Rating Potential Land Use Taking Ecosystem Service into Account—How to Manage Trade-Offs

Standards Pub Date : 2021-10-12 DOI:10.3390/standards1020008
L. Carlsen
{"title":"Rating Potential Land Use Taking Ecosystem Service into Account—How to Manage Trade-Offs","authors":"L. Carlsen","doi":"10.3390/standards1020008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Rating the potential land use for crop production and/or ranching is typically a process where production gains counterbalance environmental losses. Whereas the production gains are often easy to verify, the environmental losses may render visibility through the changes in the ecosystem service, such as water and habitat quality, carbon storage, etc., thus, leaving the decision maker with a multi-criteria problem. The present study demonstrates how partial-order methodology constitutes an advantageous tool for rating/ranking land use that takes trade-offs into account. It is demonstrated that not only the optimal choice of area, on an average basis, e.g., for crop production, is disclosed, but also the relative importance of the included indicators (production gains, ecosystem losses). A short introduction is given, applying data from a recent Chinese study looking for the optimal monoculture as a function of ecosystem tradeoffs. A more elaborate system applying data from the esgame was used, disclosing the most beneficial area for crop production and for ranching, as well as the relative indicators’ importance. The study further demonstrates that a single composite indicator obtained by simple aggregation of indicator values as a ranking tool may lead to a result where gains are optimized; however, this comes at the expense of the environment.","PeriodicalId":21933,"journal":{"name":"Standards","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Standards","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/standards1020008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Rating the potential land use for crop production and/or ranching is typically a process where production gains counterbalance environmental losses. Whereas the production gains are often easy to verify, the environmental losses may render visibility through the changes in the ecosystem service, such as water and habitat quality, carbon storage, etc., thus, leaving the decision maker with a multi-criteria problem. The present study demonstrates how partial-order methodology constitutes an advantageous tool for rating/ranking land use that takes trade-offs into account. It is demonstrated that not only the optimal choice of area, on an average basis, e.g., for crop production, is disclosed, but also the relative importance of the included indicators (production gains, ecosystem losses). A short introduction is given, applying data from a recent Chinese study looking for the optimal monoculture as a function of ecosystem tradeoffs. A more elaborate system applying data from the esgame was used, disclosing the most beneficial area for crop production and for ranching, as well as the relative indicators’ importance. The study further demonstrates that a single composite indicator obtained by simple aggregation of indicator values as a ranking tool may lead to a result where gains are optimized; however, this comes at the expense of the environment.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
考虑生态系统服务的潜在土地利用评估——如何管理权衡
对作物生产和/或牧场的潜在土地利用进行评级通常是一个生产收益抵消环境损失的过程。虽然生产收益通常很容易验证,但环境损失可能通过生态系统服务的变化(如水和栖息地质量、碳储量等)呈现可见性,因此,给决策者留下了一个多标准问题。本研究表明,部分顺序方法如何构成一种有利的工具,用于将权衡考虑在内的土地使用评级/排序。结果表明,不仅揭示了在平均基础上(例如作物生产)面积的最佳选择,而且还揭示了所包括指标(生产收益、生态系统损失)的相对重要性。本文给出了一个简短的介绍,应用中国最近一项研究的数据,寻找作为生态系统权衡函数的最佳单一栽培。使用了一个更复杂的系统,应用esgame的数据,揭示了最有利于作物生产和牧场的区域,以及相关指标的重要性。研究进一步表明,将指标值简单汇总作为排序工具得到的单一复合指标,可能导致收益优化的结果;然而,这是以牺牲环境为代价的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Towards Life Cycle Assessment for the Environmental Evaluation of District Heating and Cooling: A Critical Review Towards The Development of a Governance System for Central Purchasing Body Collaboration and Performance Benefit–Risk Assessment in Sport and Recreation: Historical Development and Review of AS ISO 4980:2023 Seasonal Data Cleaning for Sales with Chase Demand Strategy Are Stakeholders’ Opinions Redundant?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1