Scenario methodology for modelling of future landscape developments as basis for assessing ecosystem services

Matthias Rosenberg; Ralf Uwe Syrbe; Juliane Vowinckel; Ulrich Walz

doi:10.3097/LO.201433

Authors

Matthias Rosenberg Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development, Weberplatz 1, 01217 Dresden, Germany
Ralf Uwe Syrbe Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development, Weberplatz 1, 01217 Dresden, Germany
Juliane Vowinckel Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development, Weberplatz 1, 01217 Dresden, Germany
Ulrich Walz Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development, Weberplatz 1, 01217 Dresden, Germany https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2001-2386

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3097/LO.201433

Keywords:

Actors, Drivers, Ecosystem services, Future research, Landscape change, Participation, Scenarios

Abstract

The ecosystems of our intensively used European landscapes produce a variety of natural goods and services for the benefit of humankind, and secure the basics and quality of life. Because these ecosystems are still undergoing fundamental changes, the interest of the society is to know more about future developments and their ecological impacts. To describe and analyze these changes, scenarios can be developed and an assessment of the ecological changes can be carried out subsequently. In the project "Landscape Saxony 2050"; a methodology for the construction of exploratory scenarios was worked out. The presented methodology provides a possibility to identify the driving forces (socio-cultural, economic and ecological conditions) of the landscape development. It allows to indicate possible future paths which lead to a change of structures and processes in the landscape and can influence the capability to provide ecosystem services. One essential component of the applied technique is that an approach for the assessment of the effects of the landscape changes on ecosystem services is integrated into the developed scenario methodology. Another is, that the methodology is strong designed as participatory, i.e. stakeholders are integrated actively. The method is a seven phase model which provides the option for the integration of the stakeholders' participation at all levels of scenario development. The scenario framework was applied to the district of Görlitz, an area of 2100 sq km located at the eastern border of Germany. The region is affected by strong demographic as well as economic changes. The core issue focused on the examination of landscape change in terms of biodiversity. Together with stakeholders, a trend scenario and two alternative scenarios were developed. The changes of the landscape structure are represented in story lines, maps and tables. On basis of the driving forces of the issue areas "cultural/social values" and "political control", three scenarios were developed up to the time horizons in 2030 and 2050. They are titled "Trend", "Tradition and Ecology" and "Technology and Energy". These scenarios differ markedly in the degree of the future lignite exploitation, in the use of renewable energy and in the environmental compatibility of the agricultural production. In total, the investigation shows that the integration of the ecosystem services approach into the scenario technology has brought new aspects. However, the procedure became more complex. For the development of the scenarios a precise definition of the driving forces turned out to be essential. The experiences of the project further show that only two or at most three key driving forces (KDF) can be distinguished really sensibly or can be looked at in their interactions. It could be shown that from these results itself concrete measures can be derived which support desirable developments or counteract against undesirable effects. By the integration of stakeholders in different working steps, the scenarios can contribute to the sensitization and better perception of future problems and chances of a region.

References

Albert, C. (2009). Scenarios for sustainable landscape development-A comparative analysis of six case studies. 7th International Science Conference on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change,

Alcamo, J. (2008). Environmental futures: The practice of environmental scenario analysis. Environmental Futures: The Practice of Environmental Scenario Analysis,

Antrop, M. (2005). Why landscapes of the past are important for the future. Landscape and Urban Planning, 70(1-2), 21-34. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2003.10.002

Armstrong, J. S. (2001). Principles of Forecasting: A Handbook for Researchers and Practitioners,

Bastian, O., Grunewald, K., & Syrbe, R. -. (2012). Space and time aspects of ecosystem services, using the example of the EU water framework directive. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services and Management, 8(1-2), 5-16. doi:10.1080/21513732.2011.631941

Bastian, O., Haase, D., & Grunewald, K. (2012). Ecosystem properties, potentials and services - the EPPS conceptual framework and an urban application example. Ecological Indicators, 21, 7-16. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.03.014

Bastian, O., Syrbe, R. -., Rosenberg, M., Rahe, D., & Grunewald, K. (2013). The five pillar EPPS framework for quantifying, mapping and managing ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services, 4, 15-24. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.04.003

Bork, H. -., & Müller, K. (2002). Landschaftswandel von 500 bis 2500 n. chr. Offenhaltung Der Landschaft, , 11-26.

Carpenter, S. R., Bennett, E. M., & Peterson, G. D. (2006). Editorial: Special feature on scenarios for ecosystem services. Ecology and Society, 11(2)

COSTANZA, R., & DALY, H. E. (1992). Natural capital and sustainable development. Conservation Biology, 6(1), 37-46. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1992.610037.x

De Groot, R. S., Wilson, M. A., & Boumans, R. M. J. (2002). A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological Economics, 41(3), 393-408. doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00089-7

Demuth, B., Heiland, S., Wojtkiewicz, W., Wiersbinski, N., & Finck, P. (2010). Landschaften in deutschland 2030-der große wandel., 284.

Dörr, H. (2005). Die zukunft der landschaft in itteleuropa: Verantwortung für die kulturlandschaft im 21. jahrhundert. Delphi-Umfrage 2002, Arp-Planning,

Dunlop, M., Turner, G., Foran, B., & Poldy, F. (2002). Decision Points for Land and Water Futures,

Fidalgo, B., & Pinto, L. (2005). Linking landscape functions and preferences in forest landscapes-A tool for scenario building and evaluation. Proceedings of our Shared Landscape Integrating Ecological, Socio-Economic and Aesthetic Aspects in Landscape Planning and Management,

Fritsch, U. (2002). Entwicklung Von Landnutzungsszenarien Für Landschaftsö Kologische Fragestellungen,

Gausemeier, J., Fink, A., & Schlake, O. (1996). Szenario-Management: Planen Und Führen Mit Szenarien,

Gausemeier, J., Plass, C., & Wenzelmann, C. (2009). Zukunftsorientierte unternehmensgestaltung: Strategien. Zukunftsorientierte Unternehmensgestaltung,

Haase, D., Walz, U., Neubert, M., & Rosenberg, M. (2007). Changes to central european landscapes-analysing historical maps to approach current environmental issues, examples from saxony, central germany. Land use Policy, 24(1), 248-263. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2005.09.003

Höchtl, F., Bieling, C., & Konold, W. (2006). Waldzunahmen versus offenhaltung der landschaft-raum-zeit-prozesse, ökologische auswirkungen, politische lösungsansätze.

Holfeld, M., & Rosenberg, M. (2012). Anwendung von modulen des ÖSD-modells InVEST. Ökosystemdienstleistungen-Konzept, Methoden Und Fallbeispiele,

Holfeld, M., Stein, C., Rosenberg, M., Syrbe, R. -., & Walz, U. (2012). Entwicklung eines landschaftsbarometers zur visualisierung von ökoystemdienstleistungen.

Hulse, D. W., Branscomb, A., & Payne, S. G. (2004). Envisioning alternatives: Using citizen guidance to map future land and water use. Ecological Applications, 14(2), 325-341. doi:10.1890/02-5260

Iverson Nassauer, J., & Corry, R. C. (2004). Using normative scenarios in landscape ecology. Landscape Ecology, 19(4), 343-356. doi:10.1023/B:LAND.0000030666.55372.ae

Jessel, B. (2000). From 'prediction' to finding - tasks and efficiency of prognoses in environmental planning. [Von der 'vorhersage' zum erkenntnisgewinn - aufgaben und leistungsfahigkeit von prognosen in der umweltplanung] Naturschutz Und Landschaftsplanung, 32(7), 197-203.

Kahn, H., & Wiener, A. J. (1984). Ihr werdet es erleben. voraussagen der wissenschaft bis zum jahre 2000.

Klijn, J. A. (2004). Driving forces behind landscape transformation in europe, from a conceptual approach to policy options. The New Dimensions of the European Landscape, , 201-218.

Kosow, H., & Gaßner, R. (2008). Methoden der zukunfts- und szenarioanalyse. Methoden Der Zukunfts- Und Szenarioanalyse.Überblick, Bewertung Und Auswahlkriterien,

Liu, J., Zhou, H., Qin, P., Zhou, J., & Wang, G. (2009). Comparisons of ecosystem services among three conversion systems in yancheng national nature reserve. Ecological Engineering, 35(5), 609-629. doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2008.09.007

Meadows, D. (1972). Die Grenzen Des Wachstums,

Michel, E., & Walz, U. (2012). Landschaftsstruktur und artenvielfalt. art-und lebensraumspezifische untersuchungen am fallbeispiel der bodenbrüter. Angewandte Geoinformatik, , 770-779.

Nassauer, J. I., & Corry, R. C. (2002). Alternative future landscape scenarios: A means to consider agricultural policy. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 57(2), 44A-53A.

Nelson, E., Mendoza, G., Regetz, J., Polasky, S., Tallis, H., Cameron, D. R., . . . Shaw, M. R. (2009). Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7(1), 4-11. doi:10.1890/080023

Oppermann, B. (2008). Zur kunst der landschaftsvorhersage. gedanken anlässlich des fll-fachforums zum thema zukunftslandschaften. Stadt+Grün, 57, 35-38.

Pachauri, R. K., & Reisinger, A. (2007). Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,

Pijanowski, B. C., Brown, D. G., Shellito, B. A., & Manik, G. A. (2002). Using neural networks and GIS to forecast land use changes: A land transformation model. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 26(6), 553-575. doi:10.1016/S0198-9715(01)00015-1

Priess, J., & Hauck, J. (2011). Szenarien für nachhaltige landnutzung in mitteldeutschland.

Prognos, A. G. (2011). Bedeutung der braunkohle in ostdeutschland.

Reed, M. S. (2008). Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review. Biological Conservation, 141(10), 2417-2431. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014

Santelmann, M. V., White, D., Freemark, K., Nassauer, J. I., Eilers, J. M., Vaché, K. B., . . . Debinski, D. (2004). Assessing alternative futures for agriculture in iowa, U.S.A. Landscape Ecology, 19(4), 357-374. doi:10.1023/B:LAND.0000030459.43445.19

Seppelt, R., & Holzkämper, A. (2007). Multifunctional use of landscape services. applications and results of optimization techniques of land use scenario development. Proceedings 7.IALE World Congress,

Spangenberg, J. H. (2007). Biodiversity pressure and the driving forces behind. Ecological Economics, 61(1), 146-158. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.02.021

Steinitz, C., Arias, H., Bassett, S., Flaxman, M., Goode, T., Maddock III, T., . . . Shearer, A. (2003). Alternative Futures for Changing Landscapes: The Upper San Pedro River Basin in Arizona and Sonora,

Syrbe, R. U., Rosenberg, M., & Vownickel, J. (2013). Szenario-entwicklung und partizipative verfahren. Ökosystemdienstleistungen - Konzept, Methoden Und Fallbeispiele, , 110-118.

van Asselt, M., Anastasi, C., Greeuw, S., Mellors, J., Peters, S., Rothman, D., . . . Rotmans, J. (2000). Visions for a sustainable europe. Futures, 32(9), 809-831. doi:10.1016/S0016-3287(00)00033-1

Verburg, P. H., van Berkel, D. B., van Doorn, A. M., van Eupen, M., & van den Heiligenberg, H. A. R. M. (2010). Trajectories of land use change in europe: A model-based exploration of rural futures. Landscape Ecology, 25(2), 217-232. doi:10.1007/s10980-009-9347-7

Von Reibnitz, U. (1991). Szenario methode: Instrumente für die unternehmerische und persönliche erfolgsplanung. Szenario-Technik: Instrumente Für Die Unternehmerische Und Persönliche Erfolgsplanung,

Walz, A., Lardelli, C., Behrendt, H., Grêt-Regamey, A., Lundström, C., Kytzia, S., & Bebi, P. (2007). Participatory scenario analysis for integrated regional modelling. Landscape and Urban Planning, 81(1-2), 114-131. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.11.001

Zebisch, M. (2004). Modellierung Der Auswirkungen Von Landnutzungsänderungen Auf Landschaftsmuster Und Biodiversität,