Land evaluation is formally defined as 'the assessment of land performance when used for a specified purpose,

involving the execution and interpretation of surveys and studies of land forms, soils, vegetation, climate and other
aspects of land in order to identify and make a comparison of promising kinds of land use in terms applicable to the
objectives of the evaluation' (FAO, 1976).
Conceptually, land evaluation requires matching of the ecological and management requirements of relevant kinds
of land use with land qualities1, whilst taking local economic and social conditions into account. Land evaluation
provides practical answers to such questions as "What other uses of land are physically possible and economically
and socially relevant?", "What inputs are necessary to bring about a desired level of production?", and "What are the
current land uses and what are the consequences if current management practices stay the same?".
www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/nr/images/resources/images/landevaluationatfao.doc
Land evaluation is aimed at assessment of land performance and its production potential for a specific
purpose.
Land evaluation is only part of the process of land use planning.
The function of land use planning is to guide decisions on land use in such a way that the resources of
the environment are put to the most beneficial use for man, whilst at the same time conserving those
resources for the future.
Land evaluation is the process of assessing the performance of land when used for a
UNESCO EOLSS SAMPLE CHAPTERS LAND USE AND LAND COVER Vol. II
- Land Evaluation - Willy H. Verheye Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS)
given purpose. Land evaluation may be operated either for a specific kind of use (maize,
potatoes) or for a more general utilization (agriculture, grazing) and is then referred to as
land suitability or land capability evaluation respectively. Land evaluation may be
qualitative or quantitative. L
Principles

Certain principles are fundamental to the approach and methods employed in land
evaluation. These basic principles are as follows:

i. Land suitability is assessed and classified with respect to specified kinds of use
This principle embodies recognition of the fact that different kinds of land use have
different requirements. As an example, an alluvial flood plain with impeded drainage
might be highly suitable for rice cultivation but not suitable for many forms of
agriculture or for forestry.

The concept of land suitability is only meaningful in terms of specific kinds of land
use, each with their own requirements, e.g. for soil moisture, rooting depth etc. The
qualities of each type of land, such as moisture availability or liability to flooding, are
compared with the requirements of each use. Thus the land itself and the land use are
equally fundamental to land suitability evaluation.

ii. Evaluation requires a comparison of the benefits obtained and the inputs needed on
different types of land
Land in itself, without input e, rarely if ever possesses productive potential; even the
collection of wild fruits requires labour, whilst the use of natural wilderness for nature
conservation requires measures for its protection. Suitability for each use is assessed
by comparing the required input e, such as labour, fertilizers or road construction,
with the goods produced or other benefits obtained.

iii. A multidisciplinary approach is required

The evaluation process requires contributions from the fields of natural science, the
technology of land use, economics and sociology. In particular, suitability evaluation
always incorporates economic considerations to a greater or lesser extort. In
qualitative evaluation, economics may be employed in general terms only, without
calculation of costs and returns. In quantitative evaluation the comparison of benefits
and inputs in economic terms plays a major part in the determination of suitability.

It follows that a team carrying out an evaluation require a range of specialists. These
will usually include natural scientists (e.g. geomorphologists, soil surveyors,
ecologists), specialists in the technology of the forms of land use under consideration
(e.g. agronomists foresters, irrigation engineers, experts in livestock management),
economists and sociologists. There may need to be some combining of these functions
for practical reasons, but the principle of multidisciplinary activity, encompassing
studies of land, land use, social aspects and economics, remains.

iv. Evaluation is made in terms relevant to the physical economic and social context
of the area concerned
Such factors as the regional climate, levels of living of the population, availability and
cost of labour, need for employment, the local or export markets, systems of land
tenure which are socially and politically acceptable, and availability of capital, form
the context within which evaluation takes place. It would, for example be unrealistic
to say that land was suitable for non-mechanized rice cultivation, requiring large
amounts of low-cost labour, in a country with high labour costs. The assumptions
underlying evaluation will differ from one country to another and, to some extent,
between different areas of the same country. Many of these factors are often implicitly
assumed; to avoid misunderstanding and to assist in comparisons between different
areas, such assumptions should be explicitly stated.

v. Suitability refers to use on a sustained basis

The aspect of environmental degradation is taken into account when assessing
suitability. There might, for example, be forms of land use which appeared to be
highly profitable in the short run but were likely to lead to soil erosion, progressive
pasture degradation, or adverse changes in river regimes downstream. Such
consequences would outweigh the short-term profitability and cause the land to be
classed as not suitable for such purposes.
This principle by no means requires that the environment should be preserved in a
completely unaltered state. Agriculture normally involves clearance of any natural
vegetation present, and normally soil fertility under arable cropping is higher or lower,
depending on management, but rarely at the same level as under the original
vegetation. What is required is that for any proposed form of land use, the probable
consequences for the environment should be assessed as accurately as possible and
such assessments taken into consideration in determining suitability.

vi. Evaluation involves comparison of more than a single kind of use

This comparison could be, for example, between agriculture and forestry, between
two or more different farming systems, or between individual crops. Often it will
include comparing the existing uses with possible changes, either to new kinds of use
or modifications to the existing uses. Occasionally a proposed form of use will be
compared with non-use, i.e. leaving the land in its unaltered state, but the principle of
comparison remains. Evaluation is only reliable if benefits and inputs from any given
kind of use can be compared with at least one, and usually several different,
alternatives. If only one use is considered there is the danger that, whilst the land may
indeed be suitable for that use, some other and more beneficial use may be ignored.

Land evaluation can be defined in general terms as the assessment of land performance when
used for a specific purpose. Land may be evaluated directly, e.g. through the collection and
processing of crop-yield data, or indirectly. In the latter case it is assumed that a number of
diagnostic criteria influence land performance in a reasonably predictable manner, and that this
performance can be deducted from the observation of those properties. In this context, land
evaluation involves the execution and interpretation of surveys and studies of landforms, soils,
vegetation, climate and other aspects of land in order to identify and make comparisons of
promising kinds of land use in terms applicable to the objectives of the evaluation. The values
allocated to those properties can then be integrated into either a categoric or a parametric system.
Land capability classification is a more specific term introduced by the USDA approach to land
evaluation. It is used for a ranked system based on the severity of land limitations for general
agricultural use and refers in particular to the quality of the land to produce common cultivated
crops and pasture without deterioration over a long time. Good examples of land capability
classifications are discussed in Other Land Evaluation system.

Land Capability Classes and Subclasses:

Capability class is the broadest category in the land capability classification system.
Class codes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are used to represent both irrigated and
nonirrigated land capability classes.
Class 1 soils have slight limitations that restrict their use.
Class 2 soils have moderate limitations that reduce the choice of plants or require
moderate conservation practices.
Class 3 soils have severe limitations that reduce the choice of plants or require
special conservation practices, or both.
Class 4 soils have very severe limitations that restrict the choice of plants or require
very careful management, or both.
Class 5 soils have little or no hazard of erosion but have other limitations,
impractical to remove, that limit their use mainly to pasture, range, forestland, or
wildlife food and cover.
Class 6 soils have severe limitations that make them generally unsuited to
cultivation and that limit their use mainly to pasture, range, forestland, or wildlife
food and cover.
Class 7 soils have very severe limitations that make them unsuited to cultivation
and that restrict their use mainly to grazing, forestland, or wildlife.
Class 8 soils and miscellaneous areas have limitations that preclude their use for
commercial plant production and limit their use to recreation, wildlife, or water
supply or for esthetic purposes.
Capability subclass is the second category in the land capability classification
system. Class codes e, w, s, and c are used for land capability subclasses.
Subclass e is made up of soils for which the susceptibility to erosion is the dominant
problem or hazard affecting their use. Erosion susceptibility and past erosion
damage are the major soil factors that affect soils in this subclass.
Subclass w is made up of soils for which excess water is the dominant hazard or
limitation affecting their use. Poor soil drainage, wetness, a high water table, and
overflow are the factors that affect soils in this subclass.
Subclass s is made up of soils that have soil limitations within the rooting zone,
such as shallowness of the rooting zone, stones, low moisture-holding capacity, low
fertility that is difficult to correct, and salinity or sodium content.
Subclass c is made up of soils for which the climate (the temperature or lack of
moisture) is the major hazard or limitation affecting their use.
The subclass represents the dominant limitation that determines the capability
class. Within a capability class, where the kinds of limitations are essentially equal,
the subclasses have the following priority: e, w, s, and c. Subclasses are not
assigned to soils or miscellaneous areas in capability classes 1 and 8.

This pie map contains a pie chart for each state and the nation. The pie slices reflect acres in various
land capability classes as a percent of the total area of non-Federal land. The size of the pies is
proportional to the amount of non- Federal land in the state, scaled between Rhode Island and Texas.
The 32,502,700 acres in land capability class V (2% of the U.S. total) are not incorporated into the
pies. The total national acreage is also provided. Land capability class definitions area as follows: Class
I contains soils having few limitations for cultivation; Class II contains soils having some limitations for
cultivation; Class III contains soils having severe limitations for cultivation; Class IV contains soils
having very severe limitations for cultivation; Class V contains soils unsuited to cultivation, although
pastures can be improved and benefits from proper management can be expected; Class VI contains
soils unsuited to cultivation, although some may be used provided unusually intensive management is
applied; Class VII contains soils unsuited to cultivation and having one or more limitations which
cannot be corrected; Class VIII contains soils and landforms restricted to use as recreation, wildlife,
water supply or asthetic purposes.
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/about/history/?cid=nrcs143_021436