IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i2p1106-d1027638.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Land Use Indicators in the Context of Land Use Efficiency

Author

Listed:
  • Barbara Kalisz

    (Department of Soil Science and Microbiology, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland)

  • Krystyna Żuk-Gołaszewska

    (Department of Agrotechnology and Agribusiness, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland)

  • Wioleta Radawiec

    (Department of Genetics, Plant Breeding and Bioresource Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland)

  • Janusz Gołaszewski

    (Center for Bioeconomy and Renewable Energies, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland)

Abstract

In recent decades, the land use changes induced by various economic activities in agricultural ecosystems have affected many aspects of human life. This is the reason why land use change is considered as one of the agriculture-related environmental impacts in a sustainability assessment of food and bio-based products. At the same time, the methodology applied for the quantification of land use change effects is still under intensive research, stimulating scientific discussions. The overall objective of this paper is to fill the gap in knowledge of responsible and sustainable land use management. Specifically, the research provides a comprehensive set of land use change indicators in the context of land use change and land use efficiency. The indicators can be measured based on publicly available databases with the applicability to agricultural sustainability assessment of land use change on a local, regional and global scale. The high share of artificial land and dominant agricultural use of land with low land use intensity were noted in Belgium, Luxemburg, Netherlands, Slovenia, Cyprus, Croatia, Finland, Germany, and United Kingdom. However, land use efficiency was also low. In turn, heterogeneous land cover (but less artificial areas than in other EU countries) and heterogeneous land uses with diverse land use intensity were noted in Austria, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, France, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, and Sweden. The challenge in future research could be aggregation of different indicators in assessing the similarity of land use between countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Barbara Kalisz & Krystyna Żuk-Gołaszewska & Wioleta Radawiec & Janusz Gołaszewski, 2023. "Land Use Indicators in the Context of Land Use Efficiency," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-18, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:2:p:1106-:d:1027638
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/2/1106/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/2/1106/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dietrich, Jan Philipp & Schmitz, Christoph & Müller, Christoph & Fader, Marianela & Lotze-Campen, Hermann & Popp, Alexander, 2012. "Measuring agricultural land-use intensity – A global analysis using a model-assisted approach," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 232(C), pages 109-118.
    2. Ying Chen & Suran Li & Long Cheng, 2020. "Evaluation of Cultivated Land Use Efficiency with Environmental Constraints in the Dongting Lake Eco-Economic Zone of Hunan Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-15, November.
    3. Hualin Xie, 2017. "Towards Sustainable Land Use in China: A Collection of Empirical Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-9, November.
    4. Johan Rockström & Will Steffen & Kevin Noone & Åsa Persson & F. Stuart Chapin & Eric F. Lambin & Timothy M. Lenton & Marten Scheffer & Carl Folke & Hans Joachim Schellnhuber & Björn Nykvist & Cynthia , 2009. "A safe operating space for humanity," Nature, Nature, vol. 461(7263), pages 472-475, September.
    5. Bin Yang & Jun He, 2021. "Global Land Grabbing: A Critical Review of Case Studies across the World," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-19, March.
    6. Volkov, Artiom & Morkunas, Mangirdas & Balezentis, Tomas & Streimikiene, Dalia, 2022. "Are agricultural sustainability and resilience complementary notions? Evidence from the North European agriculture," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    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. Mergoni, Anna & Dipierro, Anna Rita & Colamartino, Chiara, 2024. "European agricultural sector: The tortuous path across efficiency, sustainability and environmental risk," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    2. Onggarbek Alipbeki & Gauhar Mussaif & Chaimgul Alipbekova & Aizada Kapassova & Pavel Grossul & Meirzhan Aliyev & Nursultan Mineyev, 2023. "Untangling the Integral Impact of Land Use Change, Economic, Ecological and Social Factors on the Development of Burabay District (Kazakhstan) during the Period 1999–2021," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-36, May.

    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. Nelson, Ewan & Warren, Peter, 2020. "UK transport decoupling: On track for clean growth in transport?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 39-51.
    2. Richter, Andries & Dakos, Vasilis, 2015. "Profit fluctuations signal eroding resilience of natural resources," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 12-21.
    3. Rostami-Tabar, Bahman & Ali, Mohammad M. & Hong, Tao & Hyndman, Rob J. & Porter, Michael D. & Syntetos, Aris, 2022. "Forecasting for social good," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 1245-1257.
    4. Huiyuan Guan & Yongping Bai & Chunyue Zhang, 2022. "Research on Ecosystem Security and Restoration Pattern of Urban Agglomeration in the Yellow River Basin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-19, September.
    5. Hualin Xie & Jinlang Zou & Hailing Jiang & Ning Zhang & Yongrok Choi, 2014. "Spatiotemporal Pattern and Driving Forces of Arable Land-Use Intensity in China: Toward Sustainable Land Management Using Emergy Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(6), pages 1-17, May.
    6. Filipa Correia & Philipp Erfruth & Julie Bryhn, 2018. "The 2030 Agenda: The roadmap to GlobALLizaton," Working Papers 156, United Nations, Department of Economics and Social Affairs.
    7. Birgit Kopainsky & Anita Frehner & Adrian Müller, 2020. "Sustainable and healthy diets: Synergies and trade‐offs in Switzerland," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 908-927, November.
    8. Hervé Corvellec & Johan Hultman & Anne Jerneck & Susanne Arvidsson & Johan Ekroos & Niklas Wahlberg & Timothy W. Luke, 2021. "Resourcification: A non‐essentialist theory of resources for sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(6), pages 1249-1256, November.
    9. Pérez-Sánchez, Laura & Velasco-Fernández, Raúl & Giampietro, Mario, 2021. "The international division of labor and embodied working time in trade for the US, the EU and China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    10. Islam, Moinul & Kotani, Koji & Managi, Shunsuke, 2016. "Climate perception and flood mitigation cooperation: A Bangladesh case study," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 117-133.
    11. Yutong Zhang & Wei Zhou & Danxue Luo, 2023. "The Relationship Research between Biodiversity Conservation and Economic Growth: From Multi-Level Attempts to Key Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-19, February.
    12. Carina Mueller & Christopher West & Mairon G. Bastos Lima & Bob Doherty, 2023. "Demand-Side Actors in Agricultural Supply Chain Sustainability: An Assessment of Motivations for Action, Implementation Challenges, and Research Frontiers," World, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-20, September.
    13. Martín-García, Jaime & Gómez-Limón, José A. & Arriaza, Manuel, 2024. "Conversion to organic farming: Does it change the economic and environmental performance of fruit farms?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    14. Janet Judy McIntyre‐Mills, 2013. "Anthropocentrism and Well‐being: A Way Out of the Lobster Pot?," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 136-155, March.
    15. Hametner, Markus, 2022. "Economics without ecology: How the SDGs fail to align socioeconomic development with environmental sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    16. Ronja Teschner & Jessica Ruppen & Basil Bornemann & Rony Emmenegger & Lucía Aguirre Sánchez, 2021. "Mapping Sustainable Diets: A Comparison of Sustainability References in Dietary Guidelines of Swiss Food Governance Actors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, November.
    17. Kim, Yeon-Su & Rodrigues, Marcos & Robinne, François-Nicolas, 2021. "Economic drivers of global fire activity: A critical review using the DPSIR framework," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    18. Barbara Predan & Petra Černe Oven, 2023. "Developing a Pedagogical Approach with the Aim of Empowering Educators and Students to Address Emerging Global Issues such as Climate Change and Social Justice: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-22, December.
    19. Kaltenegger, Oliver & Löschel, Andreas & Pothen, Frank, 2017. "The effect of globalisation on energy footprints: Disentangling the links of global value chains," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(S1), pages 148-168.
    20. Xujing Yu & Liping Shan & Yuzhe Wu, 2021. "Land Use Optimization in a Resource-Exhausted City Based on Simulation of the F-E-W Nexus," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-22, September.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:2:p:1106-:d:1027638. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.