Post on 10-Jan-2016
description
transcript
Linking land cover change to Linking land cover change to pressures on biodiversitypressures on biodiversity
http://www.creaf.uab.es/biopress/
Question: How have past changes in land cover
affected Biodiversity ?
Why: Legislative imperative to protect the
environment. EEA is our key stakeholder
How: Measuring land cover change by manual interpretation of aerial photos Pressure – State – Impact
Funded by EC – Framework 5:
Project coordinator: Dr. France Gerard
ffg@ceh.ac.ukTel: +44(0)1487 773381
Centre for Ecology and HydrologyMonks Wood, Abbots RiptonPE28 2 LS, UK
http://www.creaf.uab.es/biopress/
CORINE LC
Aerial photos Aerial photos
Aerial photos
From
To
Land coverConversion matrix
Human Population CensusStatistics on agricultureTransport DataEtc…
Region Specific Pressures• Abandonment• Intensification• etc…
Cause & Effect
Pressures
ZoneStratification & Extrapolation
BiodiversitySemi quantitativePressure – state model
1950 Phase I
Phase II
1990 EO
CORINE LC2000 Aerial photosEO2000+
Key steps – land cover change (1950 – 2000)
Quality assessment for pilot sites
Transect interpretation:Change matrices (1950,1990,2000)
Extrapolating the matrices to produce aEuropean land cover change product
Stratification strategy
Sampling sites across Europe: 100 windows, 50 transects
Location, acquisition, pre-processingof aerial photography
Windows: 1950 Transects: 1950, 1990, 2000
Interpreters rules: 2 manualsWindows: CORINE Land Cover backdatingTransects: photo to photo interpretation
Workshop:Training of interpreters
CORINE backdating: Change matrices
(1950-1990)
Assessment of results by external experts
Land Cover Change data
Spatial framework for integration,
extrapolation & reporting
RS of landscape features
for quantifying pressures
Improve pressure - state model
and assessment of impact on biodiversity
Error Propagation
Integrating with non RS data to
quantify pressures
Key steps – Pressure-State-Impact
Sample of Natura2000 Sites
75 Windows: 30 x 30 km (black)
59 Transects: 2 x 15 km (red)
Focussing on 4 Annex-I habitats which are found in main bio-geographical regions: (i) Freshwater habitats, (ii) Natural and semi-natural grassland formations, (iii) Raised bogs and mires and fens and (iv) Forests.
Stratification:Biogeographical Regions Map of Europe (BRME)
Sampling Area
Distribution of window area with respect to
biogeographic regions as defined by the
Biogeographic Regions Map of Europe (BRME)
Sampling Area
Area proportion of Europe calculated from the BiogeographicRegions Map of Europe (BRME)
Change matrices for ~100 Natura2000 sitesBackdating CORINE 1990 with aerial photos of the 1950’ies30 km x 30 km windows = total of 90,000 km2
Backdating CORINE land cover 1990 to 1950’ies30x30km windows centred on Natura2000 site
CORINE LC’90 on aerial photos of 1950’iesCORINE LC 1990
Area around Zaventem airport, Brussels, Belgium
Photo to Photo Interpretation15 x 2 km transects from
least intensive to most intensive
Catalonia, Spain
Semi natural shrub & woodlands
Town 1950 1990
1956 1998
Catalonia, Spain
Window 185 Czech Republic
231Pasture
242Ag’Complex
243Ag’ mosaic
211Arable
112Built
131Minerals
132Dumps
313Mixed
324Transitional
312Coniferous
322Moors
Marianskolazenske hadce (1659ha)
1950 Change 1990
Fluxes > 100haFluxes > 1000ha Fluxes > 5000ha
Window 210 Belgium
112Urban
121Industrial
124Airport
142Sports
242Ag’complex
231Pasture
243Ag’mosaic
211Arable
311Brd wood
313Mxd wood
324Scrub
Poelbos-Marais de Jette (90ha)
Valleigebied tussen Melsbroek... (1445ha)
Zoniënwoud (2761ha)
Fluxes > 100haFluxes > 1000ha Fluxes > 5000ha
1950 Change 1990
Germany Transect - De1
All transect and window data are stored in a common database
Germany Transect – De8
All transect and window data are stored in a common database
The Netherlands: Arable into harbour & build-up: Urbanisation
Finland: Peatbogs into arable land: Intensification
Germany: First intensification then abandonment
1990
1950
2000
Land cover to pressure conversionTO\T1 1.1.1. 1.1.2. 1.2.1. 1.2.2. 1.2.3. 1.2.4. 1.3.1. 1.3.2. 1.3.3. 1.4.1. 1.4.2. 2.1.1. 2.1.2. 2.1.3. 2.2.1. 2.2.2. 2.2.3. 2.3.1. 2.4.1 2.4.2. 2.4.3.1.1.1. Continuous urban fabric U U U U U U U U U U U U1.1.2. Discontinuous urban fabric U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U1.2.1. Industrial or commercial units U U U U U U U U U U U U1.2.2. Road and rail networks and associated land U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U1.2.3. Port areas U U U U U U U U U U U U U1.2.4. Airports U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U1.3.1. Mineral extraction sites U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U1.3.2. Dump sites U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U1.3.3. Construction sites U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U1.4.1. Green urban areas U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U1.4.2. Sport and leisure facilities U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U2.1.1. Non-irrigated arable land U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I2.1.2. Permanently irrigated land U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I2.1.3. Rice fields U U U U U U U U U U U Dr Dr Dr Dr Dr Dr Dr I2.2.1. Vineyards U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I2.2.2. Fruit trees and berry plantations U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I2.2.3. Olive groves U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I2.3.1. Pastures U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I2.4.1 Annual crops associated with permanent crops U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I2.4.2. Complex cultivation patterns U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I2.4.3. Land principally occupied by agriculture, with significant areas of natural vegetation U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I2.4.4. Agro-forestry areas U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I D I3.1.1. Broad-leaved forests U U U U U U D D U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.1.2. Coniferous forests U U U U U U D D U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.1.3. Mixed forests U U U U U U D D U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.2.1. Natural grasslands U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.2.2. Moors and heathland U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.2.3. Sclerophyllous vegetation U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.2.4. Transitional woodland-scrub U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.3.1. Beaches, dunes, sands U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I I3.3.2. Bare rocks U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I3.3.3. Sparsely vegetated areas U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.3.4. Burnt areas U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.3.5. Glaciers and perpetual snow U U U U U U U U4.1.1. Inland marshes U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I4.1.2. Peat bogs U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I4.2.1. Salt marshes U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I4.2.2. Salines U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I4.2.3. Intertidal flats U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I5.1.1. Water courses U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I5.1.2. Water bodies U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I5.2.1. Coastal lagoons U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I5.2.2. Estuaries U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I5.2.3. Sea and oceans U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I6.2.1. Farmed land U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I6.2.2. Plantations (food crops) U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I6.3.1. Forests U U U U U U D D D U U I I I I I I I I I I6.3.2. Grasslands U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I
Priority rules
Combination of more than one intensification OR relaxation per caseThe less natural the process, the more priority (Urbanisation > Intensification > Drainage > Deforestation > Abandonment > Afforestation) in intensification. The less natural the process, the less priority (Urbanisation < Intensification < Drainage < Deforestation < Abandonment < Afforestation) in relaxation
FINLAND - Riihimäki-Kytäjä
Total changes
ha %Urbanisation 271 9,3 %Intensification 38 1,3 %Drainage 0 0,0 %Deforestation 262 8,9 %Abandonment 0 0,0 %Afforestation 149 5,1 %Total 719 24,6 %
FI8 Riihimäki
1. Artificial surfaces (ha)
2. Agricultural areas (ha)
3. Forests and semi-natural
areas (ha)
4. Wetlands (ha) 5. Water bodies (ha)
1951 6,33% 25,66% 55,97% 0,76% 11,29%1986/1987 14,28% 21,69% 52,49% 0,83% 10,72%
2000 15,15% 20,39% 52,92% 0,83% 10,72%
Loss of valuable open habitat types and ecotonesIncrease of pine forest with no biodiversity value
Lake-and riverside fields with scattered farmhouses turned into managed forest
Forest area that turn into urban- forest lossclearcuts- loss of valuable forest habitats
Forest fragmentationloss a valuable habitaturban sprawl takes over agricultural land and forest
IMPACTImpact on Biodiversity
decrease of arable land and pasturesafforestation--intensification
agricultural areas tuned into forest
Forest and transitional woodlands turn into artificial surfacesForest turned into transitional woodland
Increase in artificial surfacesincrease of major roads
STATELand Cover Changes
IntensificationAfforestationDeforestationUrbanisationPRESSURES
Economic trendsAgricultural policiesEconomic trendsSubsidies
Economic pressuresUrban sprawl
Demographic trendsTransport networkUrban sprawl
DRIVING FORCES
DPSIR - framework Finland - Riihimäki - Hyvinkää
PRESSURES
• Urbanisation
• Deforestation
• Afforestation
• Land Abandonment
• Intensification
• Drainage
Why is it so difficult to select indicators?Pressures: How can indicators quantify them ?
INDICATORS:
• Spatial Configuration
• Semantic Composition
• Temporal Distribution
Select indicators that can be used in the short term (even when imperfect)
• Identify indicators by pressure, but also by spatial configuration, semantic composition, and temporal distribution.
• Weighting indicators using a space-time assessment Priority, ranking, or value of indicators
BIOPRESS’s strategy:
Bottom-up approach & use of analytical zoning
• Suitable spatial scales to tackle habitat information range from 1:5,000 to 1:100,000 and landscape maps are required as input to compute indicators with a spatial component.
• Suitable temporal scales are not that clear yet.
IMPACT TABLES
WP4400
Ecological interpretation of land cover change:
Loss of high value habitats? Threats on existing habitats? Fragmentation of high value habitats? Landscape structure?
BIODIVERSITY IMPACT
LAND COVER CHANGE
PRESSURE
WP4300
Link a specific pressure to an amount of land cover change:
Change in indicator of pressure? Change in land cover? Relationship?
CORINE LC
Aerial photos Aerial photos
Aerial photos
From
To
Land coverConversion matrix
Human Population CensusStatistics on agricultureTransport DataEtc…
Region Specific Pressures• Abandonment• Intensification• etc…
Cause & Effect
Pressures
ZoneStratification & Extrapolation
BiodiversitySemi quantitativePressure – state model
1950 Phase I
Phase II
1990 EO
CORINE LC2000 Aerial photosEO2000+
TO\T1 1.1.1. 1.1.2. 1.2.1. 1.2.2. 1.2.3. 1.2.4. 1.3.1. 1.3.2. 1.3.3. 1.4.1. 1.4.2. 2.1.1. 2.1.2. 2.1.3. 2.2.1. 2.2.2. 2.2.3. 2.3.1. 2.4.1 2.4.2. 2.4.3.1.1.1. Continuous urban fabric U U U U U U U U U U U U1.1.2. Discontinuous urban fabric U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U1.2.1. Industrial or commercial units U U U U U U U U U U U U1.2.2. Road and rail networks and associated land U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U1.2.3. Port areas U U U U U U U U U U U U U1.2.4. Airports U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U1.3.1. Mineral extraction sites U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U1.3.2. Dump sites U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U1.3.3. Construction sites U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U1.4.1. Green urban areas U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U1.4.2. Sport and leisure facilities U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U2.1.1. Non-irrigated arable land U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I2.1.2. Permanently irrigated land U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I2.1.3. Rice fields U U U U U U U U U U U Dr Dr Dr Dr Dr Dr Dr I2.2.1. Vineyards U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I2.2.2. Fruit trees and berry plantations U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I2.2.3. Olive groves U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I2.3.1. Pastures U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I2.4.1 Annual crops associated with permanent crops U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I2.4.2. Complex cultivation patterns U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I2.4.3. Land principally occupied by agriculture, with significant areas of natural vegetation U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I2.4.4. Agro-forestry areas U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I D I3.1.1. Broad-leaved forests U U U U U U D D U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.1.2. Coniferous forests U U U U U U D D U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.1.3. Mixed forests U U U U U U D D U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.2.1. Natural grasslands U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.2.2. Moors and heathland U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.2.3. Sclerophyllous vegetation U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.2.4. Transitional woodland-scrub U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.3.1. Beaches, dunes, sands U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I I3.3.2. Bare rocks U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I3.3.3. Sparsely vegetated areas U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.3.4. Burnt areas U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I I I3.3.5. Glaciers and perpetual snow U U U U U U U U4.1.1. Inland marshes U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I4.1.2. Peat bogs U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I4.2.1. Salt marshes U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I4.2.2. Salines U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I4.2.3. Intertidal flats U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I5.1.1. Water courses U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I5.1.2. Water bodies U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I5.2.1. Coastal lagoons U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I5.2.2. Estuaries U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I5.2.3. Sea and oceans U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I Dr I I I6.2.1. Farmed land U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I6.2.2. Plantations (food crops) U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I6.3.1. Forests U U U U U U D D D U U I I I I I I I I I I6.3.2. Grasslands U U U U U U U U U U U I I I I I I I I
Priority rules
Combination of more than one intensification OR relaxation per caseThe less natural the process, the more priority (Urbanisation > Intensification > Drainage > Deforestation > Abandonment > Afforestation) in intensification. The less natural the process, the less priority (Urbanisation < Intensification < Drainage < Deforestation < Abandonment < Afforestation) in relaxation
Combination of intensification AND relaxation in the same case: When intensification is less natural than relaxation, intensification has priorityWhen intensification is more natural than relaxation, decision should be taken per case
Socio economic Indicators
IMPACT TABLES
WP4400
Ecological interpretation of land cover change:
Loss of high value habitats? Threats on existing habitats? Fragmentation of high value habitats? Landscape structure?
BIODIVERSITY IMPACT
LAND COVER CHANGE
PRESSURE
WP4300
Link a specific pressure to an amount of land cover change:
Change in indicator of pressure? Change in land cover? Relationship?
Integration