Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Land use impacts on biodiversity from kiwifruit production in New Zealand assessed with global and national datasets

  • LAND USE IN LCA
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Habitat loss is a significant cause of biodiversity loss, but while its importance is widely recognized, there is no generally accepted method on how to include impacts on biodiversity from land use and land use changes in cycle assessment (LCA), and existing methods are suffering from data gaps. This paper proposes a methodology for assessing the impact of land use on biodiversity using ecological structures as opposed to information on number of species.

Methods

Two forms of the model (global and local scales) were used to assess environmental quality, combining ecosystem scarcity, vulnerability, and conditions for maintaining biodiversity. A case study for New Zealand kiwifruit production is presented. As part of the sensitivity analysis, model parameters (area and vulnerability) were altered and New Zealand datasets were also used.

Results and discussion

When the biodiversity assessment was implemented using a global dataset, the importance of productivity values was shown to depend on the area the results were normalized against. While the area parameter played an important role in the results, the proposed alternative vulnerability scale had little influence on the final outcome.

Conclusions

Overall, the paper successfully implements a model to assess biodiversity impacts in LCA using easily accessible, free-of-charge data and software. Comparing the model using global vs. national datasets showed that there is a potential loss of regional significance when using the generalized model with the global dataset. However, as a guide to assessing biodiversity impact, the model allows for consistent comparison of product systems on an international basis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bare JC (2010) Life cycle impact assessment research developments and needs. Clean Technol Environ Policy 12:341–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes N (1996) Conflicts over biodiversity. In: Sloep PB, Blowers A (eds) Environmental policy in an international context. Environmental problems as conflicts of interest. Arnold, London, pp 217–254

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brentrup F, Küsters J, Lammel J, Kuhlmann H (2002) Life cycle impact assessment of land use based on the hemeroby concept. Int J Life Cycle Assess 7:339–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butchart SHM, Walpole M, Collen B, van Strien A, Scharlemann JPW, Almond REA et al (2010) Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Science 328:1164–1168

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chapin FS III, Zavaleta ES, Eviner VT, Naylor RT, Vitousek PM, Reynolds HL et al (2000) Consequences of changing biodiversity. Nature 405:234–242

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Curran M, de Baan L, de Schryver A, van Zelm R, Hellweg S, Koellner T, Sonnemann G, Huijbregts M (2011) Toward meaningful end points of biodiversity in life cycle assessment. Environ Sci Technol 45:70–79

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • De Baan L, Alkemade R, Koellner T (2013) Land use impacts on biodiversity in LCA: a global approach. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(6):1216–1230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Schryver AM, Goedkoop MJ, Leuven RSEW, Huijbregts MAJ (2010) Uncertainties in the application of the species area relationship for characterisation factors of land occupation in life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:682–691

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diaz S, Cabido M (2001) Vive la difference: plant functional diversity matters to ecosystem processes. Trends Ecol Evol 16:646–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FAO (2012) FAOSTAT. http://faostat3.fao.org/home. Accessed 2 August 2012

  • Geyer R, Stoms DM, Lindner JP, Davis FW, Wittstock B (2010) Coupling GIS and LCA for biodiversity assessments of land use. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(5):454–467

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, Huijbregts M, De Schryver A, Struijs J, van Zelm R (2009) ReCiPe 2008. A life cycle impact assessment methods which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level. First edition. Report I: Characterisation. Available at http://www.leidenuniv.nl/cml/ssp/publications/recipe_characterisation.pdf Accessed 13 April 2012

  • Gottfried M, Pauli H, Futschik A, Akhalkatsi M, Barančok P, Alonso JLB et al (2012) Continent-wide response of mountain vegetation to climate change. Nat Clim Change 2:111–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haines-Young R (2009) Land use and biodiversity relations. Land Use Policy 26S:178–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henry PY, Lengyel S, Nowicki P, Julliard R, Clobert J, Celik T et al (2008) Integrating ongoing biodiversity monitoring: Potential benefits and methods. Biodivers Conserv 17:3357–3382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kati V, Devillers P, Dufrêne M, Legakis A, Vokou D, Lebrun P (2004) Testing the value of six taxonomic groups as biodiversity indicators at a local scale. Conserv Biol 18:667–675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilgour M, Saunders C, Scrimgeour F, Zellman E (2008) The key elements of success and failure in the NZ kiwifruit industry. Research Report No. 311. Agrobusiness and Economics Research Unit, Lincoln, New Zealand

  • Koellner T (2002) Land use in product life cycles and its consequences for ecosystem quality. Int J Life Cycle Assess 7:130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Köllner T (2000) Species-pool effect potentials (SPEP) as a yardstick to evaluate land-use impacts on biodiversity. J Clean Product 8:293–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kowarik I (1999) Natürlichkeit, Naturnähe und Hemerobie als Bewertungskriterien. In: Konold W, Böcker R, Hampicke U (eds) Handbuch Naturschutz und Landschaftspflege. Ecomed, Landsberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Landcare Research (2012) Threatened Environment Classification. http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/resources/maps-satellites/threatened-environment-classification, accessed 13August 2012

  • Larsson TB (ed) (2001) Biodiversity evaluation tools for European forests. Ecological Bulletins 50. Blackwell Science, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawton JH, Bignell DE, Bolton B, Bloemers GF, Eggleton P, Hammond PM et al (1998) Biodiversity inventories, indicator taxa and effects of habitat modification in tropical forest. Nature 391:72–76S

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lenzen M, Lane A, Widmer-Cooper A, Williams M (2009) Effects of land use on threatened species. Conserv Biol 23:294–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindeijer E (2000) Biodiversity and life support impacts of land use in LCA. J Cleaner Prod 8:313–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindgaard A, Henriksen S (eds) (2011) Norsk rødliste for naturtyper 2010. Artsdatabanken, Trondheim

  • MfE, Ministry for the Environment (2007) Environmental reporting, land cover, Available at http://www.mfe.govt.nz/environmental-reporting/land/cover/. Accessed 25 November 2011

  • MfE, Ministry for the Environment (2009) Publications, state of the environment, Land Environments of New Zealand, Available at http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/ser/lenz-apr03.html. Accessed 13 August 2012

  • Michelsen O (2008) Assessment of land use impact on biodiversity. Proposal of a new methodology exemplified with forestry operations in Norway. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13:22–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Milà i Canals L, Bauer C, Depestele J, Dubreuil A, Freiermuth Knuchel R, Gaillard G et al (2007) Key elements in a framework for land use impact assessment within LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12:5–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milà i Canals L, Chenoweth J, Chapagin A, Orr S, Anton A, Clift R (2009) Assessing freshwater use impacts in LCA: Part I - inventory modelling and characterisation factors for the main impact pathways. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14:28–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milà i Canals L, Chapagin A, Orr S, Chenoweth J, Anton A, Clift R (2010) Assessing freshwater use impacts in LCA, part 2: case study of broccoli production in the UK and Spain. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:598–607

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: current state and trends: findings of the Condition and Trends Working Group / co-chairs Hassan R and Scholes R. Island, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller-Wenk R (1998) Land use—the main threat to species. How to include land use in LCA. IWÖ—Diskussionsbeitrag 64. Institute for Economy and the Environment (IWÖ). University St. Gallen, St. Gallen

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson DM, Dinerstein E, Wikramanayake ED, Burgess ND, Powell GVN, Underwood EC et al (2001) Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on Earth. BioScience 51:933–938

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paracchini ML, Capitani C (2011) Implementation of a EU wide indicator for the rural-agrarian landscape. JRC Scientific and Technical Reports EUR25114EN-2011. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Brussels

  • Peltzer DA, MacLeod CJ, Gormley AM, Perry M, Burrows L, Moller H, Benge J (2011) Weed risk, plant biodiversity and carbon storage within kiwifruit orchard land titles. Landcare Research Contract Report LC626 to ZESPRI International Ltd and Bay of Plenty Regional Council, New Zealand. Landcare Research, Dunedin, New Zealand

  • Penman T, Law B, Ximenes F (2010) A proposal for accounting for biodiversity in life cycle assessment. Biodivers Conserv 19:3245–3254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peter D, Krokowski K, Bresky J, Petterssn B, Bradley M, Woodtli H, Nehm F (1998) LCA graphic paper and print products (part 1, long version). Infras AG (Zürich), Axel Springer Verlag AG (Hamburg), Stora (Falun, Viersen) and Canfor (Vancouver)

  • Prendergast JR, Eversham BC (1997) Species richness covariance in higher taxa: empirical tests of the biodiversity indicator concept. Ecography 20:210–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • QGIS, Quantum GIS project, version 1.7.4 Wroclaw (2012) http://www.qgis.org. Accessed 5 March 2013

  • Sala OE, Chapin FS III, Armesto JJ, Berlow E, Bloomfield J, Dirzo R et al (2000) Global biodiversity scenarios for the Year 2100. Science 287:1770–1774

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt JH (2008) Development of LCIA characterisation factors for land use impacts on biodiversity. J Cleaner Product 16:1929–1942

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Similä M, Kouki J, Mönkkänen M, Sippola AL, Huhta E (2006) Co-variation and indicators of species diversity: can richness of forest-dwelling species be predicted in boreal forests? Ecol Indicat 6:686–700

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toffoletto L, Bulle C, Godin J, Reid C, Deschênes L (2007) LUCAS—a new LCIA method used for a Canadian-specific context. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12:93–102

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • UNEP, United Nations Environment Programme (1992) Convention on Biological Diversity. Text and annexes. UNEP, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • van Jaarsveld AS, Freitag S, Chown SL, Muller C, Koch S, Hull H et al (1998) Biodiversity assessment and conservation strategies. Science 279:2106–2108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker S, Price R, Rutledge Dl (2005) New Zealand's remaining indigenous cover: recent changes and biodiversity protection needs. Landcare Research, Dunedin, New Zealand. Available at http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/databases/lenz/downloads/New%20Zealand_indigenous_cover.pdf. Accessed 20 September 2011

  • Walter C, Stützel H (2009) A new method for assessing the sustainability of land-use systems (II): evaluating impact indicators. Ecol Econ 68:1288–1300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weidema BP, Lindeijer L (2001) Physical impacts of land-use in product life cycle assessment: final report of the Eurenviro-LCAGAPS sub-project on land-use. Department of Manufacturing Engineering and Management, Lyngby

    Google Scholar 

  • WWF, World Wildlife Fund (2012) WWF WildFinder. http://gis.wwfus.org/wildfinder/. Accessed 18 August 2012

  • ZESPRI (2010) ZESPRI web pages. Zespri kiwifruit Annual Review 2009/2010, Investors Publications. www.zespri.com. Accessed 6 July 2012

  • ZESPRI (2012) ZESPRI web pages. www.zespri.com. Accessed 6 July 2012

Download references

Acknowledgments

The article is based on research initially conducted by the author Carla Coelho while at Landcare Research and was supported by Government capability funding to Landcare Research from the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology. At present, Carla works as Geospatial Analyst in the Auckland Council, and the views expressed in this article are independent from her current employer. Ottar Michelsen had financial support from the Norwegian Bioenergy Innovation Centre (CenBio). The authors acknowledge interesting discussions with colleague Pascale Michel, input from William Lee, who recommended the use of LENZ for better adaptation to the New Zealand context, and Nancy Golubiewski. Christine Bezar and Bob Frame reviewed an earlier draft. The authors also acknowledge thoughtful comments from two anonymous reviewers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carla R. V. Coelho.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Llorenc Milà i Canals

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

PDF 69 kb

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

V. Coelho, C.R., Michelsen, O. Land use impacts on biodiversity from kiwifruit production in New Zealand assessed with global and national datasets. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19, 285–296 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-013-0628-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-013-0628-7

Keywords

Navigation