Content uploaded by Christiaan Lemmen
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Christiaan Lemmen on Jun 03, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Christiaan Lemmen
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Christiaan Lemmen
Content may be subject to copyright.
TS02E - Land Consolidation, 6049
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN, The Netherlands
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
FIG Working Week 2012
Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage
Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2012
1/16
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Freek ROSMAN,
The Netherlands
Key words: land consolidation, re-allocation plan, allocation algorithms, information
management
SUMMARY
In the past decennia several information systems have been implemented in the Netherlands
(and also in other countries) for informational and computational support in land
consolidation projects. The paper describes and reviews the systems and underlying
approaches and algorithms in relation to the evolving policy goals and procedures in land
consolidation projects.
TS02E - Land Consolidation, 6049
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN, The Netherlands
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
FIG Working Week 2012
Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage
Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2012
2/16
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN,
The Netherlands
1. INTRODUCTION
The interest of this paper lies in the procedure, or instrument, to go from the actual situation
on the ground to an intended situation as designed in a land-use plan, or spatial plan. This
particular procedure, or instrument, is called land consolidation
1
and it has close relationships
with the four core functions of land management: land tenure, land value, land use and land
development (Sonnenberg, 1996; Williamson et al., 2009). Land rights will be changed
between owners and/or users, this land has a value, a use or multiple uses, and may contain
improvements. Within land consolidation the exchange, readjustment or reallocation of the
rights of ownership and the use of the land is the basic instrument (Sonnenberg, 2002). Rights
of ownership and use of a parcel are not necessarily held by the same right holder. Whether
such lease-relationships are considered in the land consolidation should be carefully
deliberated (Sonnenberg, 2002; Van Dijk, 2004). In any case a strong involvement of right
holders (owners, tenants and/or representatives) is a condition to achieve results based on
goals.
In section 2 an overview of goals of land consolidation is given from a Dutch perspective, but
in alignment to developments in land consolidation in Europe: land policies, multipurpose
land consolidation and the process of land consolidation are briefly introduced. After the
presented macro overview in section 2, attention is given to the information management at
micro level in section 3. Information management is always related to the goals of land
consolidation and to supporting algorithms in re-allocation. Many of this type of algorithms
have been published already some time ago. In general the algorithms have a heuristic or
optimisation basis. The paper ends with discussion on the role of the surveyor as information
manager in land consolidation. One issue is that land consolidation and land management
could be even more in the centre of attention of the Commission 7 today.
2. MULTI-PURPOSE LAND CONSOLIDATION
2.1 Land policy
In Western European countries land consolidation is used as an instrument for the
development of especially rural areas, in Central and Eastern European countries (CEEC) land
consolidation could have been used as an instrument for land reform. In rural areas the
relation to land has profound implications for agricultural productivity, environmental
sustainability, and the economic and social status of the rural households (Jansen et al., 2012).
1
In French “remembrement” and in German “Flurbereinigung”.
TS02E - Land Consolidation, 6049
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN, The Netherlands
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
FIG Working Week 2012
Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage
Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2012
3/16
Fragmentation of ownership, use or internal fragmentation (i.e.
the number of parcels exploited
by each user)
can have negative consequences for the rural economy, but at the same time it
is
not disadvantageous by definition (Van Dijk, 2004)
. The strength of a good agricultural
structure is diversity as a result of different responses to economic signals, managerial
capacities, personal choices, availability of capital and family relationships (Heywood, 2000).
In the case of the CEEC, land reforms distributional effects involved two separate issues: (1)
the legal (historical justice) demands of pre-collectivisation land owners whose land was
confiscated by the socialist governments or who were forced to participate in the
collectivisation; and (2) social equity concerns (Swinnen, 1999). However, at the time of the
implementation of the land reforms neither the size, form nor the location of land parcels were
issues. Ideally land consolidation should have taken place simultaneously with the land
reforms as it would have reduced the changes that have and will continue to take place in
order to accomplish a land parcelling structure adapted to current farming techniques
(Bullard, 2000). Land policies that are enabling diversity and change are likely to be more
successful in fostering rural prosperity than policies predicated on some specific economic
model (Heywood, 2000).
2.2 Development from single to multi-purpose land consolidation
The improvement of the agrarian structure, i.e. land-use structure, and thereby raising the
agricultural production level, decreasing production costs and increasing farming efficiency
was the main purpose, or mono-functionality, of land consolidation (Van Lier, 2000).
Legislation concerning inheritance led, and leads, in most countries to a worse parcel structure
over time, unprofitable parcel sizes and shapes, and unfavourable distribution of parcels
within a farm holding. After the Second World War the application of land consolidation in
public programmes resulted in economically-sized agricultural holdings in North-western
Europe. Enlargement of scale, specialisation and intensification were the most visible
developments in farming, demanding a rearrangement of spatial entities. The main driving
force was the improvement of the annual income position of the farmers (Van Lier, 2000).
The land consolidation process was generally implemented via Acts of Parliament and guided
by governmental support.
In the 1960s agricultural over-production and environmental demands led to a shift from the
main focus on improvement of the agrarian structure and livelihood of farmers to measures to
improve the landscape and natural conditions (nature preservation or rehabilitation, etc). The
direct effects of farming methods and indirect effects of land consolidation programmes had a
negative effect on the quality of natural resources, and sometimes human resources, in the
rural areas by leading to erosion and land degradation, pollution of water, soil and air,
biodiversity losses and losses in landscape and recreational values (Van Lier, 2000). It
became clear that farming practices needed to be changed and consequently land
consolidation programmes. Thus land consolidation had to find a balance between
development and conservation issues, consider the attractiveness of rural areas for future
generations (sustainability paradigm) and consequently it became multi-purpose oriented
enhancing the whole lay-out of rural areas (Van Lier, 2000). In the late 20
th
century land
consolidation projects in the Netherlands became tailor-made to specific areas with very
TS02E - Land Consolidation, 6049
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN, The Netherlands
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
FIG Working Week 2012
Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage
Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2012
4/16
specific objectives (for example reconstruction of greenhouse areas). FAO (2003) speaks
about ‘comprehensive land consolidation’. This includes ‘the re-allocation of parcels together
with a broad range of other measures to promote rural development. Examples of such
activities include village renewal, support to community based agro-processing, construction
of rural roads, construction and rehabilitation of irrigation and drainage systems, erosion
control measures, environmental protection and improvements including the designation of
nature reserves, and the creation of social infrastructure including sports grounds and other
public facilities’.
Apart from comprehensive land consolidation there are other approaches as simplified
consolidation, voluntary group consolidation, and individual consolidation initiatives (FAO,
2003).
Land consolidation changed over time as policies changed. It moved from the agricultural
sector into the environmental and recreational sectors. In addition to the economic role of
agriculture to supply food and fibres, it is now involved in the comprehensive renewal of the
rural economy and landscape (Fischler, 2000). The restructuring of land and farm holdings is
a dynamic process, which is taking place constantly and for all kinds of socio-economic
reasons (Heywood, 2000). For land consolidation participation is absolutely necessary and its
implementation proved successful only where stakeholders and beneficiaries are involved in
the decision-making processes and existing, informal approaches and schemes are recognised
and integrated into local democratic governance institutions (Riddell and Rembold, 2002). In
countries with land consolidation legislation this is formalised since many decades; see for
example the contributions in Van der Molen and Lemmen, (2004a). Kovács and Osskó (2004)
state very clear in relation to an evaluation of land consolidation pilots: after 50 years of
collectivisation and bad memory of “socialist land consolidation” the new land owners did not
show too much interest in the project. Land consolidation can be implemented on voluntary
basis. There are similar experiences in other CEEC countries, it is therefore recommended
starting land consolidation only on (complete) voluntary basis (FAO, 2003).
Thomas (2006a, 2006b), in his comparative study identifies as objectives in land
consolidation in Western Europe:
- improvement of production and working conditions in agriculture and forestry,
- improvement of the general use of land in rural areas,
- maintenance of existing and creating new employment in rural area’s,
- improvement of the livelihoods of the rural population, and:
- conservation and protection of the natural and cultural legacy.
2.3 The process of land consolidation
The land consolidation process starts with agreement on the area involved and comprises in
general: (1) preparation and voting of the land-use plan in a specific area, (2) inventory of the
(ownership, use) rights on the land and the valuation of the land, (3) drafting and confirmation
of the reallocation plan and other functions to be realised, (4) implementation of the
reallocation plan and creation of other functions, (5) financial arrangements taking into
account the benefits, and (6) registration of new titles. See also Box 3 in FAO (2003). In the
TS02E - Land Consolidation, 6049
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN, The Netherlands
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
FIG Working Week 2012
Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage
Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2012
5/16
process there are several moments in which persons can file objection to what is being
proposed to them. Such objections need to be solved before the next step in the process can be
made. For example: it has to be clear who is participating and for how much from the
inventory before a re-allocation plan can be designed. This is only clear after all complaints
have been processed – but it is of course always possible to be practical here. See also Jansen
et al (2010).
The redistribution of the land according to the ratio of each one’s contribution, i.e.
proportional distribution, to the total is an important characteristic of the reallocation process.
This reallocation can be based on the area or on the value of the land. The proportional
distribution incorporates the possibility to reduce each portion that has to be redistributed with
a percentage in order to acquire land that can be used for uses having a public interest (for
example water management systems, new roads or bicycle paths, new recreation facilities).
Such a reduction is called systematic reduction. But it is also an option to use governmental
land in the area where land consolidation is executed for the realisation of provisions in the
public interest. Reallocation of such governmental land can take place to where these
provisions need to be established. In advance the government can buy land in the area and this
will reduce the amount of land to be acquired by systematic reduction. However,
governmental land can also be used to enlarge farms. Differences in land in terms of
topography and quality limit the possibility of reallocation. Therefore often a quantified
discrepancy between the reallocated portion and the reallocation claim is permitted.
3. INFORMATION MANAGEMENT IN LAND CONSOLIDATION
3.1 Spatial planning context
Sonnenberg (1996) emphasises on the role of the surveyor in land consolidation. Most of the
activities of the surveyor can be characterised as being a registrative or recording nature, like
surveying, mapping and land registration. The cadastral surveyor normally registers or records
what others have changed. In land consolidation the surveyor plays an active role in changing
the ownership and use of the land which can lead to physical changes. Sonnenberg highlights
that planning is normally related to spatial, or physical, planning and is thus indicating the
design of an intended physical situation, but it does not include the way (the instrument or
procedure) how to get from the initial (existing) situation to the intended situation. The
surveyors activity is in fact the implementation of the planning objectives by procedures that
effectively result is a changed or renewed land ownership and land use which of course must
be in accordance with these objectives. See section 2 above for examples of objectives in
(multi-purpose) land consolidation.
Thomas (2006a and 2006b) also looks at land consolidation as the combination of land
readjustment plus special (agrarian) physical planning. In regard to the term ‘re-adjustment’ it
should be noted here that this is called re-allotment or re-allocation in other publications.
Sometimes ‘land re-adjustment’ has a focus to urban areas. Through special physical planning
the administrative basis for all intended agricultural measures is done and, if needed, legally
TS02E - Land Consolidation, 6049
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN, The Netherlands
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
FIG Working Week 2012
Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage
Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2012
6/16
regulated and enforced. The land readjustment component is the core issue of each land
consolidation approach; land readjustment allows a realisation of the physical planning; in
land consolidation the adjustment of the land tenure occurs in the land readjustment segment.
Thomas (2006a, 2006b) states that thorough transformations and measures are not possible
without consideration of the land ownership and land tenure structures and rights. For this
reason most of the European land consolidation laws have combined the spatial planning and
re-adjustment tools.
The following should be considered:
- the policy being conducted concerning the land consolidation process (general goals as a
result from spatial planning and spatial restrictions from landscape, nature, etc). In a
comprehensive land consolidation areas planned for specific purposes (nature
preservation, extensions of infrastructure or elements in landscape, irrigation, etc) can be
identified, the value of those areas can to be calculated to know the systematic reduction
for general or specific purposes. Value is meant as value for exchange purposes.
Systematic reduction can be an important tool to get land available for non-agricultural
purposes. This can be combined with an active land purchase policy by a land bank.
Available land in the bank can be re-allocated to achieve goals in a win win combination
with farmers. Apart from comprehensive land consolidations there are more and more
projects that are completely voluntary based. This means the supportive tools in the
decision-making process need to be flexible too: working together with the participants in
an interactive way (touch screen or beamer) should be possible,
- continuous link with the ownership data in the cadastral and land registry system. The
land market is ongoing while the design of the intended situation for implementation in
the field is being prepared – this concerns not only real rights as property but also the
actual land use; the linking should be integrated with valuation data (for example based on
a soil map) in case a valuation is applied as a basis for exchange. It is complex to manage
the impact of buying/selling transactions in the existing situation of the design; especially
because the design may be used on actual land use and not only on the properties.
Strengthening the de facto land use requires a good protection of tenants (tenancy or lease
contract should be for longer time). It should always be remembered that the actual land
user produces the crops; this is not only done by the land owners. Concentration of plots
and distance reduction to farms should (could) be applied to land use for this reason; this
results in improvement of the agricultural structure,
- preferences, of entitled parties (the ‘demand for land’ as claims for re-allotment that have
to be brought in balance with the ‘supply’ of land. It should be noted that preferences can
be expressed by representatives. Supply of land is available in allocation compartments.
The way in which preferences are discussed with entitled parties is directly related to the
implementation of spatial planning: infrastructure, nature and landscapes and water
management need space at specific locations. This has to be agreed with entitled parties,
the land users included,
- the contributed value per party, the total contributed value per entitled party has to be re-
allocated within certain margins (see also Jansen et al, 2010). Those margins are not the
systematic reduction but allowed margins in proportional distribution (voluntarily or as
allowed by law). Value may be calculated from soil quality, there may be impact of
TS02E - Land Consolidation, 6049
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN, The Netherlands
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
FIG Working Week 2012
Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage
Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2012
7/16
market value. In areas with only small differences in fertility the proportional distribution
can be area-based, and:
- public inspections to check the parcels per right holder (owner, tenant), the contributed
total value per right holder, the proposed allocation and the financial arrangements have to
be prepared. This includes also a list of parties with voting rights; for example in case of
comprehensive land consolidation. One issue here is that the land market is ongoing. For
this purpose the data for public inspections have to be ‘fixed’ at a certain date and then
these data can be prepared for public inspection. At the same time the actual people-land
relationship can change (for this reason the link with the cadastre and land registry is
needed).
3.2 Information management
The requirements for support of the decision making process (design process) in land
consolidation may include (Lemmen, 1990, Tenkanen, 1990, Hoisl, 1994, FAO 2003, Jansen
et al., 2010):
- the representation of multiple themes, for example: existing ownership and land use
(including mortgages, easements, informal rights that are not yet registered) and
transactions there on, the allocation compartments, the traffic network, tree stands, nature
elements, the valuation (based on uniform fertility), the structuring of values for allocation
purposes. Further there is a need for a large scale topographic map with height contours or
at least areal photos of the existing situation. Each theme contains spatial and
administrative data. Management complaints requires separate themes,
- the representation of preferences of entitled parties. This concerns the total contributed
value per party and (alternative) allocations of (parts of) this contributed value in
(alternative) allocation compartments. In other words the Persons-GroupPersons-Rights-
newParcels relations – that can be very complex and that are dynamic during the design
because of the ongoing land market (which in itself can be in support of the goals of land
consolidation,
- the design of the new situation. If re-allocation algorithms are applied (see section 3.3
below) interaction between the land consolidation database and the model applied is
needed; this means generating input data and inclusion of the output (results) of the
algorithm. The design needs to be transformed to a new cadastral situation which includes
all original real rights and mortgages, and:
- survey data, this concerns both acquisition and management of boundaries to be
implemented (set out) in the field.
The knowledge built up from the development of the Land Administration Domain Model
(LADM, see: Lemmen et al., 2010a, 2010b, Lemmen, 2012, Van Oosterom et al., 2011 and
ISO, 2011) seems to be very useful for information management purposes in land
consolidation. One could develop a Land Consolidation Domain Model based on LADM.
A first analysis learns that in LADM the class LA_SpatialUnitGroup can already be used to
group a set of spatial units (parcels) together forming an administrative zone such as a section,
a canton, a municipality, a department, a province, or a country. But also all spatial units
within a planning area; this can be a complete land consolidation project area. In this way it is
TS02E - Land Consolidation, 6049
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN, The Netherlands
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
FIG Working Week 2012
Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage
Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2012
8/16
known that a spatial unit is within a project. This is relevant in information supply to potential
buyers because of possible legal impact and can have as impact that a parcel that is bought
can be re-allocated. A LCDM has in principle the same structure and classes as the LADM;
there are some extra attributes and codes. And some of the class names and multiplicities are
different. This makes interaction between LCDM and LADM very easy: allocation
compartments can be identified as spatial unit groups (hierarchic identifiers can be used). In
this way the land consolidation project area is also known in a cadastral/land registry system.
All changes in the people-land relationship can be easily detected using available LADM
functionality as time stamps, source documents describing transactions or
LA_RequiredRelationship identifying the link between old and new situation within a
transaction.
Automatically all entitled parties (LA_Parties), Right-Restrictions-Responsibilities (RRRs,
including ownership, easements and mortgages etc), properties (LA_BAUnits or basic
property units including all spatial units/parcels per party) and the spatial units
(LA_SpatialUnit) are known if a spatial unit group is created based on the boundaries of the
land consolidation project.. Those BAUnits include the spatial units of involved parties
outside the project area, but new BA_Units may be formed in a separate set up of the LADM
especially organised for the land consolidation project area.
In LCDM we have the following first draft requirements (prefixes below are LA to
understand the link with LADM, in a LCDM prefixes could be LC, but this is only an idea in
this moment):
- extra attributes for value are needed in LA_SpatialUnit (a spatial unit can be a parcel);
because in the LADM value is related to an external database; in LCDM this should be
available as an attribute (because the value has a meaning within the land consolidation),
- the multiplicity between RRR and LA_BAUnit should be 1…* in both directions. This
sounds technical, but it means in principle that one LA_RRR can have several
LA_BAUnits, this allows for representation of preferences into farm models. The different
BAUnits are alternatives in allocation per farm,
- the code list in with an overview of types of BAUnit should be extended with farm
models. Farm models are alternative structures per farm, each model per farm has
allocations for associated spatial units in alternative allocation-compartments. Values in
the code list will be: ExistingFarm, FarmModel1, FarmModel2, FarmModel3, …,
ImplementedModel. This is also possible if the alternatives are not farm-based but spatial
unit based. The associated spatial units in farm models are point based or text based, the
spatial unit id contains a link with the allocation compartment,
- holders of land-use rights can be included. Related right types can be included in the code
list LA_RightType, eventually in LA_RestrictionType or Responsibility Type, as far as
not yet available,
- total contributed values can be derived from values per spatial unit in the existing
situation,
- LA_Level should include levels for soil value, the associated spatial units are areas with
equal values, and:
TS02E - Land Consolidation, 6049
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN, The Netherlands
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
FIG Working Week 2012
Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage
Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2012
9/16
- LA_Level should include one level where the new situation can be designed based on
FarmModels which should be implemented. Levels for management of complaints are
needed.
3.3 Allocation algorithms
Many allocation algorithms in support of the design of a re-allocation plan have been
published:
- Finland (Tenkanen, 1987),
- France (Ludot, 1971),
- Germany (Hupfeld, 1971) and (Schrader, 1971),
- The Netherlands (Kik, 1971, 1975, 1979), (Lemmen and Sonnenberg, 1986), (Van Beek
and Wientjes-Van Rij 1980) and (Van der Schans, 1971),
- Morocco (Essadiki, 2002), and:
- Turkey (Ayranci, 2007, Kusek, G., (presented at a GIS conference in Tirana, Albania) and
Cay et al., 2006).
Van der Schans (1975) and Hoisl and Nadolski (1994) give overviews.
A distinction in approaches can be made: heuristic approaches or optimisation approaches.
Heuristic approaches are based on experiences from manual approaches and optimisation
approaches are mostly based on linear programming where a linear objective function is
optimised (e.g. distances minimised or concentration of lots maximised). Methods used from
operations research are the transportation algorithm, the stepping stone algorithm, mixed
integer programming, simplex method. It is very interesting to see that further developments
take place in Turkey today. Large scale land consolidation is under process in Turkey, see
Jansen et al, (2010).
Some examples of algorithms developed in the Netherlands are worked out below.
An example of an optimisation approach is provided by Kik (1971, 1974, 1979). The average
distance between the farmhouse and allocated plots is minimised in such a way that the
number of plots is minimal. The applied stepping stone algorithm is not so easy to understand
for allocation experts. But the approach proved to be useful in exploration of the possible
effects of land consolidation. This method is useful for the calculation of costs and benefits of
land consolidation (during preparation of projects). Data input is based on actual land use.
An early example of a heuristic approach is the system for Automation of the Re-allotment
Plan for Land Consolidation, abbreviated in Dutch to ATOR (Van der Schans, 1971; Van der
Schans, 1975; De Vos, 1981). This concerns the administrative plan: who can be allocated for
how much and where? The input data for the calculations are based on the total contributed
value, this is the claim for allocation. This total contributed value is (can be) subdivided in
parts. This division can be based on a model (e.g., 60% near the farmhouse, 40% at distance).
Or the division can be based directly on preferences from right holders. Those preferences
represent the vision of the farmer on the future structure of the farm. Input data are: the value
TS02E - Land Consolidation, 6049
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN, The Netherlands
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
FIG Working Week 2012
Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage
Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2012
10/16
of desired (or modelled) parts, alternative locations of desired parts and weights that can be
related to each location (weights are given on the basis of existing and desired situation).
Those data concern the demand for land. Supply of land is represented by data on allocation
compartments; each compartment has an identifier (needed for the location of desired parcels)
and a value. Demand for land should be in balance with supply of land. Land banks can
facilitate this process. The allocation of parts of the total contributed value is in line with
goals to be achieved, for example to get lands available for non-agricultural purposes or to get
optimal agricultural structure.
An initial solution can be calculated in ATOR based on the locations of the desired parts with
highest preference. This will result in an allocation compartment with a higher demand then
supply and the other way around. The differences between supply and demand are called
residuals. Transfers are applied now between different alternative allocations of desired parts.
All possible transfers are calculated. The transfer with the highest reduction in residuals will
be selected (this can be more complex in case the weights are included in the selection of
transfers). The process will stop if no transfer is available which can reduce residuals. The
spatial design of boundaries can be based on the outcome of the application of this algorithm
(Lemmen, 1986; Lemmen, 1990; Jansen et al., Rosman, 2012).
The ATOR system has proved to be useful in re-allocation in many land consolidation
projects. Input is based on actual land use. Allocation can be based on farm models. This is
supportive in recognition of bottlenecks in re-allocation. This is important information in case
new farms can be constructed. A detailed application based on preferences of entitled parties
is possible too, this is the basis for the spatial design. The method is easily understandable by
re-allocation experts because it is based on the manual approach (as applied decades ago
now). The ATOR system has been further developed into the system TRANSFER, as will be
described below.
Another approach is available in the Allocation and Adjustment Model (Lemmen 1986), in
Dutch abbreviated as AVL. Solutions are calculated based on methods from operations
research (mixed integer programming). For each farm alternative farm models are defined
based on farm modelling or on preferences of parties. Each farm model is related to the total
contributed value for that farm. Each farm model concerns a complete farm; a farm model is
in fact the smallest unit (not the parts as in ATOR). Locations within one farm model are
flexible now within given margins, for example 50-70% near the farmhouse, 30-50% at
distance. This is not possible in ATOR. For each farm only one farm model can be selected in
AVL under the condition that the allocation compartments have residuals within a given
margin (each allocation compartment should close within ± 5% of its value). It may happen
that the solution space is empty. The goal is to select as many farm models with a high
priority (given the preferences which can be derived from the preferences of the farmers) as
possible.
The AVL system is very flexible in the representation of preferences of entitled parties. The
applied algorithm (mixed integer programming, with a comprehensive mathematical model) is
difficult to understand for re-allocation experts. The system has been used in practice in a few
TS02E - Land Consolidation, 6049
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN, The Netherlands
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
FIG Working Week 2012
Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage
Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2012
11/16
projects but is no longer operational.
The approach in TRANSFER combines the benefits of both ATOR and AVL. In practice
AVL can be complex in use, because the solution space is empty in case there are insufficient,
or too many, requested values in an allocation compartment. In that case no balance between
demand of land and supply of land can be calculated because the total value of allocated lands
in one allocation compartment has to be equal to the value of that compartment within
margins In TRANSFER it is possible to use the heuristic approach from ATOR combined
with flexible parcel-values as in AVL. This makes the approach easy usable in practice. In
step by step discussions with farmers the residuals can be minimised (almost equal to zero).
This is a good basis for re-allocation. The TRANSFER system has been applied very
successfully now since many years in Land Consolidation in the Netherlands, also in case of
complete voluntary land consolidations - that are more or less mainstream nowadays.
TRANSFER is operational now in the Netherlands’ Kadaster as a basic re-allocation
algorithm. The system is under further development where the calculation of the position of
boundaries is concerned (Rosman, 2012).
Land available in the land bank can be allocated in areas with with new types of land use. The
farmers in those areas can be re-allocated. This can be combined with systematic reductions
and availble lands from this. Entitled parties will get compensations of course.
Boundaries of allocation compartments are chosen in relation to existing topographic features
or feautures to be implemented.
Important is a good interaction between the database with spatial and administrative data in
land consolidation and the algorithms (solution spaces). This implies also a link with a Land
Information System with ownership and land-use data.
4. DISCUSSION
Multiple goals can be achieved with land consolidation. This has impact on the spatial
development, the economy and the livelihood of people in the area.
Land consolidation can serve many goals on macro level if sufficient financial resources are
available. Via systematic reduction, land bank and other measures land can be ‘converted’
from agricultural use to other types of use, as infrastructure, landscape, nature, leisure, etc. Or
the other way around. The structure of farms can be improved by concentrating land and by
distance reduction. This can be combined with other goals if allocation compartments are
chosen properly. Participatory approaches are very well possible: solutions for allocation can
be immediately calculated during discussions with right holders.
A discussion on information management aspects remains relevant within FIG: land
consolidation is expected to be applied more and more given the population growth and the
TS02E - Land Consolidation, 6049
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN, The Netherlands
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
FIG Working Week 2012
Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage
Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2012
12/16
expectation that the total amount of agricultural lands cannot grow substantially. This means
efficient use of the limited resources of land.
It may be useful to develop a domain model for land consolidation based on the LADM. Such
a model includes the data for representation of the existing situation (de facto land use), the
valuation data, the input alternatives for re-allocation algorithms (based on models or
preferences) and the final result of land consolidation for implementation in the field and
inclusion of the new situation in the Cadastre and Land Registry. A combination of a Land
Consolidation Domain Model, based on the LADM
2
(ISO, 2011), allocation algorithms and a
strong link with cadastre, land registry and a tenant registration is a good basis for information
management in land consolidation. Surveyors play a key role here. Research is needed to
develop a Land Consolidation Model and also for possible use of ISO 19144-1:2009 on
classifications for a proper representation of valuation data (ISO, 2009). This means a
combination of a domain model, allocation algorithms and a good representation of valuation
as a basis for information management in support to multi purpose land consolidation.
REFERENCES
Ayranci, Y., 2007. Re-allocation Aspects in Land Consolidation: A new Model and its
Application. Journal of Agronomy, 2007/6, p 270 - 277.
Bullard, R.K., 2000. Rural development of land in the changing environment and culture of
Central Europe. Paper prepared for the UDMS Conference Land Markets and Land
Consolidation in Central Europe, Delft.
Cay, T., Ayten, T. and Iscan, F., (2006). An Investigation of Reallocation Model Based on
Interview in Land Consolidation. October 8-13, 2006. XXIII FIG Congress Munich,
Germany
De Vos, W.H., 1981. Allocation in Land Consolidation in the Netherlands with the aid of an
automated system. Surevying and mapping, 182/4, p 339 – 345.
Essadiki, M, (2002). New Method for Land Reallocation by Using a Geographic Information
System, FIG XXII International Congress, April 19-26 2002, Washington, D.C. USA.
FAO, 2003. The design of land consolidation pilot projects in Central and Eastern Europe.
FAO Land tenure studies no. 6. ISBN 92-5-105001-5. FAO, Rome, Italy, 2003.
Fischler, F., 2000. Ländliche Entwicklung im 21. Jahrhundert (Rural development in the 21st
century). Z. f. Kulturtechnik und Landentwicklung 41:112-120.
Heywood, M., 2000. Rural land management and agricultural restructuring in transitional
economies – The case for developing a land tenure framework. Z. f. Kulturtechnik und
Landentwicklung 41: 127-132.
Hupfeld, W., 1971. Ein Beispiel zur mathematischen Planungsrechnung. Zeitschrift für
Vermessungswesen, 1971/2, p. 61 – 65.
2
Expected to be available as International Standard around July 2012
TS02E - Land Consolidation, 6049
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN, The Netherlands
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
FIG Working Week 2012
Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage
Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2012
13/16
Hoisl, R., and Nadolski, 1994. Computerunterstützte Bearbeitung der Bodenordnung in
verfahren der Ländlichen Entwicklung, Lehrstul für Bodenordnung und Landentwicklung,
Technische Universität Munchen, Heft 16, 1994
ISO, 2009. Geographic information -- Classification systems -- Part 1: Classification system
structure
ISO, 2011. ISO 19152, Draft International Standard (DIS), Geographic information - Land
administration domain model (LADM). Lysaker, Norway: ISO. 118pp.
Jansen, L. J.M., Karatas, M., Kusek, G., Lemmen, C.H.J., & Wouters, R. (2010). The
computerised land re-allotment process in Turkey and the Netherlands in multi-purpose
land consolidation projects. FIG XXIV Congress 2010, Sydney, Australia, 11-16
April 2010
Jansen, L.J.M., Badea, A., Milenov, P., Moise, C., 2012. The use of the Land-Cover
Classification System in Eastern European countries: experiences, lessons learnt and the
way forward. In: Braun, M., Manakos, I. (Eds.). Land-use and land-cover mapping in
Europe: current practices, trends and future. Forthcoming.
Kik, R., 1971. Een methode voor het vervaardigen van een voorlopig toedelingsplan voor een
ruilverkaveling (A method to construct a preliminary re-allotment plan). Nederlands
Geodetisch Tijdschrift, 1971, p. 207-215.
Kik, R., 1974. Inschakeling van een computer bijd etoedlings procedure voor
ruilverkavelingen. Instituut voor Cultuurtechniek en Waterhuishouding, Wageningen, The
Netherlands, Nota 835, october 1974.
Kik, R., 1979. Toedelingsonderzoek in de voorbereidingsfase van een ruilverkaveling.
Cultuurtechnisch Tijdschrift, 1979/4.
Kovács, E., and Osskó, A., 2004. Land Consolidation in Hungary, dream or reality, FIG
Commission 7 Symposium on Modern Land Consolidation, 10-11 September 2004,
Volvic, France. 21pp.
Lemmen, C.H.J. & Sonnenberg, J.K.B., 1986. A model for allocation and adjustment of lots
in land consolidation: new developments in the Netherlands. FIG XVIII Congress,
Toronto, Canada : 1-11 June 1986 : congress theme : Inner and outer space - limitless
horizons for the surveyor : papers : Commission 7 : Cadastre and rural land management /
International Federation of Surveyors. - Toronto : FIG, 1986 ; p. 326-341 : fig., tab. [B
Gen 10/7]
Lemmen, C.H.J., 1990. Integrated data processing in land consolidation in the Netherlands.
FIG XVIX International Congress, 10 -19 April 1990, Helsinki, Finland.
Lemmen, C.H.J., van Oosterom, P.J.M., Eisenhut, C., and Uitermark, H.T., (2010a). The
modelling of rights, restrictions and responsibilities (RRR) in the Land Administration
Domain Model (LADM). XXIV FIG International Congress 2010. 11-16 April 2010,
Sydney, Australia.
Lemmen, C.H.J., van Oosterom, P.J.M., Thompson, R.J., Hespanha, J. and Uitermark, H.T.,
(2010b). The modelling of spatial units (parcels) in the Land Administration Domain
Model (LADM). XXIV FIG International Congress 2010. 11-16 April 2010, Sydney,
Australia.
Lemmen, C.H.J. (2012). A Domain Standard for land Administration. PhD thesis. Delft
TS02E - Land Consolidation, 6049
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN, The Netherlands
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
FIG Working Week 2012
Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage
Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2012
14/16
University of Technology. Forthcoming.
Ludot, J.P., Modèle pour l’élaboration dún projet optimal de remembrement. Géomètre,
1971/12, p. 32 – 45.
Riddell, J., Rembold, F., 2002. Farmland rationalisation and land consolidation: strategies for
improved land management in Eastern and Central Europe. International Symposium
“Land Fragmentation and Land Consolidation in CEEC: A gate towards sustainable rural
development in the new millennium”, 25-28 February 2002, Munich, Germany. 10pp.
Rosman, F., 2012, Automated parcel boundary design systems in land consolidation, FIG
Working Week, 6 – 10 May 2012, Rome, Italy
Schrader, B., 1971. Ablaufplanung und mathematische Optimierung bei der Flurbereinigung.
Vermessungstechnische Rundschau, Bd. 33 (1971)
Sonnenberg, J.K.B., 1996. The European dimension and land management – policy issues
(land readjustment and land consolidation as tools for development. FIG Commission 7
Annual meeting ‘Land Management in the Process of Transition’, 18 June 1996, Budapest,
Hungary. 14pp.
Sonnenberg, J.K.B., 2002. Fundamentals of land consolidation as an instrument to abolish
fragmentation of agricultural holdings. FIG XXII International Congress, 19-26 April
2002, Washington DC, USA. 12pp.
Swinnen, J.F.M., 1999. The political economy of land reform choices in Central and Eastern
Europe. Economic of Transition, Vol. 7 (3): 637-664.
Tenkanen, A., 1987. Computer Aided Allocation of Plots in Land Consolidation. Surveying
Sciences in Finland no. 2/1987, p 10-25.
Tenkanen, A., 1990. Computer aided planning in Finnish land consolidation. FIG XVIX
International Congress, 10 -19 April 1990, Helsinki, Finland.
Thomas, J. (2006a). Attempt on Systematization of Land Consolidation Approaches in
Europe. Zeitschrift für Vermessungswesen, 2006/3, p 156 – 161.
Thomas, J. (2006b). What's on Regarding Land Consolidation in Europe? XXIII International
FIG Congress : Shaping the change, October 8-13, 2006, Munich, Germany.
Van Beek, P. and Wientjes-Van Rij, M.H., 1980. Eine Anwendung der Benderischen
Partitionsmethode für die Flurbereinigung. Technical note 79-04. Department of
Mathematics, Agricultural University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Van der Molen, P. (editor) and Lemmen, C.H.J. (editor) (2004a) FIG 2004 : Modern land
consolidation : proceedings of a symposium by FIG commission 7, September 10 - 11,
2004, Volvic, France. Frederiksberg, International Federation of Surveyors (FIG), 2004.
ISBN: 87-90907-38-8.
Van der Molen, P., Lemmen, C.H.J., van Dijk, T. and Uimonen, M. (2004b) Introducing the
subject of modern land consolidation and symposium report. In: Modern land
consolidation : proceedings of a symposium by FIG commission 7, September 10-11,
2004, Volvic, France. Frederiksberg, FIG, 2004. pp. 4-18.
Van Oosterom, P.J.M., Lemmen, C.H.J. Uitermark, H.T., Boekelo, G., Verkuijl,
G., (2011) Land administration standardization with focus on surveying and spatial
representations + powerpoint. In: Survey summit : the ACSM annual conference, 7-12 july
TS02E - Land Consolidation, 6049
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN, The Netherlands
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
FIG Working Week 2012
Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage
Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2012
15/16
2011, San Diego, USA : 2011 proceedings, 28 p.
Van der Schans, R., 1971. Toedelen door ordenen. Nederlands Geodetisch Tijdschrift, 1971.
Van der Schans, 1975. Aanvullingen en commentaar op toedelen doro ordenen. Publikaties
over planologische en technisch-administratieve geodesie 6. Laboratorium voor Geodesie,
Technische Hogeschool Delft, 1975
Van Dijk, T., 2004. Land consolidation as Central Europe’s panacea reassessed. FIG
Commission 7 Symposium on Modern Land Consolidation, 10-11 September 2004,
Volvic, France. 21pp.
Van Lier, H.N., 2000. Land-use planning and land consolidation in the future in Europe. Z. f.
Kulturtechnik und Landentwicklung 41: 138-143.
Williamson, I., Enemark, S., Wallace, J., Rajabifjard, A., 2009. Land administration for
sustainable development. ESRI Press Academic, Redlands, California, USA. 512pp.
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES
Christiaan Lemmen holds a degree in geodesy from Delft University of Technology, The
Netherlands. He is an assistant professor at the Faculty of Geo-Information Science and Earth
Observation (ITC), University of Twente, and sr geodetic advisor at Kadaster International.
He is chair of the Working Group 7.1 ‘Pro Poor Land Management’ of FIG Commission 7,
‘Cadastre and Land Management’, and contributing editor of GIM International. He is
director of the FIG International Bureau of Land Records and Cadastre OICRF.
Dr. Louisa Jansen holds a PhD from Wageningen University, The Netherlands. In 2008 she
joined the Cadastre, Land Registry and Mapping Agency where she is a senior advisor and
project manager at the Department of Kadaster International. She also works as freelance
senior advisor on land-related issues using remote sensing and GIS for the European
Commission, European Union and Italian government financed international projects, FAO,
the Nordic Council of Ministers and World Bank. She is author of the ISO 19144-1:2009 on
Classification Systems.
Frederik Rosman holds a degree in geodesy from Delft University of Technology, The
Netherlands. He is a consultant and software developer at Delinea in the Netherlands since
1998. He is the lead developer of the software applications Transfer and R-app
(www.r-app.eu). From 1990 to 1999 he worked at the Dutch Kadaster and as an assistant
professor at Delft University of Technology at the chair of Land consolidation. He published
several articles and papers on land consolidation policy and technology.
TS02E - Land Consolidation, 6049
Christiaan LEMMEN, Louisa J.M. JANSEN and Frederik ROSMAN, The Netherlands
Informational and computational approaches to Land Consolidation
FIG Working Week 2012
Knowing to manage the territory, protect the environment, evaluate the cultural heritage
Rome, Italy, 6-10 May 2012
16/16
CONTACTS
Christiaan Lemmen
Netherlands Cadastre, Land Registry and Mapping Agency
P.O. Box 9046
7300 GH Apeldoorn
+31 88 183 3110
E-mail: Chrit.Lemmen@kadaster.nl
www.kadaster.nl
and:
University of Twente. Faculty of Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation (ITC)
P.O. Box 6
7500 AA Enschede
+31 53 4874523
E-mail: lemmen@itc.nl
www.itc.nl
THE NETHERLANDS
Dr. Louisa J.M Jansen
Netherlands’ Cadastre, Land Registry and Mapping Agency
P.O. Box 9046
7300 GH Apeldoorn
+31 88 183 3110
E-mail: louisa.jansen@kadaster.nl
www.kadaster.nl
THE NETHERLANDS
Frederik Rosman
Delinea
tel. +31 88 5522880
Witmolen 123
2645 GH Delfgauw
E-mail: rosman@delinea.nl
THE NETHERLANDS
