IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v448y2021ics0304380021001034.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A scenario-based approach to tackle trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and land use pressure in Central Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Di Pirro, E.
  • Sallustio, L.
  • Capotorti, G.
  • Marchetti, M.
  • Lasserre, B.

Abstract

Land Use and Land Cover Changes (LULCC) are recognized among the main drivers affecting biodiversity and ecosystem services. Especially in areas with high biophysical and socioeconomic heterogeneity, the need to find optimal planning solutions to combine human and natural systems still remains an open issue. This study aims to investigate how different planning strategies affecting the spatial arrangement of LULCC can produce different impacts in terms of ecosystem conditions in the Lazio region, Central Italy. Starting from the same LULCC magnitude observed in the past through an inventory approach, three different future scenarios to 2030 were depicted by means of the InVEST tool Scenario Generator: the “Business as Usual” (BaU) and, alternatively, one avoiding changes within the “Natura 2000″ sites (N2K) and another within the regional most “Degraded Municipalities” (DM). The ecological impacts of these scenarios were then assessed using the InVEST Habitat Quality model, adopting Habitat Quality (HQ) as a proxy for biodiversity. In order to characterize LULCC impacts at multiple scales, the assessment was carried out both at the regional level and within distinct ecological units. Independently from the spatial arrangement of projected LULCC, HQ decreased under all three scenarios. Nonetheless, HQ values varied among scenarios, highlighting a strict relationship between the spatial arrangement and the ecological impact of LULCC. Compared to BaU, alternative scenarios, as well as their combination into a “Best Scenario”, reduced negative impacts on HQ. These results highlighted the weak sustainability of pursuing with past urban planning strategies, while allowed to foster innovative planning approaches to mitigate habitats loss and degradation. The proposed methodology was effective to localize the conservation priorities as well as ameliorating the reliability of planning strategies based on their ecological performance. Furthermore, it supports the resolution of planning conflicts between contrasting demands (e.g., urban expansion vs biodiversity conservation), thus enhancing simultaneous benefits for both nature and people.

Suggested Citation

  • Di Pirro, E. & Sallustio, L. & Capotorti, G. & Marchetti, M. & Lasserre, B., 2021. "A scenario-based approach to tackle trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and land use pressure in Central Italy," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 448(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:448:y:2021:i:c:s0304380021001034
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2021.109533
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380021001034
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2021.109533?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernardino Romano & Francesco Zullo & Alessandro Marucci & Lorena Fiorini, 2018. "Vintage Urban Planning in Italy: Land Management with the Tools of the Mid-Twentieth Century," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, November.
    2. Bull, J.W. & Jobstvogt, N. & Böhnke-Henrichs, A. & Mascarenhas, A. & Sitas, N. & Baulcomb, C. & Lambini, C.K. & Rawlins, M. & Baral, H. & Zähringer, J. & Carter-Silk, E. & Balzan, M.V. & Kenter, J.O. , 2016. "Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats: A SWOT analysis of the ecosystem services framework," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 99-111.
    3. Roshan Sharma & Udo Nehren & Syed Ajijur Rahman & Maximilian Meyer & Bhagawat Rimal & Gilang Aria Seta & Himlal Baral, 2018. "Modeling Land Use and Land Cover Changes and Their Effects on Biodiversity in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-14, May.
    4. Cristian Accastello & Anna Bieniasz & Róbert Blaško & Mikolaj Lula & Dariusz Pszenny & Lorenzo Sallustio & Nenad Šimunović & Nicole Vošvrdová & Erika N. Speelman, 2019. "Conflicting Demands on the Natural Resources in Northern Sweden: A Participatory Scenario Development Study," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(03), pages 1-33, September.
    5. Rosa Rivieccio & Lorenzo Sallustio & Massimo Paolanti & Matteo Vizzarri & Marco Marchetti, 2017. "Where Land Use Changes Occur: Using Soil Features to Understand the Economic Trends in Agricultural Lands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-20, January.
    6. Sandhu, Harpinder & Clarke, Beverley & Baring, Ryan & Anderson, Sharolyn & Fisk, Claire & Dittmann, Sabine & Walker, Stewart & Sutton, Paul & Kubiszewski, Ida & Costanza, Robert, 2018. "Scenario planning including ecosystem services for a coastal region in South Australia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 194-207.
    7. Bernardino Romano & Francesco Zullo & Lorena Fiorini & Serena Ciabò & Alessandro Marucci, 2017. "Sprinkling: An Approach to Describe Urbanization Dynamics in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, January.
    8. Giulia Capotorti & Eva Del Vico & Ilaria Anzellotti & Laura Celesti-Grapow, 2016. "Combining the Conservation of Biodiversity with the Provision of Ecosystem Services in Urban Green Infrastructure Planning: Critical Features Arising from a Case Study in the Metropolitan Area of Rome," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, December.
    9. C. R. Margules & R. L. Pressey, 2000. "Systematic conservation planning," Nature, Nature, vol. 405(6783), pages 243-253, May.
    10. Kubiszewski, Ida & Costanza, Robert & Anderson, Sharolyn & Sutton, Paul, 2017. "The future value of ecosystem services: Global scenarios and national implications," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 289-301.
    11. Schuwirth, Nele & Borgwardt, Florian & Domisch, Sami & Friedrichs, Martin & Kattwinkel, Mira & Kneis, David & Kuemmerlen, Mathias & Langhans, Simone D. & Martínez-López, Javier & Vermeiren, Peter, 2019. "How to make ecological models useful for environmental management," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 411(C).
    12. D. Smiraglia & G. Capotorti & D. Guida & B. Mollo & V. Siervo & C. Blasi, 2013. "Land units map of Italy," Journal of Maps, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 239-244, June.
    13. Bernardino Romano & Francesco Zullo & Lorena Fiorini & Alessandro Marucci, 2019. "Molecular No Smart-Planning in Italy: 8000 Municipalities in Action throughout the Country," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-17, November.
    14. Dainee M. Gibson & John E. Quinn, 2017. "Application of Anthromes to Frame Scenario Planning for Landscape-Scale Conservation Decision Making," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-17, May.
    15. Endreny, T. & Santagata, R. & Perna, A. & Stefano, C. De & Rallo, R.F. & Ulgiati, S., 2017. "Implementing and managing urban forests: A much needed conservation strategy to increase ecosystem services and urban wellbeing," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 360(C), pages 328-335.
    16. Ruckelshaus, Mary & McKenzie, Emily & Tallis, Heather & Guerry, Anne & Daily, Gretchen & Kareiva, Peter & Polasky, Stephen & Ricketts, Taylor & Bhagabati, Nirmal & Wood, Spencer A. & Bernhardt, Joanna, 2015. "Notes from the field: Lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world decisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 11-21.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wang, Lin & Zhao, Junsan & Lin, Yilin & Chen, Guoping, 2024. "Exploring ecological carbon sequestration advantage and economic responses in an ecological security pattern: A nature-based solutions perspective," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 488(C).
    2. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Spatial dynamics of biophysical trade-offs and synergies among ecosystem services in the Himalayas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lucia Saganeiti & Angela Pilogallo & Giuseppe Faruolo & Francesco Scorza & Beniamino Murgante, 2020. "Territorial Fragmentation and Renewable Energy Source Plants: Which Relationship?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-14, February.
    2. Keenan, Rodney J. & Pozza, Greg & Fitzsimons, James A., 2019. "Ecosystem services in environmental policy: Barriers and opportunities for increased adoption," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Antonio Ledda & Marta Kubacka & Giovanna Calia & Sylwia Bródka & Vittorio Serra & Andrea De Montis, 2023. "Italy vs. Poland: A Comparative Analysis of Regional Planning System Attitudes toward Adaptation to Climate Changes and Green Infrastructures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-18, January.
    4. Bernardino Romano & Lorena Fiorini & Alessandro Marucci & Francesco Zullo, 2020. "The Urbanization Run-Up in Italy: From a Qualitative Goal in the Boom Decades to the Present and Future Unsustainability," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-16, August.
    5. Huirong Yu, 2022. "A multi-scale approach to mapping conservation priorities for rural China based on landscape context," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(9), pages 10803-10828, September.
    6. Schirpke, Uta & Marino, Davide & Marucci, Angelo & Palmieri, Margherita & Scolozzi, Rocco, 2017. "Operationalising ecosystem services for effective management of protected areas: Experiences and challenges," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 105-114.
    7. Beniamino Murgante & Giuseppe Borruso & Ginevra Balletto & Paolo Castiglia & Marco Dettori, 2020. "Why Italy First? Health, Geographical and Planning Aspects of the COVID-19 Outbreak," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-44, June.
    8. Alessandro Marucci & Lorena Fiorini & Chiara Di Dato & Francesco Zullo, 2020. "Marginality Assessment: Computational Applications on Italian Municipalities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-17, April.
    9. Xiaoliang Han & Peiyi Lv & Sen Zhao & Yan Sun & Shiyu Yan & Minghao Wang & Xiaona Han & Xiuru Wang, 2018. "The Effect of the Gully Land Consolidation Project on Soil Erosion and Crop Production on a Typical Watershed in the Loess Plateau," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-19, September.
    10. Cundill, Georgina & Bezerra, Joana Carlos & De Vos, Alta & Ntingana, Nokuthula, 2017. "Beyond benefit sharing: Place attachment and the importance of access to protected areas for surrounding communities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PB), pages 140-148.
    11. Bernardino Romano & Francesco Zullo & Lorena Fiorini & Alessandro Marucci, 2019. "Molecular No Smart-Planning in Italy: 8000 Municipalities in Action throughout the Country," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-17, November.
    12. Gissi, Elena & Garramone, Vito, 2018. "Learning on ecosystem services co-production in decision-making from role-playing simulation: Comparative analysis from Southeast Europe," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 228-253.
    13. Kangas, Johanna & Ollikainen, Markku, 2022. "A PES scheme promoting forest biodiversity and carbon sequestration," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    14. Carlo Rega & Alessandro Bonifazi, 2020. "The Rise of Resilience in Spatial Planning: A Journey through Disciplinary Boundaries and Contested Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-18, September.
    15. Tamara S. Wilson & Benjamin M. Sleeter & Rachel R. Sleeter & Christopher E. Soulard, 2014. "Land-Use Threats and Protected Areas: A Scenario-Based, Landscape Level Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 3(2), pages 1-28, April.
    16. Brias, Antoine & Munch, Stephan B., 2021. "Ecosystem based multi-species management using Empirical Dynamic Programming," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 441(C).
    17. Bolaños-Valencia, Ingrid & Villegas-Palacio, Clara & López-Gómez, Connie Paola & Berrouet, Lina & Ruiz, Aura, 2019. "Social perception of risk in socio-ecological systems. A qualitative and quantitative analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    18. Auriel M. V. Fournier & R. Randy Wilson & Jeffrey S. Gleason & Evan M. Adams & Janell M. Brush & Robert J. Cooper & Stephen J. DeMaso & Melanie J. L. Driscoll & Peter C. Frederick & Patrick G. R. Jodi, 2023. "Structured Decision Making to Prioritize Regional Bird Monitoring Needs," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 207-217, May.
    19. Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Ros & Church, Andrew, 2016. "Deliberative Democratic Monetary Valuation to implement the Ecosystem Approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 308-318.
    20. Wang, Haoluan, 2017. "Land Conservation for Open Space: The Impact of Neighbors and the Natural Environment," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258125, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:448:y:2021:i:c:s0304380021001034. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.