skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Validity and sensitivity of a model for assessment of impacts of river floodplain reconstruction on protected and endangered species

Abstract

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) must account for legally protected and endangered species. Uncertainties relating to the validity and sensitivity of EIA arise from predictions and valuation of effects on these species. This paper presents a validity and sensitivity analysis of a model (BIO-SAFE) for assessment of impacts of land use changes and physical reconstruction measures on legally protected and endangered river species. The assessment is based on links between species (higher plants, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, butterflies and dragon- and damselflies) and ecotopes (landscape ecological units, e.g., river dune, soft wood alluvial forests), and on value assignment to protected and endangered species using different valuation criteria (i.e., EU Habitats and Birds directive, Conventions of Bern and Bonn and Red Lists). The validity of BIO-SAFE has been tested by comparing predicted effects of landscape changes on the diversity of protected and endangered species with observed changes in biodiversity in five reconstructed floodplains. The sensitivity of BIO-SAFE to value assignment has been analysed using data of a Strategic Environmental Assessment concerning the Spatial Planning Key Decision for reconstruction of the Dutch floodplains of the river Rhine, aimed at flood defence and ecological rehabilitation. The weights given to the valuation criteria formore » protected and endangered species were varied and the effects on ranking of alternatives were quantified. A statistically significant correlation (p < 0.01) between predicted and observed values for protected and endangered species was found. The sensitivity of the model to value assignment proved to be low. Comparison of five realistic valuation options showed that different rankings of scenarios predominantly occur when valuation criteria are left out of the assessment. Based on these results we conclude that linking species to ecotopes can be used for adequate impact assessments. Quantification of sensitivity of impact assessment to value assignment shows that a model like BIO-SAFE is relatively insensitive to assignment of values to different policy and legislation based criteria. Arbitrariness of the value assignment therefore has a very limited effect on assessment outcomes. However, the decision to include valuation criteria or not is very important.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [2];  [1];  [1]
  1. Department of Environmental Science, Institute for Wetland and Water Research, Faculty of Science, Radboud University Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9010, 6500 GL Nijmegen (Netherlands)
  2. Institute for Inland Water Management and Waste Water Treatment (RIZA), P.O. Box 17, 8200 AA Lelystad (Netherlands)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
20861659
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Journal Name:
Environmental Impact Assessment Review
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 26; Journal Issue: 8; Other Information: DOI: 10.1016/j.eiar.2006.06.001; PII: S0195-9255(06)00061-8; Copyright (c) 2006 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); Journal ID: ISSN 0195-9255
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES; AMPHIBIANS; BIRDS; ENDANGERED SPECIES; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; HABITAT; LAND USE; MAMMALS; REPTILES; RIVERS; SENSITIVITY; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SPECIES DIVERSITY

Citation Formats

Nooij, R.J.W. de, Lotterman, K M, Sande, P.H.J. van de, Pelsma, T, Netherlands Centre for River Studies, Leuven, R S.E.W., Netherlands Centre for River Studies, Lenders, H J.R., and Netherlands Centre for River Studies. Validity and sensitivity of a model for assessment of impacts of river floodplain reconstruction on protected and endangered species. United States: N. p., 2006. Web. doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2006.06.001.
Nooij, R.J.W. de, Lotterman, K M, Sande, P.H.J. van de, Pelsma, T, Netherlands Centre for River Studies, Leuven, R S.E.W., Netherlands Centre for River Studies, Lenders, H J.R., & Netherlands Centre for River Studies. Validity and sensitivity of a model for assessment of impacts of river floodplain reconstruction on protected and endangered species. United States. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2006.06.001
Nooij, R.J.W. de, Lotterman, K M, Sande, P.H.J. van de, Pelsma, T, Netherlands Centre for River Studies, Leuven, R S.E.W., Netherlands Centre for River Studies, Lenders, H J.R., and Netherlands Centre for River Studies. 2006. "Validity and sensitivity of a model for assessment of impacts of river floodplain reconstruction on protected and endangered species". United States. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2006.06.001.
@article{osti_20861659,
title = {Validity and sensitivity of a model for assessment of impacts of river floodplain reconstruction on protected and endangered species},
author = {Nooij, R.J.W. de and Lotterman, K M and Sande, P.H.J. van de and Pelsma, T and Netherlands Centre for River Studies and Leuven, R S.E.W. and Netherlands Centre for River Studies and Lenders, H J.R. and Netherlands Centre for River Studies},
abstractNote = {Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) must account for legally protected and endangered species. Uncertainties relating to the validity and sensitivity of EIA arise from predictions and valuation of effects on these species. This paper presents a validity and sensitivity analysis of a model (BIO-SAFE) for assessment of impacts of land use changes and physical reconstruction measures on legally protected and endangered river species. The assessment is based on links between species (higher plants, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, butterflies and dragon- and damselflies) and ecotopes (landscape ecological units, e.g., river dune, soft wood alluvial forests), and on value assignment to protected and endangered species using different valuation criteria (i.e., EU Habitats and Birds directive, Conventions of Bern and Bonn and Red Lists). The validity of BIO-SAFE has been tested by comparing predicted effects of landscape changes on the diversity of protected and endangered species with observed changes in biodiversity in five reconstructed floodplains. The sensitivity of BIO-SAFE to value assignment has been analysed using data of a Strategic Environmental Assessment concerning the Spatial Planning Key Decision for reconstruction of the Dutch floodplains of the river Rhine, aimed at flood defence and ecological rehabilitation. The weights given to the valuation criteria for protected and endangered species were varied and the effects on ranking of alternatives were quantified. A statistically significant correlation (p < 0.01) between predicted and observed values for protected and endangered species was found. The sensitivity of the model to value assignment proved to be low. Comparison of five realistic valuation options showed that different rankings of scenarios predominantly occur when valuation criteria are left out of the assessment. Based on these results we conclude that linking species to ecotopes can be used for adequate impact assessments. Quantification of sensitivity of impact assessment to value assignment shows that a model like BIO-SAFE is relatively insensitive to assignment of values to different policy and legislation based criteria. Arbitrariness of the value assignment therefore has a very limited effect on assessment outcomes. However, the decision to include valuation criteria or not is very important.},
doi = {10.1016/j.eiar.2006.06.001},
url = {https://www.osti.gov/biblio/20861659}, journal = {Environmental Impact Assessment Review},
issn = {0195-9255},
number = 8,
volume = 26,
place = {United States},
year = {Wed Nov 15 00:00:00 EST 2006},
month = {Wed Nov 15 00:00:00 EST 2006}
}