Ex Ante Impact Assessment of Policies Affecting Land Use, Part B: Application of the Analytical Framework

Katharina Helming, Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF)
Katharina Diehl, Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF)
Tom Kuhlman, Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI)
Torbjörn Jansson, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Economics
Peter H. Verburg, Institute for Environmental Studies, VU University Amsterdam
Martha Bakker, Alterra WUR
Marta Perez-Soba, Alterra WUR
Laurence Jones, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH) Bangor
Pieter Johannes Verkerk, European Forest Institute (EFI)
Paul Tabbush
Jake Breton Morris, Forest Research
Zuzana Drillet, University of Aberdeen
John Farrington, University of Aberdeen
Pierre LeMouël, Centre d’Observation Economique (COE/CCIP)
Paul Zagame, Centre d’Observation Economique (COE/CCIP)
Tomasz Stuczynski, Institute of Soil Science and Plant Cultivation
Grzegorz Siebielec, Institute of Soil Science and Plant Cultivation
Stefan Sieber, Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF)
Hubert Wiggering, Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF)

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-03840-160129

Full Text: HTML   
Download Citation

Abstract

The use of science-based tools for impact assessment has increasingly gained focus in addressing the complexity of interactions between environment, society, and economy. For integrated assessment of policies affecting land use, an analytical framework was developed. The aim of our work was to apply the analytical framework for specific scenario cases and in combination with quantitative and qualitative application methods. The analytical framework was tested for two cases involving the ex ante impact assessment of: (1) a European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) financial reform scenario employing a modeling approach and combined with a comprehensive indicator analysis and valuation; and (2) a regional bioenergy policy scenario, employing a fully participatory approach. The results showed that European land use in general is less sensitive to changes in the Common Agricultural Policy, but in the context of regions there can be significant impacts on the functions of land use. In general, the implementation of the analytical framework for impact assessment proved to be doable with both methods, i.e., with the quantitative modeling and with the qualitative participatory approach. A key advantage of using the system of linked quantitative models is that it makes possible the simultaneous consideration of all relevant sectors of the economy without abstaining from a great level of detail for sectors of particular interest. Other advantages lie in the incontestable character of the results. Based on neutral, existing data with a fixed set of settings and regions, an absolute comparability and reproducibility throughout Europe can be maintained. Analyzing the pros and cons of both approaches showed that they could be used complementarily rather than be seen as competing alternatives.

Key words

analytical framework; discussion tools; DPSIR framework; ex ante impact assessment; land-use change; model-based tools; participatory assessment tools; policy development; sustainability

Copyright © 2011 by the author(s). Published here under license by The Resilience Alliance. This article is under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. You may share and adapt the work for noncommercial purposes provided the original author and source are credited, you indicate whether any changes were made, and you include a link to the license.