Comparative characteristics of the land use structure for different types of territorial communities

Abstract

Purpose. The assess and compare the structure of land use of urban, township and rural territorial communities, to develop an optimization model to land use in case of decentralization Methods. Assessment, comparative-geographical, geoinformation, statistical, mathematical, geoecological analysis and optimization modeling. During the study, special methods were used to determine the anthropogenic pressure, coefficients of ecological stability and anthropogenic transformation of different types territorial communities. Results. According to the results of comparative assessment of the land use structure of urban, township and rural territorial communities, it was found that all three types of communities are characterized by a high degree of plowing (˃60%) and low forest share (5-10%). The share of natural lands within the studied territorial communities is 23-30%. The calculated coefficients of anthropogenic transformation, ecological stability, anthropogenic load, showed that Vyshnivets township and Borsukivska rural territorial communities belong to the category of ecologically unstable territories, Lanovets urban territorial community - to medium ecologically stable territories. In all three types of territorial communities, landscapes are moderately transformed. Urban, township and rural territorial communities experience a sufficiently high (above average) anthropogenic pressure. The obtained results of calculations create objective preconditions for optimizing the structure of land use of the studied territorial communities. Conclusions. To correct and improve the situation, to bring the territories of the studied territorial communities of different types to ecological stability, it is necessary to implement a number of optimization measures. The developed optimization model of land use of Lanovets city, Vyshnivets township and Borsukivka rural territorial communities envisages reduction of arable lands by 20-26%, increase of forest cover by 13-18% and bringing the share of natural lands to the optimal 50%. The implementation of such an approach requires a change in the purpose of individual land plots and the organization of their landscape-adapted use.