Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Sustainable Bioenergy Production - An Integrated Approach pp 181–216Cite as

Scale-Relevant Impacts of Biogas Crop Production: A Methodology to Assess Environmental Impacts and Farm Management Capacities

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

The cultivation of biogas crops can affect nature and landscapes in different ways. The increasing loss of permanent grassland, changes within cultivated crops, crop rotations and their spatial allocation within the landscape may have serious impacts on natural assets and commercial ecosystem services. Beneficial or impairing impacts occur at the level of interference (farm level) as well as on broader spatial and/or temporal scales. Governance problems often occur when impacts cross farm boundaries, since farmers have no interest in maintaining a service or avoiding impairments. This is due to the beneficiaries on regional and higher scales often not compensating farmers for the costs of the service at the farm level. Environmental governance should therefore deal with the discrepancies between farm activities that have transboundary relevance and administrative/property borders. Our research questions are:

  1. (i)

    What kinds of transboundary impacts does biogas crop cultivation have on natural assets or ecosystem services?

  2. (ii)

    How can the harmful or beneficial impacts on different spatial scales or governance levels be assessed? Where do costs and benefits occur?

  3. (iii)

    Which biomass production impacts require individual and/or collective responses and which precautionary measures could be implemented to avoid possible impacts?

The purpose of this chapter is to establish an assessment methodology to identify the discrepancies between land-use-related decision competencies and the scope of the resulting impacts.

The assessment method is based on a literature analysis and is developed in three steps:

  1. 1.

    Establishing a theoretical basis to classify the scale-related impacts of biogas crop cultivation. This theory considers the governance problems that may occur if

    • affected habitats or ecological processes cross farm boundaries;

    • the value of an affected natural asset is relevant on a broader scale (regional or even global relevance);

    • small or insignificant pressures (from the farm-level perspective) occur, as they can have a relevant impact if they occur frequently in a larger spatial context.

  2. 2.

    Classifying the typical pressures and impacts of biogas crops;

  3. 3.

    Integrating these pressures and impacts into a DPSIR framework according to their scale relevance.

This methodology provides a systematic analysis of scale-related problems of fit that occur in biogas crop cultivation. The resulting information on the required individual or collective actions supports the identification of suitable governance measures.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abercrombie, M., Hickman, C. J., & Abercrombie, M. L. J. (2008). A dictionary of biology. New Brunswick: AldineTransaction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, T. (1998). The landscape “level” is dead. Persuading the family to take it off the respirator. In D. L. Peterson (Ed.), Ecological scale. Theory and applications (pp. 35–54). New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayerisches Landesamt für Umwelt. (2011). Rotmilan (Milvus milvus). Retrieved from http://www.lfu.bayern.de/natur/sap/arteninformationen/steckbrief/zeige/90254

  • Behm, C. (2008). Grünlandverluste schreiten beschleunigt voran: Schleswig-Holstein, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern und Rheinland-Pfalz haben 5 %-Grenze bereits überschritten. Pressemitteilung Behm, C. (MdB) vom 13. November 2008. Retrieved from http://www.cornelia-behm.de/cms/default/dok/257/257613.gruenlandverluste_schreiten_beschleunigt.html

  • Behm, C. (2011). Grünlandfläche nimmt in Deutschland weiter ab: Grünland-Erhaltungsverordnungen wirken, aber keine Entwarnung möglich. Retrieved from http://www.cornelia-behm.de/cms/presse/dok/372/372285.gruenlandflaeche_nimmt_in_deutschland_we.html

  • Berkes, F. (2002). Cross-scale institutional linkages: Perspectives from the bottom up. In National research council (Etats-Unis) (Ed.), The drama of the commons (pp. 293–322). Washington (D.C.): National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bierhals, E., von Drachenfels, O., & Rasper, M. (2004). Wertstufen und Regenerationsfähigkeit der Biotoptypen in Niedersachsen. Informationsdienst Naturschutz Niedersachsen, 24(4), 231–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bird Life International. (2011). Species: Red Kite Milvus milvus. Retrieved from http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/speciesfactsheet.php?id=3353

  • Buhr, N., Kanning, H., & Rode, M. W. (2010). Raumanalyse II: Auswirkungen auf andere Raumnutzungen. In M. W. Rode & H. Kanning (Eds.), Natur- und raumverträglicher Ausbau energetischer Biomassepfade (pp. 91–156). Stuttgart: Ibidem-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cash, D. W., Adger, V., Berkes, F., Garden, P., Lebel, L., & Olsson, P. (2006). Scale and cross-scale dynamics: Governance and information in a multilevel world. Ecology and Society, 11(2), 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, L. M., & Sheate, W. R. (2004). Integrating cumulative effects assessment into UK strategic planning: Implications of the European Union SEA Directive. Impact Assess Project Appraisal, 22(1), 5–16. doi:10.3152/147154604781766067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council. (1992). Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Official Journal of the European Communities, 35(L 206), 7–50. Retrieved from http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/176.htm

  • DBFZ – Deutsches Biomasseforschungszentrum. (2011). Erneuter Zuwachs von Biogasausbau in Deutschland 2010. DBFZ-Umfrage zu Anlagenbestand und Flächenbeanspruchung zeigt einen deutlichen Anlagenzubau im Biogasbereich. Retrieved from http://www.dbfz.de/web/presse/pressemitteilungen-2011/erneuter-zuwachs-von-biogasausbau-in-deutschland-2010-dbfz-umfrage-zu-anlagenbestand-und-flaechenbeanspruchung-zeigt-einen-deutlichen-anlagenzubau-im-biogasbereich.html

  • Degryze, S., Six, J., Paustian, K., Morris, S., Paul, E., & Merckx, R. (2004). Soil organic carbon pool changes following land-use conversions. Global Change Biology, 10, 1120–1132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Del Gado, I., Six, J., Peressotti, A., & Cotrufo, F. (2003). Assessing the impact of land-use change on soil C sequestration in agricultural soils by means of organic matter fractionation and stable C isotopes. Global Change Biology, 9, 1204–1213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Directive 2009/147/EC on the conservation of wild birds, European Parliament and the Council of Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubé, M. G. (2003). Cumulative effect assessment in Canada: A regional framework for aquatic ecosystems. Environmental Impact Assessment, 23(6), 723–745. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V9G-494CHM6-1/2/829d87a5c5f5334bee0ecdd31b18700e

  • Dziewiaty, K., & Bernardy, P. (2007). Auswirkungen zunehmender Biomassenutzung (EEG) auf die Artenvielfalt – Erarbeitung von Handlungsempfehlungen für den Schutz der Vögel der Agrarlandschaft. Retrieved from http://www.erneuerbare-energien.de/files/pdfs/allgemein/application/pdf/endbericht_biomasse_vogelschutz.pdf

  • Dziewiaty, K., & Bernardy, P. (2010). Brutvögel und Energiepflanzen. In M. Reich & S. Rüter (Eds.), Umwelt und Raum: Vol. 1. Energiepflanzenanbau und Naturschutz. Referate und Ergebnisse der gleichnamigen Fachtagung in Hannover am 30. September 2009 (1st ed., pp. 115–126). Göttingen: Cuvillier.

    Google Scholar 

  • EURLex. (2002). 12002E174: Treaty establishing the European Community (nice consolidated version) – Part three: Community policies – Title XIX: Environment – Article 174 – Article 130r – EC Treaty (Maastricht consolidated version). Official Journal C 325 24/12/2002 P. 0107 – 0108. Official Journal C 340 10/11/1997 P. 0254 – Consolidated version. Official Journal C 224 31/08/1992 P. 0052 – Consolidated version. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:12002E174:EN:HTML

  • European Environment Agency (EEA). (2007). The DPSIR framework used by the EEA. Retrieved from http://root-devel.ew.eea.europa.eu/ia2dec/knowledge_base/Frameworks/doc101182

  • European Parliament. (2000). Subsidiarity: European parliament fact sheets. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/1_2_2_en.htm

  • Evans, A., Vickery, J., & Shrubb, M. (2004). Importance of overwintered stubble for farmland bird recovery: A reply to Potts: Capsule without this prescription, populations of seed-eating passerines are unlikely to recover. Bird Study, 51(1), 94–96. doi:10.1080/00063650409461339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fachagentur nachwachsende Rohstoffe (FNR) e.V. (Ed.). (2010). Standortangepasste Anbausysteme für Energiepflanzen: Ergebnisse des Verbundprojektes “Entwicklung und Vergleich von optimierten Anbausystemen für die landwirtschaftliche Produktion von Energiepflanzen unter den verschiedenen Standortbedingungen Deutschlands, EVA I” (3., veränd. und erw). Gülzow: FNR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folke, C., Pritchard, L., Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Svedin, U. (2007). The problem of fit between ecosystems and institutions: Ten years later. Ecology and Society, 12(1), 30. online.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foth, H., Faulstich, M., von Haaren, C., Jänicke, M., Koch, H.-J., Michaelis, P., & Ott, K. (2007). Klimaschutz durch Biomasse: Sondergutachten ; Juli 2007. Berlin: Schmidt. Retrieved from http://www.gbv.de/dms/zbw/540343706.pdf

  • Fuchs, S., & Stein-Bachinger, K. (2008). Naturschutz im Ökolandbau: Praxishandbuch für den ökologischen Ackerbau im nordostdeutschen Raum. Mainz: Bioland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardi, C., Tomaselli, M., Parisi, V., Petraglia, A., & Santini, C. (2002). Soil quality indicators and biodiversity in northern Italian permanent grasslands. European Journal of Soil Biology, 38(1), 103–110. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VR7-4593YCJ-P/2/537bb13d2603999ec7a82a4a2d5518ec

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, C. C., Ostrom, E., & Ahn, T. K. (2000). The concept of scale and the human dimensions of global change: A survey. Ecological Economics, 32(2), 217–239. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VDY-3YGDC6V-4/2/008fb8e45e8da7e478d44b807324c59e

    Google Scholar 

  • Girvetz, E. H., Thorne, J. H., Berry, A. M., & Jaeger, J. A. G. (2007). Integrating habitat fragmentation analysis into transportation planning using the effective mesh size landscape metric. Retrieved from http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/6cj9g88f

  • Grein, G. (2005). Rote Liste der in Niedersachsen und Bremen gefährdeten Heuschreckenarten mit Gesamtartenliste, 3. Fassung, Stand 01.05.2005. Informationsdienst Naturschutz Niedersachsen, 1/2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hák, T., Moldan, B., & Dahl, A. L. (2007). Sustainability indicators: A scientific assessment. (International Council for Science & I. ebrary Eds.). Washington DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162(3859), 1243–1248. doi:10.1126/science.162.3859.1243.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hegmann, G., Cocklin, C., Creasey, R., Dupuis, S., Kennedy, A., & Kingsley, L. (1999). Cumulative effects assessment practioners guide: Prepared by AXYS environmental consulting and CEA working group for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. Hull/Quebec. Retrieved from http://www.coalfreealberni.ca/environmental_assessment/cumulative_effects_a_guide_for_practicioners.pdf

  • Höper, H. (2008). Treibhausgasfreisetzung organischer Böden. In Umweltbundesamt (Ed.), Texte: 25/08. UBA-Workshop “Böden im Klimawandel – Was tun?!”. am 22./23. Januar 2008 (pp. 105–109). Dessau: UBA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Höper, H. (2009). Die Rolle von organischen Böden als Kohlenstoffspeicher. NNA-Berichte, 2009(1), 91–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN). (2001). IUCN red list categories and criteria: Version 3.1. Retrieved from http://www.iucnredlist.org/documents/redlist_cats_crit_en.pdf

  • IPCC. (1996). Climate change 1995: Impacts, adaptation and mitigation of climate change. (Scientific, technical analysis, contribution of working group II to the 2nd assessment reports of the IPCC). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaeger, J. A. G., Schwarz-von Raumer, H.-G., Essweing, H., Müller, M., & Schmidt-Lüttman, M. (2007). Time series of landscape fragmentation caused by transportation infrastructure and urban development: A case study from Baden-Württemberg, Germany. Ecology and Society, 12(1), 22. [online]. Retrieved from http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss1/art22/ES-2006-1983.pdf

  • Janssens, I. A., Freibauer, A., Schlamadinger, B., Ceulemans, R., Ciais, P., Dolman, A. J., & Heimann, M. (2005). The carbon budget of terrestrial ecosystems at country-scale – A European case study. Biogeosciences, 2(1), 15–26. Retrieved from http://www.biogeosciences.net/2/15/2005/bg-2-15-2005.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Jedicke, E. (1990). Biotopverbund: Grundlagen und Massnahmen einer neuen Naturschutzstrategie. Stuttgart: Ulmer. Retrieved from http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/22036999

  • Klein, A., Fischer, M., & Sandkühler, K. (2009). Verbreitung, Bestandsentwicklung und Gefährdungssituation des Rotmilans Milvus milvus in Niedersachsen. In T. Krüger & J. Wübbenhorst (Eds.), Informationsdienst Naturschutz Niedersachs: 3/2009. Ökologie, Gefährdung und Schutz des Rotmilans Milvus milvus in Europa. Internationales Artenschutzsymposium Rotmilan (pp. 136–143). Niedersächsischer Landesbetrieb für Wasserwirtschaft, Küsten- und Naturschutz (NLWKN), Hannover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krüger, T., & Wübbenhorst, J. (2009). Vollzugshinweise zum Schutz von Brutvogelarten in Niedersachsen: Teil 1: Wertbestimmende Brutvogelarten der Vogelschutzgebiete mit höchster Priorität für Erhaltungs- und Entwicklungsmaßnahmen. In T. Krüger & J. Wübbenhorst (Eds.), Informationsdienst Naturschutz Niedersachs 3/2009. Ökologie, Gefährdung und Schutz des Rotmilans Milvus milvus in Europa. Internationales Artenschutzsymposium Rotmilan (pp. 201–205). Niedersächsischer Landesbetrieb für Wasserwirtschaft, Küsten- und Naturschutz (NLWKN), Hannover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruska, V., & Emmerling, C. (2008). Flächennutzungswandel durch Biogaserzeugung. Regionale und lokale Erhebung in Rheinland-Pfalz. Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung, 40(3), 69–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lal, R. (2003). Global potential of soil carbon sequestration to mitigate the greenhouse effect. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences, 22, 151–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landesamt für Natur, U. u. V. N.-W. (2010). FFH-Arten und Europäische Vogelarten: Rotmilan (Milvus milvus (L.)). Retrieved from http://www.naturschutz-fachinformationssysteme-nrw.de/ffh-arten/de/arten/vogelarten/kurzbeschreibung/103013

  • Lutze, G., Schultz, A., & Kiesel, J. (2003). Landschaftsstruktur im Kontext von naturräumlicher Vorprägung und Nutzung – ein systemanalytischer Ansatz. Retrieved from http://www.zalf.de/home_zalf/download/lsa/agstruk/Lutze_Landschaftsstruktur_systemanalytischer%20Ansatz_2003.pdf

  • Mante, J., & Gerowitt, B. (2006). Characteristics of intensively used agricultural areas and their impact on biodiversity and nature conservation activities within farming practice. In B. Meyer (Ed.), Sustainable land use in intensively used agricultural regions (Vol. 1338. Alterra Report) (pp. 113–118), Wageningen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, G. R. (2008). Nesting, subsidiarity, and community-based environmental governance beyond the local level. International Journal of theCommons, 2(1), 75–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, E., Brown, V., Boatman, N., Wlutman, P., Squire, G., & Ward, L. (2003). The role of weeds in supporting biological diversity within crop fields. Weed Research, 43, 77–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark. (2007). Community-based natural resource management. Retrieved from http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/33236991/Technicalnotemarts2007CommunityBasedNaturalResourceManagement.pdf

  • Moorcroft, D., Whittingham, M. J., Bradbury, R. B., & Wilson, J. D. (2002). The selection of stubble fields by wintering granivorous birds reflects vegetation cover and food abundance. Journal of Applied Ecology, 39(3), 535–547. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2664.2002.00730.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, S. D., Clements, D. R., Belaoussoff, S., Kevan, P. G., & Swanton, C. J. (2006). Promotion of weed species diversity and reduction of weed seedbanks with conservation tillage and crop rotation. Weed Science, 54(1), 69–77. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4539360

    Google Scholar 

  • National research council (Etats-Unis) (Ed.). (2002). The drama of the commons. Washington (D.C.): National Academy Press. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10287&page=259

  • Neufeldt, H. (2005). Carbon stocks and sequestration potentials of agricultural soils in the federal state of Baden-Württemberg, SW Germany. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 168(2), 202–211.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nitsch, H., Osterburg, B., & Roggendorf, W. (2009). Landwirtschaftliche Flächennutzung im Wandel: Folgen für Natur und Landschaft. Retrieved from http://imperia.verbandsnetz.nabu.de/imperia/md/content/nabude/landwirtschaft/gruenland/gap-reform.pdf

  • Nitsch, H., Osterburg, B., Laggner, B., & Roggendorf, W. (2010). Wer schützt das Grünland?: Analysen zur Dynamik des Dauergrünlandes und entsprechender Schutzmechanismen. Vortrag anlässlich der 50. Jahrestagung der GEWISOLA. Retrieved from ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/93940/2/A3_3.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Noble, B. (2010). Cumulative environmental effects and the tyranny of small decisions: Towards meaningful cumulative effects assessment and management. Retrieved from http://www.unbc.ca/assets/nres/nresi_op_08_noble_2010.pdf

  • Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. The Political economy of institutions and decisions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from http://books.google.de/books?id=4xg6oUobMz4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=governing+the+commons&hl=de&ei=FgLETYiNB8zrsgaZ7umHDw&sa=X&oi=bookresult&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

  • Pannell, D. J., Marshall, G. R., Barr, N., Curtis, A., Vanclay, F., & Wilkinson, R. (2006). Understanding and promoting adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 46(11), 1407. doi:10.1071/EA05037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, S., & Cocklin, C. (1993). The use of geographical information systems for cumulative environmental effects assessment. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 17(5), 393–407. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V9K-46639KR-C1/2/b59a6ba8eae9eae75d1117e76f2c8d14

  • Peterson, E. B. (1987). Cumulative effects assessment in Canada: An agenda for action and research. Canada: Canadian Environmental Assessment Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plantureux, S., Peeters, A., & McCracken, D. (2005). Biodiversity in intensive grasslands: Effect of management, improvement and challenges. Agronomy Research, 3(2), 153–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Regional Planning Act (ROG). (2009). Raumordnungsgesetz vom 22. Dezember 2008 (BGBl. I S. 2986), das zuletzt durch Artikel 9 des Gesetzes vom 31. Juli 2009 (BGBl. I S. 2585) geändert worden ist.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reich, M., Rüter, S., & Tillmann, J. E. (2011). Auswirkungen des großflächigen Anbaus von Energiepflanzen auf die Tierwelt der Agrarlandschaft: Ergebnisse des Forschungsvorhabens SUNREG III. In M. Reich & S. Rüter (Eds.), Umwelt und Raum: Vol. 2. Auswirkungen des großflächigen Anbaus von Energiepflanzen auf die Tierwelt der Agrarlandschaft (1st ed., pp. 5–18). Göttingen: Cuvillier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riecken, U., Finck, P., & Schröder, E. (2002). Significance of pasture landscapes for nature conservation and extensive agriculture. In B. Redecker (Ed.), Pasture landscapes and nature conservation. With 167 figures (pp. 423–429). Berlin [u.a.]: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rode, M. K. H. (2006). Beiträge der räumlichen Planungen zur Förderung eines natur- und raumverträglichen Ausbaus des energetischen Biomassepfades. Informationen zur Raumentwicklung, 1/2, 103–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rode, M. W., & Kanning, H. (Eds.). (2010). Natur- und raumverträglicher Ausbau energetischer Biomassepfade. Stuttgart: Ibidem-Verlag. Retrieved from http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/686760048

  • Rode, M., Buhr, N., Kanning, H., Knispel, S., Steinkraus, K., Wiehe, J., & Wolf, U. (2010). Natur- und raumverträgliche Entwicklung des Biomasseanbaus. In M. Reich & S. Rüter (Eds.), Umwelt und Raum: Vol. 1. Energiepflanzenanbau und Naturschutz. Referate und Ergebnisse der gleichnamigen Fachtagung in Hannover am 30. September 2009 (1st ed., pp. 35–42). Göttingen: Cuvillier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodrıguez, C., & Wiegand, K. (2009). Evaluating the trade-off between machinery efficiency and loss of biodiversity-friendly habitats in arable landscapes: The role of field size. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 129, 361–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roots, E. F. (1988). The assessment of cumulative effects: A research prospectus. Hull: Canadian Environmental Assessment Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schenk, A., Hunziker, M., & Kienast, F. (2007). Factors influencing the acceptance of nature conservation measures–A qualitative study in Switzerland. Journal of Environmental Management, 83(1), 66–79. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.01.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, P. (2009). Zur Bestandessituation und Habitatnutzung des Rotmilans Milvus milvus im Landkreis Holzminden (Niedersachsen). In T. Krüger & J. Wübbenhorst (Eds.), Informationsdienst Naturschutz Niedersachsen: 3/2009. Ökologie, Gefährdung und Schutz des Rotmilans Milvus milvus in Europa. Internationales Artenschutzsymposium Rotmilan (pp. 151–157). Niedersächsischer Landesbetrieb für Wasserwirtschaft, Küsten- und Naturschutz (NLWKN), Hannover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumacher, U., & Mathey, J. (1998). Zur Analyse der Lebensräume von Heuschrecken mit Methoden der Geoinformatik – dargestellt am Beispiel der Riesaer Elberegion. In J. Strobl (Ed.), Angewandte geographische Informationsverarbeitung. Beiträge zum AGIT-Symposium Salzburg ’98 (pp. 326–333). Heidelberg: Wichmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, P., Ambus, P., Amézquita, M., Andrén, O., Arrouays, D., Ball, B., et al. (2004). Greenhouse gas emissions from European croplands. Retrieved from http://www.bgc-jena.mpg.de/bgc-processes/ceip/policy/files/ghg_reportss2.pdf

  • Sonntag, N. C. (1987). Cumulative effects assessment: A context for further research and development. Hull/Quebec: CEARC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soussana, J.-F., Salètes, S., Smith, P., Schils, R., Ogle, S., Allard, V., et al. (2004). Greenhouse gas emissions from European grasslands. Retrieved from ftp://195.37.229.5/pub/outgoing/athuille/Publications/Concerted_Papers/Grassland_GHG.pdf

  • Stanners, D., Bosch, P., Dom, A., Gabrielsen, P., Gee, D., & Jock, M. (2007). Frameworks for environmental assessment and indicators at the EEA. In International Council for Science & I. ebrary (Eds.), Sustainability indicators. A scientific assessment (pp. 127–144). Washington DC: Island Press. Retrieved from http://books.google.de/books?hl=de&lr=&id=W4o-qunretMC&oi=fnd&pg=PA127&dq=DPSIR+EEA&ots=ieyfQBCN6a&sig=kHV8ciRQ5oLtCOd75NBSyrLyHu4#v=onepage&q=DPSIR%20EEA&f=false

  • Statistisches Bundesamt. (2002). Statistical yearbook 2002 for the Federal Republic of Germany. Wiesbaden. Retrieved from http://www.digizeitschriften.de/dms/toc/?PPN=PPN635628112_2002

  • Statistisches Bundesamt. (2012). Spezielle Bodennutzung und Ernte. Retrieved from https://destatis.de/DE/ZahlenFakten/Wirtschaftsbereiche/LandForstwirtschaft/Bodennutzung/Tabellen/AckerlandHauptfruchtgruppenFruchtarten.html

  • Stevenson, F. C., Légère, A., Simard, R. R., Angers, D. A., Pageau, D., & Lafond, J. (1997). Weed species diversity in spring barley varies with crop rotation and tillage, but not with nutrient source. Weed Science, 45(6), 798–806. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4045847

    Google Scholar 

  • Sticksel, E., Salzeder, G., Eder, J., Aigner, A., Fritz, M., & Deiglmayr, K. (2010). Zweikulturnutzungssystem (ZKNS) im Vergleich zu herkömmlichen Anbauverfahren. Retrieved from https://biogas-forum-bayern.de/publikationen/ZKNS.im.Vergleich.zu.herkoemmlichen.Anbauverfahren.pdf

  • Südbeck, P., Bauer, H.-G., Boschert, M., Boye, P., & Knief, W. (2007). Rote Liste der Brutvögel Deutschlands: 4. Fassung, 30. November 2007. Berichte zum Vogelschutz, 44, 23–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (UN). (1998). Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Retrieved from http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpeng.pdf

  • Veldkamp, T., Polman, N., Reinhard, S., & Slingerland, M. (2011). From scaling to governance of the land system: Bridging ecological and economic perspectives. Ecology and Society, 16(1). Retrieved from www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art1/

  • von Haaren, C., Saathoff, W., & Galler, C. (2012). Integrating climate protection and mitigation functions with other landscape functions in rural areas: A landscape planning approach. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 55(1), 59–76. doi:10.1080/09640568.2011.580558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Ruschkowski, E., & Wiehe, J. (2008). Balancing bioenergy production and nature conservation in Germany: Potential synergies and challenges. Yearbook of Socioeconomics in Agriculture, 3–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiland, P. (2010). Biogas production: Current state and perspectives. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 85, 849–860.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wiehe, J., von Ruschkowski, E., Rode, M., Kanning, H., & von Haaren, C. (2009). Auswirkungen des Energiepflanzenanbaus auf die Landschaft am Beispiel des Maisanbaus für die Biogasproduktion in Niedersachsen. Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung, 41(4), 107–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiehe, J., Rode, M. W., & Kanning, H. (2010). Raumanalyse I: Auswirkungen auf Natur und Landschaft. In M. W. Rode & H. Kanning (Eds.), Natur- und raumverträglicher Ausbau energetischer Biomassepfade (pp. 21–90). Stuttgart: Ibidem-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiehe, J., Rode, M., & Kanning, H. (2011). Biomasseanbau. Naturschutz und Steuerung. Ökol Wirtschaf, 3, 22–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • With, K. A., & King, A. W. (1999). Extinction thresholds for species in fractal landscapes: Umbrales de extinción para especies en paisajes fraccionados. Conservation Biology, 13(2), 314–326. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1999.013002314.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Environment and Development. (1991). Our common future. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/722107774

  • Young, O. R. (2002). The institutional dimensions of environmental change: Fit, interplay, and scale. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Retrieved from http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/473025182

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Environmental Planning, Leibniz University Hannover, Herrenhäuser Str. 2, 30419, Hannover, Germany

    Wiebke Saathoff, Christina von Haaren & Michael Rode

Authors
  1. Wiebke Saathoff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christina von Haaren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael Rode
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wiebke Saathoff .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Department of Sedimentology and Environm, University of Göttingen, Goldschmidtstrasse 3, Göttingen, 37077, Germany

    Hans Ruppert

  2. Institute of Geography, Department of Cartography, GIS and Remot, University of Göttingen, Goldschmidtstrasse 5, Göttingen, 37077, Germany

    Martin Kappas

  3. , Interdisciplinary Centre for Sustainable, University of Göttingen, Goldschmidtstrasse 1, Göttingen, 37077, Germany

    Jens Ibendorf

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Saathoff, W., von Haaren, C., Rode, M. (2013). Scale-Relevant Impacts of Biogas Crop Production: A Methodology to Assess Environmental Impacts and Farm Management Capacities. In: Ruppert, H., Kappas, M., Ibendorf, J. (eds) Sustainable Bioenergy Production - An Integrated Approach. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6642-6_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation