UVM Theses and Dissertations
Format:
Print
Author:
Erickson, Daniel Lawrence
Dept./Program:
Plant and Soil Science
Year:
2012
Degree:
PhD
Abstract:
Worldwide, urbanization is causing a loss of agricultural land as residential and commercial development expands. In Chittenden County, Vermont, USA, this land use conversion has in some cases resulted in subdivision of farms into large residential parcels. Some of these residential parcels retain sizeable areas of undeveloped prime agricultural soil, yet the land is effectively removed from agricultural production. This research effort described herein consists ofithree separate studies which investigate opportunities for embedding agriculture within residential areas.
As communities around the globe begin to investigate their ability to feed themselves in light of peak oil and its impact on food prices and distribution costs, additional tools will be needed to help them answer the question, can we feed ourselves? As such, local and regional planners would benefit from additional tools that can provide actionable information to decision makers with regard to potential agricultural opportunities (AO). An agricultural opportunityI is simply any open land suitable for some level of agricultural production. In this study, a process was developed to indentify, quantify and type AO. The methods outlined here were developed in Chittenden County, Vermont but they can be applied elsewhere. While individual ancillary datasets may be unique to each study area, the general process can be replicated as long as some basic datasets such as classified land cover imagery and prime soils are available. The tools described herein, if employed by planners or geospatial analysts, can generate actionable information. The results from these analyses can be used to stimulate conversations between planners and county residents interested in increasing food and biofuel production to achieve a higher degree of self-sufficiency. Further, the results of the analyses, as well as the associated community discussions, can aid decision makers when drafting new or revising old policies.
The second study explored landowner willingness to enroll a portion of their land in a cooperative land management (CLM) scheme. The results show support for embedding production agriculture and other cooperative land use options inresidential parcels. Almost half of the respondents (45.6%) indicated they would enroll a portion of their land in a CLM program, while another 28.4% said "maybe". A cluster analysis partitioned the respondents into five clusters: "farms", rural non-farmers, old timers, suburban and big-non-farm lots. Willingness to participate in the CLM program and different land use options (livestock grazing, vegetables, fruit, field crops, biofuel, maple sugaring, wildflowers, medicinal plants, wildlife corridor, and recreational trails) varied across the clusters. A cluster containing a high percentage of agricultural land ("farms") had the highest support for production agriculture options, while a cluster of long term residents (old timers) had the lowest. Overall these results are encouraging for farmers seeking access to affordable farmland and for planning efforts seeking increased regional landscape multifunctionality.
The third study was designed to visualize and evaluate the effect various land development trajectories will have on the medium term future ofthe landscape. This was done in order to begin to create a shared vision amongst the local citizenry about increased self-sufficiency, particularly food production. Historical trend analyses and participatory workshops were conducted to develop the following scenarios: recent trend - business as usual, increased agriculture (increase land in agriculture by 30%) and embedded agriculture within residential areas. A dynamic landscape change model was used to generate spatially explicit maps for each scenario. The results show the business as usual and embedded agriculture scenarios result in loss of agricultural land and a fragmented landscape. The increased agriculture scenario resulted in the most homogenous and intact landscape. The simulated future landscapes illustrate alternatives to the status quo of development that could help guide future planning directives and related policy.
The tools described in these studies have utility far beybnd the local study area. Because of their widespread applicability, they can serve as decision support aids for policy makers and planners tasked with developing sustainability strategies, such as increased food self-sufficiency, in light of outside influences such as climate change and peak oil.
As communities around the globe begin to investigate their ability to feed themselves in light of peak oil and its impact on food prices and distribution costs, additional tools will be needed to help them answer the question, can we feed ourselves? As such, local and regional planners would benefit from additional tools that can provide actionable information to decision makers with regard to potential agricultural opportunities (AO). An agricultural opportunityI is simply any open land suitable for some level of agricultural production. In this study, a process was developed to indentify, quantify and type AO. The methods outlined here were developed in Chittenden County, Vermont but they can be applied elsewhere. While individual ancillary datasets may be unique to each study area, the general process can be replicated as long as some basic datasets such as classified land cover imagery and prime soils are available. The tools described herein, if employed by planners or geospatial analysts, can generate actionable information. The results from these analyses can be used to stimulate conversations between planners and county residents interested in increasing food and biofuel production to achieve a higher degree of self-sufficiency. Further, the results of the analyses, as well as the associated community discussions, can aid decision makers when drafting new or revising old policies.
The second study explored landowner willingness to enroll a portion of their land in a cooperative land management (CLM) scheme. The results show support for embedding production agriculture and other cooperative land use options inresidential parcels. Almost half of the respondents (45.6%) indicated they would enroll a portion of their land in a CLM program, while another 28.4% said "maybe". A cluster analysis partitioned the respondents into five clusters: "farms", rural non-farmers, old timers, suburban and big-non-farm lots. Willingness to participate in the CLM program and different land use options (livestock grazing, vegetables, fruit, field crops, biofuel, maple sugaring, wildflowers, medicinal plants, wildlife corridor, and recreational trails) varied across the clusters. A cluster containing a high percentage of agricultural land ("farms") had the highest support for production agriculture options, while a cluster of long term residents (old timers) had the lowest. Overall these results are encouraging for farmers seeking access to affordable farmland and for planning efforts seeking increased regional landscape multifunctionality.
The third study was designed to visualize and evaluate the effect various land development trajectories will have on the medium term future ofthe landscape. This was done in order to begin to create a shared vision amongst the local citizenry about increased self-sufficiency, particularly food production. Historical trend analyses and participatory workshops were conducted to develop the following scenarios: recent trend - business as usual, increased agriculture (increase land in agriculture by 30%) and embedded agriculture within residential areas. A dynamic landscape change model was used to generate spatially explicit maps for each scenario. The results show the business as usual and embedded agriculture scenarios result in loss of agricultural land and a fragmented landscape. The increased agriculture scenario resulted in the most homogenous and intact landscape. The simulated future landscapes illustrate alternatives to the status quo of development that could help guide future planning directives and related policy.
The tools described in these studies have utility far beybnd the local study area. Because of their widespread applicability, they can serve as decision support aids for policy makers and planners tasked with developing sustainability strategies, such as increased food self-sufficiency, in light of outside influences such as climate change and peak oil.