Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 1
Human Appropriation of NPP (HANPP)An accounting framwork for analysing
land use processes in the Earth system
Karlheinz ErbInstitute of Social Ecology, Vienna
in collaboration with: H. Haberl, V. Gaube, S. Gingrich, C. Plutzar, F. Krausmann, W. Lucht, A. Bondeau, et al.
GEOSS support for IPCC assessmentsGeneva, Feb. 3, 2011
ERC Start Grant 263522 LUISE
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 2
Overview
• Background: the integrated land system & the current mainstream state-of-the-art in LULC science
• The framework „Human Appropriation of Net Primary Production“: conceptual background & method
• Results: Global HANPP 2000
• Examples: global production-consumption link, global bioenergy potentials
• Conclusions: data requirements, gaps, challenges and opportunites
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 3
State-of-the-art of LU science
– Classification systems creating nominal-scale data– Focus on land cover (biophysical structures, ecological systems)– Focus on forest / non-forest dynamics– Strategy: increasing spatial resolution
From current mainstram land-use research...
+
...towards an integrated understanding of land use
+ Focus on society-nature interactions+ Broad range of land uses+ Continuous (rational) scales+ Explicitly addressing a wide range of spatial scales
SocietyEcosystems
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 4
Bridging disciplinary boundaries: the integrated land system
SocietyEcosystems
Outputs - Benefits
Inputs - Investments
management
Long-TermC-Storage
Plant biomass
CO2
Medium-TermC-Storagee.g. Soil C
GPP
NPP
Respiration
new
old
Steffen et al. Science 1998
Input Output
Socio-economic system
Economic Processing
Stocks
Input Output
Socio-economic system
Economic Processing
Stocks
Matthews et al. 2000
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 5
HANPP – the ‚human appropriation of net primary production‘
Society
Outputs - Benefits
Inputs - Investments
Potential NPP
Actual NPP
NPP remaining after harvest
dN
PP
LC
NP
Ph
HA
NP
P
Ecosystems
Change
induced
through
landuse
naturalecosystem
managedecosystem
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 6
Data integration
NPP0: LPJ-DGVM
Non-used areas
Irrigation Degradation
Erb et al., J of Land Use Science, 2007
NPPact
NPPh
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 7
HANPP%:Aggregated effect ofland use and harvest<< 24% >>
Result: Global HANPP 2000NPPLC%: Productivity changesdue to land coversions<< 10% >>
Source: Haberl et al PNAS 2007Krausmann et al., 2008
Forest11%
Cropland49%
Human induced
fires7%
Built-up land4%
Grazing land29%
Food13,7%
Market feed8,4%
Seed0,7%
Other uses11,1%
Industrial Wood6,2%
Fuelwood9,8%
Grazing, fodder50,0%
Land use activities Biomass consumption
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 8
Summary of results HANPP 2000• Global HANPP amounts to 24% of NPP0 (aboveground
30%)
• Agriculture is the most important driver:
– Cropping and grazing contribute 3/4 of global HANPP. – Feeding of livestock consumes 2/3 of the total amount of biomass
used by humanity
• Considerable regional variation of HANPP, mainly depending on
– Consumption level (per capita HANPP in industrialized countries is about twice that of developing countries)
– Population density– Technology: yields
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 9
HANPP data integration: ‚old‘ and ‚new‘ challenges
Ecosystems Socioeconomic Systems
Area
Land covere.g. Modis
GLC2000Globcover
Land usee.g. Census statistics:
agriculture, forestry, grazing, settlements
e.g. national economic data (SNA)
Flows
Ecosystem flows DGVMs: GPP, NPP,
Respiration, water, nutrients
Inputs - Outputs (Census) Statistics:
agriculture, forestry, grazing
Socioeconomic models
CONSISTENCY
! CONSISTENCY !
CONSISTENCY
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
[196
1 =
1]
Area
Yield
Production
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
[19
61
= 1
]
Area
Yield
Production
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 10
The HANPP framework: Data integration
• Consistency
– extents and flows: yields [=flow per area and year]– Prioritizing: correspondence of (national) land use census
statistics and the (national) spatial extent more important than the accuracy of spatial information. But: how to deal with flawed census data?
• Comprehensiveness
– all ‘relevant’ land use types, inclusive “non-land-use” areas:– 100% of each gridcell
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 11
Applications
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 12
HANPP
Example ILinking ecosystem impacts and socio-economic drivers
0,0
1,0
2,0
3,0
4,0
5,0
6,0
HANPP NPPh Used extraction Finalconsumption of
biomass
[t D
M/c
ap
/yr]
Ecosystem Impacts Socio-economic drivers
conversionlosses
harvestlosses/damages
productivitylosses
Erb
et
al. 2
009conversion
losses
harvestlosses/damages
productivitylosses
conversionlosses
harvestlosses/damages
productivitylosses
Erb
et
al. 2
009
eHANPP consumption
Source: Erb et al, EE 2009a, Erb et al., 2009b
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 13
Difference of „production“ and „consumption“ of „embodied HANPP“
Source: Erb et al,EE 2009
Example ILinking ecosystem impacts and socio-economic drivers
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 14
Example I: Conclusions
• A considerable flow: international “transfer” = 1.7 PgC/yr in 2000 [global deforestation: ~1.5 PgC/yr], increasing
• Large, densely populated countries, which do not yet participate, will soon do so (e.g. China, India)
• Drivers AND consequences of land use are global. No simple causal chains between drivers and associated impacts
• Sustainability challenge:
– High degree of international interdependence (vulnerability, resilience)
– high risk of shifting the environmental burdens to distant locations and withdrawing it from environmental legislation
– markets will not minimize burdens, as many ecosystems services have no price
need for global monitoring and management of biomass demand & supply
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 15
Example IIGlobal bioenergy potentials
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 16
A scoping study: Explore the scale and option space on basis of HANPP analyses
Systematic combination of existing (e.g. FAO) assumptions and 2 – 4 modulations on developments until 2050 of:
• diets (4)
• livestock efficiency (2)
• agricultural yields (4)
• cropland expansion (2)
64 combinations (scenarios)
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 17
Results: Feasibility Analysis: 43 of 64 scenarios “feasible”
Probably feasible
Feasible
Highlyfeasible
Not feasible
Source: Erb et al., 2009c
For „feasible“ scenarios: bioenergy potential1) on „free“ cropland2) on high-quality grazing land3) crop residues
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 18
ResultsEnergy crop area [km²] (2.1 – (6.3) – 10.9 mio. km²)
Energy crop yield [gC/m²/yr]
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
20-40 40-60 60-80 80-100
100-120
120-140
140-160
160-180
180-200
Bioenergy potential [EJ/yr]
[#]
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Primary crops Residues
[EJ/
yr]
Histogramm: feasible scenarios
Source: Erb et al., forthcomingHaberl et al., 2010, COSUST Haberl et al., 2011, Biomass & Bioenergy
Primary energy supply
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 19
Example II: Conclusions
• Feeding a growing world population is – in principle - possible with ecologically sound agricultural production. Dietary levels will be most important.
• Energy crop potentials – ‚conventional wisdom‘ needs to be reconsidered: Sustainability constraints are decisive:– Conservation / biodiversity– Subsistence agriculture, food security, etc.– GHG balance
• Climate change impacts are poorly understood but could be strong
• Bioenergy and globalization: Largest bioenergy potentials in Subsaharan Africa and Latin America: Caution – problem shifting!
• ‚Cascade utilization‘ – focus on recycling, re-use and efficiency improvement of biomass flow-chains
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 20
Conclusions: HANPP studies illustrate
• Link land use – land cover is complex: no easy look-up table.
• Spatial seggregation between appropriation and consumption: Issues of scale, governance: drivers as well as consequences of land use are global. Important for the construction of causal chains
• Future biomass demand-supply: Options/potentials for sustainable biomass utilization are limited – requires integrated perspectives
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 21
Data challenges...• Land-use assessments require land-cover and additional (‚socio-economic‘)
information
• Many socio-economic drivers, mechanisms, processes of LU (change) and their impacts are not (yet) well documented. Basic research (still) required. List of EHV not ready yet.
– Links to MaB (UNESCO), LTER-LTSER
• The spatial and temporal scales of natural and socioeconomic processes are different
– Increasing spatial resolution is only a partial solution: the gain in detail allows to better describe LC, but contextual information is required to assess LU; social systems are not organized in grids
• Move beyond the S-o-A in LU-LC data:
consistency and comprehensiveness abandon “hybrid”, ambiguous legends
complement “dominance” classes or “discrete” classification schemes with continuous parameters. Gradients are equally important, for LC and LU
move beyond “agriculture”, “deforestation”, and “urban” land use land management is key
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 22
... and opportunities
Data gaps/deficits are ubiquitous:
• missing socio-economic data
• flawed, incomplete census data
...and RS can contribute
– forestry (used vs. unused forests, forest degradation)
– grazing (intensity, spatial pattern of grazing, biomass harvest through grazing; effects of grazing)
– cropland fallow (where, frequency)
– rural infrastructure
– soil/vegetation degradation (where? how much land? how intensive?)
– ()NPP, ()Biomass stocks
yield the mutual benefits of combining RS data and “ground data”
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 23
Thank you for your attention!
The End
Further information/maps/data:http://www.uni-klu.ac.at/socec/
ERC Start Grant 263522 LUISE
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 24
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 25
Explore the scale and option space: a NPP perspective
NPP0
NPPact
Harvest
Solid consistent empirical data-bases for 2000
• Land use: Consistency between pixels (5 min, 10x10 km) and statistical data at country level (cropland and woodlands according to FAO, FRA und TBFRA). Erb et al. 2007. J. Land Use Sci. 2, 191-224
• National biomass balances : Production and consumption of biomass: Feed balances, processing losses, trade, incl. trends 1960-2000.Krausmann et al. 2008. Ecol. Econ. 65, 471-487.
• HANPP: Spatially explicit integration of NPP flows (LPJ-DGVM) and anthropogenic biomass flows (5 min, 10x10 km).Haberl et al., 2007. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 104, 12942-12947.
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 26
Grazing• livestock grazing is the largest fraction of the global biomass harvest
(32%), a major driver of the human transformation of terrestrial ecosystems
• Statistics comprise only market feed – no information on grazed biomass available. “Grazing Gap” must be modelled as difference between demand & market feed supply
• very loose relation of land use and land cover (occurs in almost all ecosystems (hampers application of remote sensing techniques)
• Census statistics are of limited practicability, inconsistent, heterogenous definitions (e.g. artificial grasslands vs. natural grasslands)
-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Market feed Feedstuff demand
[10^
6 tD
M/y
r]
Crop residues
Fodder Crops
Grazing Gap
Source: Krausmann et al. Ecological Economics 2008
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 27
Data Gap: grazing land
‚Result‘ Remaining area = Grazing land
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 28
Estimates on global grazing lands
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80R
am
an
kutty
et a
l., 2
00
8
Kle
inG
old
ew
ijk2
00
1
FA
O 2
00
4,
Kle
inG
old
ew
ijk2
00
7
Wh
itta
ker
an
dL
ike
ns
19
73
Ajta
y e
t al
19
79
Erb
et a
l.2
00
7
Wh
ite e
t al
20
00
Ols
on
et a
l1
98
3
Me
yer
an
dT
urn
er
19
92
[mio
km
²]
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 29
Grazing land
1E-01
1E+00
1E+01
1E+02
1E+03
1E+04
1E+05
1E+06
1E+07
1E-01 1E+00 1E+01 1E+02 1E+03 1E+04 1E+05 1E+06 1E+07
FAO permanent pasture
Gra
zin
g l
and
(su
btr
acti
ve a
pp
roac
h)
Russ Fed.
India
Egypt Finnland
Norway
China
Mexico
Brazil
Saudi Arabia
Western Sahara
Yemen
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 30
consequences of land use: Biodiversity Species richness is well correlated with NPPt – indirect support for HANPP/biodiversity hypothesis
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 202010
-2
4x10-2
Y = -1.975 +0.485 X R² =0 .549, p < 0.0001
i)
all h
eter
otro
phs
NPPt
0.1 1 10
1
10
100
Y =1.32916+0.69916 X-0.22962 X2
Adj. R2 = 0.69bree
ding
bird
spe
cies
richn
ess
NPPt [MJ/m²*a]
Case study 1: Correlation between NPPt and autotroph species richness (5 taxa) on 38 plots sized 600x600 m, East Austria
Haberl et al., 2004, Agric., Ecosyst. & Envir. 102, p213ff
Case study 2: Correlation between NPPt and breeding bird richness in Austria, 328 randomly chosen 1x1 km squares.
Haberl et al., 2005. Agric., Ecosyst. & Envir. 110, p119ff
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
NPPt [gC/m²/yr]
0
200
400
600
800
1000
Nu
mb
er o
f S
pec
ies
Case study 3: Correlation between NPPt and vertebrate richness in the Americas, 10,000 randomly chosen 5min gridcells
Haberl et al., forthcoming
= 0.708
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 31
Karlheinz Erb | The HANPP framework | Hamburg | February 10, 2010 | 32