1
|
Germany’s Agricultural Land Footprint and the Impact of Import Pattern Allocation. SUSTAINABILITY 2021. [DOI: 10.3390/su14010105] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Footprints are powerful indicators for evaluating the impacts of a country’s bioeconomy on environmental goods, both domestic and abroad. We apply a hybrid approach combining a multi-regional input-output model and land use modelling to compute the agricultural land footprint (aLF). Furthermore, we added information on land-use change to the analysis and allocated land conversion to specific commodities. Using Germany as a case study, we show that the aLF abroad is 2.5 to 3 times larger compared to impacts within the country. When allocating land conversion of natural and semi-natural land-cover types in 2005 and 2010 to import increases by Germany, conversion rates were found to be 2.5 times higher than for the global average. Import increases to Germany slowed down in 2015 and 2020, reducing land conversion attributed to the German bioeconomy as well. Our results indicate that looking at a static import pattern is not sufficient to draw a realistic picture of the land footprint of a country. For a more detailed assessment that also considers temporal dynamics and impacts of biomass use and trade, our newly developed set of indicators also captures changes of import patterns over time. The case study shows that our enhanced land footprint provides clear and meaningful information for policymakers and other stakeholders.
Collapse
|
2
|
Study Progress of Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (IAHS): A Literature Analysis. SUSTAINABILITY 2021. [DOI: 10.3390/su131910859] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (IAHS), as a new type of heritage, has received extensive attention from the international scientific communities. With the increase of IAHS research, reviews on it have been conducted by many scholars. However, visualized research to show future research trends of IAHS are lacking. Therefore, using metrology analysis methods, this study aims at presenting the progress of research and the general development trends of Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS) in the world from 2006 to 2020 to provide ideas for the development of countries or regions in the future. This study mapped 292 literatures from Web of Science core collections from 2006 to 2020 by CiteSpace software. The results show that research on IAHS from 2006 to 2020 experienced two stages: the fluctuating increase stage, and the steady growth stage. Author groups from China, Italy, the USA, Japan, etc., contributed many papers on IAHS. Institutions including the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the University of Florence and the University of Padua in Italy, etc., have a relatively high influence on international IAHS research. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment is the most cited journal. Agricultural Heritage Systems, regeneration, agriculture, agroforestry, dry-stone wall, social capital, instability, and agricultural biodiversity have been hotspots in the past 15 years. The research themes mainly focus on GIAHS, tourism, livelihood assets, and direct georeferencing. Authors in different regions concern different research themes. In the future, the fields of applications and microscopic views, social sciences, applications of standardized quantitative research methods, and broadened international cooperation should be paid more attention.
Collapse
|
3
|
Rethinking Sustainability within the Viticulture Realities Integrating Economy, Landscape and Energy. SUSTAINABILITY 2018. [DOI: 10.3390/su10020320] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
|
4
|
Thrän D, Arendt O, Banse M, Braun J, Fritsche U, Gärtner S, Hennenberg KJ, Hünneke K, Millinger M, Ponitka J, Rettenmaier N, Schaldach R, Schüngel J, Wern B, Wolf V. Strategy Elements for a Sustainable Bioenergy Policy Based on Scenarios and Systems Modeling: Germany as Example. Chem Eng Technol 2017. [DOI: 10.1002/ceat.201600259] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
|
5
|
Evaluation of Ecological Criteria of Biofuel Certification in Germany. SUSTAINABILITY 2016. [DOI: 10.3390/su8090936] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
|
6
|
Azarpour A, Suhaimi S, Zahedi G, Bahadori A. A Review on the Drawbacks of Renewable Energy as a Promising Energy Source of the Future. ARABIAN JOURNAL FOR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING 2012. [DOI: 10.1007/s13369-012-0436-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 55] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
|
7
|
|
8
|
Tools and methodologies to support more sustainable biofuel feedstock production. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 2010; 38:371-4. [DOI: 10.1007/s10295-010-0858-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2010] [Accepted: 08/19/2010] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
|