Landscape fragmentation in Mediterranean Europe: A comparative approach |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Department of Agricultural Sciences, University of Sassari, 07100, Italy;2. Department of Forest and Environmental Engineering and Management, MONTES (School of Forest Engineering and Natural Environment), Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM), 28040, Spain;3. Transport Research Centre (TRANSyT-UPM), Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM), 28040, Spain;4. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Architecture, University of Cagliari, 09123, Italy;1. Graduate School of Agriculture, Hokkaido University, Kita 9, Nishi 9, Kita-ku, Sapporo, Hokkaido, 060-8589, Japan;2. Center for Environmental Biology and Ecosystem Studies, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Onogawa 16-2, Tsukuba City, Ibaraki, 305-8506, Japan;3. Hokkaido Research Center, Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute, Hitsujigaoka 7, Sapporo, 062-8516, Japan;4. Graduate School of Environmental Science, Hokkaido University, Kita 10, Nishi 5, Kita-ku, Sapporo, Hokkaido 060-0810, Japan;1. Departament of Regional Geographical Analysis and Physical Geography, University of Granada, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Campus de Cartuja s/n., 18071 Granada, Spain;2. Institute of Regional Development, University of Granada, Centro de Documentación Científica, Rector López Argüeta s/n, 18071 Granada, Spain;3. Departament of Human Geography, University of Granada, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Campus de Cartuja s/n., 18071 Granada, Spain;4. Department of Geography and GeoSyntheSES Lab, Programs in Rural Sociology and Ecology, Pennsylvania State University, State College 16802, USA;1. University of Bucharest, Institute of Research, ICUB, Romania;2. Transdisciplinary Research Centre Landscape-Territory-Information Systems, CeLTIS, Romania;3. University of Bucharest, Department of Regional Geography and Environment, Faculty of Geography, Romania;4. University of Bucharest, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Romania;5. Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL, Landscape Dynamics, Switzerland;6. University of Bucharest, Centre for Environmental Research and Impact Studies, Romania;1. Center for Chinese Agricultural Policy, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, China;2. University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100049, China;3. Faculty of Engineering, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong, China;4. Institute of Environmental Sciences (CML), Leiden University, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands;5. National Center for Science and Technology Evaluation, Beijing 100081, China;6. Geoinformatics Division, Department of Urban Planning and Environment, Royal Institute of Technology-KTH, Stockholm, 10044, Sweden;7. Collaborative Innovation Centre for Baiyangdian Basin Ecological Protection and Jingjinji Regional Sustainable Development, Hebei University, Baoding, 071002, China;1. Discipline of Geography, School of Agricultural, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Private Bag X01, Scottsville, Pietermaritzburg 3209, South Africa;2. Geo-Information and Remote Sensing Institute, Scientific and Industrial Research and Development Centre (SIRDC),1574 Alpes Road, Hatcliffe, Harare, Zimbabwe;3. Department of Earth Sciences, University of the Western Cape, Private Bag X17, Bellville, 7535, South Africa;1. Department of Agronomical and Environmental Sciences – Production, Landscape, Agroenergy, University of Milan, Milan, Italy;2. Institute of Life Sciences, Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna di Pisa, Pisa, Italy |
| |
| Abstract: | Maintaining ecosystem continuity has become a central element in spatial planning policies. Several authors acknowledge the environmental, also known as landscape, fragmentation due to human action as one of the main causes which have negative effects on biodiversity. The phenomenon consists of the transformation of larger patches of habitat in smaller ones, or fragments, which tend to be more isolated than in the original condition. It is extremely evident in urban areas, including settlements and various transport and mobility infrastructures, whose main ecological effects include loss of habitat, increased mortality of plants, and isolation of animal and vegetal species. In this paper, we assess landscape fragmentation dynamics of six landscape units belonging to two European regions, i.e. Sardinia in Italy (from 2003 to 2008), and Andalusia in Spain (from 2005 to 2009). We developed on three indices: the Infrastructural Fragmentation Index (IFI), the Urban Fragmentation Index (UFI), and the Connectivity Index (CI). We found that coastal areas generally suffer from an higher pressure due to the demand of longer or faster transport infrastructures and new settlements and less fragmented areas tend to show the most relevant dynamics in a sort of convergent pattern. Even though landscape fragmentation and connectivity are intuitively complementary phenomena, in this paper we did not found any statistical evidence of this associative property. |
| |
| Keywords: | Landscape fragmentation Fragmentation indices Infrastructural Fragmentation Index Urban Fragmentation Index Connectivity Index |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
