VOLANTE Roadmap for Future Land Resource Management in Europe

T H E S C I E N T I F I C B A S I S

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement n° 265104.

It's most fortunate that we do not know exactly

what kind of world we live on.

...

For the sake of research, clarity of the picture, and the final results,

one must rise above time, in which everything drives and whirls.

Wisława Szymborska

part of Wielkie to szczęście (‘It’s most fortunate’ translated by Walter Whipple)

from ‘Koniec i początek’ (The End and the Beginning) (1993)

Imprint

The VOLANTE Roadmap for future land resource management in Europe is the main result of a collaborative EU research project (grant agreement n° 265104) running from 2010 – 2015, involving 14 partners in 11 countries. This document is a collective product of the entire VOLANTE Consortium, to be cited as:

Pedroli B, M Gramberger, A Gravsholt Busck, M Lindner, M Metzger, J Paterson, M Pérez Soba & P Verburg (eds, 2015). VOLANTE Roadmap for future land resource management in Europe – The Scientific Basis. Alterra Wageningen UR, The Netherlands.

This document is also available as an interactive internet based file at www.volante-project.eu, including access to all supporting information.

ii VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

Table of Contents

Executive Summary 1

Preface 3

1 More from land, dream or reality? 5 1.1 Societal demands – visionary and realistic? 5 1.2 Challenges of land systems research 5 1.3 Future land use: the requirement of an outcome-driven strategy 6 1.4 What needs to happen? 6

2 The challenge of future land resource management tackled 7 2.1 The VOLANTE Roadmapping process 7 2.2 Stakeholders creating land use visions 8 2.3 Using scenarios to define a range of possible futures 11 2.4 The VOLANTE policy alternatives and pathways towards the visions 12 2.5 Selecting Robust Pathways 15 2.6 Learning from the past 16 2.7 The endeavour of policy implementation 17

3 VOLANTE Vision Best Land Use in Europe 19

4 VOLANTE Vision Regional Connected 22

5 VOLANTE Vision Local Multifunctional 25

6 Synopsis 29 6.1 Overcoming institutional barriers 29 6.2 VOLANTE Key messages 30 6.3 Policy recommendations 30

7 Further reading 33

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis iii

iv VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

Executive Summary

The landscapes of Europe have altered rapidly over the last few decades, with profound changes in the ways we use the land to support a growing, and increasingly affluent and urban population. The past 50 years have seen significant and unprecedented human impacts on our landscapes and we have now entered a critical decision space: a window of several decades within which it is still possible to avoid crossing planetary boundaries. In a Europe facing many challenges and changing aspirations, it is imperative to explore alternative visions of a more sustainable future land use, and evaluate the pathways that can lead us to these visions. Within the context of land use, this implies managing natural capital to ensure the continued provision of ecosystem services into the future. This document “VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis” gives the rationale (including references to VOLANTE’s scientific background evidence) for a roadmap to a future Europe that manages its land resources better to achieve several societal and environmental goals.

The VOLANTE roadmap 1 comprises: a) three visions of future land use in Europe derived from consultations with a wide range of European stakeholders, taking into consideration the linked components of food, feed and fibre production, rural development and urbanisation; b) a set of pathways required to achieve these visions in a suite of scenarios, and c) the implications of these visions and pathways for society and decision makers, including the associated trade-offs. A general consensus is emerging around future European land use, which emphasises the role of multi-functionality, resource efficiency and the provision of services in rural areas – all of which are reflected in the VOLANTE visions:

BEST LAND IN EUROPE Optimal use of land resources

REGIONAL CONNECTED Living closer to the natural environment

LOCAL MULTIFUNCTIONAL Self-sufficiency of local communities

Optimal use of land is crucial to ensuring maximum production of food and other natural products. Land across the EU is matched to the most appropriate use.

Society’s needs are met regionally in a coherent relationship between people and their resources. In a non-globalised economy, there is a move away from regional specialisation.

Land functions are localised in small areas based on innovative approaches to living, working and recreation. There is high diversity in goods and services, land use and society.

The VOLANTE roadmap emphasises that there are alternative, not necessarily compatible, visions of future sustainable land use in Europe. Under current socio-economic and policy conditions, however, none of these visions can be achieved without the need for trade-offs. LOCAL MULTIFUNCTIONAL, in particular, seems the most challenging vision to achieve without a thorough transformation in society and decision-making processes, underpinned by individual behavioural change. BEST LAND IN EUROPE would supply the greatest quantity of ecosystem services on a continental scale, but remote rural areas would struggle to support local communities unless land use and economic activities were restructured, for example by moving away from a dependence on agriculture to new rural businesses that require new infrastructure. REGIONAL CONNECTED would require strong regional governance and regulation and a broad acceptance of this by society. Despite major contrasts between the three VOLANTE visions, there are important similarities which highlight the need for bold and coordinated change in European land use.

Moving towards the visions requires targeted policy intervention that takes account of the diverse regional contexts across Europe and which balances trade-offs in a transparent and well-informed way. To be effective and relevant, such policies also require cross-sectoral strategies for land use and management that depart from the traditional focus on sectoral policy. The incentive for such strategies is that European land resources must be used more efficiently, providing a wider range of benefits, including a better environment, enhanced socio-economic wellbeing, and ultimately a more equitable European society.

1

2 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

Preface

Land is a crucial resource for the European Union and especially in the delivery of its Europe 2020 agenda. Economists see it as one of the three factors of production – alongside labour and capital. Making the best use of it is essential in achieving sustainable development – economic progress that benefits all in society, while using resources wisely, and respecting global environmental limits. Yet the potential contribution land could make to prosperity and wellbeing is often not realised. Until now, land management policies have generally operated in disjointed, reactive ways – with decisions generally taken individually, or without proper engagement with other policy delivery measures. But incremental, reactive approaches may well not lead to the best outcomes for future generations. The demands to land everywhere in the world are set to rise over the coming decades, given a global population increasing in number and wealth – and consuming more food and energy –, and looking for cleaner water and protection from environmental hazards. At the same time, the world will need to address the challenges of climate change and of protecting biodiversity. Achieving this set of demands will depend crucially on using land well. Governments as well as business and civil society representatives at all levels will need to take responsibility for incentivising sustainable development by putting in place improved, properly coordinated land management policies and ensuring that other policies do not create perverse incentives. In short, globally, nationally and locally, there is a need to envision clear outcomes for land use in the future; and having done so, this will require the best set of measures to be identified for achieving the desired outcomes. This is where the VOLANTE project comes in. The project is structured to provide European policymakers from a range of sectors relevant for land use with a new conceptual platform for making the very best of Europe’s precious land resource – in fact a new land management paradigm. It will enable policy makers to work with land managers and other stakeholders to establish clear outcome goals (which we call “Visions”); and then identify potential routes and measures needed to deliver them (“Robust Pathways”). These routes can be seen as alternative approaches on a roadmap. By examining the trade-offs associated with following each of the different route options, it allows to test the feasibility both of the desired outcomes and of the measures needed to achieve them. The VOLANTE project has focussed on European land use, although we made an effort to provide general reference to international boundary conditions and effects as well. Also water management issues and climate mitigation were not a primary focus of VOLANTE. Still these effects are addressed in the interpretation of the results. Arriving at the final stage of the VOLANTE project, we wish to acknowledge with gratitude the contribution of our large and committed VOLANTE stakeholder community to the project achievements. It has been a great pleasure to challenge each other to keep ‘thinking out of the box’; we hope this community will continue to do so, eventually evolving towards a dedicated EU think-tank for land use issues.

Bas Pedroli, project leader

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis 3

4 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

1 More from land, dream or reality?

More benefits, more quality, more identity, more... 1.1 Societal demands – visionary and realistic?

What would happen with European land resources if we would manage to organise urbanisation processes in a way that urban sprawl is reduced to a minimum? Or if we would be able to stop land abandonment and deserting of the rural by enhancing tourism and nature recreation in those areas? Or if we would take climate mitigation serious? The societal debate is not so much on the impact on the land of these dreams. Land is rather being considered as the resource that should make all those dreams possible: the societal demand for a liveable rural area, within reach of an increasing number of city-dwellers, on the condition that agriculture would provide food-security and the environment as a whole would safeguard biodiversity while providing the desired ecosystem services. Many economists claim that it is indeed just a dream that this is possible, and they present sector analyses demonstrating how difficult it is to achieve e.g. the EU’s 20% renewable energy target in 2020, or the zero land take target of 2050, given the economic boundary conditions that are determining societal trajectories. On the other side, among other things inspired by the ideas of Elinor Ostrom, a strong voice is increasingly being heard that citizens could very well assume self-governing responsibility. In many small-scale initiatives this seems indeed to work. Can this be a model for Europe as a whole as well? 1.2 Challenges of land systems research

To the background of the questions raised above, the VOLANTE project has fundamentally addressed some of the grand challenges of land systems research. Land systems2 not only provide food, feed and fibre, but also building materials, bio-energy and increasingly a broad range of other products. Moreover, ecosystem services such as cultural and social landscape values are closely connected to the functioning of land systems whereas regulating services such as flood regulation3 and carbon sequestration, pollination and biocontrol of pests play a crucial role as well. Two major challenges in studying the links between human transformations of land systems and the changing role of land systems are (a) up-scaling of local and regional process understanding to achieve global process understanding, and (b) integrating the societal and environmental dimensions of the land system problem. In the most recent decades many studies have addressed the possible land cover consequences of changing demographic and socio-economic conditions of Europe, the increasingly complex connections between nature and human beings that are growing ever tighter in a more globalised world, and multiple competing demands on services from land resources. Both retrospect analysis of the dynamics as they have occurred over the past period, and scenario studies for future have been performed. Scenario studies are a useful tool to explore the land use consequences of unknown developments in demographic, socio-economic and policy conditions. Scenarios often aim at showing the alternative trajectories of change under different, plausible, developments of the driving factors of land use change. Most of the previous scenarios studies have focussed on either analysing land cover changes or have addressed a single sector only.

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis 5

1.3 Future land use: the requirement of an outcome-driven strategy

There is a strong case for more strategic thinking in land use planning, focusing on outcomes and searching out breakthrough strategies, rather than reacting ad-hoc on external developments. Land use has never been static. In the last few centuries dramatic changes have taken place4. Looking forward, global populations are set to continue to grow in both number and wealth, and demand more from the resource that productive land represents5. Feeding the resulting demands for consumption will result in production that will often impact on future land use6, just as current land use and the associated landscapes are frequently a by-product of previous generations’ consumption, and the associated land management7. Good management practice suggests that specifying long-term success as a desired outcome helps create a whole-organisation focus on what will really make a difference. What’s more, testing potential outcomes that seem impossible at first consideration can stimulate breakthrough strategies – new ways forward that simply do not emerge through incremental processes. That points to the need to postulate a bold vision for the land uses society will need a decade or two ahead, within the vision that has been set. It means exploring the feasibility of radical measures, when stakeholders might prefer to go forward incrementally. 1.4 What needs to happen?

There is growing awareness in the EU that land is a finite resource. Though land management per se is not specifically targeted by EU policies, the EU is taking action to set targets that lead to a more sustainable management of land as a resource. A first step toward this aim was reported in the 2011 Communication from the Commission on a Roadmap to Resource Efficient Europe (RRE). The RRE defines milestones that illustrate what will be needed for Europe to follow a path toward resource efficiency and sustainable growth, thus contributing to a global economic transformation. The RRE vision is that by 2050 the EU economy becomes more competitive with much lower environmental impacts, and that "By 2020, EU policies take into account their direct and indirect impact on land use in the EU and globally, and the rate of land take is on track with an aim to achieve no net land take by 2050". This is particularly urgent given the number of policies and initiatives that have an impact on land use and is based on the identification of specific targets that will:

o Reduce land used for biofuels; o Avoid additional land take (e.g. for urban sprawl); avoid urban sprawl on fertile soils; o Remediate contaminated sites; o Optimise land use to reconcile with other uses; reverse soil loss; o Halt the degradation of ecosystem services in the EU and restore ecosystems as far as possible by 2020; o Halt the loss of biodiversity; o Invest in Green Infrastructure; o Reorganise the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP, 2014-2020); o Develop a blueprint for water management (2012); o Enhance natural capital through nature-based solutions; o Innovate for sustainable growth through a Bioeconomy Strategy, including improvements in the management

of renewable biological resources. Moreover, the EU’s 7th Environment Action Programme 2014-2020 calls for targets to be set to limit land take, and the Rio+20 conference proposed to strive for "a land degradation neutral world in the context of sustainable development". The next milestone in this process is to bring together the common elements of these processes by releasing the Communication “Land as a resource”, which will specifically list objectives for the EU to contribute to more sustainable land management.

6 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

2 The challenge of future land resource management tackled

2.1 The VOLANTE Roadmapping process

The world has changed rapidly in the last decades, with profound changes in the ways we use the land to support a growing, and increasingly affluent and urban population. Substantial increases in rates of change of human impact occur around mid-20th century in many cases. This illustrates how the past 50 years have been a period of significant and unprecedented change in human history8. This is confirmed by the development of land management regimes as depicted in Figure 19. As we head towards a global population of more than 9 billion people, we have entered a critical decision space, a window of several decades within which it is still possible to avert a move beyond the planet’s sustainability threshold10. The successful transition towards a global society that can live within the planet’s boundaries is widely seen as the greatest challenge humanity has ever faced. More people will require more space and more resources, which will have to be provided by a finite land surface facing added pressures from our changing climate. Land use change is inevitable and managing this change sustainably will become a major challenge. There are inherent uncertainties, and responsibility will have to be shared by governments, the private sector and individual citizens. A major first step toward achieving the future we want is to understand better what type of world we would like to live in.

Figure 1 Spatio-temporal distribution of land management regimes11. Gradual change

culminates in increasing rates of change towards the end of the 20th century.

Visions of the future stimulate dialogue, help build a consensus on shared priorities, and support planning by providing long-term targets. Land use is determined by the complex interface between the biophysical environment, and human activity shaped by historical and current cultural and socio-economic processes. Many groups may have contrasting interests in the land, and any change can be contentious. Understanding these different viewpoints and finding common ground will therefore have to be the first step towards managing sustainable land use change.

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis 7

Figure 2 gives a schematic representation of the roadmapping process we followed in VOLANTE. For this purpose Explorative Scenarios are adopted as boundary conditions (2.3), and Policy Alternatives are defined as a basis for model simulation to explore whether land use transitions create pathways towards the desired land use visions (2.4). Selected pathways towards the Visions are described, and when feasible selected as Robust Pathways (2.5). These pathways and their trade-offs are evaluated according to experiences in the past (2.6), for each of the visions (3, 4 and 5).

2.2 Stakeholders creating land use visions

In the course of the VOLANTE project, sixty-nine European stakeholders have created their desired visions about how Europe landscapes will look in 2040. Being of different ages, EU nationalities and cultural backgrounds, and coming from a variety of organisations in business, government, research and civil society, they represented the main land use sectors. The 69 stakeholders were carefully chosen in order to make sure that the group included a broad set of perspectives from pertinent sides of policy, economy and society: from entrepreneurs to policy-makers, from architects and local city planners to bird watchers and farmers. In order to develop visions, each stakeholder joined one professionally facilitated workshop for two days, with workshops bringing together separately the viewpoints on nature conservation and recreation; food, bio-energy and timber production; settlements and transport; and energy and water. Stakeholders were invited to imagine the future land use they wished for, describing it as if they were living in the future now, with their current age. Particular attention was paid to the fact that it is so difficult to think about the future and make these thoughts and ideas comprehensible and explicit for discussion.

Figure 2 Schematic representations of the VOLANTE Roadmapping process

8 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

Visions were created in a progressive way during the two days, and the stakeholders worked individually and in groups. They started with individual reflections, and then were divided into coherent groups based on the way they wanted land to be used by their sector/topic of expertise in the future. These groups developed fifteen sectorial and finally societal visions. Sharing their thoughts during the group discussions stimulated the creation of their common group visions (Figure 3). They presented their individual and groups visions at the end of the workshop in an exposition, which stimulated identifying of similarities and differences between visions.

The work on visions was imaginative and, at the same time, very much hands-on. Cards were filled out, posters painted, photos collated, charts filled in, stories written and maps adapted and redrawn. This process was not arbitrary or coincidental – it followed a carefully devel-oped and applied method allowing similarities and differences to show, refine and clarify (Figure 4). This created the space to think further, to dare, try out and then come back to an agreed design of the desired future.

Figure 5 Internet-based Canvas for the individual visions of future living (left) and for the sectorial visions on settlement

development (right)

As a further support to this co-creative process, two computer-based instruments were developed, one to broaden the individual visioning in an interactive visual survey (Figure 5 left), and the other to link developing group or sectorial visions to overarching themes (Figure 5 right). These are called ‘canvas tools’ as they resemble a white painting surface where to place elements for the visions. Goal of the tools is to support, elicit and analyse rich visions. There are three notable aspects of these tools. Firstly, as in the hands-on visioning, images may overcome language barriers in a workshop, make concepts more explicit, and stimulate associations that widen the scope of the discussion. Secondly, the images from which stakeholders could choose, included information that would facilitate the further processing of the vision results. Materials used as content in the tools were provided by the researchers involved in the modelling. They hence enabled to complement the qualitative hands-on visioning above. Finally, the results of the participants’ efforts are saved digitally to be directly accessible for further analysis and comparison at later stages.

Figure 3 Stakeholders sharing their visions

Figure 4 Exposition of the stakeholder visions

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis 9

The fifteen resulting rich visions offered multifaceted future scenarios through images, graphs, indications of trends, analyses of relationships between elements, descriptions, land cover maps, and video recordings. The material was carefully structured before being analysed, taking into consideration other land use visions documented for Europe12. The visions were then deconstructed and cross-analysed in terms of how they approached land use intensity, land use patterns and the extent of land cover, as well as the role played by several key drivers of change (economic, technological, social & behavioural and demographic). Finally, they were clustered according to their similarities. These clustered visions were presented and discussed in two workshops with a subgroup of the 69 stakeholders, resulting in the three consolidated visions described in the next sections: BEST LAND IN EUROPE, REGIONAL CONNECTED and LOCAL MULTIFUNCTIONAL. The three visions are each ‘multifunctional’ in that they wish to ensure as many as possible land functions (the capacity of the land to deliver all goods and services), but they basically differ in the scale at which this multifunctionality happens, i.e. local, regional or EU. These three visions were presented and discussed in two extra workshops with a selected subgroup of the 69 stakeholders, resulting in the three visions described in the next section. In order to introduce the three visions simultaneously and to facilitate the understanding of their differences, we present their key priorities for the four main land uses in Table 1. In sections 3, 4 and 5 the basic principles of the three Visions are illustrated and described. Further narratives are provided in a separate document13.

Table 1 Characterisation of the three consolidated visions Main aspiration

BEST LAND IN EUROPE

Maximise the value of existing land by using the best locations in the EU

REGIONAL CONNECTED

Keep a regional coherence by supplying all land goods and

services at regional level based on a very good green and blue

connectivity

LOCAL MULTIFUNCTIONAL

Local self-sufficiency by supplying the functions in one spot instead of different locations, depending on human desires

and needs

Urban areas Peri-urban areas disappear, making way for other land functions around the cities, such as urban agriculture,

recreation, nature.

Cities are compact, with vertical growth, and very well connected

with surrounding towns or villages and nature areas in the region.

New villages emerge in former forests and on abandoned rural land.

Agriculture The intensity of agricultural production, including biofuels, varies

depending on the agro-climatic conditions. E.g., in W and C Europe, production is intensive, while Alpine and southern regions see a decline in

agriculture or extensification.

The overall intensity of agriculture decreases with a focus on

sustainable production, including a large increase in High Nature Value

farming as part of the green network.

Food is produced locally and new practices allow food to be grown everywhere (in

cities, forest and nature areas). Consequently, intensity increases in some

areas but may decrease in traditional agricultural regions.

Forestry Industrial highly productive forest dominates in N and C Europe, whilst

regions that are biophysically less suitable or face climate change

pressures, such as the Mediterranean, are more extensively managed.

Forest area increases through the conversion of marginal agricultural land to productive forests supplying the local region. This includes green

corridors and forests planted to mitigate carbon emissions.

Forest area increases through the conversion of marginal land and an

increase in agroforestry. Multifunctional mixed wood production is everywhere to

cover local demand for all the services delivered by forests.

Nature Conservation

Some nature areas with emblematic endangered species become strict

conservation areas: isolated and with no human interference. Other areas

are managed for recreation.

Nature is encouraged and managed everywhere (in cities, agricultural areas, production forests) with an

emphasis on green/blue infra-structure connecting different areas.

Protected areas are open to sustainable food production and forestry where it

helps to meet local demand. Management is focused on increasing the number of

goods and services delivered. Green connections

Green connectivity is increased by restoring nature areas with high

biodiversity value; there is a special emphasis on wetland rehabilitation.

There are big investments in green and blue corridors.

Nature is pervasive and ubiquitous (even in dense urban areas such as park systems,

green rings, green facades and roofs or converted disused transport sites).

Viability in rural areas

Rural areas suffering from severe socio-economic decline do not get

further policy support and are abandoned and used for nature.

Rural areas are well connected with big cities, keeping the regional

coherence.

Rural viability increases as a result of the strong diversification of activities, creating new opportunities for urbanites who want

to start part-time farming. New ways of living appear, such as communal farms.

10 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

2.3 Using scenarios to define a range of possible futures

VOLANTE has developed an integrated framework to analyse land use scenarios that address not only land cover change but also changes in land management within both the agricultural and forestry sector. Following many other scenario studies worldwide14, and in close consultation with our stakeholder community, the uncertainty in future driving factors of land use change was partitioned into four scenarios by creating consistent storylines 15 that differ in the amount of global integration of trade (increased telecoupling of land systems) and the level of policy intervention guiding agriculture, urbanisation, forestry and land use planning in general. A suite of linked simulation models16 was used to calculate the land cover and land management developments for the period 2010-2040 under these scenarios (Figure 6)17. Figure 7 provides, for two scenarios, the expected changes in land use in Europe18.

Figure 6 VOLANTE scenarios used (derived from IPCC-SRES storylines)

Figure 7 Simulated dominant land change processes between 2010 – 2040 based on two different VOLANTE scenarios (V-A1 and V-B2), showing the areas affected by specific trends in land cover and land use intensity changes: multiple processes are happening at the same time in different regions of

Europe; opposite conversions may occur in neighbouring regions.

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis 11

The results reveal a number of important trends19: 1. Land use change processes are spatially variable: opposing trends occur in different parts of Europe. The same

overall storyline of the scenario leads to location-specific impacts. 2. A strong polarisation of land use is occurring: intensification of agriculture and forestry is happening in many

regions while at the same time marginal agricultural lands are abandoned. Urban land cover is becoming more dominant in the main urban conglomerations of Europe. Together these processes lead to an ‘unmixing’20 of the multi-functional land use of Europe.

3. The four different scenarios show differences in the spatial extent of the different conversion types. However, the general pattern of occurrence of the different processes and challenges the regions will face in terms of land use is not strongly different. Irrespective of the uncertainty in socio-economic conditions and globalisation, the challenges for the VOLANTE roadmap are consistent, but differ in terms of impact and urgency.

2.4 The VOLANTE policy alternatives and pathways towards the visions

VOLANTE did not rely on explorative scenario modelling alone. A guiding question was “How can we reach a desirable land use future”? To answer this question, backcasting methods could be employed. Backcasting was developed in the 1970s and 1980s by foresight experts to identify alternative pathways to reach a desired policy outcome. The starting point of this normative foresight method is a particular desirable future end-point, from which the analysis goes backwards to the present in order to determine the feasibility of that future and to search for decisions (e.g. policy measures) and conditions that would be required to reach the desired end point (Figure 8).

This method was originally applied in the context of energy policy, but later it has been applied also to analyse alternative sustainable development pathways. Backcasting may create awareness for possible solutions among various actors. It may also be used to highlight consequences of strategic choices in society that could open or close out future options. Whereas many foresight studies explore pathways and roadmaps to one desirable future end-point, it is unlikely that the complex decision making on land management could be solved with one pathway: there

Figure 8 Policy alternatives and pathways towards the visions

12 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

are conflicting land use policies that cannot be addressed simultaneously, and likewise, stakeholders have different views on the desired future land use. VOLANTE has explored possible pathways to each of the identified stakeholder visions, and for those cases where we found pathways, trade-offs are discussed that may be attached to them, as there is no solution that fits all needs21. The VOLANTE Pathway analysis can be understood as a backcasting variant, although our land use models cannot be applied in a reverse modelling mode. To link the normative visions of desired futures that were qualitatively defined by stakeholders (see 2.2) to explorative projections of future land use derived from quantitative simulation models, we developed an integrated assessment framework. We used seven land-use simulation models (Figure 9) to project future land use for the four possible global developments (marker scenarios) and eleven policy alternatives22. The policy alternatives were defined each for a limited combination of sectorial measures that included assumed changes in land-use related policies at the European level. The marker scenarios (see 2.3) and policy alternatives were used to project land use and management changes until 2040. The linkage between the quantitative modelling results and the qualitative vision statements was achieved by identifying attributes that were addressed both in the visions and in the projections of the policy alternatives (Figure 10). To identify pathways to the desired future land use, we matched the projected changes with desired changes of land use and estimated the degree of agreement. We considered a model projection of a policy alternative to become a pathway, if the projected land-use agreed with at least 60% of the desired land-use change for a two-third majority of the EU land area and population.

Figure 9 Suite of models applied in VOLANTE

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis 13

The VOLANTE pathway analysis links explorative land use modelling with normative stakeholder visions It is possible that some vision cannot be reached with the investigated scenarios

The link between land use modelling and the normative visions was made using land use attributes (building blocks) that were addressed both in the visions and in the projections. The projected (modelling) and desired (vision) changes in land use are compared to estimate the degree of agreement (+1 = increase, -1 = decrease, 0 = no trend). This was done for the 20 selected land use attributes at the regional level (NUTS2) across Europe. The pathway analysis results were finally mapped, indicating the level of agreement between the projected and desired land use changes. Grey regions agree with less than 60% with the targeted vision. We considered a model projection to become a pathway, if the projected land-use matched with at least 60% of the desired land- use change for all building blocks for a two-third majority of the EU land area and population.

Figure 10 The VOLANTE pathway analysis approach. Vision characteristics are translated into building blocks, which are also simulated with explorative modelling. Pathways are policy alternatives which agree at least with 60% of the desired land use

change for a two-third majority of the EU land area and population.

Land cover extent

Land management intensity

Land use patterns

Land use services

Global land impacts

Model Vision Interpretation

-1 -1 Agreement

-1 0 Slight disagreement

-1 +1 Strong disagreement

0 -1 Slight disagreement

0 0 Agreement

0 +1 Slight disagreement

+1 -1 Strong disagreement

+1 0 Slight disagreement

+1 +1 AgreementV-B2 Greening Europe

14 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

We could identify two pathways to the vision BEST LAND IN EUROPE and five pathways to the vision REGIONAL CONNECTED. Unfortunately none of the explorative modelling projections was found to be sufficiently matching the vision LOCAL

MULTIFUNCTIONAL (Table 2). As a matter of fact, none of the pathways are completely in agreement with any of the consolidated visions; total agreement would also not be likely in this approach of backcasting. It should be noted that project timing did not allow selecting and simulating new policy alternatives after the identification of visions. Additional policy alternatives or combinations of alternatives could be studied, which possibly could perform better than the present selection, potentially also creating a pathway towards the vision LOCAL MULTIFUNCTIONAL.

Table 2 Policy Alternatives (starting from one of the VOLANTE marker scenarios V-A2,V-B1 or V-B2) matching the desired changes of land use

BEST LAND IN EUROPE REGIONAL CONNECTED LOCAL MULTIFUNCTIONAL V-B2 Greening Europe V-B2 Storing more Carbon

V-A2 Greening Europe V-B1 Marker Scenario V-B2 Greening Europe V-B2 Storing more Carbon V-B2 Supporting amenity values

none

2.5 Selecting Robust Pathways

Our future is inherently uncertain and it is clear that we cannot forecast future land use with any confidence. Too many factors are out of our control. Extraordinary climate extremes could have drastic influences on agriculture and forestry – just imagine a 2003 drought extreme three decades later around 2035 when average climate will be considerably warmer and rainfall distribution could be much more variable. We may experience more severe economic or political crises with devastating consequences on all land use related sectors. When studying potential pathways to specific desirable land use futures we found in our analysis that certain policy options brought us close to a specific vision, at least under given assumptions of the socio-economic conditions and policy environment in the future world. But what would happen, if these conditions would not be favourable and this pathway would not be accessible to us? We cannot forecast which of the investigated marker scenarios of our future society will be closest to reality. Because of this uncertainty, it is advisable to choose robust pathways to the desired land use visions. Robust pathways are suitable under different marker scenario conditions, so that regardless of socio-economic and political developments they would bring us closer to our desired sustainable land use vision. It would be even better, if a pathway could support reaching alternative stakeholder visions. We found two policy alternatives (B2 Greening Europe and B2 Storing more carbon) that represent pathways to both BEST LAND IN EUROPE and REGIONAL CONNECTED, but none of the pathways led to LOCAL MULTIFUNCTIONAL, which would require very different land use pathways. While all three stakeholder visions incorporate aspects of multifunctional land use – they differ strongly with respect to the scale at which multifunctionality should be achieved. The vision BEST LAND IN EUROPE implies that we should make best use of the land according to available resources and to satisfy the demand for all services at the European level. This would allow for much greater regional differences compared to the vision LOCAL MULTIFUNCTIONAL. Land use traditions are very diverse in Europe and some regions are quite specialised in their land use. This explains why stronger land use change would be required to satisfy multifunctional land use at the local scale. It also becomes evident that no single pathway could simultaneously reach all three identified stakeholder visions. Because of the diverse land use history (see 2.6) and contrasting stakeholder visions we are thus not able to identify only one pathway to the desired sustainable future land use. Each pathway has certain drawbacks and trade-offs. It is crucial to recognise these, for example to avoid that we choose a land use strategy in Europe that exports the

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis 15

sustainability problems to other world regions. It may also be possible that alternative pathways are more suitable in one geographic region in Europe than elsewhere. It is important to note that most of the identified pathways assume socio-economic conditions and a policy environment where land use is strongly regulated. Most pathways furthermore include restrictions with regard to land use/cover conversions and management. In other words: in a world with little or no regulations and interventions it is unlikely that the land use desired by stakeholders can be reached. What we call a pathway to a desired future land use strongly depends on the choice to what extent the agreement between projected and desired land use should apply to a majority of the people and across the European land area. Furthermore, whereas the identified pathways would lead land systems more closely to a desired future, not all impacts are in line with a particular vision and the identification of pathways depends on the trade-offs that society is willing to accept. 2.6 Learning from the past

Reaching a given vision will most often imply innovative ways of thinking and acting. Nevertheless, trends and insights from the past help to underpin the probabilities of reaching the vision and provide understanding of the possible barriers on the road. In VOLANTE past land use trends and drivers of change have been analysed at local to EU-wide scale and for time periods ranging from decades to centuries. Three examples are given here, of trends in agricultural intensification, of displacements effects, and of local multifunctionality. Trends of agricultural intensification – slightly decreasing in the past decade, and some disruption on the way23 Centuries: Since approximately 1800, agricultural expansion and modern crops and crop rotation systems increased the agricultural production. Land-use intensification generally emerged with the introduction of phosphates and mechanisation in the century following 1850, but with very different uptake rates across Europe. After 1945, the widespread and often government-supported availability of synthetic nitrogen and fossil-fuel based motorisation caused a surge in agricultural input and output intensity, often with negative environmental impacts. Decades: Strong increases of land-use intensity, mainly on cropland, in particular in the decades after 1950. These increases in cropland yields were accompanied by slight reductions in cropland area as well as areas used for livestock grazing, allowing forests to grow in area. Agricultural outputs increased significantly driven by surges in agricultural inputs (fertilizers, machinery), a link that was only weakened from the late 1980s onwards in Western Europe. Central and Eastern European countries showed disruptions with the collapse of the Soviet Union around the year 1990, leading to abandonment, drastic reductions of the livestock numbers and reductions in agricultural output24. Recent years: By and large, agriculture has stagnated in Europe as a whole recently, both in terms of intensity (e.g. yields) as well as in the extent of agricultural land. The use of fertilizers and pesticides has decreased in Western Europe, contrary to the trends observed in Eastern Europe (i.e. rebounding from the post-socialist decline). Polarisation trends continue, i.e., the intensification of fertile lands and the abandonment of marginal lands in Europe’s mountain areas and in the Mediterranean25. Important drivers of change are structural changes in the agricultural sector and EU and national environmental and agricultural policies, which are increasingly concerned with improving environmental conditions in rural areas. Forestry has been intensifying in many areas recently26. Displacement effects – disconnection of land use and consumption27

An investigation into cropland areas embodied in international trade shows that in 2007 the European Union’s (EU27) consumption of agricultural products required a cropland area of 125 million hectares28. One out of three of these hectares is located outside the European Union’s territory. In contrast only one out of ten hectares of cropland harvested within the EU serves the export of agricultural products29. In the period from 1987 to 2007 harvested cropland area within the EU declined by 5 million hectares, while the cropland for the EU’s consumption remained virtually unchanged30. Looking at the location of croplands supplying the EU’s consumption, a striking increase in land located in South America was observed

16 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

during the two decades (an increase by 7 million hectares, an area larger than the UK’s entire cropland). These overall trends are mirrored when using the indicator eHANPP 31 (i.e. a measure for the amount of biological productivity, or net primary production, embodied in final biomass products) as a comprehensive consumption-based measure of land use impacts across different land use classes (cropland, forest land, grassland). This indicator also reveals a growing impact of the EU on land use processes around the globe, with imports from the Global South (above all, Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Southeast Asia) playing an increasingly dominant role, with especially high growth rates during the last decade32. Local multifunctionality

In the past decades, the number of persons working full-time on farms in the EU is reduced, and 83% of the family labour force were only working part-time on the farm in 2002 (Linares, 2003). In many cases, economic circumstances have forced land owners to supplement income with off farm income or to diversify production on the property into non-agricultural activities, also named Other Gainful Activities33. Both of these types of development lead to a more multifunctional production pattern, as opposed to the traditional agricultural production strategy, and this has important land use implications. Part-time farmers may need to pursue special strategies to be able to accommodate both on- and off-farm employment (e.g. a simple rather than a complex crop rotation, no animals to reduce labour use and thus less need for fodder crops). Properties with Other Gainful Activities may devote buildings or land to these activities and thus introduce alternative types of land use34. These changes mirror some of the intentions expressed in the LOCAL MULTIFUNCTIONAL vision. 2.7 The endeavour of policy implementation

Reaching the visions will in many cases imply the need of policy intervention. In the VOLANTE project, drivers of landscape change were assessed for different environmental zones in Europe. Meetings with central stakeholders highlighted the major processes occurring and two major drivers stood out: economical (global economic market) and policy drivers35. It is, however, important to acknowledge that implementing EU policies (transposition, administrative implementation, enforcement, and application) is not always a smooth process, and barriers can be rooted in a number of aspects, including the institutional and political situation in the member states36.

Some studies observe that different general compliance patterns can be found for groups of member states – ranging from “rule abiding” countries that in general make an effort to implement EU policies in spite of domestic barriers, while transposition in another group of countries depends more strongly on the domestic policy context and the extent to which the directive aligns with this37. A third group of countries is reluctant or economically restrained in EU policy implementation, which may turn into a long and foot-dragging experience, sometimes to be coerced by the judgment of the European Court of Justice. Also, governance frameworks set up in EU policies may not fit to the

Figure 11 EU Policies meet a national context of compliance cultures and governance structures and thus may have different effects at subnational level

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis 17

existing domestic frameworks (so-called misfits38) and adaptations may need to take place39. Overcoming these to some extent seems to depend on the compliance culture (Figure 11). Concerning local level implementation, policies related to land use often rely on land owners participating in voluntary schemes or local authorities’ competences in EU project participation. Barriers to participation include lack of information, fear of bureaucracy and risks of sanctions in case of non-compliance with conditions, and the fact that subsidy do not always compensate for the income foregone or the extra effort required. Therefore effective communication, reduction of administrative burden for the land owner and adequate compensation levels are important. Furthermore, special attention is needed to cater for different needs of different land-owner types (e.g. full-time farmers and non-farmers have different management goals and response patterns) and different local and regional contexts (e.g. land use drivers and land pressure vary between peri-urban and remote rural areas). The effects of human behaviour as part of the governance process40 should be taken into due consideration. Easing the way to EU funding of nature conservation projects for local authorities is also an issue. The above considerations apply in different variations for each of the consolidated visions, as illustrated in the following sections.

18 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

3 VOLANTE Vision Best Land in Europe The vision in short In this vision, optimal use of land is crucial to ensuring maximum production of food and other natural products. This means matching land across the EU to the most appropriate use. The concept This vision is based on a fundamental premise: by 2040 there will be intense global competition for resources so we have to make land use more efficient to be able to meet society’s needs. Across the EU, land provides for multiple functions, making a well-planned, well-ordered and zoned use of our space imperative. Much of Europe’s land is suited to multiple uses: poorly drained fields, for example, can be used for woodland, grassland and nature reserves. On the other hand, some land is perfectly suited to just one function, such as the rich, fertile soils that are ideal for food production. Further specialisation is therefore required. The broader context is a globalised world with its intensified movement of products, money and people, resulting in an ever greater geographical mobility. Good accessibility is therefore crucial, linking distant large urban areas in such a way that local events are shaped by events many miles away, and vice versa. Equally crucial is political collaboration between and beyond the Member States.

How to reach a vision BEST LAND IN EUROPE? BEST LAND IN EUROPE targets towards procedures where land use types (farming, forestry, nature, etc.) are performed in the most appropriate locations for these functions. This implies a competition for land and best land use, efficient management and best use of resources in terms of well-ordered and zoned spaces.

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis 19

How can such a vision be reached? The VOLANTE analysis found two pathways to this vision41 in a fragmented world with modest economic growth and strong policy interventions in general. As best fitting, the results suggest that a policy with payments for carbon sequestration (Pathway B2 Storing more carbon) would create incentives to limit the conversion of grassland, to protect areas that are prone to carbon emissions due to their high soil organic carbon contents, and to stimulate carbon sequestration in forest biomass (Figure 12). While this pathway is related to restricting land conversion and land use intensification, it fits well to BEST LAND IN

EUROPE because it is a rather flexible approach that includes alternative marketing assets.

Another pathway is the Greening Europe policy (also starting from Marker Scenario B2) with a strong focus on nature protection, expansion of protected zones beyond Natura2000, a robust ecological network and strengthened constraints on land cover conversions and restrictions on forest management. The main land use changes that render such a policy a pathway is the projected increase in the extent and connectivity of the natural area. This is because strong rules are implemented in this policy alternative to avoid conversion of nature to built-up land, thus conserving the nature areas around cities. There are also strong policies to protect natural areas in rural landscapes: more nature reserves and assignment of ecological corridors and strong disincentives towards fragmentation of natural areas. Together this leads to larger, unfragmented natural areas but at the same time some more intensified agricultural production in concentrated agricultural areas, thereby generating more homogeneous landscapes. However, there are expected trade-offs: while carbon stock and biodiversity to a certain extent (e.g. deadwood in forests) are presumably increasing along both pathways, there will be productive forest and agricultural land taken out of conventional use. This leads to intensification of agriculture on the most suitable sites and on the other hand to abandonment of extensive land use forms such as permanent grazing in marginal areas; at least the first trend does not comply with carbon mitigation strategies, and both trends break with a balanced approach of intensification and extensification according to the best land use concept.

Policy implication of the vision BEST LAND IN EUROPE In general this vision seems most in line with historical trends, whereas the two other visions will need significant political intervention in order to be realised. The overall premise – that fertile land is increasingly used for agriculture, and abandonment occurs on less fertile land, associated with regional specialisation – is to some extent seen in the historical trends. And some trends of regional specialisations are also found. Such developments are – in principle – also in line with the EU Habitats Directive that favours nature in areas where nature is already of high quality, and thus implies leaving areas well suited for nature to stay as such. The analyses of past trends, however, point to some important barriers to reaching the vision. In the past, urban or peri-urban expansion often occurred on fertile soils, since the original settlements were generally located on or close to fertile soils. In contrast to historic and current trends, however, the vision BEST LAND IN

EUROPE asks for a high degree of confinement of urban growth. Only in some countries strict public regulation has implied clear borders between urban and non-urban areas, indicating that restricting land take is possible through regulation.

Figure 12 Permanent grassland that is prevented to be converted to cropland to save carbon, a crucial feature of the policy alternative

‘Storing more carbon’ (Montado landscape near Évora, PT)

20 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

The vision statement of rewilding is not in line with current trends, as most land is in use and also support schemes related to the Common Agricultural Policy – including the Rural Development Programs – aim at keeping land under agricultural use. However, the abandonment of labour and capital intensive land uses in the Mediterranean countries (e.g. on terraces42), or the trend towards increases in forest areas across Europe can be interpreted to be broadly in line with this vision. Rewilding could be a consequence of these major trajectories. The overall premise of biophysical conditions defining the optimal land uses is in some situations overruled by other aspects, ranging from local level decision-making by land owners 43 to political and institutional regime shifts as in Central and Eastern Europe, which strongly affects land use pattern dynamics. Also the payments related to the Common Agricultural Policy level out some of the competitive advantages that fertile soils have in relation to intensification of agriculture. And a general trend of intensification of agricultural land use44 has been seen throughout Europe. Over the last decade, however, land-use experienced a period of relative levelling off or stagnation, in terms of intensity (e.g., yields) as well as extents. Polarisation, i.e. intensification of fertile lands and concomitant abandonment of marginal lands, continues in Europe. There are opportunities for this vision in adapting the existing Rural Development policy, Greening of the CAP and Climate mitigation & adaptation policies. The health effects of concentrated services and green corridors may be supporting this vision. Also agricultural technology is already moving towards larger, more efficient machinery suited to the intensively used regions, whereas forestry already shows trends towards more northerly production. Land abandonment is already happening in many parts of Europe, and rewilding has quite a momentum recently45. Rewilding would meet many of the vision’s objectives and (contrary to pure non-intervention, no-access to public sites such as e.g. Lady Park Wood in UK and Białowieża in Poland/Belarus), could still have recreational use in most places. Stakeholders’ views on BEST LAND IN EUROPE The stakeholders who created this vision called for strong spatial planning and governance as key issues. Good, efficient infrastructure should be enhanced as well as shared housing with a focus on self-sufficiency. Community gardens and private gardens will contribute to the green and recreational space. Urban areas should stay equal in size while reducing the peri-urban areas. People live on communal farms, where they create a new type of village life, providing space and opportunities for new farmers as well. Urban farming is suggested for the peri-urban areas of today. The main tenet is that land should be used for the most appropriate land use: e.g., better technological development should engender smarter agriculture on the most fertile soils. Multifunctional water management is essential for this vision46, as is living in a carbon-free Europe where resources are managed efficiently and there is less land use. This allows a closed loop of ecosystem services in Europe, maximising efficiency and reducing waste47. Also more decentralisation is mentioned, while good governance should facilitate ecosystem services to be provided in an equitable, efficient way. Barriers The strong pressure on urban sprawl will necessitate strict spatial planning, and polycentric development requires facilitation by a strong transport policy. Also, major policy change is needed in integrating and coordinating land use, where a tailored approach to environmental management is required so the best land areas can 'get on' with producing without worrying about conservation. Possibly, government intervention is needed to ensure that the best producers are using the best land, e.g. through incentives to improve productivity again (e.g., like post-war UK). A more coordinated European forestry policy may be needed to balance demand with shifting production, especially considering a regional focus for forestry48. There are precedents for no-go nature reserves but creating these would not be popular with the public. Many of the most famous reserves in Europe are popular visitor centres too. However, rewilding large areas of abandoned agricultural land could increase habitat without restricting access.

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis 21

4 VOLANTE Vision Regional Connected The vision in short In this vision, most society’s needs are met regionally through a more coherent relationship between the people in a region and their resources. The premise is that economies do not need to globalise to thrive, moving away from regional specialisation. The concept This vision is based on a greater appreciation of the resources that are available regionally and of the value of trying to live without external inputs, with the help of technological developments. Key priorities are serving the regional population first and keeping regional coherence: this reduces the need for transportation and therefore its negative impact. However, fostering territorial cohesion on the regional scale should not be seen as an attempt to isolate communities or to re-close borders. More local autonomy does not mean introversion and isolation, but more resilience, more involvement by the population, and more democracy.

How to reach a vision REGIONAL CONNECTED? The underlying idea of this vision is that society should try to live with a more regional focus, living closer to the natural environment instead of following a cost-driven approach of continued global development. Such a change of paradigm towards a regional anchoring should dramatically reduce the global consumption of energy linked to transportation of food, people and goods. How can such a vision be reached? The VOLANTE analysis found five pathways suitable to sufficiently approach this vision49. The Greening Europe policy (both starting from A2 or from B2) is one of the most feasible pathways for this vision. A strong focus on nature protection, with expansion of protected zones beyond Natura2000, a robust ecological corridor network and strengthened constraints on land cover conversions and restrictions on forest

22 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

management would result in more forest and natural areas and improved connectivity of these areas (Figure 13). The principal mechanism of this pathway is land use restrictions in favour of nature protection and limited intensification of land use. The trade-offs lie mainly in the economic potential of land use in Europe. We can see trade-offs both within Europe (e.g., negative impact on the shadow value of agricultural land, limited climate change mitigation potential in agriculture) and consequences for land use outside Europe (e.g., increased cropland displacement to African, Latin-American and Pacific OECD regions, and increased roundwood imports)50. It can also

be observed that intensification of agriculture and forestry due to reduction of available area will corrupt some of the positive effects of nature protection actions. The other four pathways to this vision and the respective trade-offs are presented in the fact sheets. Policy implications of the vision REGIONAL CONNECTED In general this vision may require increased weight of EU policy and implementation, as it deviates significantly from current development and policies. Especially the emphasis on green and blue connectivity is not in line with past trends and current EU policies, as even the implementation of the Natura 2000 network has met considerable challenges, and the designation of conservation areas has often not led to more integrated and connected ecological networks. The call for supplying all land goods and services at a regional level is also contrary to the ongoing trend of international via trade (increasing the distance between the place of consumption and the locations of production) and land use displacement both inside and outside the EU (See Text Box on displacement Effects). The consumption of the EU’s population is thus increasingly affecting diverse regions around the globe, causing considerable environmental footprints abroad. Domestic EU policies potentially increase this trends, e.g., via the increased demand for bioenergy in the EU that may lead to growing biomass imports. The vision calls for compact cities, which is only partly in line with recent trends of substantial urban sprawl and peri-urban developments, especially in Western and Central Europe. Analysis shows that in general settlement areas grow faster51 in population than the population number increases throughout Europe – being in contrast to the notion of compact cities. Some countries, however, have managed to confine urban sprawl through strict public regulation and planning (see also under BEST LAND IN EUROPE). Concerning general the ‘greening’ of agriculture (extensification and High Nature Value Farmland), past also development show diverging trends. On the one hand, agricultural intensification is found has been a prevailing trend throughout Europe (box and fact sheet on intensification), and the overall share of agricultural land in Natura 2000 areas is low. Both these trends suggest an increasing separation of conservation and agricultural production areas, and thus speak against a call for a ‘greening’ of agriculture. On the other, hand Agri-environmental Schemes related to the Rural Development Programmes are currently implemented, and an increasing share (though still low) of the CAP budget is allocated to schemes under the Rural Development Program . This indicates a move towards a greening of agriculture, at least at the policy level. Indeed, some empirical evidence for a reduction in land-use intensity is already observable in the last years (e.g., declines in fertiliser use in Europe’s West).

Figure 13 Landscape of connected forests with agriculture in between, which is a crucial feature of the Greening Europe policy alternative

(Mediterranean landscape near Perpignan, FR).

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis 23

The call for increasing forest areas on abandoned land is in line with past trends, as this is seen at all spatial levels52. The development is driven by a combination of support schemes for afforestation, and abandonment of agricultural lands based on either changes in agricultural practises implying less need for pastures or small farms in remote areas becoming economically non-viable. Some of these abandoned lands develop into forest by means of natural succession. Restrictions on green belt development means planners are having to think about new ways of housing people in cities (or rehash old ways). Current road development trends help the connection aspect although in this vision. Sustainable agriculture does not necessarily mean low yields – there are several technologies that can allegedly achieve both, e.g., precision farming. Agri-environmental schemes are already well established in most EU countries. Forest area is increasing in many EU countries mainly as a result of government support through grants. In some areas, abandoned land is slowly converting to forest53. Many opportunities for nature are available; small gains (roofs, gardens, abandoned industrial sites, road verges) can all make a difference. Agri-environmental schemes have laid a foundation in some areas. The EU is currently already supporting green infrastructure and nature based solutions. Strong support for this vision also consists in several government policies trying to improve rural-urban connectivity. Stakeholders’ views on REGIONAL CONNECTED For this vision the stakeholders suggested a strong but slightly more central governance, banning urban sprawl and focussing on green and blue networks, increased growth in smaller, compact cities, and a diversified and liveable rural space by introducing economic functionality. However, there should be more coherence to the regions we live in, that is to say we should live closer to our direct environment instead of following the monetary cost-driven approach of global development. The development of a highly efficient transport infrastructure is essential to enhance a sustainable and ecological neural network of settlements, and to allow people to live in the smaller towns and in largely self-sufficient villages in the countryside without being isolated from society. Such a change of paradigm towards a regional anchoring should dramatically reduce the global consumption of energy linked to transportation of food, people and goods. Agriculture in a considerably reduced land area will need to focus on sustainability, supporting interconnections of larger forest areas. Land resource in regions should be used for what it is the best suited, but always with the objective to serve the regional population first, in order to decrease transportation needs and the related negative externalities. The development of agro-tourism, eco-tourism, the harvesting of timber, or biomass and bio-energy production are suggested important functions of the rural ideal. Barriers Vertical growth could be difficult to implement in several cities, particularly historic cities with restrictions on skyscrapers (e.g., London, Paris), so urban planning development may need to adapt. Similarly, connecting to smaller towns may require careful changes to the planning laws, possibly implying costly and controversial land use change. ‘Well connected’ implies massive economic investment, whether that is road, rail (tram), cycle path or superfast internet. This vision has huge implications for how we farm today – a large-scale move towards extensive farming54 is contrary to the vast bulk of EU agriculture. If predominantly marginal farming would become High Nature Value, that would provide jobs, if economically viable. This would require major political and policy changes to enforce and establish small scale farming. While land use change is not always popular, even on marginal land (if privately owned by farmers for example) and the long-term aspect of forest creation is also off-putting to many, loss of marginal land to forest would be fairly easy to incorporate into policy and is indeed already a facet of woodland creation55 in many countries. This vision would require radical re-writing of most planning policies to incorporate biodiversity aspects. This includes, business, housing development, transport, etc.

24 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

5 VOLANTE Vision Local Multifunctional The vision in short In this vision, the localisation of all land functions in a small area paves the way for a new approach to living, working and recreation facilities in Europe. This vision targets diversity, not just in nature, but in land use and in society. The concept The key idea in this vision is not to create a mosaic of distinct sectoral areas (agriculture, settlement, nature conservation, etc.), but to incorporate multi-functionality in existing zones. For example, agricultural areas will have biodiversity conservation, improved water quality and ecological corridors as well as a strong green economy: this will optimise multiple ecosystem services wherever possible. A radical shift in behaviour and a switch to more ‘bottom-up’ politics will ensure localised thinking and decision-making is commonplace. This is a vision where locally driven agro-environmental measures produce their effects where they are really needed. Access to the latest technology, facilitating the sustainable management of our resources or ensuring that everyone has a say, is common. A major benefit of this vision is a huge reduction in ‘food miles’ as many of the products we need are grown or manufactured locally.

How to reach the vision LOCAL MULTIFUNCTIONAL? In the vision LOCAL MULTIFUNCTIONAL land use functions are not spatially separated but are often found together within a small area. The multi-functionality enables local communities to become more self-sufficient. This localisation of all functions in a small area enables the development of new living, working and recreation facilities for the citizens, which finally may change the whole social-ecological interactions. The VOLANTE analysis suggests that it would be difficult to reach this vision56, since none of the examined scenarios would fully comply with this vision. This implies that major changes in land use may be needed. Indeed, the local

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis 25

multifunctional approach seems not overly responsive to current European policy schemes, and in particular not to land use restriction or segregation policies. This implies that the LOCAL MULTIFUNCTIONAL vision seems to require the strongest changes in the political and societal system. Linking the available projections (which are mainly based on sectoral policies) to this vision suggests that the desired diversification of land-use, increase of self-sufficiency (e.g. comprising an equal trade-balance), carbon neutral economy, and avoidance of outsourcing land use related problems to overseas, presents huge challenges.

Policy implications of the vision LOCAL MULTIFUNCTIONAL Central to this vision is multifunctional land use at a local spatial scale. Although most of the analyses of past trends have been applied at the national or regional level and therefore have difficulties in addressing this level, it is clear that the effects of displacement (disconnection of agricultural production and consumption), the lack of general greening of agriculture, but increasing areas of forest, as mentioned above in the comments to the vision REGIONAL

CONNECTED, are also valid for the vision LOCAL MULTIFUNCTIONAL. The vision foresees the emergence of new villages in abandoned rural areas; the past trend, however, shows that uncontrolled urban sprawl does take place in the rural areas. Most often the pressure for urban development is merely an expansion of existing villages or cities, which does not take place in remote and abandoned rural areas. The prevailing trend is, thus, towards a differentiation in areas with urban development and pressure for more urban expansion versus areas being abandoned by agriculture and local population too. But in many rural areas a trend of structural changes in agriculture imply possibilities for urbanites to buy former farm buildings and engaging in part time / leisure farming. This potential is most profoundly recognised in peri-urban areas, but few examples are seen of old villages in remote locations becoming retreats for the urbanites. This may imply new forms of living in the rural areas. The call for many areas being involved in food production and the emergence of many, small and local markets represents a break with past trends. Yet, in some locations direct sales and niche production are observed, which support the realisation of this vision. And intensive agriculture can be found in peri-urban areas, supporting the possibility of more direct sales. In addition, the recent changes in the Common Agricultural Policy imply more emphasis on crop diversity at a farm level. In contrast to this vision, however, is an overall trend of polarisation in agricultural land use – intensification in regions with fertile soils and abandonment in locations with less favourable conditions. Concerning the vision statement of nature protection areas being open to other uses this is in line with the implementation of Natura 2000 sites in many European countries. Here human intervention is not excluded and for several habitat types e.g. extensive farming, human management is a requirement to preserve the quality of the habitat. In some member states, however, the Natura 2000 implementation imply a ban on human interference, even though the implementation sometimes lack proper enforcement and e.g. illegal wood felling takes place.

Figure 14 Mulitifunctional land use at the Peak District England: grazing, tourism, hunting, nature conservation all concurrently

26 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

The focus on enhancing biodiversity everywhere is against the past trends, as especially in economically challenged countries economic development tends to take priority over biodiversity and other environmental concerns. However, at the local scale often more nature has been created than removed on farmland in the past decade. This underlines that agricultural land should not be understood as a uniform category, as land use patterns may be heterogeneous, with mixed extensive and intensive types of land use. The analyses of the land owners’ motives for creating nature on farm land indicate that the desire to improve the quality of the property is an important driver. Implementing this vision might be enhanced by adopting Rural Development Funds from the EU to provide chances for urban agriculture. Also a move towards sustainable provisioning services (fuelwood, local food) may be helpful. Current trends towards local food production support this development which is confirmed by long waiting lists for urban allotments in many towns. Also greening of the urban environment is popular. Marginal land is already being afforested, grant schemes being available to do so. Although agroforestry is a slow burn in Europe – it has a long history and new schemes may be initiated. In relation to nature conservation, in some countries coppice woodlands are already being restored, while some woods allow mushroom harvesting, which can be very profitable. Also, a small but growing trend of urban greening can be observed e.g. with more and more green roofs. Rural Development initiatives are already in place, often with EU funding. Some rural areas are leading the way and could teach others. Increasingly, even agricultural colleges are adding farm diversification courses for their students.

Stakeholders’ views on LOCAL MULTIFUNCTIONAL The fundamental tenet of this vision is the maxim food comes first: food production is promoted everywhere, in cities, forests and natural areas, in brownfields and on roofs and in gardens (opposite to the maxim of ‘trading more food’ 57). The key idea of incorporating multi-functionality in existing areas is crucial: agricultural areas will have more biodiversity58, preserve the quality of water resources and create ecological corridors; all sustaining green economy (payment for ecosystem services, e.g., areas with carbon values, high conservation values or high social and spiritual values, is considered a strong basis for local economy). Forests can be used for biomass, carbon sequestration, biodiversity, agriculture59 and outdoor activities. Optimising multiple ecosystem services60 everywhere is key but the other essential concept is about localised thinking and decision-making. In this regard, knowledge of local territorial characteristics becomes an overriding tenet for development or planning. Expansion of metropolitan areas should be halted, leading to a transformation of the EU into a fabric of medium-sized dense towns leading to a hybrid-green countryside. A reduction in transport use and high-energy efficiency systems based on local networks will reduce energy consumption. Barriers Urban development in the rural fabric has been almost prohibited for decades in many countries; to overcome this mind-set would require revolutionary thinking and massive investment as part of rural development initiatives. Since food production is a low-paying job, it is a challenge to keep workers living in cities, because competition for land in urban areas is intense. A huge evolution of several policies throughout Europe would be needed including urban planning as well as forest and conservation policies. This also has implications for education and training policies to ensure a new generation of smart urban farmers. The conservation movement would not like agricultural exploitation of nature areas; current biodiversity protection laws would have to be rewritten to allow. Funding of research would be needed to prove that this is a viable prospect that would not affect biodiversity negatively. Also to allow for new technologies of green urban development, dedicated product innovation should be actively incentivised. It is not sure whether people want to return to an outdoor, agrarian life, although there are many types of jobs available in rural areas. These would require proper infrastructure (internet etc.), and a change of mind-set to convince people that communal living would be an attractive proposition.

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis 27

28 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

6 Synopsis

Of course the above mentioned observations should be considered in dependence on regional conditions. They will thus vary across Europe and not all three visions fit equally well to all parts of Europe. For example, the LOCAL

MULTIFUNCTIONAL vision is difficult to implement in regions where specialised or industrial agriculture is dominant, but could be promising in others. There could be substantially larger trade-offs, if any of the visions would be enforced throughout Europe. Thus there might arise a need to use policy instruments to address the remaining less desired consequences of each of the visions. Also a wish can be identified to continue exploring better land use policies which surpass the performance of the selected alternatives we have been able to study thus far. 6.1 Overcoming institutional barriers

EU policies may not align easily with existing governance frameworks within the given policy area (so-called misfits), and the extent to which necessary adaptations take place, seem to depend on general compliance patterns. In VOLANTE, we studied the implementation of the Habitats Directive in member states that were selected based on an assumption of their different compliance cultures. We focused on the institutional barriers by analysing the timeliness of transposition, the relationship between the directive’s requirements and the existing nature conservation governance framework, the adaptations taking place and the perception of implementation barriers for various types of stakeholders. Following are examples of important challenges for implementation. We found that already in the transposition stage important barriers could prevent later implementation by the lack of aligning the emerging policy framework to existing ones. This was exemplified in Greece, where conflicting interests between sector ministries resulted in overlapping regulation, and unclear roles in the administrative structures and responsibility. This was reinforced by overlapping spatial management units, as the Natura 2000 sites often overlapped with the many existing types of area protections – based on national policies and international conventions, which also led to incoherent site-specific regulation. Another aspect was the need to address the concurrent implementation of different but related policies. The study showed examples of the Habitats Directive implementation being affected by the implementation of the Nitrate Directive and the Water Framework Directive, in the Netherlands and in Denmark. This played out as challenges in the conception and stakeholder acceptance of the Natura 2000 management plans in the Netherlands, where the water table management and the nitrogen regulation influences the major part of the Natura 2000 areas, and in the desire by the Danish Government to implement the Habitats Directive and the Water Framework Directive in a common process, which ultimately delayed the adoption of the Natura 2000 plans. As an institutionally and economically challenged country, Romania met implementation problems related to the complexity of getting access to EU funding. An obstacle to farmer acceptance of the Natura 2000 network has been the time-related gap between restrictions on land management in Natura 2000 areas from the date of EU adoption of the site list, and the possibility to obtain economic compensation, e.g. from Rural Development Funds. A further example is the agricultural abandonment in mountain areas and other landscapes with marginal agricultural potential, that has been an important process in European land use for many decades associated with scale enlargement in agricultural production, improved accessibility to global markets and agricultural policy reforms. Scenario projections of VOLANTE indicate that also in the next 25 years land abandonment will continue to be an important process changing Europe's landscapes. Agricultural abandonment leads to losses of rural employment, loss of cultural heritage landscapes, and loss of agro-biodiversity associated with extensive, small scale, agriculture. Abandoned lands can be invaded by invasive species and lead to increased forest fire risk. However, land

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis 29

abandonment can also lead to new natural areas, larger continuous natural habitats and the possibility of return of large mammals (re-wilding). Regrowth of vegetation can sequester carbon, help regulate streamflow and provide a range of other ecosystem services. The trade-off between the positive and the negative effects of agricultural abandonment is strongly location specific. VOLANTE made a typology of the differential trade-offs for all European areas facing abandonment. By targeting policy efforts to maintain farming to regions where losses are large upon abandonment and guiding abandonment in other regions towards desirable outcomes will help to increase efficient use of resources and optimise ecosystem service outcomes. 6.2 VOLANTE Key messages

Although society is often aware of the need for trade-offs in land use planning, the consequences of alternative land use futures are difficult to imagine. Traditional assessment methods are limited in their capacity to simulate visions that firmly depart from existing land use patterns, and the current European model has difficulty in accommodating local multi-functionality. Furthermore, land use governance struggles to achieve multi-functionality since policy strategies focus on sectoral aims. Reaching any of these visions will require policy intervention based on new, integrated policy approaches in support of multiple land use functions. The VOLANTE roadmap demonstrates that:

1. A general consensus is emerging around the notions of multi-functionality on different geographic scales, resource efficiency and the provision of services in rural areas.

2. Despite major contrasts between the three VOLANTE visions, there are important similarities that highlight the need for bold and coordinated change in European land use.

3. To achieve the visions along robust pathways we need a broader range of land use policy options and governance structures that balance trade-offs in a transparent and well-informed way.

4. To be effective and relevant, land use policy needs to be sensitive to regional differences across Europe, and based on cross-sectoral strategies that move away from the traditional sectoral policy focus.

5. Under these preconditions land use management can offer huge opportunities for society and promote socio-economic wellbeing and environmental improvement.

6.3 Policy recommendations

The VOLANTE project has demonstrated that to understand current land use changes, we need to know the relevant processes in the past. To project to the future we need to define clear scenarios of possible developments. But most important is to develop visions with overarching themes, which could well differ from the current trends. Incremental policy change merely reacting on external developments may not achieve the changes that we want, and that also society requires for sustainable development. The assessment of pathways towards visions of future land use management in the VOLANTE project leads to the following policy recommendations. 1. General consensus emerges on major land use management issues

o Europe will need to greatly increase its resource use efficiency, and reduce its ecological footprint, both within and outside Europe, through better governance, integrated land use policies, and by adopting technology;

o The coming decades will see a growing demand on European land to provide a wide range of services, requiring careful land use planning and management;

o Rural areas will provide many of these services, and will have an important role in supporting sustainable development of Europe.

30 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

2. Bold and coordinated change in European land use needed The generally adopted scenarios for global economic and societal development show a strong polarisation of land functions in Europe in the near future. Continuing current trends, land sparing seems a much more likely prospect over large parts of Europe than land sharing, possibly with the exception of peri-urban landscapes. Still, a large majority of the visions expressed in our stakeholder consultations aim for a considerable degree of multifunctionality. However, we have seen that the investigated VOLANTE policy alternatives did not always achieve this target even if so wished: it seems that we are not getting what we want! Apparently it is extremely difficult to set out a structured road to a future that is substantially different from the one that could be expected from business as usual, following current trends. This planning paradox requires due societal consideration and debate, especially because it seems that neglecting long term consequences of current trends could lead to almost irreversible land transitions, including uncontrolled land abandonment, soil degradation, biodiversity decrease, loss of ecosystem services and decline of rural liveability. 3. Consideration of a broad range of land use policy options necessary to select robust pathways VOLANTE has developed an innovative approach to guide land use decision making in achieving desired land use visions. To reach some of the stakeholder visions we need a much broader range of pathways and policy options than we had the possibility to use in our foresight studies, for various reasons. It appears that traditional assessment instruments are limited in their capability to simulate visions which strongly depart from existing land use patterns, and that the Europe-wide models used have difficulty in accommodating local multifunctionality. Moreover, land use governance is not well adapted for multifunctionality either, which is much more complicated than planning for strictly separated functions using incremental policy strategies. Although society does have awareness of trade-offs of the latter, comprehensive consequences of futures are difficult to imagine. Therefore new integrated policy approaches of a high governance effectivity regarding multiple functions in the rural area are needed. 4. Land use policy needs to be sensitive to regional differences Recently, land use change has been relatively limited over Europe as a whole, but VOLANTE shows that there are hotspots of change, both in land abandonment and land recultivation in various parts of Europe, where large dynamics occur and can be expected in the near future in the rural area. Moreover, historical evidence shows that there are periods of decreasing and of increasing land use change across Europe, depending largely on changes in external conditions and political turnovers. To keep land use transitions manageable at a European and regional level, it seems crucial to identify hotspots of change at an early stage, implying in-depth study of land use processes, since land cover changes generally show a considerable time lag after changes in land use functions. 5. Wise use of land resources can offer huge opportunities for society Because land use planning is strictly speaking not an EU competence, while at the same time land use development is largely determined by a range of sectoral EU policies, it should be a priority action in policy and society to accommodate cross-sectoral strategies to achieve new images of land use for the future. At national level comparable situations can be observed in many countries. Creative out-of-the-box thinking is needed to provide for innovative combinations of sectoral policy targets, and to allow narrowing down the wide range of possible futures, instead of ad-hoc reacting on external developments. Although it is not sure e.g. whether our society will accept returning to a more agrarian life, it might be worthwhile to explore the advantages and disadvantages of such future in terms of ecosystem services (including amenity value and cultural heritage), investments and trade-offs.

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis 31

32 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis

7 Further reading

The VOLANTE Roadmap is supported by a large body of background information and documentation (Figure 15).

Figure 15 The VOLANTE Roadmap and its supporting information

This Scientific Basis is also available as an interactive internet based file at www.volante-project.eu, including access to all supporting information. References (and hyper-links) in the digital document version refer to the next layer supporting the Roadmap itself: Syntheses of the VOLANTE research activities are given in a large number of Fact sheets. These Fact sheets contain further reference to basic results of the various research activities in VOLANTE Deliverables and scientific papers.

References & links to other VOLANTE products

1 Pedroli, B., Rounsevell, M., Metzger, M., Paterson, J. and the VOLANTE consortium (2015). The VOLANTE Roadmap towards sustainable land resource management in Europe. VOLANTE final document, Alterra Wageningen UR, 24 pp. ISBN 978-94-6257-407-6.

2 Rounsevell et al. (2012) Land Use Policy 29 (2012) 899–910. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.01.007 3 Verburg et al. (2012) Landsc.Ecol. 27:473-486. doi: 10.1007/s10980-012-9715-6 4 Krausman et al. (2013) PNAS 110(25):10324-10329. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1211349110 5 Bodirsky et al. (2012) Biogeosciences Discuss. 9:2755-2821. doi: 10.5194/bgd-9-2755-2012 6 Erb et al.(2012) Science 338:1419-1420. doi: 10.1126/science.338.6113.1419-d 7 Prishchepov et al (2012) Environ.Res.Letters 7. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/7/2/024021 8 Krausmann et al. (2012) Ecol.Econ. 77:129-138. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.02.019 9 VOLANTE Deliverable 4.3 – Technological, institutional and economic drivers of land use change: p.14 10 Fischer et al. (2011) Science 334(6056):593. doi: 10.1126/science.334.6056.593-a 11 VOLANTE Deliverable 4.3 – Technological, institutional and economic drivers of land use change: p.14

VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis 33

12 VOLANTE Deliverable 9.2 - An analysis of documented visions on land use in Europe 13 VOLANTE Visions of future land use in Europe. Stakeholder visions for 2040. Brochure, Wageningen, January 2015. 14 Verburg et al. (2013) J.Environ.Man. 127:S132-144. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.08.038 15 Fact sheet A1 on Marker scenario storylines; VOLANTE Deliverable 7.3 – Description of the translation of sector specific

land cover and land management information 16 Fact Sheet A3 on Model linkages 17 Fact sheet A2 on Marker Scenario Model Implementation 18 VOLANTE Deliverable 7.3 – Description of the translation of sector specific land cover and land management information 19 Fact sheet A4 on Marker Scenario Results 20 VOLANTE Deliverable 3.4 – Maps of syndromes of land system changes in Europe 21 Fact Sheet V1 on Pathways Methods 22 Fact sheets on Models (A2), Marker Scenarios (A1) and Policy Alternatives (A5-A15); VOLANTE Deliverables 7.3 and 11.1 23 Fact sheet P3 on Agricultural abandonment, recultivation and intensification 24 Alcantara et al. (2013) Environ.Res.Letters 8 (3) 035035. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/035035 25 Van der Sluis et al. (2015) Land Use Policy online. doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.12.005 26 Popp et al. (2012) Ecol.Economics 74:64-70. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.11.004 27 Fact sheet P1 on Displacement effects 28 Kastner et al. (2014) Environ.Res.Letters 9 (3): 034015. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/9/3/034015 29 VOLANTE Deliverable 3.1 – European-wide maps of recent changes in agriculture, forest systems and embodied HANPP 30 VOLANTE Deliverable 3.2 – Report on recent land use transition hotspots in Europe 31 Haberl et al. (2012) Ecol.Indicators 23: 222-231. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.03.027 32 Erb et al. (2012) Energy Policy 47:260-269. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.04.066 33 Fact sheet P4b on Land owner involvement in other gainful activities 34 VOLANTE Deliverable 1.4 – Landscape changes in Europe: Upscaling results from case studies and cross-region

comparisons 35 Fact sheet P5 on drivers of landscape change 36 VOLANTE Deliverable 2.2 – Policy drivers of land use/landscape change and the role of institutions 37 Fact sheet P2 on Policy driven land use change 38 Fact sheet V5 on Methods for Trade-off analysis 39 VOLANTE Deliverable 2.1 - Literature study on land use and landscape change as a result of European policies - an

overview of institutions and governance structures regarding land use change for different countries in Europe 40 VOLANTE Deliverable 6.3 – Application of an agent-based model of land use change within the VOLANTE project 41 Fact sheet V2 on Pathways to ‘Best Land’ 42 Van der Sluis et al. (2014) J.Landsc.Ecol. 7(1):23-44. doi: 10.2478/jlecol-2014-0008 43 Fact sheet P4a on Land owner involvement in landscape activities 44 Fact sheet P3 on Agricultural abandonment, recultivation and intensification 45 Gos & Lavorel (2012) Intern.J.Biodiv.Sci,Ecosys.Serv.Man.8:93-106 doi: 10.1080/21513732.2011.646303 46 Nielsen et al. (2013) Land Use Pol. 30(1): 437-445. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.04.011 47 Mouchet et al. (2014) Glob.Environ.Change 28:298-308. doi: 10.1016/j.globenvcha.2014.07.012 48 Griffiths et al. (2014) Remote Sensing Environ. 151:72-88. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2013.04.022 49 Fact sheet V3 on Pathways to ‘Regional Connected’ 50 Fact sheet P1 on Displacement effects 51 Fact sheet P3 on Agricultural abandonment, recultivation and intensification 52 Fact sheet P3 on Agricultural abandonment, recultivation and intensification 53 Alix-Garcia et al. (2012) Land Econ. 88(3):425-443. 54 Fischer et al. (2012) Conserv. Letters 5: 167-175. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00227.x 55 Griffiths et al. (2012) Remote Sensing Environ. 118:199-214. doi: j.rse.2011.11.006 56 Fact sheet V4 on Pathways to ‘Local Multifunctional’ 57 Schmitz et al. (2012) Glob.Environ.Change 22:189-209. doi : 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.09.013 58 Overmars et al. (2014) Ecol. Indicators 37(A):186-198. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.11.006 59 Krause et al. (2013) Land Use Policy 30:344-354. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.03.020 60 VOLANTE Deliverable 8.2 – Spatially explicit assessment of current ecosystem service supply for Europe

34 VOLANTE Roadmap – The Scientific Basis