandQuality.
Definitions
Nodes(alsocalledbranchpointsordecisionpoints):thequestionsthatmustbeansweredasthetreeis
followedinthiscase,thesearethediagnosticLCs,andthequestionis,'Whatisthedatavalueofthe
LC?'
Leaves(alsocalleddecisions):theresultoffollowingthetree,theanswerinthiscase,thesearethe
severitylevelsoftheLQ.
Decisiontreesaremoreexpressivethantables,i.e.,anytablecanbetransformedintoadecisiontreebut
notviceversa.Theyallowcompletecontroloverinteractions.ALESusesthisasitsprimarymethodto
evaluateLandQualities.
Advantage:fullyexpressive,canexplicitlyrateanycombinationofLCvalues,i.e.,anyinteraction
betweendiagnosticLCs.hierarchicalstructureisfairlyeasytounderstand.
Disadvantage:Aneffectivegraphicalpresentationisdifficult.
ExamplefromthePapuaNewGuineaLandEvaluationSystem(Venema&Daink,1992):
28/39
1/3/2015
LandUtilizationType:riceuplandhi
LandUseRequirement:'t':*nutrientavailability/retentioncapacity
SeverityLeveldecisiontree
>ph(soilreaction2/3(025cm)+1/3(25100cm))
1(weaklyacidtoneutral,pH67)>cec(cationexchcapacity(025cm))
3(low)[010me/100gsoil]>texture1(topsoiltexture(025cm))
1(coarse)..............:*3
2(medium)..............:*2
3(finebutfriable&blocky):=2
4(veryfine(massive)).:=2
5(peats)...............:=2
6(rock)................:=1
2(moderate)[1025me/100gsoil]>anionfix(anionfixation)
1(noproblem)..........:*1
2(moderate)............:=1
3(high)................:*2
1(high)[25100me/100:=2
2(acid,pH56)........:=1
3(stronglyacid,pH<5)>cec(cationexchangecapacity(025cm))
3(low)[010me/100gs:*3
2(moderate)[1025me/1:*2
1(high)[25100me/100:=2
4(alkaline,pH78)....:=3
5(stronglyalkaline,pH>8):*3
ThistreewasimplementedaspartofanALESmodel.WecanseethatLQ'nutrientavailability/retention
capacity'ismeasuredinthreeseveritylevels:1(highfertility),2(moderatefertility),and3(lowfertility).
ThediagnosticLCsare'pH'(5classes),'cec'(3classes),topsoiltexture(6classes),and'anionfix'(3
classes).Notethatthetreeisnotbalanced,i.e.,somepathsarelongerthanothers.Forexample,in
stronglyalkalinesoils,onlyonediagnosticLCwasnecessary,whereasinneutral,moderateCECsoils,
threediagnosticLCswerenecessarytoarriveatadecision.Also,theLCsusedatlowerlevelsinthetree
dependonthepathtothatpoint.Forexample,inlowandhighCECneutralsoils,thetextureisusedasa
secondarydiagnosticLC,whereasinmoderateCECneutralsoils,theanionfixingpropertiesofthesoils
areusedasasecondarydiagnosticLC.
7.3Landindicesfromclassifiedlandcharacteristics
(Note:Ifacontinuousindexisdesired,itshouldbebasedonempiricalstatisticalrelationsasexplainedin
thenext.TheLandIndexisincludedinthesenotesprimarilyforcompleteness,becausethepracticing
evaluatorwilloftenencounteritsuse.)
Landindices(formerlyandconfusinglycalledparametricindices)arepointsystemswitheachdiagnostic
LCcontributingpointstoanoverallvalue,whichthenisclassifiedintoaseveritylevel.Itdiffersfrom
empiricalstatisticalmethods(next)inthatclassifiedLCscanbeused,andthatthereisrarelyan
empiricalstatisticalbasistothecombination.
Theindicesmaybeadditive(i.e.,adduptheindividualpointvalues)ormultiplicative(i.e.,multiplythe
individualpointvalues,andthennormalize)oracombinationofarbitraryarithmeticoperations,resulting
ina'continuous'value(whichwillingeneralbeanintegeronlyforadditiveindices),whichisthen
classifiedintoseveritylevelsbyarbitrarycutoffpoints.Forexample,onascaleof0100,80100could
beclassifiedas'slightlimitation',6080as'moderatelimitation',etc.Notethatthereisnoobjectivebasis
forthisclassificationnorfortheoriginalpointsystem.
29/39
1/3/2015
Landindicescaninsomedegreecompensateforproblemswithmatchingtables.Typically,thesame
tableisused,buteachrowisassignedapointvalue,andeachcellisworthacertainnumberofpoints.
EachdiagnosticLCisratedseparately,andthepointsareadded,multiplied,orcombinedaccordingto
someotherrule.Thisallowstheevaluatortremendousflexibility(andsubjectivity).Interactionscanstill
notbeaccountedforinapurelyadditiveormultiplicativeindex,sinceeachrowisevaluatedseparately,
butitispossibletousecrossproductsofpointvaluesforsomeLCsalongwithsumsforotherstoget
someapproximationofinteractioneffects.
LandindicesarenotmuchusedtoestimateLQs,moretogodirectlyfromLCstosuitabilityasinearlier
'parametric'methodsoflandevaluation(seesectioninlatersectiononpreFAOlandclassification
methods).
Advantage:ProvidesamoreorlesscontinuousscaleoftheLandQuality,allowsalargenumberofLCs
toparticipateintherating,eachmoreorlessweightedaccordingtoitsimportance.
Disadvantage:Highlysubjective,appearsmoreprecisetothecasualobserverthanitisinfact.
HereisahypotheticalexampleofatabletocomputeanadditivelandindexforasingleLQ:
PhysicalsoilcharacteristicsforLUT'millets,traditionalmanagement'
60pointsmaximum(total)
S1:5160S2:3150S3:1130N2:010totalpoints
Texture/structure..........................................................................20pointsmaximum
C60s,SiCS,Co,SiCL,CL,Si,Sil,SC,L,SCL,SL.............20points
C+60v,C+60s,C60v,LfS,LS...........................................15points
Cm,SiCm,LcS,fS,S............................................................10points
cS............................................................................................0points
Coarsefragments,volume%........................................................10pointsmaximum
<15........................................................................................10points
1535.......................................................................................6points
3555.......................................................................................3points
>55..........................................................................................0points
Soildepth,cm..................................................................................20pointsmaximum
>100.......................................................................................20points
80100....................................................................................18points
6080......................................................................................14points
4060........................................................................................8points
2040........................................................................................4points
<20...........................................................................................0points
CaCO3,%.......................................................................................10pointsmaximum
025........................................................................................10points
2535........................................................................................6points
3550........................................................................................4points
30/39
1/3/2015
>50...........................................................................................0points
Noticethat'texture/structure'and'soildepth'aretwiceasimportantastheothertwolandcharacteristics,
alsothateachLCcanhaveadifferentnumberofclasses,andfinallythatthepointsdonothavetobea
linearfunctionofclass.Thecutoffpointsforeachseveritylevelisarbitraryandatthediscretionand
experienceoftheevaluator.
Thehypotheticalmapunitofthe'matchingtable'section(above)wouldberated:
Landcharacteristic
Datavalue Points
texture/structure,class
LfS
15
coarsefragments,volume%
20
soildepth,cm
100
20
CaCO3,%
45
total
45
severitylevel
S2
7.4Landindicesfromcontinuousvaluedland
characteristics
Anotherkindoflandindex(alsoformerlyandconfusinglycalledparametricindices)isapointsystems
witheachdiagnosticLCcontributingpointstoanoverallvalue,whichthenisclassifiedintoaseverity
level,withthedifferencethattheLCisgivenpointsaccordingtoitsvalueonacontinuousscale,not
accordingtoitsclass.Itdiffersfromempiricalstatisticalmethods(next)inthatthereisrarelyan
empiricalstatisticalbasistothecombination.
Forexample,eachcmofsoildepthupto150cmcanbeassigned0.2points,sothatsoildepthgives0to
30pointstowardsthelandindexeach%coarsefragmentscansubtract0.1pointsfromamaximumof10
points,sothatcoarsefragmentcontentgives0to10pointstowardsthelandindex.Asinthecontinuous
case,landcharacteristicsareweightedbyassigningthemdifferentmaximumpoints.
Asexplainedintheprevious,ifacontinuouslandindexisdesired,empiricalstatisticalmethodsare
shouldbeusedasexplainedinthenext.
7.5Empiricalstatisticalmethods
TheseareequationsrelatingseveraldiagnosticLCstothevalueoftheLQ.Theyareusuallyestablished
byregressionanalysis(latersectionofthecourse).Thismethodproducescontinuousratings,i.e.,an
'exact'valueoftheLQ,notaclassifiedvaluetheresultistypicallyclassifiedintoaseveritylevel.
Example:'Universal'SoilLossEquation(USLE)forLQ'erosionhazard':estimatedfromrainfall
erosivity,soilerodability,slopedegreeandlength,andlanduse:A=RKLSCP,eachofthefactorsis
alsoestimatedfromprimaryLCsbyaregressionequationortable.E.g.R=abc+,wherea=average
annualprecipitationincm,b=maximumdayprecipitationoccurringoncein2yr,incm,c=maximum
totalprecipitationofaoneyearrecurrencerainshower,incm,andareparametersthatmustbeestimated
31/39
1/3/2015
locally.
Problem:parameterestimation,regressionsmustbecalibratedlocally.
Wewillstudystatisticalmethodsindetailinalatersectionofthecourse.
InALES,formulascanbeusedtorelateasetofcontinuousdiagnosticLCstoanothercontinuousLC,
whichisthenclassifiedintoadiscreteLC,whichisthenusedasdiagnostictoaLQ,possiblyina1to1
relation.
7.6Dynamicsimulationoflandqualities
OnewaytodeterminetheseveritylevelofaLandQualityistosimulateitovertime,usingadynamic
simulationmodel.Forexample,wecouldestimatethelandquality'moistureavailability'fromtimeseries
ofthediagnosticLCssuchasrainfallandsolarenergy.Thisisespeciallyappropriateifthedynamicor
timedependentnatureoftheLQisimportant,forexample,moisturestressatcriticaltimes.Theresultsof
thesimulationarethebehaviorovertimeoftheLandQuality.Thismustbeclassifiedtoseveritylevels.
Forexample,'highmoistureavailability'couldbedefinedaslessthan10%frequencyofthreeormore
consecutivedayswithamoisturedeficitinthegrowingseason.
Advantages:(1)themodelprovidesamoreorlessmechanisticviewofthelandquality,i.e.,itscausesas
wellasitsseveritylevel(2)dynamicsimulationprovidesatimeseriesofresults.
Disadvantagesinalandevaluationcontext:(1)highdatarequirements,(2)difficultcalibration,and(3)
theconsiderableexpertiseandjudgmentneededfortheircorrectapplication.
Wewillstudythisindetailinalatersectionofthecourse.
8EvaluatingoverallsuitabilityfromLand
Qualities
Intheprevioussection,westudiedavarietyofmethodsfordeterminingseveritylevelsorsinglefactor
ratingsforthevariousLandQualitiesdefinedforaLandUtilizationType.Evaluationofindividualland
qualitiesisusefulinitself,e.g.,foridentifyingareaswithspecialneedsforsoilconservation,orwhere
foundationsforbuildingswillneedspecialtreatment.However,inmostlandevaluationexercises,we
alsowantasinglemeasureofsuitabilityofthelandareaforthelanduse.Todothis,thesinglefactor
ratingsoftheindividualLQsmustbecombinedinsomewayintoanoverallmeasureofsuitability.The
waysinwhichwecanperformthiscombinationisthetopicofthissection.
Definitionof(land)suitability:"thefitnessofagiventypeoflandforaspecifiedkindoflanduse"[Food
andAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations,1985#193].Intuitively,themeasureofsuitability
tellsushowgoodthelandisforthespecificLUTbeingevaluated.Thisdefinitionbegsthequestion,
whatis'fitness'?Wehavetogivethisanoperationaldefinition,i.e.,somethingwecancompute.
(1)Aneconomicdefinitionofsuitabilitycanbebasedondefinedmetricsofeconomicvalue,e.g.,
predictedgrossmargin,netpresentvalue,internalrateofreturn,benefit/costratio.
32/39
1/3/2015
(2)Aphysicaldefinitionofsuitabilityismorearbitrary,beingbasedonaspecifiedmethodfor
combiningLQratingsintoanoverallrating.Theideaistogivethelanduserafeelforhowlimiting,or
difficulttomanage,thelandisfortheproposedLandUtilizationType,onanordinalscaleof1(no
limitation)tosomemaximum.
8.1Theconceptofsuitabilityclasses
TheFAOconceptof'suitabilityclasses'isappropriateifthereisnocontinuousscalefortheevaluation,
orifwewanttoclassifyacontinuousscaleofsuitabilityintoasmallsetofclasses,readily
understandablebytheclient.
Recallfromaprevioussection:thesuitabilityclassisthesecondlevelofdetailinthehierarchyorder
classsubclassunit.
PhysicalSuitabilityClasses:S1,S2,S3/N1,N2:.NotethatS3andN1can'tbedistinguished.N2is
definedaslandthatiscompletelyunsuitedtotheuse,i.e.,theusewouldtotallyfailorcauseirreparable
environmentaldegradation.S2andS3/N1indicatelandthatisincreasinglymoredifficulttomanageor
presentsstrongerlimitationstoproduction.
EconomicSuitabilityClasses:S1,S2,S3,N1,N2:.NotethatS3andN1areseparatedaccordingto
predictedeconomicvalue:S3iseconomicallyviableandN1isnot.InanycaseN2isphysically
unsuited,andisdefinedbythePhysicalSuitabilityclassification.S2andS3areprogressivelyless
remunerativethanS1.
Thereisnoapriorireasonwhythescaleofsuitabilityclassescan'tbefinerorcoarserthan4or5(ALES
allowsthis)butthisdivisionseemspsychologicallyadequateforitspurpose.Remember,ifwehavea
predictedeconomicvalueonacontinuousscale,theEconomicSuitabilityClassisonlyaconvenienceto
communicatetheresultsinaneasilyunderstoodform.
Thereisanobviousconfusionbetweenphysicalandeconomicclassesofthesamename.ExceptforN2,
theyarenotnecessarilyrelated.Forexample,theremaybelandwithmanyphysicallimitationsthatplace
itinclassS3/N1,butiftherelationofpricesofoutputstocostsofinputsisfavorable,itmaybein
economicclassS1.Conversely,theremaybelandwithnophysicallimitationstoause,butifthe
economicsituationisnotfavorable,itmaybeineconomicclassN1.
8.2Methodsofevaluatingoverallphysicalsuitability
(1)theMaximumLimitationmethod
TheoverallphysicalsuitabilityofalandareaforaLUTistakenfromthemostlimitinglandquality,i.e.,
theLQwhoseratingistheworst.TheLQsmustberatedonacommensuratescale,e.g.,'2'forLQ1must
insomesensebe'asbadas''2'forLQ2.
Advantage:simplicity,'lawoftheminimum'ifseveritylevelsofLQsweredefinedaccordingtoa
standardsetofyieldreductions,andiftheseyieldfactorsdonotinteract,thesuitabilityclassobtainedby
thismethodwillbecorrect.IngeneralFAOpractice,S1correspondsto80100%ofoptimumyield,S2to
4080%,andtheS3/N1to2040%.Butsomephysicalfactorsdonotaffectyield,theyjustmake
managementmoredifficultorexacting.
Disadvantage:doesnotdifferentiatebetweenlandareaswithseverallimitationsandthosewithonlyone,
33/39
1/3/2015
aslongasthemaximumlimitationisthesame.
ALES:MarktheLUR'useinthemaximumlimitationmethod'.
(2)algebraiccombinationsoflandqualityratings
TheoverallphysicalsuitabilityofalandareaforaLUTiscomputedaccordingtoaformulabasedonthe
individualfactorratings.Forexample,theaverageoftheLQlevels,oraweightedaveragegivingmore
weighttomoreseverelimitations.Or,somerulelike'3moderatelimitationsareequivalentto1severe
limitation'.
Thisisamoreflexibleversionofthemaximumlimitationmethod.TheindividualLQscalesmustagain
becommensurate.
(3)adhoccombinationoflandqualityratings
TheoverallphysicalsuitabilityofalandareaforaLUTiscomputedaccordingtoanotherdecisionrule.
Advantage:landqualitiescanbeweighted,andtheydonothavetobeonthesamescaleof'goodness'.
Disadvantage:lotsofwork,subjectivecombinations
ALES:PhysicalSuitabilitySubclassdecisiontreesallowforanyinteractionsorincommensurate
meaningsofLQseveritylevels.ThebestapproachinALESistousethemaximumlimitationmethodif
possible,andputanyinteractions(specialrules)inadecisiontree,whichtakesprecedenceoverthe
maximumlimitationmethod.
8.3Methodsofevaluatingoveralleconomicsuitability
Thisismoreobjectivethanphysicalsuitability.Someeconomicmetric(indicator)ischosen,andthe
valueofeachlandarea/landusecombinationiscalculated,withoutreferencetotheLQfactorratingsper
se,althoughtheLQsaffectyields(cashin)andcosts(cashout).
Theevaluatorassignsthefollowingvalues:
1.LowerlimitofclassS1(=upperlimitofclassS2)
2.LowerlimitofclassS2(=upperlimitofclassS3)
3.LowerlimitofclassS3(=upperlimitofclassN1)
Thenthevalueofthepredictedmetricisclassifiedaccordingtotheseclasslimits.Forexample,a
predictedvaluelessthanthelowerlimitofclassS3placestheevaluationunitinclassN1.
Inalaterunit,wewillstudythevariouseconomicmetricsandhowtheyarecalculated.
9Glossary
Classifiedvalue:
onemeasuredonadiscretescale.
34/39
1/3/2015
Client:
Apersonororganizationthatrequeststheworkandwillactonthebasisofitsresults.Alsocalled
theuserofthelandevaluationresults.
Continuousvalue:
onemeasuredonacontinuousscale,witharbitraryprecision.
Decisiontree:
ahierarchicalmultiwaykey,leadingviaaseriesofquestionsatthenodesofthetreetoadecision
atitsleaves.
Delineation(onamap):
theundividedportionofamapsheetinsideacontinuousboundaryline,andoutsideanycontained
continuousboundaryline,ifany.
Economiclandevaluation:
anevaluationofsuitabilitybasedonsomeeconomicmeasureofnetbenefits,shouldagivenLUT
beimplementedonagivenlandarea.
Evaluations:
specificevaluationexercises.
Evaluator:
Apersonwhocarriesoutthelandevaluation.
Framework:
howtocarryoutanevaluationexercise.
Guidelines(directives):
whatfactors(landqualities)toconsiderwhenevaluatingforcertaingeneralkindsoflanduses,
howtoevaluatethesequalities.
Land:
anareaoftheearth'ssurface,thecharacteristicsofwhichembraceallreasonablystable,or
predictablycyclic,attributesofthebiosphereverticallyaboveandbelowthisarea,includingthose
oftheatmosphere,thesoilandunderlyinggeology,thehydrology,theplantandanimal
populations,andtheresultsofpastandpresenthumanactivity,totheextentthattheseattributes
exertasignificantinfluenceonpresentandfutureusesofthelandbyhumans.
LandCharacteristic(LC):
asimpleattributeofthelandthatcanbedirectlymeasuredorestimatedinroutinesurveyinany
operationalsense,includingbyremotesensingandcensusaswellasbynaturalresourceinventory.
Cf.landquality.
LandQuality(LQ):
acomplexattributeoflandwhichactsinamannerdistinctfromtheactionsofotherlandqualities
initsinfluenceonthesuitabilityoflandforaspecifiedkindofusetheabilityofthelandtofulfill
specificrequirementsforaLUT.Cf.landcharacteristic.
LandQualityclass:
see'severitylevel'.
35/39
1/3/2015
Landresourceexpert:
apersonwhohasinformationonthelandresource
LandSuitability:
thefitnessofagiventypeoflandforaspecifiedkindoflanduse.
Landuseexpert:
apersonwhohasinformationaboutalanduseorlandquality,inrelationtotheland.
LandUseRequirement(LUR):
aconditionofthelandnecessaryforsuccessfulandsustainedimplementationofaspecificLand
UtilizationType
LandUtilizationType(LUT):
Akindoflandusedescribedordefinedinadegreeofdetailgreaterthanthatofamajorkindof
landuse.
Inthecontextofirrigatedagriculture,alandutilizationtypereferstoacrop,cropcombinationor
croppingsystemwithspecifiedirrigationandmanagementmethodsinadefinedtechnicaland
socioeconomicsetting.
Inthecontextofrainfedagriculture,alandutilizationtypereferstoacrop,cropcombinationor
croppingsystemwithaspecifiedtechnicalandsocioeconomicsetting.
Alandutilizationtypeinforestryconsistsofatechnicalspecificationsinagivenphysical,
economicandsocialsetting
MajorKindofLandUse:
Amajorsubdivisionofrurallanduse,suchasrainfedagriculture,irrigatedagriculture,
grassland,forestry,recreation,annualcrops,perennialcrops,swampricecultivation,forest
plantation,ornaturalforests.
Mapunit:
asetofmapdelineationsdesignatedbyasinglename,andrepresentingasinglelegendcategory.
Minimumdecisionarea:
thesizeoftheindividuallandareasforwhichdecisionsaretobemade.
Minimumlegibledelineation(MLD)ofamap:
theminimumlegiblesizeofapolygononamapatagivenscale,conventionallytakentobe
0.4cmonthemap.
Nominalvalue:
aclassifiedvaluewhosescaleofmeasurementisnotordered(cf.ordinalvalue),i.e.,
theorderoftheclassesisarbitraryandthereforenotmeaningful.
Optimumlegibledelineation(OLD)ofamap:
theminimumeasilylegiblesizeofapolygononamapatagivenscale,conventionallytakentobe
4timestheminimumlegibledelineation(MLD)of0.4cm,i.e.1.6cmonthemap.
Ordinalvalue:
aclassifiedvaluewhosescaleofmeasurementisordered(cf.nominalvalue),i.e.,theorderofthe
36/39
1/3/2015
classesismeaningful.
Physicallandevaluation:
anevaluationbasedonlyonphysicalfactorsthatdeterminewhetheraLUTcanbeimplementedon
alandarea,andthenatureandseverityofphysicallimitationsorhazards.
Scalefactorofamap:
ratioofdistanceonthegroundtodistanceonthemap.Thedenominatoroftheconventional
representationofmapscale.
SeveritylevelofaLandQuality:
aclassificationoftheLQ,indicatingthedegreeoflimitationorhazardassociatedwiththeLQona
particularlandarea,fromLevel1=nolimitation,upwardstosomemaximum.
Stakeholders:
allpartieswhowillbeaffectedbytheresultsoftheplanningdecisionstakenonthe
basisofthelandevaluation.
Suitability:
seelandsuitability.
Suitabilityclasses:
Divisionsofsuitabilityordersthatindicatethedegreeofsuitability,notsimplysuitablevs.not
suitable.
Suitabilityorders:
LandiseithersuitableornotsuitableforaLUT.
Suitabilitysubclasses:
Divisionsofsuitabilityclasseswhichindicatenotonlythedegreeofsuitabilitybutalsothenature
ofthelimitationsthatmakethelandlessthancompletelysuitable.
Suitabilityunits:
Divisionsofsuitabilitysubclasses,whichhavedifferentmanagementrequirements.
10References
1. Beek,K.J.1978.Landevaluationforagriculturaldevelopment.ILRIPublication23,Wageningen:
ILRI.333pp.S605.I61pno.23Mann
2. EUROCONSULT.1989.AgriculturalCompendiumforruraldevelopmentinthetropicsand
subtropics.Amsterdam:Elsevier.740pp.S481.A271989Mann
3. FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations.1976.Aframeworkforlandevaluation.
SoilsBulletin32,Rome,Italy:FAO.S590.F68no.32Mann
4. FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations.1983.Guidelines:landevaluationfor
rainfedagriculture.SoilsBulletin52,Rome,Italy:FAO.S590.F68no.52Mann
37/39
1/3/2015
5. FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations.1984.Landevaluationforforestry.
Forestrypaper48,Rome,Italy:FAO.123pp.SD1.F21no.48Mann
6. FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations.1985.Guidelines:landevaluationfor
irrigatedagriculture.SoilsBulletin55,Rome,Italy:FAO.231pp.S590.F68no.55Mann
7. FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations.1991.Guidelines:land
evaluationforextensivegrazing.SoilsBulletin58,Rome,Italy:FAO.158pp.S590
.F68no.58Mann
8. Forbes,T.R.,Rossiter,D.,&VanWambeke,A.1982.Guidelinesforevaluatingtheadequacyof
soilresourceinventories.1987printinged.SMSSTechnicalMonograph#4,Ithaca,NY:Cornell
UniversityDepartmentofAgronomy.51pp.S592.14.F69Mann
9. Laban,P.(ed).1981.Proceedingsoftheworkshoponlandevaluationforforestry.ILRI
Publication28,Wageningen:ILRI.355pp.S605.I61pno.28Mann
10. Siderius,W.(ed).1986.Landevaluationforlanduseplanningandconservationinslopingareas.
ILRIPublication40,Wageningen:InternationalInstituteforLandReclamationandImprovement
(ILRI).S605.I61pno.40Mann
11. Sys,C.1985.Landevaluation.Ghent,Belgium:StateUniversityofGhent,InternationalTraining
CentreforpostgraduatesoilscientistsAlgemeenBestuurvandeOntwikkelingssamenwerking.
12. Tisdale,S.L.,Nelson,W.L.,&Beaton,J.D.1985.Soilfertilityandfertilizers.4thed.NewYork:
Macmillan.xiv,754pp.
13. vanDiepen,C.A.,VanKeulen,H.,Wolf,J.,&Berkhout,J.A.A.1991.Landevaluation:from
intuitiontoquantification,inAdvancesInSoilScience,Stewart,B.A.,Editor.NewYork:Springer.
p.139204.
14. Venema,J.H.&Daink,F.1992.PapuaNewGuineaLandEvaluationSystems(PNGLES).AG:
TCP/PNG/0152FieldDocument1,PortMoresby:PapuaNewGuineaDepartmentofAgriculture
andLivestock.157pp.
15. Vink,A.P.A.1975.Landuseinadvancingagriculture.NewYork:SpringerVerlag.x,394p.pp.
HD111.V78Mann
|Home|LandEvaluation|ResourcesonInternet|Contacts|Examples|Tothetop|
|LectureNotes(Index)|Introduction|Part2|Part3|Part4|Part5|Part6|Part7|
Lastupdated:
Wednesday,October18,1995
Thispageisbroughtby
DepartmentofSoil,Crop,&AtmosphericSciences
38/39
1/3/2015
CollegeofAgriculture&LifeSciences
CornellUniversity
Author:AntonioJimenez
Pleasesendusyourcomments!
Disclaimer:ThesenotesweredevelopedfortheCornellUniversitycourseSoil,Crop&Atmospheric
Sciences494'SpecialTopicsinSoil,Crop&AtmosphericSciences:Landevaluation,withemphasison
computerapplications',SpringSemester1994,andweresubsequentlyexpandedandformattedfor
publication.Theyarenottobeconsideredasadefinitivetextonlandevaluation.
CopyrightDavidG.Rossiter1994.Completeorpartialreproductionofthesenotesispermittedifand
onlyifthisnoteisincluded.Saleofthesenotesoranycopyisstrictlyprohibited.
AllcontentscopyrightCornellUniversity1995
ALLRIGHTSRESERVED
ThispageURLis:http://wwwscas.cit.cornell.edu/landeval/le_notes/s494ch1p.htm
39/39

Part 1 - Basic Concepts & Procedures of Land Evaluation

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Part 1 - Basic Concepts & Procedures of Land Evaluation

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

1/3/2015

Вам также может понравиться