Search

Landscape indicators, when combined with information about environmental conditions (such as habitat potential, biodiversity, carbon and nutrient cycling, and erosion) and socioeconomic forces, can provide insights about changing ecosystem services. They also provide information about opportunities for improving natural resources management. Landscape indicators rely on data regarding land cover, land management and land functionality. Challenges in using landscape indicators to assess change and effects include (1) measures of land management and attributes that are reliable, robust and consistent for all areas on the Earth do not exist, and thus land cover is more frequently utilized; (2) multiple types of land cover and management are often found within a single landscape and are constantly changing, which complicates measurement and interpretation; and (3) while causal analysis is essential for understanding and interpreting changes in indicator values, the interactions among multiple causes and effects over time make accurate attribution among many drivers of change particularly difficult. Because of the complexity, sheer number of variables, and limitations of empirical data on land changes, models are often used to illustrate and estimate values for landscape indicators, and those models have several problems. Recommendations to improve our ability to assess the effects of changes in land management include refinement of questions to be more consistent with available information and the development of data sets based on systematic measurement over time of spatially explicit land qualities such as carbon and nutrient stocks, water and soil quality, net primary productivity, habitat and biodiversity. Well-defined and consistent land-classification systems that are capable of tracking changes in these and other qualities that matter to society need to be developed and deployed. Because landscapes are so dynamic, it is crucial to develop ways for the scientific community to work together to collect data and develop tools that will enable better analysis of causes and effects and to develop robust management recommendations that will increases land's capacity to meet societal needs in a changing world.

Indicators are needed to assess both socioeconomic and environmental sustainability of bioenergy systems. Effective indicators can help to identify and quantify the sustainability attributes of bioenergy options. We identify 16 socioeconomic indicators that fall into the categories of social well-being, energy security, trade, profitability, resource conservation, and social acceptability. The suite of indicators is predicated on the existence of basic institutional frameworks to provide governance, legal, regulatory and enforcement services. Indicators were selected to be practical, sensitive to stresses, unambiguous, anticipatory, predictive, estimable with known variability, and sufficient when considered collectively. The utility of each indicator, methods for its measurement, and applications appropriate for the context of particular bioenergy systems are described along with future research needs. Together, this suite of indicators is hypothesized to reflect major socioeconomic effects of the full supply chain for bioenergy, including feedstock production and logistics, conversion to biofuels, biofuel logistics and biofuel end uses. Ten indicators are highlighted as a minimum set of practical measures of socioeconomic aspects of bioenergy sustainability. Coupled with locally prioritized environmental indicators, we propose that these socioeconomic indicators can provide a basis to quantify and evaluate sustainability of bioenergy systems across many regions in which they will be deployed.

Indicators are needed to assess environmental sustainability of bioenergy systems. Effective indicators will help in the quantification of benefits and costs of bioenergy options and resource uses. We identify 19 measurable indicators for soil quality, water quality and quantity, greenhouse gases, biodiversity, air quality, and productivity, building on existing knowledge and on national and international programs that are seeking ways to assess sustainable bioenergy. Together, this suite of indicators is hypothesized to reflect major environmental effects of diverse feedstocks, management practices, and post-production processes. The importance of each indicator is identified. Future research relating to this indicator suite is discussed, including field testing, target establishment, and application to particular bioenergy systems. Coupled with such efforts, we envision that this indicator suite can serve as a basis for the practical evaluation of environmental sustainability in a variety of bioenergy systems.