Land Resource Management Policy in Selected European Countries
Armands Auzins,
Peter Brokking,
Evelin Jürgenson,
Peteris Lakovskis,
Jenny Paulsson,
Andis Romanovs,
Jolanta Valčiukienė,
Janis Viesturs,
Kurt Weninger
Affiliations
Armands Auzins
Faculty of Engineering Economics and Management, Riga Technical University, 1048 Riga, Latvia
Peter Brokking
School of Architecture and the Built Environment, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 10044 Stockholm, Sweden
Evelin Jürgenson
Institute of Forestry and Rural Engineering, Chair of Forest and Land Management and Wood Processing Technologies, Estonian University of Life Sciences, 51014 Tartu, Estonia
Peteris Lakovskis
Institute of Agricultural Resources and Economics, 1039 Riga, Latvia
Jenny Paulsson
School of Architecture and the Built Environment, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 10044 Stockholm, Sweden
Andis Romanovs
Faculty of Engineering Economics and Management, Riga Technical University, 1048 Riga, Latvia
Jolanta Valčiukienė
Faculty of Engineering, Vytautas Magnus University Agriculture Academy, 53361 Kaunas, Lithuania
Janis Viesturs
Faculty of Engineering Economics and Management, Riga Technical University, 1048 Riga, Latvia
Kurt Weninger
Faculty of Architecture and Planning, TU Wien, 1040 Vienna, Austria
Land use, land resource demands, and landscape management practices are linked to many of the environmental, climatic, and socio-economic challenges faced by contemporary society. The study focuses on a comparative analysis of the experience of the land resource management (LRM); thus, the study aims respond to how the land-related resources are managed, what policy instruments support it, and what improvements would promote the sustainable management of these resources. Exploring LRM policies in selected countries, the experience of three Baltic countries and two other countries under the jurisdiction of continental Europe was analyzed, and their comparison was made based on qualitative research methodology. Based on the study’s results, the most important comparative characteristics of LRM policies are discussed. The findings of the study in selected countries provide recommendations for improving the institutional framework related to LRM. However, the outcome encourages a transfer of the research experience to other jurisdictions.
