Advertisement

Tools for Modelling and Assessing Peri-Urban Land Use Futures

  • Dagmar Haase
  • Annette Piorr
  • Nina Schwarz
  • Sophie Rickebusch
  • Franziska Kroll
  • Hedwig van Delden
  • Affonso Zuin
  • Tim Taylor
  • Marco Boeri
  • Ingo Zasada
  • Carlo Lavalle
  • Roel Vanhout
  • Alessandro Sarretta
  • Felix Müller
  • Mark Rounsevell
  • Simon Bell
Chapter

Abstract

 Chapters 1 and  2 set the scene for the scenarios of possible futures, presented modelling results and identified a typology of rural urban regions. The next set of chapters in Part 2 focus on the case studies and what can be learned from them. Before examining each case study it will be useful to provide an overview of the various models and tools used to simulate potential land use futures of peri-urban regions and to assess their impacts across Europe. The focus of this chapter is at two scales: the pan-European (EU27) and the regional scale, as produced by the typology in  Chap. 2 and exemplified by the case studies presented in  Chaps. 4,  5,  6,  7,  8 and  9.

Keywords

Gross Domestic Product Contingent Valuation Urban Region Artificial Surface Case Study Region 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Bateman I, Carson RT, Day B, Hanemann M, Hanley N, Hett T, Jones-Lee M, Loomes G, Mourato S, Ozdemiroglu E, Pearce DW, Sugden R, Swanson J (2002) Economic valuation with stated preference techniques: a manual. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  2. Boyd J, Banzhaf S (2007) What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecol Econ 63(2–3):616–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brécard D, Fougeyrollas A, Le Mouël P, Lemiale L, Zagamé P (2006) Macro-economic consequences of European research policy: prospects of the Nemesis model in the year 2030. Res Policy 35:910–924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Curran SR, Sherbinin A (2004) Completing the picture: the challenges of bringing “Consumption” into the population–environment equation. Popul Environ 26(2):107–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Daily GC, Alexander S, Ehrlich PR, Goulder L, Lubchenco J, Matson PA, Mooney HA, Postel S, Schneider SH, Tilman D, Woodwell GM (1997) Ecosystem services: benefits supplied to human societies by natural ecosystems. Issues Ecol 1(2):1–18Google Scholar
  6. De Groot RS (1992) Functions of nature: evaluation of nature in environmental planning, management and decision making. Wolters-Noordhoff, GroningenGoogle Scholar
  7. De Groot RS, Wilson M, Boumans R (2002) A typology for the description, classification and valuation of ecosystem functions goods and services. Ecol Econ 41:393–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. EEA (European Environment Agency) (2006b) The thematic accuracy of corine land cover 2000. Assessment using LUCAS, land-use/cover area frame statistical survey, Technical report no. 7/2006. Retrieved 25 Nov 2008 from http://reports.eea.europa.eu/technical_report_2006_7/en/technical_report_7_2006.pdf
  9. EEA (European Environment Agency) (2006c) The thematic accuracy of corine land cover 2006. Assessment using LUCAS, land-use/cover area frame statistical survey, Technical report no. 17/2007. Retrieved 09 Nov 2010 from http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/technical_report_2007_17
  10. EEA (European Environmental Agency) (2006a) Urban sprawl in Europe—the ignored challenge. European Environmental Agency, EEA Report 10/2006, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  11. EEA (European Environmental Agency) (2009) Corine Land Cover report. http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/COR0-landcover. Accessed 12 Jan 2009
  12. Haase D, Bauer A, Reuther I, Schiffers B, Schwarz N, Seppelt R, Weinert J (2009) Spatial development in the Leipzig-Halle region. Brochure at www.plurel.net
  13. Haines-Young R, Potschin M (2010) Proposal for a common international classification of ecosystem goods and services, CICES for integrated environmental and economic accounting. Report to the European environmental agency, NottinghamGoogle Scholar
  14. Haude W (1955) Zur Bestimmung der Verdunstung auf möglichst einfache Weise. Mitt. d. Dt. Wetterd. 2 (11). Deutscher Wetterdienst, FrankfurtGoogle Scholar
  15. Helminen V, Ristimäki M, Kontio P, Vuori M (2010) Response function for commuting. PLUREL deliverable report D2.3.7. http://www.plurel.net/images/D237.pdf. Accessed 13 Mar 2012
  16. Helminen V, Hannu R, Ristimäki M, Kontio P (2012) Commuting to the centre in different urban structures. Environ Plann B 39(2):241–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Johnson MP (2001) Environmental impacts of urban sprawl: a survey of the literature and proposed research agenda. Environ Plann A 33(4):717–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. KC S, Barakat B, Goujon A, Skirbekk V, Sanderson WC, Lutz W (2010) Projection of populations by level of educational attainment, age, and sex for 120 countries for 2005–2050. Demogr Res 22:383–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kroll F, Müller F, Bell S, Haase D, Helminen V, Kabisch N, Piorr A, Schwarz N, Strohbach M, Taylor T, Zuin A (2010) Indicator framework for evaluating impacts of land use changes. PLUREL deliverable report D4.3.1. http://www.plurel.net/images/D431.pdf. Accessed 13 Mar 2012
  20. Kroll F, Müller F, Haase D, Fohrer N (2012) Rural–urban gradient analysis of ecosystem services supply and demand dynamics. Land Use Policy 29(3):521–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lambin EF, Geist HJ (2006) Land use and land cover change: local processes and global impacts. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lambin EF, Meyfroidt P (2010) Land use transitions: socio-ecological feedback versus socio-economic change. Land Use Policy 27:108–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Liu JG, Dietz T, Carpenter SR, Alberti M, Folke C, Moran E, Pell AN, Deadman P, Kratz T, Lubchenco J, Ostrom E, Ouyang Z, Provencher W, Redman CL, Schneider SH, Taylor WW (2007) Complexity of coupled human and natural systems. Science 317:1513–1516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2005) Ecosystems and human wellbeing: synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  25. Markandya A, Harou P, Bellu LG, Cistulli V (2002) Environmental economics for sustainable growth: a handbook for practitioners. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  26. Nefs M, Alves S, Zazada I, Haase D (in press) Retirement cities: analysing the opportunities and challenges of a co-existence of ageing and urban shrinkage in Europe. Env and Plan AGoogle Scholar
  27. Nuissl H, Haase D, Wittmer H, Lanzendorf M (2008) Impact assessment of land use transition in urban areas—an integrated approach from an environmental perspective. Land Use Policy 26:414–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (1997) Toward sustainable development: environmental indicators. OECD Publication, ParisGoogle Scholar
  29. Petrov L, Haase D, Lavalle C (2009). MOLAND model results for the Leipzig region. PLUREL Newsletter 5, p 5 at www.plurel.net
  30. Piorr A, Müller K (2009) Making the multifunctionality concepts operable for impact assessment. In: Piorr A, Müller K (eds) Rural landscapes and agricultural policies in Europe. Springer, Berlin, pp 9–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ravetz J (2000) City region 2020: integrated planning for a sustainable environment. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Ravetz J, Rounsevell M (2008) Scenarios—crystal balls for the urban fringe. PLUREL Newsletter 3, at www.plurel.net
  33. Reginster I, Rounsevell M (2006) Scenarios of future urban land use in Europe. Environ Plann B 33:619–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. RIKS (2009) Metronamica—model descriptions. RIKS, Maastricht, The Netherlands. http://www.metronamica.nl/. Accessed 13 Mar 2012
  35. Schwarz N, Bauer A, Haase D (2011) Assessing climate impacts of local and regional planning policies—quantification of impacts for Leipzig (Germany). Environ Impact Assess Rev 31:97–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Strohbach MW, Haase D (2012) Estimating the carbon stock of a city: a study from Leipzig, Germany. Landsc Urb Plan 104:95–104. doi:  10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.10.001
  37. UNESA (2007) World population prospects: the 2006 revision. http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/wpp2006/wpp2006.htm. Accessed 13 Mar 2012
  38. Verburg PH, Eickhout B, van Meijl H (2008) A multi-scale, multi-model approach for analyzing the future dynamics of European land use. Ann Reg Sci 42:57–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wessolek G, Trinks S, Duijnisveld WHM (2004) Entwicklung von Boden und nutzungsspezifischen Regressionsgleichungen zur Ermittlung der Sickerwasserrate aus dem Boden: Das TUB-BGR-Verfahren. Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe/TU Berlin, Geozentrum Hannover/Berlin/HannoverGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dagmar Haase
    • 1
  • Annette Piorr
    • 2
  • Nina Schwarz
    • 3
  • Sophie Rickebusch
    • 4
  • Franziska Kroll
    • 5
  • Hedwig van Delden
    • 6
  • Affonso Zuin
    • 7
  • Tim Taylor
    • 8
  • Marco Boeri
    • 9
  • Ingo Zasada
    • 2
  • Carlo Lavalle
    • 10
  • Roel Vanhout
    • 6
  • Alessandro Sarretta
    • 10
  • Felix Müller
    • 5
  • Mark Rounsevell
    • 4
  • Simon Bell
    • 7
  1. 1.Humboldt University Berlin and Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZLeipzigGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Socio-EconomicsLeibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape ResearchMünchebergGermany
  3. 3.Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZLeipzigGermany
  4. 4.David Kinloch Michie Chair of Rural Economy and Environmental SustainabilityGeography and the Lived Environment Research InstituteEdinburghUK
  5. 5.Institute for Natural Resource Conservation, Department of Ecosystem ManagementUniversity of KielKielGermany
  6. 6.Research Institute for Knowledge Systems (RIKS)MaastrichtNetherlands
  7. 7.Edinburgh College of Art, Openspace Research CentreEdinburghUK
  8. 8.Department of EconomicsUniversity of BathBathUK
  9. 9.Fondazione Eni Enrico MatteiVeneziaItaly
  10. 10.Institute for Environment and Sustainability of the Joint Research Centre (JRC)IspraItaly

Personalised recommendations