The research relevance is determined by the need to modernise the state land monitoring system in Ukraine in the context of post-war reconstruction, when sustainable development of territories, food security and social cohesion directly depend on the quality, efficiency and adaptability of management decisions. The study aimed to justify the possibilities of applying the Agile paradigm as a conceptual basis for updating state land monitoring and monitoring of land relations in the post-war period. The study used a narrative review of scientific sources, analysis of the regulatory framework, elements of the case method and conceptual modelling. As a result, the study determined that the modern system of state land monitoring in Ukraine is fragmentary, has limited data integration, is insufficiently adapted to the conditions of the war and post-war period, and has weak institutional coordination, which reduces the effectiveness of management decisions. The study argues that the combination of the principles of Strong Land Governance, digitalisation, stakeholder and polycentric approaches creates the preconditions for the transition from static monitoring models to adaptive iterative systems. The concept of Sustainable Agile Land Management was proposed, which integrates resilience, adaptive management and institutional change, prioritising the use of geospatial data in near real time. A conceptual framework for sustainable land management in post-war Ukraine and a model of an Agile ecosystem for monitoring and managing land resources with a stakeholder core have been developed, demonstrating the logic of interaction between monitoring, auditing and management decision-making. The study demonstrated that the Agile approach can ensure a rapid response to the risks of land degradation, incorporating the local context and ensuring the coordination of environmental, economic and social development goals. The practical value of the study results is determined by the possibility of using the proposed approach and models as a methodological basis for modernising state land monitoring and supporting management decisions in the process of post-war reconstruction of Ukraine
public administration; land resource management; social welfare; sustainable development; land use
Received 25.07.2025, Revised 16.10.2025, Accepted 10.12.2025
Retrieved from Volume 18, No. 2, 2025
https://doi.org/10.56318/dg/2.2025.05
Pages 5-15
[1] Alsamar, A., Korabi, A., Jalabi, S., Khan, I., & Lintelo, D. (2023). Land registry in Syria after a decade of conflict: A tale of three cities. International Development, 35(8), 2667-2685. doi: 10.1002/jid.3792.
[2] Aoki, C., Al-Lami, A., & Kugaprasatham, S. (2014). Environmental management of the Iraqi marshlands in the post-conflict period. In E. Weinthal, J. Troell & M. Nakayama (Eds.), Water and post-conflict peacebuilding (pp. 118-136). London: Earthscan.
[3] Azadi, H. (2020). Monitoring land governance: Understanding roots and shoots. Land Use Policy, 94(6), article number 104530. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104530.
[4] Boza Espinoza, T.E., Salinas, N., Cosio, E.G., Tito, R., Nina-Quispe, A., & Roman-Cuesta, R.M. (2024). Assessing Peru’s land monitoring system contributions towards fulfilment of its international environmental commitments. Land, 13(2), article number 205. doi: 10.3390/land13020205.
[5] Braslavska, O. (2025). GIS technologies and remote sensing in monitoring land use changes. Urban Development and Spatial Planning, 89, 472-487. doi: 10.32347/2076-815x.2025.89.472-487.
[6] Dyshlyk, O., Dorosh, A., Tarnopolsky, A., & Tarnopolsky, Ye. (2018). Infrastructure of geospatial data in Ukraine: Status and methodological problems of legislative regulation. Land Management, Cadastre and Land Monitoring, 1, 33-43. doi: 10.31548/zemleustriy2018.01.004.
[7] Embley, D., & Thalhelm, B. (2011). Handbook of conceptual modeling: Theory, practice, and research challenges. New York: Springer.
[8] Enemark, S., McLaren, R., & Lemmen, C. (2016). Fit-for-purpose land administration: Guiding principles for country implementation. Nairobi: UNHabitat.
[9] Ercan, O. (2022). Land management paradigm: Global agenda and the case of Turkey. Konya Journal of Engineering Sciences, 10(3), 2667-8055. doi: 10.36306/konjes.1143000.
[10] Hall, R., Scoones, I., & Henley, G. (2016). Strengthening land governance: Lessons from implementing the voluntary guidelines. LEGEND State of the Debate Report 2016. London: UKaid. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2084.6962.
[11] Jorgensen, I., Garrick, D., & Wight, Ch. (2025). A narrative review of social infrastructure for agricultural groundwater nature-based solutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/sus.2025.10020.
[12] Kopecká, M., Szatmári, D., & Polyvach, K. (2025). Land cover mapping of war-affected areas. Geographical Journal, 77(2), 97-110. doi: 10.31577/geogrcas.2025.77.2.04.
[13] Land Code of Ukraine. (2001, October). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2768-14#Text.
[14] Lazareva, O.V., & Yuzva, V.V. (2024). Justification of the application of the synergy approach in land use in the post-war period. In Management and rational use of land resources in territorial communities in the post-war period: Proceedings of the VII all-Ukrainian scientific and practical conference (pp. 26-29). Kherson: KhDAEU.
[15] Lyusak, A., & Nikolaichuk, K. (2020). Problems and areas to improve a land monitoring system in Ukraine. Land Reclamation and Water Management, 2, 81-88. doi: 10.31073/mivg202002-249.
[16] Malashevskyi, M., Tarnopolskyi, A., Kovalchuk, I., Malashevska, O., & Tarnopolskyi, Y. (2025). Geospatial data infrastructure for land monitoring in Ukraine. In 18th international conference monitoring of geological processes and ecological condition of the environment (Vol. 2025, article number 156). Kyiv: European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. doi: 10.3997/2214-4609.2025510156.
[17] Matias, M., Henriques, Ch., Damásio, C., Birra, F., & Pires, J. (2025). LAND IT: A decision support system for optimising land use planning strategies. AGILE GIScience Series, 6, article number 39. doi: 10.5194/agile-giss-6-39-2025
[18] Mishchenko, R., Ilchenko, V., Kariuk, A.M. (2020). Geospatial data infrastructure in Ukraine. Herald of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 12, 136-140.
[19] Ndugwa, R.P., & Omusula, C.K. (2025). Institutional frameworks, policies, and land data: Insights from monitoring land governance and tenure security in the context of Sustainable Development Goals in Kenya, Rwanda, Uganda, and Zambia. Land, 14(5), article number 960. doi: 10.3390/land14050960.
[20] Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 474 “On Public Monitoring of Land Relations”. (2023, May). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/main/474-2023-%D0%BF?utm_source#Text.
[21] Reydon, B., Fernandes, V., & Telles, T. (2020). Land governance as a precondition for decreasing deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Land Use Policy, 94, article number 104313. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104313.
[22] Rybalko, K.V. (2025). Mechanisms of public management of agricultural lands. (Doctoral dissertation, V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Kharkiv, Ukraine).
[23] Sharapova, S., & Kashkina, V. (2025). Current status and development directions of the land and soil monitoring system in Ukraine. Analytical and Comparative Law, 2(3), 39-43. doi: 10.24144/2788-6018.2025.03.2.5.
[24] Vasilieva, L. (2024). Problems and prospects of the mechanism of state management of land relations. Pressing Problems of Public Administration, 2(65), 83-98. doi: 10.26565/1684-8489-2024-2-05
[25] Weith, Th., Barkmann, T., Gaasch, N., Rogga, S., Straub, Ch., & Zscheischler, Z. (Eds.). (2021). Sustainable land management in a European context: A co-design approach. Heidelberg: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-50841-8.