Review of land use impact methodologies

Lindeijer, Erwin

doi:10.1016/s0959-6526(00)00024-x

Cited by 97 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These include issues such as landscape fragmentation (Jordaan et al, 2009), impacts on life support functions and ecosystem services, impacts on naturalness of areas, like regeneration times after different types of use, and impacts on biodiversity (Lindeijer, 2000;Scholz, 2007;Schmidt, 2008) (see Section 9.3.4.6).…”

Section: Quality Impacts Of Upstream Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Renewable Energy in the Context of Sustainable Development

Sathaye¹,

Lucon²,

Rahman³

et al. 2011

Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation

102

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Quality Impacts Of Upstream Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Renewable Energy in the Context of Sustainable Development

Sathaye¹,

Lucon²,

Rahman³

et al. 2011

Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation

102

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The relative ranking of land use types also has another advantage over the direct display of indicators. When using a set of indicators and knowledge sources for each land use type and service, the ranking becomes more stable over time compared to each single indicator (compare e.g., Lindeijer 2000). On the other hand, the chosen referencing of the results on a relative scale might reduce the transparency of the results.…”

Section: Complexity Versus Simplicity -Advantages and Disadvantagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pimp Your Landscape - a Generic Approach for Integrating Regional Stakeholder Needs into Land Use Planning

Fürst¹,

König²,

Pietzsch³

et al. 2010

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This is partly due to the theoretical focus of current review and meta-studies (e.g. Agostini et al (2013), Goglio et al (2015), Helin et al (2013), Lamers and Junginger (2013), Lindeijer (2000)). Moreover, the relatively small number of case studies that actually test proposed methods (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting for effects of carbon flows in LCA of biomass-based products—exploration and evaluation of a selection of existing methods

Liptow

Janssen

Tillman

2018

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Life cycle assessment (LCA) has become one of the most widespread environmental assessment tools during the last two decades. However, there are still impacts that are not yet fully integrated, including climate impacts of land use. This study contributes to the development process by testing a selection of recently proposed climate impacts assessment methods, some more focused on the impact of land use and others more focused on a product's carbon life cycle. Methods Several assessment methods have been proposed in recent years, with their development still being in progress. Of these methods, we selected three methods that are more focused on the product's carbon life cycle, and two methods more focused on the impact of land use. We applied the methods to an LCA study comparing biomass-based polyethylene (PE) packaging via different production routes in order to identify their methodological and practical challenges. Results and discussion We found that including the impact of land use and carbon cycles had a profound effect on the results for global warming impact potential. It changed the ranking among the different routes for PE production, sometimes making biomass-based PE worse than the fossil alternative. Especially, the methods accounting for long time lags between carbon emissions and uptake in forestry punished the wood-based routes. Moreover, the variation in the results was considerable, showing that although assessment methods for climate impact can be applied to biomass-based products, their outcomes are not yet robust. Conclusions We recommend efforts to harmonize and reconcile different approaches for the assessment of climate impact of biomass-based products with regard to (1) how they consider time, (2) their applicability to both short and long rotation crops and (3) harmonization of concepts and terms used by the methods. We further recommend that all value laden methodological choices that are built into the methods, such as the choice of reference states/points, are made explicit and that the outcomes of different modelling choices are tested.

show abstract

Review of land use impact methodologies

Cited by 97 publications

References 5 publications

Renewable Energy in the Context of Sustainable Development

Renewable Energy in the Context of Sustainable Development

Pimp Your Landscape - a Generic Approach for Integrating Regional Stakeholder Needs into Land Use Planning

Accounting for effects of carbon flows in LCA of biomass-based products—exploration and evaluation of a selection of existing methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About