IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jenpmg/v69y2026i8p2393-2425.html

Identification of land-use conflicts: a novel framework combining scientific expertise and local stakeholders’ views

Author

Listed:
  • Aibo Sun
  • Yunlong Gong
  • Shaoliang Zhang
  • Huping Hou
  • Anna M. Hersperger

Abstract

Divergent perspectives on future land-use changes, known as land-use conflicts (LUCs), significantly affect the local environment, human well-being, and sustainable development goals. However, the accurate identification and resolution of LUCs remain challenging. This study proposed a framework for LUC identification by integrating the land characteristics obtained from expert analyses with local stakeholder preferences. It outlined four types of LUCs and ten conflict combinations. The results indicated that 44.64% of the land plots exhibited at least one type of conflict. Among these, 896, 324, 115, 15, and 12 plots encountered suitability, preference-current use, preference-evaluation, and preference-preference conflicts, respectively. These findings validated the feasibility of the proposed framework and methods. Furthermore, different types of conflict combinations require different coordination rules, which indirectly reflect the complexity of conflict resolution. This framework aids the classification and identification of LUCs; offers targeted conflict resolution strategies; and contributes to informed and inclusive land-use and spatial planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Aibo Sun & Yunlong Gong & Shaoliang Zhang & Huping Hou & Anna M. Hersperger, 2026. "Identification of land-use conflicts: a novel framework combining scientific expertise and local stakeholders’ views," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 69(8), pages 2393-2425, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:69:y:2026:i:8:p:2393-2425
    DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2025.2502514
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09640568.2025.2502514
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09640568.2025.2502514?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:69:y:2026:i:8:p:2393-2425. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.