The Impact of Differences in Land Fragmentation Parameters on the Planning, Implementation, and Evaluation of Land Consolidation Projects. Case Studies of Turkey and Poland
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2020
Authors
Ertunç, Ela
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
ELSEVIER SCI LTD
Open Access Color
Green Open Access
Yes
OpenAIRE Downloads
4
OpenAIRE Views
7
Publicly Funded
No
Abstract
Land fragmentation is one of the key factors of agricultural production profitability. One way to objectively assess the phenomenon is to represent it as several specific land fragmentation indices. Nevertheless, similar land fragmentation index values can be interpreted differently in different farming conditions in various countries. How these indices are calculated depends directly on the format of input data, usually based on cadastral data. The present research on eight villages in Turkey and Poland was an attempt to determine the impact of the identified differences, including different ways cadastral data are organised, on the method of calculating land fragmentation indices and results of the calculations. The authors have demonstrated the fundamental importance of the method of including holding shares in parcel ownership titles in the calculations. Spatial distribution of farm buildings turned out to have a significant impact as well. The differences identified for the villages in both the investigated countries influence the primary objectives of land consolidation projects and should be decisive for key aspects when evaluating such projects.
Description
ORCID
Keywords
Land fragmentation, Land consolidation, Cadastre, Agriculture, Land ownership
Turkish CoHE Thesis Center URL
Fields of Science
0211 other engineering and technologies, 02 engineering and technology, 01 natural sciences, 0105 earth and related environmental sciences
Citation
WoS Q
Q1
Scopus Q
Q1

OpenCitations Citation Count
18
Source
COMPUTERS AND ELECTRONICS IN AGRICULTURE
Volume
179
Issue
Start Page
105813
End Page
PlumX Metrics
Citations
CrossRef : 20
Scopus : 22
Captures
Mendeley Readers : 39
SCOPUS™ Citations
21
checked on Feb 03, 2026
Web of Science™ Citations
20
checked on Feb 03, 2026
Google Scholar™


