IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v100y2021ics0264837718317915.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental fragility analysis in reservoir drainage basin land use planning: A Brazilian basin case study

Author

Listed:
  • Anjinho, Phelipe da Silva
  • Barbosa, Mariana Abibi Guimarães Araujo
  • Costa, Carlos Wilmer
  • Mauad, Frederico Fábio

Abstract

Reservoirs constructed for multiple water and land use changes alter the hydro-sedimentological dynamics of drainage basins, intensifying erosion and silting of water bodies. To ensure water and soil conservation, environmental fragility analysis is a notable tool in land use planning. Potential environmental fragility (PEF) is the dynamic equilibrium of the environment, understood as the natural susceptibility of physical parameters to erosion. In conjunction with the socioeconomic parameter of land use, it generates emergent environmental fragility (EEF). This study analyzes PEF and EEF of the Lobo Reservoir Drainage Basin, a small basin in southeastern Brazil, and recommends environmental zoning derived from its assessment. Physical parameters, on a 1:50,000 scale, and land use spatial data were used to create PEF and EEF maps, followed by recommendations for suitable use for the basin’s sectors, taking into account their environmental fragility and current land use. The results indicate that the basin is primarily classified as medium EEF, which is related to its medium PEF and to the region’s agricultural activities. The proposed environmental zoning designates nearly half the basin as suitable for anthropic use, while 28.5 % is considered a priority for environmental conservation. Areas identified as a priority for conservation/restoration represent some 16 % of the basin. Limitations and potential enhancements to the study’s methodology were encountered, but none impaired the EEF analysis, which identified areas that could favor erosion. The land use planning proposed by the study based on its environmental fragility analysis provides a low cost, flexible, and easy to use method, facilitating its adoption by public managers and use by government technicians. Moreover, the study’s methodology can be widely replicated in other regions and fine tuned in accord with their specific characteristics and morphodynamic patterns.

Suggested Citation

  • Anjinho, Phelipe da Silva & Barbosa, Mariana Abibi Guimarães Araujo & Costa, Carlos Wilmer & Mauad, Frederico Fábio, 2021. "Environmental fragility analysis in reservoir drainage basin land use planning: A Brazilian basin case study," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:100:y:2021:i:c:s0264837718317915
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104946
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837718317915
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104946?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. Ruggiero, Patricia G.C. & Metzger, Jean Paul & Reverberi Tambosi, Leandro & Nichols, Elizabeth, 2019. "Payment for ecosystem services programs in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest: Effective but not enough," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 283-291.
    2. Marcos Adami & Bernardo Friedrich Theodor Rudorff & Ramon Morais Freitas & Daniel Alves Aguiar & Luciana Miura Sugawara & Marcio Pupin Mello, 2012. "Remote Sensing Time Series to Evaluate Direct Land Use Change of Recent Expanded Sugarcane Crop in Brazil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-12, April.
    3. Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 663-674, May.
    4. Wood, Sylvia L.R. & Jones, Sarah K. & Johnson, Justin A. & Brauman, Kate A. & Chaplin-Kramer, Rebecca & Fremier, Alexander & Girvetz, Evan & Gordon, Line J. & Kappel, Carrie V. & Mandle, Lisa & Mullig, 2018. "Distilling the role of ecosystem services in the Sustainable Development Goals," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 70-82.
    5. George W. Annandale & Gregory L. Morris & Pravin Karki, 2016. "Extending the Life of Reservoirs," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 25085.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kubiszewski, Ida & Concollato, Luke & Costanza, Robert & Stern, David I., 2023. "Changes in authorship, networks, and research topics in ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    2. Philippe Delacote & Gwenolé Le Velly & Gabriela Simonet, 2020. "Distinguishing potential and effective additionality to revisit the location bias of REDD+ project," Working Papers hal-01954923, HAL.
    3. Giefer, Madeline M. & An, Li, 2022. "Divergent impacts of the grain to green program, landholdings, and demographic factors on livelihood diversification in rural China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    4. Bhatta, Manoj & Garnett, Stephen T. & Zander, Kerstin K., 2022. "Exploring options for a PES-like scheme to conserve red panda habitat and livelihood improvement in western Nepal," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    5. Kemigisha, Esther & Babweteera, Fred & Mugisha, Johnny & Angelsen, Arild, 2023. "Payment for environmental services to reduce deforestation: Do the positive effects last?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    6. Long, Kaisheng & Omrani, Hichem & Pijanowski, Bryan C., 2020. "Impact of local payments for ecosystem services on land use in a developed area of China: A qualitative analysis based on an integrated conceptual framework," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    7. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    8. Philippe Delacote & Gwenolé Le Velly & Gabriela Simonet, 2018. "A tale of REDD+ projects. How do location and certification impact additionality?," Working Papers 1808, Chaire Economie du climat.
    9. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    10. Ian Hodge & William M. Adams, 2016. "Short-Term Projects versus Adaptive Governance: Conflicting Demands in the Management of Ecological Restoration," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-17, November.
    11. Surun, Clément & Drechsler, Martin, 2018. "Effectiveness of Tradable Permits for the Conservation of Metacommunities With Two Competing Species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 189-196.
    12. Frings, Oliver & Abildtrup, Jens & Montagné-Huck, Claire & Gorel, Salomé & Stenger, Anne, 2023. "Do individual PES buyers care about additionality and free-riding? A choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    13. Bardsley, Douglas K. & Bardsley, Annette M., 2014. "Organising for socio-ecological resilience: The roles of the mountain farmer cooperative Genossenschaft Gran Alpin in Graubünden, Switzerland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 11-21.
    14. McGrath, F.L. & Carrasco, L.R. & Leimona, B., 2017. "How auctions to allocate payments for ecosystem services contracts impact social equity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 44-55.
    15. Xiaorui Wang & Shen Hu, 2024. "How do organizations in Chinese agriculture perceive sustainability certification schemes? An exploratory analysis," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 42(3), May.
    16. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    17. Veronesi, Marcella & Reutemann, Tim & Zabel, Astrid & Engel, Stefanie, 2015. "Designing REDD+ schemes when forest users are not forest landowners: Evidence from a survey-based experiment in Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 46-57.
    18. Alessio D’Auria & Pasquale De Toro & Nicola Fierro & Elisa Montone, 2018. "Integration between GIS and Multi-Criteria Analysis for Ecosystem Services Assessment: A Methodological Proposal for the National Park of Cilento, Vallo di Diano and Alburni (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-25, September.
    19. Alain‐Désiré Nimubona & Jean‐Christophe Pereau, 2022. "Negotiating over payments for wetland ecosystem services," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(3), pages 1507-1538, August.
    20. Tan Li & Qingguo Zhang & Ying Zhang, 2018. "Modelling a Compensation Standard for a Regional Forest Ecosystem: A Case Study in Yanqing District, Beijing, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-20, March.

    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:lauspo:v:100:y:2021:i:c:s0264837718317915. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.