land use dynamics and ecological transition: the case of south florida

Land use dynamics and ecological transition: the case ofSouth Florida

ROBERT T. WALKER* and WILLIAM D. SOLECKIDepartment of Geography, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306-2050, USA

CHRISTINE HARWELLRosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami, Miami, FL 33149, USA

This study examines the process of land use change in South Florida. Through this discussion, a conceptual modelof ecological transition is developed and presented. The model is built on the general principles of neoclassicaleconomic theories of land rent, behavioral models of resource use, and an historical geographic account of envi-ronmental change. Central to the paper is the specification of the theoretical link between demographics, market andservice demands, land use, and ecological change. This study focuses on the nature and drivers of environmentalchange that has occurred in South Florida since 1900. The region studied includes the southern Florida Evergladesand the surrounding area. The analysis determines that massive land use/land cover has taken place in the region,particularly since the end of World War II. These landscape changes are conceptualized by a model that linksregional demand for both agricultural and residential land through the agency of hierarchical forces. In this model,landscape evolution and natural areas encroachment are articulated as a dynamic process in which the regime ofinteraction between human systems and land use changes. Three main time periods for regional ecological transitionare defined: (1) frontier closure; (2) articulation of a system of cities with coupled agricultural hinterlands servingnational and international markets. Differing land use change dynamics are identified as specific to each time period.

Keywords:land use; ecological transition; hierarchical model

The impact of human population on environmental sustainability is complex and varies from system tosystem.‡ Historical change involving technological and cognitive adaptations, as well as the hierarchicalarticulation of impacting forces, complicate specification of such impacts (Blaikie and Brookfield, 1987).The Human Dominated Systems Directorate (HDSD) of the U.S. Man and the Biosphere Program hasaddressed several of these issues in a case study of South Florida. In this region extensive ecologicalresources of international significance exist in close proximity to burgeoning urban populations (Long,1995). This paper presents a discussion of historical changes in factors affecting the relationship betweenhuman and ecological systems. The policy debate surrounding sustainability and maintenance of scarceecological resources can only be resolved by dealing with the human and ecological factors in such anintegrated fashion. The designation of national parks and wilderness land is becoming increasinglyproblematic in the current era of rapidly growing global population and political conflict (Solecki, 1994;

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.‡Sustainability and sustainable development are key concepts in discussions on environmental degradation; unfortunately, they arenot well defined. We choose not to engage in this discourse, however, and rely instead on a largely intuitive notion of sustainability.For human systems, sustainability implies the ‘reproducibility’ of the social unit, through adequate economic performance. Alsoinforming our use of the term is an ecological dimension, similar to the human system usage; that is, ecological sustainabilityimplies reproducibility of the resident ecosystem. Thus, sustainability would seem to suggest harmonious longterm relationsbetween human systems and the environment, when taken as a term of sufficient generality to include natural and humandimensions.

Urban Ecosystems,1997,1, 37–47

1083-5155 © 1997 Chapman & Hall

West and Brechin, 1991). Conservation of natural resources will inevitably require an adaptive equilib-rium between natural and human systems.

Land use and, in particular, land use dynamics are of key importance to conceptualizing the relation-ship between natural and human systems (Turner and Meyer, 1994). Technological changes (particularlyin agriculture), government interventions (e.g. infrastructure development), and the evolution of envi-ronmental cognition all affect land use of dynamics and can be addressed theoretically by referring toconcepts from the frontier development literature and bid-rent theory, which stems from Von Thunen(Nerlove and Sadka, 1991) and was initially elaborated for the urban case by Alonso (1964). Theobjective of this paper is to identify the main social forces that have affected ecological resources inSouth Florida and to provide a theoretical framework useful to the policy debate surrounding the issueof ecological sustainability in South Florida and elsewhere.

South Florida development

HDSD research has focused on South Florida, which consists of seven counties – Broward, Collier, Dade,Hendry, Lee, Monroe, and Palm Beach – that had a 1990 population of 4.6 million; about 87% of arearesidents live on the eastern coastal strip (Winsberget al., 1994). The Gulf Coast to the west is lessdensely settled but has recently experienced accelerated growth rates. Agriculture is practiced along theeast coast urban fringe, below Lake Okeechobee, and on larger dispersed patches toward the west(Winsberget al., 1994). Much interior land is under government jurisdiction (federal and state), desig-nated as water conservation and wildlife management areas. Ecological resources in the region includethe Everglades, as well as extensive areas of cypress and pine forest. Between 1975 and 1986, about 2000km2 of natural areas were converted to human use in the region, which represented 13% of the naturalland at the start of the period. This represents an annual rate of conversion of 1.1%, 60% greater than theglobal rate of tropical rainforest loss in the 1980s (FAO, 1992). An estimated 50% of the originalecosystem has been lost since 1900, representing a conversion of 6000 km2 of Everglades wetlands andpine forest and the complete loss of three of seven physiographic landscapes in the original system (Daviset al. 1994). Conversion of Everglades land to human use through extensive drainage and flood controlhas had tremendous impact on the natural hydrologic regime; this is a major factor in several currentenvironmental problems, including reduced bird populations, disappearance of wetlands, and declines inaquifer recharge (Browderet al., 1994).

Until the end of the 19th century much of the land cover in South Florida remained in a natural state(see Fig. 1). Indigenous populations altered the landscape through hunting, foraging, and use of fire, butmuch of the ecological integrity of the Everglades watershed remained intact until the early 1900s. In1900, only 5000 people inhabited the whole South Florida region, mostly in 16 small settlements,excluding Key West which at the time had a population of approximately 18 000. Very few individualsactually lived within the boundaries of the Everglades watershed. The largest settlement at the time wasMiami, with a 1896 population of about 300 (Chapman, 1991). All 16 settlements were coastal inorientation and were located no more than a mile from estuaries and beaches. A minimal amount of landwas in agricultural production, but little commercial agricultural production was present (Snyder andDavidson, 1994). Much of the produce probably fulfilled both the subsistence needs of the settlers andthe consumption demands of a population of elite tourists. Strong nonlocal demand had not developedfor the current staples of the region (vegetables, cattle, and sugar), and markets remained relativelylimited for agricultural produce, serving only the urban centers and their seasonal visitors. The comple-tion of a railway to Miami in 1896, making the coastal area much more accessible to tourists and potentialresidents, dramatically affected local land use by opening the region to extensive residential and com-mercial development.

By 1930, the population of Southeast Florida had grown to approximately 230 000, as immigration of

Walkeret al.38

retirees, tourists, and other settlers began to spread out along the coastal ridge. Regional growth rates inSoutheast Florida during this time were among the highest recorded by the U.S. Census, with decadalgrowth exceeding 100% from 1900 to 1930. This growth further encouraged the construction of the waterand flood control systems now present in the region. The opening of South Florida by railroad andhighway and the hydrologic alteration in the interest of drainage and flood protection closed the frontier,with the appropriation of unclaimed lands to public and private ownership. Subsequently, the ecologicalresource base faced substantial exposure to human activities.

Although population increased significantly, the vast majority remained tightly clustered within a fewmiles of the Atlantic coast. Only near Miami did settlement occur west of the coastal ridge in anymagnitude. The amount of land converted to urban use remained small, accounting for a minusculeproportion of the entire watershed. Most tourists and retirees sought the natural amenities of the coast.High-density development took place right at the water’s edge or at nearshore locations such as the PalmBeaches, Miami, and Miami Beach. In contrast, agricultural production was already a substantial con-sumer of land. Along the Atlantic coast, three large agricultural districts had developed on lands just

Figure 1. South Florida land cover – 1900.Source:Department of Geography, Florida State University.

Land use dynamics and ecological transition in South Florida 39

beyond the urban fringe. A fourth emerged south of Lake Okeechobee in the vast muckland soil area,where farmlands grew to over 55 000 ha by 1943 (30 353 ha of vegetables, 12 141 ha of sugar cane, 2024ha of pasture and miscellaneous minor crops) (Snyder and Davidson, 1994).

Population growth during the 1930s and 1940s was less dramatic than during the earlier period, butstrong enough to reach 720 000 by 1950. In the early 1950s the general regional pattern of land useremained largely the same as before, although urban areas were beginning to expand. Immigrants tookadvantage of the promise of flood control to develop urban settlements. Much of this residential growthoccurred in Dade and Broward counties, filling in the unoccupied and agricultural spaces in and aroundthe cities of Miami and Ft. Lauderdale.

Since the early 1950s, South Florida has been the site of tremendous land use modification andconversion. There were several driving forces behind this, including increased national demand forwinter vegetables and fruits and rapid population growth in response to tourism and changing residentialpreferences, particularly among retirees. In 1947, a series of massive floods increased the impetus for theexpansion of the water projects in the region. The federal government responded to the hurricane-related


Walkeret al.40

floods by building dikes around Lake Okeechobee and by changing its water management goals fromdrainage to flood control. Simultaneously, strong nonlocal markets for Florida’s winter vegetables andfruits grew throughout the country as the region’s transportation and product distribution system becamemore integrated into northern and midwestern markets. Residents in these areas increasingly wanted andcould afford fresh winter produce (Winsberg, 1991). Agricultural production was also stimulated byinternational events. The Cuban Revolution sparked a series of tariff increases on imported sugar thatfostered rapid growth in sugar cane production. When Castro came to power in 1959, about 19 020 haof sugar cane were harvested just south of Lake Okeechobee [a.k.a. Everglades Agricultural Area(EAA)]. By 1986 these lands had grown to 161 880 ha (Salley, 1986).

Additional land use pressures came from increased population in the region, which reached nearly 2.3million in the four southeastern counties by 1970. Huge streams of in-migrants came from the north-eastern and midwestern United States and from other countries, particularly from Latin America. Muchof the housing development undertaken to accommodate these individuals was in the form of land-intensive, low-rise, single-family dwellings. Demand for land originated primarily from retirees, otherin-migrants, and tourists. Tourism, focused largely on coastal and near-coastal locations, maintained ahigh central-strip rent profile which promoted decentralized residential choices by retirees and nonre-tirees alike. Residential developments with detached homes and landscaped lots near land-extensiverecreational amenities such as golf courses increased dramatically during this period. Sharp growth in theconsumer base (both local residents and tourists) increased demand for locally grown produce andthereby encouraged further agricultural development (M. Winsberg, personal communication, 1995).

The impact of increased agricultural activity and in-migration on land use was dramatic, and tremen-dous change took place from the early 1950s to the mid-1970s. Two of the most obvious changes werethe rapid increase of agricultural production in the EAA and the increase of urban-oriented land use. Analmost continuous strip of development emerged beside the Atlantic (see Fig. 2). Urban land uses becamewell established in the extreme southeastern part of the region, particularly around the cities of Miamiand Fort Lauderdale and along the entire coast north to West Palm Beach.

Rapid urbanization resulted in three additional land cover dynamics. From 1953 to 1975, most of theremaining upland pine forests and near-shore agricultural areas were converted to urban land. In 1975,just a few remnants of the coastal pine forest were evident, and increasingly agricultural production wasfound only in isolated pockets situated between the urban fringe and the publicly owned conservationlands to the west. Agricultural lands were largely reduced to a narrow transition between the urbanizedcoast and the interior Everglades area. However, as Atlantic coastal land was converted to urban use,certain inland parcels were taken under agricultural production. Such shifts were particularly evident inthe southeastern and northeastern sections of the region.

By the late 1980s, the current land use pattern was largely in place, although certain earlier processesintensified (see Fig. 3). The continuous strip of urbanized land along the Atlantic coast became moreclearly defined and pronounced. Much conversion to urban use from the 1970s to the late 1980s occurredon lands within or adjacent to the already settled areas. The coastal urban strip clearly dominated aroughly 100-mile stretch along the coast, and the agricultural zone separating coastal settlement from theinterior Everglades was significantly reduced. Also during this period, a northern corridor connecting theremaining Everglades wetlands to the native areas in the north was lost, diminishing the ecologicalconnectivity of the region. Concomitant with the articulation of the coastal urban strip, extensive con-version of natural areas to agriculture took place in the interior, particularly within the EAA.

Theoretical issues

Long-run landscape changes may be conceptualized by a model linking regional development and thedemand for both agricultural and residential land through the agency of hierarchical forces. Our focus is


the relationship between demographics, market and service demands, and land use. Our primary moti-vation in this regard is the centrality of land use and land use changes, including human encroachmentinto natural areas, to the issue of ecological degradation, particularly in regions where significant humanpopulation is found in close proximity to important ecological resources. We have drawn on severalstrands of economic theory in developing a model statement, including notions of regional development,bid–rent-based theories of agricultural and urban land use, the hierarchical notion of central places, andfactor-based production theory applied in the agricultural setting with technical change. The followingdiscussion presents important conceptual elements from the literature and states a number of theoreticalconclusions germane to the issue at hand.

Theories of regional development point to both the export base (or staple) and the regional produc-tion function as primary factors driving development processes; unfortunately, empirical research hasnot resolved their relative importance (Giarratani and McNelis, 1980). One implication is that thedevelopmental role of integration into national and international economies remains ambiguous, although


Walkeret al.42

intuition would suggest that with development comes a proliferation of market attachments. Brownet al.(1994) consider various approaches to region-scale change of landscapes in newly settled areas (see alsoBrownet al.,1992; Browder and Godfrey, 1990). Landscape evolution is largely driven by the articulationof a system of urban places; such places experience differential rates of growth and development as afunction of comparative advantage with respect to resources and location (Muller, 1977). The landscapeand city system approaches to development emphasize the early importance of the export of primarygoods, both agricultural and mineral. Transportation development serves to integrate production sites andallow further inter-regional linkages. Maturation of the city system leads to industrial development, thecreation of a large regional market, and articulation of central place arrangements determined by scaleeconomies in the provision of services. Although the export base remains an important source ofearnings, the increasing significance of the service sector may diminish the export sector’s share in theregional economy.

The various theories of regional and landscape change do not explicitly consider on-the-groundecological dynamics, although they clearly imply a continuing process of natural areas conversion. Urbaneconomic theory (Fujita, 1989) and derivatives of the Von Thunen spatial model of agricultural land use(e.g. Nerlove and Sadka, 1991) do not address structural changes in urban places or relational changesbetween them occurring in the course of regional development. Nevertheless, it is precisely such changesthat drive land use dynamics and consequent landscape evolution at a regional scale, the geographicaldomain of land-extensive and ecological resources. One possible generalization from bid–rent-basedtheories positing central places with market nodes (see Fujita, 1989), consistent with early theorization byBoserup (1965), is that individual land parcels evidently undergo a process of agricultural intensificationuntil possible conversion to urban uses.

Land use intensity in Von Thunen-based models is conceptualized in two related ways. Nerlove andSadka (1991) consider the labor-to-land ratio, whereas Jones and O’Neill (1993a,b) consider rotationtimes under a traditional technology. Nerlove and Sadka (1991) show that at an increasing distance fromthe market node the labor application per unit land decreases; for traditional technologies, this isconsistent with an increasing rotation period. If the labor-to-land ratio reflects the settlement density,Boserup’s empirical observations of the long-run processes of agricultural intensification are reproduced(1965). Increasing population leads to a shortening of fallow times because of land scarcity. Jones andO’Neill (1993a) show explicitly that population growth leads to intensification.

Boserup (1965) criticizes economists’ notion of empty land beyond the agricultural fringe. Neverthe-less, in formal models allowing for rotational agriculture the fringe may be far removed from the marketnode. With a gradual de-intensification of traditional technology at increasing distance from the citycenter, fallow periods can theoretically achieve those consistent with Boserup’s long fallow designation,largely consistent with maintenance of the ecological resource base. Reduction of fallow periods belowsome threshold must ultimately lead to ecosystem loss with widespread conversion to permanent agri-cultural lands and degraded ecosystems. Intensity is not only a function of distance and populationdensity, but of prices as well (Jones and O’Neill, 1993a). Nerlove and Sadka (1991) define a point beyondwhich cultivation ceases because of some minimal labor requirement per unit cultivated land. Extensionsof this fringe may be regarded as the initial act of land reclamation that paves the way to eventualencroachment with sufficient intensification of land use (Lambin, 1994).* Nerlove and Sadka (1991) alsoshow that increasing population growth expands the agricultural fringe as do reduced transportation costs.

*Bilsborrow (1992) draws a distinction in the natural areas conversion process (e.g. deforestation) between land extensification andintensification. Encroachment associated with extensification is essentially the movement of the agricultural frontier into pristinenatural ecosystems (e.g. virgin forest), whereas intensification is a filling-in of the agricultural landscape through the removal ofremaining ecosystem patches and fallow areas.


Although Hicks-neutral technical change in agricultural production shows no spatial effect, labor-savinginnovations could alter the minimum labor necessary to achieve positive production per unit farmland,leading to agricultural expansion (Nerlove and Sadka, 1991).

Urban models ostensibly explain transitions from urban to agricultural land, given some positive valueof agricultural rent. Nevertheless, nothing intrinsic to these models inhibits their application to directencroachment into natural areas generating zero rent. In this regard, results identical to the agriculturalcase are obtained with respect to population growth and transportation costs, both of which affect theextensive margin of residential habitation (Wheaton, 1974; Fujita, 1989). Given modern transportationsystems and cost, urban markets and agricultural production in the hinterland may be completely de-coupled. Walker and Solecki (1995, unpublished work) show that direct urban area encroachment intoimportant U.S. ecological landscapes is a substantial portion of natural areas loss not involving initialconversion to agricultural use. Godfrey (1990) emphasizes the urban nature of contemporary develop-ment processes in an active resource frontier. Family structure also has been shown to affect urban space;families with many dependents expand the residential fringe (Fujita, 1989; Beckman, 1973), as doesincreasing income (Fujita, 1989). Income classes, in turn, show spatial articulation in residential patterns,with wealthier individuals living closer to the town center (Wheaton, 1976; Hartwicket al.,1976). Theagricultural setting is analogous in that Von Thunen orders space into zones of particular crop types onthe basis of their rent-generation capabilities, with more valuable crops per unit area grown closer to thecentral market.

Toward an analytical model of regional ecological transition

The landscape articulation of regional development in South Florida and many other places may beconceptualized as a progressive encroachment of settled land, both urban and agricultural. Decliningtransportation and central place accessibility costs expand the profitable domain of agriculture andresidential development; population growth accentuates spatial encroachment by increasing the demandfor land. In this regard, federal highway and airport projects have made the South Florida region muchmore accessible to dramatically increased numbers of tourists and permanent in-migrants.

Changes in agricultural technology and environmental cognition are occurring along with transport andaccessibility cost reductions in the development process. Technical changes affect the agricultural sys-tem, particularly as land scarcities arise, allowing producers to use new lands or to substitute labor andother factors for land. Substitutions of inputs and/or labor can compensate to a great extent the decliningsupply of land to individual operators given sectoral growth. Similarly, sufficiently productive innova-tions may release both labor and land from production, reducing the demand for continued natural areasencroachment. On the other hand, technical information may create productive resources from unused,natural lands. Since the 1920s, South Florida has been the focus of intense agricultural research andinnovation, which has yielded the information necessary to exploit the unique climatic conditions and soilresource base of the region, in effect creating land. Possibly countervailing this land opening process hasbeen the historic abundance of cheap migrant labor from the Caribbean, which could be used as aproduction substitute.

Consumer preference functions typically evolve with rising incomes, leading in particular to growingappreciation of natural area amenities and concern for ecological integrity. Such concerns may ultimatelyconflict with the imperatives of development, either for land reclamation or continued exploitation ofnatural resources key to ecosystem function (e.g. water). Beyond land consumption impacts, the devel-opment process unleashes other effects on natural areas. Agricultural intensification may reduce and evenreverse natural areas encroachment, but the use of inputs leads to externality impacts occurring off-sitein downstream natural areas. In South Florida, agricultural practices in the EAA have caused dramaticshifts in the nitrogen and phosphorous balances of downstream ecosystems. Similarly, human popula-

Walkeret al.44

tions concentrating in already settled urban zones contribute to the growing volume of pollutant impactsand compete with nature through the direct utilization of important natural resources such as water.

Landscape evolution and natural areas encroachment are of necessity dynamic processes in which theregime of interaction between human systems and land use changes. We identify three main time periodsfor regional ecological transition involving: (1) frontier closure; (2) articulation of a system of cities withcoupled agricultural hinterlands serving mostly local markets; and (3) evolution to a conurbation anddecoupled agricultural hinterland serving national and international markets. Concomitant to this devel-opmental process are a progressive opening of the region to population movements, such as retirees inSouth Florida, and an ongoing expression of governmental interests through infrastructure development,such as the drainage and flood protection projects in the Everglades region.

We emphasize that these regimes do not show abrupt historical beginnings or endings; they exist withsubstantial overlap, because some agricultural export is observed during the frontier period (Mealor andPrunty, 1976; Dacy, 1940), whereas current agricultural production does not leave the region in its entirety(Mulkey and Clouser, 1988). A key event with respect to South Florida ecological transition is thesimultaneous decoupling of agricultural production from regional consumption and the development ofa service-based tourist industry, which elicited strong demand for land creation (i.e. reclamation). Theindependent growth of these two sectors has led to competition for land and accelerated rates of naturalareas conversion.

Policy implications and conclusion

Much of the policy debate in South Florida has focused on the role of agriculture in generating exter-nalities having an impact on the quality of water entering Everglades National Park (excess phospho-rous). Much current agriculture probably still is a transitional form of land cover in the region, andpressures for ongoing urbanization can be expected to build in areas now used for farming. Consequently,major threats to ecosystem sustainability over the long run will arise from urban land uses and theirresident populations.

The muck soils of the EAA represent a nonrenewable resource, and unchecked subsidence willseriously affect agricultural productivity, particularly in the sugar lands. Given the decoupled nature ofagricultural production, prices for agricultural commodities are largely exogenous to the system, andrent-generating capability of the farmlands must necessarily diminish with declines in productivity.Although EAA sugar may have some market privilege nationwide, geopolitical dynamics augur forincreasing exposure of the industry to circumstances in the international market, given the inevitabletransition of political power in Cuba. Vegetables and citrus will be affected in a similar way by theweakening of trade barriers associated with the North American Free Trade Agreement.

The urban-based land use demands also are currently quite dynamic. Recent evidence indicates thatalthough population growth rates have started to decline, the rate of land conversion continues to be high(Walker and Solecki, unpublished work, 1995). Increased rates of intraregional migration are taking placeas well. Migration flows from Dade County to Broward County and from Broward to Palm Beach Countyhave been identified (Winsberg, personal communication, 1995). Many of the intraregion migrants residein new residential developments along the urban-agricultural fringe.

Consequently, urban uses will continue to encroach on agricultural lands, and threats to the Evergladeswetlands will shift from excess phosphorous to the destructive and highly variegated constituents ofurban runoff, sewage effluent, and hazardous wastes. In addition, urban populations are likely to demandstronger flood protection than their agricultural predecessors. Environmental policy makers concernedwith Everglades restoration and ecological sustainability in the region must recognize that developmentforces in the space economy are not likely to provide them the luxury of a stationary target. Future


research should be directed at specifying the relative importance of these many factors in order to developa policy-focused model of land use demand in the region.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Roger Soles, Executive Director of the U.S. Man and the Biosphere Program,Mark Harwell, Chair of MAB’s Dominated Systems Directorate, and John Long, Co-Chair of theDirectorate, for strong encouragements and support, without which this paper could not have beenwritten. Financial support for the research was provided by the U.S. MAB Program.

References

Alonso, W. (1964)Location and Land Use.Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Beckman, M. J. (1973) Equilibrium models of residential land use.Reg. Urban Econ.3, 361–8.Bilsborrow, R. E. (1992)Population, Development, and Deforestation: Some Recent Evidence.Carolina Population

Center Paper. Carolina Population Center, Chapel Hill, NC.Blaikie, P., and Brookfield, H. (1987)Land Degradation and Society.Methuen, London.Boserup, E. (1965)The Conditions of Agricultural Progress.Allen and Unwin, London.Browder, J. A., Gleason, P. J., and Swift, D. R. (1994). Periphyton in the Everglades: Spatial variation, environ-

mental correlates, and ecological implications. InEverglades: The Ecosystem and Its Restoration(S. M. Davisand J. C. Ogden, eds) pp. 357–78. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, FL.

Browder, J. O., and Godfrey, B. J. (1990) Frontier urbanization in the Brazilian Amazon: A theoretical frameworkfor urban transition.Yearb. Conf. Latin American Geographers16, 56–66.

Brown, L. A., Digiacinto, S., Smith, R., and Sierra, R. (1994) Frameworks of urban system evolution in frontiersettings and the Ecuador Amazon.Geogr. Res. Forum14, 72–96.

Brown, L. A., Sierra, R., Southgate, D., and Labao, L. (1992) Complementary perspectives as a means of under-standing regional change: Frontier settlement in the Ecuador Amazon.Environ. Plann. A.24, 939–61.

Chapman, A. E. (1991) History of south Florida. InSouth Florida: The Winds of Change(T. D. Boswell, ed), pp.31–42. Association of American Geographers, Miami, FL.

Dacy, G. H. (1940)Four Centuries of Florida Ranching.Britt Printing Company, St. Louis, MO.Davis, S. M., Gunderson, L. H., Park, W. A., Richardson, J. R., and Mattson, J. E. (1994) Landscape dimension,

composition, and function in a changing Everglades ecosystem. InEverglades: The Ecosystem and Its Resto-ration (S. M. Davis and J. C. Ogden, eds), pp. 419–44. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, FL.

FAO (1992)The Forest Resources of the Tropical Zone by Main Ecological Regions.United Nations Food andAgricultural Organization (FAO), Rome, Italy.

Fujita, M. (1989).Urban Economic Theory.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Godfrey, B. J. (1990) Boom towns of the Amazon.Geogr. Rev.80, 103–17.Giarratani, F., and McNelis, P. D. (1980) Time series evidence bearing on crude theories of regional growth.Land

Econ.56, 238–48.Hartwick, J. M., Schweitzer, U., and Varaiya, P. (1976) Comparative statistics of a residential economy with several

classes.J. Econ. Theory13, 396–413.Jones, D. W., and O’Neill, R. V. (1993a) Human-environmental influences and interactions in shifting agriculture

when farmers form expectations rationally.Environ. Plann. A25, 121–36.Jones, D. W., and O’Neill, R. V. (1993b) Human-environmental influences and interactions in shifting agriculture.

In Structure and Change in the Space Economy(T. R. Lakshmanan and P. Nijkamp, eds), pp. 297–309.Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

Lambin, E. F. (1994)Modelling Deforestation Processes.European Space Agency, Brussels.Long, J. F. (1995) Demographic-environmental interaction on a regional scale: The Everglades and south Florida.

Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America, San Francisco, April 5–8, 1995.

Walkeret al.46

Mealor, W. T., and Prunty, M. C. (1991) Open range ranching in southern Florida.Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr.66,360–76.

Mulkey, D., and Clouser, R. L. (1988)The Economic Impact of the Dairy Industry in Okeechobee County, Florida.Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.

Muller, E. K. (1977). Regional urbanization and the selective growth of towns in North American regions.J. Hist.Geogr.3, 21–39.

Nerlove, M., and Sadka, E. (1991) Von Thunen’s model of the dual economy.J Econ.54, 97–123.Salley, G. H. (1986)A History of the Florida Sugar Industry.G. H. Salley, Miami; available form the Florida Sugar

Cane League, Clewiston.Snyder, G. H., and Davidson, J. M. (1994) Everglades agriculture: Past, present, and future. InEverglades: The

Ecosystem and Its Restoration(S. M. Davis and J. C. Ogden, eds), pp. 85–115. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach,FL.

Solecki, W. D. (1994). Putting the biosphere reserve concept into practice: Some evidence of impacts in ruralcommunities in the United States.Environ. Conserv.21, 242–7.

Turner, B. L., and Meyer, W. B. (1994) Global land-use and land-cover change: An overview. InChanges in LandUse and Land Cover: A Global Perspective(W. B. Meyer and B. L. Turner, eds), pp. 3–10. CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge.

West, P. C., and Brechin, S. R., eds. (1991)Resident Peoples and National Parks: Social Dilemmas and Strategiesin International Conservation.University of Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ.

Wheaton, W. C. (1974). A comparative static analysis of urban spatial structure.J. Econ. Theory9, 223–37.Wheaton, W. C. (1976) On the optimal distribution of income among cities.J. Urban Econ.3, 31–44.Winsberg, M. (1991) South Florida agriculture. InSouth Florida: The Winds of Change(T. D. Boswell, ed), pp.

17–30. Association of American Geographers, Miami, FL.Winsberg, M., Solecki, W. D., and Walker, R. (1994) Rapidly changing land use in south Florida: Measurement,

problem, and solution.Governing Fla.4, 23–9.


land use dynamics and ecological transition: the case of south florida

Documents