Land Consolidation Suitability Ranking of Cadastral Municipalities: Information-Based Decision-Making Using Multi-Criteria Analyses of Official Registers’ Data
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Land Development on Croatian Territory
3. Problem Definition
3.1. Available Data Sources
- Register of Spatial Units (Croatian abbrev: RPJ);
- Real Property Registration and Cadastre Joint Information System (JIS);
- System for Registration of Agricultural Parcels (LPIS, Croatian abbrev: ARKOD);
- Physical Planning Information System (Croatian abbrev: ISPU); and
- Information system for the disposal of state agricultural land.
3.2. Current Situation of Identified LAS Datasets
3.2.1. Register of Spatial Units (Croatian Abbrev: RPJ)
3.2.2. Real Property Registration and Cadastre Joint Information System (JIS)
3.2.3. System for Registration of Agricultural Parcels (LPIS, Croatian Abbrev: ARKOD)
3.2.4. Physical Planning Information System
3.2.5. Information System for the Disposal of State Agricultural Land
4. Materials: Indicators and Units Selection
4.1. Selection of Evaluation Units
4.2. Selection and Determination of Indicators
5. Methods
5.1. Weighted Sum Model (WSM)
5.2. Preference Ranking Organisation Method for Enrichment Evaluation (PROMETHEE)
5.3. Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution (TOPSIS)
6. Results and Discussion
- Weighted sum model values, using equal weights for all indicators (WSM-EW);
- Weighted sum model, using AHP assigned weights (WSM-AHP);
- PROMETHEE I, partial ranking and PROMETHEE II ranking; and
- TOPSIS.
6.1. Limitations
6.2. Further Research
7. Conclusions
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Zevenbergen, J.; De Vries, W.; Bennett, R.M. (Eds.) Advances in Responsible Land Administration; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2015; ISBN 978-1-4987-1959-9. [Google Scholar]
- Roić, M. Land Information Administration: Cadastre; University of Zagreb Faculty of Geodesy: Zagreb, Croatian, 2012; ISBN 978-953-6082-16-2. (In Croatian) [Google Scholar]
- Zanon, B.; Taylor, Z.; Sykes, O.; Stead, D.; Meijers, E.; de Vries, J.; Tasan-Kok, T.; Shaw, D.; Lord, A.; Sanyal, B.; et al. Between State and Market: A Third Way of Planning. Int. Plan. Stud. 2008, 13, 119–132. [Google Scholar]
- Hartvigsen, M. Land reform and land fragmentation in Central and Eastern Europe. Land Use Policy 2014, 36, 330–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mađer, M.; Matijević, H.; Roić, M. Analysis of possibilities for linking land registers and other official registers in the Republic of Croatia based on LADM. Land Use Policy 2015, 49, 606–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Medić, V. Devedeset godina komasacija u hrvatskoj. Sociol. Prost. 1993, 119, 97–106. [Google Scholar]
- Medić, V. Komasacija Zemljišta; University of Zagreb Faculty of Geodesy: Zagreb, Croatian, 1978. [Google Scholar]
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (UN FAO). The Design of Land Consolidation Pilot Projects in Central and Eastern Europe; UN FAO: Rome, Italy, 2003; ISBN 9251050015. [Google Scholar]
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (UN FAO). Operations Manual for Land Consolidation Pilot Projects in Central and Eastern Europe; UN FAO: Rome, Italy, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Pašakarnis, G.; Morley, D.; Malien, E.V. Author’s personal copy Rural development and challenges establishing sustainable land use in Eastern European countries. Land Use Policy 2013, 30, 703–710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lemmen, C.; Jansen, L.J.M.; Rosman, F.; Rosman, F. Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation. In Proceedings of the FIG Working Week 2012 Knowing to Manage the Territory, Protect the Environment, Evaluate the Cultural Heritage, Rome, Italy, 6–10 May 2012; pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Leń, P.; Mika, M. Determination of the Urgency of Undertaking Land Consolidation Works in the Villages of the Sławno Municipality. J. Ecol. Eng. 2016, 17, 163–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guanghui, J.; Xinpan, W.; Wenju, Y.; Ruijuan, Z. A new system will lead to an optimal path of land consolidation spatial management in China. Land Use Policy 2015, 42, 27–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janus, J.; Taszakowski, J. The Idea of Ranking in Setting Priorities for Land Consolidation Works. Geomat. Landmanag. Landsc. 2015, 1, 31–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hiironen, J.; Riekkinen, K. Agricultural impacts and profitability of land consolidations. Land Use Policy 2016, 55, 309–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Terres, J.M.; Scacchiafichi, L.N.; Wania, A.; Ambar, M.; Anguiano, E.; Buckwell, A.; Coppola, A.; Gocht, A.; Källström, H.N.; Pointereau, P.; et al. Farmland abandonment in Europe: Identification of drivers and indicators, and development of a composite indicator of risk. Land Use Policy 2015, 49, 20–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farahani, R.Z.; SteadieSeifi, M.; Asgari, N. Multiple criteria facility location problems: A survey. Appl. Math. Model. 2010, 34, 1689–1709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sklenicka, P. Applying evaluation criteria for the land consolidation effect to three contrasting study areas in the Czech Republic. Land Use Policy 2006, 23, 502–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jansen, L.J.M.; Karataş, M.; Küsek, G.; Lemmen, C.; Wouters, R. The computerised land re-allotment process in Turkey and the Netherlands in multi-purpose land consolidation projects. In Proceedings of the FIG Congress 2010 Facing the Challenges—Building the Capacity, Sydney, Australia, 11–16 April 2010; pp. 1–21. [Google Scholar]
- Zou, X.C.; Li, D.L. A multidisciplinary GIS-based approach for the potential evaluation of land consolidation projects: A model and its application. In Proceedings of the 7th WSEAS International Conference on Applied Computer & Applied Computational Science, Hangzhou, China, 6–8 April 2008; pp. 551–556. [Google Scholar]
- Xie, Y.; Runck, B.; Shekhar, S.; Kne, L.; Mulla, D.; Jordan, N.; Wiringa, P. Collaborative Geodesign and Spatial Optimization for Fragmentation-Free Land Allocation. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2017, 6, 226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Demetriou, D. The assessment of land valuation in land consolidation schemes: The need for a new land valuation framework. Land Use Policy 2016, 54, 487–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lisec, A.; Primožič, T.; Ferlan, M.; Šumrada, R.; Drobne, S. Land owners’ perception of land consolidation and their satisfaction with the results—Slovenian experiences. Land Use Policy 2014, 38, 550–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; Zhang, Z.; Ma, L.; Gu, Q.; Wang, K.; Xu, Z. Assessment on the Impact of Arable Land Protection Policies in a Rapidly Developing Region. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2016, 5, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asiama, K.; Bennett, R.; Zevenbergen, J. Participatory Land Administration on Customary Lands: A Practical VGI Experiment in Nanton, Ghana. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2017, 6, 186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tomić, H.; Roić, M.; Mastelić Ivić, S.; Mičević, B.; Jurakić, G. Use of Multi-Criteria Analysis for the Ranking of Land Consolidation Areas. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Land Consolidation and Land Readjustment for Sustainable Development, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands, 9–11 November 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Marinković, G.; Ninkov, T.; Trifković, M.; Nestorović, Ž.; Pejičić, G. On the land consolidation projects and cadastral municipalities ranking. Tech. Gaz. 2016, 23, 1147–1153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Yang, L.; Zhu, A.; Shao, J.; Chi, T. A Knowledge-Informed and Pareto-Based Artificial Bee Colony Optimization Algorithm for Multi-Objective Land-Use Allocation. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2018, 7, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pašakarnis, G.; Malienė, V. Land readjustment for sustainable rural development. In Proceedings of the 5th International Vilnius Conference on EURO Mini Conference “Knowledge-Based Technologies and OR Methodologies for Strategic Decisions of Sustainable Development”, Vilnius, Lithuania, 30 September–3 October 2009; pp. 169–174. [Google Scholar]
- Miranda, D.; Crecente, R.; Alvarez, M.F. Land consolidation in inland rural Galicia, NW Spain, since 1950: An example of the formulation and use of questions, criteria and indicators for evaluation of rural development policies. Land Use Policy 2006, 23, 511–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maleki, J.; Hakimpour, F.; Masoumi, Z. A Parcel-Level Model for Ranking and Allocating Urban Land-Uses. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2017, 6, 273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gónzalez, X.P.; Marey, M.F.; Álvarez, C.J. Evaluation of productive rural land patterns with joint regard to the size, shape and dispersion of plots. Agric. Syst. 2007, 92, 52–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Demetriou, D.; See, L.; Stillwell, J. A Spatial Multi-Criteria Model for the Evaluation of Land Redistribution Plans. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2012, 1, 272–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zou, X.; Luo, M.; Su, W.; Li, D.; Jiang, Y.; Ju, Z. Spatial decision support system for the potential evaluation of land consolidation projects. WSEAS Trans. Comput. 2008, 7, 887–898. [Google Scholar]
- Joerin, F.; Thérialult, M.; Musy, A. Using GIS and outranking multicriteia analysis for land-use suitability assesment. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2001, 15, 153–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Memarbashi, E.; Azadi, H.; Barati, A.A.; Passel, S.V.; Witlox, F. Land-Use Suitability in Northeast Iran: Application of AHP-GIS Hybrid Model. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2017, 6, 396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janssen, R.; Rietveld, P. Multlcriteria evaluation of land-reallotment plans: A case study. Environ. Plan. A 1985, 17, 1653–1668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bournaris, T.; Moulogianni, C.; Manos, B. A multicriteria model for the assessment of rural development plans in Greece. Land Use Policy 2014, 38, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, W.; Ningsheng, H.; Yaoqiu, K.; Jinhao, Z.; Yuan, Z.; Zhen, Z.; Yueming, H. Optimized selection of suitable sites for farmland consolidation projects using multi-objective genetic algorithms. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2014, 7, 19–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cai, F.; Pu, L.; Zhu, M. Assessment framework and decision-support system for consolidating urban-rural construction land in coastal China. Sustainability 2014, 6, 7689–7709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Niekerk, A.; du Plessis, D.; Boonzaaier, I.; Spocter, M.; Ferreira, S.; Loots, L.; Donaldson, R. Development of a multi-criteria spatial planning support system for growth potential modelling in the Western Cape, South Africa. Land Use Policy 2016, 50, 179–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cay, T.; Uyan, M. Evaluation of reallocation criteria in land consolidation studies using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Land Use Policy 2013, 30, 541–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Comino, E.; Bottero, M.; Pomarico, S.; Rosso, M. The combined use of Spatial Multicriteria Evaluation and stakeholders analysis for supporting the ecological planning of a river basin. Land Use Policy 2016, 58, 183–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuburić, M.; Tomić, H.; Mastelić Ivić, S. Use of multicriteria valuation of spatial units in a system of mass real estate valuation. Kartogr. Geoinformacije 2012, 11, 58–74. [Google Scholar]
- Cetl, V.; Ivić, S.M.; Tomić, H. Improvement of national spatial data infrastructure as a public project of permanent character. Kartogr. Geoinformacije 2009, 8, 68–83. [Google Scholar]
- Odak, I.; Tomić, H.; Mastelić, S.; Zagreb, I. Vrednovanje fragmentacije poljoprivrednog zemljišta. Geod. List 2017, 21, 215–232. [Google Scholar]
- Roić, M.; Vranić, S.; Kliment, T.; Stančić, B.; Tomić, H. Development of Multipurpose Land Administration Warehouse. In Proceedings of the FIG Working Week 2017: “Surveying the World of Tomorrow—From Digitalisation to Augmented Reality”, Helsinki, Finland, 29 May–2 June 2017. [Google Scholar]
No. | Indicator Name | Description | Data Source | Scoring |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Agricultural land share | Share of agricultural land in total area of cadastral municipality | ARKOD (LPIS) | More agricultural land in total is better |
2 | Agricultural parcel size | Average size of agricultural parcel area | ARKOD (LPIS) | Smaller average sizes are better scored (more suitable) |
3 | Agricultural parcel shape index | Average index of parcel shape fragmentation-measure of parcel shape irregularity | ARKOD (LPIS) | More irregular shapes are better scored (more suitable) |
4 | Agricultural holdings fragmentation index | Average index of agricultural holdings fragmentation | ARKOD (LPIS) | More fragmented holdings are better scored (more suitable) |
5 | Share of state owned agricultural land | Share of state owned agricultural land parcels area in total cadastral municipality area | Information system for the disposal of state agricultural land (Agricultural land agency) | More state owned agricultural land in total is better (DM preference) |
6 | Regional development index (RDI) | Composite indicator calculated as a weighted average of more fundamental socio-economic indicators | Ministry of Regional Development and EU Funds | Lower RDI is more suitable for LC (DM preference-EU CAP) |
7 | Number of agricultural holdings | Number of agricultural holdings (OPG) in Cadastral municipality | ARKOD (LPIS) | More OPG holdings is better (DM preference) |
Indicator No. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Weight |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 1.000 | 2.000 | 2.000 | 2.000 | 2.000 | 2.000 | 2.000 | 0.12 |
2 | 0.500 | 1.000 | 3.000 | 3.000 | 3.000 | 3.000 | 3.000 | 0.11 |
3 | 0.500 | 0.333 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.15 |
4 | 0.500 | 0.333 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 5.000 | 5.000 | 5.000 | 0.11 |
5 | 0.500 | 0.333 | 1.000 | 0.200 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.17 |
6 | 0.500 | 0.333 | 1.000 | 0.200 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 2.000 | 0.17 |
7 | 0.500 | 0.333 | 1.000 | 0.200 | 1.000 | 0.500 | 1.000 | 0.18 |
CM ID | 302775 | 317616 | 335266 |
---|---|---|---|
CM Name | Belica | Bijela Stijena | Črnomerec |
Map | |||
a1 | 0.799 | 0.031 | 0.0000 |
a2 | 0.181 | 0.173 | 0.0000 |
a3 | 0.902 | 0.264 | 0.0000 |
a4 | 1.000 | 0.024 | 0.0000 |
a5 | 0.068 | 0.080 | 0.0005 |
a6 | 0.750 | 1.000 | 0.0000 |
a7 | 0.527 | 0.010 | 0.0000 |
φ+ | 1244.500 | 300.628 | 0.0200 |
φ− | 105.200 | 306.551 | −864.7950 |
φ | 1140.300 | −5.923 | −864.7750 |
PROM. II rank | #1 | #1686 | #3370 |
si+ | 1.112 | 2.060 | 2.4492 |
si− | 1.992 | 1.333 | 1.0000 |
si | 0.642 | 0.392 | 0.2899 |
TOPSIS rank | #3 | #2225 | #3370 |
Rank | CM_Id | CM_Name | Indicator 1 | Indicator 2 | Indicator 3 | Indicator 4 | Indicator 5 | Indicator 6 | Indicator 7 | LCSI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 302775 | Belica | 0.799 | 0.181 | 0.902 | 1.000 | 0.068 | 0.750 | 0.527 | 0.604 |
2 | 308927 | Krndija | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.155 | 0.027 | 1.000 | 0.750 | 0.023 | 0.565 |
3 | 334103 | Grabovo | 0.982 | 1.000 | 0.202 | 0.031 | 0.960 | 0.750 | 0.009 | 0.562 |
4 | 302996 | Gardinovec | 0.877 | 0.160 | 0.979 | 0.400 | 0.160 | 0.750 | 0.600 | 0.561 |
5 | 316849 | Sesvete Ludbreške | 0.919 | 0.156 | 0.693 | 0.508 | 0.205 | 0.750 | 0.673 | 0.557 |
... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
3370 | 335266 | Črnomerec | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0005 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0001 |
PROMETHEE I | PROMETHEE II | TOPSIS | WSM-EW | WSM-AHP | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
PROMETHEE I | 0.0 | 146.9 ± 109% | 159.8 ± 105% | 156.8 ± 101% | 146.9 ± 109% |
PROMETHEE II | 0.0 | 266.5 ± 98% | 66.5 ± 102% | 0.6 ± 157% | |
TOPSIS | 0.0 | 251.63 ± 96% | 266.5 ± 98% | ||
WSM-EW | 0.0 | 66.3 ± 102% | |||
WSM-AHP | 0.0 |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Tomić, H.; Mastelić Ivić, S.; Roić, M. Land Consolidation Suitability Ranking of Cadastral Municipalities: Information-Based Decision-Making Using Multi-Criteria Analyses of Official Registers’ Data. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2018, 7, 87. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi7030087
Tomić H, Mastelić Ivić S, Roić M. Land Consolidation Suitability Ranking of Cadastral Municipalities: Information-Based Decision-Making Using Multi-Criteria Analyses of Official Registers’ Data. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information. 2018; 7(3):87. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi7030087
Chicago/Turabian StyleTomić, Hrvoje, Siniša Mastelić Ivić, and Miodrag Roić. 2018. "Land Consolidation Suitability Ranking of Cadastral Municipalities: Information-Based Decision-Making Using Multi-Criteria Analyses of Official Registers’ Data" ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information 7, no. 3: 87. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi7030087
APA StyleTomić, H., Mastelić Ivić, S., & Roić, M. (2018). Land Consolidation Suitability Ranking of Cadastral Municipalities: Information-Based Decision-Making Using Multi-Criteria Analyses of Official Registers’ Data. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 7(3), 87. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi7030087