004 
res- 
ings 
ing, 
sion 
ting 
lina, 
jne- 
mil/ 
LE. 
ribu- 
della 
'rna- 
lotes 
erlag 
Ap- 
esis, 
uter, 
rob- 
ation 
04, 15:51 
AN APPROACH TO IDENTIFY AREA-SPECIFIC LAND USE ANALYSIS OBJECTIVES 
Uday Bhaskar Nidumolu'?*, CAIM de Bie', Herman van Keulen*, Andrew K Skidmore 
| Department of Natural Resources, International Institute for Geoinformation Science and Earth Observation (ITC), 
7500 AA, Enschede, The Netherlands 
* Plant Research International/Group Plant Production Systems, Wageningen University and Research Centre, 
PO Box 16, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands; ? National Remote Sensing Agency, India, 
* Corresponding Author: uday@itc.nl 
\ ISPRS XXth Congress, Istanbul, Turkey, July 14-22, 2004 
ABSTRACT: 
Maps of land use classes and soil series were analysed to identify areas having specific priorities with respect to agricultural land use 
analysis under the project Integrated Mission for Sustainable Development (IMSD) in India. IMSD used remote sensing data supported 
by field investigations to generate land use and soil maps. At present, using GIS techniques, relationships between soils and associated 
land cover/use are analysed and patterns in these relationships are identified, relationships observed on the basis of a priori knowledge of 
the area and the available statistics are compared and these relationships in the field and through interviews with farmers are correlated. 
Based on the analysis, three land use analysis objectives have been formulated: Crop Management Improvement, Crop Selection and 
Conservation. The results can be used to focus the efforts of planning and extension services in the area. The method was tested using a 
participatory rural appraisal in eighteen villages in which the areas for the three land use analysis objectives were identified. The findings 
are that the Crop Management Improvement areas require knowledge about sustainable management practices for a specific crop to 
optimise yield and water use. Areas identified for Crop Selection are mainly occupied by smallholder subsistence farmers with 
insufficient water for irrigation, and lack of contact with the extension service. In these areas, identifying suitable crops to minimise risk 
and allow subsistence for the resource-poor farmers may be the priority. In areas identified for Conservation the question should be 
addressed whether to grow a crop at all, or use the land for alternative activities. The approach identified specific agricultural land use 
analysis objectives, which match farmers' needs and objectives. 
KEY WORDS: Land use; soils; land use analysis objective; Conservation; Crop Management Improvement; Crop Selection; GIS; remote 
sensing. 
1. INTRODUCTION 
Biophysical conditions and in particular soil conditions are 
considered important determinants of land use and receive 
ample attention, both in land use analysis and in analysis of 
actual land use patterns (Ravnborg and Rubiano, 2001). Land 
use refers to a series of operations on land, carried out by 
humans, with the purpose to obtain products and/or benefits 
through using land resources (de Bie, 2000). Human resource 
management strategies, characterized by the arrangements, 
activities and inputs to produce, change or maintain a desired 
land cover (Di Gregorio and Jansen, 1998) for arable farming 
and livestock grazing, significantly influence land use (Nielsen 
and Zobisch, 2001). Land use, defined in this way, is linked 
directly to the actions of people in their environment. The 
general assumption is that land use decisions are primarily 
driven by socio-economic-cultural considerations of land users. 
Through experience, often going back generations, farmers 
have developed land use systems that are well adapted to the 
potentials and constraints of their land (Cools et al., 2003). It is 
also assumed that farmers, if they have lived long enough in an 
area, know the spatial distribution of ‘good soils’ and the 
distribution of all soils of different degrees of suitability for 
production (Messing and Fagerstrom, 2001). Ravnborg and 
Rubino (2001) quoting Talwar (1996) and Talwar and Rhoades 
(1998) state that many studies provide evidence of farmers’ 
detailed knowledge of their soils and of their ability to translate 
this knowledge into agronomic management options. Hence, 
where land use systems are being practiced not in accordance 
with the potentials or the suitability of the land, these practices 
can often be traced back to socio-economic factors as discussed by 
FAO (1976) and Rossiter and van Wambeke (1993). This is also in 
agreement with Daba’s (2003) observation that in addition to 
climate, inherent soil properties, topography, vegetation cover and 
other environmental factors, the socio-economic conditions of 
farmers can play a significant role in preventing or promoting land 
degradation. Understanding the relations between socio-economic 
factors, human use of the land resources and their degradation is 
essential for the development of appropriate and sustainable land- 
use systems (Nielsen and Zobisch, 2001 quoting Hare, 1985; Roe et 
al., 1998). 
The current study is part of an ongoing land use planning 
programme in the study area called the ‘Integrated Mission for 
Sustainable Development (IMSD)'. Databases on land use/cover, 
soils, terrain, geomorphology, groundwater prospects and 
infrastructure are generated at 1:50, 000 scale using remote sensing 
data and conventional surveys. These data are then integrated to 
generate 'action plans' for land and water management (NRSA, 
1995, Nidumolu and Alanga, 2001, Harmsen and Nidumolu, 2002). 
The databases are intended for use by district level planning officials 
in the area of agricultural development and water and soil 
conservation in the wider perspective of district rural development. 
The IMSD study areas have been identified by the respective State 
and District Administrations as relatively less developed areas, 
experiencing resource- related problems such as land degradation, 
topsoil loss and sub-optimal yields. The selection of such areas for 
the study is supported by the views expressed by Ruben et al. 
(2003), who argue that a substantial impact on poverty alleviation 
and sustainable natural resources management might be expected 
from targeting investments in less-favoured areas (LFAs). The 
1203