Jump to content

Talk:Land use

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Couldn't this be merged/redirred to zoning?

I agree. Be bold. older≠wiser 01:10, 11 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if it should be merged with zoning. I think Zoning is formalised land use (when Govt/Local councils puts it in their district plans), but I think the term land use is more general. I think land use also applies to how land patterns occur naturally in cities without zoning. But I'm just a student studying for an exam tommorrow, so I'm not 100% sure on this topic.

Nah, 'Zoning' is a very distinct method of planning in some countries, whereas land use encompasses use of land independantly of land use planning. Bjrobinson 15:09, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that 'Land Use' is distinct from 'Zoning'. Many places don't have formal zoning regulations. This page would benefit from land use/land cover data, eg UN, NASA, CIA, USGS. JC Shepard (talk) 20:55, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced US section

[edit]

In the US, every legal activity must have its place in municipal and county zoning laws. Meaning if an adult entertainment facility can legally operate in a given jurisdiction, then the zoning laws must offer a proper and by-right zone for that business to operate within.

To regulate what can be built and where, cities create comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances to create an order to the potential uses of land within their political boundaries. A municipality will spend thousands if not hundreds of thousands of dollars to determine where best to encourage industrial growth, allow residential building and permit commercial activity. These decisions have impacts on land values, safety and community interests. The process of determining what can be built where has become extremely politicized.

Some active community groups wield much strength in the public land use approval process. Politics plays a part in the approval process.

With the approval process being susceptible to public pressure and politics, there is now a subset of political culture known as land use politics.

Patterns of land use arise naturally in a culture through customs and practices, but land use may also be formally regulated by land use planning through zoning and planning permission laws, or by private agreements such as restrictive covenants. For example, the setting aside of wilderness either publicly as a Wilderness Area or privately as a conservation easement.

This article is describing the general patterns of land use not the various governmental instruments used to implement them.Synchronism (talk) 18:42, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

land use vs. Landnutzung

[edit]

I just wanted to draw attention to the fact that the English land use article is linked to the German article Flaechenverbrauch; However, land use means something completely different. What do I have to do so this article gets linked to Landnutzung, which comes closes to being equivalent? Discosu (talk) 09:04, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Planetary boundaries

[edit]

Add The percentage of land used in agriculture is a Planetary boundaries metric. 99.19.46.34 (talk) 03:45, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 08:30, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why, what? 99.109.126.34 (talk) 17:10, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resource for Planetary boundaries: "Boundaries for a Healthy Planet" by Jonathan Foley, Gretchen C. Daily, Robert Howarth, David A. Vaccari, Adele C. Morris, Eric F. Lambin, Scott C. Doney, Peter H. Gleick and David W. Fahey Scientific American April 2010 99.190.85.150 (talk) 19:00, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You're advertising the topic, just as you were advertising 350.org when I first noticed you. However, even assuming it were an appropriate topic to link, it would be much more appropriate use an article in Category:Agriculture, rather than land use, to spam links to your new favorite article. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:13, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why would some random agriculture article be more appropriate as per Talk:Planetary boundaries Land use is a "Planetary Boundary"? 99.119.128.35 (talk) 21:38, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Because even the article "Planetary Boundaries", although it calls it "land use", the boundary refers to "agricultural land use". Even if a link were appropriate, it should only be from an article on agricultural land use. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 10:21, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The SciAm article is about Land use in general, with food production being a limiter to human population. Why complicate the issue? 209.255.78.138 (talk) 20:22, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That may be true. However, the quote and the planetary boundary do not have to do with land use in general, so should not be referenced in this article. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 20:38, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You are losing me, what quote? Why doesn't Planetary boundaries have to do with land use in general, as there is a finite land area on Earth, and only some of it can be for agriculture? 99.181.128.253 (talk) 23:56, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Quote = "The percentage of land used in agriculture is a Planetary boundaries metric."
And land use, even in the table in Planetary boundaries, takes the form of a subtitle or list entry title, which would not be considered "reliable" even if in a reliable source. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 05:45, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What subtitles? It is a list of boundaries, of which Land use is one. 99.190.87.1 (talk) 18:17, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not apparently so. "Land use" is the title of a section describing a "boundary", not a name or description. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 06:09, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mr. Rubin, please write more plainly. Not apparently so, seems weasely, per Wikipedia:WEASEL (as I have written and seen in other Talk associated with your comments). 209.255.78.138 (talk) 18:46, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Land use" is the title of a "boundary", not a description. The description relates to agricultural land use, which should be wikilinked to a more agricultural Wikipedia article. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 21:54, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Add Portal|Agriculture and Agronomy

[edit]

Add {{Portal|Agriculture and Agronomy}} 99.19.41.10 (talk) 05:04, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why? If we had an article agricultural land use, that might link to the portal. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 05:33, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why does a portal need to be so specific, just include related ones; and Agriculture is certainly a Land Use. 99.181.155.158 (talk) 03:57, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Add Add Portal:Ecology and/or Add Portal:Environment

[edit]

Add Add Portal:Ecology and/or Add Portal:Environment 99.190.81.210 (talk) 21:54, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Better is better ... add Portal|Agriculture and Agronomy|Sustainable development

[edit]

Better is better ... add {{Portal|Agriculture and Agronomy|Sustainable development}} 99.181.139.42 (talk) 02:22, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oddities on the Europe map

[edit]
A map of land use in Europe. Yellow: cropland and arable, light green: grassland and pasture, dark green: forest, light brown: tundra or bogs, unshaded areas: other (including towns and cities). Underlying map is a terrain map.

The example map (Image:Europe land use map.png) seems bogus to me. Specifically, the large cropland areas are mostly missing – it seems correct for Skåne, but the other areas which are just mile after mile of farmland (NW Västergötland, parts of Dalsland, Uppland ...) are marked as forest. Also, large areas around the mountains in Norway and Sweden are marked as "grassland or pasture". That seems excessive. JöG (talk) 21:06, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you. For the case of Germany, it didn't seem right to me that nothing was showing up as forest area. I've removed the map now. EMsmile (talk) 10:59, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Environment Section

[edit]

"According to a report by the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organisation, land degradation has been exacerbated where there has been an absence of any land use planning, or of its orderly execution, or the existence of financial or legal incentives that have led to the wrong land use decisions, or one-sided central planning leading to over-utilization of the land resources - for instance for immediate production at all costs. As a consequence the result has often been misery for large segments of the local population and destruction of valuable ecosystems. Such narrow approaches should be replaced by a technique for the planning and management of land resources that is integrated and holistic and where land users are central. This will ensure the long-term quality of the land for human use, the prevention or resolution of social conflicts related to land use, and the conservation of ecosystems of high biodiversity value."

It is entirely unclear to me what parts of this paragraph stem from the uncited FAO report and which parts are simply the opinion of the author. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.134.136.139 (talk) 15:11, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you and have removed this paragraph. EMsmile (talk) 10:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Land use. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:36, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:33, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Housekeeping edit: the decision was to keep this article. EMsmile (talk) 10:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

[edit]

I propose to merge land change science into here. It was a student assignment and would have been better off integrated into this article from the start rather than as a separate article. Note that land use change redirects to land change science. I think "land use", "land use change" and "land change science" all belong into just one article, not two. Pinging User:Chidgk1 and User:RCraig09. EMsmile (talk) 10:43, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Mild oppose. There is a difference between land use and land usechange science. It's better to edit Land change science (LCS) to remove the findings (results) of the science. The science itself is the history, techniques, scientists, technology, etc. Copying LCS here would bloat this article, which is more important and more viewed (60,694 vs 2,458 views/year). —RCraig09 (talk) 15:29, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there is a difference but that doesn't mean both topics couldn't be sensibly discussed in the same article. I don't think bloat would be a problem as both articles are rather small at present. Maybe before merging, I could first start to move relevant "findings" content from the science article to here. I see quite a lot of stuff that I think ought to be moved. I do think that "land use" and "land use change" ought to be discussed in one and the same article. For comparison, the German Wikipedia has "land use" and "land use change" together in one article. - And therefore I think land use change should redirect to here, and not to land change science. EMsmile (talk) 23:07, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could be an option. Land change modeling is a method used within land change science. EMsmile (talk) 10:00, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Land_use&oldid=1258554892"