Testing GeoDesign in Landscape Planning â First Results
Testing GeoDesign in Landscape Planning â First Results
Testing GeoDesign in Landscape Planning â First Results
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
224<br />
C. Albert and J. C. Vargas-Moreno<br />
Land uses type <strong>in</strong><br />
scenario “Status quo”<br />
Land use type <strong>in</strong> scenario<br />
“Bioenergy”<br />
Grassland Fields Grassland<br />
Fields (on organic and Fields<br />
Grassland<br />
alluvial soils)<br />
Fields (all other areas) Fields Fields<br />
Table 3: Transition rules for the two scenarios to create alternative futures<br />
Land use type <strong>in</strong> scenario<br />
“Climate mitigation”<br />
The simulation of land use changes <strong>in</strong> each scenario followed the transition rules listed <strong>in</strong><br />
table 3. Plots of land were selected that fulfilled the land use type criterion, or the<br />
comb<strong>in</strong>ation of land use type and soils criteria. The attributes of the selected plots were<br />
subsequently changed to represent the land use type of the respective scenario.<br />
3.2.4 Assessment and report of impacts of the two scenarios on biodiversity<br />
To assess the impacts of the two scenarios, the respective alternative futures were used as<br />
<strong>in</strong>put for the developed models <strong>in</strong> the ArcGIS model builder environment. The result<strong>in</strong>g<br />
evaluation maps were color coded for the respective importance of each polygon on the 1 to<br />
five scale. Furthermore, the respective distribution of areas for each level of importance<br />
was summarized <strong>in</strong> a table, and illustrated <strong>in</strong> a bar chart for comparison (figure 2).<br />
Fig. 2:<br />
Simulated land use changes as well as impact evaluation maps and reports