Transitions in European land-management regimes between 1800 and 2010

• Martin Rudbeck Jepsen ^[1] ; Tobias Kuemmerle ^[12] ; Daniel Müller ^[12] ; Karlheinz Erb ^[2] ; Peter H. Verburg ^[3] ; Helmut Haberl ^[13] ; Jens Peter Vesterager ^[1] ; Maja Andrič ^[14] ; Marc Antrop ^[4] ; Gunnar Austrheim ^[5] ; Ismo Björn ^[6] ; Alberte Bondeau ^[15] ; Matthias Bürgi ^[16] ; Jessica Bryson ^[17] ; Gilles Caspar ^[7] ; Louis F. Cassar ^[8] ; Elisabeth Conrad ^[8] ; Pavel Chromý ^[9] ; Vidmantas Daugirdas ^[18] ; Veerle Van Eetvelde ^[4] ; Ramon Elena-Rosselló ^[10] ; Urs Gimmi ^[16] ; Zita Izakovicova ^[11] ; Vit Jančák ; Ulf Jansson ; Jacek Kozak ; Éva Konkoly-Gyuró ; Fridolin Krausmann
  1. [1] University of Copenhagen

     University of Copenhagen

     Dinamarca

     
  2. [2] University of Klagenfurt

     University of Klagenfurt

     Klagenfurt, Austria

     
  3. [3] VU University Amsterdam

     VU University Amsterdam

     Países Bajos

     
  4. [4] Ghent University

     Ghent University

     Arrondissement Gent, Bélgica

     
  5. [5] Norwegian University of Science and Technology

     Norwegian University of Science and Technology

     Noruega

     
  6. [6] University of Eastern Finland

     University of Eastern Finland

     Kuopio, Finlandia

     
  7. [7] University of Luxembourg

     University of Luxembourg

     Luxemburgo

     
  8. [8] University of Malta

     University of Malta

     Malta

     
  9. [9] Charles University in Prague

     Charles University in Prague

     Chequia

     
  10. [10] Universidad Politécnica de Madrid

      Universidad Politécnica de Madrid

      Madrid, España

      
  11. [11] Institute of Landscape Ecology

      Institute of Landscape Ecology

      Eslovaquia

      
  12. [12] Geography Department, Humboldt-University Berlin, Berlin. Germany
  13. [13] Integrative Research Institute on Transformation of Human- Environment Systems (IRI THESys), Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin. Germany
  14. [14] Institute of Archaeology, Scientific Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Ljubljana. Slovenia
  15. [15] Institut Méditerranéen de Biodiversité et d’Ecologie Marine et Continentale (IMBE), Aix Marseille Université, CNRS, IRD, Avignon Université, Aix-en-Provence. France
  16. [16] Landscape Ecology Group, Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL, Birmensdorf. Switzerland
  17. [17] Institute of Geography & The Lived Environment, School of Geosciences, University of Edinburgh. UK
  18. [18] Lithuanian Social Research Centre, Institute of Sociology, Department of Human Geography, Vilnius. Lithuania

  Mostrar afiliaciones +
• Localización: Land use policy: The International Journal Covering All Aspects of Land Use, ISSN 0264-8377, ISSN-e 1873-5754, Nº. 49, 2015, págs. 53-64
• Idioma: inglés
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Dialnet Métricas: 6 Citas
• Resumen

  • Land use is a cornerstone of human civilization, but also intrinsically linked to many global sustainability challenges—from climate change to food security to the ongoing biodiversity crisis. Understanding the underlying technological, institutional and economic drivers of land-use change, and how they play out in different environmental, socio-economic and cultural contexts, is therefore important for identifying effective policies to successfully address these challenges. In this regard, much can be learned from studying long-term land-use change. We examined the evolution of European land management over the past 200 years with the aim of identifying (1) key episodes of changes in land management, and (2) their underlying technological, institutional and economic drivers. To do so, we generated narratives elaborating on the drivers of land use-change at the country level for 28 countries in Europe. We qualitatively grouped drivers into land-management regimes, and compared changes in management regimes across Europe. Our results allowed discerning seven land-management regimes, and highlighted marked heterogeneity regarding the types of management regimes occurring in a particular country, the timing and prevalence of regimes, and the conditions that result in observed bifurcations. However, we also found strong similarities across countries in the timing of certain land-management regime shifts, often in relation to institutional reforms (e.g., changes in EU agrarian policies or the emergence and collapse of the Soviet land management paradigm) or to technological innovations (e.g., drainage pipes, tillage and harvesting machinery, motorization, and synthetic fertilizers). Land reforms frequently triggered changes in land management, and the location and timing of reforms had substantial impacts on land-use outcomes. Finally, forest protection policies and voluntary cooperatives were important drivers of land-management changes. Overall, our results demonstrate that land-system changes should not be conceived as unidirectional developments following predefined trajectories, but rather as path-dependent processes that may be affected by various drivers, including sudden events.