Land Use Allocator: Design Your Impact

Define your total land area, divide it into lots, and assign various land uses to model potential outcomes. This tool empowers you to translate local knowledge and stewardship goals into actionable plans, fostering self-efficacy by visualizing how your choices can lead to enhanced biodiversity, optimized yields, and improved quality of life. See how your land can become a source of verifiable data and sustainable value.

To define a custom project area: Click the ⬟ icon on the map to draw. Drawing will start a new custom model. Use ✥ to navigate. Click drawn polygons for details or use 'Clear All Polygons' below.

Loading Map...
Interactive Land Scenario Modeler
Define your total project area and allocate land uses for two independent scenarios to compare outcomes.

Any application of these concepts to a specific geographical area or project would necessitate thorough site-specific assessments, local market research, detailed financial modeling using locally validated data, and engagement with local stakeholders.

Showing pre-filled scenarios for a 1000ha project. Scroll down to explore, or draw your project area on the map to start a custom model.

hectares
Enter the total land area available for allocation. This will be divided into lots.

Land Use Scenarios

Define and compare two independent land use scenarios (Scenario 1 and Scenario 2) for the entire project area.

Total Project Land: 1,000 ha

Scenario 1: Diverse Mix
Total Area: 1,000 ha | Allocated: 1,000 ha

Forestry & Agroforestry:

Sustainable Timber Harvesting (Teak)

(200 ha)

↳ Teak Sawlogs (~1,600 m^3/yr)

Mixed-Species Agroforestry (Timber & Non-Timber Products)

(150 ha)

↳ Mixed Timber Species (~750 m^3/yr)

Livestock & Grazing:

Rotational Grazing Cattle (Grass-Fed)

(250 ha)

↳ Grass-Fed Beef (Live Weight) (~50,000 kg/yr)

Food Production:

Mixed Fruit Orchard (Tropical)

(100 ha)

↳ Assorted Tropical Fruits (~1,500 tonnes/yr)

Regenerative Annual Cropping (No-Till & Cover Crops)

(150 ha)

↳ Primary Cash Crop (e.g., Maize) (~900 tonnes/yr)

Natural Capital & Conservation:

Reforestation with Native Species

(150 ha)

↳ Long-term Carbon Sequestration (~1,800 tCO2e/yr)

Scenario 2: Livestock Monoculture
Total Area: 1,000 ha | Allocated: 1,000 ha

Livestock & Grazing:

Rotational Grazing Cattle (Grass-Fed)

(1,000 ha)

↳ Grass-Fed Beef (Live Weight) (~200,000 kg/yr)

Scenario Comparison

Scenario 1 (Scenario 1: Diverse Mix)
Comprehensive overview of allocations, financials, and impacts for this scenario.

Land Allocation Status

Total Scenario Area:1,000 ha
Total Allocated:1,000 ha

100.0% of total area used.

Unallocated in Scenario:0 ha

Allocation by Primary Land Use:

TypeArea (ha)
Forestry & Agroforestry350
Natural Capital & Conservation150
Food Production250
Livestock & Grazing250

Financial Snapshot (Estimates)

Total Est. Establishment Cost:$907,500
Total Est. Annual Maintenance:$123,000 /yr
Potential Annual Revenue:$2,396,900 /yr
Detailed Land Use Allocations for Scenario 1: Diverse Mix
Total Scenario Area: 1,000 ha | Allocated: 1,000 ha| Est. Ann. Value: $2,396,900

Land Use Allocations & Value:

Ecosystem Services & Co-benefits:

  • From: Sustainable Timber Harvesting (Teak) (200 ha)

    Services:
    • Enhanced Biodiversity (Managed Forest) (~100 Index Score/yr)

  • From: Mixed-Species Agroforestry (Timber & Non-Timber Products) (150 ha)

    Services:
    • Pollinator Habitat Enhancement

  • From: Rotational Grazing Cattle (Grass-Fed) (250 ha)

    Services:
    • Soil Carbon Enhancement (Grazing) (~125 tCO2e/yr)

  • From: Regenerative Annual Cropping (No-Till & Cover Crops) (150 ha)

    Services:
    • Improved Soil Organic Carbon (~300 tCO2e/yr)

  • From: Reforestation with Native Species (150 ha)

    Services:
    • Long-term Carbon Sequestration (~1,800 tCO2e/yr)
    • Habitat Restoration Value (~120 Biodiversity Index Score/yr)
    • Improved Water Quality (Filtration)

  • From: Sustainable Timber Harvesting (Teak) (200 ha)

    Key Benefits:
    • High-value timber product
    • Long-term carbon storage
    • Improved biodiversity if managed well

  • From: Mixed-Species Agroforestry (Timber & Non-Timber Products) (150 ha)

    Key Benefits:
    • Increased biodiversity
    • Risk diversification
    • Enhanced ecosystem resilience

  • From: Rotational Grazing Cattle (Grass-Fed) (250 ha)

    Key Benefits:
    • Efficient production of a single commodity (beef/dairy)
    • Simpler management than diversified systems

  • From: Mixed Fruit Orchard (Tropical) (100 ha)

    Key Benefits:
    • Diversified income from multiple fruit types
    • Extended harvest season (potentially)
    • Enhanced local food security

  • From: Regenerative Annual Cropping (No-Till & Cover Crops) (150 ha)

    Key Benefits:
    • Improved soil health and resilience
    • Reduced erosion
    • Lower input costs over time (fertilizer, fuel)
    • Carbon sequestration

  • From: Reforestation with Native Species (150 ha)

    Key Benefits:
    • Significant biodiversity uplift
    • Long-term carbon sink
    • Improved watershed health
Scenario Environmental Summary:

Est. Carbon Sequestration:6,900 tCO2e/yr

Net emissions include sources like livestock methane.

Water Demand (Area %):

  • Medium: 100% (1,000 ha)

Soil Impact (Area %):

  • Improving: 65% (650 ha)
  • Neutral: 35% (350 ha)

Assumes best-practice rotational management; can become degrading if overstocked.

Overall Key Performance Indicators (KPIs - Scenario Wide)

Legend:PositiveNeutralNegative

Biodiversity

  • Canopy structural complexity(Index)- Target: High
    positive
  • Presence of indicator species (fauna)(Species Count)
    positive
  • SFM Enhances Biodiversity(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Habitat Provision (Mature Forest Values)(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Forest Certification Biodiversity Benefits(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Functional diversity of plant species(Index)
    positive
  • Resilience to specific pest outbreaks(Incidence Rate)
    positive
  • Enhanced Habitat Complexity(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Support for Pollinators & Beneficial Insects(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Impact on Native Flora/Fauna(Qualitative)
    negative
  • Limited Habitat Complexity(Qualitative)
    negative
  • Risk of Land Degradation(Qualitative)
    negative
  • Grassland Habitat Maintenance(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Pollinator species diversity(Species Count)
    positive
  • Soil health (organic matter)(% content)
    positive
  • Enhanced Agrobiodiversity (Fruit Diversity)(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Soil microbial biomass and diversity(Index/Value)
    positive
  • Beneficial insect populations (e.g., ground beetles)(Count per trap)
    positive
  • Reduced Chemical Input Needs Over Time(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Return of native bird species(Species Count)
    positive
  • Increase in native plant understory diversity(Shannon Index)
    positive
  • Ecological Corridor Creation(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Enhanced Ecosystem Complexity & Resilience(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Habitat Restoration Quality(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Facilitation of Natural Regeneration(Qualitative)
    positive

Culture & Community

  • Skilled forestry jobs(No. of jobs)
    positive
  • Access for traditional uses (if applicable)(Yes/No)
    neutral
  • Skilled Livelihoods & Employment(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Integration with Traditional Livelihoods(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Positive Landscape Aesthetics(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Diversified livelihood opportunities(No. of income sources)
    positive
  • Preservation of traditional ecological knowledge (TEK)(Index of TEK application)
    positive
  • Community Resilience & Food Security(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Enhanced Landscape Multifunctionality & Aesthetics(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Jobs per Hectare(FTE/100ha)
    negative
  • Support for pastoral livelihoods(No. of households supported)
    positive
  • Animal welfare standards(Certification/Score)
    neutral
  • Landscape Aesthetics of Well-Managed Pastures(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Availability of diverse local foods(Variety Count)
    positive
  • Agro-tourism opportunities(Visitor numbers)
    positive
  • Supports Local Economies & Small Farmers(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Farmer adoption of regenerative practices(% of local farmers)
    positive
  • Knowledge sharing networks on soil health(No. of participants)
    positive
  • Contribution to Resilient Local Food Systems(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Community involvement in planting/monitoring(Participation hours)
    positive
  • Educational site for local schools(Visits/year)
    positive
  • Potential for Land Use Conflict(Qualitative)
    neutral
  • Support for Local Livelihoods (Sustainable Products)(Qualitative)
    positive

Infrastructure & Operations

  • Forest road maintenance quality(Index)
    neutral
  • Watershed protection effectiveness(Runoff quality index)
    positive
  • Support for Quality Processing Infrastructure(Qualitative)
    positive
  • SFM Drives Infrastructure Standards(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Soil health improvement (organic matter)(% change)
    positive
  • Reduced reliance on external inputs(Cost/ha)
    positive
  • Support for Diversified Product Processing(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Complex Management & Logistics(Qualitative)
    neutral
  • Water Quality Runoff Risk(Nutrient Levels (N, P))
    negative
  • Fencing and water point distribution(Adequacy score)
    neutral
  • Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Methane)(tCO2e/ha/yr)
    negative
  • Irrigation system efficiency(% water used effectively)
    neutral
  • Post-harvest processing facilities (local)(Capacity (tonnes))
    positive
  • Local Market Access & Distribution Needs(Qualitative)
    neutral
  • Reduced soil erosion rates(tonnes/ha/year lost)
    positive
  • Increased water infiltration rates(mm/hour)
    positive
  • Need for Specialized Equipment(Qualitative)
    neutral
  • Reduced downstream sedimentation(Turbidity (NTU))
    positive
  • Soil organic matter accumulation rate(%/year)
    positive
  • Improved Water Regulation within Watershed(Qualitative)
    positive
  • Downstream Water Quality Enhancement(Qualitative)
    positive
Scenario 2 (Scenario 2: Livestock Monoculture)
Comprehensive overview of allocations, financials, and impacts for this scenario.

Land Allocation Status

Total Scenario Area:1,000 ha
Total Allocated:1,000 ha

100.0% of total area used.

Unallocated in Scenario:0 ha

Allocation by Primary Land Use:

TypeArea (ha)
Livestock & Grazing1,000

Financial Snapshot (Estimates)

Total Est. Establishment Cost:$250,000
Total Est. Annual Maintenance:$100,000 /yr
Potential Annual Revenue:$600,000 /yr
Detailed Land Use Allocations for Scenario 2: Livestock Monoculture
Total Scenario Area: 1,000 ha | Allocated: 1,000 ha| Est. Ann. Value: $600,000

Land Use Allocations & Value:

Ecosystem Services & Co-benefits:

  • From: Rotational Grazing Cattle (Grass-Fed) (1,000 ha)

    Services:
    • Soil Carbon Enhancement (Grazing) (~500 tCO2e/yr)

  • From: Rotational Grazing Cattle (Grass-Fed) (1,000 ha)

    Key Benefits:
    • Efficient production of a single commodity (beef/dairy)
    • Simpler management than diversified systems
Scenario Environmental Summary:

Est. Net GHG Emissions:2,000 tCO2e/yr

Net emissions include sources like livestock methane.

Water Demand (Area %):

  • Medium: 100% (1,000 ha)

Soil Impact (Area %):

  • Neutral: 100% (1,000 ha)

Assumes best-practice rotational management; can become degrading if overstocked.

Overall Key Performance Indicators (KPIs - Scenario Wide)

Legend:PositiveNeutralNegative

Biodiversity

  • Impact on Native Flora/Fauna(Qualitative)
    negative
  • Limited Habitat Complexity(Qualitative)
    negative
  • Risk of Land Degradation(Qualitative)
    negative
  • Grassland Habitat Maintenance(Qualitative)
    positive

Culture & Community

  • Jobs per Hectare(FTE/100ha)
    negative
  • Support for pastoral livelihoods(No. of households supported)
    positive
  • Animal welfare standards(Certification/Score)
    neutral
  • Landscape Aesthetics of Well-Managed Pastures(Qualitative)
    positive

Infrastructure & Operations

  • Water Quality Runoff Risk(Nutrient Levels (N, P))
    negative
  • Fencing and water point distribution(Adequacy score)
    neutral
  • Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Methane)(tCO2e/ha/yr)
    negative