Biotope mapping in an urban environment and its implications for urban management in Turkey

The biotopes of ecological importance in urban environments worldwide are under the pressure of many negative factors such as urbanization, air pollution, human disturbance, etc. Biotope mapping is an important tool for urban planning and management and of importance for the protection of biotopes for future generations. The biotopes in Antalya city of Turkey, which has faced to a great population pressure due to tourism developments and immigration in the last two decades, were investigated in this study. The selective biotope mapping method was used and major biotope sites were determined by the interpretation of panchromatic aerial photographs, assisted with field verifications. A sensitivity assessment based on two parameters, the rarity and the re-establishment ability of biotopes, was made as it was considered important information for urban planning and management. According to the results of the assessment, the majority of biotopes in Antalya city were found to be very sensitive or sensitive. It was concluded that insufficient legislation, the lack of an ecological urban planning approach and poor urban management are the most important reasons for today's pressures on urban biotopes in Turkey.     

Environmental Equity and the Role of Public Policy: Experiences in the Rijnmond Region

This Φ Ψ study of environmental equity uses secondary quantitative data to analyze socioeconomic disparities in environmental conditions in the Rijnmond region of the Netherlands. The disparities of selected environmental indicators—exposure to traffic noise (road, rail, and air), NO₂, external safety risks, and the availability of public green space—are analyzed both separately and in combination. Not only exposures to environmental burdens (“bads”) were investigated, but also access to environmental benefits (“goods”). Additionally, we held interviews and reviewed documents to grasp the mechanisms underlying the environmental equity situation, with an emphasis on the role of public policy. Environmental equity is not a priority in public policy for the greater Rotterdam region known as the Rijnmond region, yet environmental standards have been established to provide a minimum environmental quality to all local residents. In general, environmental quality has improved in this region, and the accumulation of negative environmental outcomes (“bads”) has been limited. However, environmental standards for road traffic noise and NO₂ are being exceeded, probably because of the pressure on space and the traffic intensity. We found an association of environmental “bads” with income for rail traffic noise and availability of public green space. In the absence of regulation, positive environmental outcomes (“goods”) are mainly left up to market forces. Consequently, higher-income groups generally have more access to environmental “goods” than lower-income groups.     

Policy Development for Biodiversity Offsets: A Review of Offset Frameworks

Biodiversity offsets seek to compensate for residual environmental impacts of planned developments after appropriate steps have been taken to avoid, minimize or restore impacts on site. Offsets are emerging as an increasingly employed mechanism for achieving net environmental benefits, with offset policies being advanced in a wide range of countries (i.e., United States, Australia, Brazil, Colombia, and South Africa). To support policy development for biodiversity offsets, we review a set of major offset policy frameworks—US wetlands mitigation, US conservation banking, EU Natura 2000, Australian offset policies in New South Wales, Victoria, and Western Australia, and Brazilian industrial and forest offsets. We compare how the frameworks define offset policy goals, approach the mitigation process, and address six key issues for implementing offsets: (1) equivalence of project impacts with offset gains; (2) location of the offset relative to the impact site; (3) “additionality” (a new contribution to conservation) and acceptable types of offsets; (4) timing of project impacts versus offset benefits; (5) offset duration and compliance; and (6) “currency” and mitigation replacement ratios. We find substantial policy commonalities that may serve as a sound basis for future development of biodiversity offsets policy. We also identify issues requiring further policy guidance, including how best to: (1) ensure conformance with the mitigation hierarchy; (2) identify the most environmentally preferable offsets within a landscape context; and (3) determine appropriate mitigation replacement ratios.     

Evaluating Holistic Environmental Consequences of Brownfield Management Options Using Consequential Life Cycle Assessment for Different Perspectives

Brownfields are abandoned, idled, or underused sites whose reuse necessitates some sort of intervention. These sites are largely urban and are frequently contaminated. Brownfield management options can be associated with three types of environmental consequences: those resulting from changes in the site’s environmental quality (primary impacts); those resulting from the actual intervention stage (secondary impacts); and, if the vocation of the site changes, those resulting from effects on regional land use (tertiary impacts). Different stakeholders and decision-making contexts will place a different importance on each of these types of impacts. This article proposes a framework for comparing brownfield management options in regard to these three types of environmental impacts and for interpreting these results from different perspectives. The assessment framework is based on consequential life cycle assessment (LCA), which is shown to provide environmental information on the three types of impacts. The results for a case study are presented, where a “rehabilitation” option allowing residential redevelopment is compared to an “exposure minimization” option not resulting in the site being reused. Calculated primary and tertiary impacts are favorable to the rehabilitation option, whereas secondary impacts are favorable to the exposure minimization option. A ternary diagram presents the favorable option for different stereotypical perspectives. Tertiary impacts are much greater than secondary impacts, and consequently all perspectives that consider tertiary impacts favor rehabilitation. The perspective that considers primary and secondary impacts receives conflicting information. The ternary diagram, showing results for all perspectives, could possibly be useful for consensus-building among stakeholders.     

A Mediation Case for Resolving the Energy and Environment Dispute at Aliağa-İzmir, Turkey

A mediation exercise to resolve the ongoing dispute against these power plant projects at Aliağa was recommended and participated in by the author in 1997. In this article the basis of the continuing environmental concern about the feared impacts of the new power plants, procedure, and results of this mediation are mentioned. The basis of the “energy versus environment” dispute in Aliağa are introduced. Mediation exercise and its end results have been criticized.     

Interaction Between the Environment and Animals in Urban Settings: Integrated and Participatory Planning

In urban ecosystems, the ecological system has become completely unbalanced; this, in turn, has led to an increase in well-known problems such as air pollution, ground pollution, and water pollution. This imbalance has also led to the growth and spread of pathogens harmful to man, animals, and plants. Urban sustainability indicators, both global and local, also “indicate” the percentage of population, but these refer only to the human population, not the animal population. Cities need good waste, water, and air management, effective traffic planning, and good zoning of businesses, crafts, and services; over and above these activities, cities also need for planning to take into account the existence of pets (dogs, cats, and etc.) and nonpet animals (insects, birds, mice, etc.). Cities tend to be designed around humans and “on a human scale,” without taking into account the fact that a huge animal population is living side by side with people. That explains why overcrowding tends to go hand in hand with urbanization; all these populations, including humans, need to adapt to new spaces and often need to drastically change their behavior. This is a fact that must be included when drafting sustainable city plans. The supposed strategy is that of “integrated-participatory” control of the interactions between the environment and animals in the cities. Strategy will focus on the development of integrated approaches and tools for environment and animal management in the context of urban settings. This will require such specific methods as ecological balance sheets and ecoplans for the planning, management, and control of the interrelation among environment, animal, and public health. The objective is to develop a better understanding of urban biodiversity and of urban ecosystem functioning, in order to understand and minimize the negative impacts of human activities on them. The research will focus on assessing and forecasting changes in urban biodiversity, structure, function, and dynamics of urban ecosystems, with relationships among society, economy, biodiversity, and habitats.     

Biodiversity and industry ecosystem management

The term biodiversity describes the array of interacting, genetically distinct populations and species in a region, the communities they comprise, and the variety of ecosystems of which they are functioning parts. Ecosystem health, a closely related concept, is described in terms of a process identifying biological indicators, end points, and values. The decline of populations or species, an accelerating trend worldwide, can lead to simplification of ecosystem processes, thus threatening the stability and sustainability of ecosystem services directly relevant to human welfare in the chain of economic and ecological relationships. The challenge of addressing issues of such enormous scope and complexity has highlighted the limitations of ecology-as-science. Additionally, biosphere-scale conflicts seem to lie beyond the scope of conventional economics, leading to differences of opinion about the commodity value of biodiversity and of the services that intact ecosystems provide. In the face of these uncertainties, many scientists and economists have adopted principles that clearly assign burdens of proof to those who would promote the loss of biodiversity and that also establish near-trump (preeminent) status for ecological integrity. Electric utility facilities and operations impact biodiversity whenever construction, operation, or maintenance of generation, delivery, and support facilities alters landscapes and habitats and thereby impacts species. Although industry is accustomed to dealing with broad environmental concerns (such as global warming or acid rain), the biodiversity issue invokes hemisphere-wide, regional, local, and site-specific concerns all at the same time. Industry can proactively address these issues of scope and scale in two main ways: first, by aligning strategically with the broad research agenda put forth by informed scientists and institutions; and second, by supporting focused management processes whose results will contribute incrementally to the broader agenda of rebuilding or maintaining biodiversity.     

Environmental Impact Assessment Under the National Environmental Policy Act and the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty

US government actions undertaken in Antarctica are subject to the requirements of both the Protocol and the US National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). There are differences in the scope and intent of the Protocol and NEPA; however, both require environmental impact assessment (EIA) as part of the planning process for proposed actions that have the potential for environmental impacts. In this paper we describe the two instruments and highlight key similarities and differences with particular attention to EIA. Through this comparison of the EIA requirements of NEPA and the Protocol, we show how the requirements of each can be used in concert to provide enhanced environmental protection for the antarctic environment. NEPA applies only to actions of the US government; therefore, because NEPA includes certain desirable attributes that have been refined and clarified through numerous court cases, and because the Protocol is just entering implementation internationally, some recommendations are made for strengthening the procedural requirements of the Protocol for activities undertaken by all Parties in Antarctica. The Protocol gives clear and strong guidance for protection of specific, valued antarctic environmental resources including intrinsic wilderness and aesthetic values, and the value of Antarctica as an area for scientific research. That guidance requires a higher standard of environmental protection for Antarctica than is required in other parts of the world. This paper shows that taken together NEPA and the Protocol call for closer examination of proposed actions and a more rigorous consideration of environmental impacts than either would alone. Three areas are identified where the EIA provisions of the Protocol could be strengthened to improve its effectiveness. First, the thresholds defined by the Protocol need to be clarified. Specifically, the meanings of the terms “minor” and “transitory” are not clear in the context of the Protocol. The use of “or” in the phrase “minor or transitory” further confuses the meaning. Second, cumulative impact assessment is called for by the Protocol but is not defined. A clear definition could reduce the chance that cumulative impacts would be given inadequate consideration. Finally, the public has limited opportunities to comment on or influence the preparation of initial or comprehensive environmental evaluations. Experience has shown that public input to environmental documents has a considerable influence on agency decision making and the quality of EIA that agencies perform.     

Conflicting Frames about Ownership and Land Use Drive Wildfire Ignitions in a Protected Conservation Area

The creation of protected conservation areas may result in protracted conflicts between stakeholders. In this study we examine the drivers of anthropogenic wildfire ignitions in the National Park of “los Alerces” (NPA) in Patagonia, Argentina. The NPA was established in 1937 to protect the native “andino-patagónico” forests from wildfires as well as preserving its scenic beauty and native flora and fauna. At the time of its creation state authorities prohibited all extractive human activities in the “intangible”—fully protected—“National Park” section, while other regulated extractive and ecotourism activities were allowed to continue in the “Natural Reserve” section in an effort to accommodate the historical entitlements of the displaced populations of “pobladores” (settlers) that had been living in the NPA for over a century. Here we interviewed the main stakeholder groups—“pobladores”, forest rangers and administrators, ecolodge owners and angler club members—to identify the drivers of wildfire ignitions in the park. Wildfires have been singled out by state authorities as the main threat to the NPA though considerable scientific uncertainty exists regarding their complex ecological effects. This study argues, based on the human and biophysical system data collected, that two conflicting cultural frames exist within the NPA that provide the necessary backdrop for understanding the drivers of wildfire ignitions. In turn, these findings raise puzzling dilemmas for the main theoretical approaches that have been used to inform and design conflict management strategies in protected conservation areas.     

Including past and present impacts in cumulative impact assessments

Environmental concerns such as loss of biological diversity and stratospheric ozone depletion have heightened awareness of the need to assess cumulative impacts in environmental documents. More than 20 years of experience with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) have provided analysts in the United States with opportunities for developing successful techniques to assess site-specific impacts of proposed actions. Methods for analyzing a proposed action's incremental contribution to cumulative impacts are generally less advanced than those for project-specific impacts.The President's Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) defines cumulative impact to include the impacts of past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of who undertakes the action. Court decisions have helped clarify the distinction between reasonably foreseeable future actions and other possible future actions. This paper seeks to clarify how past and present impacts should be included in cumulative impact analyses.The definition of cumulative impacts implies that cumulative impact analyses should include the effects of all past and present actions on a particular resource. Including past and present impacts in cumulative impact assessments increases the likelihood of identifying significant impacts. NEPA requires agencies to give more consideration to alternatives and mitigation and to provide more opportunities for public involvement for actions that would have significant impacts than for actions that would not cause or contribute to significant impacts. For an action that would contribute to significant cumulative impacts, the additional cost and effort involved in increased consideration of alternatives and mitigation and in additional public involvement may be avoided if the action can be modified so that its contributions to significant cumulative impacts are eliminated.Managed by Lockheed Martin Energy Research Corporation under contract DE-AC05-84OR21400 with the US Department of Energy.     

Risk management: Time for innovative approaches

Risk management practices under the current environmental regulations is a long, complex process that considers scientific, technologic, and management factors to develop various regulatory standards and pollution control measures. Using the mandatory enforcement approach, sometimes referred to as “command-and-control”, a set of preliminary environmental goals, such as better air and water qualities, were achieved. However, the information-intensive nature of the risk management process and the lack of flexibility in conventional regulatory methods to changing economic and technologic realities of the decade has created interest among risk managers to examine some innovative management approaches. Above all, environmental problems of a global scale require novel management methods while striving to achieve the desired environmental goals. As the principal analytical tool in risk management, quantitative risk assessment exerts considerable influence on the risk management process. Therefore, advances in risk management are closely associated with scientific developments that enhance the risk assessment process, particularly those efforts aimed at improving human exposure and toxicity assessments. Market incentives, information dissemination, creative enforcement practices, and interagency and intergovernmental interactions were identified as the key elements of innovative environmental risk management practices. This paper will present an overview of the emerging innovative risk management approaches.     

Multi-Criteria Assessment of Tensions in Resource Use at Continental Scale: A Proof of Concept with Australian Rangelands

The purpose of this study was to help to inform policy development for the Australian rangelands, and provide a proof of concept for application of a multi-criteria analysis approach to assessment of competing resource use at continental scale. The study aimed to identify and locate key natural resource and agricultural production assets in the rangelands, define a number of measures of potentially threatening processes, and use a multi-criteria approach to identify areas where threatening processes, agricultural production problems, or valuable natural resources coincided. The analysis used 35 readily available, continental spatial data layers at 5-km pixel resolution ranked from 1 (low) to 5 (high) under three themed groupings: natural resource base, production base, and threatening processes. These measures were aggregated into composite indicators to define attributes such as environmental sensitivity and total grazing pressure. The composites were then compared in a two-way analysis to explore particular interactions between threatening processes such as pastoralism and mining, and the condition of production and natural resource assets. These interactions were defined as “tensions” for purposes of this analysis. Example “tensions” included the association of high grazing intensity with areas of high environmental sensitivity, indicating a risk of land degradation under adverse climatic conditions. A summary of patterns of tension was obtained by extracting area proportions of high-tension classes for selected Natural Heritage Trust Regions, which are a basis for Australian Government funding of improved environmental management. The study provides a basis for further examination of trade-offs in the use of natural assets, opportunities for improved productivity and sustainability, and social and economic implications.     

Beyond the Prevention of Harm: Animal Disease Policy as a Moral Question

European animal disease policy seems to find its justification in a “harm to other” principle. Limiting the freedom of animal keepers—e.g., by culling their animals—is justified by the aim to prevent harm, i.e., the spreading of the disease. The picture, however, is more complicated. Both during the control of outbreaks and in the prevention of notifiable, animal diseases the government is confronted with conflicting claims of stakeholders who anticipate running a risk to be harmed by each other, and who ask for government intervention. In this paper, we first argue that in a policy that aims to prevent animal diseases, the focus shifts from limiting “harm” to weighing conflicting claims with respect to “risks of harm.” Therefore, we claim that the harm principle is no longer a sufficient justification for governmental intervention in animal disease prevention. A policy that has to deal with and distribute conflicting risks of harm needs additional value assumptions that guide this process of assessment and distribution. We show that currently, policies are based on assumptions that are mainly economic considerations. In order to show the limitations of these considerations, we use the interests and position of keepers of backyard animals as an example. Based on the problems they faced during and after the recent outbreaks, we defend the thesis that in order to develop a sustainable animal disease policy other than economic assumptions need to be taken into account.     

Developing an Environmental Indicator System for Sustainable Development in China: Two Case Studies of Selected Indicators

Environmental indicator systems are a fundamental tool in quantifying the environmental component of sustainable development. They are useful because they quantify the status and trends of key environmental parameters and provide information on the environment that allows authorities and communities to make informed decisions. This article analyzes the basic framework for Chinese environmental indicator systems and presents a “core” set of environmental indicators. In our research, we used a theme approach to develop the environmental indicator systems. We performed two case studies of selected indicators. In the first, we used an urban ambient air pollution composite index and an urban ambient air pollution indicator for three main pollutants to examine trends in urban air pollution in China from 1990 to 2000 at regional and national levels. The results indicate that China has made some progress towards controlling urban air pollution, but must do more in order to reach acceptable pollution levels. We think that an aggregated index and disaggregated indicators have important complementary roles in the policy-making processes. In the second case study, we developed and constructed a grassland degradation index that aggregates information on the extent and severity of grassland degradation. Taking the Xilinhaote region of Inner Mongolia as the study area, we calculated this index by combining remote-sensing data, a geographical information system (GIS), and field investigation. Based on these results, we provide recommendations regarding further development and measurement of environmental indicators in China.     

Biodiversity Offsets: Two New Zealand Case Studies and an Assessment Framework

Biodiversity offsets are increasingly being used for securing biodiversity conservation outcomes as part of sustainable economic development to compensate for the residual unavoidable impacts of projects. Two recent New Zealand examples of biodiversity offsets are reviewed—while both are positive for biodiversity conservation, the process by which they were developed and approved was based more on the precautionary principal than on any formal framework. Based on this review and the broader offset literature, an environmental framework for developing and approving biodiversity offsets, comprising six principles, is outlined: (1) biodiversity offsets should only be used as part of an hierarchy of actions that first seeks to avoid impacts and then minimizes the impacts that do occur; (2) a guarantee is provided that the offset proposed will occur; (3) biodiversity offsets are inappropriate for certain ecosystem (or habitat) types because of their rarity or the presence of threatened species within them; (4) offsets most often involve the creation of new habitat, but can include protection of existing habitat where there is currently no protection; (5) a clear currency is required that allows transparent quantification of values to be lost and gained in order to ensure ecological equivalency between cleared and offset areas; (6) offsets must take into account both the uncertainty involved in obtaining the desired outcome for the offset area and the time-lag that is involved in reaching that point.     

Indicators of Biodiversity and Conservational Wildlife Quality on Danish Organic Farms for Use in Farm Management: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Indicator Development and Testing

Organic farming is expected to contribute to conserving national biodiversity on farms, especially remnant, old, and undisturbed small biotopes, forests, and permanent grassland. This objective cannot rely on the legislation of organic farming solely, and to succeed, farmers need to understand the goals behind it. A set of indicators with the purpose of facilitating dialogues between expert and farmer on wildlife quality has been developed and tested on eight organic farms. “Weed cover in cereal fields,” was used as an indicator of floral and faunal biodiversity in the cultivated land, and “uncultivated biotope area” on the farm was used as a general measure of wildlife habitats. Functional grouping of herbaceous plants (discriminating between “high conservation value” plant species and “competitive”/“ruderal” species) and low mobility butterflies were used as indicators of conservation value, especially focusing on the few sites left with considerable remnant conservation value. The dialog processes revealed that the organic farmers’ ideas and goals of conservation of wildlife quality were not necessarily the same as for biologists; the farmers expressed very different opinions on the biological rooted idea, that wildlife quality is related to the absence of agricultural impact. However, farmers also stated that the information given by the indicators and especially the dialogue with the biologist had influenced their perception and awareness of wildlife. We conclude that, combined with a dialogue process, using these indicators when mapping wildlife quality could be an important key component of a farm wildlife management advisory tool at farm level.     

Evaluating wilderness recreational opportunities: Application of an impact matrix

An inventory of the severity and spatial distribution of wilderness campsite impacts in Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks identified a total of 273 distinct nodes of campsites or “management areas.” A campsite impact matrix was developed to evaluate management areas based on total impacts (correlated to the total area of campsite development) and the density, or concentration, of impacts relative to each area's potentially campable area. The matrix is used to quantify potential recreational opportunities for wilderness visitors in a spectrum from areas offering low impact-dispersed camping to those areas offering high impact-concentrated camping. Wilderness managers can use this type of information to evaluate use distribution patterns, identify areas to increase or decrease use, and to identify areas needing site-specific regulations (e.g., one-night camping limits) to preserve wilderness resources and guarantee outstanding opportunities for solitude.     

Learning about Environments: The Significance of Primal Landscapes

The way we learn about our environments—be they farms, forests, or tribal lands—has implications for the formulation of environmental policy. This article presents the findings of how residents learned about their environments in two rural case studies conducted in northern Queensland and relates these to the concept of “primal landscapes,” which is concerned with the interaction that occurs between children and the environments in which they mature. Rather than focusing specifically on built environments or natural environments, the article draws on an approach that conceptualizes environment as meaning-laden places in which we live and work, which integrate social, cultural, biological, physical, and economic dimensions. In drawing insights for environmental policy, the article draws attention to the timing of policy interventions, the significance of experiential environmental education, the potential to learn from place-based festivals, and the importance of learning from extreme events such as fires and floods.     

Understanding and Managing Experiential Aspects of Soundscapes at Muir Woods National Monument

Research has found that human-caused noise can detract from the quality of the visitor experience in national parks and related areas. Moreover, impacts to the visitor experience can be managed by formulating indicators and standards of quality as suggested in park and outdoor recreation management frameworks, such as Visitor Experience and Resource Protection (VERP), as developed by the U.S. National Park Service. The research reported in this article supports the formulation of indicators and standards of quality for human-caused noise at Muir Woods National Monument, California. Phase I identified potential indicators of quality for the soundscape of Muir Woods. A visitor “listening exercise” was conducted, where respondents identified natural and human-caused sounds heard in the park and rated the degree to which each sound was “pleasing” or “annoying.” Certain visitor-caused sounds such as groups talking were heard by most respondents and were rated as annoying, suggesting that these sounds may be a good indicator of quality. Loud groups were heard by few people but were rated as highly annoying, whereas wind and water were heard by most visitors and were rated as highly pleasing. Phase II measured standards of quality for visitor-caused noise. Visitors were presented with a series of 30-second audio clips representing increasing amounts of visitor-caused sound in the park. Respondents were asked to rate the acceptability of each audio clip on a survey. Findings suggest a threshold at which visitor-caused sound is judged to be unacceptable, and is therefore considered as noise. A parallel program of sound monitoring in the park found that current levels of visitor-caused sound sometimes violate this threshold. Study findings provide an empirical basis to help formulate noise-related indicators and standards of quality in parks and related areas.     

The Scaling of Water Governance Tasks: A Comparative Federal Analysis of the European Union and Australia

Conflicts over how to “scale” policy-making tasks have characterized environmental governance since time immemorial. They are particularly evident in the area of water policy and raise important questions over the democratic legitimacy, economic efficiency and effectiveness of allocating (or “scaling”) tasks to some administrative levels as opposed to others. This article adopts a comparative federalism perspective to assess the “optimality” of scaling—either upward or downward—in one issue area, namely coastal recreational water quality. It does so by comparing the scaling of recreational water quality tasks in the European Union (EU) and Australia. It reveals that the two systems have adopted rather different approaches to scaling and that this difference can partly be accounted for in federal theoretical terms. However, a much greater awareness of the inescapably political nature of scaling processes is nonetheless required. Finally, some words of caution are offered with regard to transferring policy lessons between these two jurisdictions.