Spatial Characteristics of Land Use Patterns in Mugello (Central Italy) and Policy Impacts on Their Environmental Outputs

  • Fabrizio Ungaro
  • Arianna Ciancaglini
  • Claudia Sattler
  • Sandra Uthes
  • Martin Damgaard
  • Kathrin Happe
  • Amanada Sahrbacher
Chapter

Abstract

Scenarios induced land use changes and their effects on abiotic and biotic indicators are analysed for a heterogeneous territory in Northern Tuscany. Results show that under a specific policy scenario the responses are highly variable within a given region depending of the landscape component considered and that scenarios induced changes result in significant modifications of land use patterns. The changes in crop spatial pattern are clearly differentiated in three groups of responses depending upon the scenario settings. The spatially explicit approach adopted proved to be necessary to properly evaluate the impacts of policy scenarios on the environmental services provided by agriculture.

Keywords

land use change ecosystem services nitrogen leaching spatial autocorrelation 

Notes

Acknowledgment

This work was carried out as part of the EU funded 6th framework project MEA-Scope (Micro-economic instruments for impact assessment of multifunctional agriculture to implement the Model of European Agriculture, SSPE-CT-2004- 501516). The authors wish to thank all the members in the consortium who contributed to the discussion that helped shape this work.

References

  1. Ausdley E, Pearn KR, Simota C, Cpojocaru G, Koutsidouk E, Rounsevell MDA, Trnka M, Alexandrov V (2006) What can scenario modelling tell us about future European scale agricultural land use, and what not? Environmental Science and Policy 9: 148–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dalgaard T, Kjeldsen C, Hutchings N, Happe K, Osuch A, Damgaard M, Zander P, Piorr A (2007) Multifunctional farming, multifunctional landscapes and rural development. In: Mander Ü, Wiggering H, Helming K (eds) Multifunctional Land Use: Meeting Future Demands for Landscape Goods and Services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin, pp 183–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dendoncker N, Rounsevell M, Bogaert P (2007) Spatial analysis and modelling of land use distributions in Belgium. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 31: 188–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Goovaerts P (1997) Geostatistics for Natural Resources Evaluation. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. ISTAT (2002) 5° Censimento generale dell’Agricoltura 2000, http://www.istat.it/censimenti/agricoltura/
  6. Piorr A, Müller K, Happe K, Uthes S, Sattler C (2007) Agricultural management issues of implementing multifunctionality: commodity and non commodity production in the approach of the MEA-Scope project. In: Mander Ü, Wiggering H, Helming K (eds) Multifunctional Land Use: Meeting Future Demands for Landscape Goods and Services. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin, pp 167–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Sattler C, Schuler J, Zander P (2006) Determination of trade-off-functions to analyze the provision of agricultural non-commodities. International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology 5(2/3): 309–325Google Scholar
  8. Zander P, Kächele H (1999) Modelling multiple objectives of land use for sustainable development. Agricultural Systems 59: 311–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fabrizio Ungaro
    • 1
  • Arianna Ciancaglini
    • 2
  • Claudia Sattler
    • 3
  • Sandra Uthes
    • 3
  • Martin Damgaard
    • 5
    • 6
  • Kathrin Happe
    • 4
  • Amanada Sahrbacher
    • 4
  1. 1.National Research CouncilResearch Institute for Hydrogeological ProtectionSesto FiorentinoItaly
  2. 2.Department of Agricultural and Land EconomsUniversity of FlorenceFirenzeItaly
  3. 3.Leibniz-Institute of Socio-Economics, Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF)MünchebergGermany
  4. 4.Department Structural Development of Farms and Rural AreasLeibniz-Institute of Agricultural Development in Central and Eastern Europe (IAMO)HalleGermany
  5. 5.Leibniz-Institute of Agricultural Development in Central and Eastern Europe (IAMO)Halle (Saale)Germany
  6. 6.Institute of Food and Resource Economics, University of CopenhagenFrederiksberg CDenmark

Personalised recommendations