Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Federal Ministry of Education, Science, and Culture
Fo
rsc
hu
ng
sp
rog
ram
m K
ult
url
an
ds
ch
aft
Au
str
ian
La
nd
sc
ap
e R
es
ea
rch
FR
Spatial Indicators of Land use Sustainability
submitted by the Project team SINUS
co-ordinated by Thomas Wrbka
Vienna, January 2003
Final report of the research project
SINUS
a product of the national research program ‘Austrian Landscape Research’funded by the Federal Ministry of Education, Science, and Culture
(formerly Federal Ministry of Science and Transportation)
Imp r e s s um :
Ed i t o r i a l a nd De s i g n :
Institute of Ecology and Conservation Biology; University of Vienna, IECB,Johannes Peterseil und Thomas WrbkaA-1090 Vienna, Althanstraße 14; [email protected]
a product of the national research program ‘Austrian Landscape Research’funded by the Federal Ministry of Education, Science, and Culture(formerly Federal Ministry of Science and Transportation)
Geschäftszahl GZ 30.642/1-VII/A/3a/97 © SINUS 2003
I ECB Thomas Wrbka, Johannes Peterseil, Andrea Kiss, Ingrid Schmitzberger,Christoph Plutzar, Erich Szerencsits und Barbara Thurner
I V F L Werner Schneider und Franz Suppan
KL IVV Helmut Beissmann, Renate Hengsberger und Gernot Tutsch
Pro jec t team SINUS
Department of Conservation Biology, Vegetation and Landscape Ecology; Institute of Ecology and Conservation Biology; University Vienna (IECB)
Institute of Surveying, Remote Sensing, and Land Information; University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences; Vienna (IVFL)
Institute of Geography and Regional Research; University Klagenfurt (IGR)Konrad Lorenz Institute for Comparative Ethology; Austrian Academy of Sciences (KLIVV)
Project team SINUS
(Johannes Peterseil, Ingrid Schmitzberger,
Werner Schneider, Franz Suppan, , Gernot Tutsch und )
Helmut Beissmann, Renate Hengsberger, Andrea Kiss, Christoph Plutzar,
Erich Szerencsits Barbara Thurner, Thomas Wrbka
(Landschaftsökologische Strukturmerkmaleals Indikatoren der Nachhaltigkeit)
Spatial Indices for Land use Sustainability
Final report of the research project
SINUS
Austrian Landscape ResearchVienna, January 2003
Remarks
This CD contains the final report of the research project ‘Spatial Indicators of Land use Sustainability (SINUS)’. In this booklet the general framework, the concepts, the methods and the basic results are shortly presented.
The full version of the final report (only in German language) is on the CD as pdf-documents. The navigation through the report can be done by a normal WWW-browser. Just insert the CD-ROM disc and open the file sinus.htm.
The documents of the final report can be viewed with the Acrobat Reader. If you don't have this viewer you can download it from for free.http://www.acrobat.com
All results (screen and print version) underlie copyright regulations. Unauthorised copying and digital use of the data, e.g. reverse engineering or copy by means of the clipboard, or changing the data is prohibited. The digital products can be used only with permission of the SINUS project team.
Contact:Univ.Ass. Dr. T. WRBKA
Department of Conservation Biology, Vegetation and Landscape EcologyInstitue of Ecology and Conservation Biology; University of ViennaA-1090 Vienna, Althanstraße 14
I
II
Preface
Austria has a wide variety of different landscapes. Several bio-geographic regions and different socio cultural influences come together in the heart of Europe. The diverse natural potential in our country and regional land use traditions were the basis for the development of the present cultural landscape.
Change is and was an important feature of landscapes. Speed and scale of these change processes accelerated during the past decades. This mostly led to a decrease of the richness and heterogeneity of the landscapes due to economic reasons.
The assessment of the sustainability of landscape changes and development in respect to secure resources for the coming generations have to be therefore a central political issue. Indicators for this assessment are needed. The present research project ‘Spatial Indicators for Land use Sustainability (SINUS)’ resulted in a set of methods to perform such an assessment. The results of this project are presented in this final report.
We hope to enhance quality, efficiency and precision with the result of this project within the framework ‘Austrian Landscape Research’.
Karolina Begusch-PfefferkornProgram co-ordination
Austrian Landscape Research
Christian SmolinerFederal Ministry of Education,Science and Culture
III
Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.1 The concept of Sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.2 Landscapes as spatial reference units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31.3 Hemerobiotic state and sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Land use and landscape structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. Land cover and landscape structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. Cultural Landscape Types as spatial reference units . . . 11
5. Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135.1 Hemerobiotic state and landscape complexity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6. Sustainability of Austrian Cultural Landscapes . . . . . . . 176.1 Statistical approach – REGSUST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186.2 Rule based approach – FUZSUST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
7. Data processing and management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
8. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
ALR – Information about the research program . . . . . . . . . 24
The project was designed to develop reliable and operational indicators of practical
use for long term monitoring and assessment of land use sustainability in Austrian
cultural landscapes. Enabling objective measurements of the ecological performance
of land use should result in practical guidelines for the future development of Austrian
landscapes. The research project aimed at the identification and examination of the
relationship between landscape structure and processes in the landscape. A broad
empirical approach was designed to meet the scientific and practical demands. The
project results in a well based contribution to the international relevant topic of
environmental indicators (see EEA, OECD). For the scientific field of landscape
ecology, an important contribution to a better understanding of the interdependence
of land-use processes and the emerging spatial patterns – the pattern and process
paradigm (see Forman & Godron 1986; Naveh & Liebermann 1993; Godron 1995;
Zonneveld 1995) – can be made. The analysis is based on a broad empirical
investigation of about 200 sample plots which are representative for the Austrian
cultural landscapes.
The aim of the project was to analyse landscape processes and to design procedures
for fine and coarse scaled sustainability assessment on a landscape level. The use of
landscape structure attributes for this assessment was tested and implemented in an
assessment procedure by answering the following research questions:
# Which and how many attributes of the land use mosaic have to be recorded to describe the landscape with respect to its sustainability?
# How are landscape ecological relevant features of the landscape structure distributed on a local and on a regional level and which patterns – the so-called ‘structural types’ can be distinguished on different scales?
# Which theoretical concepts can be applied to explain these patterns and can be used to perform a classification?
1. Introduction
1
1.1 The concept of sustainability
The term ‘sustainability’ was first introduced into the terminology of forestry of the late
18th century. In the 80s and the beginning of the 90s of the 20th century the term was
defined in a different meaning. Sustainability as a sustaining and future orientated
concept for regional policy and planning became more and more important in the last
centuries. Sustainability nowadays is a central element of research programs
(Begusch et al. 1995), political guidelines and development strategies (Österr.
Bundesreg. 1995, 2002). Referring to various authors sustainability has three main
components: an economical, a social and an ecological.
2
social dimensionmaintenance of social peace
and life quality
economic dimensionmaintenance of economical
competitiveness
ecological dimensionmaintenance of natural
resources
A strategy for sustainable
development therefore has
to address all three compo-
nents (Österr. Bundesreg.
2002).
In ecology the concept of sustainability is viewed by two different aspects. On the one hand there is aprocess-oriented view, where the sustainable use of resources is compared with the material and energy fluxes in natural and semi natural ecosystems. On the other hand, a structure-based approach can be identified, where sustainable landscapes have to have an optimal arrangement of spatial elements, including a certain amount and configuration of valuable biotopes.
For the implementation of these concepts, reliable, robust, and operational indicators for the assessment and the reporting of sustainable developments in the Austrian cultural landscapes are needed.
3
1.2 Landscapes as spatial reference units
1.3 Hemerobiotic state and sustainability
Forman & Godron (1986) define landscapes as a ‘mosaic of interacting ecosystems’.
The focus lies on the relation and the processes between the smallest spatial units of
these landscapes, the landscape elements. The landscape is the framework. Groups of
ecologically similar individual landscapes, so-called landscape types are therefore
valuable spatial reference units, which are necessary for a consistent comparative
sustainability assessment.
The concept of the hemerobiotic state was developed by Jalas (1955) and introduced
to the European vegetation and landscape ecology by Sukopp (1969, 1972). It is
based on an actualistic approach, which is orientated on the deviation of the actual
vegetation in comparison to the potential natural vegetation (PNV) of a certain plot.
The hemerobiotic state therefore is a measure of the human influence on ecosystems.
In Austria the concept of hemerobiotic state was first applied by Grabherr (1991) for
the biotope mapping of Vorarlberg (Grabherr & Broggi 1991) and later for forest
ecosystems in an Austrian wide survey (Grabherr et al. 1998). The concept was also
implemented in the methodology for the ‘Classification of Austrian Cultural
Landscapes’ (Wrbka 1996; Wrbka et al. 2002) and was used for the description and
assessment on the ecotope level as well as on the landscape level.
The main advantage of this concept is the consistent and comparable framework for
the assessment of different landscapes. On the basis of this concept, dissimilar regions
like the Alpine pasture landscapes of the western Austria and the vineyard dominated
landscapes in the eastern part of Austria, can be compared regarding their
naturalness.
4
Man changes the landscape system for his own benefit (Fischer-Kowalski et al. 1997).
The production potential of a landscape is raised by energy and material input. This
leads to a decreasing entropy of the landscape (Forman & Moore 1992) and a change
in the landscape structure. Human influence tends to a simplification and
geometrisation of the landscape's structure (Odum & Turner 1990; Forman & Godron
1986). Changes in the configuration of the landscape, e.g. changes in the amount and
distribution of small biotopes, influence biodiversity. Several studies, also within the
Austrian Landscape Research Program, have shown that the hemerobiotic state, as a
measure for human induced land use intensity, is an important descriptor for
biodiversity on a landscape level (Grabherr et al. 1998; Zechmeister & Moser 2001;
Moser et al. 2002).
The degree of human influence on the ecosystems is therefore a highly integrative
indicator for the description of the landscape system. Changes in a landscape towards
a stronger anthropogenic influence can therefore be seen as a non-sustainable
development (see Fig. 1). The hemerobiotic state is not sustainability itself, but
changes in the hemerobiotic state allow us to assess the sustainability of a
development on the landscape level. The assessment of a certain landscape element
results in relation to the average situation of the respective landscape type. This is
called ‘Concept of Relative Deviance’ (see Fig. 1) within the present research
project. The change of deviance of the hemerobiotic state of a certain landscape has
to be assessed in respect of a comparable reference unit, as the classification of the
Austrian Cultural Landscapes is providing.
Landscape structure attributes play a main role as indirect indicators. They are applied
to determine the hemerobiotic state of a certain landscape. The relation between
hemerobiotic state and attributes of the landscape structure was empirically tested.
5
Fig.1. Scheme of the ‘Concept of Relative Deviance’ which is used for the assessment of land use sustainability of the Austrian Cultural Landscapes: Changes, e.g. intensification of the land use regime, are reflected by the hemerobiotic state of a specific landscape. These changes of the hemerobiotic state are indicating changes of the sustainability of these landscapes. Sustainability is measured as the deviance of a certain landscape cell from the average hemerobiotic state of the reference unit, e.g. a certain landscape type. A detailed explanation is given in the final report.
hemerobiotic state of the main land use system
forested landscapes
positive negativenodeviance agricultural landscapes
urban landscapes
ahemerob metahemerob
decrease of sustainability
low
high
low
high
sust
ain
abili
ty
positive negativenodeviance
positive negativenodeviance
pro
port
ion
pro
port
ion
pro
port
ion
stro
nger
anth
ropogenic
influence
6
2. Land use and landscape structure
Concepts: Landscapes can be understood as a ‘mosaic of interacting ecosystems’,
the landscape elements. Structure, function and change are the central features
examined by landscape ecological research (Forman & Godron 1986; Godron 1995). A
holistic understanding of the backgrounds and dynamics of landscape processes is
necessary (Naveh 2000). Landscape history and dynamics are central terms.
Landscape elements, as the smallest distinguishable functional and structural
homogenous units on the landscape level, are the founding stones of the landscape.
Every landscape element can be categorised as either (a) matrix, (b) corridor, or (c)
patch. The investigation of origin and internal dynamic, e.g. changes in species
composition due to disturbance, gives us important insights into the function and
potential of development for the respective landscape element as well as the whole
landscape. Disturbance, resource heterogeneity or introduction of artificial elements
are the main drivers for landscape dynamics and change. When analysing processes
and functional relations on a landscape level, landscape structure plays a key role in
the understanding. Most processes on a landscape level are influenced or even
controlled by spatial patterns.
Fig.2. Examples for the results of the landscape structure mapping. (1) land use classes (yellow ... crop land, light green ... grassland, dark green ... forest). (2) hemerobiotic state (graduate colour from red = artificial to green = natural). Samples from crop land dominated landscapes : (a) Gradnitz - fine-grained landscape with a high amount of small biotopes (Waldviertel); (b) Teichhof - coarse-grained agricultural landscape (Marchfeld).
7
(a) Gradnitz (b) Teichhof
(1)
(2)
8
Examples: The sample plot Gradnitz (E662389, Fig. 2a) is representing the
traditional crop-land dominated landscapes of the hercynian uplands (Waldviertel).
Narrow grassland corridors along brooks are running through a fine-scaled
heterogeneous landscape. The small sized strip-fields with narrow balks witness a
long land use history, which dates back to the middle ages. The agricultural matrix is
rich in mesohemerob elements, like field-margins or hedgerows.
Intensive crop-land use, especially cash crops, is characteristic for the agricultural
landscape of the sample plot Teichhof (E788338, Fig. 2b). The only intersections of
this coarse-grained landscape is a dense network of agricultural driveways. The fields
are large, compact and rectangular. The agricultural matrix is strongly anthropogenic
influenced and small biotopes are very sparsely distributed. The remaining linear
features of this landscape are road verges. Balks have been almost removed in the
course of amelioration and intensification of agricultural land use.
The results of this landscape structure mapping are used for the description of the units of the Classification of the Austrian Cultural Landscapes (Wrbka et al. 2002). These units play a key role for the sustainability assessment at a regional level. The fine-scaled mapping procedure provides valuable information about the configuration of Austrian landscapes that can be used for the description and assessment of ecological sustainability on the local level.
Methods: From the variety of the Austrian Cultural Landscapes 120 1 x 1 km sample
plots were chosen using a stratified random sampling procedure. Base unit for the
mapping was the landscape element as well as the landscape. In a field survey for the
whole landscape plot every landscape element was delineated on a base map.
Attributes of landscape structure, the hemerobiotic state, the trophic level, plant
species richness, origin type and dynamic were recorded for every single landscape
element. The spatial data were stored in a GIS that was linked with the landscape
structure database JOKL.
9
3. Land cover and landscape structure
Concepts: An actual and detailed Austrian wide land cover data set was generated
using reference data from the fine scale landscape structure mapping. Remote
sensing data – satellite images – were the primary data source.
Methods: Different methods of satellite imagery were tested (e.g. sub-pixel analysis,
watershed segmentation, etc.) to select the most efficient for this huge data set. The
methods were applied to the area cover satellite images of Austria. Landsat TM-5
images were used. The combination of an innovative segmentation method (region-
growing algorithm) and classification procedure (knowledge based classification by
using additional attributes like shape and spatial distribution of the segments) resulted
in an efficient use of the resources. The method was implemented in a stand-alone
application under a UNIX platform.
As reference data the fine scaled landscape structure mapping (scale 1 : 10.000) as
well as the information about the landscape types of the Austrian Cultural Landscapes
Classification were used (scale 1 : 200.000; Wrbka et al. 2002).
Results: The result of the automatic satellite image interpretation was an Austrian
wide land cover data set. Eighteen different land cover types were distinguished. The
spatial resolution of the segments corresponds to the units of land ownership and land
use i.e. the parcels.
The method of the automatic satellite image interpretation was optimised to analyse
the landscape structure. Thus a clear defined field of application for the land cover
data is determined. In comparison to widely used classification methods, the results of
this newly developed land cover classification are better with respect to landscape
structure information, but weaker in other aspects.
10
Fig. 3. Examples of the results of the satellite image segementation and land cover classification (nothern Weinviertel, Raum Poysdorf):
(li) Landsat TM Band 4,3,2; (mi) Segments produced by the ‘region-growing’-algorithm;
(re) Land cover (green … grassland, yellow … crop land, red .. . build up areas, dark green … forest).
The segments with their attributes, describing spectral characteristics, shape and land
cover type, have to be put into the context of an individual landscape they are
belonging to. Therefore, much emphasis was given to calculate the percentage of a
certain land cover type within a landscape and other average figures, whereas the
accurate measurements of single segments were less important.
The data set was used for a detailed description of the landscape types and provided
the primary dataset for the assessment of the sustainability of land use management
in different cultural landscape types.
11
4. Cultural Landscape Types as reference units
Concepts: A sustainable development of the cultural landscape to secure the living
space and quality for humans, as well as for other organisms can only be achieved by
foresighted environmental planning. To be successful, such planning processes often
follow widely accepted guiding visions, which have to be based on scientifically sound
facts and figures. For this procedure, administrative units are often used as spatial
reference units, but they are not always useful. This is due to the fact, that regions with
a homogenous natural potential are divided into different parts and conversely,
ecological transition zones are not being taken into consideration by administrative
units, like municipalities.
Landscape ecology can help to overcome these shortcomings, by providing landscape
types as "ecologically meaningful units". Such land units can be used as the basis for
analysis and assessment, as well as for the formulation of landscape ecological models
for a sustainable regional development. When implementing the suggestions of such
development models into a regional development policy it is necessary to come back
to administrative units again - in respect to political and historical issues (Matouch et
al. 1992).
Methods: The map of the Austrian Cultural Landscape Types (done on the basis of a
visual satellite image interpretation on a 1 : 500.000 scale within the project
‘Classification of Austrian Cultural Landscapes’) was refined. The detailed description
of the cultural landscape types – the ecological fact-sheets- was the aim of this part of
the project.
Beside this, the classification of the sample plots into landscape ecological functional
units was carried out. The base data for this analysis were the results of the landscape
structure mapping. This was an attempt to create an objective and comprehensible
classification of the Austrian cultural landscapes.
12
Fig.4. Classification of the Austrian Cultural Landscapes - Landscape Type Series (Wrbka et al. 2002).
Results: A total of 13.748 individual landscapes were delineated for the whole of
Austria. These were classified into 42 Cultural Landscape Type Groups (CLT – second
order). These groups were then aggregated to 12 Cultural Landscape Type Series (CLT
– first order). Whereas the series were primarily defined by the dominant land use
system, the landscape type groups also reflect major eco-regions of Austria.
Landscapes dominated by alpine and sub-alpine grassland, forest dominated
landscapes, grassland dominated landscapes, landscapes with fodder crop production
or mixed agriculture, crop land dominated landscapes, viniculture landscapes or urban
and industrial landscapes were distinguished.
The Classification of the Austrian Cultural Landscapes was the main spatial reference
system for the analysis and assessment of land use sustainability.
13
5. Indicators
Concepts: Indicators are used to reduce complexity and simplify information, in
order to get a better understanding of systems and intersystem relations.
Environmental issues can be communicated to a wider audience, thus getting policy
relevant. A wide range of indicators is in use to describe and monitor sustainable
development on a national, regional and a local level. Such indicators are often
orientated on material, energy, and economic fluxes. Especially on the landscape
level, regarding the important issue of biodiversity and landscape heterogeneity,
valuable indicators are still missing. The here presented project is an attempt to fill this
gap by elaborating a set of spatially explicit indicators - such as indices of landscape
structure. The use of such indices for sustainability assessment can be justified by
applying the pattern/process paradigm and its underlying assumption that the spatial
arrangement of landscape elements is the manifestation of material and energy fluxes
on the landscape level.
Methods: The data analysis was performed in a combination of a bottom-up and a
top-down approach. The landscape was quantified by using landscape ecological
relevant landscape metrics (see Fragstats; McGarigal & Marks 1994). On the basis of a
comprehensive literature review of ‘sustainability indicators on the landscape level’ as
well as the interpretation of the results of the classification of the landscape types and
the respective description (fact-sheets), an assessment of the structural configuration
of the landscape types was performed. Land use mosaic, fragmentation and
connectivity, as well as the landscape characteristics were the main criteria in this step.
The resulting indicators were also used for the sustainability assessment of the specific
landscape.
Crucial for the suitability of a parameter (index) as indicator to assess land use
sustainability was its ability to depict the degree of human influence on ecosystems,
14
landscape elements, and landscapes, based on the concept of the hemerobiotic state
and its sensitivity to changes.
On the basis of the results of the fine-scaled landscape structure mapping, so-called
Local Indicators of Land use Sustainability (LOISL) were selected using a bottom-up
approach. Examples are the number and distribution of ecological valuable habitats,
the naturalness of landscapes, the amount of introduced patches in a landscape, and
the degree of disturbance as a pressure on the landscape.
In a top-down approach, sustainability indicators on a regional level, the so-called
Regional Indicators of Land use Sustainability (RESL) were identified. Examples are:
the degree of fragmentation of landscapes by supra regional road networks, the
naturalness of forest ecosystems as backbone of many agricultural landscapes, the
density of settlement areas, and the extent of build-up areas, e.g. urban and
industrial.
5.1 Hemerobiotic state and landscape complexity
Concepts: Human activity tends to simplify and geometrise the landscape (Forman &
Godron 1986). The complexity of borders decreases and the landscape is becoming
more compact. Various studies support this observation (see Odum & Turner 1990).
Forman & Moore (1992) interpret this development as an effect of concentrated input
of energy into the landscape system, which leads to a decrease of entropy and an
increasing degree of system organisation. Landscape structure can be therefore
defined as ‘frozen processes’ on the landscape level (Wrbka 1996). The analysis of the
landscape structure – the biotic and abiotic characteristics and configuration of the
landscape – is the key to understand spatial processes and to achieve sustainable
development.
15
Remote sensing techniques, combined with representative field survey on a local
level, is enabling us to analyse and assess the landscape configuration. Indices that
describe the shape, distribution or heterogeneity of landscape elements are used to
describe the Austrian cultural landscapes. Finally, the analysis of the relation between
land use intensity and landscape structure is allowing us to draw conclusions about the
sustainability of the land use management and the biotic potential of the landscapes
(Zechmeister & Moser 2001; Moser et al. 2002).
The landscape structure of the different cultural landscapes can easily be observed
and analysed with remote sensing and GIS-methods and can be compared by using
landscape metrics, like the area/perimeter-relation of the landscape elements or
segments. A comprehensive analysis of these landscape metrics in different landscape
types and the combination with data from fine scaled landscape ecological mapping
approaches, provides detailed ecological knowledge about the different landscape
types. This enables us to draw conclusions about the sustainability of different land
use regimes (Wrbka et al. 2002).
Methods: The degree of anthropogenic influence on a landscape, as measured by the
concept of the hemerobiotic state, is an aggregated indicator on the landscape level.
The relation between the attributes describing landscape structure - indicators that
can easily be measured - and hemerobiotic state - a very complex and aggregated
indicator - was analysed. On the basis of these results a system to assess the
sustainability of certain landscapes was developed. Base data for the analysis were the
results of the fine-scale landscape structure mapping. The analysis of the landscape
structure (= ‘landscape metrics’) was done by using the Patch Analyst 2.2 (Elkie et al.
1999) under ArcView 3.3. The relation between the hemerobiotic state and the
variables describing landscape structure were tested on the landscape element level
as well as on the landscape level.
16
Results: A significant relation on both levels of investigation can be shown. With
increasing land use intensity, measured by the concept of hemerobiotic state, the
landscape complexity decreases (see Fig. 5).
Fig. 5. Relation between land use intensity and landscape complexity:
(left) effect of land use on landscape complexity: intensively used crop fields (left in photo) and low intensity, semi-natural halophilous vegetation (right in Foto);
(right) scatter plot of land use intensity (mean hemerobiotic state) and landscape boundary complexity (NSCP-index), r²=0.50 (p<0.001).
R2 = 0.50
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5 6
land use intensit y (average hemeroby)
landscape
com
ple
xity
(NS
CP
)
The beneficial use of parameters describing the landscape structure as the basis for
the assessment of land use intensity could therefore be demonstrated. Attributes of
landscape structure can be generated by applying remote sensing methods (see Land
cover and landscape structure) in an efficient and reproducible way.
17
6. Sustainability of Austrian Cultural Landscapes
The aim of this research project was to design an integrative approach to identify and
visualise landscapes with sustainable land use. Two different approaches were
developed: (a) a rule based model by using the concepts of fuzzy set theory (FuzSust),
and (b) a formal model by determining the deviation of a certain landscape cell from
the average hemerobiotic state of the spatial reference unit (RegSust).
Various authors (see Zechmeister & Moser 2001; Moser 2002) could show that on the
level of the sample plots (= local level) there is a clear relation between land use
intensity, measured by the concept of hemerobiotic state, and the landscape
complexity and configuration. Based on this findings and results from the presented
research project, landscape structure attributes can be seen as crucial for the
sustainability assessment of landscapes.
For both approaches ecological relevant landscape metrics which were derived from
the land cover map and additional spatial data sets (e.g. digital elevation model, road
and river network) were the basis data. All variables were calculated on a grid of 1 x 1
km landscape cells which was the basis for further analysis. In addition every
landscape cell was assigned to the dominant cultural landscape type (Wrbka et al.
2002).
A short introduction into the basic concept - the ‘Concept of the Relative Deviance’ -
is given in Chapter 1 - Hemerobiotic state and sustainability.
18
Concept: The sustainability assessment on the landscape level is done, according to
the ‘Concept of the Relative Deviance’, by measuring the deviation of a certain
landscape cell from the average hemerobiotic state of the respective cultural
landscape type, the spatial reference unit. By looking at crop land dominated
landscapes for example, we can find some that have been intensified more than
others. This deviation from the average situation can be used as a ‘measurement of
sustainability’.
Methods: Because detailed Austrian wide data about the degree of anthropogenic
influence on the landscape level are missing or are only present for certain
ecosystems, (see Grabherr et al. 1998) the hemerobiotic state of the Austrian Cultural
Landscapes was predicted on a 1 x 1 km grid base using ordinal regression techniques
and using the sample plots as sample for the analyses (n=132). The predicted
hemerobiotic state was the input for the statistical sustainability assessment.
Predictors used included variables on the bio-geographic characteristics, variables
describing the landscape pattern and configuration, variables on the characteristics of
the segments, and variables describing the fragmentation and connection of the
landscape in supra regional networks. The variables on the landscape structure and
land use were derived from the land cover map, which was produced within this
research project.
The resulting model (R²=0.535, p<0.001) was applied to the whole data set and the
results were visualised. Based on the modelled hemerobiotic state the sustainability
assessment was performed for the cultural landscape type groups, as well as for the
cultural landscape type series. The deviation of a certain landscape cell from the
average hemerobiotic state of the respective spatial reference unit was determined
and classified. The result, the sustainability indicator RegSust, was classified into five
6.1 Statistical approach – REGSUST
19
classes ranging from -2 (strong negative deviation, reddish) to +2 (strong positive
deviation, greenish). Landscape cells showing no deviation from the average
hemerobiotic state (0) were displayed as light yellow areas.
Fig.6. The result of the sustainability indicator RegSust for the Cultural Landscape Type Groups of Austria. The sustainability indicator RegSust represents the deviation of a certain landscape cell to the average hemerobiotic state of the respective spatial reference unit, e.g. the cultural landscape type group. The determination of the sustainability indicator is done by using the modelled hemerobiotic state of the Austrian cultural landscapes.
A clear and characteristic distribution of ‘sustainable’ and ‘non sustainable’ areas is the
result. Especially regions, like the Tullner Feld or the Marchfeld and other crop-land
dominated basins, in the eastern parts of Austria, are captured clearly as hot spots of
‘non-sustainable areas’ by this approach.
20
6.2 Rule based approach - FUZSUST
Concepts: Because the relation between landscape configuration and sustainability
is rather difficult to express by using classical mathematical methods, the concept of
fuzzy set theory (Kosko 1992; Spies 1993; Mandl 1994a,b) was applied for designing a
rule-based assessment tool. Such rule-based fuzzy logic systems have been
successfully applied in environmental management, particularly in the field of
sustainability assessment (Ducey & Larson 1999; Philis & Andriantiatsaholiniaina
2001; Cornelisssen et al. 2001).
Methods: On the basis of a comprehensive literature review and expert knowledge, a
set of rules for every cultural landscape type group was defined, describing
sustainable land use. Sustainability was described by using the concept of linguistic
variables, which allow the use of the terms ‘more’ or ‘less’. Thus different shades of a
term could be expressed. The rules were transformed into membership function (µ)
using logistic and triangular functions. By relating these rules (approximate reasoning)
the membership value for the linguistic variable ‘highly sustainable’ was determined
and visualised.
Basis data for the formulation of rules were attributes describing the landscape
structure and configuration which were derived from the Austrian land cover map, as
well as additional data which were derived from spatial relevant data sets (e.g. digital
elevation model, road and stream networks, etc.). All variables were calculated for a
grid of 1 x 1 km landscape cells. Each landscape cell was assigned to the dominant
landscape type group and landscape type series of the Austrian cultural landscape
classification.
Results: The results are ‘high’ to ‘low’ membership values to the linguistic variable
‘highly sustainable’. This linguistic variable was the basis for formulating the rules. The
map shows the results of the rule-based approach.
21
Fig. 7. Results of the sustainability indicator FUZSUST on the level of the Cultural Landscape Type Groups. The assessment was done by a rule based expert system using the concepts of fuzzy set theory.
Ecological sustainable areas are distributed very differently in the Austrian cultural
landscapes. As expected, areas with a lower ecological sustainability are found mainly
in the intensively managed landscapes of the lowlands; e.g. in the cultural landscapes
of the ‘Extra-alpine downlands dominated by crop land (TG403)’ or the ‘Extra-alpine
basins and valley bottoms dominated by crop land (TG404)’, but most interestingly not
only there.
It could be shown that within the Cultural Landscape Type Groups a high variation of
different sustainability levels can be present. Good examples are the intensively
managed crop-land dominated landscapes of the extra-alpine basins and valley
22
bottoms (TG404), e.g. the Tullner Feld or the Marchfeld. Apart of the intensively
managed landscape cells some others can have a much higher sustainability value
which is possibly due to a greater extent of small biotopes and a higher landscape
heterogeneity. Such outlying areas could only be identified by applying the rule-based
fuzzy logic approach.
The literature used in this booklet can be found in the references of the final report (kap09.pdf).
7. Data processing and management
The processing and management of the base data, as well as the documentation and
visualisation of the results were major issues of this research project. The usefulness
of data and results for future projects is largely depending on that.
The presentation of the data and the result is done on four different levels:
(a) visualisation of the base data using the map tool developed under
ARC/Info
(b) analogue and digital preparation of the results as maps (pdf-files and gif-
images)
(c) presentation of the project results on the project homepage
(http://www.pph.univie.ac.at/intwo/sinus.htm; final report and maps)
(d) presentation of the project results on a CD (final report and maps).
Despite the differences of the two approaches of sustainability assessment for the
Austrian Cultural Landscapes, many similarities can be envisaged in the results. The
deviation in the results originates on the one hand in the conceptual differences of the
two approaches and on the other hand in the limitations of the base data material, e.g.
the land cover data. Especially ecological valuable regions, e.g. the fine grained
agricultural landscapes with a dense network of linear features like balks, are usually
not recognised by analysing and automatic interpretation of satellite images. Due to
the coarse resolution of Landsat TM-5 images this fine-scaled pattern could not be
detected. In general, both approaches reflect the actual situation in Austrian Cultural
landscapes quite well. The actual and detailed land cover map of the Austrian Cultural
Landscapes was a substantial progress, which led to satisfactory results of the
sustainability assessment. Especially the combination of fine-scaled data from the
field-survey based landscape structure mapping, as used for the formal approach for
sustainability assessment on the regional level, with the Austrian wide land cover data
was an important scientific advance. This knowledge base on landscape configuration,
history and the basic processes of the various landscape types is necessary to perform
a scientifically sound sustainability assessment. The presented project has
contributed to this knowledge substantially.
Further development in this respect should be initiated. The usefulness of these
concepts for different user groups and the applicability of the elaborated methods in
the fields of regional planning, nature conservation, rural development should be
tested in case studies. As better input data –higher spatial and spectral resolution – will
also yield better results, a further improvement of methods and tools can be expected.
A scientifically sound monitoring procedure, based on repetitions of the field survey in
regular periods, is an indispensable prerequisite for an objective assessment and
evaluation of future changes in Austrian Cultural Landscapes.
23
8. Discussion
Austrian Landscape Research (ALR)a research programme explores path towards a sustainable development of Austrian landscapes and regions
The research programme ‘Sustainable Development of Austrian Landscapes and
Regions’ (short Austrian Landscape Research, ALR) is a co-operative initiative of the
federal government, the state governments and municipalities, initiated and co-
ordinated by the Federal Ministry of Science. The Federal Ministry of Education,
Science and Culture finances two third of the programme. The remaining third is
contributed by different institutions and programmes.
The projects have to be interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary, have to involve the
public and need to have practical relevance.
In ALR interdisciplinarity is defined as follows: several disciplines work together on a
problem by going beyond the borders of the individual disciplines. Problems have to be
addressed by natural sciences, social sciences and humanities jointly, across
disciplines and on equal terms. Transdisciplinarity stands for an approach to scientific
work that crosses the borders of the system ‘science’. Scientists co-operate for
example with schools, farmers, citizens, with media and artists. The programme does
not only have the purpose of providing scientific findings; the results have to be
transferred into practice in a comprehensible and applicable form.
Three programmatic goals determine the programme and the realization of its results:
U substantial reduction of the anthropogenic flows of material
U optimisation of the relationship between biodiversity and quality of life
U promotion of living and development options within the framework of
landscape dynamics.
The researchers are active in the fields of research such as biodiversity and quality of
life, perception, genesis and transformation of (cultural) landscapes, multi-
24
functionality and conflicts of use, supra-regional and regional control and
implementation, societal infrastructure; water and wetlands, cities – surrounding
countryside, rural (regional) development.
Since the programme's inception in 1992 about 500 researchers are involved in more
than 70 projects of the ALR; scientists from 40 disciplines and from more than 170
institutions - university institutes, private research institutions, national and state
institutions - have participated.
The Ministry of Science also wants to implement the socio-political objective
‘promotion of women’ in the area of research. Therefore the promotion focus
‘promotion of women in science’ was established in 1999. Thanks to the programme,
the share of work performed by women scientists in the projects was increased from
an average of 30% to over 50%.
December 2002 Karolina Begusch-PfefferkornJudith Brücker
25
Austrian Landscape Research
Dr. Karolina Begusch-Pfefferkorn DI Judith Brücker
Co-ordination Austrian Landscape Research
A-1040 Vienna, Lambrechtgasse 5/6Tel: +43 (0)1 585 28 77 Fax: +43 (0)1 585 28 35
e-mail: [email protected]://www.klf.at
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.1 The concept of sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.2 Landscapes as spatial reference units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31.3 Hemerobiotic state and sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Land use and landscape structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63. Land cover and landscape structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94. Cultural landscape types as spatial reference units. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115. Indicators. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.1 Hemerobiotic state and landscape complexity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146. Sustainability of Austrian Cultural Landscapes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.1 Statistical approach – REGSUST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186.2 Rule based approach – FUZSUST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
7. Data processing and management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23ALR – Information about the research program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Contents
Projektteam SINUS
Univ.Ass. Dr. Thomas WrbkaDep. of Conservation Biology, Vegetation and Land-scape Ecology; Inst. of Ecology and Conservation Bio-logy; University of Vienna
A-1090 Vienna, Althanstrasse 14Tel.: +43 (0)1 4277 54375Fax: +43 (0)1 4277 9542
e-mail: [email protected]://www.pph.univie.ac.at/intwo/sinus.htm
Contacts
