Land and biodiversity policies/Land-use regulation: Difference between revisions

From IMAGE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
 
(23 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{ZZ_PolicyResponsePartTemplate
{{PolicyResponsePartTemplate
|PageLabel=Targeting agricultural demand
|PageLabel=Land-use regulation
|Sequence=2
|Sequence=5
|Reference=Stehfest et al., 2013;
|Reference=UNEP-WCMC, 2008; Overmars et al., 2012;
|Description=<h2>Interventions targeting agricultural demand</h2>
}}<div class="page_standard">
{{DisplayFigureLeftOptimalTemplate|Flowchart LBP}}<br clear="all"/>
<h2>Land-use regulation</h2>
Demand and production technology determine the overall demand for agricultural and forestry land. However, land-use patterns and agricultural areas may also be influenced by regulating the land area available for specific purposes. Land allocation can be restricted in several ways.
 
{{DisplayFigureLeftOptimalTemplate|Flowchart Land and biodiversity policies (D)}}
</div>
{{PolicyInterventionSetTemplate
|Header=Land-use planning
|Description={{DisplayFigureTemplate|Flowchart Land and biodiversity policies (B)}}{{DisplayFigureTemplate|Flowchart Land and biodiversity policies (A)}}
Land-use planning directly affects the land-use pattern, which determines the impact on climate and biodiversity and could enhance the use of ecosystem functions. Measures, such as zoning plans and land registration, designate land areas to certain uses, including protected areas and natural corridors between designated agricultural land areas. The purpose of such natural corridors is to limit the impact on biodiversity of large agricultural areas and to connect individual spots rich in biodiversity. Restricting the land area for agriculture could affect land prices and prices of agricultural commodities thus reduce the relative costs of production factors, such as labour and capital, and other inputs. Such interventions may result in changes to the production system (Figure B) and the demand system (Figure A), and in impacts on biodiversity and climate.
|PISet=Implementation of land use planning;
}}
}}
{{ZZ PolicyInterventionSetTemplate
{{PolicyInterventionSetTemplate
|Header=Changing consumption
|Header=REDD+ schemes or payments for ecosystem services
|Description=Interventions that induce shifts in consumption, for example, towards less meat-intensive diets, directly reduce the demand for animal products (figure B on the right). As a first order effect, this intervention reduces all downstream effects of production proportionally. In other words, less demand for animal products and thus less demand for feed crop production, which requires less land and water and fewer nutrients – if all other settings in the crop production system remain the same – and thus decrease the impacts on biodiversity and climate (figures B and C on the right). However, as production systems are heterogeneous across and within regions, the effects may not be proportional. If, for example, extensively farmed agricultural areas, which typically have lower yields than other agricultural lands, are abandoned first, the reduction in area will be larger. Likewise, if production would shift to regions with lower yields, less area reduction can be achieved. In addition to this heterogeneity effect, feedbacks in the economic system via price and trade may change the final impact of a demand intervention, compared to the first-order effect, especially if such interventions are only applied in certain regions. Lower demand for meat may reduce world market prices, and thus increase the demand in other regions ([[Stehfest et al., 2013]]). Although this rebound effect would reduce the environmental benefits of the intervention, the impact on human health could still be positive.
|Description={{DisplayFigureTemplate|Flowchart Land and biodiversity policies (B)}}
|PISet=Consumption and diet preferences;
Some land uses that also provide ecosystem services could generate additional returns via REDD+ schemes or payments for ecosystem services. Such payments would place a value on ecosystem services that do not have a market value at present and would then compete with other economic activities for the same land area. This intervention would restrict the land available for agriculture or forestry, which would affect land prices and reduce consumption. This could induce adaptations in the production system (Figure B), and consequently alter the impacts on biodiversity and climate at that level. The outcome of introducing payments for ecosystem services are currently most uncertain, as such schemes have not been applied frequently as yet.
}}
|PISet=Avoiding deforestation; REDD policies;
{{ZZ PolicyInterventionSetTemplate
|Header=Managing demand for bio-energy crops
|Description=Policy interventions to manage the demand for bio-energy directly change the demand for bio-energy crops (figure A on the right). The environmental impacts, including land use, of such interventions depend on the mix of bio-energy crops, and stimulation of and/or restrictions on different bio-energy sources. Restricting the use of bio-energy directly affects the options and costs of climate policies (see also [[Climate policy]] and [[Air pollution and energy policies]]). It is important to note that the impact of reduced bio-energy demand on biodiversity can be twofold: on the one hand, more bio-energy use requires more land and therefore involves biodiversity loss (the same dynamics can be expected as described under 'shifts in consumption'). On the other hand, if policy on bio-energy use is not replaced by other (maybe more costly) climate policy measures, long-term climate change would be more severe, and thus biodiversity loss due to climate change could be greater, as well ([[Oorschot et al., 2010]]).
 
Several policies that affect demand have been analysed using the IMAGE model; for example, that on the reduction in the consumption of meat and dairy ([[PBL, 2011]]; [[Stehfest et al., 2013]]), restricted use of bio-energy, and reductions in losses and waste ([[PBL, 2010]]; [[PBL, 2012]]).
|PISet=Biofuel; Sustainability criteria in bio-energy production;
}}
}}
{{ZZ PolicyInterventionSetTemplate
{{PolicyInterventionSetTemplate
|Header=Reducing food losses
|Header=Expansion of bioreserves
|Description=Policies aimed at reducing food losses directly decrease the demand for food, in the case of waste on a consumer level, or, if post-harvest losses are reduced, decrease the amount of produce needed to fulfil the demand. This reduces the need for the production of food crops, fodder crops and animal products and therefore also reduces the environmental impacts of the production systems and the amount of agricultural land used. However, the same dynamics and second-order effects could be expected as those described under 'shifts in consumption'.
|Description=Expansion of bio-reserves should increase biodiversity values, provided sites are well selected. The climate impact of these protection areas depends on the carbon content of the standing biomass. Most hot spots for biodiversity protection also have high carbon content ([[UNEP-WCMC, 2008]]). Furthermore, the impact of this intervention on agricultural production depends on the productivity level in these areas. Restricting the land area available for agriculture could affect land prices. Consequently, the same impacts as described under land-use planning could be expected. Expansion of bio-reserves has been analysed by PBL ([[PBL, 2010]]; [[PBL, 2012]]), and an evaluation of costs and CO<sub>2</sub> emission reductions via {{abbrTemplate|REDD+}} schemes has been made by Overmars et al. ([[Overmars et al., 2012| 2012]]).
|PISet=Enlarge protected areas;
}}
}}
[[Page has default form::ZZ_PolicyResponsePartForm| ]]
{{ContentPartsTemplate}}
{{#default_form:PolicyResponsePartForm}}

Latest revision as of 10:51, 20 November 2018

link to framework components overview

Parts of Land and biodiversity policies/Land-use regulation

  1. Introduction page
  2. Agricultural demand
  3. Agricultural production system
  4. Forestry sector
  5. Land-use regulation
  6. Policy issues
  7. Data, uncertainties and limitations
  8. Overview of references
Relevant overviews
References

Land-use regulation

Demand and production technology determine the overall demand for agricultural and forestry land. However, land-use patterns and agricultural areas may also be influenced by regulating the land area available for specific purposes. Land allocation can be restricted in several ways.


Policy interventions in land-use regulation
Flowchart Land and biodiversity policies (D). Policy interventions that regulate land use and land supply.


Land-use planning

Policy interventions in the crop and livestock production systems
Flowchart Land and biodiversity policies (B). Policy interventions in crop and livestock production systems.
Policy interventions in agricultural demand
Flowchart Land and biodiversity policies (A). Policy interventions in the agricultural demand system.

Land-use planning directly affects the land-use pattern, which determines the impact on climate and biodiversity and could enhance the use of ecosystem functions. Measures, such as zoning plans and land registration, designate land areas to certain uses, including protected areas and natural corridors between designated agricultural land areas. The purpose of such natural corridors is to limit the impact on biodiversity of large agricultural areas and to connect individual spots rich in biodiversity. Restricting the land area for agriculture could affect land prices and prices of agricultural commodities thus reduce the relative costs of production factors, such as labour and capital, and other inputs. Such interventions may result in changes to the production system (Figure B) and the demand system (Figure A), and in impacts on biodiversity and climate.

Table: Policy interventions Land-use planning
Policy interventionDescriptionImplemented in/affected component
Implementation of land use planning Application of zoning laws or cadastres, assigning areas to certain land uses.

(*) Implementing component.


REDD+ schemes or payments for ecosystem services

Policy interventions in the crop and livestock production systems
Flowchart Land and biodiversity policies (B). Policy interventions in crop and livestock production systems.

Some land uses that also provide ecosystem services could generate additional returns via REDD+ schemes or payments for ecosystem services. Such payments would place a value on ecosystem services that do not have a market value at present and would then compete with other economic activities for the same land area. This intervention would restrict the land available for agriculture or forestry, which would affect land prices and reduce consumption. This could induce adaptations in the production system (Figure B), and consequently alter the impacts on biodiversity and climate at that level. The outcome of introducing payments for ecosystem services are currently most uncertain, as such schemes have not been applied frequently as yet.

Table: Policy interventions REDD+ schemes or payments for ecosystem services
Policy interventionDescriptionImplemented in/affected component
Avoiding deforestation Here comes description
REDD policies The objective of REDD policies it to reduce land-use related emissions by protecting existing forests in the world; The implementation of REDD includes also costs of policies.

(*) Implementing component.


Expansion of bioreserves

Expansion of bio-reserves should increase biodiversity values, provided sites are well selected. The climate impact of these protection areas depends on the carbon content of the standing biomass. Most hot spots for biodiversity protection also have high carbon content (UNEP-WCMC, 2008). Furthermore, the impact of this intervention on agricultural production depends on the productivity level in these areas. Restricting the land area available for agriculture could affect land prices. Consequently, the same impacts as described under land-use planning could be expected. Expansion of bio-reserves has been analysed by PBL (PBL, 2010; PBL, 2012), and an evaluation of costs and CO2 emission reductions via REDD+ schemes has been made by Overmars et al. ( 2012).

Table: Policy interventions Expansion of bioreserves
Policy interventionDescriptionImplemented in/affected component
Enlarge protected areas Increase in areas with protected status, as well the size of the areas as the numer of parks.

(*) Implementing component.


  1. Introduction page
  2. Agricultural demand
  3. Agricultural production system
  4. Forestry sector
  5. Land-use regulation
  6. Policy issues
  7. Data, uncertainties and limitations
  8. Overview of references
Retrieved from "https://models.pbl.nl/index.php?title=Land_and_biodiversity_policies/Land-use_regulation&oldid=33875"