Review of land use impact methodologies

doi:10.1016/S0959-6526(00)00024-X

Journal of Cleaner Production

Volume 8, Issue 4, August 2000, Pages 273-281

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-6526(00)00024-X Get rights and content

Abstract

A review was performed of existing approaches on land use methods for LCA. Two main questions arise: how does land occupation relate to (irreversible) land changes, and what indicators are to be used to describe land use impacts. Most approaches aim at a single or limited number of indices for land use impacts, for data availability reasons. Vascular plant species density is the most common basis for an indicator. Methods using many more indicators may be seen as future sophistications, when data is available over the whole life cycle. For silviculture and agriculture crops multi-indicator scores may be applicable now to compare management techniques. Land use efficiency measured by m2.y is presently seen as the inventory step of land occupation impact assessment, but may also be a separate issue. Land management techniques in fact influence long-term changes and should be assessed as such, or not quantified at all. Further discussion and harmonisation is however required.

Introduction

Land use has recieved increasing attention in life cycle assessment (LCA). In the Dobris Assessment of the EU [1] the issue is mentioned as a separate problem, being a main cause of ecosystem degradation. But recently there have been structural changes in land use which are beneficial to ecosystem development. Both kinds of impacts need a quantitative basis to ensure this important contributor to ecosystem quality is dealt with adequately. This article is a review of the developments since about 5 years ago, based on LCA literature on land use.

Section snippets

General framework and terminology for land use impacts in LCA

Land use impacts in LCA are related to the area of land used, generally in combination with the time required to produce a certain output. These data are generally combined with qualifications of the land type changed or under use. The rationale for this is that the area and time required to produce a certain output reveals something about the land use effectivity or productivity, whereas the quality shows how seriously a land use change or a certain land occupation should be considered from an

Land use impacts assessment approaches

Three groups of assessment systems for land use impacts in LCA can be distinguished [6], although they are to a certain extent overlapping. The groups are chosen according to how the methods deal with the cause–effect chain of land use impacts. These are:

1.
functional approach
2.
land use classes
3.
key indicators

Next to this grouping, indicator systems vary in their dealing with a reference state to relate a certain score to background information, and on which type of impacts are considered. These

Discussion

It is worth considering the cause effect chain in relation to the different approaches (see the figure relating to this cause effect chain in [6, Fig. 2], discussed elsewhere in this issue). All indicators up until now relate to the safeguard subject Ecosystem Quality, according to the terminology of [38], [39]. According to [6] the impacts of water extractions on ecosystems can be expressed using the same indicators for Ecosystem Quality. For vascular plant species density and (f)NPP, data

Conclusions

In conclusion, once the ambition is to quantify land use impacts in LCA the starting point should be a simple list of indicators. Further sophistication is then possible, when required in discussions on land use issues. Most indicators being suggested relate to biodiversity, and are measured in terms of vascular plant species diversity, due to lack of more extensive data. Only two authors apply biomass-related indicators, to address the issue of life support. The recovery time seems a possible

References (44)

EUROSTAT/EEA/DGAI/PHARE/UNECE/OECD/WHO. Statistical compendium for the Dobris assessment. Luxembourg: OOPEC,...
G Finnveden
Resources
M Baitz et al.
Methode zur Integration der Naturraum-Inanpruchnahme in Ökobilanzen
(1998)
R Frischknecht et al.
Ökoinventare für Energiesysteme
(1996)
M Goedkoop et al.
Draft manual Eco-Indicator '99. Amersfoort: Pré Consultants
(1999)
E.W Lindeijer et al.
Biodiversity and life support indicators for land use impacts in LCA
(1996)
de Groot RS. Functions of nature. The Netherlands, 1992 [ISBN 9001 35594...
T.J Blonk et al.
To a methodology for the quantification of ecosystem degradation in LCA
RWS DWW publication series raw materials no. 1995/15, November 1995
(1995)
Schweinle
Integration of land use into Life Cycle Assessment
I Knoepfel
Indicatorensystem für die ökologische Bewertung des Transports von Energie
Dissertation ETH nr. 11146
(1995)

Th Mosimann

Ökotope als elementar Prozesseinehiten der Landschaft

R Heijungs et al.

Environmental life cycle assessment of products; guide and backgrounds

(1992)

Caring for the earth

(1991)

P.M Vitousek et al.

Human appropriation of the products of photosynthesis

BioScience

(1986)

E.P Odum

Ecology and our endangered life-support systems

(1993)

Renner I, Klöppfer W. Methodology of impact assessment within the framework of LCA. Germany: CAU, February 1994. Also...

A Wegener Sleeswijk et al.

Application of LCA to agricultural products

(1996)

J Giegrich et al.

Methodenvorschlag Operationalisierung der Wirkungskategorie Naturraumbeanspruchung

(1996)

Wissenschaftliche Grundlagen zure Berechnung einer Ausgleichsausgabe

(1994)

P Felten et al.

Weiterentwicklung ökologischer Indikatoren für die Flächenbeanpruchung und für Lärmwirkungen und Aufwendung auf Logistik-Konzepte einer Firma, Semesterarbeit

(1995)

F.F Beetstra

Quantifying degradation and the use of space

UCB rapport 301 A

(1996)

Beetstra F. The Ecolemma model. PhD dissertation, Technical University of Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 30 September 1998...

Cited by (89)

Circular economy monitoring – How to make it apt for biological cycles?
2021, Resources, Conservation and Recycling
Circular economy (CE) principles distinguish between technical and biological cycles. Technical cycles involve the management of stocks of non-renewable abiotic resources that cannot be appropriately returned to the biosphere, whereas, biological cycles involve the flows of renewable biotic resources that can safely cycle in and out of the biosphere. Despite this distinction, existing CE monitors are typically developed for technical cycles, and focus mainly on the extent to which resources are looped back in the technosphere. These monitors seem less apt to assess the circularity of biological cycles. This study aims to identify this gap by critically reviewing the CE monitoring criteria and CE assessment tools, and evaluate if they include the four key characteristics of biological cycles.
Firstly, biotic resources, although renewable, require to be harvested sustainably. Secondly, while abiotic resources can be restored and recycled to their original quality, biotic resources degrade in quality with every subsequent use and are, hence, cascaded in use. Thirdly, biotic resources should safely return as nutrients to the biosphere to support the regeneration of ecosystems. Fourthly, biological cycles have environmental impacts due to resource extraction, resulting from land-use and resource-depletion and biogenic carbon flows. The CE monitoring criteria lack in thoroughly assessing these characteristics. With the growing demand for biotic resources, the gap in the assessment could exacerbate the overexploitation of natural resources and cause the degradation of ecosystems. The study discusses measures to bridge this gap and suggests ways to design a CE assessment framework that is also apt for biological cycles.
Ecological impact assessment of land use in eco-industrial park based on life cycle assessment: A case study of Nanchang High-tech development zone in China
2021, Journal of Cleaner Production
Citation Excerpt :
In the LCA, the research results based on products, processes and management were plentiful (Lindeijer, 2000a,b; Pennington et al., 2004), but the studies of ecological impacts related to land use were weaker, and far from meeting the needs for LCA and ecosystem management practices (Anto’n et al., 2007). In other countries, the LCA assessment of land use was carried out in three ways: biodiversity damage (Souza et al., 2013; Baan et al., 2013; Geyer et al., 2010); ecological support function damage (Lindeijer, 2000a,b; Taelman et al., 2016), and natural ecological environment damage (Brentrup et al., 2002; Koellnert et al., 2007). However, there is currently no scientific evaluation method in China.
As the main unit of developing a circular economy, and an important way of realizing the ecological industry (eco-industry), the eco-industrial park (EIP) is the way forwards for industrial park development in China. As land is the carrier of industrial parks, the ecological effects brought about by its use patterns, and the evolution process play an important role in the sustainable park development. Based on 3S technology, using Nanchang High-tech Development Zone as a case-study, the life cycle assessment (LCA) is used to quantitatively analyze the ecological impact of land use change, and the characteristics of its evolution or laws at different stages of the EIP life cycle. The results showed the following: (1) In the life cycle development period, the annual average ecological effect was −2.15 × 10⁴ CNY, and during the mature life cycle period, the value rose to −2.01 × 10⁴ CNY, an increase of 6.44%; (2) During the mature period, as a result of changes in quantity and quality, the cultivated, forest, and unutilized land types, had all increased in both total value and annual average value of the ecological effect, showing an improvement in the overall ecological environment of the park. These three types of land were the main contributors to the improvement of the ecological effect. The contribution size was: forest land > cultivated land > unutilized land. On the contrary, the construction land and grassland showed negative ecological effects compared with the previous life cycle stage. Construction land was the main contributor to the decline in ecological park quality, and its negative ecological effect increased by 1.66 times; (3) In the two life cycle stages, amongst the ecological effects caused by the transformation of various land usees, only the conversion to forest land brought significant ecological benefits. Others showed either a certain degree of improvement, or the accumulation of negativizes in ecological effects. Therefore, the EIP generally showed the state of ecological destruction; (4) Finally, there is a relevant discussion about the applicability, scientificity, and innovation of the LCA applied to evaluate the ecological effects of industrial land.
Economic and environmental impacts of photovoltaic power with the declining subsidy rate in China
2021, Environmental Impact Assessment Review
Photovoltaic (PV) power is expected to play an important role in reducing global warming and improving energy security. China promotes PV power development by implementing feed-in tariff policies. However, the economic and environmental impacts of substituting coal-fired electricity with PV power, particularly as the subsidy rate declines, are not well-known. This study estimates the economic and environmental impacts in different cases and scenarios by combining life-cycle assessment with input-output analysis. Results indicate that substituting PV power for coal-fired electricity has negative impacts on employment, household income, and tax revenue. Although this substitution can promote economic growth when PV power generation is subsidised, the impact of the substitution on GDP will gradually decline as the subsidy rate is reduced and finally becomes negative. Assuming that the levelized cost of PV power declines following the learning curve, the same results will hold even if PV power generation becomes profitable in the future. Despite its negative impacts on employment, household income and tax revenue, the substitution has huge external values. Therefore, policies are needed to internalise the external value and address the economic impacts of the substitution.
An improved life cycle impact assessment principle for assessing the impact of land use on ecosystem services
2019, Science of the Total Environment
In order to consider the effects of land use, and the land cover changes it causes, on ecosystem services in life cycle assessment (LCA), a new methodology is proposed and applied to calculate midpoint and endpoint characterization factors. To do this, a cause-effect chain was established in line with conceptual models of ecosystem services to describe the impacts of land use and related land cover changes. A high-resolution, spatially explicit and temporally dynamic modeling framework that integrates land use and ecosystem services models was developed and used as an impact characterization model to simulate that cause-effect chain. Characterization factors (CFs) were calculated and regionalized at the scales of Luxembourg and its municipalities, taken as a case to show the advantages of the modeling approach. More specifically, the calculated CFs enable the impact assessment of six land cover types on six ecosystem functions and two final ecosystem services. A mapping and comparison exercise of these CFs allowed us to identify spatial trade-offs and synergies between ecosystem services due to possible land cover changes. Ultimately, the proposed methodology can offer a solution to overcome a number of methodological limitations that still exist in the characterization of impacts on ecosystem services in LCA, implying a rethinking of the modeling of land use in life cycle inventory.
The needs of nomadic-pastoral land users with respect to EIA theory, methods and effectiveness: What are they and does EIA address them?
2019, Environmental Impact Assessment Review
The aim of this article is to examine the needs of nomadic-pastoral land users with respect to EIA theory, methods and effectiveness based on literature review by applying Retief (2010)’s framework. The article intends to identify these needs and analyse whether EIA addresses them sufficiently and appropriately. Retief (2010)’s framework defines theory, methods (quality) and effectiveness as three main interrelated themes of environmental assessment. Our review was guided by these three themes and moreover, using nomadic pastoralism as a test case, we attempted to expand this broad framework into a four-step approach that can be used to systematically examine EIA literature. The approach first adopts the Retief (2010)’s framework and secondly, identifies issues of nomadic-pastoral land use which matter the most with respect to Retief (2010)’s themes. The next step selected 156 articles for literature review considering the issues identified previously and the fourth step examined the selected articles using a concept-centric review and a content analysis. Nomadic-pastoral land users need EIA theory to incorporate irrational logic and complex and unpredictable socio-ecological features of nomadic-pastoral land use. Decisions made based on the rational decision-making model in EIA cannot sufficiently incorporate the needs of nomadic-pastoral land use due to uncertainties associated with rational decision-making and different power, values and interests of stakeholders in pasture land resources. Furthermore, the needs of nomadic-pastoral land users with respect to EIA methods are related to impact pathways and dynamic character of land use. EIA methods systematically address impact pathways. However, the current EIA methods primarily focus on static land use, and do not address sufficiently and appropriately dynamic nature of land use. For nomadic-pastoral land users, maintaining land quality in nomadic pastoralism and participation in EIA are the most important issues with respect to effectiveness of EIA. However, empirical data are needed to examine whether these needs are addressed in EIA. Nevertheless, the current frameworks for evaluation of effectiveness of EIA are sufficient for assessment of EIA's capacity for addressing the needs of nomadic-pastoral land users. Further studies should aim at incorporating the nature of socio-ecological interaction and dynamics into EIA theories and developing suitable models on herding mobility and strategy for impact prediction in EIA.
Aesthetic impact of solar energy systems
2018, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
The presence of solar energy systems has increased significantly in recent years both in rural areas –in the form of solar farms–, and in urban areas as part of building installations. This transformation of the landscape, in spite of the good social acceptance of solar energy, causes an aesthetic impact whose interest has been growing in literature in recent years. This study aimed to review prior literature in order to establish the objective factors, aesthetic perception and methods that are most relevant when assessing the aesthetic impact. As a result of the lack of consensus, a new qualitative methodological framework is proposed that can serve as a basis for future research in the field of the integration of solar energy and its aesthetic impact. The framework comprises three sub-impacts: land use, solar system energy and glare. The results are discussed for future research and innovation in building photovoltaic integration and for SES site location and its environmental impact assessments.

View all citing articles on Scopus

¹: The author is chair of the COST E9 working group on land use and co-chair of the SETAC-Europe WIA subgroup on resources (including land use impacts).

View full text

Review of land use impact methodologies

Abstract

Introduction

Section snippets

General framework and terminology for land use impacts in LCA

Land use impacts assessment approaches

Discussion

Conclusions

Resources

Methode zur Integration der Naturraum-Inanpruchnahme in Ökobilanzen

Ökoinventare für Energiesysteme

Draft manual Eco-Indicator '99. Amersfoort: Pré Consultants

Biodiversity and life support indicators for land use impacts in LCA

To a methodology for the quantification of ecosystem degradation in LCA

RWS DWW publication series raw materials no. 1995/15, November 1995

Integration of land use into Life Cycle Assessment

Indicatorensystem für die ökologische Bewertung des Transports von Energie

Dissertation ETH nr. 11146

Ökotope als elementar Prozesseinehiten der Landschaft

Environmental life cycle assessment of products; guide and backgrounds

Caring for the earth

Human appropriation of the products of photosynthesis

BioScience

Ecology and our endangered life-support systems

Application of LCA to agricultural products

Methodenvorschlag Operationalisierung der Wirkungskategorie Naturraumbeanspruchung

Wissenschaftliche Grundlagen zure Berechnung einer Ausgleichsausgabe

Weiterentwicklung ökologischer Indikatoren für die Flächenbeanpruchung und für Lärmwirkungen und Aufwendung auf Logistik-Konzepte einer Firma, Semesterarbeit

Quantifying degradation and the use of space

UCB rapport 301 A