Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Recommendation for land use impact assessment: first steps into framework, theory, and implementation

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article presents research, criteria, framework, and guidance which were developed to provide recommendations for land use impact assessment specific to biofuels, but applicable to a variety of land uses. The criteria for land use modeling were developed along with a 10-step framework including a comprehensive ecosystem services valuation of scenarios. This research program is defined which includes the development of a user-friendly ecosystem services tool with accompanying default values and recommendations on input parameters which are necessary to develop the scenarios, integration curves, maps, and ecosystem profiles of each scenario. Based on these scenarios, curves, maps, and profiles, additional recommendations may be made on land use practices or regional selections. Finally, a discussion of implementation of the theory behind this methodology focuses on an analysis of biofuels.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anonymous (2009) Buying farmland abroad—outsourcing’s third wave. Economist

  • Archer C, Jacobson MZ (2010) Evaluation of global wind power. http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/winds/2004jd005462.pdf

  • Bare JC, Gloria TP (2006) Critical analysis of the mathematical relationships and comprehensiveness of Life Cycle Impact Assessment approaches. Environ Sci Technol 40:1104–1113

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bare JC, Gloria TP (2008) Environmental impact assessment taxonomy providing comprehensive coverage of midpoints, endpoints, damages, and areas of protection. J Clean Prod 16:1021–1035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bare JC, Norris GA, Pennington DW, McKone T (2003) TRACI—the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts. J Ind Ecol 6:49–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bockstael N, Freeman AM, Koop RJ, Portney PR, Smith VK (2000) On measuring economic values for nature. Environ Sci Technol 34:1384–1389

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Boumans R, Costanza R (2007) Multiscale Integrated Modeling of Ecosystem Services (MIMES): Ecosystem Services Program seminar series

  • Boyd J, Banzhaf S (2005) What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Brand G, Braunschweig A, Scheidegger A, Schwank O (1998) Weighting in ecobalances with the ecoscarcity method—ecofactors 1997, BUWAL series 297

  • Campbell JE, Lobell DB, Genova RC, Field CB (2008) The global potential of bioenergy on abandoned agriculture lands. Environ Sci Technol 42:5791–5794

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R, d’Arge R, de Groot R, Farberk S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naeem S, O’Neill R, Paruelo J, Raskin R, Sutton P, van den Belt M (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 357:253–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Covey S (1989) The 7 habits of highly effective people. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Daily GC (ed) (1997) Nature’s services—societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Daily GC, Matson PA (2008) Ecosystem services: from theory to implementation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:9455–9456

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • de Groot RS (1992) Functions of nature: evaluation of nature in environmental planning, management and decision-making. Wolters Noordhoff BV, Groningen, 345 pp

  • Farber SC, Costanza R, Wilson MA (2002) Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 41:375–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Federal Register (2009) Regulation of fuels and fuel additives: modifications to renewable fuel standard program requirements, June 24, vol 74, no 120

  • Finnveden G, Hofstetter P, Bare J, Basson L, Ciroth A, Mettier T, Seppala J, Johansson J, Norris G, Volkwein S (2002) Normalization, grouping, and weighting in Life Cycle Impact Assessment. In: Udo de Haes HA, Finnveden G, Goedkoop M, Hauschild M, Hertwich E, Hofstetter P, Jolliet O, Klopffer W, Krewitt W, Lindeijer E, Muller-Wenk R, Olsen S, Pennington D, Potting J, Steen B (eds) Life Cycle Impact Assessment: striving towards best available practice. SETAC, Pensacola

    Google Scholar 

  • Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (2009) FAPRI 2009 US and world agricultural outlook

  • Gloria TP, Lippiatt BC, Cooper J (2007) Life cycle impact assessment weights to support environmentally preferable purchasing in the United States. Environ Sci Technol 41:7551–7557

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Goedkoop M, Spriensma R (1999) The eco-indicator 99: a damage orientated method for life cycle impact assessment. The Hague, the Netherlands

  • Hauschild M, Wenzel H (1998) Environmental assessment of products, vol 2. Scientific Background, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauschild MZ, Potting J, Hertel O, Schopp W, Bastrup-Birk A (2006) Spatial differentiation in the characterisation of photochemical ozone formation—the EDIP2003 methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11:72–80

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R, Guinée JB, Huppes G, Lankreijer RM, Udo De Haes HA, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Ansems AMM, Eggels PG, van Duin R, de Goede HP (1992a) Environmental life cycle assessment of products: guide and backgrounds (part 1) Leiden. CML, the Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R, Guinée JB, Huppes G, Lankreijer RM, Udo De Haes HA, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Ansems AMM, Eggels PG, van Duin R, de Goede HP (1992b) In CML (ed) Environmental life cycle assessment of products: guide and backgrounds (Part 2). CML, Leiden

  • Hertwich E (1999) Value judgements and the public right—rebuttal to Marsmann et al. on ISO 14042. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment gate to EHS: global LCA village

  • Hertwich E, Pease W (1998) ISO 14042 restricts use and development of impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 3:180–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Imhoff M, Elvidege C, Mayhew C, Simmon R (2010) Nighttime view of the earth. http://www.ceoe.udel.edu/WindPower/ResourceMap/index-world.html. Accessed 25 Mar 2010

  • Itsubo N, Inaba A (2003) A new LCIA method: LIME has been completed. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8:305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jack Ruitenbeek H (1995) Functions of nature: evaluation of nature in environmental planning, management and decision making: Rudolph S. de Groot. Wolters-Noordhoff, Amsterdam, 1992. 315 pp. ISBN 90-01-35594-3. Ecol Econ 14:211–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koellner T, Scholz RW (2007) Assessment of land use impacts on the natural environment—part 1: an analytical framework for pure land occupation and land use change. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12:16–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koellner T, Scholz RW (2008) Assessment of land use impacts on the natural environment—part 2: generic characterization factors for local species diversity in central Europe. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13:32–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindeijer E, Muller-Wenk R, Steen B (2002) Impact assessment of resources and land use. In: Udo de Haes HA, Finnveden G, Goedkoop M, Hauschild M, Hertwich EG, Hofstetter P, Jolliet O, Klopffer W, Krewitt W, Lindeijer EW, Muller-Wenk R, Olsen SI, Pennington DW, Potting J, Steen B (eds) Life Cycle Impact Assessment: striving towards best available practice. SETAC, Pensacola

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsmann M, Ryding SO, Udo de Haes H, Fava J, Owens W, Brady K, Saur K, Schenck R (1999) Letters to the editor—in reply to Hertwich & Pease. Int J Life Cycle Assess 3(4):180–181. ISO 14042 Restricts Use and Development of Impact Assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 4:65

  • McCarl B (2009) Forest and Agricultural Sector Optimization Model (FASOM): model description. http://agecon2.tamu.edu/people/faculty/mccarl-bruce/FASOM.html. Accessed 30 July 2009

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Board (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being—a report of the millennium ecosystem assessment. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Naidoo R, Balmford A, Costanza R, Fisher B, Green R, Lehner B, Malcolm T, Ricketts T (2008) Global mapping of ecosystem services and conservation priorities. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:9495–9500

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration (2009) MODIS—Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer. http://modis.gsfc.nasa.gov/about/. Accessed 30 July 2009

  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration (2010) NASA surface meteorology and solar energy. http://eosweb.larc.nasa.gov/sse/. Accessed 25 Mar 2010

  • National Research Council of the National Academies (2004) Valuing ecosystems services toward better environmental decision-making. National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Natural Capital Project (2009) Aligning economic forces with conservation. http://www.naturalcapitalproject.org/toolbox.html

  • Nelson E, Polasky S, Lewis D, Plantinga A, Lonsdorf E, White D, Bael D, Lawler J (2008) Efficiency of incentives to jointly increase carbon sequestration and species conservation on a landscape. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:9471–9476

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson E, Mendoza G, Regetz J, Polasky S, Tallis H, Cameron DR, Chan KMA, Daily GC, Goldstein J, Kareiva PM, Lonsdorf E, Naidoo R, Ricketts TH, Shaw MR (2009) Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Front Ecol Environ 7:4–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norris G (2003) Impact characterization in the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts—methods for acidification, eutrophication, and ozone formation. J Ind Ecol 6:79–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson T, Walker S, Brown S (2005) Sourcebook for land use, land-use change and forestry projects. Winrock International, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Penman J, Gytarsky M, Hiraishi T, Krug T, Kruger D, Pipatti R, Buendia L, Miwa K, Ngara T, Tanabe K, Wagner F (2003) Good practice guidance for land use, land-use change and forestry: IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme, Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change

  • Ricketts T, Ennaanay D (2009) InVEST: a tool for mapping and valuing hydrological and other ecosystem services. In: US EPA webinar for Ecosystem Services Program

  • Steen B (1999a) A systematic approach to environmental priority strategies in products development (EPS). Version 2000—general system characteristics—CPM report 1999, vol 4. Chalmers University of Technology, Gotheburg

  • Steen B (1999b) A systematic approach to environmental priority strategies in products development (EPS). Version 2000—models and data—CPM report 1999, vol 5. Chalmers University of Technology, Gotheburg

  • Sutton P, Costanza R (2002) Global estimates of market and non-market values derived from nighttime satellite imagery, land cover, and ecosystem service valuation. Ecol Econ 41:509–527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toffoletto L, Bulle C, Godin J, Reid C, Deschenes L (2007) LUCAS—a new LCIA method used for a Canadian-specific context. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12:93–102

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Turner WR, Brandon K, Brooks T, Costanza R, da Fonseca GAB, Portela R (2007) Global conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Bioscience 57:868–873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (2010) Global biofuel map. http://www.grida.no/publications/vg/kick/ebook.aspx. Accessed 25 Mar 2010

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture (1997) Predicting soil erosion by water. A guide to conservation planning with the revised universal soil loss equation (RUSLE)—agricultural handbook # 703

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture (2001) NCRS irrigation handbook part 652—national irrigation guide template—PB2001-104348

  • US Department of Agriculture (2009) NRCS pest management policy and supporting documents—general manual title 190. Ecological Sciences Division, part 404—pest management

  • US Department of Agriculture (2010) Global desertification vulnerability map. http://soils.usda.gov/use/worldsoils/mapindex/desert.html. Accessed 25 Mar 2010

  • US Department of Agriculture–Natural Resources Conservation Service (2006) Model simulation of soil loss, nutrient loss, and change in soil organic carbon associated with crop production, pp 114, 171

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture–Natural Resources Conservation Service (2010a) Geospatial data gateway. http://datagateway.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed 25 Mar 2010

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture–Natural Resources Conservation Services (2010b) Global population density map. http://soils.usda.gov/use/worldsoils/mapindex/popden.html. Accessed 25 Mar 2010

  • US Department of Energy (2010) Wind power classification in US. http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/wind_maps.asp. Accessed 25 Mar 2010

  • US Department of Energy–Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (2009) EPA’s proposed renewable fuel standard tackles GHG emissions. EERE Netw News

  • US DOE National Renewable Energy Laboratory (2010) Photovoltaic solar resource of the United States. http://www.nrel.gov/gis/images/map_pv_national_lo-res.jpg. Accessed 25 Mar 2010

  • US Environmental Protection Agency–Office of Transportation and Air Quality–Assessment and Standards Division (2009) Draft regulatory impact analysis: changes to renewable fuel standard program

  • US Geological Survey (2010) Water use data in US. http://water.usgs.gov/watuse/data/2000/. Accessed 19 Jan 2010

  • US Government (2007) Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007—public law 110-140-Dec. 19

  • Wenzel H, Hauschild M (1997) Environmental assessment of products, vol 1: methodology, tools and case studies in product development. Chapman and Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Winrock International (2010) Winrock International. http://www.winrock.org/index.asp. Accessed 25 Mar 2010

  • World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Our common future. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Sustainable Technology Division, US EPA Office of Research and Development, 26 W MLK Dr, Cincinnati, OH, 45268, USA

    Jane Bare

Authors
  1. Jane Bare
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jane Bare.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bare, J. Recommendation for land use impact assessment: first steps into framework, theory, and implementation. Clean Techn Environ Policy 13, 7–18 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-010-0290-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-010-0290-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation