Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
LAND-USE PLANNING...
a conceptual development
Ronald A. Oliveira
PACIFIC
SOUTHWEST
Forest and Ranee
Experiment Station
FOREST SERVICE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
P.O. BOX W6. BERKELEY. CALIFORNIA 94701
Land-UseProblems ...................................... 1
Conclusion ............................................ 7
A s population pressures have increased and national American people. . .with consideration being given to
goals changed in past decades, land-use decisions have the relative values of the various resources, and not
become increasingly complex and difficult. The necessarily the combination of uses that will give the
reasons are not far to seek. Choices must be made greatest dollar return or the greatest unit output."
between conflicting uses of resources. Necessary data Multiple use, then is not necessarily equal use; it
and analysis of resource relationships are often lack- means equal consideration for each resource in deter-
ing. Local objectives and problems have regional and mining the "best" possible combination of uses. This
national ramifications. As the manager of the Nation- outcome requires knowledge of how one use affects
al Forests, the Forest Service is confronted with par- another, of how to measure present use and predict
ticularly difficult and widely influential decisions, future demands, and how to weight different uses
together with the need to make the basis of such when conflicts arise.
decisions clearly evident. As a result, the improve- Evaluation or weighting of the various conflicting
ment of planning methods has become an important uses can be troublesome. Besides the difficulty of col-
concern of both the agency and the public. lecting and analyzing data for such resources as
A planning model in which social, economic, and timber and water there is the problem of quantifying
environmental constraints are specified, especially in the intangible, o r at least unmarketable, products of
mathematical form, can be a valuable guide to deci- National Forest use, such as the esthetic quality of a
sionmaking. Such a model allows evaluation of the landscape or a wilderness experience. The value of
effects of policy alternatives and changing conditions. such uses is evident in the costs incurred t o experi-
It can cover either a broad area, such as a region or a ence them. Moreover, in order to experience such
National Forest, or can be limited to a particular uses people often forego the opportunity to engage in
district or planning unit. other activities that may have a market-determined
This report describes the general structure of a price or value.
land-use decision model approached through systems The relationship of National Forest land use to
analysis. Actual relationships are not developed in that of surrounding areas is another source of prob-
detail. The type of model presented is most suitable lems. Land managed privately or by local commu-
for determining the desirable balance of alternative nities, county, State, and other Federal agencies
resource uses for a specific area, in the context of the affects and is affected by National Forest manage-
broad goals of Forest Service management. To illus- ment. Such relationships should be considered to
trate the complexity of land planning, some problems achieve the aims of comprehensive multiple-use man-
facing the Dillon Ranger District, Arapaho National agement. Varying origins of demand for a particular
Forest, in Summit County Colorado, are described. use must also be considered. Local demands may, for
Examples of some elements of the planning model are example, conflict with national ones. Too superficial
drawn from this area. an inventory and analysis of the relationships of non-
National Forest resources and social and economic
conditions will limit the usefulness of unit or District
LAND-USE PROBLEMS plans.
Thus, National Forest land-use planning must ac-
The multiple-use concept requires that a land unit count for a complex system of interrelated elements.
be managed so as to achieve the best possible balance It seems reasonable that an empirical decisionmaking
of resource uses. Such balancing may mean that a procedure for such planning should emphasize the
land unit is used less than its potential number of need to explain the workings of the system.
uses-if full utilization might impair the use of either
that unit or another for a purpose to which it is pecu- DILLON RANGER DISTRICT
liarly suited. The Forest Service Manual (Title 1,
November 1, 1971) defines multiple use as the "man- The Dillon Ranger District offers an illustration of
agement of all the various renewable surface resources the complexity of land-use problems on the National
of the National Forests so that they are utilized in the Forests. The District surrounds Dillon Reservoir.
combination that will best meet the needs of the Here, most problems of land use arise from high
demands for recreation in several competing forms. The variety of land-use problems in the Dillon area
Dillon Reservoir is a drawing card for water-related has resulted in the expression in multiple-use plans of
recreation activities and is a water supply facility for intention to take specific actions. These actions (e.g.,
Denver. In addition, several ski developments are in "Convert recreation sites to day use only" or "Retain
the area. These two attractions and the general scenic and obtain in public ownership or open space max-
beauty of the area have made it popular for second imum frontage along the Blue River") may eventually
home and mountain condominium developments as prove to be the "best7' ones. But they appear to be
well as for the usual day and weekend recreation uses. preconceived solutions based on conventional wis-
These high recreation demands and the expanding dom, rather than the outcome of study or analysis,
activity in building have created an atmosphere of supported by facts, in a form understandable to the
urgency concerning land-use planning in the Dillon public. Perhaps a better planning would be
area. Some development is occurring on areas with to consider all relevant relationships between land
unstable soils,"high pollution potential, and high fire uses, public demands, ecosystems, etc., in the light of
hazards. Inadequate sewage facilities may lead to the principles of multiple-use management. By so
water pollution problems. Many of the new develop- doing it would be possible to set forth the policy
ments may also face water supply problems in the actions needed to meet the goals of the Region,
future. Forest, Ranger District, County, and State. The sys-
Consequently, the Dillon Ranger District must tems analysis approach seems the appropriate one.
consider these conditions in its planning. The surge of
construction resulting from the impetus of winter SYSTEMS ANALYSIS APPROACH
sports and reservoir developments is occurring on pri-
vate land adjacent to the National Forest. Thus, the A systems orientation implies a view of a system
National Forest serves as a "backyard play area" to of elements as a whole, rather than individually. That
these developments, and pressure on the capabilities is, this perspective emphasizes the interdependencies
of the Forest lands coritinues to rise. The Forest Serv- between the elements of the system and concentrates
ice needs to know and stipulate the recreation capac- attention on their relationships (DeLucia et al. 1971 ;
ity of various land types on the Forest and the capital Churchman 1968).
requirements associated with varying levels of capac- Often the systems approach to complex problem
ity. In addition, its fire prevention capabilities are solving requires data gathering and analysis by inter-
facing increasing pressure from the higher population disciplinary teams. It is not always obvious in advance
densities in subdivisions on private lands as well as which disciplines will make the major contribution to
from intensified use of the National Forest land. the study. Viewpoints and procedures may be drawn
Campground use on the Dillon Ranger District has from a variety of disciplines.
been high in past seasons and is expected to grow In the construction of large systems models, the
unless terminated or otherwise controlled. Increasing gap between specialists is often bridged by a mathe-
fire and water pollution hazards of high campground matical formulation. This formulation provides valu-
use, as well as financial limitations, have obliged the able guidance for research and data collection and
District to consider the various alternatives; that is, allows the engineer, the economist, the biologist, and
should more campgrounds be built and who should others to see how small but vitally important pieces
build them, or should all camping be prohibited and of information and theory can merge, and to recog-
public areas limited to day use? nize critical gaps in existing information and knowl-
Land exchanges are needed to facilitate judicious edge. Mathematical models are tools of the systems
and coordinated development of both public and pri- approach. Their development and utilization provide
vate lands. Developers are seeking more suitable sites a useful framework for integrating the contributions
along the Blue and Snake Rivers. It is also desirable to from various disciplines and for incorporating data
leave these areas as open space, however, to reduce and the research results from different fields.
flood hazards and maintain esthetic quality. Whether
these areas are to become part of private subdivisions, Specifying System Boundary
or be left as open space, or become partly open space
and partly subdivisions must be determined. These The nature and scope of the particular problem at
land exchange issues are an essential element in coor- hand defines the system boundary-the "line" that
dination of Forest Service land-use plans with those surrounds those elements considered to be part of the
of the local communities and Summit County. system. In the "art of systems analysis," specifying
I I
I System 1
I I
P o s s i b l e expansion
boundary of boundary
Feedback
Figure 1-A basic system model consists of inputs,
elements of the system, and the outputs. The boun-
dary of the system can be expanded to cover problems
whose scope widens during the systems analysis.
this boundary enables the user to choose the appro- National Forest campground area. The inputs would
priate model to define the system. Land-use planning be demand for the campground, fees, and other
models are subjective in that the system boundary is campground regulations, type of sites, soil types and
not an objective datum perceivable through direct slopes, vegetation, etc. The system would be the in-
observation, but is largely a choice of the analyst, teraction of these inputs, and the outputs would be
who arbitrarily classifies some borderline interactions environmental quality of the area, fire hazard, actual
as exogenous (outside the system). campground use, etc. These outputs in turn would
The system boundary is specified to include those have feedback effects on future inputs. Forest Service
elements that are interrelated and pertinent to the set decisionmakers, recognizing the interactions within
of decisions to be made. The boundary usually en- the system, would manipulate the controllable inputs,
closes those parts of the system that are subject to such as length-of-stay or limit, to achieve the outputs
some degree of control. For example, if in planning desired.
for campground units it is assumed that the demand Evaluating Resource Uses
functions for campgrounds are known but that
pricing policy is beyond the planner's control, then A systems analysis approach to the integrated con-
demands are noncontrolled. If, however, the planner trol and use of National Forest resources provides for
can charge camping fees or establish quotas, demands the examination and evaluation of a large number of
are now at least partially controllable, and are con- possible resource uses. It does not necessarily, how-
sidered endogenous to the system. In effect, the ever, require the inclusion of all uses in the resource
scope of the problem can expand or contract the development plan. Inclusion or exclusion depends on
system boundary definition. In addition, it can influ- the degree to which a particular use contributes to
ence the degree of aggregation and approximation the broad objectives of land use, and on the extent to
with which pertinent interacting elements are con- which the use is complementary to other desired uses.
sidered. The danger exists that the attempt to be compre-
A system in simple terms is charted in figure 1. hensive may be used to guarantee the inclusion of
The system receives inputs-some controlled, others certain preselected uses. A systems planning effort
not-that affect the interaction of system elements. that is well designed and executed avoids this hazard.
Outputs are produced which in dynamic systems may In contrast to the traditional analysis of a partic-
affect the inputs (feedback). The control decisions ular function, a well-defined systems model allows
seek to achieve some objective or set of objectives. A decisionmakers to assess the degree of complemen-
simplified example of such a system could be a tarity between purposes. Complementarity may be
considered a measure of the efficiency with which a
land resource system can serve several purposes-sites
for outdoor recreation, timber production, and wild- S p e c i f y o b j e c t i v e s and
life habitat, for example. Complementarity exists major problem a r e a s
when a stand of timber that is thinned to control
disease and insect damage yields usable wood. Sirni-
larly, the thinning may improve stand growth and
wildlife habitat. Different purposes are usually not L i s t key v a r i a b l e s o r
perfectly compatible; for instance, timber harvesting subsystems t o b,e analyzed
and recreation seasons may coincide, and the removal and c o n t r o l v a r i a b l e s
of trees may temporarily reduce the esthetic quality
of the landscape. If a system is developed and oper-
ated t o obtain maximum efficiency for one resource
use, then in general, less than full efficiency is Determine t h e i n t e r -
achieved in other uses. dependencies between
DEVELOPMENT OF A SYSTEMS MODEL subsys tems
Employment
sectors
Optimization Procedure
or examples, see the paper A conceptual regional econo-
metric model incorporating policy considerations, b y R. A.
An optimization procedure would prove useful for Oliveira and G. C. Rauser, presented at the Western Eco-
decisionmakers in a policymaking framework. Often nomic Association annual meeting, Davis, Calif., Aug. 27-28,
policy makers dislike the use of words (or proce- 1970; and the paper Estimation o f social preference
dures) such as "optimize" or "maximize." Such functions for the analysis of economic policy problems, b y
G. C. Rauser and J. W. Freebairn, presented at the American
terminology is used in government planning guides, Agricultural Economics Association annual meeting, Gaines-
however, and specifically in the multiple-use direc- ville, Florida, Aug. 20-23, 1972 (copy on file at Dep. Agric.
tives of the Forest Service Manual (Title 2100, Economics, Univ. Calif., Davis, Calif.).
subjective barter terms underlying the preference
function of such a group, Van Eijk and Sandee (1959,
.
........................
..
Â
'
Â
Â
.. Recreation u s e
Â
Â
type of imaginary interviewing or actually a reviewing Â
Â
the imaginary or straightforward interviewing proce- Â
Â
a
Environmental systems
citizens' groups) involved in the planning process, as
well as viewpoints lying between these extremes.
Thus, the analysis team could present the policy
Â
Â
Â
Â
. model
Â
Â
Â
objectives. Â
Outputs:
Where objectives are not complementary, but
where they can be ranked in order of preference or
.
Â
II
Â
Stream q u a l i t y
L....... Erosion
priority, the analyst could specify a ranking or orde-
ring of objectives where the last objective consists of
a few variables that could be combined in a prefer-
ence function. That is, satisfactory levels (e.g., satis-
factory water quality standard) would be specified
[ Wildlife habitat
Fire potential
Etc.
A
for all variables except those in the last objective, and (Feed-back e f f e c t s )
preference weights would need to be determined for Figure 4-Hypothetical simulation model of camp-
these few variables only. The weighted combination ground use.
of these variables would then be maximized subject
to satisfactory levels of all prior objectives or goals. ground management is given in figure 4. The inputs
would be recreation use in camper days and land
Simulation Procedures management decisions, such as the number of camp-
ing sites and trails. The model would show how these
If it is not possible to specify an objective func- inputs interact with the local environment (or eco-
tion, then the land-use systems model may be system). Plausible outputs could be various environ-
analyzed by simulation procedures. In other words, mental measures. The effects of various inputs (such
the analyst could vary the magnitude of certain vari- as different use rates) could be simulated with the
ables and/or parameters and simulate the effects on model. A more sophisticated approach would treat
the system. Experiments could be performed on the recreation use as an endogenous output which would
model to see how sensitive the outputs were to be a result of the interactions within the system.
various assumptions, variables, parameters, or fore-
casts. In addition, certain policy actions could be CONCLUSION
tested and their results observed. If several such tests
were made, policymakers could observe the results of The land-use systems model and the analysis
their actions and thus make better decisions. methods I have described are in accord with the
A hypothetical simple simulation model for camp- Forest Service's multiple-use planning unit concept.
Planning units could easily serve as boundaries for approach has cumulative value in that information
land use systems. The Forest Service Manual (Title and operation costs incurred in one area may be
2100, Directive 1, Section 2126, Nov. 1971) de- applicable t o National Forest planning problems in
scribes such units as "specific, identified and delin- other areas.
eated land areas. Smaller than Planning Areas, they Obviously implementing the systems approach to
are large enough to encompass most of the meaning- National Forest land use planning would not be easy;
ful or significant relationships within a drainage or investments would be required in system analysis,
series of drainages. The purpose of Planning Units is computer time, and supporting facilities. The invest-
to provide a focus for planning activities in a small ments in time and money would be small, however,
enough area to be workable and large enough to minuscule compared with the total costs of managing
enable the planning team t o envision or predict the the National Forests. Complex and sophisticated pro-
cause and effect relationships of management cedures are now in use in such areas as timber man-
alternatives ...." agement, watershed management, and forest engineer-
The proposed land-use planning systems analysis ing. The land use decision process could profitably be
could easily meet the analysis requirements as speci- analyzed with the same rigor.
fied in the Forest Service Manual. The use of an
objective function would indicate how alternative
plans contribute t o goals and would indicate the
trade-offs between alternatives. In addition, the con-
struction phase of the model would point out any
data or inventory limitations which may exist. LITERATURE CITED
The systems analysis approach seems well suited t o
Forest Service land use planning. It allows for DeLucia, R. J., H. A. Thomas, Jr., P. P. Rogers, M. B. Fiering,
analysis, experience, judgments, and revisions t o enter and R. P. Burden.
the decisionmaking process. Proposed programs can 197 1. Systems analysis in water resources planning. 393
p. Cambridge, Mass.: Meta Systems, Inc.
be examined in relation t o various objectives, both
Churchman, C. West.
economic and social, of local and regional programs. 1968. The systems approach. 243 p. New York, New
This type of multidiscipline approach is needed t o York: Delacorte Press.
solve problems having a wide range of alternative USDA Forest Service.
solutions. The effects of such alternatives can be dis- 1970. Framework for the future. Washington, D. C.
(unpaged)
played in multiobjective accounts framework that can Van Eijk, C. J., and J. Sandee.
then be used in policy discussion and in other studies 1959. Quantitative determination of an optimum eco-
and programs. In addition, the systems planning nomic policy. Econometrics 27(1): 1-13.
The Author
GPO 794-426/3742