knowledge brokerage for impact assessment of land use scenarios in inner mongolia, china: extending and testing the fopia approach

Clicks: 320
ID: 156950
2015
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Popular

Ranked #104 of 935 articles by views in journal of physics: conference series

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 935 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
While land serves numerous societal functions and contributes to sustainable development, it is often unclear how these functions are affected by political decisions and common drivers of land use change, such as economic development, climate change and demographic change. This study evaluates alternative land use scenarios in reference to a rural region of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region (China), where various processes and decisions have historically triggered unsustainable development. The scientifically tested “Framework for Participatory Impact Assessment (FoPIA)” method is developed further to address specific features of the case study region, and its function as a knowledge-brokerage (KB) tool is evaluated. Three scenarios are developed and analysed in expert workshops. “Land intensification: Agriculture” and “Land intensification: Mining” scenarios are found to have mainly negative environmental and social effects and positive economic impacts, while the “Environmental conservation and tourism” scenario is found to more positively affect all three sustainability dimensions. Assessments of methodological phases show that the FoPIA primarily serves to establish the KB process and that the framework particularly benefits from early examinations of scientific results by policy makers.
Reference Key
knig2015sustainabilityknowledge Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;Hannes J. König;Aranka Podhora;Lin Zhen;Katharina Helming;Huimin Yan;Bingzhen Du;Jost Wübbeke;Chao Wang;Julie Klinger;Cheng Chen;Sandra Uthes
Journal journal of physics: conference series
Year 2015
DOI
10.3390/su7055027
URL
http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/5/5027
Keywords
sustainable development impact assessment expert knowledge policy supportenvironmental effects of industries and plantsrenewable energy sourcesenvironmental sciences

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.