Factors and problems influencing solutions of land consolidation projects

Abstract

As we can see from the table, the situation after the project changed very little. Plots were not formed closer to the owners (only from 10.5% to 29.5%). Their configuration was mainly due to the fact that the neighboring plots of the same owner were connected. This indicates that the land management specialists who made these projects were not able to achieve the desired improvement of land plots allocation. In addition, in the Kelmė project, 51% of owners had only one plot, in the Biržai project there were 40 percent of such owners. These figures indicate that a large part of the project participants only wanted to make free cadastral measurements without other additional profits from land consolidation projects. Land consolidation is a special land management process, in which land parcels are redistributed in a certain area. This specific process is not applied on a daily basis; therefore individual projects are important for the development of Lithuanian agriculture [1]. The main tasks of land consolidation project are: the complex redevelopment of land plots; formation of rational size and shape of land plots; increasing landholding and reducing distances between land parcels on farms [2]. However, real implementation of land consolidation projects is faced with a variety of problems that has a negative impact on project solutions [3]. The aim of the article is to identify problematic factors influencing land consolidation project solutions. To achieve the goal, two land consolidation projects in Kelmė and Biržai districts were analyzed. A comparative analysis for identifying problematic factors in the consolidation projects has been carried out. The total area of land consolidation project in Kelmė district is 1049 ha, with 91 land owners and 196 land plots participated. The area of analyzed project in Biržai district was 569 ha, with 38 participants and 98 land plots. Changes of land plots owners after land consolidation project were analyzed in this survey (table 1).