@article{koch_dorning_van berkel_beck_sanchez_shashidharan_smart_zhang_smith_meentemeyer_et al._2019, title={Modeling landowner interactions and development patterns at the urban fringe}, volume={182}, ISSN={["1872-6062"]}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.09.023}, DOI={10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.09.023}, abstractNote={Population growth and unrestricted development policies are driving low-density urbanization and fragmentation of peri-urban landscapes across North America. While private individuals own most undeveloped land, little is known about how their decision-making processes shape landscape-scale patterns of urbanization over time. We introduce a hybrid agent-based modeling (ABM) – cellular automata (CA) modeling approach, developed for analyzing dynamic feedbacks between landowners’ decisions to sell their land for development, and resulting patterns of landscape fragmentation. Our modeling approach builds on existing conceptual frameworks in land systems modeling by integrating an ABM into an established grid-based land-change model – FUTURES. The decision-making process within the ABM involves landowner agents whose decision to sell their land to developers is a function of heterogeneous preferences and peer-influences (i.e., spatial neighborhood relationships). Simulating landowners’ decision to sell allows an operational link between the ABM and the CA module. To test our hybrid ABM-CA approach, we used empirical data for a rapidly growing region in North Carolina for parameterization. We conducted a sensitivity analysis focusing on the two most relevant parameters—spatial actor distribution and peer-influence intensity—and evaluated the dynamic behavior of the model simulations. The simulation results indicate different peer-influence intensities lead to variable landscape fragmentation patterns, suggesting patterns of spatial interaction among landowners indirectly affect landscape-scale patterns of urbanization and the fragmentation of undeveloped forest and farmland.}, journal={LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING}, author={Koch, Jennifer and Dorning, Monica A. and Van Berkel, Derek B. and Beck, Scott M. and Sanchez, Georgina M. and Shashidharan, Ashwin and Smart, Lindsey S. and Zhang, Qiang and Smith, Jordan W. and Meentemeyer, Ross K. and et al.}, year={2019}, month={Feb}, pages={101–113} }
 @article{dorning_koch_shoemaker_meentemeyer_2015, title={Simulating urbanization scenarios reveals tradeoffs between conservation planning strategies}, volume={136}, ISSN={["1872-6062"]}, DOI={10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.11.011}, abstractNote={Land that is of great value for conservation can also be highly suitable for human use, resulting in competition between urban development and the protection of natural resources. To assess the effectiveness of proposed regional land conservation strategies in the context of rapid urbanization, we measured the impacts of simulated development patterns on two distinct conservation goals: protecting priority natural resources and limiting landscape fragmentation. Using a stochastic, patch-based land change model (FUTURES) we projected urbanization in the North Carolina Piedmont according to status quo trends and several conservation-planning strategies, including constraints on the spatial distribution of development, encouraging infill, and increasing development density. This approach allows simulation of population-driven land consumption without excluding the possibility of development, even in areas of high conservation value. We found that if current trends continue, new development will consume 11% of priority resource lands, 21% of forested land, and 14% of farmlands regionally by 2032. We also found that no single conservation strategy was optimal for achieving both conservation goals. For example, strategies that excluded development from priority areas caused increased fragmentation of forests and farmlands, while infill strategies increased loss of priority resources proximal to urban areas. Exploration of these land change scenarios not only confirmed that a failure to act is likely to result in irreconcilable losses to a conservation network, but that all conservation plans are not equivalent in effect, highlighting the importance of analyzing tradeoffs between alternative conservation planning approaches.}, journal={LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING}, author={Dorning, Monica A. and Koch, Jennifer and Shoemaker, Douglas A. and Meentemeyer, Ross K.}, year={2015}, month={Apr}, pages={28–39} }
 @article{spies_white_kline_fischer_ager_bailey_bolte_koch_platt_olsen_et al._2014, title={Examining fire-prone forest landscapes as coupled human and natural systems}, volume={19}, number={3}, journal={Ecology and Society}, author={Spies, T. A. and White, E. M. and Kline, J. D. and Fischer, A. P. and Ager, A. and Bailey, J. and Bolte, J. and Koch, J. and Platt, E. and Olsen, C. S. and et al.}, year={2014} }