Changes in land use in an historical area of Central Italy over twenty years : the use of environmental indicators

• Autorzy: Bodesmo M. , Romano B. , Pacicco L. , Cagiotti M. , Ranfa A.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The analysis of the area of the municipality of Tuoro sul Trasimeno in Umbria, Central Italy (the historical site of the Battle of Trasimeno in 217 BC) was carried out to evaluate changes in land use from 1977 to 2000 at the land-plot level using relevant land use maps. An evaluation of the environmental quality of land use in 2000 was also made. The study involved an analysis of the environmental diversity in terms of extent and variety of land use. The Landscape Conservation Index (ILC), and diversity indicators (Shannon-Wiener Index and Eveness Index) were calculated. The study showed how landscape quality gradually declined due to an increase in agricultural areas to the detriment of natural areas. The calculation of environmental indicators, particularly the Eveness Index showed how the difference between real and potential diversity increased, in favour of real diversity. This is a symptom of increased human pressure.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

environmental quality; historical landscape; index of landscape conservation; landscape changes; Umbria

PL

jakość środowiska; krajobraz historyczny; Umbria; wskaźnik ochrony krajobrazu; zmiany krajobrazowe

• Wydawca: Museum and Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Ecology
• Rocznik: 2010
• Tom: Vol. 58, nr 3
• Strony: 429--438
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 39 poz.,Rys., tab., wykr., w

Twórcy

autor

Bodesmo M.

autor

Romano B.

autor

Pacicco L.

autor

Cagiotti M.

autor

Ranfa A.

• Department of Applied Biology, Applied and Environmental Botany Section, University of Perugia, Borgo XX Giugno, 74-06121 Perugia, Italy,

Bibliografia

• 1. APAT 2005 – La realizzazione in Italia del progetto europeo CORINE Land Cover 2000 Rapporti 36/2005, Roma, 86 pp. (in Italian).
• 2. Biondi E. 1996 – L’analisi fitosociologica nello studio integrato del paesaggio – (In: Avances en Fitosociologìa, Ed. J. Loidi) – Serv. Ed. Univ. Pais Vasco, Bilbao, pp.13–22 (in Italian).
• 3. Biondi E., Feoli F., Zuccarello V. 2004 – Modelling environmental responses of plant associations: a review of some critical concepts in vegetation study – Critical Rev. Plant Sci. 23: 149–156.
• 4. Braband D., Geier U., Koepke U. 2003 – Bio-resource evaluation within agri-environmental assessment tools in different European countries – Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 98: 423–434.
• 5. Braun-Blanquet J. 1964 – Pflanzensoziologie. Grundzüge der Vegetationskunde 3rd – Springer, Wien–New York, 865 pp.
• 6. Foley J.A., DeFries R., Asner G.P., Barford C., Bonan G., Carpenter S.R., Chapin F.S., Coe M.T., Daily G.C., Gibbs H.K., Helkowski J.H., Holloway T., Howard E.A., Kucharik C.J., Monfreda C., Patz J.A., Prentice I.C., Ramankutty N., Snyder P.K. 2005 – Global consequences of land use – Science, 309: 570–574.
• 7. Forman R.T.T., Godron M. 1986 – Landscape Ecology. Wiley, New York.
• 8. Gambini E. 2004 – La cartografia storica del Lago Trasimeno. Lo sviluppo sostenibile del Lago Trasimeno – Sistema Informativo Territoriale, CD ROM, Parco Del Lago Trasimeno, Dipartimento di Economia, facoltà di Economia, Università degli Studi di Perugia. (in Italian).
• 9. Gehu J.M., Rivas-Martinez 1981 – Notions fondamentales de phytosociologie (In: Syntaxonomie. Ed. H. Dierschke) – Ber Int. Symp. Int. Vereinigung Vegetationsk., J. Cramer, Vaduz, pp. 5–33.
• 10. Geist H.J., Lambin E.F. 2002 – Proximate causes and underlying driving forces of tropical deforestation –BioScience, 52 : 143–150.
• 11. Heyer W., Huelsbergen K.J., Papaja S., Wittmann C. 2003 – Field related organisms as possible indicators for evaluation of land use intensity – Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 98: 453–461
• 12. Hietel E., Waldhardt R., Otte A. 2004 – Analysing land-cover changes in relation to environmental variables in Hesse, Germany – Landscape Ecology, 19: 473–489, 2004.
• 13. Kommission der Europaeischen Gemeinschaften (KOM) 2001a – Statistischer Informationsbedarf fuer Indikatoren zur Ueberwachung der Integration von Umweltbelangen in die Gemeinsame Agrarpolitik. Mitteilung der Kommission an den Rat und das Europaeische Parlament, COM’2001, 144 final.
• 14. Kommission der Europaeischen Gemeinschaften (KOM) 2001b – Aktionsplaene zur Erhaltung der biologischen Vielfalt fuer die Gebiete Erhaltung der natuerlichen Ressourcen, Landwirtschaft, Fischerei sowie Entwicklung und wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit. Mitteilung der Kommission an den Rat und das Europaeische Parlament, COM’2001, 162 final.
• 15. Lambin E.F., Rounsevell M., Geist H. 2000 – Are current agricultural land use models able to predict changes in land use intensity? – Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 1653: 1–11.
• 16. Levin S.A., Paine R.T. 1974 – Disturbance, patch formation and community structure – Proc. Nat. Acad. Sc. 71: 2744–2747.
• 17. Muessner R., Jebram J., Schmidt A., Wascher D., Bernotat D. 2002 – Derzeitige Entwicklungsstand. (In: Entwicklung und Festlegung von Methodenstandards im Naturschutz. Eds: H. Plachter, D. Bernotat, R. Muessner, U. Riecken 2002 – Schrif. Landschaf. Naturschutz, 70: 35–53.
• 18. NRC (National Research Council, Board on Sustainable Development, Policy Division, Committee on Global Change Research) 1999 – Global Environmental Change: Research Pathways for the Next Decade. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
• 19. Oppermann R. 2003 – Nature balance scheme for farms evaluation of the ecological situation – Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 98: 463–475.
• 20. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and development (OECD) 1997 – Environmental Indicators for Agriculture, Paris.
• 21. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2001 – Methods and results. Environmental Indicators for Agriculture, vol. 3. Paris.
• 22. Orsomando E., Catorci A., Pitzalis M., Raponi M. 1999 – Carta fitoclimatica dell’Umbria – S.EL.CA., Firenze, 57 pp.
• 23. Orsomando E., Ragni B., Segatori R. 2004 – Siti Natura 2000 in Umbria – Regione dell’Umbria, 373 pp.
• 24. Osinski E., Meier U., Büchs W., Weickel J., Matzdorf B. 2003 – Application of biotic indicators for evaluation of sustainable land use current procedures and future developments – Agric. Ecosys. Environ. 98: 407–421.
• 25. Pielou E.C. 1966 – The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections – J. Theor. Biol. 13: 131–144.
• 26. Pizzolotto R., Brandmayr P. 1996 – An index to evaluate landscape conservation state based on land-use pattern analysis and geographic information system techniques – Coenoses, 11: 37–44.
• 27. Podani J. 2001 – Syntax 2000 – Computer program for data analysis in ecology and systematics. User’s manual – Scientia Publishing, Budapest, 53 pp.
• 28. Prieler S., Hamann B., Anderberg S., Stigliani W., 1996 – Land use change in Europe – Scenarios for a project area in East Germany, Poland and the Czech Republic, WP-96-40 – International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis A-2361 Laxenburg Austria.
• 29. Riebsame W.E., Meyer W.B., Turner II, B.L. 1994 – Modelling land use and cover as part of global environmental change – Climate Change, 28: 45–64.
• 30. Roth, D., Schwabe, M. 2003 – Method for assessing the proportion of ecologically, culturally and provincially significant areas (“OELF”) in agrarian spaces used as a criterion for environmental friendly agriculture – Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 98: 435–441.
• 31. Shannon C.E. 1948 – A mathematical theory of communication – Bell System Tech. J. 27: 379–423.
• 32. Spellerberg I.F., Fedor P.J. 2003 – A tribute to Claude Shannon (1916–2001) and a plea for more rigorous use of species richness, species diversity and the “Shannon–Wiener” index – Global Ecol. Biog. 12: 177–179.
• 33. Sklar F.H., Costanza R. 1991 – The development of dynamic spatial models for landscape ecology: a review and prognosis. (In: Quantitative Methods in Landscape Ecology. Eds: M.G. Turner, R.H. Gardner) – Ecological Studies 82. Springer, Berlin, pp. 239–288.
• 34. Theurillat J.P. 1992 – L’analyse du paysage vegetal en symphytocoenologie: ses niveaux et leurs domains spatiaux – Bull. Ecol. 23: 83–92.
• 35. Van Kamp I., Leidelmeijer K., Marsman G., De Hollander A. 2003 – Urban environmental quality and human well-being Towards a conceptual framework and demarcation of concepts; a literature study – Landscape and Urban Planning 65: 5–18.
• 36. Veldkamp A., Lambin E.F. 2001 – Predicting land-use change – Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 80: 1–6.
• 37. Viikari A.Y., Koivu R.H., Veistola E.H., Hyvonen T., Perala P., Turtola E. 2007 – Evaluating agri-environmental indicators (AEIs) – use and limitations of international indicators at national level – Ecol. Indic. 7: 150–163
• 38. Westhoff V. 1971 – The dynamic structure of plant communities in relation to the objectives of nature conservation – (In: The Scientific Management of Animal and pant Communities for Conservation, Eds: E. Duffey, A.S. Watt) – Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 3–14.
• 39. Westhoff V., Van der Maarel E. 1979 – The Braun-Blanquet approach: 2nd ed. (In: Classification of Plant Community, Ed. R.H. Whittarker) – Junk, The Hague, pp. 287–390.