www.sensor-ip.org Marta Pérez-Soba - April 2008111/04/2008 www.sensor-ip.org

Land use functions – a multifunctionalityapproach to assess the impact of land usechange on land use sustainability

By Marta Pérez-Soba (Alterra WUR), Sandrine Petit (INRA) and Laurence Jones (NERC)

www.sensor-ip.org Marta Pérez-Soba - April 2008211/04/2008 www.sensor-ip.org

Mountain recreation area

Grazing

Residential

Forest plantation

ENV 9.2: Flood risk

ENV9.1: Forest fore risk

ENV 8.2: Waste water increased by tourists

ENV8.1: Waste increase by tourists

ENV 6.6: Pesticide use

ENV 6.5: Landscape cohesion

ENV 6.4: HNV farmland

ENV 6.3: Deadwood

ENV 6.2: Farmland birds

ENV 6.1: Eutrophication

ENV5: Biomass potential

ENV 4.3: Carbon sequestration

ENV 4.2: CH4/N2O emission

ENV4.1: CO2 emission

ENV 3.3: Soil wind erosion

ENV 3.2: Soil sealing

ENV3.1: Soil water erosion

ENV2.2: Water abstraction

ENV2.1: N&P surplus

ENV1.1: Ammonia emission

ECO 11.1: Growth rate of real GDP per capita

ECO 8.1: Gross value added per sector

ECO 4.1: Administrative costs

ECO 3.2: Energy cost

ECO 3.1: Labour cost

ECO1.1: Net trade flows for agricultural products, energy, tourism & wood

SOC 12.1: Migration

SOC 11.2: Change of visual attractivity

SOC 11.1: Continuity of appreciated landscape heritage

SOC 10.2: Recreational tourism pressure

SOC 10.1 Social tourism pressure

SOC 9.1: Migration pressures

SOC 3.2: Deviation of regional income from national mean

SOC 3.1: Regional cohesion

SOC 1.2: Employment by sector

SOC 1.1: Unemployment rate

Impact Indicators

Environmental Economical Social

5www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

Rationale• Sustainability Impact Assessment

need for integrative approaches (economic, environmental and social issues)

• Multifunctionalityto understand the complexity of interactions

between the multiple uses of land, their temporal and spatial changes

6www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

Needs

• Methods to evaluate simultaneously economic, environmental and social impacts of land use change, that are expressed by a large set of indicators

SENSOR policy scenarios

Economic impacts

Social impacts

Environmental impacts

Regional sustainability assessment: LUFs

Macroeconomic model

Sectoralmodels

Land usemodel

8www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

• Reduction of the number of dimensions represented by the set of indicators to make the sustainability assessment interpretable LUFS approach

SENSOR indicators (60)

LUFs (9)

economic

social

environmental

Land Use Functions definition

LUFs are the goods and services provided by the different land uses, which characterize the most relevant economic, environmental and social aspects of a region

Maintenance of ecosystem processes

TransportCultural

Support and provision biotic resources

Land based production

Human health and recreation

Provision of abioticresources

Residential and land independent production

Provision of work

Mainly environmental

Mainly economical

Mainly societal

Forest Land Use Functions

Maintain ecosystem processes

Cultural: be part of a cultural landscape

Support biodiversity in the form of landscape cohesion

Land based production: provision of wood for industry and/or for renewable energy

Recreation

Regulate the supply and quality of air, water and minerals

ResidentialProvision of work

Mainly environmental

Mainly economical

Mainly societal

11www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

DefinitionsProvision of work: Employment provision according to activities in relation with natural resources (quality of jobs, jobs security, etc.)

12www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

DefinitionsLand based production: human productive activities which are mainly reversible, e.g. agriculture, forestry, natural energy resources, mining

13www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

DefinitionsSupport and provision of habitat: capacity of the land to provide biodiversity, from the genetic diversity of organisms to a diversity of habitats in the landscape

14www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

Roots LUFs

• Multifunctionality in agriculture• Ecosystems goods and services• Landscape functions

15www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

To be testedBalanced towards the three pillars

Land Use Functions

Separation between social/cultural and natural/cultivated capital

Link between LU and goods andservices

Landscape functions

Only environment affects society and economics

Seminatural ecosystems providers

Ecosystems goods and services

Not explicitly associated with SD

Integration of multiple functions

Multifunctionality in agriculture

weaknessstrengthFunctional approach

Step 1

SENSOR indicator

framework: EU level

Identification of relationship

between indicators and

LUFs

Matrix of indicators per

LUF

LUFs General Framework

17www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

Examples of generic tablesLUF7: Provision of abiotic resources

Indicator Impact issue

Score for

Link with

LUF Justification for score

Confidence

of expertise

NH3 ENV 1 (Air Quality) -2

Ammonia emissions affect negatively the quality of air, water and soil.

Ammonia is a secondary particulate precursor affecting air quality. It

can cause plant damage. In addition, deposition of nitrogen compounds

from NH3 emissions can lead to increased concentrations of nitrate in

ground and drinking water due to nitrate leaching. Finally, ammonia

emissions increase the N depositon and can lead to eutrophication and

acidification of soils (EEA 2001; Oenema et al. 2007). High

2200Indicator n

01-1-1Indicator 4…

0-11-2Indicator 3

1001Indicator 2

101-1Indicator 1

LUF9LUF3…LUF2LUF1

Step 1

Step 2

SENSOR indicator

framework: EU level

Spatial Regional

Reference Framework:

CR level

Identification of relationship

between indicators and

LUFs

Matrix of indicators per

LUF

LUFs General Framework

2700

1500

400

3000

300

900

400801

18001600

2502

100

1600

2400

1900

2600

1300

100

2000

1200

802

2900

1800

2102

200

200

400

2101

2800

1300

2102

1700

500

2700

300

300

200

300

1900

2600

802

100

2300

400

2000

300

2000

13001300

1300

1300

1900

2502

1200

2501

300

2101

802

200

1300

1200

2400

2600

1900

1300

2800

1300

802

2400

al Reference Framework (SRRF)Regional Reference Framework

Step 1

Step 2

SENSOR indicator

framework: EU level

Spatial Regional

Reference Framework:

CR level

Identification of relationship

between indicators and

LUFs

Detail characterization

of each CR

Matrix of indicators per

LUF

Importance of each indicator

for CR sustainability

Set of CR specific

matrix with indicators

weights for each LUF

LUFs General Framework

21www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

Interdisciplinary group of experts have developed expert rules based on

Detailed description of CRsExternal data

Examples:Econ: The degree of importance of the forestry sector was assessed by using the proportion of forest cover in the cluster region

22www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

EC

O1.1

A

Agricult.

EC

O1.1

E E

nergy

EC

O1.1

F Forestry

EC

O1.1

T ECO

3.1A

EC

O3.1

C

EC

O3.1

F ECO

3.2

EC

O6.1

EC

O7.1

EC

O8.1

A

Agricult.

EC

O8.1

E E

nergy

EC

O8.1

F Forestry

EC

O8.1

T ECO

10.1

EC

O11.1

1 Scandinavian Mountains And Valleys 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 2 2 2 0 1 1 1 2 2 2 Scandinavian Shield 0 2 2 1 0 1 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 1 2 2 3 Eastern Baltic Plains 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 2 2 1 0 1 0 2 2 4 Central Baltic Plains 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 5 South-East Baltic 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 2 2 1 0 1 0 2 2 6 Alpine Mountains and Valleys 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 7 North-West Atlantic 1 1 0 2 1 2 0 2 2 2 1 1 0 2 2 2 8 West Baltic / North Sea 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 2 9 North-Eastern Lowlands / Southern Baltic 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 0 1 1 2 2 10 North Sea Plains 1 2 0 2 1 2 0 2 2 2 1 2 0 2 2 2 11 Balkan Plains 0 0 2 1 0 1 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 2 12 Central Continental Lowlands 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 13 South Continental 1 0 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 0 2 1 2 2 14 Atlantic Plains 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 2 2 15 Central Atlantic Plains / Hills 1 2 1 0 1 0 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 0 2 2 16 Central Atlantic Hills 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 17 Central Atlantic Hills / Plains 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 18 Central Atlantic Lowlands 2 2 0 1 2 1 0 2 2 2 2 2 0 1 2 2 19 Northern Mediterranean Coastal / Hinterland 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 20 Central Pannonian Plains 2 0 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 0 1 1 2 2 21 East Pannonian Plains 2 0 0 1 2 1 0 2 2 2 2 0 0 1 2 2 22 North Pyrenean Margin 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 23 Atlantic Lusitanian Coast 2 2 1 0 2 0 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 0 2 2 24 West And Central Mediterranean 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 2 2 2 0 0 1 1 2 2 25 Core Mediterranean 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 26 Western Iberia And Mediterranean Islands 0 0 1 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 0 0 1 2 2 2 27 South-East Mediterranean 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 0 1 1 2 2

Step 1

Step 2

Step 3

SENSOR indicator

framework: EU level

Spatial Regional

Reference Framework:

CR level

Assessment of sustainability limits for each indicator: CR or NUTS-X

level

Regional downscaling

Identification of relationship

between indicators and

LUFs

Detail characterization

of each CR

Normalisation of indicator values

Matrix of indicators per

LUF

Importance of each indicator

for CR sustainability

Set of CR specific

matrix with indicators

weights for each LUF

Integrated Assessment:

LUFS weighting and score for each

region

Step 4

LUFs General Framework

24www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

The example: the bio-energy policy case

- Scenario: Higher demand in biofuelcrops (rapeseed, sunflower, sugar beet, etc.)

- Policy variables: subsidies for producing biofuel crops

- Model chain analyses the complex inter-relations of econ, soc and env variables

00

25www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

The bio-energy policy case: results

- Land use: lower rate of abandonment of arable land with national restrictions

- Indicators:- Increase in fuel

(cultivation + harvesting), fertilizer and water consumption

- Increase eutrophication- Decrease in erosion and

soil compaction- Reduced biodiversity- Decrease GHG emissions- Increase employment in

rural areas

26www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

2700

1500

400

3000

300

900

400801

18001600

2502

100

1600

2400

1900

2600

1300

100

2000

1200

802

2900

1800

2102

200

200

400

2101

2800

1300

2102

1700

500

2700

300

300

200

300

1900

2600

802

100

2300

400

2000

300

2000

13001300

1300

1300

1900

2502

1200

2501

300

2101

802

200

1300

1200

2400

2600

1900

1300

2800

1300

802

2400

nna)0 500 1.000 1.500250

Kilometers

Region 9Scenario 2

27www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

Threshold assessment per indicatorProvision of habitat

Employment in agricultural sector (SOC 10)Change in visual attractively (SOC 11)N surplus (ENV3)Water extraction (ENV 4)Soil erosion (ENV 5)Farmland birds (ENV 6)Pesticide use (ENV 8)Unemployment rate (SOC 1)Gross added value for agricultural sector (ECON 4)Net trade flows for

agricultural sector (ECON 5)

SOC10

SOC11

ENV3

ENV5

ENV6

ENV8

ECO3

Threshold

28www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

0yes50 kg/ha/year60 kg/ha/year

N surplus

0ECO 1

1SOC 2

1noLowEmployment

0yesLowNr farmland birds

Assessment value

Threshold exceeded?

Threshold for the region

Predicted value (M2 models)

KEY-INDICATORS

Assessment of key indicators for each LUF

29www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

ECO 2

IntegrAsses

ECO 1

SOC 2

SOC 1

ENV 1

Land bas prod

AbiotHabitWorkKEY-IND

Integrated assessment of indicators in LUF

Work

Health & Recreation

Cultural

Residential & non-land based

industry

Land based production

Infrastructure

Abioticresources

Habitat

Ecosystem processes

Reference scenario

High growth scenario

30www.sensor-ip.org

Sustainability Impact Assessment of multifunctional land use

IALUC Conference - April 2008

LUFs advantagesNew tool for Land use Sustainability Impact AssessmentIt simplifies the classic complex IA based on a large number of indicators by grouping them into 9 LUFsIt makes explicit the connection between multifunctionality and SD. LUFs framework interlinks functions of land mainly characterised by the production of market goods and services with the mainly non-market functions, and illustrates their trade-offs and therefore raises the question of the implication of multifunctionality for the sustainability of the regionModus operandi for assessing multiple stakeholder preferences for future changes and for presenting impact of policies

00