Evaluation of land-use planning in greenbelts based on intrinsic characteristics and stakeholder values: Fid-Bau Portal

Evaluation of land-use planning in greenbelts based on intrinsic characteristics and stakeholder values

Fitzsimons, John / Pearson, Craig J. / Lawson, Christopher / Hill, Michael J.

Highlights ► Spatial multi-criteria modelling and focus groups were combined to develop land-use scenarios for part of the Toronto Greenbelt. ► The method identifies land that has embedded attributes or value, pinpoints areas of conflict, and provides a real-time tools to help resolve, or at least clarify, conflicting community interests. ► However, multi-criteria modelling with focus groups requires local contextual knowledge. ► It is unlikely to be scalable across large areas other than to assist planning professionals and identify inconsistencies in land-use classification.

Abstract Legislation of greenbelts adjacent to cities is a common method to contain sprawl and protect land for multiple purposes e.g., agriculture, environment and recreation. However, greenbelt planning lacks an effective approach which can combine multiple intrinsic land characteristics with diverse stakeholder values to quantitatively identify a desired long term mix of land uses and the criteria upon which changes in land use can be judged. The research aimed to create a quantitative, community-engaged basis for the evolution of multiple land-uses. It evaluates a process to simultaneously develop multiple land-use designations e.g., for agriculture and environmental preservation, based on combining spatial multi-criteria modelling using MCAS-S software and stakeholder judgment. Trialling the process on a 129,000ha portion of the Toronto Greenbelt demonstrated that it effectively identifies land that has embedded attributes or value and provides a real-time tool for assessing land-use scenarios. Maps of these attributes and focus-group scenarios did not coincide with the existing boundary of the Toronto Greenbelt. The MCAS-S composites that simultaneously address the multiple purposes of greenbelts (agriculture, environment, etc.) were likely to be helpful for policy-makers and researchers to identify land that was highly valued for several purposes and therefore likely to be contested, but they were less helpful than simple composites addressing one purpose as a basis of explanation and guiding community discussion. The method is unlikely to be scalable across large heterogeneous areas, other than to assist professionals and identify inconsistencies in land-use classification, because local knowledge is desirable for consensus on land-use scenarios.