Trading land: A review of approaches to accounting for upstream land requirements of traded products

Journal of Industrial Ecology

Volumn 19, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 703-714

  Schaffartzik, Anke ^a   Haberl, Helmut ^a,b   Kastner, Thomas ^a   Wiedenhofer, Dominik ^a   Eisenmenger, Nina ^a   Erb, Karl Heinz ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KLAGENFURT   (Austria)

^b HUMBOLDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Environmental accounting; Environmental input output analysis; Industrial ecology; Land footprint; Land use; Trade

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; CLIMATE CHANGE; COMMERCE; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT;

BIODIVERSITY LOSS; DISAGGREGATION; ECONOMIC APPROACH; ENVIRONMENTAL ACCOUNTINGS; ENVIRONMENTAL INPUT-OUTPUT ANALYSIS; GLOBAL TRADE; INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY; INPUT OUTPUT ANALYSIS;

LAND USE;

BIODIVERSITY; BIOMASS; CLIMATE CHANGE; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; GLOBAL TRADE; INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY; LAND USE;

EID: 84934884722     PISSN: 10881980     EISSN: 15309290     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/jiec.12258     Document Type: Article

References (89)

1. Asner, G. P., A. J. Elmore, L. P. Olander, R. E. Martin, and A. T. Harris. 2004. Grazing systems, ecosystem responses, and global change. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 29(1): 261-299.
2. Azapagic, A. and R. Clift. 1999. Allocation of environmental burdens in multiple-function systems. Journal of Cleaner Production 7(2): 101-119.
3. Bastianoni, S., F. M. Pulselli, and E. Tiezzi. 2004. The problem of assigning responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions. Ecological Economics 49(3): 253-257.
4. Bergh, J. C. J. van den and F. Grazi. 2014. Ecological footprint policy? Land use as an environmental indicator. Journal of Industrial Ecology 18(1): 10-19.
5. Bergh, J. C. J. M. van den and H. Verbruggen. 1999. Spatial sustainability, trade and indicators: An evaluation of the "ecological footprint." Ecological Economics 29(1): 61-72.
6. Bicknell, K. B., R. J. Ball, R. Cullen, and H. R. Bigsby. 1998. New methodology for the ecological footprint with an application to the New Zealand economy. Ecological Economics 27(2): 149-160.
7. Bird, D. N., G. Zanchi, and N. Pena. 2013. A method for estimating the indirect land use change from bioenergy activities based on the supply and demand of agricultural-based energy. Biomass and Bioenergy 59: 3-15.
8. Bullard, C. W. and R. A. Herendeen. 1975. The energy cost of goods and services. Energy Policy 3(4): 268-278.
9. Chum, H., A. Faaij, J. Moreira, G. Berndes, P. Dhamija, H. Dong, B. Gabrielle, et al. 2011. Bioenergy. In IPCC special report on renewable energy sources and climate change mitigation, edited by O. Edenhofer et al. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press.
10. Čuček, L., J. J. Klemeš, and Z. Kravanja. 2012. A review of footprint analysis tools for monitoring impacts on sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production 34: 9-20.
11. DeFries, R., M. Herold, L. Verchot, M. N. Macedo, and Y. Shimabukuro. 2013. Export-oriented deforestation in Mato Grosso: Harbinger or exception for other tropical forests? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 368(1619): 20120173.
12. DeFries, R. S., T. Rudel, M. Uriarte, and M. Hansen. 2010. Deforestation driven by urban population growth and agricultural trade in the twenty-first century. Nature Geoscience 3(3): 178-181.
13. Eder, P. and M. Narodoslawsky. 1999. What environmental pressures are a region's industries responsible for?A method of analysis with descriptive indices and input-output models. Ecological Economics 29(3): 359-374.
14. Erb, K.-H. 2004. Actual land demand of Austria 1926-2000: A variation on ecological footprint assessments. Land Use Policy 21(3): 247-259.
15. Erb, K.-H., V. Gaube, F. Krausmann, C. Plutzar, A. Bondeau, and H. Haberl. 2007. A comprehensive global 5 min resolution land-use data set for the year 2000 consistent with national census data. Journal of Land Use Science 2(3): 191-224.
16. Erb, K.-H., H. Haberl, M. R. Jepsen, T. Kuemmerle, M. Lindner, D. Müller, P. H. Verburg, and A. Reenberg. 2013. A conceptual framework for analysing and measuring land-use intensity. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 5(5): 464-470.
17. Erb, K.-H., F. Krausmann, W. Lucht, and H. Haberl. 2009. Embodied HANPP: Mapping the spatial disconnect between global biomass production and consumption. Ecological Economics 69(2): 328-334.
18. Fang, K., R. Heijungs, and G.R. de Snoo. 2014. Theoretical exploration for the combination of the ecological, energy, carbon, and water footprints: Overview of a footprint family. Ecological Indicators 36: 508-518.
19. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2014. FAOSTAT database. Rome: FAO. http://faostat.fao.org/. Accessed 12 March 2014.
20. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), UNDP (United Nations Development Programme), and UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme). 2008. UN Collaborative Programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (UN-REDD). 20 June. www.un-redd.org/Portals/15/documents/publications/UNREDD_FrameworkDocument.pdf. Accessed 10 April 2014.
21. Fargione, J., J. Hill, D. Tilman, S. Polasky, and P. Hawthorne. 2008. Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Science 319(5867): 1235-1238.
22. 2 over-emissions from the perspectives of benefit principle and ecological deficit. Ecological Economics 46(1): 121-141.
23. Finnveden, G., M. Z. Hauschild, T. Ekvall, J. Guinée, R. Heijungs, S. Hellweg, A. Koehler, D. Pennington, and S. Suh. 2009. Recent developments in life cycle assessment. Journal of Environmental Management 91(1): 1-21.
24. Foley, J. A., R. DeFries, G. P. Asner, C. Barford, G. Bonan, S. R. Carpenter, F. S. Chapin, et al. 2005. Global consequences of land use. Science 309(5734): 570-574.
25. Gallego, B. and M. Lenzen. 2005. Aconsistent inputoutput formulation of shared producer and consumer responsibility. Economic Systems Research 17(4): 365-391.
26. Galli, A., J. Weinzettel, G. Cranston, and E. Ercin. 2013. A footprint family extended (MRIO) model to support Europe's transition to a one planet economy. Science of the Total Environment 461-462: 813-818.
27. Gavrilova, O., M. Jonas, K. Erb, and H. Haberl. 2010. International trade and Austria's livestock system: Direct and hidden carbon emission flows associated with production and consumption of products. Ecological Economics 69(4): 920-929.
28. Gerber, J.-F. 2011. Conflicts over industrial tree plantations in the South: Who, how and why? Global Environmental Change 21(1): 165-176.
29. Giljum, S., F. Hinterberger, C. Lutz, and B. Meyer. 2009. Accounting and modelling global resource use. In Handbook of inputoutput economics in industrial ecology (pp. 139-160). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
30. Güneralp, B., K. C. Seto, and M. Ramachandran. 2013. Evidence of urban land teleconnections and impacts on hinterlands. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 5(5): 445-451.
31. Haberl, H. 2013. Net land-atmosphere flows of biogenic carbon related to bioenergy: Towards an understanding of systemic feedbacks. GCB Bioenergy 5(4): 351-357. Accessed 14 April 2014.
32. Haberl, H., K.-H. Erb, F. Krausmann, S. Berecz, N. Ludwiczek, J. Martínez-Alier, A. Musel, and A. Schaffartzik. 2009. Using embodied HANPP to analyze teleconnections in the global land system: Conceptual considerations. Geografisk Tidsskrift-Danish Journal of Geography 109(2): 119-130.
33. Haberl, H., K.-H. Erb, F. Krausmann, V. Gaube, A. Bondeau, C. Plutzar, S. Gingrich, W. Lucht, and M. Fischer-Kowalski. 2007. Quantifying and mapping the human appropriation of net primary production in earth's terrestrial ecosystems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 104(31): 12942-12947.
34. Haberl, H., T. Kastner, A. Schaffartzik, N. Ludwiczek, and K.-H. Erb. 2012. Global effects of national biomass production and consumption: Austria's embodied HANPP related to agricultural biomass in the year 2000. Ecological Economics 84: 66-73.
35. Haberl, H., C. Mbow, X. Deng, E. G. Irwin, S. Kerr, T. Kuemmerle, O. Mertz, P. Meyfroidt, and B. L. Turner II. 2014. Finite land resources and competition. In Rethinking global land use in an urban era (pp. 33-67). Cambridge, MA: USA MIT Press.
36. Haberl, H., M. Wackernagel, F. Krausmann, K.-H. Erb, and C. Monfreda. 2004. Ecological footprints and human appropriation of net primary production: A comparison. Land Use Policy 21(3): 279-288.
37. Henders, S. and M. Ostwald. 2014. Accounting methods for international land-related leakage and distant deforestation drivers. Ecological Economics 99: 21-28.
38. Hosonuma, N., M. Herold, V. D. Sy, R. S. D. Fries, M. Brockhaus, L. Verchot, A. Angelsen, and E. Romijn. 2012. An assessment of deforestation and forest degradation drivers in developing countries. Environmental Research Letters 7(4): 044009.
39. Hubacek, K. and S. Giljum. 2003. Applying physical input-output analysis to estimate land appropriation (ecological footprints) of international trade activities. Ecological Economics 44(1): 137-151.
40. Huppes, G. 1994. A general method for allocation in LCA. In Proceedings of the European Workshop on Allocation in LCA (pp. 74-90). Leiden, the Netherlands: SETAC-Europe, 24 February.
41. ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2006. ISO 14040: 2006-Environmental management-Life cycle assessment-Principles and framework. www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=37456. Accessed 4 September 2014.
42. 2 emission transfers. Nature Climate Change 3(1): 19-23.
43. 2 emissions from Brazilian deforestation to consumers between 1990 and 2010. Environmental Research Letters 8(2): 024005.
44. Kastner, T., K.-H. Erb, and H. Haberl. 2014a. Rapid growth in agricultural trade: Effects on global area efficiency and the role of management. Environmental Research Letters 9(3): 034015.
45. Kastner, T., A. Schaffartzik, N. Eisenmenger, K.-H. Erb, H. Haberl, and F. Krausmann. 2014b. Cropland area embodied in international trade: Contradictory results from different approaches. Ecological Economics 104: 140-144.
46. Kastner, T., K.-H. Erb, and S. Nonhebel. 2011a. International wood trade and forest change: A global analysis. Global Environmental Change 21(3): 947-956.
47. Kastner, T., M. Kastner, and S. Nonhebel. 2011b. Tracing distant environmental impacts of agricultural products from a consumer perspective. Ecological Economics 70(6): 1032-1040.
48. Kauppi, P. E., J. H. Ausubel, J. Fang, A. S. Mather, R. A. Sedjo, and P. E. Waggoner. 2006. Returning forests analyzed with the forest identity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 103(46): 17574-17579.
49. Kim, S. and B.E. Dale. 2002. Allocation procedure in ethanol production system from corn grain in system expansion. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 7(4): 237-243.
50. Kitzes, J., A. Galli, M. Bagliani, J. Barrett, G. Dige, S. Ede, K. Erb, et al. 2009. A research agenda for improving national ecological footprint accounts. Ecological Economics 68(7): 1991-2007.
51. Kuemmerle, T., K. Erb, P. Meyfroidt, D. Müller, P. H. Verburg, S. Estel, H. Haberl, et al. 2013. Challenges and opportunities in mapping land use intensity globally. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 5(5): 484-493.
52. Lambin, E. F. and P. Meyfroidt. 2011. Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming land scarcity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 108(9): 3465-3472.
53. Lapola, D. M., R. Schaldach, J. Alcamo, A. Bondeau, J. Koch, C. Koelking, and J. A. Priess. 2010. Indirect land-use changes can overcome carbon savings from biofuels in Brazil. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107(8): 3388-3393.
54. Lenzen, M. 1998. Primary energy and greenhouse gases embodied in Australian final consumption: An input-output analysis. Energy Policy 26(6): 495-506.
55. Lenzen, M. and C. Dey. 2000. Truncation error in embodied energy analyses of basic iron and steel products. Energy 25(6): 577-585.
56. Lenzen, M., J. Murray, F. Sack, and T. Wiedmann. 2007. Shared producer and consumer responsibility: Theory and practice. Ecological Economics 61(1): 27-42.
57. Leontief, W. 1970. Environmental repercussions and the economic structure: An input-output approach. The Review of Economics and Statistics 52(3): 262-271.
58. Liang, S. and T. Zhang. 2013. Investigating reasons for differences in the results of environmental, physical, and hybrid input-output models. Journal of Industrial Ecology 17(3): 432-439.
59. Lugschitz, B., M. Bruckner, and S. Giljum. 2011. Europe's global land demand: study on the actual land embodied in European imports and exports of agricultural and forestry products. Vienna: Sustainable Europe Research Institute (SERI). http://seri.at/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Europe_Global_Land_Demand_Oct11.pdf. Accessed 19 March 2014.
60. Mayer, A. L., P. E. Kauppi, P. K. Angelstam, Y. Zhang, and P. M. Tikka. 2005. Importing timber, exporting ecological impact. Science 308(5720): 359-360.
61. Meyfroidt, P. and E. F. Lambin. 2009. Forest transition in Vietnam and displacement of deforestation abroad. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106(38): 16139-16144.
62. Meyfroidt, P., E. F. Lambin, K.-H. Erb, and T. W. Hertel. 2013. Globalization of land use: Distant drivers of land change and geographic displacement of land use. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 5(5): 438-444.
63. Meyfroidt, P., T. K. Rudel, and E. F. Lambin. 2010. Forest transitions, trade, and the global displacement of land use. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107(49): 20917-20922.
64. Monfreda, C., N. Ramankutty, and J. A. Foley. 2008. Farming the planet: 2. Geographic distribution of crop areas, yields, physiological types, and net primary production in the year 2000. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 22(1): GB1022.
65. 2 accounts for open economies: Producer or consumer responsibility? Energy Policy 29(4): 327-334.
66. Muradian, R., M. O'Connor, and J. Martinez-Alier. 2002. Embodied pollution in trade: Estimating the "environmental load displacement" of industrialised countries. Ecological Economics 41(1): 51-67.
67. Owen, A., K. Steen-Olsen, J. Barrett, T. Wiedmann, and M. Lenzen. 2014. A structural decomposition approach to comparing MRIO databases. Economic Systems Research 26(3): 262-283.
68. Peluso, N. L. and C. Lund. 2011. New frontiers of land control: Introduction. Journal of Peasant Studies 38(4): 667-681.
69. Peters, G. P. 2008. From production-based to consumption-based national emission inventories. Ecological Economics 65(1): 13-23.
70. Peters, G. P., G. Marland, E. G. Hertwich, L. Saikku, A. Rautiainen, and P. E. Kauppi. 2009. Trade, transport, and sinks extend the carbon dioxide responsibility of countries: An editorial essay. Climatic Change 97(3-4): 379-388.
71. Reap, J., F. Roman, S. Duncan, and B. Bras. 2008. A survey of unresolved problems in life cycle assessment. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 13(4): 290-300.
72. Rudel, T. K., L. Schneider, M. Uriarte, B. L. Turner, R. DeFries, D. Lawrence, J. Geoghegan, et al. 2009. Agricultural intensification and changes in cultivated areas, 1970-2005. Proceedings of theNational Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106(49): 20675-20680.
73. Saikku, L., S. Soimakallio, and K. Pingoud. 2012. Attributing landuse change carbon emissions to exported biomass. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 37: 47-54.
74. Schaffartzik, A., N. Eisenmenger, F. Krausmann, and H. Weisz. 2014. Consumption-basedmaterial flow accounting:Austrian trade and consumption in raw material equivalents 1995-2007. Journal of Industrial Ecology 18(1): 102-112.
75. Searchinger, T., R. Heimlich, R. A. Houghton, F. Dong, A. Elobeid, J. Fabiosa, S. Tokgoz, D. Hayes, and T.-H. Yu. 2008. Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change. Science 319(5867): 1238-1240.
76. Seto, K. C., A. Reenberg, C. G. Boone, M. Fragkias, D. Haase, T. Langanke, P. Marcotullio, D. K. Munroe, B. Olah, and D. Simon. 2012. Urban land teleconnections and sustainability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 109(20): 7687-7692.
77. Suh, S. 2004. Functions, commodities and environmental impacts in an ecological-economic model. Ecological Economics 48(4): 451-467.
78. Turner, K., M. Lenzen, T. Wiedmann, and J. Barrett. 2007. Examining the global environmental impact of regional consumption activities-Part 1: A technical note on combining input-output and ecological footprint analysis. Ecological Economics 62(1): 37-44.
79. UNSTATS (United Nations Statistical Division). 2014. System of environmental-economic accounting (SEEA). United Nations Statistical Division. http://unstats.un.org/unsd/envaccounting/seea.asp. Accessed 3 September 2014.
80. Wackernagel, M., C. Monfreda, N. B. Schulz, K.-H. Erb, H. Haberl, and F. Krausmann. 2004. Calculating national and global ecological footprint time series: Resolving conceptual challenges. Land Use Policy 21(3): 271-278.
81. Wackernagel, M. and W. Rees. 1998. Our ecological footprint: Reducing human impact on the earth. Stony Creek, CT, USA: New Society.
82. Wackernagel, M., N. B. Schulz, D. Deumling, A. C. Linares, M. Jenkins, V. Kapos, C. Monfreda, et al. 2002. Tracking the ecological overshoot of the human economy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 99(14): 9266-9271.
83. Weinzettel, J., E. G. Hertwich, G. P. Peters, K. Steen-Olsen, and A. Galli. 2013. Affluence drives the global displacement of land use. Global Environmental Change 23(2): 433-438.
84. Weinzettel, J., K. Steen-Olsen, E. G. Hertwich, M. Borucke, and A. Galli. 2014. Ecological footprint of nations: Comparison of process analysis, and standard and hybrid multiregional input-output analysis. Ecological Economics 101: 115-126.
85. Weisz, H. and F. Duchin. 2006. Physical and monetary input-output analysis: What makes the difference? Ecological Economics 57(3): 534-541.
86. West, P. C., H. K. Gibbs, C. Monfreda, J. Wagner, C. C. Barford, S. R. Carpenter, and J. A. Foley. 2010. Trading carbon for food: Global comparison of carbon stocks vs. crop yields on agricultural land. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107(46): 19645-19648.
87. Wiedmann, T. 2009. A first empirical comparison of energy footprints embodied in trade-MRIO versus PLUM. Ecological Economics 68(7): 1975-1990.
88. Würtenberger, L., T. Koellner, and C. R. Binder. 2006. Virtual land use and agricultural trade: Estimating environmental and socio-economic impacts. Ecological Economics 57(4): 679-697.
89. Yu, Y., K. Feng, and K. Hubacek. 2013. Tele-connecting local consumption to global land use. Global Environmental Change 23(5): 1178-1186.