| dc.contributor.author |
Helming, Katharina |
|
| dc.contributor.author |
Diehl, Katharina |
|
| dc.contributor.author |
Kuhlman, Tom |
|
| dc.date.accessioned |
2011-09-27T14:51:26Z |
|
| dc.date.available |
2011-09-27T14:51:26Z |
|
| dc.date.issued |
2011 |
en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri |
https://hdl.handle.net/10535/7568 |
|
| dc.description.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." |
en_US |
| dc.language |
English |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
impact assessment |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
land tenure and use |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
participatory development |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
policy analysis |
en_US |
| dc.subject |
sustainability |
en_US |
| dc.title |
Ex Ante Impact Assessment of Policies Affecting Land Use, Part B: Application of the Analytical Framework |
en_US |
| dc.type |
Journal Article |
en_US |
| dc.type.published |
published |
en_US |
| dc.type.methodology |
Case Study |
en_US |
| dc.subject.sector |
Land Tenure & Use |
en_US |
| dc.identifier.citationjournal |
Ecology and Society |
en_US |
| dc.identifier.citationvolume |
16 |
en_US |
| dc.identifier.citationnumber |
1 |
en_US |
| dc.identifier.citationmonth |
March |
en_US |