Land‐Use Dynamics Beyond the American Urban FringeFootnote^*

* Portions of this research were supported by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, through the Center of the American West, University of Colorado, Boulder; the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Science to Achieve Results program (#R827449–01–0); and The Nature Conservancy's David H. Smith postdoctoral fellowship program. I wish to thank the reviewers for helpful suggestions and Mark Easter for assistance with the National Resources Inventory data set.

References

• Alonso, W. 1993. The Interpenetration of Rural and Urban America. In Population Change and the Future of Rural America: A Conference Proceedings, edited by L. L. Swanson and D. L. Brown, 23–28. Report No. ages 9324. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Agriculture and Rural Economy Division.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, J. R., E. E. Hardy, J. T. Roach, and R. E. Witmer. 1976. A Land Use and Land Cover Classification System for Use with Remote Sensor Data. Geological Survey Professional Paper 964. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
   Google Scholar
• Aspinall, R. J. 2000. A Framework for Use of Spatial Information in Analysis and Prediction of Land Use Change. In Spatial Information for Land Use Management, edited by M. J. Hill and R. J. Aspinall, 205–215. Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Bank of America. 1996. Beyond Sprawl: New Patterns of Growth to Fit the New California. [http:www.bankofamerica.comenvironmentindex.cfmMenu_Sel =public&oth=urban1].
   Google Scholar
• Batty, M. B., and Y. Xie. 1994. Urban Analysis in a GIS Environment: Population Density Modelling Using ARC/INFO. In Spatial Analysis and GIS, edited by S. Fotheringham and P. Rogerson, 189–219. London, England, and Bristol, Penn.: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Beatley, T., and K. Manning. 1997. The Ecology of Place: Planning for Environment, Economy, and Community. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Benfield, F. K., M. D. Raimi, and D. D. Chen. 1999. Once There Were Greenfields: How Urban Sprawl Is Undermining America's Environment, Economy, and Social Fabric. New York: National Resources Defense Council.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, D. G., B. C. Pijanowski, and J. D. Duh. 2000. Modeling the Relationships between Land Use and Land Cover on Private Lands in the Upper Midwest, U.S.A. Journal of Environmental Management 59 (4): 247–263.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clawson, M. 1971. Suburban Land Conversion in the United States: An Economic and Governmental Process. Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cromartie, J. B., and L. L. Swanson. 1996. Census Tracts More Precisely Define Rural Populations and Areas. Rural Development Perspectives 11 (3): 31–39.
   Google Scholar
• Daniels, T. L. 1998. The Struggle to Manage Growth in the Metropolitan Fringe. In Proceedings of the 1998 National Planning Conference “Revolutionary Ideas in Planning,” 4–7 April, 1998, edited by B. Mcclendon and B. Pable. Chicago: American Planning Association.
   Google Scholar
• Daniels, T. L. 1999. When City and Country Collide: Managing Growth in the Metropolitan Fringe. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Diamond, H. L., and P. F. Noonan, eds. 1996. Land Use in America. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Doyle, R. 2001. Sprawling into the Third Millennium. Scientific American 284 (3): 25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eicher, C. L., and C. A. Brewer. 2001. Dasymetric Mapping and Areal Interpolation: Implementation and Evaluation. Cartography and Geographic Information Science 28 (2): 125–138.
   Google Scholar
• El Nasser, H., and P. Overberg. 2001. What You Don't Know about Sprawl: Controlling Development a Big Concern, but Analysis Has Unexpected Findings. USA Today, 22 February, §A, 1.
   Google Scholar
• Fesenmaier, D. R., M. F. Goodchild, and S. Morrison. 1979. The Spatial Structure of the Rural‐Urban Fringe: A Multivariate Approach. Canadian Geographer 23 (3): 255–265.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischel, W. A. 1982. The Urbanization of Agricultural Land: A Review of the National Agricultural Lands Study. Land Economics 58 (2): 236–259.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fonseca, J. W., and D. W. Wong. 2000. Changing Patterns of Population Density in the United States. Professional Geographer 52 (3): 504–517.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fulton, W., R. Pendall, M. Nguyen, and A. Harrison. 2001. Who Sprawls Most? How Growth Patterns Differ across the U.S. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, R. P. 1997. The Farmland Conversion Process in a Polynucleated Metropolis. Landscape and Urban Planning 36 (4): 291–300.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hart, J. F. 1976. Urban Encroachment on Rural Areas. Geographical Review 66 (1): 1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hart, J. F. 1991. The Perimetropolitan Bow Wave. Geographical Review 81 (1): 35–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hart, J. F. 1992. Nonfarm Farms. Geographical Review 82 (2): 166–179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heimlich, R. E., and W. D. Anderson. 2001. Development at the Urban Fringe and Beyond: Impacts on Agriculture and Rural Land. Agricultural Economic Report No. 803. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
   Google Scholar
• Holloway, S. R., J. Schumaker, and R. L. Redmond. 1997. People and Place: Dasymetric Mapping Using ARC/INFO. Missoula: University of Montana.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, J. R., and D. L. Toll. 1982. Detecting Residential Land‐Use Development at the Urban Fringe. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 48 (4): 629–643.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katz, B., and A. Liu. 2000. Moving beyond Sprawl: Toward a Broader Metropolitan Agenda. Brookings Re view 18 (2): 31–34.
   Google Scholar
• Kolankiewicz, L., and R. Beck. 2001. Weighing Sprawl Factors in Large U.S. Cities: Analysis of U.S. Bureau of the Census Data on the 100 Largest Urbanized Areas of the United States. [http:www.sprawlcity.orgstudyUSAindex.html].
   Google Scholar
• Lagro, J. A. 1994. Population Growth beyond the Urban Fringe: Implications for Rural Land Use Policy. Landscape and Urban Planning 28 (2–3): 143–158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamb, R. F. 1983. The Extent and Form of Exurban Sprawl. Growth and Change 14 (1): 40–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loveland, T. R., J. W. Merchant, D. O. Ohlen, and J. F. Brown. 1991. Development of a Land‐Cover Characteristics Database for the Conterminous United States. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 57 (11): 1453–1463.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LTA [Land Trust Alliance]. 1998. 1998 National Directory of Conservation Land Trusts. Washington, D.C.: Land Trust Alliance.
   Google Scholar
• Mcdonnell, M. J., and S. T. A. Pickett. 1990. Ecosystem Structure and Function along Urban‐Rural Gradients: An Unexploited Opportunity for Ecology. Ecology 71 (4): 1232–1237.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mcgranahan, D. A. 1999. Natural Amenities Drive Rural Population Change. Agricultural Economic Report No. 781. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
   Google Scholar
• Medley, K. E., M. J. Mcdonnell, and S. T. A. Pickett. 1995. Forest‐Landscape Structure along an Urban‐to‐Rural Gradient. Professional Geographer 47 (2): 159–168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrill, R., J. Cromartie, and G. Hart. 1999. Metropolitan, Urban, and Rural Commuting Areas: Toward a Better Depiction of the United States Settlement System. Urban Geography 20 (8): 727–748.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Myers, R. R., and J. A. Beegle. 1947. Delineation and Analysis of the Rural‐Urban Fringe. Applied Anthropology 6: 14–22.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• NALS [National Agricultural Lands Study]. 1981. National Agricultural Lands Study: Final Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.
   Google Scholar
• Nizeyimana, E. L., G. W. Petersen, M. L. Imhoff, H. R. Sinclair Jr., S. W. Wattman, D. S. Reed‐margetan, E. R. Levine, and J. M. Russo. 2001. Assessing the Impact of Land Conversion to Urban Use on Soils with Different Productivity Levels in the USA. Soil Science Society of America Journal 65: 391–402.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nusser, S. M., and J. J. Goebel. 1997. The National Resources Inventory: A Long‐Term Multi‐Resource Monitoring Programme. Environmental and Ecological Statistics 4(3): 181–204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pendall, R. 1999. Do Land‐Use Controls Cause Sprawl Environment and Planning B: Planning & Design 26 (4): 555–571.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Platt, R. H. 1985. The Farmland Conversion Debate: NALs and Beyond. Professional Geographer 37 (4): 433–442.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pond, B., and M. Yeates. 1993. Rural‐Urban Land Conversion, 1: Estimating the Direct and Indirect Impacts. Urban Geography 14 (4): 323–347.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radeloff, V. C., A. E. Hagen, P. R. Voss, D. R. Field, and D. J. Mladenoff. 2000. Exploring the Spatial Relationship between Census and Land‐Cover Data. Society and Natural Resources 13 (6): 599–609.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radeloff, V. C., R. B. Hammer, P. R. Voss, A. E. Hagen, D. R. Field, and D. J. Mladenoff. 2001. Human Demographic Trends and Landscape Level Forest Management in the Northwest Wisconsin Pine Barrens. Forest Science 47 (2): 229–241.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raup, P. M. 1982. An Agricultural Critique of the National Agricultural Lands Study. Land Economics 58 (2): 260–274.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ridd, M. K. 1995. Exploring a V—I—S (Vegetation‐Impervious Surface‐Soil) Model for Urban Ecosystem Analysis through Remote Sensing: Comparative Anatomy for Cities. International Journal of Remote Sensing 16 (12): 2165–2185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ridd, M. K., and J. J. Liu. 1998. A Comparison of Four Algorithms for Change Detection in an Urban Environment. Remote Sensing of Environment 63 (2): 95–100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riebsame, W. E., ed. 1997. Atlas of the New West: Portrait of a Changing Region. New York: W. W. Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Riebsame, W. E., H. Gosnell, and D. M. Theobald. 1996. Land Use and Landscape Change in the Colorado Mountains, I: Theory, Scale, and Pattern. Mountain Research and Development 16 (4): 395–405.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, A. H., J. L. Morrison, P. C. Muehrcke, and S. C. Guptill. 1995. Elements of Cartography. 6th ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Rome, A. W. 1998. William Whyte, Open Space, and Environmental Activism. Geographical Review 88 (2): 259–274.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schrupp, D. L., W. A. Reiners, T. G. Thompson, L. E. O'brien, J. A. Kindler, M. B. Wunder, J. F. Lowsky, J. C. Buoy, L. Satcowitz, A. L. Cade, J. D. Stark, K. L. Driese, T. W. Owens, S. J. Russo, and F. D'erchia. 2000. Colorado Gap Analysis Program: A Geographic Approach to Planning for Biological Diversity—Final Report. Denver: U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, Gap Analysis Program; Colorado Division of Wildlife.
   Google Scholar
• Sierra Club. 1998. Sprawl: The Dark Side of the American Dream. [http:www.sierraclub.orgsprawlreport98].
   Google Scholar
• Simon, J. L., and S. Sudman. 1982. How Much Farmland Is Being Converted to Urban Use International Regional Science Review 7 (3): 257–272.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sorensen, A. A., R. P. Greene, and K. Russ. 1997. Farming on the Edge. Washington, D.C.: American Farmland Trust; DeKalb: Northern Illinois University, Center for Agriculture in the Environment.
   Google Scholar
• Sutton, P., C. Roberts, C. Elvidge, and H. Meij. 1997. A Comparison of Nighttime Satellite Imagery and Population Density for the Continental United States. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 63 (11): 1303–1313.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Theobald, D. M. 2000. Fragmentation by Inholdings and Exurban Development. In Forest Fragmentation in the Southern Rocky Mountains, edited by R. L. Knight, F. W. Smith, S. W. Buskirk, W. H. Romme, and W. L. Baker, 155–174. Boulder: University Press of Colorado.
   Google Scholar
• Theobald, D. M., and N. T. Hobbs. 1998. Forecasting Rural Land‐Use Change: A Comparison of Regression‐ and Spatial Transition‐Based Models. Geographical and Environmental Modelling 2 (1):57–74.
   Google Scholar
• Theobald, D. M., H. Gosnell, and W. E. Riebsame. 1996. Land Use and Landscape Change in the Colorado Mountains, II: A Case Study of the East River Valley. Mountain Research and Development 16 (4): 407–418.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Theobald, D. M., J. M. Miller, and N. T. Hobbs. 1997. Estimating the Cumulative Effects of Development on Wildlife Habitat. Landscape and Urban Planning 39 (1): 25–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Census Bureau. 1993. 1990 Census of Population and Housing. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Commerce.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. Geographic Areas Reference Manual. [http:www.census.govgeowwwgarm.html].
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Census Bureau. 2001. Census 2000, Summary File 1: United States. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Commerce.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Commerce. 2001. Urban Area Criteria for Census 2000: Proposed Criteria…. Federal Register 66 (60): 17018–17033.
   Google Scholar
• USDA [U.S. Department of Agriculture]. 1999. 1997 Census of Agriculture. Vols. 1, 1A, 1B, 1C, Geographic Area Series. Washington, D.C.: National Agricultural Statistics Service.
   Google Scholar
• USDA [U.S. Department of Agriculture]. 2000. National Resources Inventory: 1997 State of the Land Update. Fort Worth, Tex.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
   Google Scholar
• USGS [U.S. Geological Survey]. 1990. Land Use and Land Cover Digital Data from 1:250,000‐ and 1:100,000‐Scale Maps. Data Users Guide 4. Reston, Va.: U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey.
   Google Scholar
• USGS [U.S. Geological Survey]. 2000. National Land Cover Dataset: Fact Sheet 108–00. Reston, Va.: U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. [http:mac.usgs.govmacisbpubsfactsheetsfsl0800.html].
   Google Scholar
• Vesterby, M., and R. E. Heimlich. 1991. Land‐Use and Demographic Change: Results from Fast‐Growth Counties. Land Economics 67 (3): 279–291.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogelmann, J. E., T. Sohl, and S. M. Howard. 1998. Regional Characterization of Land Cover Using Multiple Sources of Data. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 64 (1): 45–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogelmann, J. E., T. Sohl, P. V. Campbell, and D. M. Shaw. 1998. Regional Land Cover Characterization Using Landsat Thematic Mapper Data and Ancillary Data Sources. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 51 (1–2): 415–428.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waldie, D. J. 2000. Do the Voters Really Hate Sprawl New York Times (Late edition, final), 3 March, §A, 21.
   Google Scholar
• Ward, D., S. R. Phinn, and A. T. Murray. 2000. Monitoring Growth in Rapidly Urbanizing Areas Using Remotely Sensed Data. Professional Geographer 52 (3): 371–386.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright, J. K. 1936. A Method of Mapping Densities of Population. Geographical Review 26 (2): 103–110.
   Google Scholar