Abstract
Purpose
Among other regional impact categories in LCA, land use still lacks a suitable assessment method regarding the least developed “soil ecological quality” impact pathway. The goals of this study are to scope the framework addressing soil ecological functions and to improve the development of regionalized characterization factors (CFs). A spatially explicit approach was developed and illustrated for the Canadian context using three different regional scales and for which the extent of spatial variability was assessed.
Materials and methods
A model framework based on the multifunctional character of soil and the ecosystem services defined by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment is suggested. This framework includes land use impacts on soil ecological quality evaluated regarding the change in soil capacity to fulfill a range of soil ecological functions. Four impact indicators, namely erosion resistance, groundwater recharge, mechanical, and physicochemical filtration, proposed by the functional method of Baitz (2002), were used to assess three major degraded regulating services: erosion regulation, freshwater regulation, and water purification. Spatially differentiated CFs were calculated based on the principles proposed by the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative for two Canadian spatial models (15 ecozones, 193 ecoregions) along with a non-spatial one (one generic). Seven representative land use types were tested.
Results and discussion
Using the ecozone-based scale, an overall result comparison between the non-spatial and spatial models indicates significant differences between ranges across land use types and results up to four times larger than what the generic scale can capture. This highlights the importance of introducing a regionalized assessment. When considering the impacts from a specific land use type, such as urban land use, generic CFs fail to adequately represent spatial CFs because they tend to be highly dependent on the biogeographical conditions of the location. When comparing all three resolution scales, CF results calculated using the ecoregions spatial scale generally show a larger spread across each land use type. Interesting variations and extreme scenarios are revealed which could not be observed using a coarser scale-based model such as the ecozone resolution scheme.
Conclusions
This work demonstrates the accomplishment of developing spatially differentiated CFs addressing impacts of different land use types on soil ecological functions. For a large territorial area spreading over many biomes, such as Canada, accounting for ecological unit boundaries proves to be necessary since the generic scale is not sufficiently representative. An evaluation of the extent of spatial differentiation emphasized the influence on the variability of regionalized CFs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The four remaining impact indicators from the method proposed by Baitz (2002) are disregarded in this paper because they either have already been assessed in other existing methods or simply do not fall within the scope of the framework defined for land use impacts on ecosystem services potential (section 2.1): (1) biotic production, (2) pollution control function (particulate and acoustic), (3) species diversity and ecosystem formation, and (4) other functions and potentials of natural areas (landscape quality, recreation esthetic functions, etc.)
The approach adopted in the LANCA model to reconstruct the land quality curve and calculate occupation and transformation impacts is slightly different than the one presented in this paper.
References
Arshad MA, Martin S (2002) Identifying critical limits for soil quality indicators in agro-ecosystems. Agri Ecosyst Environ 88(2):153–160
Baitz M (2002) Bedeutung der funktionsbasierten Charakterisierung von Flächeninanspruchnahmen in ndustriellen Prozesskettenanalysen. Life Cycle Engineering. Stuttgart, Germany, University of Stuttgart. PhD thesis, pp 172
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(3–4):49–78
Beck T, Bos U, Wittstock B, Baitz M, Fischer M, Sedlbauer K (2010) LANCA—land use indicator value calculation in life cycle assessment. Fraunhofer, Stuttgart
Bossard M, Feranec J, Otahel J (2000) CORINE land cover technical guide—Addendum 2000. Commission of the European Communities Copenhagen, Denmark
Cowell SJ, Clift R (2000) A methodology for assessing soil quantity and quality in life cycle assessment. J Clean Prod 8:321–331
Doran JW, Parkin TB (1994) Defining and assessing soil quality. In: Doran JW, Coleman DC, Bezdicek DF, Stewart BA (eds) Defining soil quality for a sustainable environment. Soil Sci Soc Am J (special publication) 35:3–21
Ecological Stratification Working Group (1995) A national ecological framework for Canada. Report and national map at 1:7500 000 scale. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Research Branch, Centre for Land and Biological Resources Research and Environment Canada, State of the Environment Directorate and Ecozone Analysis Branch. Ottawa, Hull, Minister of Supply and Services Canada, p 132
ESRI (2010) Desktop GIS. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands
FAO, IIASA, ISRIC, ISSCAS and JRC (2008) Harmonized world soil database (version 1.1). FAO, Rome
Foley JA, DeFries R, Asner GP, Barford C, Bonan G, Carpenter SR, Chapin FS, Coe MT, Daily GC, Gibbs HK, Helkowski JH, Holloway T, Howard EA, Kucharik CJ, Monfreda C, Patz JA, Prentice IC, Ramankutty N, Snyder PK (2005) Global consequences of land use. Science 309(5734):570–574
Foster SSD, Morris BL, Lawrence AR (1993) Effects of urbanization on groundwater recharge. In: Wilkinson WB (ed) Groundwater problems in urban areas. The World Bank, London, pp 43–63
Frischknecht R, Steiner R, Braunschweig A, Egli N, Hildesheimer G (2008) Swiss ecological scarcity method: the new version 2006. ESU Services: 4
Haxeltine A, Prentice CE (1996) BIOME3: an equilibrium biosphere model based on ecophysiological constraints, resource vailability and competition among plant functional types. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 10(4):693–709
Hertwich EG, Pennington D, Bare J (2002) Introduction. In: Udo de Haes H, Finnveden G, Goedkoop M, Hauschild M, Hertwich EG, Hofstetter P, Jolliet O, Klöpffer W, Krewitt W, Lindeijer E, Müller-Wenk R, Olsen SI, Pennington D, Potting J, Steen B (eds) Life-cycle impact assessment: striving towards best practice. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC), Pensacola, pp 1–10
Holdridge LR (1947) Determination of world plant formations from simple climatic data. Science 105(2727):367–368
Humbert S, Manneh R, Shaked S, Wannaz C, Horvath A, Deschênes L, Jolliet O, Margni M (2009) Assessing regional intake fractions in North America. Sci Total Environ 407(17):4812–4820
Kaplan JO, Bigelow NH, Prentice IC, Harrison SP, Bartlein PJ, Christensen TR, Cramer W, Matveyeva NV, McGuire AD, Murray DF, Razzhivin VY, Smith B, Walker DA, Anderson PM, Andreev AA, Brubaker LB, Edwards ME, Lozhkin AV (2003) Climate change and arctic ecosystems II: Modeling, paleodata-model comparisons, and future projections. J Geophys Res 108(D19):8171
Koellner T, Scholz R (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(1):32–48
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(1):16–23
Lambin EF, Turner BL, Geist HJ, Agbola SB, Angelsen A, Bruce JW, Coomes OT, Dirzo R, Fischer G, Folke C, George PS, Homewood K, Imbernon J, Leemans R, Li X, Moran EF, Mortimore M, Ramakrishnan PS, Richards JF, Skånes H, Steffen W, Stone GD, Svedin U, Veldkamp TA, Vogel C, Xu J (2001) The causes of land-use and land-cover change: moving beyond the myths. Glob Environ Change 11(4):261–269
Lerner D (2002) Identifying and quantifying urban recharge: a review. Hydrogeol J 10(1):143–152
Lindeijer E (2000) Biodiversity and life support impacts of land use in LCA. J Clean Prod 8:313–319
Lindeijer E, Müller-Wenk R, Steen B (2002) Impact assessment of resources and land use. In: Udo de Haes H, Finnveden G, Goedkoop M, Hauschild M, Hertwich EG, Hofstetter P, Jolliet O, Klöpffer W, Krewitt W, Lindeijer E, Müller-Wenk R, Olsen SI, Pennington D, Potting J, Steen N (eds) Life-cycle impact assessment: striving towards best practice. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC), Pensacola, pp 11–64
LULCIA (2008–2011) Koellner T (Project Leader), Partners (in alphabetical order by last name): Arena AP, Beck T, Bos U, Brandão M, Civit B, Deschenes L, Margni M, Mila I, Canals L, Müller-Wenk R, Saad R, Wittstock B: Operational Characterization Factors for Land use Impacts on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in the Life-Cycle Impact Assessment—Compatible with the Framework of the UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative (LULCIA). http://lcinitiative.unep.fr/sites/lcinit/default.asp?site=lcinitandpage_id=337831BE-0C0A-4DC9-AEE5-9DECD1F082D8
Marshall IB, Schut P, Ballard M (1999) A national ecological framework for Canada: attribute data. Environment Canada, Ottawa
Mattsson B, Cederberg C, Blix L (2000) Agricultural land use in life cycle assessment (LCA): case studies of three vegetable oil crops. J Clean Prod 8:283–292
MEA (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC
Meyer WB, Turner BL II (1992) Human population growth and global land-use/cover change. Ann Rev Ecolog Syst 23:39–61
Milà i Canals L, Bauer C, Depestele J, Dubreuil A, Freiermuth Knuchel R, Gaillard G, Michelsen O, Müller-Wenk W, Rydgren B (2007a) Key elements in a framework for land use impact assessment within LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12(1):5–15
Milà i Canals L, Romanya J, Cowell JS (2007b) Method for assessing impacts on life support functions (LSF) related to the use of “fertile land” in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). J Clean Prod 15(15):1426–1440
Müller-Wenk R (1998) Land use—the main threat to species. how to include land use in LCA. Universität of St.Gallen, Switzerland, p 46
Müller-Wenk R, Brandão M (2010) Climatic impact of land use in LCA—carbon transfers between vegetation/soil and air. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(2):172–182
Nelson DW, Sommers LE (1996) Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. In: Page AL et al (eds) Methods of soil analysis, Part 2, 2nd ed. Agronomy 9:961–1010. Am Soc of Agron, Inc. Madison, WI
Nortcliff S (2002) Standardisation of soil quality attributes. Agri Ecosyst Environ 88(2):161–168
Olson DM, Dinerstein E, Wikramanayake ED, Burgess ND, Powell GVN, Underwood EC, D'amico JA, Itoua I, Strand HE, Morrison JC, Loucks CJ, Allnutt TF, Ricketts TH, Kura Y, Lamoreux JF, Wettengel WW, Hedao P, Kassem KR (2001) Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on earth. Bioscience 51(11):933–938
Pimentel D, Allen J, Beers A, Guinand L, Linder L, McLaughlin P, Meer B, Musonda D, Perdue D, Poisson S, Siebert S, Stoner K, Salazar R, Hawkins A (1987) World agriculture and soil erosion. Bioscience 37(4):277–283
Potting J, Hauschild MZ (2006) Spatial differentiation in life cycle impact assessment: a decade of method development to increase the environmental realism in LCIA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(1):11–13
Schmidt JH (2008) Development of LCIA characterisation factors for land use impacts on biodiversity. J Clean Prod 16(18):1929–1942
Sedlbauer K, Braune A, Humbert S, Margni M, Schuller O, Fischer M (2007) Spatial differentiation in LCA—moving forward to more operational sustainability. Technikfolgenabschätzung. Theor Prax 3(16):24–31
Seybold CA, Mausbach MJ, Karlen DJ, Rogers HH (1998) Quantification of soil quality. In: Lal R, Kimble JM, Follett RF, Stewart BA (eds) Soil processes and the carbon cycle. CRC, Boca Raton, p 609
Canada S (2006) Human activity and the environment: annual statistics. Minister of Industry, Ottawa, p 153
Stone R, Myslik J (2007) Assessing the potential for ground water contamination on your farm. Ministry of agriculture food and rural affairs. Queen’s Printer for Ontario, Ontario
Toffoletto L, Bulle C, Godin J, Reid C, Deschênes L (2007) LUCAS—a new LCIA method used for a Canadian-specific context. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12(2):93–102
Tolba MK, El Kholy OA, El-Hinnawi E, Holdgate MW, McMichael DF (1992) The world environment 1972–1992: two decades of challenges. Chapman and Hall, London
Tóth G, Stolbovoy V, Montanarella L (2007) Soil Quality and Sustainability Evaluation—an integrated approach to support soil-related policies of the European Union. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg
US Geological Survey and Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) (2009) HYDRO1k Elevation Derivative Database: GTOPO30. USGS, Sioux Falls
Vitousek PM, Mooney HA, Lubchenco J, Melillo J (1997) Human domination of earth’s ecosystems. Science 277(5325):494–499
Weidema BP, Lindeijer E (2001) Physical impacts of land use in product life cycle assessment. Final report of the EURENVIRON-LCAGAPS sub-project on land use, Department of Manufacturing Engineering and Management. Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby
Westhoff V, Van der Maarel E (1973) The Braun-Blanquet approach. In: Whittaker RH (ed) Ordination and classification of communities. Handbook of Vegetation Science. Junk, The Hague, pp 617–726
Acknowledgements
The International Chair in Life Cycle Assessment (a research unit of the CIRAIG) would like to acknowledge the financial support of the industrial partners: Arcelor-Mittal, Bell Canada, Cascades, Eco Entreprises Québec/Recyc-Québec, Groupe EDF/GDF-SUEZ, Hydro-Québec, Johnson and Johnson, Mouvement des caisses Desjardins, Rio Tinto Alcan, RONA, SAQ, Total, Veolia Environnement and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Agricultural Bioproducts Innovation Program. Three anonymous reviewers have provided useful comments improving the quality of the paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Responsible editor: Llorenç Milà i Canals
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Online Resource 1
(PDF 305 kb)
Online Resource 2
(PDF 1.07 MB)
Online Resource 3
(PDF 138 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Saad, R., Margni, M., Koellner, T. et al. Assessment of land use impacts on soil ecological functions: development of spatially differentiated characterization factors within a Canadian context. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16, 198–211 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-011-0258-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-011-0258-x