2 Integrating Land Use Planning into Planning Systems

This chapter shows that in order to achieve sustainable land use planning, it is important to link its content with other planning processes. It becomes clear that planning systems are a product of the development of the society and can therefore be very different from country to country. A differentiation is made between central, decentralised and heterogeneous planning systems. The development tendencies of planning systems are presented. The main tasks of LUP at different planning levels and some interfaces in the vertical and horizontal linkages are described. Land use planning is understood as partially integrating and sector-overlapping planning. It is aimed at the object of reference, which is land use, and is not suitable for solving all local problems. It cannot replace an overall planning related to areas, but it can be part of village, district or provincial planning.

2.1 Planning Systems, Land Use Planning and Individual Objectives

Plans for using land resources are made everywhere. Farmers and livestock owners decide which products they want to have in what areas whether to increase or reduce the size of their herds and whether to fence off pasture land or to keep meadows for growing fodder only. Large companies dealing with wood and energy as well as authorities concerned with road-building or conservation of the nature also decide which areas they wish to use for their purpose. In addition, there are countless other individual plans by various people, groups and organisations at different levels regarding land use in rural areas

Competing interests in the use of land resources lead to social conflicts. Often, the interests of farmers and tenants are at a disadvantage in comparison to the interests of large companies or authorities. Also, public interests such as the protection of land resources, are given too little attention in favour of the short-term interests of individuals in making profit.

State authorities, and in many cases projects of the development co-operation intervene with the aim of overcoming these problems. Such instances of intervention occur according to the instructions from the authority, mostly within a clearly defined framework and restricted to a specific planning level and plan content. As a result, only partial solutions are achieved. However, if different planning tasks (land use planning, traffic planning, regional planning) and planning levels (village, district, regional, national) are integrated into an overall planning system, it is more likely that the sustainability of agreements reached within a restricted framework (e.g. in village land use planning) can be guaranteed.

The following are elements of a planning system:

1. Different types of planning
In principle, a differentiation is made between sectoral and technical planning (e.g. transportation planning or the planning of water resources) and planning which overlaps sectors or is partially integrative. The nature of the planning process differs depending on its specific task.

2. Overall Goals of Planning
These cover the central idea of planning, such as participation, conservation of land resources or balancing of regional disparities. In a democratic system the overall goals of planning correspond to the fundamental principles and values in a society.

3. Definition of responsibilities
Planning assignments are mandated to certain administrative levels (national, regional, district, community) and authorities (sectoral and territorial, Department of Agriculture and community).

4. Regulating the relationship between the various types of planning
The nature of relationships between the various types of planning is stipulated. This results in a vertical linkages being made between the planning levels and a horizontal linkages between the various technical and partially integrative processes.

5. Rules
The set of rules for the participation of those people affected by planning and their representation at higher levels of planning are manifested. Mechanisms for settling conflicts of interests are agreed on.

Nowadays there are planning system approaches in most countries of the world. In an ideal situation, all planning processes in a region or country are harmonised with each other and complement each other mutually. Competencies and responsibilities are clearly defined and the interests of all groups of the population are taken into consideration equally when negotiation takes place on the plans. The reality, however, is different from theory, even it is often far from it.

It is not unusual for activities of a development co-operation project - in which participation mechanisms, conciliation of interests and manifold co-operations within the framework of a land use planning process are promoted - to be in contradiction to the usual, official ways and accepted top-down planning mechanisms. Due to their activities in the field of planning, projects intervene to a certain extent in existing planning systems. Friction and conflicts can therefore not be avoided in most instances. Developing an enhanced planning system should be a gradual transition process. Thus planning practices which are based on co-operation and participation should be carefully introduced and integrated as well be linked to the existing planning systems.

2.2 Planning Systems in the Social and Political Context

Planning systems are an expression of social and political conditions in respect of space and time. They are expressed by means of legal regulations (planning laws), social conventions and rules.

In addition to codified agreements (laws, administrative regulations), there are others which have been agreed verbally in form of traditional rules of conduct. Those are significant at local level.

In relation with the legal norms of a planning system, a special terminology is used which may have different meanings. This also applies to the term "land use planning", which is used in some countries to cover planning for urban regions too. This is in contrast to the concept presented here.

Planning systems differ from country to country. A rough differentiation is made between three types: central, decentralised and heterogeneous planning systems.

Centralised planning systems are characterised by clear and top-down oriented directive structures. In this process, the task of the lower administrative levels is to implement the directives of the central authorities. All decisions are made at the highest level, which at the same time also approves the decisions at all levels. Problems arise as a result of a lack of flexibility in adapting to the local peculiarities.

In decentralised systems certain powers and at least partial budget autonomy are transferred to lower administrative levels, with the aim of creating participatory decision-making structures. In this process, attempts are often made to take regional and local peculiarities into account using appropriate special regulations, and then integrate them into the overall planning system. Such systems have been set up since the mid-1980s, even in countries which until that time had been characterised to a large extent by centralised planning systems (e.g. Bolivia). The federal system of the Federal Republic of Germany was often given as model. The cost and efforts involved in setting up such complex structures exceeds the means of many countries. In addition, problems can arise concerning the efficiency of this planning system.

At higher administrative levels (national and regional) heterogeneous systems are characterised by modern planning mechanisms, following the example of former colonial powers and other industrialised nations. Different regulating mechanisms may work at the lower level. Important city regions are often the exception. Deficits arise in the exchange between the planning levels since central planning concepts are too inflexible for local structures. Local regulating mechanisms do not usually include the provision for processes for which there are no models in the traditional society. Examples can be found in the implementation of large-scale projects in road-building and large-scale migration movements. Systems like this are typical of many African nations.

Various components influence and control land use.

Generally, this includes policies on infrastructure, taxes, credit and import/export as well as environmental and development policies. These political focal points create the framework for medium-term planning visions. But land use is planned at local level. Therefore national directives have to be translated into rules for planning land use at local level.

Countries with a strongly centralised administration tend to regulate land use objectives even at local levels in a "top- down" manner.

In contrast, in decentralised planning models land use regulations at community or village level should be agreed by the land users themselves, linked to each other at regional level and co-ordinated with national development projects. The prerequisite for this is that the stakeholders should have the capacity to co-operate and create suitable co-ordination mechanisms related to land use.

In heterogeneous systems, land use decisions at local levels are made exclusively among the stakeholders, but they do not have any legal protection against the intervention by third parties at a later stage.

Planning systems are not static, but are subject to continuous change. This reflects the processes of social transformation as much as new problems or changed perception of problems. In the following paragraph, an attempt will be made to demonstrate some tendencies which have been observed in many countries, but which do not necessarily apply in every case. It is the intention to make suggestions for an improved understanding of planning systems as well as the role and importance of land use planning within these systems.

Increasingly, additional and new tasks, such as environmental protection and natural resources management, are being integrated into existing planning systems. Usually, they adjust established types of planning or introduce new ones.

Nowadays, land use planning is part of the planning regulations of many countries without necessarily using the term "land use planning". There is also a considerable range of understandings of the term "land use planning" as traditions and development processes differ from country to country.

Related to the planning contents, the tasks can be manifold.
The planning process involves an increase of duties, especially of competencies and responsibilities at lower planning levels, which play a crucial role in implementing the plan. This is mostly linked to a policy of decentralisation which transfers budgetary responsibilities to the communities. Unfortunately, however, in many developing countries the reality is far from this ideal, and planning competencies and structures have been restricted until now to the higher levels only.

In many countries land use planning is applied as an approach which lacks links to other planning units. Thus land use planning is understood as regional or national strategic planning only, or it is restricted to the village level. Local agreements on land use do not receive the necessary backing from the higher levels and, when interests come into play which affect the society as a whole (e.g. large road-building projects), they are not taken into account. Another problem is posed by the lacking co-ordination between the organisations concerned with sectoral and intersectoral aspects. In this respect overlapping competencies and power-motivated interests play an important role and have to be considered.

It is becoming more and more accepted that land use plans can only be carried out in a sustainable way if they are shared and owned by the people. Nevertheless this realisation is rarely translated into purposeful actions. Planning should be shifted from offices and conference rooms to dialogues involving the public. Nowadays "politically correct"- slogans (participation by the people) characterises now the language of planning. However, in many instances there is still a lack of both concepts and experience how this can be put into practice.

In developing countries, innovations in planning are often copied from the social learning process done in industrialised nations without being firmly rooted in the thinking of the population. Development co-operation projects are aimed at raising awareness and creating consciousness for new knowledge and at spreading this knowledge. Swift adaptation in many developing countries is, however, often superficial and rather serves the purpose of guaranteeing that the project continues to be financed.

In addition to these externally induced planning innovations, there are now many examples of an independent development or refinement of planning tools. In this respect, development co-operation plays an important role also by supporting such processes. This applies particularly to land use planning, which in developing countries has provided a considerable impact, for example in the areas of village land use planning and in settling land use conflicts.

As a result of recent discussions about planning tools, many developing countries are now facing the challenge of abandoning rigid and overriding regulations which hamper the free play of forces and which have often resulted in the use of evasion/avoidance tactics. At the same time new and refined planning structures should be established also at lower levels. Nevertheless a long tradition of strictly hierarchical authorities and bureaucracies is a constraint for achieving both objectives.

In many developing countries there is still a considerable discrepancy between the existing planning legislation, which often includes more radical wording than in some industrialised countries, and planning reality. Many plans which have been made with great ambitions, do not get implemented and are "shelved" by the authorities. Deficits in plan implementation are often closely connected to an insufficient technical competence as far as the planning agencies are concerned. This applies particularly to the corresponding organisations at lower level.

In contrast, in many countries there are traditional, non-codified forms of agreements on land use which work well at local level. However, they often fail when social relationships become more complex (e.g. spontaneous migration, pressure of use on areas which had previously been reserved for pastoralists). Nevertheless they provide important connecting links for LUP at local level.

2.3 Land Use Planning at Different Planning Levels
and the Vertical and Horizontal Linkages

Land use planning is a partially integrating and sector overlapping process. The planning objects are the land resources. Therefore, LUP is not suitable for solving all local problems, nor can it replace the overall planning for an area.

The basic technical strategy in LUP is to plan land use according to the suitability and the various needs in the area to be considered. As long as the objectives of land use planning (see Chapter 1) are sufficiently taken into consideration, there is no need to carry out LUP separately.

Links between land use plans in different areas as well as between land use plans and other area-related plans are necessary both horizontally (from village to village, district to district, etc.) and vertically (between village and district, region and nation) (Figure 1).

Vertical and horizontal links between plans are more effective if various contact points between the different planning agencies (authorities, population, etc.) exist. The flow of information should run in two directions. This is especially necessary as far as exchange between the planning levels is concerned. Thinking in hierarchical structures frequently hampers the free exchange of information. Figure 2 illustrates the way in which the flow of information should run between village, district and nation levels. The concept on which this model is based is called the "counterflow principle".

The central questions related to the vertical link are:

• In what way can strategic directives from superior planning at a decentralised level be adapted to local conditions and peculiarities?
• To what extent do decisions made at a lower level require the approval by the next higher instance?
• How can decisions made at village level be protected against third party interests?

Figure 1: Vertical and Horizontal Links in Land Use Planning (idealised figure)

• Mechanisms for settling conflicts between sectoral agencies, of which one is often more influential than the other.
• Binding nature of already existing planning frameworks (e.g. overall planning) to other planning frameworks (e.g. sectoral planning).

Nowadays, land use planning is used at all planning levels. The hierarchy of planning levels depends on existing planning systems, the size of the area, etc. Overview 2 provides information on the tasks of LUP, taking a six-stage model as basis. However, in the subsequent discussion, a simple, three-stage model is used (local, regional and national level).

Figure 2: Land Use Planning, Flow of Information and Relation to
Other Planning at Various Levels Source: FAO 1993, p.6

Local Level

At local level, the most important subject is the preparation of the implementation of the LUP. The plan at this level is very detailed, and it is possible for all participants to take part directly in the decision-making process. Traditional and often non-codified forms of agreement on land use become significant. State intervention is restricted to fields in which these traditional systems fail (e.g. supra-regional conflicts on land use or increasing degradation of land resources). There are many interfaces between LUP at local level and other local or superior planning activities.

National and regional objectives constitute important general conditions for the preparation of the planning process. The availability of local staff and finances is determined by the superior planning level. If the people at local level are sufficiently well organised, they will try to ensure that the necessary financial means are made available to support their land use planning activities effectively.

While collecting and analysing data and information, institutions and organisations which are active in the field of planning are analysed. In addition, existing plans and individual development activities are going to be reviewed. This information is taken into account when plans are drawn up.

In the process of drawing up and negotiating plans, conflicts between local development objectives in land use and other local interests as well as superior planning objectives are identified. Solutions acceptable to all participants are proposed. In this way, agreements can be sought between neighbouring villages concerning an adjoining area of protected woodland, or water conservation areas can be successfully established respecting also the interests of the urban supply of drinking water. Representatives of interest groups affected by local planning decisions are involved in the discussion process. Objectives of existing sectoral planning (agriculture, forestry, nature conservation, tourism) are reflected in the village land use plan. Any nature conservation areas, state forests, country road routes, etc. lying within the village boundaries are indicated on the map.

Land use planning at the regional or district level has a kind of "linking function" between implementation and national strategic planning. One of its major tasks is to provide information for subordinate and superior planning levels, i.e. for the population as the decision-makers using privately the areas or for the state as trustee of public interests. A well-prepared and realistic presentation of the present land use situation in the region including a simple preview of potential future developments is indispensable. It makes the planning processes more transparent, and thereby improves the opportunities of disadvantaged groups. In general, such groups do not have sufficient access to information.

It is impossible to achieve direct participation by all individuals taking part at regional and district level. Interest groups therefore need representation structures and recognised organisations. Special attention should be given to "weaker" groups in order to promote their integration.

With respect to the plan implementation at local level, district planning has the following tasks:

• to provide information on national development objectives and guidelines;
• to determine the need for technical training and consultation of the population, authorities and organisations at local level and to provide appropriate proposals;
• to mediate in conflicts between stakeholders;
• to identify land use objectives of regional interest (e.g. ensuring urban water supply);
• to identify and promote disadvantaged groups (e.g. pastoralists) which are not sufficiently integrated into local planning;
• to derive simple criteria by means of which the needs of regional interests and of disadvantaged groups can be brought as aims into local discussion processes.

"Guidelines for Participatory Village Land Use Management in Tanzania" prepared by the National Land Use Planning Commission as an example of an assignment of land use planning at national level

Plans at regional or district level are not absolutely clear-cut as far as the delimitation of the areas are concerned. They give an orientation without excessively restricting the opportunities for local action. The plans presents what future development concerning land use is socially desirable and how disadvantaged groups in particular can be involved. Boundaries of land units are usually expressed by straight lines or are slightly curved. In reality, those boundaries do not match the inherent complexity of the different ecosystems. At local level, the planning area including boundaries in which the activities will take place have to be clarified in co-operation with a competent regional authority.

If needed, the regional directive can also contain a simple lists of criteria only, for example, statements such as "On slopes of over 10 degrees incline, arable land use is only permitted in agreement with the district authority upon submission of their proposed protective measures" or "Each village land use plan should provide information on who has participated in drawing up the plan".

„Guidelines for Participatory Village Land Use Management in Tanzania" prepared by the National Land Use Planning Commission as an example of an assignment of land use planning at national level.

Land use planning at higher planning levels, focuses mainly on strategic aspects. General laws and regulations on implementation are passed, development objectives are set and budgets are assigned to the project. In this instance too, participation is ensured via the representative structures.

In general, state authorities should be suitable planning agencies for LUP. Given the demands of harmonising and ensuring plans, peoples organisations and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) alone are often too weak to take on the duties of a planning agency. The responsibility for carrying out land use planning should therefore lie in the hands of the state authorities. However, complementary to the planning, which is carried out by the population, these authorities should be given a co-ordinating role to play.

The authorities responsible can be regional and local administrative bodies (community, district, etc.) as long as they have specialised technical know-how and the financial resources. In addition, they should not be used as political instruments for parties to an excessive extent. If it is the case, or if the allocation of LUP to these bodies is not desirable for other reasons, there is the possibility of placing land use planning with sectoral agencies (Bureau of Agriculture, Nature Conservation agency etc.). These receive the mandate on the condition that they take care of the necessary co-ordination with other authorities to a sufficient degree and that they take into consideration aspects, which lie outside their sectoral responsibility.

If there are no regional or national land use planning structures or no clear directives (cf. Chapter 2.2), or if other superior planning is restricted to individual sectors (road building, energy etc) LUP at local level will remain without the necessary recognition or legal back-up. This makes it difficult to solve supra-local problems, and sufficient personnel and financial resources are not provided. There is no transparency in the co-ordination with existing sectoral plans. In addition, representatives of powerful groups are often not prepared either to participate in negotiation processes at local level, or to recognise the results.

Conversely, the regional and national LUP will not have an impact if there is no planning at local level in which the directives of LUP can be integrated. Technical co-operation projects have developed three different concepts for dealing with such situations (Diagram 3).

• A project starts with LUP at local level. Positive experiences in pilot villages are spread to other areas. At the same time the project extends its action area and incorporates its experiences in the rudimentary superior planning structures.
• A project has the mandate to promote LUP at regional and national levels. It convinces its partner of the necessity to plan the implementation at local level, and will support the implementation in selected villages. Experiences are evaluated and form the basis for a new orientation in regional or national land use planning.
• Two or more projects, of which one is placed at national or regional level and the other(s) at local level, supplement each other and collaborate.

Diagr. 3: Promoting the integration of LUP at various planning
levels using technical co-operation projects

Go back the Table of Contents