Species-pool effect potentials (SPEP) as a yardstick to evaluate land-use impacts on biodiversity

Journal of Cleaner Production

Volumn 8, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 293-311

  Köllner, Thomas ^a  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOMASS; ECOSYSTEMS; LIFE CYCLE; WEATHERING;

BIODIVERSITY; SPECIES POOL EFFECT POTENTIALS (SPEP);

LAND USE;

EID: 0342350243     PISSN: 09596526     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0959-6526(00)00026-3     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Frischknecht R. Ökoinventare für Energiesysteme. Grundlagen für den ökologischen Vergleich von Energiesystemen und den Einbezug von Energiesystemen in Ökobilanzen für die Schweiz, Gruppe Energie-Stoffe-Umwelt (ESU-ETHZ), Sektion Ganzheitliche Systemanalyse (Paul Scherrer Institut), Zürich, Villigen/Würenlingen, 1996.
2. Giegrich J, Sturm K. Operationalisierung der Wirkungskategorie Naturraumbeanspruchung. Heidelberg: Institut für Energie und Umwelt (IFEU), 1996.
3. LCA graphic paper and print products. Part 1: proposal for a new forestry assessment method in LCA. 1998;Axel Springer, Hamburg.
4. Lindeijer E, van Kampen M, Fraanje P, van Dobben H, Nabuurs GJ, Schouwenberg E, Prins D, Dankers N. Biodiversity and life support indicators for land use impacts in LCA. Publication series raw materials no. 1998/07, IVAM ER, IBN-DLO, Wageningen, Texel, 1998.
5. Müller-Wenk R. Land use - the main threat to species. How to include land use in LCA. IWÖ-Diskussionsbeitrag 64, electronically published at http://www.iwoe.unisg.ch/service/veroeff/db64.htm . Institute for Economy and the Environment (IWÖ), University St Gallen, St Gallen, 1998.
6. Blonk H., Lindeijer E., Broers J. Towards a methodology for taking physical degradation of ecosystems into account in LCA. Int. J. LCA. 2:1997;91-98.
7. Müller-Wenk R. Safeguard subjects and damage functions as core elements of life-cycle impact assessment. IWÖ-Diskussionsbeitrag 42. Institute for Economy and the Environment (IWÖ), University St Gallen, St Gallen, 1997.
8. Goedkoop M., Hofstetter P., Müller-Wenk R., Spriensma R. The eco-indicator 98 explained. Int. J. LCA. 3:1998;352-360.
9. Udo de Haes H, Jolliet O, Finnveden G, Hausschild M, Krewitt W, Müller-Wenk R. Best available practice regarding impact categories and category indicators in life cycle impact assessment. Background document for the second working group on Life Cycle Impact Assessment of SETAC-Europe (WIA-2), 1999.
10. Lindfors L-G, Christiansen K, Hoffmann L, Virtanen Y, Juntilla V, Leskinen A, Hanssen O-L, Rønning A, Ekvall T, Finnveden G. LCA-Nordic. Impact assessment. Technical report no. 10, TemaNord 1995:503. Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen, 1995.
11. Hofstetter P. Perspectives in life cycle impact assessment. A structured approach to combine models of the technosphere, ecosphere and valuesphere. Ph.D. thesis, Swiss Federal Insitute for Technology (ETHZ), Zurich, 1998.
12. Korneck D, Sukopp H. Rote Listen der in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland ausgestorbenen, verschollenen und gefährdeten Farn- und Blütenpflanzen und ihre Auswertung für den Arten- und Biotopschutz, Schr.Reihe Vegetationskde. Heft 19, Bonn-Bad Godesberg, 1988.
13. Perrings C.et al. Biodiversity loss: economic and ecological issues. 1995;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
14. Saving biological diversity. Economic incentives. 1996;Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Paris.
15. Turner II B.L., Meyer W.B. Global land-use and land-cover change: an overview. Meyer W.B., Turner II B.L. Changes in land use and land cover: a global perspective. 1994;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
16. Baitz M, Kreißig J, Schöch C. Methode der Integration der Naturrauminanspruchnahme in Ökobilanzen, unveröffentlicht. IKP Ganzheitliche Bilanzierung, University Stuttgart, Stuttgart, 1998.
17. European Environmental Agency. CORINE Land Cover. http://etc.satellus.se , 8 June 2000, Luxembourg.
18. Schaefer M. Wörterbuch der Biologie. Ökologie. 1992;Gustav Fischer, Jena.
19. Jantsch E. System, Systemtheorie, dtv Wissenschaft, München, 1989.
20. Müller F. State-of-the-art in ecosystem theory. Ecological Modelling. 100:1997;135-162.
21. O'Neill R.V. Perspectives in hierarchy and scale. 1989;Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
22. UNCED. Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. UNCED, Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992.
23. Council of Europe, UNEP and European Centre for Nature Conservation. The Pan-European biological and landscape diversity strategy. A vision for Europe's natural heritage. Strasburg, Geneva, Tilburg, 1996.
24. Held M., Kümmerer K. Preserving soils for life. Proposal for a "Convention of sustainable use of soils" Gaia. 6:1997;212-216.
25. UNEP. Convention on Biological Diversity, http://www.biodiv.org/convtext/cbd0000.htm , 1998 Aug 17. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Nairobi, Kenya, 1992.
26. di Castri F., Younès T. Introduction: biodiversity, the emergence of a new scientific field - its perspectives and constraints. 1996;CAB International, Oxon, UK.
27. Heywood V.H., Baste I. Introduction. Heywood V.H., Watson R.T. Global Biodiversity Assessment. 1995;Cambridge University Press, New York.
28. Bisby F.A. Characterization of biodiversity. 1995;Cambridge University Press, New York.
29. UNEP. Convention on Biological Diversity, gopher://gopher.undp.org:70/00/unconfs/UNCED/English/biodiv, 1999 Feb 4. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Nairobi, Kenya, 1992.
30. BUWAL. Nationaler Bericht der Schweiz zum Übereinkommen über die biologische Vielfalt. Bundesamt für Umwelt, Wald und Landschaft (BUWAL), Bern, 1998.
31. Daly G.C. Introduction: what are ecosystem functions? Daly G.C. Nature's services. Societal dependence on natural ecosystems, island. 1997;Covelo, Washington, DC.
32. de Groot R.S. Functions of nature. Evaluation of nature in environmental planning, management and decision making. 1992;Wolters-Noordhoff, Amsterdam.
33. Barbier E.B. Tropical wetland values and environmental functions. Perrings C.A., Mäler K.G., Folke C., Holling C.S., Jansson B.-O. Biodiversity conservation: problems and policies. 1995;Kluwer, Dordrecht.
34. van den Bergh J.C.J.M. Ecological economics and sustainable development: theory, methods and application. 1996;Elgar, Cheltenham.
35. Schulze E.D., Mooney H.A. Biodiversity and ecosystem function. 1994;Springer, Berlin.
36. Suter II G.W., Barnthouse L.W., Bartell S.M., Mill T., Mackay D., Paterson S. Ecological risk assessment. 1993;Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI.
37. Zobel M. The relative role of species pools in determining plant species richness: an alternative explanation of species coexistence? Trends Ecol. Evol. 12:1997;266-269.
38. Wiertz van Dijk J, Latour JB. MOVE: vegetatie-module; de kans op voorlomen van 700 plantsoorten als functie van vocht, pH, nutienten en zout. Rapport no. 711901006, RIVM, Bilthoven, 1992.
39. Arrhenius O. Species and area. J. Ecol. 9:1921;95-99.
40. Caley M.J. Local endemism and the relationship between local and regional diversity. OIKOS. 79:1997;612-615.
41. Connor E.F., McCoy E.D. The statistics and biology of the species-area relationship. The American Naturalist. 113:1979;791-833.
42. Morton R.D., Law R. Regional species pools and the assembly of local ecological communities. J. Theor. Biol. 187:1997;321-331.
43. Preston FW. The canonical distribution of commoness and rarity: part I and II. Ecology 1962;43:185-215, 410-32.
44. Wisheu I.C., Keddy P. Three competing models for predicting the size of species pools: a test using eastern North American wetlands. Oikos. 76:1996;253-258.
45. Wohlgemuth T. Modelling floristic species richness on a regional scale: a case study in Switzerland. Biodiversity and Conservation. 7:1998;159-177.
46. Lubchenco L.et al. The sustainability biosphere initiative: an ecological research agenda. Ecology. 72:1991;371-412.
47. Duelli P. Biodiversity evaluation in agricultural landscapes: an approach at two different scales. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 62:1997;81-91.
48. Forman R.T.T. Land mosaics. The ecology of landscapes and regions. 1995;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
49. Hampicke U. Naturschutz-Ökonomie. 1991;Ulmer, Stuttgart.
50. Broggi MF, Schlegel H. Mindestbedarf an naturnahen Flächen in der Kulturlandschaft. NFP 22 no. 31, Bern, 1989.
51. Horlitz T. Flächenansprüche des Arten- und Biotopschutzes. 1994;IHW-Verlag, Eching.
52. Heijungs R., Hofstetter P. Definitions of terms and symbols. Udo de Haes H. Towards a methodology for life cycle impact assessment. 1996;Society of Environmental Chemistry and Toxicology (SETAC), Brussels.
53. Barthlott W. The uneven distribution of global biodiversity: a challenge for industrial and developing countries. Ehlers E., Krafft T. German Global Change Research 1998. 1998;German National Committee on Global Change Research, Bonn.
54. Schläpfer F., Schmid B., Seidl I. Expert estimates about effects of biodiversity on ecosystems processes and services. OIKOS. 84:1999;346-352.
55. Hegg O., Béguin C., Zoller H. Atlas schutzwürdiger Vegetationstypen der Schweiz, Bundesamt für Umwelt. 1993;Wald und Landschaft, Bern.
56. Wohlgemuth T. Der Verbreitungsatlas der Farn- und Blütenpflanzen der Schweiz (Welten und Sutter 1982) auf EDV: Die Artenzahl und ihre Abhängigkeit von verschiedenen Faktoren. Bot. Helv. 103:1993;55-71.
57. WSL/FNP. EDV-Flora der Schweiz 1.0, Eidgenössische Forschungsanstalt für Wald, Schnee und Landschaft (WSL/FNP), Birmensdorf, undated.
58. Heck K.L., van Belle G., Simberloff D. Explicit calculation of the rarefaction diversity measurement and the determination of sufficient sample size. Ecology. 56:1975;1459-1461.
59. Hulbert S.H. The nonconcept of species diversity: a critique and alternative parameters. Ecology. 52:1971;577-586.
60. Reidl K. Floristische und vegetationskundliche Untersuchungen als Grundlage für den Arten- und Biotopschutz in der Stadt - dargestellt am Beispiel Essen. Dissertation, GHS Essen, Essen, 1989.
61. Schreiber C. Vergleich der Artenvielfalt von konventionellen-, IP- und Biobetrieben (auf verschiedenen Unterlagen in der kollinen-submontanen Stufe) im westlichen Aargauer Mittelland. ETH Zürich, Zürich, 1995.
62. Lips A., Dubois D.et al. Belebte Umwelt. Wolfensberger U., Dinkel F. Beurteilung nachwachsender Rohstoffe in der Schweiz in den Jahren 1993-1996. Vergleichende Betrachtung von Produkten aus ausgewählten NWR und entsprechenden konventionellen Produkten bezüglich ihrer Umweltwirkungen und Wirtschaftlichkeit. 1997;FAT Carbotech, Tänikon, Basel.
63. Wohlgemuth T. Die vegetationskundliche Datenbank. Schweiz. Z. Forstwes. 143:1992;22-36.
64. Hawksworth D.L., Kalin-Arroyo M.T. Magnitude and distribution of biodiversity. 1995;Cambridge University Press, New York.
65. Obrist M.K., Duelli P. Wanzen und Pflanzen. Auf der Suche nach den besten Korrelaten zur Biodiversität. Inf.bl. Forsch. bereiches Landschaftsökologie. 37:1998;1-5.
66. Palmer M.W. The estimation of species richness by extrapolation. Ecology. 71:1990;1195-1198.
67. Ellenberg H. Veränderung der Flora Mitteleuropas unter dem Einfluss von Düngung und Immissionen. Schweiz. Z. Forstwes. 136:1985;19-39.
68. Klepper O, Meent D. Mapping the potentially affected fraction (PAF) of species as an indicator of generic toxic stress. Report no. 607504001, RIVM, Bilthoven, 1997.