Land use Control and Growth Options for Environmentally Sensitive Areas
Ayman M. Ismail, Ph.D. AICP
*Asst. Professor. Department of Architecture Cairo University - Fayoum
Abstract: How to promote growth within a resource-rich but environmentally fragile region of a developing country? Egypt has been desperately seeking new development axes and promoting population dispersion over new areas for the past decades. Yet, whenever a new resource development axis is discovered, planners are challenged with the long-term environmental consequences of that growth, particularly when it relates to its most scarce resource, fresh-water. Because most penalizing regulatory control measures have proven inadequate, many realists advocate no development as the safest growth pattern. Yet the country is running out of spatial development corridors and new, potentially non-regulatory options are sought. What are these alternatives?
This paper assembles and evaluates many of the tools used to control growth in Environmentally Sensitive Areas both in Egypt and elsewhere. It evaluates the frequency of use and effectiveness of these tools in order to (1) identify the forgotten but potentially effective tools at the design phase, (2) the most applicable tool for each ESA classification, and (2) revisit the conditions under which some design-based settlement development alternatives are likely to be more effective.
The paper concludes with a case-study in Egypt where the concepts developed were applied to locate and design a number of new settlements in an ESA may soon be under development pressure.
Introduction
Environmental Sensitive Areas (ESA) is defined both in terms of the expected mutual impact and the nature of the area in question. The American Law Institute defined an ESA as “an area significantly affected by or having an impact upon, an existing or proposed major public facility or other areas of major public investment. It is also an area “containing or having a significant impact upon historical, natural or environmental resources of regional importance.” (American Law Institute 1974).1 Forester Ndubisi (1995)1 and his colleagues define ESA as “places that are vital to the long-term maintenance of biological diversity, soils, water, or other natural resources.
They include wildlife habitat, steep slopes, wetland, and prime agriculture lands”
Adapting the above definition to the Egyptian context, ESA can thus be defined as
“places of unique historical, natural or environmental resources vital to the long- term maintenance of biological diversity, soils, water, or other natural resources that are or may become vulnerable by major public investment”
Fred Steiner (2000) has suggested a system of classifying ESA based on several US state experiences. He has divided ESA into four categories: ecologically critical areas, perceptually and culturally critical areas, resource production critical areas, and natural hazard critical areas (table 1).
Table 1 - Environmental Sensitive Areas Classification System Class Subclass
A. Ecologically Critical Areas 1. Natural wildlife habitat areas 2. Natural ecological areas 3. Scientific areas
B. Perceptually And Culturally Critical Areas
4. Scenic areas
5. Wilderness recreation areas
6. Historic, archaeological and cultural areas C. Resource Production
Critical Areas
7. Agricultural lands 8. Water quality areas 9. Mineral extraction areas D. Natural Hazard Critical
Areas
10. Flood-prone areas 11. Fire hazard areas 12. Geologic hazards areas 13. Air pollution areas source: Adapted from Steiner (2000)
Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Egypt
There is no formal official mechanism to globally delineate ESA as defined above.
However, areas of special environmental values may be identified on a case-by-case basis. Following recommendations to and review by the Cabinet, a decree is issued placing the area under the protection of law 102/1983. Activities within the boundaries of the area are henceforward almost banned. The key environmental agency in Egypt is the Egyptian Environmental Affairs Agency (EEAA) that has the responsibility to:
o Coordinate efforts of various ministries and agencies on environmental matters
o Control over Egypt’s Protected Areas Network
o Coordinate the approach to pollution control by the large number of regulatory agencies,
o Prepare environmental legislations, managing overall environmental policy, and follow up on the implementation of environmental laws
o Contributing to planning regarding pollution control environmental monitoring.
The EEAA has so far declared 24 protectorates in Egypt and identified their unique features (figure 1).
Figure 1 – Protectorates of Egypt (2003) source: EEAA 2003
The process for protectorate delineation is different from the concept of ESA in many regards including the scope, the threat of growth and the tools available for handling them. Environmentally Sensitive Areas are: first a broader concept than protectorates, second they are not necessarily under immediate risk of encroachment and third, legislative protection (the prohibition concept) is not the only tool that can deal with them.
Approach to Define Control Tools within ESA’s under Growth
It is necessary to revisit the environmentally sensitive areas delineation. First, because evaluating the effectiveness of tools require a delineation of their context of application. Second, it is not possible to assess which of these areas is actually under growth pressure without first knowing where growth is.
1. Identify Environmentally Sensitive Areas
Using the classification system described above, a GIS analysis was conducted using 1: 1,000,000 scale base maps that included topography, drainage features, elevation, water features, VI, precipitation, soil, agriculture lands, and coral reefs. The results are displayed in figure 2, which identifies 14 potential locations of Environmentally Sensitive Area’s.
4
1 5
2
3
6 7 8
9 10
11 12
14 13
NORTH 50 0 100 200KM
Legend 1 Fertile Land 2 River Nile 3 Nile Islands 4 Delta Wetlands 5 Lake Qarun 6 Red Sea Coasts 7 S. Sinai Coasts 8 Siwa Oasis 9 Lake Nasser 10 Wadi Allaqi 11 W. Oasis System 12 E. Watersheds 13 N Sinai Shores 14 NW Coastal Zone
Figure 2 – Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Egypt
Comparison between Figure 2 and Figure 1 reveals that indeed many of the Environmentally Sensitive Area’s have been declared protectorates. However, the comparison also reveals that the extent of protection is far greater than the Environmentally Sensitive Area. The total area of protectorates is about 99,600 km2 representing about 10% of the area of Egypt.
2- Identify Sources of Growth Pressure and Potential
The world has adopted growth as their dominant social paradigm. All incentives of producers are towards growth (Ophuls, 1977). Developed countries link economic growth to consumption while developing countries associate growth with survival.
The profit motive to produce and induce consumption drives the western economy (Zachary, 1992). Land use designation and control has been one of tools associated with planned development in the developing countries (O’Keefe and Wisner 1997).
Egypt has adopted a growth-oriented policy that calls for the redrawing of population map since the mid seventies. The protection of the narrow fertile Nile valley has been its declared motto since the sixties, but has not became national policy till the mid seventies. The policy chose the new settlement approach and seeking new axes for growth. Since the first of the new cities (1982), the population increased by about 25 million while the 16 new settlements built so far accommodated 3 million at best.
Almost 1% of the fertile land is lost annually due to urban encroachment, which eats up about 45,000 acres (out of a total of 6 million). Growth control tools are severe de- legitimization of that growth that renders all lands changed from agricultural use as informal. Naturally, this was not enough to stop the natural increase of the population and lure of the market to sell the land for building (Stewart, 1996).
Inevitably, Environmentally Sensitive Areas that are along the path of that growth (urban, tourist or otherwise) have faced and will face considerable challenges. If agriculture land, the primary resource of the nation has not survived the pressure with all the regulatory tools applied, what will?
Delineating growth potential and directions in Egypt has been a concern for the past couple of decades. Many factors need to be considered, but for the purpose of this exercise, physical factors alone have been considered. These factors include availability and usability of resources, accessibility, and proximity to water and to urban areas. The GIS analysis was conducted using 1: 1,000,000 scale base maps that included minerals, geology, soil classification, industries, tourism sites, agriculture lands and reclamation potential, topography, roads, water features, and urban areas.
The results are displayed in figure 3, which identifies 12 potential growth directions.
3- Identify ESAs Under Growth Pressure and Potential
The third step is to identify which of the ESA’s are actually along the path of growth.
By superimposing the Environmentally Sensitive Areas identified in Figure 2 with the Development Growth Pressure and Potential in Figure 3 using the map overlay technique, it was possible to identify 11 Environmentally Sensitive Area locations that were either under present growth pressure or will potentially become so in the foreseeable future. The results are shown in figure 4.
For each of the identified Environmentally Sensitive Area locations, research was done seeking approximate date the issue was perceived as a problem, the approximate date it became identified requiring national government intervention and finally, the year action was officially taken. The results are shown in Table 2.
2
1 5
2
9
6 7 8
10 11
12 4 3
NORTH 50 0 100 200KM
Legend 1 Nile Valley 2 Nile Delta 3 NW Coast 4 NW Gulf 5 Fayoum 6 Red Sea Coasts 7 S. Sinai Coasts 8 Siwa Oasis 9 Aswan
10 Abu Simbel/Toshka 11 Kharga/
Darb Arbeein 12 N Sinai Shores
12
Figure 3 – Development Growth Pressure and Potential
4
1 5
2
3
6 7
NORTH 9 50 0 100 200KM
Legend 1 Fertile Land 2 River Nile 3 Nile Islands 4 Delta Wetlands 5 Lake Qarun 6 Red Sea Coasts 7 S. Sinai Coasts 8 Siwa Oasis 9 Lake Nasser 10 Wadi Allaqi 11 Darb Arbeein
10 11
8
8
3 Present Growth Projected Growth
Figure 4 - Environmentally Sensitive Areas Under Growth Pressure
Table 2 – Action Chart of Environmentally Sensitive Area at Risk Environmentally
Sensitive Area at Risk
Since Id. In Declared Protected
Current Pressure
Source
1 Fertile Land 1953 1960 1983 U,I
2 River Nile 1962 1975 1982 A,F,I,T,U
3 Nile Islands 1989 1994 1998 U,T
4 Delta Wetlands -- 1998 1998 A
5 Lake Qarun 1975 1987 1989 A,I
6 Red Sea Coasts 1981 1994 2003 T
7 S. Sinai Coasts 1987 1989 1992 T
8 Siwa Oasis 1985 1998 2002 U, A
9 Lake Nasser -- 1987 -- A,F,I,T,U
10 Wadi Allaqi -- 1987 1989 M,I,
11 Darb Arbein -- -- -- A,U
A: Agriculture, F: Fishing, I: Industry , M: Mining, T: Tourism, U: Urban
Source: Laws dates compiled from Bakr,2000. Other dates are approximate compiled from the Al- Ahram internet archives.
Traditional Settlement Tools
Policy maker, legislators and planners usually have a wider array of options than those actually used to deal with growth over Environmentally Sensitive Areas. It is possible to classify the tools into two categories: negative enforcement tools and positive encouragement mechanisms. Negative enforcement tools are usually phrased within the “don’t” paradigm and require a punitive enforceable system to calibrate. These are divided into 2 main types: Physical Tools, and Regulatory Tools.
It is necessary to point out two things: that the negative enforcement tools are not necessarily, and while tools many may become eventually translated into law, the intention of the phrase “regulatory” in the classification is to isolate the vehicle of implementation (law) from the concept of control.
o Physical tools are those used during the initial design phase of settlements or development. They include the careful selection of the location, the design of the settlement form that is adapted to the region, the density of development to cope with the carrying capacity, the timed phasing of development to allow for mitigation and adaptation to growth, facilitation or complication of access to encourage or discourage growth, and finally the buffer is a tool to limit the distance between the threatened area and the source of the threat.
o Regulatory tools are usually used during or after the settlements have grown (and often after the problem arises). These include zoning to isolate polluters, administrative boundaries to cordon the settlement’s growth, farmland protection, pollution control regulations that specify discharge and mitigation technology, EIA statements to evaluate the impact of development, protectorate and National Security designations. The second category is economic incentive measures. This category of tools is used within a market system to induce a desirable growth pattern. These tools are considered positive enforcement mechanisms in the sense that they work on the “choose”
paradigm. Individuals and groups weigh out their benefits and losses from compliance through the incentives and “hopefully” choose the most desirable
The Frequency and Effectiveness of Traditional Tools
The most preferred approach to deal with growth-related environmental problems has been the regulatory approach. In most of the cases studied, a form of “protection, prevention or prohibition” has been used in a law that deals with the pollution. The punitive tools associated with the law have been severe, including, for example, the possibility of demolition of the violation and/or jail. In many cases, sentences have been issued, but enforcement has not caught up. The National Democratic Party (2003) has found that the national spatial and regional planning policy is in need of overhaul. Especially since the farm protection laws, informal growth policies, and urban boundaries (cordons) have neither prevented the depletion of prime agricultural land nor the sizable growth of informal areas. This fact is exemplified almost across the cases reviewed as shown in table 3.
Table 3 – Implementation Effectiveness of Growth Control Tools
Environmentally Sensitive Area at
Risk
Tools Progress Remarks
1 Fertile Land L,D,B,F 3 Laws and 2 military decrees have not prevented the annual loss 30-60,000.
2 River Nile P Significant improvements have been made due to the politicization and public focus on the issue. The problem far from over.
3 Nile Islands C Islands continue to be used for tourist- housing development in violation of the Law.
4 Delta Wetlands C Illegal fishing and industrial discharge violations continue to damage the habitat, pollute and salinate the wetlands.
5 Lake Qarun P,C Illegal agricultural and industrial discharge sewers continue to damage the habitat, pollute and salinate the Lake.
6 Red Sea Coasts Z,C,E,N Illegal filling of shores to add acreage to tourist facilities continue to damage corals and the habitat.
7 S. Sinai Coasts Z,C,E Aside for Ras Moahamed Protectorate, informal spread of tourist villages along Ras Sudr-Sharm Axis threaten the shore env.
8 Siwa Oasis C Well over-use and agricultural drains into the soils continue and increase damage to the aquifers and soil fertility.
9 Lake Nasser N Over fishing and use of chemical fertilizers is a cause for alarm. There is no measurable impact yet on water quality.
0 Wadi Allaqi C Quarrying is in close proximity to the core area. A new village is built along the watershed.
unknown problem persists situation improving Many factors combine to make enforcement incoherent. Partly, it is due to the power nature of the institutions. For example, the EEAA follows a ministry of State rather than a conventional Cabinet ministry. This means that it makes recommendation and standards but lacks executive power to implement them. Cabinet ministries like The Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Industry, Ministry of Housing and Construction
(responsible for municipal waste-water), Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Wealth, Ministry of Health (responsible for air quality), The Ministry of Public Works and Water Resources and the Ministry of the Interior enforce the regulations only when Ministerial Decrees or laws are issued by their respective ministry.
The track record of environmental protection in table 3 reveals many interesting features:
1. Environmental concerns (or red flags) are usually raised reasonably before the problem becomes chronic. Urban encroachment over agriculture land, and tourist over-development of the Red Sea coasts are two obvious examples.
However, the gap between problem identification and action is significant.
2. In 8 of the cases, regulatory tools (prohibition) have been the preferred option, usually with little, reluctant or inconsistent enforcement.
3. Rarely has there been the use of physical design tools especially location, which plays a preventative rather than a curative tool.
4. At least 7 of the cases have had the problems persist. In about 5 of the cases, the problems have in fact worsened (NDP 2003).
While protection may have worked well in the US or elsewhere, it is rarely practical when applied alone, at least in the case of Egypt (and probably in many developing countries). Protection may be a viable alternative alone in the following conditions:
1. Rational and scientific process for the identification of Environmentally Sensitive Area
2. The abundance of alternative growth directions 3. The availability of a strong enforcement system
4. Organized and aware citizens and community institutions
5. Clear and transparent administrative process for development permits
This is not to say that all regulatory tools are useless. While regulatory tools are unavoidable, in combination with other tools, it has become clear that at least for the case of Lake Nasser, other tools are also needed. These lessons that were learnt from the national review and analysis of policies have been considered in the case at hand, the development for Lake Nasser.
Revisiting Growth Control Tools for Lake Nasser
Serious national interest in the development of the area of Lake Nasser began in 1997 when the Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation in collaboration with Economic and Social Planning for Spatial Development (a UNDP Project) launched a new project for development called: Lake Nasser Development Project within the Comprehensive Development Plan of Aswan Governorate (MOP, 2002).
Early on, the dilemma of proposing any form of development in the area was realized. The demonstrated track record in dealing with sensitive areas was not very
pollution and environmental damage almost irreversible. The zero alternative was necessarily: that no development is the safest alternative.
Option 1: No-Development
Many notable scholars and scientists spearhead the pro-protection school.
Among which are Dr. Abdel-Fatah El-Kasas and Dr Ahmed Hamed, both professors of Environment Studies and notable universities. The proponents of this approach argue that the slow moving waters of the Lake are a perfect environment for the growth of micro-organisms. The location of a large water surface in an hot-arid region, creates a competitive habitat where the struggle for survival among certain types of algae releases poisons into the water that can reach harmful levels to humans if flooding does not flush these poisons annually. Urban and tourist discharge of untreated sewage into the Lake is likely to increase that threat. Since our experience with prohibition and pollution discharge is not that impressive, it was perceived that the “no development” was the safest alternative.
Option 2: Have Faith and Develop
The second option was to trust that the current and improved efficiency of institutions is likely to safeguard the Lake as Egypt’s water bank and environmental resource while reaping the economic benefits of the area. This approach was found similar to the one applied in the Red Sea experience with its now-known unfortunate facts.
Option 3: Proceed With Innovation
The third and final option was to appreciate the unique economic opportunity this place has, while admitting but dealing with the flaws in the system. This was the last location in Egypt along the Nile. Water for development is the major factor. The costs of expanding further east or west along the desert were high and socially undesirable. The area is vast, resourceful and within few kilometers from the most congested parts in the South. The challenge was to improve upon the tools used during the design phase and innovate (within the Egyptian context) other tools that were in harmony with its market orientation and its expected institutional performance.
The aim of choosing among the above options has been to assist policy-maker defend their position in promoting a developmental stand. It was necessary to designating land use control and growth options for the area that are more likely to work in future Environmentally Sensitive Areas such as Lake Nasser. While the Lake is not yet an ESA at risk, it is an area of extreme environmental importance that fortunately has not joined the fateful path of other fertile and resourceful lands of Egypt. The reasons why Lake Nasser may be a turning point in growth control are as follows:
1. This is the first time planning for growth is ahead of the problem. Planning will not be reactive with crisis management mentality.
2. The biologic and hydrologic nature of the basin magnifies possible environmental problems, even more so than in the Nile.
3. It is the only remaining part of Nile-basin Egypt where growth has not yet taken place. Thus, development over there is desirable, economical and inevitable.
Conclusions: Concepts for Settlements and Landuse
The lessons learnt from the national overview and analysis have helped define a new framework to guide settlement growth strategy and land use control as they approach the Environmentally Sensitive Area of Lake Nasser:
1. The growth pattern, location and density need to differ from other parts of the valley: settlements need to be smaller, more distant and less populated to be better absorbed by the environment. The national policy of large 100,000 people-cities would just not work.
2. The settlement form would also need to be re-visited. Linear settlement along the shore that were typical in the Nile valley could not be accommodated along the slow waters of the Lake.
3. New forms of economic incentives need to be integrated with landuse.
Especially those related to Security of Tenure and Conditional Use. The current system of temporary farming causes a sense of instability to the farmer and encourages misuse of farming techniques, depleting the soils and polluting the waters with fertilizers.
4. The use of Protection areas needs to be applied cautiously and based on actual study of the core areas worthy of protection. This will add more legitimacy to the process and ensures that economic use is not forsaken in other parts.
Based on the considerations set forth, a Comprehensive Development Plan was prepared that introduces a better geographic distribution pattern of economic and population activities to improve resource utilization. Through the integration of environmental preservation with economic welfare objectives, new development concepts were proposed for the promising areas in the region, especially around Lake Nasser (Ismail, 2001). The new concepts also relate to combining landuse permits with pollution abatement compliance, the use of bio-regions in industrial allocation, economic activity diversity, encouraging eco-tourism, community and popular oversight on plan implementation, and advocating democratic management planning.
The resulting settlement strategy component of the plan was based on the use of GIS to identify the location of settlements within reasonable growth distances from Environmentally Sensitive Areas. Each settlement was identified within an Environmentally Sensitive Area based on the classifications system used in Table 1.
Finally, the tools proposed to guide the growth control policy of the regions was linked to each settlement. (figure 5).
Table 4- Alternative Tools Developed for Lake Nasser Settlement Growth
Tool Symbol More Effective If Applied
Location L Based on a sound Land
Suitability Analysis
; Settlement Form S Identifies directions of future
expansion that are away from Environmentally Sensitive Area
;
Density D Based on a sound Carrying
Capacity and Mitigation Analysis
; Phasing P Sequence of projects is logical
and a step-wise approach is recommended
;
Access A Linked with environmental as well as economic policy
Physical Tools
Buffer B Only the only factor is distance ; Zoning Z Zoning Review Institutions
functional
: Boundaries D Objectively and reasonably
dynamic
: Farmland Protection F Linked with economic as well as
environmental policy
: Pollution Cntrl P Enforcement is objective,
possible, consistent and reasonable.
:
EIA Statements E Professionally and conscientiously done
: Protectorate Designation C Designation is limited to the core
area with its tributaries.
:
Regulatory Tools
NS Designation N “Beyond the scope” :
Conditional Use Rights CU Associated with standards compliance
; Mitigation Grants MG Encourage proactive
involvement
: Density Bonuses DB Density is preferred to be
lowered to reduce a problem
: Transferable Development
Rights
TD :
Economic Incentives Tools
Security (Land Titles) LT Overuse of a temporary or common resource
;
Figure 5 – Location Distribution of Proposed New Settlements along the Lake
Table 5- Designation of Appropriate Tools for Lake Nasser Settlement Growth
Id Settlement Name Rank Sector
Additional Population
Environmentally Sensitive Area
Type Proposed GCT 1Abu-Simbel south 4 9 8250 B6, C8 LPBE
2Abu-Simbel south (1) 5 9 4100 B6, C8 LPBE 4Abu-Simbel center (1) 5 9 3200 B6, C8 LPBE 5Abu-Simbel center (2) 5 9 3200 B6, C8 LPBE 6Qostol and Adindan 4 9 9000 A12,B6,B8 CU,P 7Qostol and Adindan(1) 5 9 4500 A1, A2,B6,B8 L,CU,P 9Abu-Simbel City north (2) 5 9 3500 B78 CU,LT,L 10Abu-Simbel City north (3) 5 9 3500 B78 CU,LT,L
11Toshka south (1) 4 9 3800 B78 CU,LT,L
12Toshka south (2) 5 9 3800 B78 CU,LT,L
13Toshka south (3) 5 9 3800 B789 CU,LT,L 14Toshka north (3) 4 8 4000 B789 CU,LT,L 15Toshka north (2) 5 8 4000 B789,C9 CU,LT,L 16Toshka north (1) 5 8 4000 B789,C9 CU,LT,L 17Tomas And Afia (2) 5 8 3500 B5,B7,B8 L,B,CU,LT 18Tomas And Afia(1) 5 8 3500 B5,B7,B8 L,B,CU,LT 19Tomas And Afia 3 8 11000 B5,B7,B8 L,B,CU,LT
20Amada 5 8 1500 B5,B6,B7,B8 L,B,CU,LT
21El Sboaa 5 8 1500 B56,C7,B8 L,S,D,P,B
22South wadi Alaqi (1) 5 7 5548 A123,B5 L,S,D,P,B 23South wadi Alaqi (2) 5 7 5548 A123,B5 L,S,D,P,B 24South wadi Alaqi (Saiala) 4 7 11097 A123,B5,C7 L,B,CU,LT 25South wadi Alaqi (3) 5 7 5548 A123,B5 L,S,D,P,B 26North wadi Alaqi (Abisco) 5 7 6381 A123,B5,C7 L,B,CU,LT
27wadi Alaqi 3 7 15258 B4,C9 L ,D,B
28Garf Husein (4) 5 6 5050 A1,B78 L,S,CU,LT,P
29South Kalabsha (1) 5 6 3500 C78,D10,D12 L,S,CU,LT,MG
30Kalabsha 3 6 25000 C78,D10,D12 L,S,CU,LT,MG
31South Kalabsha (2) 5 6 3500 C78,D10,D12 L,S,CU,LT,MG
32Garf Husein (1) 5 6 5050 A1,B78 L,S,CU,LT,P
33Garf Husein (2) 5 6 5050 A1,B78 L,S,CU,LT,P
34Garf Husein (3) 5 6 5050 A1,B78 L,S,CU,LT,P
35Garf Husein 4 6 5050 5050 L,S,CU,LT,P,MG
36North Kalabsha (1) 5 6 3450 C789,D10,D12 L,S,CU,LT,MG 37North Kalabsha (2) 5 6 3450 C789,D10,D12 L,S,CU,LT,MG
38Karkar (1) 5 5 6836 C9,D12 L,S
39Karkar (2) 5 5 6836 C9,D12 L,S
40Karkar 3 5 32960 C9,D12 L,S
59Qostal and Adindan(2) 5 9 4500 A1, A2,B6,B8 L,CU,P
References:
Bakr, S. (2000) “Environmental Management in Egypt”. In PROCEDEINGS Conference Paper at the Regional Arab Conference for Sustainable Urban Development. Cairo-Egypt
EEAA (2003). Annual Report on the Environment Ministry of State for
Environmental Affairs, Egyptian Environmental Affairs Agency Steiner, F (2000). The Living Landscape. McGraw Hill
Ismail, A. (2001). “GIS Resource Analysis for Sustainable Spatial Planning” in PROCEDEINGS of CUPUM 2001, Honolulu.
Ministry Of Planning (MOP-Egypt) (2002) Lake Nasser Development Plan with Aswan Governorate Comprehensive Development Plan. Ministry of Planning/UNDP May 2002
National Democratic Party (2003). Policy Paper on Regional Planning and Growth May 2003.
O'Keefe, P and Wisner, B (1997) Landuse and development / editors, London : International African Institute
O'Looney, J. (1995) Economic development and environmental control : balancing business and community in an age of NIMBYs and LULUs / John O'Looney. Westport, Conn. : Quorum Books
Ophuls, W. (1977) Ecology and Politics of Scarcity. CSF Freeman.
Stewart, D (1996) Cities in the desert: the Egyptian New - Town Program. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 86,460–479.
Zachary, S (1992) The Environmental Policy Paradox. Prentice Hall. NJ
